Pamela Taylor/Human Rights Tribune – It’s the issue that won’t go away and one that has dominated much of the discussion inside the Human Rights Council chamber. Muslim members have introduced the subject of Islamophobia into the nearly every debate, especially those on freedom of expression, religion and now, racism.

In the first instance, Western nations countered that freedom of expression should not be compromised by defamation of religion, which is already addressed in international and civil legislation. In the debate on religious discrimination, the West argued that discrimination against any religion is already covered in the existing UN mandate on religious freedom.

Not to be deterred, Muslim delegates raised the matter in the debate on the agenda for the 2009 world conference on racism. They insist that racism must be redefined, post-September 11, to include xenophobia, racial profiling and religious discrimination. But this time, some African nations may join the West in objecting that too much focus on religious discrimination will dilute the core meaning of racism.

When the UN expert on racism, Senegal’s Doudou Diene, delivered his annual report to the Council on Wednesday (March 19), he recommended that Durban II “should provide the opportunity for the international community to express its political commitment to assess these phenomena.”

Diene also drew member’s attention “to the serious nature of the defamation of religion, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and, more particularly, Islamaphobia.” This was seen by Western observers as an attempt to get greater support for including religious discrimination within the definition of racism.

However, according to Swiss delegate, Anh Thu Duong, the Durban I document already contains a reference to Islmaphobia and she reminded that "the aim is to protect individuals, not religions.”

Omar Shalaby of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the African delegates, referred to the “alarming increase in instances of incitement to racial and religious hatred.” While Egypt is leading the effort to put discrimination against Muslims on the Durban agenda, some delegates question whether all African members will go along.

A European diplomat told HRT he sees a gulf widening “between Sub-Saharan and North African countries “with religious discrimination being more important to the North while Sub-Saharan Africans consider racial discrimination the core issue for the conference.”

Even if some Africans oppose broadening the definition of racism when the issue comes to a vote next week, the result would merely soften what many think is a foregone conclusion – that religious discrimination in one form or another will be on the agenda for Durban II, wherever it takes place.

At present, the World Conference Against Racism, or Durban II, has no confirmed venue, no precise date and no chairperson. Although South Africa has offered to host the conference in Durban again in 2009, both Geneva and New York are also under consideration. Moreover, the person who will chair the conference has yet to be determined since it falls to the UN Human Rights High Commissioner and Louise Arbour has announced she will be stepping down in June.

In the meantime, preparatory meetings are proceeding apace to examine the progress that has or has not been made by UN member states to combat racist since Durban I. But these discussions have been complicated by the deate on whether or not the definition of racism should be broadened to include religious discrimination.

In January Canada announced it will boycott the 2009 conference on the grounds it would likely “degenerate into expressions of intolerance and anti-Semitism.” Israel followed suit in February saying it would also boycott unless “it is proven that the conference will not be used as a platform for further anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic behaviour.” In 2001, the United States and Israel walked out of Durban I to protest Arab-led attacks on Israel but Washington has not announced its intentions for 2009.

Report on racism