Whatever happened to that stupid "working definition of antisemitism"?

You know the one, the European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia Working Definition of Antisemitism. Well Richard Kuper may have the answer. Here he is on the JNews website:

Antisemitism and delegitimisation

Critics of Israel are increasingly accused of delegitimising Israel and encouraging antisemitism. This creates a climate of suspicion in which the onus is on critics to somehow demonstrate they are not antisemitic.

By Richard Kuper

Tuesday, 22 February, 2011 - 14:01

London, UK

The strong fight-back by Israel and its supporters against the country’s deteriorating public image has been sometimes crude, sometimes carefully pitched. The dissemination of a draft ‘working definition’ of antisemitism by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) in 2005 has proven particularly effective. Inadequate as a definition and never formally adopted, it is not up for discussion by those who could change it. Yet it is increasingly presented today as the definition of antisemitism. It cannot bear this weight.

It came about in 2004 after the EUMC published a report highlighting the need for an operational definition of antisemitism to provide a common standard for data collection across the EU. Eventually, the EUMC posted a ‘Working Definition of Antisemitism’ on its website.

The document was produced behind closed doors after a consultation with Kenneth Stern of the American Jewish Committee and others (see Roth, ‘Proposal for a Redefinition of Antisemitism’), but not including those experts, cited in the original report, who sharply distinguished between antisemitism and legitimate opposition to Israel – even though theEUMC intended the definition to be ‘in line with the theoretical arguments’ in the report.

Let’s look at the document itself. It is unclear whether ‘Working Definition’ means the whole document (which fills a single A4 sheet) or just this paragraph which is in bold italics and preceded by the phrase: Working definition:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

If this is indeed the definition, it is so vague as to be useless as a practical tool. If it is the entire document (headed ‘Working Definition of Antisemitism’), then it is not only unwieldy but also untrue to the original report which clearly differentiates political criticism of Israel from antisemitism. The ‘Working Definition’ leans towards conflating them.

Following the quoted paragraph, the document continues: ‘In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity.’ This single sentence has dominated the way the ‘Working Definition’ is read.

The use of ‘could’, here and later in the document, is loaded. Following six relatively unproblematic examples of antisemitism, the document again focuses on Israel and lists five ways in which antisemitism ‘could’ be manifested, which are both confused and tendentious. The text says that ‘the overall context’ should be taken into account. Yet, regardless of context, one of the examples – ‘using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism’ – could hardly be anything but antisemitic. As for the remaining examples, the word ‘could’ draws attention to only one possibility – antisemitism.

Take, for instance, its example of “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”. This could be antisemitic. Equally, denying that same right to Basques, Catalans, Scots or indeed the Zulu or Afrikaner nations/peoples, could be racist. But there are all kinds of non-racist reasons why someone might not support these national causes. The right to national self-determination is after all not the primordial right.

Or consider this: ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel’. Of course this is wrong. It could be antisemitic. But no-one makes this accusation when Zionists routinely conflate Jews collectively with Israel. Indeed it is hard to have a discussion about Zionism without this notion coming up positively, expressed clearly in the idea of Israel as the Jewish state, acting on behalf of all Jews (e.g. Olmert in August 2006: “This is a war which is fought by all the Israelis. I believe that this is a war that is fought by all the Jews.”)

The document is riddled with problems; which perhaps is why, contrary to what the European Forum on Antisemitism claims, the ‘Working Definition’ was not adopted by theEUMC. As Beate Winkler, EUMC Director, said at the time, it ‘should be viewed as “work in progress” … with a view to redrafting.’

In fact, the document appears to be dead in the water as far as the Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the successor body to the EUMC, is concerned. They recently told me that feedback on initial testing of the document ‘drew attention to a number of issues which impacted on its effectiveness as a data collection support tool.’ In other words, it wasn’t useful. ‘Since its development we are not aware of any public authority in the EU that applies it,’ the FRA official added.

Moreover, ‘The FRA has no plans for any further development’ of the ‘Working Definition.’ (24 August 2010)

The latest FRA publication on the topic - its Working Paper Anti-Semitism: Summary overview of the situation in the European Union 2001-2009 (April 2010) does not even mention the ‘Working Definition’. It does complain (p.3) that: “Even where data exist they are not comparable, since they are collected using different definitions and methodologies.” That was precisely the reason why a operational definition was called for in the first place. The ‘Working Definition’ clearly does not do this and is not fit for purpose.

None of this has stopped the perversely named ‘EUMC Working Definition’ from taking on a life of its own. The European Forum on Antisemitism has translated it into no fewer than 30 languages; in the United Kingdom an All-Party Parliamentary Enquiry into Antisemitismendorsed it uncritically (Sept 2006), as did the National Union of Students (March 2007, reaffirmed in 2010). Careless bloggers now even refer to it as the ‘EU definition’.

The reservations in the document, where things ‘could, taking into account the overall context’ be antisemitic, have all but disappeared in practice.

This document has little to do with fighting antisemitism and a lot to do with waging a propaganda war against critics of Israel. It is time it was buried.

Richard Kuper is a former chair of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, an organisation of more than 1,600 Jews in Britain. He grew up in apartheid South Africa and has been a political and social activist, publisher, trade-unionist and university lecturer.

This article may be reproduced on condition that JNews is cited as its source

So the answer to the question, whatever happened to that stupid "working definition of antisemitism"? is that it has been quietly dropped. This doesn't stop zionists across the media, not just "careless bloggers", from citing it as a basis for their bogus allegations.

EU threat to treat Israel like any other serial international law-breaker

Sheesh, this is a turn up for the books. Several former EU leaders have suggested that far from keep rewarding Israel for its persistent breaches of international law, the EU should impose sanctions instead, just like it would in the case of any other country in breach of international law. Here's the BBC website:

A group of 26 ex-EU leaders has urged the union to impose sanctions on Israel for continuing to build settlements on occupied Palestinian territory.

In a letter sent on Monday, they said Israel "like any other state" should be made to feel "the consequences" and pay a price for breaking international law.

The signatories include the former EU foreign affairs chief, Javier Solana.

But in a written response Mr Solana's successor, Catherine Ashton, said the bloc's approach would remain unchanged.

An Israeli foreign ministry official said the proposal represented "a giant leap of bad faith".

Israel complaining of bad faith. Anyone out there looking for a definition of chutzpah? Look no further.

Still this isn't quite as exciting as it might appear.  These people are ex-EU leaders.  Their careers are all sorted now so they can do what they didn't dare do when they were in office.  And according to EU Observer their plea is falling on deaf ears.  Also, this is on the BBC website.  I listen to Radio 4 every day and I haven't heard any of this on the radio and I am guessing it won't be on TV either.  Still it is another addition to the drip drip that is gradually turning the State of Israel into a pariah state so it is good news.

Hats off to Ireland, naff off to Israel

Here's some good news for now. See this from Ireland's main broadcaster, RTE:

The European Commission has halted a proposal to allow Israel access to potentially sensitive data on European Union citizens following concerns expressed by the Irish Government.

The concerns arose following the use of forged Irish passports in the murder of a Hamas operative, allegedly by Israeli agents.

In a surprise move this morning, the Commission said they would withdraw the application to effectively recognise Israel's data protection standards as being on a par with those enjoyed in the EU.

According to a spokesman for the Department of Justice, the European Commission acknowledged the concerns expressed by an Irish official about the reliability of the Israeli data protection regime.

There are some technical issues around Israel's data protection but there is a little more to it than that:

the Irish Government had raised concerns in the context of the fraudulent misuse of information on Irish passport holders for an extra judicial killing in Dubai and had articulated its anger about that on a number of occasions.

The objection, he said, was a further manifestation of this anger and protest at what had transpired in relation to, what was in essence, the stealing of data from legitimate Irish passports.

Mr Martin added, however, that he has made it consistently clear that Ireland wants good relations with Israel.

But over the past 18-24 months, he said, a series of events had happened which had put a strain on that.

So good news and bad really. That one of the economically weaker member states of the EU is standing up to Israel is a good thing but a clear majority of member states want those racist war criminals to get their hands on personal information about EU citizens. This will presumably help Israel harass anyone from the EU area who wants to assist the Palestinians in any way, be it campaigning, human rights information gathering or feeding or educating Palestinians. But there's respite because Ireland is digging in...for now.

Israel appeals to white solidarity

It is common for Israeli apologists to ask why Israel has become such a symbol of imperialism. The implication is that this is due to antisemitism. An alternative explanation is to note just how transparent Israeli support for racism is, not just against Palestinians but in general.

Here's the latest. Breaking the Silence, an Israeli organization of former Israeli soldiers that publicizes the atrocities committed regularly by the IDF through soldier testimonies, receives funding from a number of European governments, including the U.K., Spain and the Netherlands. That is great. The Israeli government is not happy, which is understandable. The Israeli Foreign office is now using is friendly relations in the Netherlands to try to cut the funding of the group.

According to sources familiar with the situation, Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen - considered one of Israel's staunchest supporters in the European Union - did not know that the embassy in Tel Aviv was funding Breaking the Silence. He learned about it after the organization's funding sources were published in an article in The Jerusalem Post.

Sources say Verhagen reproached senior figures in the Dutch Foreign Ministry upon learning this and gave instructions to launch an internal investigation on the matter. It showed that the embassy in Israel gave Breaking the Silence 19,995 euros to help put together its 2009 report, which discusses Operation Cast Lead and was released earlier this month.  (Haaretz, July 26, 2009)

Nobody should be surprised that Israel has plenty of European politicians willing to do their bit to help cover up its crimes. What is interesting is the logic of Israel's appeal to the Dutch Foreign Minister.

According to a senior Israeli official: "A friendly government cannot fund opposition bodies. We are not a third world country."

There you have it. States of white people can fund "oppositional" groups in states of dark people, but not in other states of white people. Everybody understands this global demarcation, but only Israeli diplomats are unselfconsciously racist enough to express it so blatantly.

Palestine solidarity activists in France reject antisemitism

Here's a letter from EuroPalestine in France about who they will be supporting in the up coming Euro elections:

Dear friends,

A short note about the elections at the European Parliament that will take place soon (June 7), to tell you that, as you know, we’ve asked all the political parties in France (except for the right and the extreme-right) to support the BDS campaign (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions against Israel) in order to put an end to Israel’s impunity.

We got only one positive answer : it came from the NPA (New Anticapitalist Party led by Olivier Besancenot). So we decided to support its candidates in the whole country. Inasmuch as these candidates do not only make statements about the boycott, but they act accordingly. See for instance this video : http://www.europalestine.com/spip.php ?article4089

In 2004, our association presented a list of EuroPalestine candidates in the Paris region, because at the time, not one party accepted to even quote Palestine as one of the issues to deal with at the European Parliament. So our tiny association spent more than 100 000 euros to be present in just one region in France (out of 8) — money that was not refunded. But we had a good campaign, even without any media coverage. This time we are happy to see that a larger organization, with more means, has agreed to deal with this vital issue. Of course this decision is linked to the indignation created among the population by the Gaza massacres, but also by the fact that many men and women in France and in Europe have not stopped their mobilization at the end of January, but have started being very active in the boycott campaign (of Israeli goods, for example). They have not waited for politicians to act. They have shown the way.

In 2004, The French comedian Dieudonne was part of our list of candidates. We chose him because he had principles. He had fought against the extreme-right (Le Pen’s National Front) in the city of Dreux, and had dared criticize the Israeli settlers on TV. But after the media — following the Israeli lobby decisions— rejected him from all kind of media appearance, he made the wrong choices, choices that we condemned as soon as September 2004, and that have nothing to do with the Palestinian cause. He chose to make a filthy alliance with the the extreme-right, becoming friend with le Pen, a man who is proud of having tortured Algerians during the French war in Algeria, who makes jokes about Blacks, saying that their unique competence is to run fast, who hates Jews and Arabs, and asks for the expusion of all immigrants from France.

Dieudonné announces that he will run in the European elections in Paris Region under the label : "Anti-zionist Party". But how can you fight zionism which is a form of racism consisting in excluding all those who are not Jewish from a land conquered by violence, and favor other kinds of racisms ?

We cannnot accept that. We want to fight for Palestine with those who share the sames values as we do, and kick back all the Lieberman (see the video http://www.europalestine.com/article.php3 ?id_article=4080 ) and alike. Let the boycott campaign become each day stronger in all Europe !

Best wishes, CAPJPO-EuroPalestine http://www.europalestine.com

Very sad about that Dieudonné chap, still c'est la vie.

EU gives Israel the Waldheim treatment

or was it the Haider treatment? Anyway, apparently even Germany is getting sniffy about Israel's more overtly fascistic government and that is saying something. Here's Der Spiegel:

Germany and the European Union are unhappy with the approach so far by Benjamin Netanyahu's government to the Middle East peace process. EU diplomats are increasing pressure on Israel to voice its support for a two-state solution that would see the creation of a Palestinian state.

In a series of diplomatic barbs, the German government has expressed its displeasure at the new, right-leaning Israeli government. German Chancellor Angela Merkel of the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) has delayed a joint meeting of the cabinets of both countries, initially planned for June, for an undetermined amount of time.

This really shows the absurdity of differentiating among the zionist rulers of Palestine. Lieberman and Netanyahu might not talk to the Palestinians about something they can fly a flag over in the West Bank and Gaza so the EU postpones diplomatic junkets for a while. On the other if they slaughtered Palestinian men, women and children at the same time as claiming to want those dead people to have a state the EU would line for piccies like they did when Tzipi Livni embarked on her election campaign known as "cast lead".

End of zionist project as EU spots Israel expanding

Wow, this is so exciting!!! The European Union has officially noticed Israel's expansionist tendency. Look at this headline in the Guardian:

Israel annexing East Jerusalem, says EU

But it's not just the headline. The article shows remarkable insight:

A confidential EU report accuses the Israeli government of using settlement expansion, house demolitions, discriminatory housing policies and the West Bank barrier as a way of "actively pursuing the illegal annexation" of East Jerusalem.

The document says Israel has accelerated its plans for East Jerusalem, and is undermining the Palestinian Authority's credibility and weakening support for peace talks. "Israel's actions in and around Jerusalem constitute one of the most acute challenges to Israeli-Palestinian peace-making," says the document, EU Heads of Mission Report on East Jerusalem.

The report, obtained by the Guardian, is dated 15 December 2008. It acknowledges Israel's legitimate security concerns in Jerusalem, but adds: "Many of its current illegal actions in and around the city have limited security justifications."

Zionist beware. It took European states a mere 60 years to notice the expansionist tendency of the project, whilst sycophantically noting Israel's "security concerns" - ie taking on board that the victims of ethnic cleansing sometimes resist. Can boycott, divestment and sanctions be far behind? Er yes, probably another 60 years.

Oh, hold on. I've noticed another issue here. The EU report is confidential. So the EU has finally noticed the zionist expansionist tendency but it wants to spare Israel's blushes by keeping it secret. Which is strange because Israel makes no secret of it.

EU envoy shocked, shocked that Israel can be so cruel

Israel must lift its ban on materials to rebuild Gaza after its offensive in a territory resembling "hell" where children have to sleep outside shattered homes, the European Union's Middle East envoy said in Jerusalem on Tuesday.

"What encouragement to terrorism would it be to rebuild the sewage system, have clean water, have kids going to school, have clinics that work, have mothers delivering their babies in safe conditions?" Marc Otte asked following Operation Cast Lead - Israel's devastating 22-day assault in the Hamas-ruled territory. (Haaretz)

Dear Marc Otte,

Let me explain it to you. You probably noticed the Israeli spokespersons calling the slaughter of civilians a strike against 'Hamas,' which is described in the West as a "terror" organization, despite being the party that won the elections, a resistance movement against a brutal occupation and a social and welfare network. This misidentification is not just a matter of propaganda. It is deeply felt. The word 'terrorist,' among Israelis and their supporters, means 'Palestinian'. Thus, all Palestinians are considered terrorists. The reason for that is that every Palestinian, even a child, strikes terror in the heart of Israelis. Israelis are terrorized by the fear that they might one day be held to account for the 100 years of crimes, of ethnic cleansing, land theft and murder. Israelis can forgive the German people the holocaust but they cannot forgive Palestinians for being their victims, and for being, simply by being, the incarnation of their fault. This is why they see the rebuilding the sewage system, letting kids go to school, drinking clean water, as an encouragement of "terrorism." For these children will learn at school that their houses and their fields, the lives their parents could have had, the world that was theirs, were stolen from them. And what is more horrible, more instilling terror in the heart of the perpetrators than the thought of a day of reckoning and the knowledge of their guilt?

Your question, dear Marc Otto, should not be directed to Israelis. The truth terrorizes them so much they can barely speak coherently. Your question should be directed at the governments that sent you. Ask them this:

For how long are you going to support and defend the criminals instead of supporting bringing them to justice? For how long are you going to support the murder of children in defense of the dispossession of their parents?