IV 
111TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. RES. 42 
Calling on the President and the Secretary of State to withhold United 
States funding for and participation in the Durban Review Conference 
and its preparatory activities, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JANUARY 9, 2009 
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN (for herself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. BURTON of 
Indiana, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. WILSON 
of South Carolina, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. BILIRAKIS, and Mr. GARRETT 
of New Jersey) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
RESOLUTION 
Calling on the President and the Secretary of State to with-
hold United States funding for and participation in the 
Durban Review Conference and its preparatory activities, 
and for other purposes. 
Whereas the United States is opposed to racism, racial dis-
crimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, and has 
long been a party to the Convention on the Elimination 
of Racial Discrimination; 
Whereas expensive and politically skewed international con-
ferences can disserve and undermine the worthy goals 
that they are ostensibly convened to support; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
Whereas the goals of the 2001 United Nations World Con-
ference Against Racism—held in Durban, South Africa 
and commonly referred to as the ‘‘Durban Conference’’— 
were undermined by hateful, anti-Jewish rhetoric and 
anti-Israel political agendas, prompting both Israel and 
the United States to withdraw their delegations from the 
Conference; 
Whereas during the preparations leading up to the World 
Conference Against Racism, United Nations High Com-
missioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, who served 
as Secretary-General of the conference, repeatedly failed 
to publicly condemn efforts by member states of the Or-
ganization of the Islamic Conference to single out Israel 
for criticism and to single out the Israeli-Palestinian con-
flict for discussion; 
Whereas the official government declaration adopted by the 
World Conference Against Racism, the ‘‘Durban Declara-
tion and Program of Action’’, focused on the ‘‘plight of 
the Palestinian people under foreign occupation’’, and 
thereby singled out one regional conflict for discussion 
and implicitly launched a false accusation against Israel 
of racism towards the Palestinians; 
Whereas on September 3, 2001, Secretary of State Colin 
Powell explained the withdrawal of the United States del-
egation by stating that ‘‘you do not combat racism by 
conferences that produce declarations containing hateful 
language, some of which is a throwback to the days of 
‘Zionism equals racism’; or supports the idea that we 
have made too much of the Holocaust; or suggests that 
apartheid exists in Israel; or that singles out only one 
country in the world—Israel—for censure and abuse’’; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
Whereas the late United States Representative Tom Lantos, 
who participated as a member of the United States dele-
gation to the Durban Conference, supported that delega-
tion’s withdrawal and wrote in 2002 that the conference 
‘‘provided the world with a glimpse into the abyss of 
international hate, discrimination and, indeed, racism’’; 
Whereas on December 19, 2006, the United Nations General 
Assembly approved a resolution initiating preparations 
for a Durban Review Conference (commonly referred to 
as ‘‘Durban II’’); 
Whereas the Durban Review Conference will be held between 
April 20 and 24, 2009, in Geneva, Switzerland; 
Whereas the chair of the preparatory committee for the Dur-
ban Review Conference is Libya, and the co-chairs in-
clude Iran, Pakistan, and Cuba; 
Whereas throughout the preparatory process for the Durban 
Review Conference, member states of the Organization of 
the Islamic Conference have urged that the conference 
again focus criticism on Israel and single out the Israeli- 
Palestinian conflict for discussion; 
Whereas throughout the preparatory process for the Durban 
Review Conference, member states of the Organization of 
the Islamic Conference have also urged that the Durban 
Review Conference consider global legal codes that would 
impose restrictions on the freedoms of religion, expres-
sion, thought, conscience, the media, and opinion, con-
trary to fundamental freedoms recognized in the provi-
sions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; 
Whereas in testimony before the House of Representatives on 
April 2, 2008, then-Assistant Secretary of State for 
International Organizations Kristen Silverberg stated 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
that the United States had decided against participating 
in preparatory activities for the Durban Review Con-
ference because ‘‘[there is] absolutely no case to be made 
for participating in something that is going to be a re-
peat of Durban I. We don’t have any confidence that this 
will be any better than Durban I’’; 
Whereas Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, United States Permanent 
Representative to the United Nations, stated on April 8, 
2008, that ‘‘we have made clear that the United States 
is not participating in the [Durban Review Conference] 
process and we have no plans to do so. We will not par-
ticipate unless it is proven that the conference will not be 
used as a platform for anti-Semitic behavior’’; 
Whereas on January 23, 2008, Canada’s secretary of state 
for multiculturalism and Canadian identity, Jason 
Kenney, announced that Canada would not participate in 
the Durban Review Conference, stating that ‘‘Canada is 
interested in combating racism, not promoting it . . . 
Our considered judgment having participated in the pre-
paratory meetings, was that we were set for the replay 
of Durban I. And Canada has no intention of lending its 
good name and resources to such a systematic promotion 
of hatred and bigotry’’; 
Whereas on September 23, 2008, the House of Representa-
tives passed House Resolution 1361, which, among other 
things, called on the President to ‘‘urge other heads of 
state to condition participation in the 2009 Durban Re-
view Conference on concrete action by the United Na-
tions and United Nations Member States to ensure that 
it is not a forum to demonize any group, or incite anti- 
Semitism, hatred, or violence against members of any 
group or to call into question the existence of any state’’ 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
and urged all United Nations Member States ‘‘not to 
support a 2009 Durban Review Conference process that 
fails to adhere to established human rights standards and 
to reject an agenda that incites hatred against any group 
in the guise of criticism of a particular government or 
that seeks to forge a global blasphemy code’’; 
Whereas the draft declaration or ‘‘draft outcome document’’ 
published at the second preparatory session of the Dur-
ban Review Conference in October 2008 again implicitly 
criticized Israel, singled out the Israeli-Palestinian con-
flict for discussion, and advocated global legal codes that 
impose restrictions on the freedoms of religion, expres-
sion, thought, conscience, the media, and opinion; 
Whereas in December of 2008, the intersessional working 
group, chaired by Russia, published on the website of the 
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for 
Human Rights a revised ‘‘draft outcome document’’ that 
reaffirmed the biased 2001 Durban Declaration and Plan 
of Action ‘‘in its entirety’’; ratcheted up implicit criticism 
of Israel and singling-out of the Israeli-Palestinian con-
flict for discussion, and also increased its calls for global 
legal codes that impose restrictions on the freedoms of 
religion, expression, thought, conscience, the media, and 
opinion; 
Whereas the present United Nations High Commissioner for 
Human Rights and Secretary-General of the 2009 Dur-
ban Review Conference, Dr. Navanethem Pillay, has 
sought to minimize the level of hateful, anti-Jewish rhet-
oric and anti-Israel political agendas present at the 2001 
Durban Conference, describing it as merely ‘‘the virulent 
anti-Semitic behavior of a few non-governmental organi-
zations on the sidelines’’ and praising the biased Durban 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
Declaration and Program of Action as ‘‘[t]he legacy of 
this Conference’’; 
Whereas the present High Commissioner Pillay has repeat-
edly and publicly criticized nations that have announced 
that they do not plan to participate in the Durban Re-
view Conference or are considering not participating, but 
she has yet to publicly criticize countries who have thus 
far succeeded in using the conference’s preparatory con-
ference to criticize Israel and to attempt to restrict fun-
damental freedoms; 
Whereas a United Nations press release on September 8, 
2008, regarding an address by High Commissioner 
Pillay, disturbingly dismissed objections raised by non- 
governmental organizations to the Durban Review Con-
ference as ‘‘ferocious, and often distorted, criticism by 
certain lobby groups focused on single issues’’; 
Whereas on November 19, 2008, Israeli Foreign Minister 
Tzipi Livni announced that Israel would not participate 
in the Durban Review Conference and called on other na-
tions ‘‘not to participate in the conference, which seeks 
to legitimize hatred and racism’’; 
Whereas on December 16, 2008, Dutch Foreign Minister 
Maxime Verhagen announced that the Netherlands was 
considering not participating in the Durban Review Con-
ference, stating ‘‘It seems like the sole intention is to 
criticize Israel and condemn the West for slavery and its 
colonial history . . . We will take every opportunity at 
this time to fight racism and discrimination but we will 
not be used for a propaganda circus’’; 
Whereas to date, over $2,000,000 from the United Nations 
regular budget has been expended on Durban Review 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
Conference preparatory activities, and on December 24, 
2008, the United Nations General Assembly approved a 
program budget for the biennium 2008–2009 that, over 
the objections of the United States, the European Union, 
Canada, Australia, and other prominent Member States, 
will provide a significant portion of the funding for the 
Durban Review Conference and its preparatory activities 
from the United Nations regular budget; 
Whereas the United States is the largest contributor to the 
United Nations system, and is assessed for a full 22 per-
cent of the United Nations regular budget, which is fund-
ed by assessed contributions from Member States; 
Whereas funding Durban Review Conference activities 
through the United Nations regular budget would result 
in United States taxpayer dollars being used for those 
purposes; 
Whereas the United States decided to withhold from its 2008 
funding for the United Nations regular budget an 
amount equivalent to the United States share of the 
United Nations Human Rights Council budget, including 
its share of the Council-administered preparatory process 
for the 2009 Durban Review Conference; 
Whereas the preparation and management of the Durban Re-
view Conference has been committed to the United Na-
tions Human Rights Council; and 
Whereas during the 110th Congress the House of Represent-
atives approved a prohibition on United States funding 
for the United Nations Human Rights Council, and has 
strongly condemned the Council for ignoring severe 
human rights issues in other countries, while choosing to 
unfairly target the State of Israel: Now, therefore, be it 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 
(1) reaffirms the fundamental commitment of 
the United States to combating racism, racial dis-
crimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance; 
(2) believes strongly that the 2009 Durban Re-
view Conference, like its 2001 predecessor, has been 
subverted by members of the Organization of the Is-
lamic Conference and irredeemably distorted into a 
forum for anti-Israel and anti-Semitic activity; 
(3) urges the President and the Secretary of 
State to build upon present United States policy by 
publicly declaring that the United States will not 
fund or participate in any portion of the Durban Re-
view Conference or its preparatory activities; 
(4) urges the President and the Secretary of 
State to withhold from United States funding for 
the United Nations regular budget an amount equiv-
alent to the United States share of assessed con-
tributions for the Durban Review Conference and its 
preparatory activities; 
(5) urges the President and the Secretary of 
State to lead a high-level diplomatic effort to encour-
age other responsible nations to not fund or partici-
pate in any portion of the Durban Review Con-
ference or its preparatory activities; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
•HRES 42 IH 
(6) commends the governments of Canada and 
Israel for publicly refusing to fund or participate in 
the Durban Review Conference; and 
(7) calls upon the President and the Secretary 
of State to lead a high-level diplomatic effort to ex-
plore credible, alternative forums for combating rac-
ism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related 
intolerance. 
Æ 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
16:17 Jan 10, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\HR42.IH
HR42
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS