Zionism Is Racism: Ridiculous Resolution or the Truth that Hurts?

By Ian Williams

This September, the 46th General Assembly will doubtless have a surfeit of the Middle East. From the Western Sahara to the Gulf the delegates will have a wide range of issues to discuss. If Vice President Quayle is to be believed, the most important issue is the overturning of Resolution 3379, which in 1975 determined that "zionism (sic) is a form of racism and racial discrimination."

Of all the ignored resolutions passed by the UN against Israel, this is the one that rankles Israel most, perhaps proving the adage about the hurtfulness of the truth. It has even been quoted by Israelis as justification for the UN not having a role in the peace process—as if resolutions against apartheid debarred the UN from a role in South Africa.

Indeed, 3379 referred back to the 1973 resolution condemning "the unholy alliance between South African racism and zionism, " and to the 1963 resolution which determined that "Any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous. " It passed by 72 to 32, with 35 abstentions. In general it was the East Bloc and Islamic states against the West, with the nonaligned states split between abstentions and support.

Secretary General Perez de Cuellar, whose sometimes discernible unhappiness with the Security Council's conduct of the Gulf war could not overcome his sense of duty to it, felt able to speak against this General Assembly resolution in May, after Quayle had spoken. He told reporters:

"My position has always been that there was a wrong and unfair interpretation of what Zionism is. Zionism was first of all the need of the Jewish people to preserve their identity and at the same time to try and get a state for their nation. You cannot say that trying to get a territory for your nation is racism. For instance, the Kurds or the Basques in Spain are not racists. These are two different things which should not be mixed up."

And of course he is right; they should not be mixed up. The Basques and Kurds wanted a state on the land which they were currently occupying—not somebody else's! However, because a position has serious flaws, it is not always polite to say so. It alienates its supporters, as well as giving them an excuse not to listen to you. Could there be grounds for a package deal? The overturning of the racist Law of Return, or its extension to Palestinians, in return for dropping 3379 and the Palestinian National Covenant?

If the issue were raised seriously, there would be no guarantees either way. The main supporters of Zionism is Racism last time included the now defunct Eastern Bloc, while the non-aligned movement is presently having difficulty aligning itself. On the other hand, Israel's behavior in the Lebanon war and the intifada have since tended to prove the point of the resolution. Public relations have never been Likud's strong point.

In many ways it suits Israel to have the resolution as an excuse to repudiate a UN role in the peace. In the US, racism is about skin color. So, semantically, it seems self-evidently absurd to apply the term to Israel. On the other hand, an open debate could lead to some solid points being made in a forum which for once would attract the attention of the US media. A Western diplomat reported that the US is looking at the issue, but almost certainly will not raise it if there is any chance of not succeeding in overturning the resolution. If, on the other hand, the US succeeds, one hopes that the White House appreciates that it will get no thanks from Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.

Security Council Considers Israeli Settlements

"We don't want the impression to get about that Israel is above the UN, " said a Yemeni diplomat of the Arab group's happily unanimous move to table a Security Council resolution on the settlement issue in the second half of July. There had been some dissent, but Israeli intransigence had produced a consensus—including among some permanent members—that something must be done. The Yemeni sponsors claim that even the US and UK have no arguments with the substance of the resolution, and are only worried about its effects on Baker's peace process. Following Bush's reported delinking of immigration aid and the settlement issue, however, the Arabs suspected that the peace process was not proceeding anywhere. One very pertinent paragraph of the draft resolution "calls upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used in connection with settlements in the occupied territories."

Since Cuba has the presidency of the Security Council in July, there are unlikely to be any serious procedural bars and the Yemenis consider a US veto unlikely. The resolution could give the White House leverage over AIPAC in Congress on the aid issue. On the other hand, a US veto could give the Bush administration brownie points with pro-Israel political donors as the next election looms in politicians' minds.

Talk of elections and Arab unanimity leads gracefully into the question of the presidency of the General Assembly. In June, Ambassador Al-Ashtal of Yemen reiterated his candidacy. In retaliation, Saudi Ambassador to the UN Samir Shihabi announced that he, too, would run, on the grounds that the Middle East would be a big topic in the General Assembly. Also in the race is Cypriot Foreign Minister Iacovou. None are likely to get far against Papua New Guinea's candidate, Foreign Minister Michael Somare, who is so far the clear favorite. Sparsely populated PNG has fewer enemies than anyone else, and it has been making friends and influencing people throughout the year.

The presidency of the General Assembly is sometimes said to be a position so inconsequential that the very act of wanting it should disqualify a candidate. But it is worth remembering that the "zionism is racism" resolution, for example, was very much because of the procedural skills of the then Algerian president of the General Assembly, Abdelaziz Bouteflika. As the candidate with no enemies, Somare is unlikely to commit himself in advance of the election in September. PNG does, however, have a strong commitment to anti-colonialism which may carry through to the Middle East if the issue is raised.

Ian Williams is a British journalist based at the United Nations.

SIDEBAR

Living Under Israeli Occupation

The toll of human rights violations by Israeli forces since Dec. 9, 1987:

Deaths … 956

Injuries requiring hospitalization… 113,150*

Expulsions… 62

Administrative detentions… 15,100

Curfews (areas with 10,000 + population under 24-hour curfew) … 10,072

(Plus almost constant curfews over entire West Bank and Gaza from Jan. 16-Feb. 28, 1991)

Land confiscation (acres)… 93,413

House demolitions/sealings… 1,951

Tree uprootings… 110,646

Source: Palestine Human Rights Information Center, Jerusalem/Chicago, (312) 271-4492. Figures through May 31, 1991

*Estimated number