International UN conferences are not normally the kind of matters which occupy much attention in the US. An upcoming conference on racism in South Africa on August 31st is proving to be an exception.
Several newspaper editorials have called for limited US participation or an all-out boycott. The main sticking point for the US is draft resolution language equating Zionism with racism.
The US has threatened to boycott the event, as it did two previous UN conferences on racism in 1978 and 1983. The Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell, had been expected to lead the US delegation. But the New York Times, in an editorial, has called for Mr Powell to stay at home.
"Originally conceived as a forum on how to combat contemporary forms of racism, the meeting now threatens to dissolve into an unproductive debate about reparation payments for slavery, condemnation of Israel and such topics as whether the word holocaust should be capitalised," the paper wrote.
The paper, none the less, concludes that the US should send a representative. "Were the conference more promising, Secretary of State Colin Powell might consider leading the American delegation. At this point, however, his presence would lend the gathering a distinction it has not earned. But America should be represented." The New York Daily News said the US should not attend.
The issue is drawing attention. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, of the Congressional Black Caucus, wrote to President Bush saying there was "no acceptable reason" for the US to decline participation. Amnesty International, citing pervasive examples of racism and bias in the US, said the US should attend.
It is unlikely, however, that such calls will find a sympathetic response from Mr Bush or Vice-President Dick Cheney. When he was in Congress, Mr Cheney voted against a 1986 resolution seeking the release of Nelson Mandela from prison. He also voted against sanctions on South Africa during the apartheid era.
`Deep frustration' and anger over US boycott threat: page 6 US considers boycott: page 9