Canada has pulled out of the followup to the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism conference in Durban, South Africa, saying it’s shaping up to be a repeat of the original, which was widely criticized as a forum for anti-Semitism and Israel-bashing.

Last week, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, Maxime Bernier, and the country’s secretary of state for multiculturalism and Canadian identity, Jason Kenney, issued a joint statement suggesting that discussions in the run-up to the second conference indicate the 2009 meeting will be similar to the first.

“Secretary of State Kenney and I had hoped that the preparatory process for the 2009 Durban Review Conference would remedy the mistakes of the past. Despite our efforts, we have concluded that it will not. Canada will, therefore, not participate in the Durban Review Conference in 2009,” Bernier said in a statement announcing the pullout.

Kenny concurred, adding: “Canada will continue to focus its efforts on genuine anti-racism initiatives that make a difference,” referring specifically to the federal government’s participation in the Task Force for International Co-operation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research as an example.

Commonly referred to as “Durban II,” the 2009 conference will take place in the same location as its predecessor.

It’s being planned by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) – the body that last week passed a one-sided resolution calling on Israel to end its “siege” of Gaza. The UNHRC will be chaired in 2009 by Libya and vice-chaired by Cuba, with Iran sitting on the Durban II organizing committee.

The American and Israeli delegations both walked out of Durban I in disputes over language that sought to equate Zionism with racism. The conference was also heavily criticized by Jewish groups and others worldwide for its blatant anti-Semitic bias and extreme focus on Israel.

Canadian Jewish groups lauded the government’s decision to withdraw from Durban II.

Canadian Jewish Congress called the withdrawal a “a solid and principled” stance, while B’nai Brith said Canada acted “honourably” in the matter.

Amir Gissin, Israeli consul general for Toronto and Western Canada, also praised the decision.

“We see [Durban II] as an anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic circus,” Gissin told The CJN. “Canada’s decision not to lend its hand to it is something we greatly appreciate… and hope sets an example for the rest of the world.”

Leo Adler, director of national affairs for the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center, called the decision “bold and brave.”

“The fact that Canada has tried its best to change the mood and tenor of Durban II and… see to it that the poisonous atmosphere of 2001 is not repeated, speaks volumes about this government’s commitment to… values of freedom and liberty,” Adler said.

Even members of the Opposition applauded Ottawa’s choice.

The group Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel – co-chaired by Winnipeg South Centre MP Anita Neville and Senator David Smith – issued its own statement.

“We are pleased that the government is finally taking this issue seriously and is doing the right thing,” Neville said.

Smith added: “It is inappropriate for Canada to advance the international human rights agenda through a forum that makes a mockery of the fight against racism and discrimination.”

Various Canadian NGOs have denounced the government’s move, saying   an official Canadian presence should   be a part of any conference on racism.

Though the Durban I conference was overshadowed by the later events of Sept. 11, 2001, many remember how a forum that was supposed to be a watershed gathering aimed at fighting racism and discrimination was hijacked by an anti-Israel agenda.

Speaking to The CJN last week, Liberal MP, noted human rights advocate and former federal justice minister Irwin Cotler said he was pleased that the government pulled out of Durban II.

“[Ottawa] made the right decision in not being there,” he said. “All the preparatory signs for Durban II [indicate] a re-run of Durban I. Those of us who were at Durban I and witnessed that festival of hate will never forget the depth and pervasiveness of the hate at that conference.”

Cotler added that besides the fact that Iran, Libya and Cuba – all “oppressive regimes [and] all explicit in their anti-Israel indictments,” he said – are on the organizing committee of Durban II, there is another reason to shun the conference.

“The UNHRC, which has made a fetish of condemning Israel while giving major human rights violators exculpatory immunity… will have the super-attending authority over the [preparatory committees] on the way to Durban II,” he said. “And the meetings of the prep-comms are scheduled to take place on both Passover and Yom Kippur. One would have thought that with the remembrance of Durban I, the organizers would have been sensitive to anything that appears to exclude Jews, Israel and their representatives. They chose not only to ignore [the lessons of] Durban I, but to repeat… a mocking insensitivity to the Jewish people.”

Cotler expressed hope that Canada would now consider hosting an “alternative” anti-racism conference to demonstrate that Ottawa is committed to being at “the forefront of the struggle against racism.”

Cotler said he would promote the idea in Ottawa.

 The UN Human Rights Council last week adopted a resolution calling for an “end to grave violations committed by Israel” against Gaza.

It also calls on “the occupying power, Israel” to immediately “lift the siege it has imposed on the Gaza Strip.”

The motion was brought forward by Syria on behalf of the Group of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference and was passed by a count of 30 votes for, one against and 15 abstentions.

Canada was the lone member-state to vote against the resolution. The United States and Israel are not part of the council.

Nowhere in the text of the resolution are calls made to end daily rocket fire from Gaza into Israel.

Citing the absence of any balanced language in the resolution, Slovenia, speaking on behalf of the rest of the European Union voting members, decided to abstain, saying the resolution lacked “an acknowledgement of civilian casualties on both sides.”

In a Jan. 24 Associated Press report, Louise Arbour, the UN high commissioner for human rights and former Canadian Supreme Court justice, said Israel’s closure of the Gaza border was causing “desperation” for Palestinians.

The same report quotes Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Izhak Levanon, as saying, “I am glad Israel did not participate in this circus.”

Canadian Jewish groups hailed Canada’s vote against the resolution.

In a personal letter, Moshe Ronen, chair of the Canada-Israel Committee, thanked Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier for Canada’s stance on the council.

“I greatly appreciate Canada’s support for Israel’s right to security and its condemnation of Palestinian terrorist attacks,” Ronen wrote. “Canada demonstrated principled leadership in voting against such a one-sided resolution and sent a clear message to the world that Canadians will not accept the hijacking of UN institutions.”

U.S. Ambassador Warren Tichenor said the council had “squandered its credibility” by failing to address continued rocket attacks against Israel.

The council’s actions, he said “do nothing to help the Palestinian people, in whose name the supporters of this session claim to act.”

With files from JTA