Boycot because of Freedom of Expression? ACTUAL WINDOW by Bob Corstens Myrthe Hennevelt 28th april 2009

Racism Summit Geneva th april, continuation of Summit 2001 in Durban Racism, xenophobia and related intolerance Already at ‘Durban I’ anti-semitism and zionism dominated the Summit. USA and Israel withdrew from Summit in 2001 Now same problems arose, and new initiatives were lost because of Islamic opposition.

Fears of abuse Certain (western) Countries and Human Rights organisations have doubts about the Summit. Attack on the western world by domination of islamic countries? Religion prioritised above Human Rights? Discrimination women and homosexuals ignored? Israel as a scapegoat?

Boycott Several countries did not want to be present Countries could not come to a joint conclusion President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran caused a lot of commotion with his statements: he said that the US, Europe and Israel are wrenching the world and he is of the opinion that Israel was formed with the excuse of the Jewish suffering of the WW II.

Dutch Position Minister of Foreign Affairs Maxime Verhagen Took the initiative to propose different closing statement of the Summit on behalf of the EU Expressed his good will to come to a joint conclusion but could not give in to demands Western world was a target of criticism, summit is to important to let abused for politic purposes. The Netherlands will not support that. “Certain countries are abusing the Summit, they are of the opinion that religion is more important than human rights and they’re using it to limit the freedom of speech.”

Questions? Should there be limits of freedom of expression for Countries? If so, were/how to limit? How should countries respond to extreme positions in the UN?