Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

The EU and Anti-Semitism

by Londonbear
Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 06:33:50 AM EST

At various times during discussion of Israel and Palestine on Daily Kos, pro-Israelis will come up with a reference to the European Union having a definition of antisemitism and claiming that it has been officially adopted by the "European Commission".

The matter is fudged on Wikipedia under the entry for "New antisemitism" (in part}

In September 2004, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, a part of the Council of Europe, called on its member nations to ensure that anti-racist criminal law covers antisemitism. In 2005, the EUMC offered a definition of antisemitism, [98] one that the British government was urged to adopt by a 2006 all-party parliamentary inquiry. Some contemporary examples included, but were not limited to:

There then follows a list of actions.

This set me off further investigating as those of you who know anything of European and EU institutions will know that the Council of Europe is not an EU body. Having tried to navigate the EU's sometimes labarynthine web sites, not helped by a change in the name of the body, I contacted the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Today I received an answer to my email which states quite simply at the end:

Finally I stress once again that "working definition" is part of an ongoing process with no legal basis whatsoever.

This was the main part of my email to the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA):

I have great difficulty in finding on your site or the main Europa site a definition of "anti-semitism". Is there one separate from the general treaties, including the Treaty of Amsterdam? Does it list activities which are automatically regarded as anti-semite and are there ones which must be judged separately?
If a separate definition exists, what status does this have within the acquis? Which EU bodies have endorsed this?
These questions are prompted by assertions I have had from certain pro-Zionists that I have encountered which claim the EU regards criticising actions by the state of Israel's actions towards the Palestinians is defined by it as anti-semitism. This has also been
phrased in terms of "the oppressed becoming the oppressors". Does the EU regard comparisons of actions by the Israeli governments to action by the Nazis or the apartheid regimes of South Africa to be automatically anti-semitic remarks? These appear to be the interpretations presented by those Americans I have encountered and it would seem that this would
have the effect of restricting criticism of another form of Xenophobia.

The response makes it clear that the "definition" is a working definition used by the FRA and its allied agencies for the purpose of data collection and "supporting the implementation and enforcement of legislation dealing with antisemitism". The exact definition is solely:

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

.pdf original

It indeed lists actions and opinions which might be regarded as antisemitism but, and this is the part frequently omitted, "taking into account the overall context".

The FRA also directed me to the background on this working definition.

The EUMC Report on Antisemitism published in March 2004 highlighted both the lack of operational definitions of antisemitism in most EU Member States and the insufficient data comparability due to the different methodologies used by primary data collectors.
In order to support the collection of more specific and relevant data and to have a very precise view on the developments of anti-Semitism the EUMC and OSCE/ODIHR consulted Jewish organisations like the European Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee , other major Jewish NGO's and prominent academics. Informal discussions were held with a view to develop a common "working definition" in line with the theoretical arguments elaborated in the EUMC's antisemitism report, whose author was also consulted to ensure that the working definition is compatible with the theoretical considerations outlined in the report, which was adopted by the EUMC's Management Board.
This working definition has a practical purpose acting as a basic guide to both official and non-official primary data collecting agencies highlighting possible examples of antisemitism, taking into account the overall national context.
The text was sent to the EUMC's RAXEN network (organizations based in each EU Member State contracted by the EUMC to collect data) for distribution among data collecting agencies in order to get feedback regarding its functionality, effectiveness and relevance to their country specific situation. The role of the network does not include primary data collection. However, since they interact with both official and non-official primary data collectors, they were asked to discuss this working definition with them and provide the EUMC with feedback regarding their views on its functionality. The text will be reviewed again with all those involved in the process and the next steps will be discussed with OSCE/ODIHR and the Jewish organisations.
For the EUMC the "working definition" is developed as a practical tool to support more accurate data collection and is part of an ongoing process having no legal basis. Similar "working definitions" for data collection proposes, improving comparability and effectiveness, will be also developed in the future for other subjects.
The OSCE/ODIHR's involvement is particularly important, since they have announced that they will also be collecting data on antisemitism in the near future, and is therefore worthwhile to make an effort to ensure coherence and consistency.

What is clearly a tool to provide common standards of data collection has somehow been transformed into official EU policy in the eyes of some on Kos. It is also interesting to note that changes in definitions also have an affect on the data collected. To take one example, the number of racist incidents reported by the police in the UK rose significantly when the victim was asked if he considered the incident racist. Clearly country by country increases in antisemetic incidents can be recorded where the country's definition remains the same. On the other hand, EU wide statistics may well be affected by the adoption of a common working definition and its accompanying notes.

The EU and Anti-Semitism | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Why, at DKos, have you been playing games (1.00 / 3)

with this diary? I refer to your posting it, deleting it, reposting it, and redeleting it?

And why post a diary here making allegations about conduct at Daily Kos?

"`Our country, right or wrong!' . . . when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." (Sen. Carl Schurz)

by one of the people on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 09:42:22 AM EST

Re: Why, at DKos, playing games (3.50 / 2)

"why post a diary here making allegations about conduct at Daily Kos?"

Ya gotta be kidding. Ya really gotta be kidding.

by shergald on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 12:48:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why, at DKos, have you been playing games (3.50 / 2)

To an extent, BMT has become the unwitting repository of all things dkos. Unfortunately many here are dkos refugees for whom agent orange holds little fascination.

Fear will keep the local systems in line. -Grand Moff Tarkin Survivor Left Blogistan

by boran2 (blogistan@yahoo.com) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 03:30:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

agent orange/agent purple (none / 0)

I haven't been around dailykos enough to understand the reference to agent orange.

Now I do understand about agent purple as Canada was developing something far worse than agent orange to use against the Vietnamese people, even though we were not at war against the Vietnamese people. It's ok though as we exposed our soldiers to it first. You know - with friends like Canada... or is that the government will look after you... But I am pretty sure that this is not what you are talking about.

by edwin333 on Thu Jun 7th, 2007 at 03:46:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's also deal with some substance. (none / 1)

Here's what the paper has to say about criticism of Israel:

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

Obviously, this explication of the working definition rests on certain assumptions. One assumption, for example, appears to be that "contemporary Israeli policy" is not meaningfully similar "to that of the Nazis."

I confess I have not closely followed discussions at Daily Kos about the EUMC working definition. Inasmuch as you felt moved to post a diary accusing some members of Daily Kos of misusing the definition, I would appreciate the diarist providing some representative examples of alleged this alleged misuse together with a substantive commentary explaining why the examples constitute misuse. And I would invite you to do so at Daily Kos, so that the people you accuse can have fair notice and an opportunity to respond.

"`Our country, right or wrong!' . . . when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." (Sen. Carl Schurz)

by one of the people on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 09:45:28 AM EST

Re: Let's also deal with some substance. (4.00 / 5)

Those were part of a definition of antiSemitism supplied by an EU organization by a right wing Likudnik ZIonist organization in America, the American Jewish Committee. Next to the Zionist Organization of America, the AJC is probably the worst exemplar of an AIPAC laison in the country.

Criticism of Israel being antiSemitic is probably the worst of the lot, hidden among quite appropriate symptoms of antiSemitism, thus giving them equal significance.

This is really a checklist of antiSemitism so that it is no longer necessary to understand the basis for a criticism of Israel. It mere fact is enough. And that Israelis and even a rabbi, I believe, made comparisons of Israel's behavior toward Palestinians in the West Bank with Nazi behavior. That is troubling. Before long they will add comparisons to apartheid South Africa as being antiSemitic. Of course, such a comparison is not appropriate, since we now have South Africans like Bishop Tutu claiming that Blacks were never treated the way Israelis treat Palestinians.

by shergald on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 12:57:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's also deal with some substance. (1.75 / 4)

Contemporary Israeli policy "is" similar to that of the nazis.

In fact I would say they are almost exact if you look at the early stages of the nazis actions against the jews...the Israelis just haven't gone as far as the nazis...Yet. But no doubt in my mind if the world wasn't watching they would.

Dont' see how it could be any plainer.

by calypso on Wed Jun 6th, 2007 at 02:33:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obviously not (none / 1)

Obviously, this explication of the working definition rests on certain assumptions. One assumption, for example, appears to be that "contemporary Israeli policy" is not meaningfully similar "to that of the Nazis."

But the qualifying phrase -- "taking into account the overall context could include" -- means that the assumption is that there may be contexts where any of the listed rhetoric could be legitimate and not anti-Semitic. (And the working group definition doesn't imply that all such comparisons are wrong or illegitimate.)

For example, a comparison of Israel to the Nazi regime when the context shows it are nonsensical could be an example of antisemitism. But, my interpretation is, if the comparison is accurate and compares to 'uniquely Nazi' aspects of the Nazi regime, it might be legitimate.

Example of illegitimate comparison, even if true:

Israel and the Nazis both built very strong militaries.

Example of legitimate comparison, if true:

Israeli and Nazi soldiers both killed kids from victimized ethnic groups for sport.

The above said, I still think Nazi comparisons are generally an incredibly counterproductive debate tactic.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. G.K. Chesterton

by fairleft (fairleft(at)yahoo.com) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 10:15:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That may be (2.33 / 3)

The above said, I still think Nazi comparisons are generally an incredibly counterproductive debate tactic.

However, to say that genocide was bad when the Nazis did it, but good when Israel does it, is the very essence of the corruption of discourse.

It is a corruption that some of us have lost patience for.

This corruption is not an accident, it is deliberate and malicious, and is generated by Zionists seeking to cover up great crimes.

Yes, they are criminals, and they are BLAMEWORTHY.

We should quit being deceived by them.

by Gaianne on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 05:27:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're debasing the meaning of 'genocide' (none / 1)

by applying it to vastly different acts. Ethnic cleansing is bad enough, and I'm sure it legitimately applies to what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians. Israel is not doing genocide, as that word was understood before its meaning was widened into incoherence during the 1990s anti-Yugoslavia 'human rights' era.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. G.K. Chesterton

by fairleft (fairleft(at)yahoo.com) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 06:06:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're debasing the meaning of 'genocide' (4.00 / 3)

Actually I tend to agree with you in that the Genocide Convention has a very precise definition of Genocide which includes a matter of intent. This in part is why the former UN Secretary General's envoy to Darfur refused to characterise that situation as falling within the definition. In fact I wrote a diary on Kos making just that point, something that the petty Likudniks refuse to acknowledge.

That however was the situation last year. I am starting to come to the opinion that the current Israeli government's policy in Gaza is edging closer to the definition. The arming of one side of the government looks suspiciously like it is trying to forment a civil war. In addition, they have recently re-occupied the area in the north of the Gaza strip where the tragedy of the sewage works spill cost lives. That further delays the necessary repair and upgrade work which had already been delayed by continued Israeli shelling of the immediate area.

by Londonbear (bearATzooDOTcoDOTuk) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 06:23:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're debasing the meaning of 'genocide' (none / 1)

From Article III of the 1948 convention:

The crime of genocide has two elements: intent and action. "Intentional" means purposeful. Intent can be proven directly from statements or orders. But more often, it must be inferred from a systematic pattern of coordinated acts.

Intent is different from motive. Whatever may be the motive for the crime (land expropriation, national security, territorrial integrity, etc.), if the perpetrators commit acts intended to destroy a group, even part of a group, it is genocide.

The phrase "in whole or in part" is important. Perpetrators need not intend to destroy the entire group. Destruction of only part of a group (such as its educated members, or members living in one region) is also genocide. Most authorities require intent to destroy a substantial number of group members - mass murder. But an individual criminal may be guilty of genocide even if he kills only one person, so long as he knew he was participating in a larger plan to destroy the group."

Looks like to me any old country lawyer could get a slam dunk on the "systematic pattern of coordinated acts"...

Of course Isr is engaging in genocide..so-mo genocide, but still genocide.

And as for the nazi reference arguement..since I don't practice political correctness I go along with Col Lang's guide to critical thinking....."if it walks, talks and quacks like a duck then it's a damn duck" ..same goes for nazis.

by calypso on Wed Jun 6th, 2007 at 02:08:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're debasing the meaning of 'genocide' (4.00 / 2)

Your argument is partly why I am moving towards regarding the position in Gaza as meeting the definition of Genocide under the Convention. In particular it is the systematic destruction of the means of living, ie by the creation of a near-ghetto where there are limited opportunities to find employment so that there is dependency on food aid; The withholding of tax revenue and the promotion of aid boycotts which have restricted the availability of medical supplies; The restriction on movement into Israel where many were formerly employed; the destruction of the power station leaving the strip dependent on imported electricity; The continued incursions into the area in the north of the strip and its bombardment that led to the loss of life following the sewage works collapse.

It is interesting that neither the USA not Israel have ratified the first and second protocols to the Geneva Conventions which deal with non-state conflicts. In part they also recognise the right to form resistance against an occupying power. Here there is a legitimate comparison with Europe in WWII. There is another in the illegal annexation of land in Jerusalem in particular with the Nazi annexation of the Sudetenland.

The last is also the aspect I find most revolting about some of the pro-Israeli posters on Kos, namely the belief in the right of conquest with the excuse that the annexed lands were won in a defensive war and that the other country should be "punished" for aggression. By that criterion the US should be handing over southern Iraq to the Quwaitis. There also appears to be a growing movement in the areas round the Strip to drive the Palestinians into the sea, film of just such a chant was part of an Al Jazeera English's station ident although I would like to have the translation verified.

The real question is how the actions of the Israeli governments can be tested against the Genocide Convention. Any action through the UN would be blocked by the USA. The only option appears to be the court of public opinion and the propaganda machine looks like it is finely tuned to close down legitimate debate there.

by Londonbear (bearATzooDOTcoDOTuk) on Wed Jun 6th, 2007 at 05:19:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're debasing the meaning of 'genocide' (4.00 / 2)

Yep...the US and their "strongarming" other members of the UN thru various means of carrots and sticks on their own country's interest has kept the UN from moving to examine Israel on the 1948 conventions.
Quite ironic isn't it...considering how the Conventions came to exist in the first place.

by calypso on Wed Jun 6th, 2007 at 03:29:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's your response to MBNYC's comment at DKos? (none / 0)

I'm just vastly amused that you would even write this diary, Londonbear. "Yeah, the EU uses this definition, but it's not equipped it with the force of law, so nyah nyah nyah" - that's basically what you seem to be saying.

"`Our country, right or wrong!' . . . when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." (Sen. Carl Schurz)

by one of the people on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 09:50:42 AM EST

Re: What's your response to MBNYC's comment at DKo (3.75 / 4)

I made this request to the EU for clarification because at least one on Kos had claimed that either the European Parliament or the Commission had passed it. I found no evidence of that on their site and therefore asked them. It is surprising (or perhaps not) that the Wikipedia piece selectively quotes the list of "evidence" but fails to either quote the definition itself or the question of context.

When I made the search, the Europa portal and the Agency's site were undergoing a revamp making searching on it even more difficult.

by Londonbear (bearATzooDOTcoDOTuk) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 02:05:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What's your response to MBNYC's comment at DKo (4.00 / 2)

I should explain that last point. The EUMC was changed to the Agency for Fundamental Rights by a Council (of Ministers) order in February to reflect a different role within the Treaty of Amsterdam. When I asked the question, most of the links on the Europa portal site were broken as the change in name meant a major revamp of their site, including a change of site name from EUMC.EU to FRA.EU Subsequently the links on the Wikipedia site were restored. I have now edited the "New Antisemitism" page on Wiki so it more accurately reflects the situation.

The point in answer to the Kos question is that the EUMC/FRA working definition which had a specific purpose of unifying data collection was being represented as having the status as part of the acquis. It is clear from the list of people consulted that the EUMC asked people with a distinct bias for a definition and they included aspects which cut down debate on Israel/Palestine matters, especially when the caveat about "context" is eliminated.

Judging by the swamping of my posting of this on Kos, the usual suspects find this unacceptable. Similarly they freely use "Islamofascist" as an acceptable term but object to the use of "Judeofascist" to describe actions like those of the US rabbi who went to Israel to get the Gay Pride march in Jerusalem banned as "this is the Holy Land, not Homo Land".

by Londonbear (bearATzooDOTcoDOTuk) on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 10:35:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Troll rate THIS! (3.00 / 5)

One of the People, your troll rating-tacting is pure D.Kos.

Maybe you should go back there with the thugs where you are at home.

by Gaianne on Tue Jun 5th, 2007 at 10:03:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Troll rate THIS! (4.00 / 2)

Agreed. Enough with the troll-rating bullshit.

---Cthulhu for President: Why vote for the lesser evil?

by eodell (eodell at naqada dot org) on Wed Jun 6th, 2007 at 10:51:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The EU and Anti-Semitism | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Proud member of

The Liberal Blog Network

a FeedBurner Network

Advertise in The Liberal Blog Network

Subscribe to this network

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Learn the real story behind the WMD in Iraq:

The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism
by Ron Suskind

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

DaveW recommends:

I Am a Strange Loop
by Douglas Hofstadter

Need some laughs?

I Am America (and So Can You!)
by Stephen Colbert

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End
by Peter W. Galbraith

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Download Sleeper Cell on iTunes

(Better than "24") Download Weeds on iTunes

(Hilarious 1/2-hour adult comedy starring Mary-Louise Parker) Download Late Nite with Conan O'Brien on iTunes

Download South Park on iTunes

James Hunter - People Gonna Talk:

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.