A campaign against the declaration that includes the BDS in the definition of anti-Semitism was distributed on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day • Opinion

• Demonstrators for BDS in France

  Photo: 

  AFP

In honor of Holocaust Remembrance Day, the Jerusalem branch of the Lau Beck Institute decided to do something on the initiative of scholars and academics, mostly left-wing activists, who oppose the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's anti-Semitism definition (IHRA) BDS is an antisemitic movement.

The Leo Beck Institute, a body that studies the history and culture of German Jews and works to seek the "liberal heritage" of parts of German Jewry, actually promotes an initiative that began with a document called the "Jerusalem Declaration of Antisemitism," signed two weeks ago by 200 academics from Israel and the West. USA and Germany - offering an alternative definition of anti-Semitism.

The one behind the initiative is the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem.

"While the IHRA Declaration does not separate the fight against anti-Semitism from the Israeli-Palestinian political struggle, the Jerusalem Declaration seeks to separate the fight against anti-Semitism from an argument and political criticism of Israel," the Lan Bek Institute in Jerusalem said in a statement. 

Why then was the "Jerusalem Declaration" necessary?

The drafters of the statement clarify: 'The IHRA definition provides 11 examples of anti-Semitism.

Seven of them focus on the State of Israel.

In view of the excessive emphasis on one arena, the need to clarify the legitimate boundaries of political freedom of expression and action regarding Zionism, Israel and Palestine clearly emerges. They say that alongside "strengthening the fight against anti-Semitism" we must work to "defend an open debate on the future of Israel / Palestine" . 

In fact, what do more than 200 drafters of the "Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism" - people who study anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, Jewish and Israeli studies and Middle East studies - want to achieve?

In short, the disregard for the key term "Palestine", thus whitewashing Palestinian anti-Israel anti-Israelism, which has long been considered accepted and taken for granted in the world of the liberal-progressive left. 

The drafters of the statement distinguish between "Israel and Palestine" between two cases: examples of antisemitic revelations;

And examples of non-antisemitic views or actions. 

And what are "non-antisemitic" revelations?

The drafters of the declaration list a number of examples, including support for Palestinian demands for justice, human rights and the full realization of their political, national and civil rights;

Criticism of Zionism or opposition to Zionism as a form of nationalism;

Israel's comparison to other historical cases, including settlement colonialism or apartheid, is not anti-Semitic either, and of course - boycotts, investment withdrawals and sanctions are "not anti-Semitic in themselves", and so on.  

This is where the radical political agenda of the drafters of the statement emerges: giving legitimacy to the denial of Zionism and Jewish nationalism, using terms such as "systematic racial discrimination," granting kosher status to boycotts of Israel, excessive criticism and unreasonable speech, Israel's unfounded comparison to South Africa Or to the colonial powers, and above all a complete disregard for the clear and distinct antisemitic elements of the "Palestinian national movement."

All of these make this statement a clear political manifesto.

Very far from the same "academic tool" that the drafters of the statement claim they seek to present. 

The German Foreign Ministry, through the German Embassy in Israel, is heavily involved in the activities of the Lau Beck Institute in Jerusalem.

This raises the question of whether the German Foreign Ministry accepts the Institute's opposition to the definition of international anti-Semitism, which was adopted by the German government and the German Bundestag and formed the basis for the groundbreaking decision that defined the BDS movement as antisemitic. 

This case may reveal some of the internal dynamics within the German system, and perhaps tension that exists on the issue between elected officials and bureaucrats.

This is not the first time: last December, a call was published in Berlin by the heads of German cultural bodies, most of which are funded by the German government, which defines the Bundestag decision on BDS as a violation of freedom of expression and opinion.

One of the figures involved in drafting this call was a very senior official in the German Foreign Ministry.

Following the protest, the Bundestag's Legal Advice Department clarified that the decision regarding the BDS is not legally binding.

That is, it is only a symbolic act with no practical significance. 

In other words: a senior official in the German Foreign Ministry acted to nullify a decision of the German House of Representatives.

The bureaucratic establishment opposes the decisions of the German parliamentary establishment on anti-Semitic issues related to Israel.

Oh, the banality. 

The fact that a body such as the Lau Beck Institute in Jerusalem, which enjoys the generous support of the German government, found it appropriate to promote this manifesto on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day, shows more than anything else the loss of the values ​​of the Israeli left.

And, apparently, on the role of elements in the German government in striving against the Jewish state.

The publication of the "Lau Beck Jerusalem Institute" has meanwhile been removed following a protest.

But the intention behind it remained as it was.