Crossing the Line: When Criticism of Israel Becomes Anti-Semitic

From Huffington Post:

Jonathan Greenblatt
National Director and CEO of the Anti-Defamation League

In the wake of a protest against a reception featuring an Israeli community group at a recent LGBTQ conference, there has been widespread controversy. We have read blog posts and articles, watched videos of the protest, and heard from friends and allies who were present at the demonstration.

Yet, what was perhaps most painful for many of us is that we value and embrace much of the good work of these activists and organizers. They are some of our nation’s leading advocates, working to secure justice and fair treatment to all. Often they stand as allies in our work for justice and equality.

Unfortunately, though, this fissure is not a new experience. Since starting as the CEO of ADL last summer, I personally have heard from many college students that their Jewish faith renders them pariahs on their campuses — unless and until they affirmatively denounce Israel.

Campus Hillels and other Jewish organizations that have long worked with LGBTQ campus groups, student of color organizations, and other progressive clubs on campus to host film festivals, panels, and other events increasingly are being shut out, rejected from participating, even when Israel is not on the agenda. Where other students are not being subjected to a litmus test on their views on Israel, Jewish students have been singled out and questioned about their objectivity and position on the issue.

As racial tensions flared across the country the past few years, we heard anecdotes from Jewish racial justice advocates that they were called “kikes” or targeted with other anti-Jewish slurs. When they tried to address the epithets, they were told they need to understand that “it’s because of Israel.”

Here’s the thing, though. It’s not. It’s anti-Semitism.

Let’s be clear. No government is immune from criticism. Surely neither the U.S. government nor the government of Israel nor any other. Indeed, we have criticized policies and practices of Israeli leadership when we felt appropriate to do so.

We recognize that anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian activists will condemn Israel. That is a reality. That is their right. We disagree – vigorously – with their accusations of pinkwashing, with claims that Israel is an apartheid state, and with other efforts to demonize Israel. And we will speak out, challenge their mischaracterizations, and dismantle their indictments with facts and truths, as is our right.

But when that criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism, we will condemn it. It is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated anywhere, especially not in social justice circles.
To be specific, when a person conflates Jews, Israelis, and the Israeli government, it is anti-Semitic. When all Jews and all Israelis are held responsible for the actions of the Israeli government, it is anti-Semitic. When Jews would be denied the right to self-determination accorded to all other peoples, it is anti-Semitic.

And when protesters chant “Palestine will be free from the river to the sea,” it is appropriately interpreted by most people as a call for the erasure of Israel – and it is anti-Semitic. Giving protestors the benefit of the doubt, it is unlikely that most intend their message to be anti-Semitic. However, regardless of the intent of the protest, the impact matters.

Yet, too often, when students, individuals, or organizations raise the specter of anti-Semitism it is quickly rejected, disregarded, or written off. Israel’s critics literally have written best-selling books decrying their so-called inability to criticize Israel.

But President Obama himself noted that anti-Semitism is on the rise. And, as he eloquently reminded, “When any Jews anywhere is targeted just for being Jewish, we all have to respond.. ‘We are all Jews.’ ”

Indeed, we know that women are best positioned to define sexism, people of color to define racism, and LGBTQ people to define homophobia, transphobia, and heterosexism. But, does this mean that all women must reach consensus on what offends them? All people of color? Everyone in LGBTQ communities? Hardly.

So too, we Jews are best situated to define anti-Semitism, even if all of us may not likely reach consensus on the definition. Our millennial experience with intolerance demands the same acknowledgement as other forms of bigotry. Indeed, it is the collective responsibility of activists and organizers across the ideological spectrum to stop and listen when someone says, “You’ve crossed the line.”

Standing up for rights of disempowered people is a job for us all. ADL has been doing it for more than 100 years. But marginalizing and wounding others in the process helps no one. Rather, it divides us and impedes our ability to find common ground in places where our collective strength could do so much good.

2 Responses to “Crossing the Line: When Criticism of Israel Becomes Anti-Semitic”

  1. Margo Schulter Says:

    Thank you for an opportunity as a Jew to address some very serious issues, starting with a possibly humorous question which Judith Butler and I may both face: “Can a Jewish feminist be both Lesbian and Bi(nationalist)?”

    My own position on the Palestine/Israel question is this: “A binational and inclusive Israel from the river to the sea!” Such an Israel would be based on equal civil and also nationality rights for Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, and might well be subdivided into 12-15 federal districts or cantons in order to represent the ethnic diversity of the country, to which a binary “two-state solution” cannot do justice.

    Having said that, I will happily agree that to equate Israeli policies with all Jews, or even with all Zionists (including binational Zionists like the Rabbi Judah L. Magnes and Albert Einstein), is anti-Semitism. That is the “Zion” of “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and such an equation deserves condemnation by all people of goodwill.

    However, the claim that Israel as now constituted has elements of “an apartheid state” is, unfortunately, not without reality, for anyone familiar with the realities of al-Nakba or the Palestinian Catastrophe of 1947-1949. Massive ethnic cleansing took place, and this neocolonial transfer was duly ratified by the Absentee Property Law of 1950. This injustice haunts Israel today, just as the Compromise of 1877 with its acceptance of Jim Crow haunted the USA for almost a century until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 began the process of righting a racist injustice.

    In fact, restoring the high principles announced in the Israeli Declaration of Independence (14 May 1948) would logically lead to some kind of evenhanded binationalism, including a right of return for Palestinian Arab refugees displaced by the 1948 conflict. At the same time, it is vital to affirm that Israeli Jewish nationality is a legitimate identity which will not be erased, but will exist in the peaceful coexistence with Palestinian Arab nationality on a nondiscriminatory basis.

    An evenhanded approach requires criticizing not only what I might call Palestinian-Exclusionary Zionist that seeks to justify, or at least to forget, the structural injustices growing out al-Nakba, but also some Jewish-Exclusionary tendencies in some Palestinian Arab positions voiced at times, for example the Palestinian Covenant of 1964.

    Binationalism, championed not only by Jewish thinkers but by such a great Palestinian thinkers as Edward Said and Lama Abu-Odeh, deserves consideration as a path toward equity and peace, and away from some of the anti-Semitic and anti-Arab prejudices that have been obstacles on the road to truth and reconciliation in Israel/Palestine.

    • Suzan Says:

      How is this going to work with Palestinian terrorist murdering Jews every chance they get? How does this cohabitate peacefully with the Death to all Jews peddled by the Imans and Hamas?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: