| 2. State delegations
The following UN member states participated in the Regional PrepCom
for the Americas: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados,
Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican
Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica,
Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela.
This section briefly highlights some perspectives of a few of the
participating government delegations. It is worth noting that the United
States and Canada participated jointly with the countries of Latin
America and the Caribbean for the first time within the framework of the
preparatory process for a World Conference. The presence of these two
countries affected the dynamics of the Regional PrepCom in important
ways. It was generally a positive development that for these purposes,
North America was grouped with the Americas, as opposed to with Western
Europe as it usually is. Nevertheless, on key issues such as
reparations, globalization, and the legacy of colonialism and slavery,
there was a clear alignment of Caribbean and Latin American countries
supporting more progressive positions than the United States and Canada.
- United States
The government delegation from the United States was probably the
largest and one of the most active at the Regional PrepCom. Its
official position was that it would not accept any compromise in the
Final Declaration or Plan of Action that would go further than U.S.
domestic laws. The United States strongly opposed issues such as
criminalizing racist speech, regulating the Internet, considering
slavery and the treatment of slaves as crimes against humanity, and
criticizing globalization as an instrument of racial discrimination.
On the subject of reparations, the United States only accepted the
proposal that dialogue be initiated at the national and international
levels to determine the content and necessity of reparations. With
respect to indigenous peoples, the United States accepted the use of
the term "peoples" provided that it contain a limitation
indicating that this did not imply any recognition of the right to
self-determination.
Among the positive aspects of the United States delegation, it is
worth mentioning that daily briefings were held with NGOs from the U.
S. to inform them of the intergovernmental debates and the positions
taken by the governments. With respect to the substantive themes, the
United States supported stronger language on the subject of the role
of education in the fight against racism, references to racial
discrimination in the criminal justice system, the need for collecting
and compiling statistics that are disaggregated according to ethnicity
and race, as well as a condemnation of anti-Semitism in the region.
- Canada
In general, the participation of Canada coincided with the work of
the United States. The only aspect in which the Canadian government
delegation apparently adopted a stronger and less progressive position
than that held by the United States was on the issue of the legacy of
colonialism. On that subject, Canada completely opposed any mention of
this issue.
However, the Canadian delegation did insist that the Final
Declaration and Plan of Action include sufficient references to the
important role that NGOs and civil society play in the fight against
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
- Brazil
The members of the Brazilian government delegation demonstrated
their activism and their openness to Brazilian civil society
organizations during the Regional PrepCom. It bears remembering that
in May of 2000, during the first global PrepCom in Geneva, the
government delegation and the Afro-Brazilian organizations had a
serious confrontation due to the government’s decision not to
organize the regional conference. In the view of many Afro-Brazilians,
the situation in Santiago was completely different, with important
Afro-Brazilian figures being part of the official delegation and with
the government delegates constantly consulting with the Afro-Brazilian
organizations and being open to their suggestions. The change of
attitude should be attributed, among other things, to the work done by
Afro-Brazilian organizations in the months prior to the Regional
PrepCom.
In substantive matters, it deserves mention that the Brazilian
government was one of the most ardent proponents of having the Final
Declaration and Plan of Action contain categorical language in
reference to Afro-descendants.
- Barbados
One of the high points in Santiago was the level of activism and
vanguard positions taken by the government delegation from Barbados.
In particular, the delegation advanced all of the issues related to
slavery and colonialism and their contemporary legacies, as well as
the need to establish specific mechanisms for reparations both within
countries and among States. The Barbados delegation also launched the
recognition of Caribbean societies as a model of integration for
multiracial societies.
- Cuba
In contrast to their participation in the first global PrepCom in
May 2000, the Cuban government delegation was not very active in
Santiago. While it supported the majority of the more progressive
initiatives presented, it did not take on a leadership role. Among the
issues which Cuba strongly supported were the condemnation of slavery
and colonialism as crimes against humanity, the critique of the
effects of globalization, and the affirmation of the close
relationship between poverty and racism. One of the issues that the
Cuban delegation actively pushed was the criminalization of racist
speech and regulation of the Internet. The U.S. delegation clashed
with the Cuban delegation on these points, with the United States
maintaining that it could not accept those proposals as it is bound by
the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, which protects freedom
of expression.
- Guatemala
Guatemala played an active role in the Santiago meeting. Not only
did it act as the General Rapporteur of the Regional PrepCom, it was
also the coordinator of an informal working group charged with
discussing how the issues of slavery, colonialism and their present
legacies would be treated. Guatemala also adopted an advanced position
with respect to the rights of indigenous peoples.
- Mexico
The principal theme on which the Mexican government delegation
worked was the question of migrants. It was the coordinator of a
working group on migrants, which reached a consensus on positions and
language, despite having to address difficult issues such as
xenophobia, the economic costs and contributions of migration, and the
need for reforming discriminatory migration laws.
- Other States
It is also worth mentioning that Peru insisted that the Final
Declaration include specific references to the situation of mestizos.
Uruguay, though not in a completely consistent way, defended the
positions promoted by the Afro-Latino organizations. Costa Rica and
Colombia were open in general to the suggestions of civil society
organizations and maintained very progressive positions on issues such
as the condemnation of slavery as a crime against humanity. Argentina,
however, maintained a highly passive position and only promoted the
inclusion of anti-Semitism in the Final Declaration.
 
|
