A/76/434 it in General Assembly resolution 56/266. There is thus a growing trend of States disengaging from Durban follow-up. 80. As mentioned above, some States and NGOs allege that the Conference was not anti-racist and similarly condemn its outcome document. Such assertations are false. 81. Paragraph 63 of the Declaration reads as follows: “We are concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation. We recognize the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self -determination and to the establishment of an independent State and we recognize the right to security for al l States in the region, including Israel, and call upon all States to support the peace process and bring it to an early conclusion.” Paragraph 64 reads as follows: “We call for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region in which all peoples sha ll co-exist and enjoy equality, justice and internationally recognized human rights, and security.” As with all other peoples, Palestinians deserve the full recognition of their fundamental human rights. 82. In paragraph 151 of the Programme of Action, with regard to the situation in the Middle East, Member States called “for the end of violence and the swift resumption of negotiations, respect for international human rights and humanitarian law, respect for the principle of self-determination and the end of all suffering, thus allowing Israel and the Palestinians to resume the peace process, and to develop and prosper in security and freedom”. Despite the arguments of its critics, the Programme of Action is not focused only on violence against Palestinians; the above language is most clearly interpreted as calling for the end of suffering on both sides. 83. The Durban Declaration and Programme of Action paragraphs relating to the Middle East conflict were “consistent with what the United States had agreed to in the past”, and with the post-Conference policies of the administration of the President of the United States, George W. Bush, regarding the conflict. 97 In the months after the Conference, the recognition of Palestinians’ right to an independent State was endorsed by President Bush and by the United Nations in a Security Council resolution backed by the United States, and the concern for the plight of the Palestinian people under occupation reflected widespread understanding of the legal status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. 98 While many critics of the Conference questioned why other geopolitical conflicts were not considered in document, the fact that the second intifada was ongoing at the time provides key context. News media __________________ 97 98 21-15325 Gay McDougall, “The World Conference against Racism: through a wider lens”, Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, vol. 26, No. 2 (Summer/Fall 2002), p. 148. Ibid. A White House press secretary stated that Mr. Bush considered a Palestinian State to be “part of the vision” for the Middle East and that it was “important to respect Israel’s right to exist in security”, adding that the United States believed that Palestinians and Israelis should each be able to live “peacefully and securely in their own State”; Security Council resolution 1397 (2002) was adopted by a vote of 14–0; and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Israel, Shimon Peres, called the conference in South Africa a “great success” for Israel and expressed “satisfaction that hateful chapters against the Jewish people were withdrawn from the final declaration”. See Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary, United States of America, White House press briefing, 2 October 2001; Council resolution 1397 (2002), second and third preambular paragraphs, and S/PV.4489; and Agence France-Presse, “UN conference success for Israel says Peres”, The Irish Times, 9 September 2001. In addition, the mention of “foreign occupation” in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, and the support expressed therein for the human rights of the Palestinians more broadly, is consistent with international law and consensus, including the positions later adopted by several States that boycotted the Durban follow-up events. See Council resolution 2334 (2016); and John Kerry, Secretary of State, United States, remarks on Middle East peace, 28 December 2016. 21/26