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