Knowing well in advance that the World Conference on Racism in Durban, South Africa, would take a definite anti-Israel spin, the United States had several ways to prepare an appropriate response. The one it chose – leaving the conference in a huff – was the least desirable.

Certainly, the State Department had a responsibility to assert, in the most strenuous manner diplomacy allows, that it would not allow a conference designed to confront the serious issue of racism to be hijacked by Arab states and distorted into a platform for Jew-bashing. Both the United States and Israel boycotted the two previous U.N. racism conferences – in 1978 and 1983 – in part because of similar attempts to single out Israel for condemnation, so the direction the 2001 conference took was sad but hardly a surprise.

The time gap between this conference and the last is even sadder – 18 years is far too long between attempts by the world to address the cause of so much misery, hatred and war. The utter lack of progress since the first conference flopped 23 years ago is appalling.

The withdrawal from the conference Monday by the United States and Israel was caused by language the Arab bloc forced into a proposed draft of the conference’s final proclamation which stated that the nations of the world viewed with “deep concern the increase of racist practices of Zionism” and said Zionism, the movement to create a Jewish state, “is based on racial superiority.” Israel was the only country mentioned specifically in the document, which accused it of “practices of racial discrimination.”

The two withdrawing countries knew the attack was coming and took steps to limit the damage by sending delegations of only mid-level staff. That wisely shielded high-profile diplomats, such as Secretary of State Colin Powell, from humiliation on the global stage, but, unfortunately, further plans for preventative action were not laid.

The United States and Israel do have allies at the conference – all 15 nations of the European Union, South Africa and other sub-Saharan nations, the developed nations of Asia. With that kind of clout to counter the anti-Israel attack, the United States could have been part of a strong, multi-nation stand against this blatant attempt to subvert the conference. A direct, unambiguous statement of unity by the United States and its allies before the conference would have been an effective pre-emptive strike against the proposed draft resolution. Failing that, a mass withdrawal – such as the EU now threatens – would have been more effective than the U.S.-Israel walkout.

Now, the United States is being accused of deliberately thwarting the conference to avoid a frank discussion of slavery. That is a baseless allegation, given that Africa sees European nations, the merchants in that hideous trade, as far more responsible than the United States and other countries that, as colonies of European powers, had slavery imposed on them. Unfortunately, the United States is not there to defend itself.

The neat sequence of events is clear indication that the entire scenario was planned and that the United States got suckered in. The unity that still exists among the EU and other nations is evidence that there was consultation before the conference on an effective response to the anti-Israel gambit, consultation in which the United States chose not to participate. This is not the first time the Bush administration’s go-it-alone approach to foreign policy has caused problems; nor is it the first time it has caused such needless embarrassment.