|
WASHINGTON,
Jul 23 (IPS) - A leading US human rights group is calling for the
upcoming world conference against racism to approve a process by
which reparations for slavery, racial discrimination and other extreme
forms of racism can be assessed.
The
US administration is so uneasy about reparations, among other issues
on the agenda, that it has yet to decide whether it will participate
in the Aug 31-Sep 7 conference in Durban, South Africa. The new
proposal, from Human Rights Watch (HRW) is designed to overcome
officials' discomfort and comes as support for the cause grows among
various elements of US society.
In
a five-page policy statement, HRW urges that national and international
panels be set up to discuss past abuses and redress their impact.
Reparations should take the form of enhanced enforcement of social
and economic rights for victimised groups, the rights watchdog says.
Within countries, measures would include investments in education,
housing, health care, or job training.
Possible
remedies at the international level include debt relief and preferential
trade.
''We're
not talking about a handout or a windfall,'' says Kenneth Roth,
executive director of the largest and most influential of US rights
groups. ''We are calling for long-term commitments to correct the
damage done to the groups left most seriously disadvantaged.''
HRW
urges a particular focus on helping groups that continue to suffer
the effects of past abuses - even those, like slavery in the United
States, that were legally abolished many years ago.
''Those
most seriously victimised today by past wrongs should be the first
priority for compensation to end their victimisation,'' says Roth.
Claims
for reparations against past abuses should be based on "contemporary
effects", HRW's paper explains, because of the practical difficulty
of proving old claims and likely resistance from current generations
to take responsibility for abuses that occurred long before they
were born.
Compensation
for past wrongs is perhaps the most controversial issue on the agenda
of the UN-sponsored talks in Durban, formally called the World Conference
against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
Some
African leaders and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have said
the conference might be a good vehicle for gaining reparations for
colonialism. Caribbean, Latin American, and US citizens of African
descent have said it might serve as a forum for addressing compensation
for slavery and the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
These
issues have Washington policy-makers worried. The administration
of President George W. Bush has not decided whether it will attend
the Durban conference, and, if it does, at what level it would be
represented. Officials say decisions likely will be made only after
a preparatory committee meeting in Geneva at the end of this month.
There, negotiators will try to settle on a final agenda for the
Durban talks.
NGOs
here have urged Secretary of State Colin Powell, in a letter, to
head the US delegation. Powell has yet to reply. In testimony before
Congress last month, he hinted that Washington might be far less
inclined to attend the conference if the subject of reparations
becomes a major focus.
Powell
told lawmakers he had told UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Mary Robinson, a prime mover behind the conference, that he was
''anxious to see strong US participation in the conference, but
that some serious work had to be done to eliminate such issues as
a 'Zionism is racism' proposition or getting into slavery and compensation
and things of that nature that would detract from the purpose of
the conference.''
''We
don't want to derail this conference, but these issues could derail
it and make it harder for us to participate,'' he said, stressing
that Washington wanted a ''forward-looking conference that points
the way ahead.''
HRW's
statement is designed to do just that, says Reed Brody, the organisation's
advocacy director.
"If
you want a constructive way forward that, on the one hand, doesn't
offer a windfall or handout to anyone, but, on the other hand, addresses
current marginalisation and deprivation, then this is a reasonable
way to go," Brody says.
Specifically,
HRW proposes setting up international panels to assess the impact
of the slave trade, and reparations panels in multi-racial countries
such as the United States, Brazil and South Africa.
The
panels would serve as ''truth commissions'' to reveal the extent
to which a government's past racist practices contribute to today's
deprivation, both domestically and abroad. Their role would be to
educate the public, acknowledge responsibility, and propose ways
to make amends.
The
panels would focus on the impact on entire groups rather than particular
individuals, says HRW, which consulted leaders of the reparations
movement here and in Africa in drawing up its proposal.
This
movement has grown stronger in recent years, particularly in the
wake of major successes for other groups: Japanese-Americans have
gained compensation for their internment during World War II. Jews
and other victims of Nazi Germany have effectively pressed slavery
reparations claims against the German government and German and
other European companies.
Last
March, the Oklahoma Commission to Study the Race Riots of 1921,
a massacre of blacks in which an entire community was displaced,
recommended that survivors and their descendants be paid reparations.
In June, the Philadelphia Inquirer, one of the most important of
US big-city newspapers, endorsed the creation of a national reparations
commission.
At
least ten US city councils have endorsed the idea of a federal "impact
statement" on slavery.
Several
large US corporations have formally apologised for their role in
promoting and sustaining slavery before the Civil War. A coalition
of civil rights groups, acting on behalf of the descendants of slaves,
is preparing class-action lawsuits seeking reparations from the
government and companies that benefited from slavery.
Reparations,
according to HRW, should mean not only financial compensation, ''but
also acknowledgement of past abuses, an end to ongoing abuses, and,
as much as possible, restoration of the state of affairs that would
have prevailed had there been no abuses.'' (END/IPS/NA/HD/JL/AA/01)
|
