UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS U.S. RESOLUTION

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000073 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM PREL UNGA IS IR SUBJECT: UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS U.S. RESOLUTION CONDEMNING HOLOCAUST DENIAL, ISOLATING IRAN ¶1. (U) Summary. On January 26, the day before the sixty-second anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the UN General Assembly adopted by consensus a U.S.-sponsored resolution that condemned without reservation any denial of the Holocaust. The resolution garnered the support of 103 UN co-sponsors, including four Islamic countries - Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Indonesia and Turkey. Iran disassociated itself from the consensus, labeling the plenary proceedings a "hypocritical exercise" and condemning Israel's so-called "exploitation" of its historic suffering. However, Iran was wholly isolated. Egypt's Permrep delivered a remarkably conciliatory statement, declaring that, "...the Holocaust should be remembered as one of the dark points in the history of humanity" and urging the GA to revitalize a culture of peace, tolerance and co-existence. Introducing the resolution at the podium, U.S. Ambassador Alejandro Wolff said, "Those who would deny the Holocaust ... reveal not only their ignorance but their moral failure as well." Following adoption of the resolution, SYG Ban Ki-Moon issued a statement expressing his "strong support to see this fundamental principle respected both in rhetoric and in practice." End Summary. -------------- U.S. RALLIES SUPPORT FOR GA CONSENSUS -------------- ¶2. (U) Following an intense and coordinated two-week outreach initiative in the media and among UN delegations, the U.S. garnered 103 co-sponsors (plus three hopefuls who arrived too late) to support a concise resolution that "condemns without any reservation any denial of the Holocaust." Israel, the EU and Australia also advocated actively. The delegations of Barbados, Burundi and Tanzania told USUN that they had intended to join co-sponsorship, but reportedly misunderstood procedures (Burundi) or arrived too late at the morning session to sign the Secretariat's register. Only Iran disassociated its delegation from the decision. No other country publicly dissented. On January 26, the General Assembly adopted the resolution by consensus. Absent from the General Assembly were 21 delegations, including 11 countries that also declined to co-sponsor the resolution, including South Africa, Sudan, Somalia, Swaziland, Belize, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Tajikistan. ¶3. (U) Overall, however, language of the resolution (A/61/53) was lean enough to drive a principled consensus, while also conveying a strong rebuke toward any attempts to deny the history of the Holocaust. The resolution reaffirms an Israeli sponsored resolution of November 2005 (A/60/7), which designates January 27 as a UN International Day of Commemoration in memory of Holocaust victims. The text notes that everyone has a vital stake in a world free of genocide and encourages nations to include in their educational programs measures to confront attempts to deny or minimize the importance of such terrible, historic events. Although Iran and its recent Holocaust denial conference were not explicitly referenced in the text, implications of the resolution resonated resoundingly at UN headquarters and in the press. ¶4. (U) Mounting the GA dais to introduce the resolution, U.S. Ambassador Alejandro Wolff described the Holocaust as "one of the most tragic moral catastrophes in the history of mankind," which we must remember so it does not happen again. In a clear though unnamed reference to Iran, Ambassador Wolff added, "Those who would deny the Holocaust--and, sadly, there are some who do--reveal not only their ignorance but their moral failure as well." By adopting this resolution, Ambassador Wolff declared that the General Assembly would place its moral authority and its political will squarely behind the first words of the UN Charter, "to save succeeding generations." (Note: The full text of U.S. introductory and national statements are posted on USUN website www.un.int/usa/.) ¶5. (U) Prior to adoption of the resolution, Iran responded immediately to the U.S. introduction. However, Iran refrained from calling for a vote. Instead, an Iranian delegate read an explanation of position in which Iran "fully dissociated" from what it characterized as a "hypocritical exercise." Iran charged indignantly that the resolution masked "a mischievous intention" on the part of its main sponsors to pursue "narrow political interests." To justify its recent Holocaust denial conference, Iran argued that rigorous research, objectivity and scrutiny were required to "address historical events of horrific enormity," without any arbitrary restrictions, in order to prevent a recurrence. Iran cited other genocidal events as implicitly analogous in terms of "enormous suffering and pain to mankind," including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Palestine, Rwanda and the Balkans. The Iranian statement accused Israel of "routinely attempting to exploit the sufferings of the Jewish people in the past as a cover for the crimes it has perpetrated over the past six decades against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, including massacre, targeted assassination, ethnic cleansing and state terrorism." -------------- CHORUS OF SOLIDARITY FOLLOWS ADOPTION -------------- ¶6. (U) After the President of the General (PGA) gaveled to consensus the decision to adopt the resolution, at least eight delegations requested the floor to deliver overwhelmingly strong and supportive explanations of position and national statements. PGA Haya Rashed Al Khalifa (Bahrain) said, "By its action today, the Assembly has reaffirmed its condemnation of the Holocaust as a crime against humanity, and issued a strong reminder that the international community was united in opposing all crimes against humanity." Quoting Edmund Burke, she added: "All that is needed for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Later in the day, SYG Ban Ki-Moon issued a short statement that said the resolution reflected the prevailing view of the international community. His statement adds that the denial of historical facts such as the Holocaust are unacceptable, and expresses the Secretary-General's "strong desire to see this fundamental principle respected both in rhetoric and in practice." ¶7. (U) Of particular note among Members' statements, were some unusually conciliatory remarks from traditional adversaries, as well as emotive expressions of regret and shame that were movingly delivered, and at least one haunting premonition (from Israel.) Highlights follow: Egypt: Ambassador Abdelaziz stressed his "strong belief that the Holocaust should be remembered as one of the dark points in the history of humanity." He thanked the co-sponsors, particularly the European countries, for keeping that memory alive and for working to correct those mistakes. He asserted that the painful memories of the Holocaust should serve as a repugnant reminder of the need to combat racism, intolerance and xenophobia in all its forms, including Islamophobia, "and serve as a lesson that appeasing intolerant ideologies would cost humanity dearly." Germany: Ambassador Matussek acknowledged that the unprecedented crime of the Holocaust had been committed by Germans in the name of their country, and that Germany bore a very special responsibility stemming from that. On behalf of the EU, he said a prerequisite for combating racism or intolerance of any kind was a readiness to face the truth and not to distort historical facts. "Such distortions are a shameful failure of the common responsibility to ensure a world free from such atrocities," he concluded. Russia: Recalling that, "the memory of the monstrous crimes of Naziism is still alive today," Ambassador Churkin asserted that no one had the right to forget the tragedy. "It must be remembered in order to avoid its possible repetition," he said. Churkin particularly "honored as sacred" the memory of the six million and Jews and Europeans, half of whom had been citizens of the former Soviet Union. (Russia co-sponsored the resolution.) Venezuela: While acknowledging that millions of human beings had been Holocaust victims, the Venezuelan delegation regretted that "hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are being victimized by actions carried out in the name of democracy by the United States." Venezuela regretted that the resolution had not been broader in scope, asserting that it should have also covered the deaths of those killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the Palestinian people. Israel: In a direct and stinging rebuke of Iran, Ambassador Gillerman declared: "While the nations of the world gather here to affirm the Holocaust with the intent of never again allowing genocide, a Member of this Assembly is developing the capabilities to carry out its own. The President of Iran is in fact saying, 'There really was no Holocaust, but just in case, we shall finish the job.'" The Israeli PR employed a 1936 quotation from Winston Churchill to deliver a warning, describing Churchill's words as more poignant than ever. He quoted Churchill as saying: "The era of procrastination, of half measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays have come to a close. In its place, we are entering a period of consequences." U.S.: In a closing statement, Ambassador Wolff described a confluence of forces that were gathering ominously in Iran, including the regime's questioning of the Holocaust, President Ahmadi-Nejad's call for Israel to be "wiped off the map," and Iran's development of nuclear weapons. He described those forces as creating "a cauldron of conflict" that must not be ignored. He epitomized the significance of achieving international consensus on the resolution by concluding: "To deny the events of the Holocaust is tantamount to the approval of genocide in all its forms. Today we stand together saying to the world that we will not allow that to happen." -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶8. (SBU) Comment: Such a strong demonstration of solidarity in support of a U.S. sponsored resolution provided a rare moment of moral and political uplift in the UN General Assembly. Iran received an unequivocal message. Egypt's statement represented a well crafted breakthrough in terms of empathy toward Holocaust victims and a willingness to stake out a moral high ground on universal tolerance. In mounting a campaign for this initiative, USUN reached out proactively to create a buzz in the press, which may have helped shame potential opponents and avert a vote, which would have been construed as a setback. In the end, most UN officials recognized that the General Assembly itself was a victor as it served as a sounding board and international platform for universal values and high moral purpose. WOLFF