The UN Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, is timely and I praise the UN in organising it as racism is an issue that we all must come to grips with. Unfortunately, the direction of this potentially great event has been usurped and sidetracked by other issues that may not belong here.

On the Palestinian question, I do not support by any means Israel's occupation of what is rightfully Palestinian territory or the oppression of the Palestinian people there and I join others in condemning Israel for these acts. Yet neither do I support suicide bombers blowing up school children or snipers constantly shooting at civilian targets.

This is clearly a political issue about land rights. One might even say it could be a religious issue but we can't deny that land is the central issue here.

A few years back Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was accused of being anti-Semitic, to which he replied that he wasn't as Arabs were also Semites.

This is not a racial issue and it has no place at this conference. It is detracting from the real racial issues that need to be resolved.

On the issue of reparations for slavery, I'd say that this is also a misguided cause even though it is a racism issue. Again I must make my disclaimer and denounce slavery in all its forms both past and present but do reparations at this point make any sense? First of all we must remember that historically many of the slaves taken to European countries and colonies were slaves already as a result of tribal conflicts in west Africa and were sold to the European slave traders by Africans.

Also today, when the descendants of former slaves are free and equal under the law, and given the same rights as anyone else, why should these people receive financial reparations? After all, even the poorest African American is probably better off than his or her African brethren. Sure it took a long time to win these rights and the struggle continues but progress is clearly evident.

Perhaps if reparations are to be given, the descendants of American slaves should be offered the money for 40 acres of land and a mule (the promise given by Abraham Lincoln) in 1865 dollars and a first-class plane ticket (one way) to an African country of their choice and see how many take the offer? This comment may seem trite but I'm trying to emphasise the ridiculousness of reparations.

Similar arguments can be put with regard to reparations for colonisation. Again, yes the colonisers took much from the colonised but they also gave other things such as democracy, government systems and some infrastructure (although I acknowledge the earlier letters to malaysiakini criticising this argument).

The colonisers should not be blamed for the governments who took over after they left, many of whom came to power in bloody civil wars and coups.

If we want to discuss unsupportable reasons for reparations, let's also talk about reparations that the Oil Cartel countries owe the developing world for causing the Oil Crisis of the 1970s which led to the developing world debt crisis of the 1980s which in turn led to a widening North-South gap and the destruction of the economies of many Southern countries.

In short, this conference is a indicator of the times where the developing world is taking over the UN for its own purposes.

The recent ejection of the US from some key UN committees is another indication of this.

Now I'm not saying that given the developing world's population and problems that it should not have a say in world policy. The developed world has controlled and still controls the UN to an overly great extent.

Perhaps this could lead to positive developments by giving the powerful western countries a scare to make them more inclusive and sensitive to the needs of the developing world. Yet it could also lead to a dysfunctional UN and perhaps it will go the way of the League of Nations before it.

If that's what the developing world wants, then it's working; if not, then they had better be a little more careful in approaching these issues.