 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
||
Israel, the Conflict and Peace:
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
Index / Introduction / Conflict / Peace /
Delegitimization and Anti-semitism / Basic Issues / AppendixDelegitimization and Anti-semitism
- Is anti-Zionism different from anti-semitism?
- What is Holocaust denial?
- Why has there been a rise in anti-semitic incidents?
- Does the international community treat Israel fairly?
- Has the media been fair in covering the conflict?
Is anti-Zionism different from antisemitism?
Israel, as a democracy, is receptive to fair and legitimate criticism. However, all too often Israel is singled out and held up to standards not applied to any other state. Although valid criticism of Israel has absolutely no connection to antisemitism, some of the unreasonable condemnation has its roots in antisemitic attitudes, often disguised as "anti-Zionism." Just as in the past Jews were the scapegoat for many problems, today there are attempts to turn Israel into an international pariah.
"Antisemitism" is the name given to the form of racism practiced against the Jewish people. Though the literal interpretation of antisemitism would appear to denote hostility to all Semitic peoples, this is a fallacy. The term was originally coined in Germany in 1879 to describe the European anti-Jewish campaigns of that era, and it soon came to define the persecution or discrimination against Jews throughout the ages.
Hatred of the Jewish people is an age-old phenomenon, traditionally associated with expressions of xenophobia and religious intolerance. Antisemitism has taken different forms and used various motifs throughout history. In modern times, it has been promoted by extreme nationalistic and even racist ideologies. Severe antisemitism exists in Arab countries today.
Egyptian version (1994) of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
Egyptian version (2001) of antisemitic tract "The International Jew"
Antisemitism reached its peak in the Holocaust. Over 6 million Jews (one third of the world's Jewish population) were brutally and systematically murdered during World War II.
Modern antisemitism in Europe, after being repressed for decades, has erupted with renewed fury in recent years in a new form: "anti-Zionism," or hatred of the State of Israel.
Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people - an expression of their legitimate aspiration to self-determination and national independence. The Zionist movement was founded to provide an ancient people with a sovereign state of its own, in its ancestral homeland. Israel is the modern political embodiment of this age-old dream.
The goal of anti-Zionism is to undermine the legitimacy of Israel, thereby denying the Jewish people their place in the community of nations. Denigration of Zionism is therefore an attack on Israel's basic right to exist as a nation equal to all other nations, in violation of one of the fundamental principles of international law.
Just as antisemitism denies Jews their rights as individuals in society, anti-Zionism attacks the Jewish people as a nation, on the international level. Similar to the use of "the Jew" as a scapegoat for many a society's problems, Israel has been singled out for disproportionate and one-sided condemnation in the international arena.
Anti-Zionism is often manifested as attacks on Israel in the United Nations and other international forums. Over the years, many a meeting and event of the international community has been exploited as an opportunity to condemn Israel - no matter what the subject matter, no matter how tenuous the tie to the conflict in the Middle East.
Moreover, it is no coincidence that the recent censure of Israel in international forums and the media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in antisemitic incidents in many parts of the world.
As a nation dedicated to the principles of democracy, Israel believes that criticism, whether by other nations or our own people, is a powerful force for positive change. However, there is a clear distinction between legitimate calls for improvement and the attempt to delegitimize Israel by consistently singling it out and holding it up to standards not applied to other states. All this ignores the context in which Israel must strive to survive in the face of violent attacks against its citizens and, all too often, against its very existence.
The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism The Middle East Conflict, Antisemitism and the Holocaust - Yad Vashem, May 2002 Antisemitism Today (2002) - E. Zev Sufot, Ambassador (ret.) The New Antisemitism (2002) - Rabbi Michael Melchior Antisemitism and Xenophobia Today (Institute for Jewish Policy Research) Anti-Semitism in the Arab World - Anti-Defamation League
The Holocaust was the deliberate and systematic attempt to exterminate the entire Jewish people. Modern attempts to diminish or deny this tragedy, unique in its scale, desecrate the memory of its millions of victims.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany and established a racist regime, in which Jews were deemed to be "Untermenschen" (sub-humans), not part of the human race.
After Germany instigated World War II in 1939, Hitler began implementing his "Final Solution" to annihilate the Jewish people. His forces concentrated the Jews in ghettos and established labor, concentration, and extermination camps to which the Jews were transported. Those deemed unfit for labor were exterminated, while most of the remaining Jews died of deliberate starvation and disease. Documents uncovered after the war show that Hitler's aim was to exterminate every Jew in the world.
©Yad Vashem Archives /Film & Photo Dept.
Survivors of Buchenwald concentration campDuring the six years of the war, 6,000,000 Jews - including 1,500,000 children - were murdered by the Nazis. Hitler's deliberate annihilation of the Jews, carried out with chilling efficiency, killed one-third of the Jewish population of the world. This genocide was unique in scale, management and implementation. It sought to destroy an entire people, wherever they could be found, merely for being born Jewish. For these reasons it was given a name of its own: the Holocaust.
Now, little more than fifty years later, many antisemites deny that the Holocaust took place, or attempt to diminish the tragedy by claiming that its scale was much smaller. Some racists wish to cleanse Nazism of its evil stain. Others believe the State of Israel was established to compensate the Jews for the Holocaust; by denying that it took place, they seek to deprive Israel of its right to exist. This is why Holocaust deniers have much support in Arab countries. In fact, some Arab leaders during World War II supported the Nazi plans to annihilate the Jews, and some Arab voices have been heard in recent times complaining that Hitler did not finish the job.
In recent years, Holocaust denial has taken on a new facade. Malicious haters of Israel from both the left and the right wings of the political spectrum frequently equate Israelis with the Nazis and the Palestinians with the Jews. Not only is this an abhorrent blood libel aimed at delegitimizing the very existence of Israel, it is an attempt to minimize the Holocaust. By comparing the two situations, which absolutely share no common ground, Israel is both immorally condemned and the suffering of Holocaust victims is trivialized.
Holocaust denial, in all its forms, is a moral abomination and it should never be tolerated. Only by remembering, documenting and commemorating the Holocaust, can we ensure that nothing like it will ever happen again to Jews or to any other people on earth.
Holocaust Denial: An Online Guide to Exposing and Combating Anti-Semitic Propaganda - Anti-Defamation League Holocaust Denial in the Middle East - Anti-Defamation League Holocaust-related websites
Why has there been a rise in antisemitic incidents?
The campaign to delegitimize Israel has led to a sharp increase in anti-Israel and antisemitic attacks worldwide. Increasingly, the line between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitic attacks on Jewish targets has blurred.
Since the beginning of the violence in September 2000, Israel has been subjected to a worldwide campaign of delegitimization. It has been attacked in the media and international forums, vilified by political leaders and intellectuals. It has had its very right to exist questioned, as has its basic duty to defend its citizens. Extremists on the left and the right have joined together in their hatred of the Jewish State.
These attacks go beyond justifiable criticism, which Israel, as a vibrant democracy, considers part of the legitimate discourse of states. However, it is not legitimate to censure Israel in a grossly disproportionate way, single it out and hold it up to impossible standards not demanded of any other state.
The reasons behind this growing phenomenon are many. It is closely connected to the ability of the Palestinians to market their image as one of powerless victims. They have used this perception to play on the sentiments of those who advocate human rights (while the Palestinian leadership and terrorists violate the most basic human rights of innocent Israeli victims of terror and of their own people). Other condemnation is more ideologically based, often advanced by those who are willing to ignore all transgressions of totalitarian regimes, no matter how egregious, yet criticize any defensive steps taken by democratic states. Traditional antisemitic attitudes, often cloaked as anti-Zionist positions, have also played a role. Bias in the media has also been an important contributing factor to the delegitimization of Israel.
These attacks on Israel's legitimacy have been accompanied by physical attacks on Jewish targets the world over, including in Europe. Antisemitic incidents have included bombings of synagogues and Jewish schools, vandalism and desecration of Jewish cemeteries, death threats and violence against Jews, and unprovoked assaults up to and including murder. These hate crimes directed against Jewish individuals and community institutions are often disguised as "anti-Zionist" actions.
©2002 Reuters
Damage after attack on synagogue in Djerba, Tunisia (Apr 11, 2002)
The situation in the Middle East is even worse. Virulent anti-Israeli rhetoric is commonplace and has intensified. Antisemitic and anti-Israeli myths, often perpetuated by governments (such as in statements made by Syria's President Bashir Assad and Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir), are readily believed by large percentages of the region's population. The relentless flow of outrageous and unfounded accusations emanating from Palestinian spokespersons has greatly contributed to the growing wave of antisemitism. One of the consequences has been an increase in the attacks on Jewish targets in the Arab world, leading to loss of life such as during the April 2002 terror attack on the ancient synagogue in Djerba, Tunisia - 12 European tourists, 4 local Arabs and a Jew were murdered.
Israel is gravely concerned by the recent significant rise in antisemitism that targets Jewish communities in Europe and elsewhere. This should arouse the deep concern of all civilized peoples. Israel calls on the governments of countries where the scourge of antisemitism is spreading to take all measures necessary to ensure the security of Jewish communities - and to bring the perpetrators of these deplorable attacks to justice. Antisemitic incitement - whether by individuals, organizations or even the leaders of certain countries - should be strongly condemned.
Does the international community treat Israel fairly?
The State of Israel is part of the family of nations and an active participant in international organizations. While the United Nations has from time-to-time adopted resolutions which would provide a fair basis for advancing peace between Israel and its neighbors, much of the time the UN has taken a biased approach against Israel.Israel joined the United Nations as its 59th member on 11 May 1949. Since then, it has participated in a wide range of UN activities and has actively contributed to UN organs and international agencies devoted to health, development, labor, food and agriculture, education and science. Israel also plays a role in the work of non-governmental organizations conducted under UN auspices, which deal with issues ranging from aviation to immigration, from communications to meteorology, from trade to the status of women.
Some UN resolutions have been of crucial significance for Israel, among them Security Council Resolutions 242 (22 November 1967) and 338 (22 October 1973), which provide an agreed framework for settling the Arab-Israel conflict. Over the years, the UN has at times contributed to bringing about a cessation of hostilities between Israel and its Arab neighbors by appointing mediators, extending UN auspices to cease-fire and armistice agreements, and stationing UN forces between the adversaries.
On the other hand, the UN has been often misused and turned into a partisan battleground in the ongoing political campaign carried out against Israel by its adversaries in the region. The 21 Arab states, with the aid of Islamic countries and the non-aligned camp, constitute an "automatic majority" for hostile initiatives, assuring the adoption of anti-Israel resolutions in the General Assembly and other UN forums.
Since the end of the Cold War and with the momentum gained in the Arab-Israel peace process, a somewhat more balanced approach began to be felt in General Assembly resolutions regarding the Middle East. The General Assembly's 1991 repudiation of its infamous 1975 resolution libeling Zionism as racism is one such example. Israel has also been allowed to increase its involvement in United Nations activities, due to its recent limited admission into a regional group (although participation in a regional group was uniquely long-denied to Israel).
However, the outbreak of Palestinian violence and terrorism in late September 2000 and the ensuing three years has largely reversed the positive trend. The Palestinian leadership, the Arab member states and their supporters in the UN seek to exploit the politically motivated unrest to their advantage against Israel in the international arena. As in the past, blatantly one-sided resolutions against Israel are often proposed and adopted. At times, even international gatherings, like the "2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance" in Durban, have been abused and hijacked to engage in antisemitic and extreme anti-Israel bashing. Syria, a terrorism sponsoring state, has become a member of the Security Council and seeks to misuse that forum as another means to strike at Israel. Unfortunately, all too often an appalling anti-Israel bias on the part of the UN casts a dark shadow on its integrity and raises serious doubts about its ability to contribute to the easing of tensions, let alone play a constructive role in promoting a genuine and fair peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Israel among the Nations: United Nations
Has the media been fair in covering the conflict?
The international media's coverage of the conflict in the Middle East has in many cases been unbalanced, unfair and biased against Israel.
The modern press, especially the electronic media, is a means for conveying huge amounts of information to millions of people. Commercial competition affects the way the media provides speedy and concise information. This competition often leads to a superficial and simplistic portrayal of a reality that is actually complex and complicated, such as the one existing in the Middle East.
The contradiction between the need to report about the complex reality of the Middle East and the need to provide concise information as simply (and even as superficially) as possible, often results in a distorted, unbalanced and unjust coverage of matters that pertain to Israel.
In many cases, the media tends to portray a complex situation through black-and-white stereotypes, in which Israel is perceived as playing the role of an "occupier" that is trampling on the rights of the "occupied." This in turn automatically leads to the distorted portrayal of Israel as the root of all evil in the Middle East.
However, the reality is much more complicated than that. Fairness requires that the reason why Israel came into control of the territories should be examined, as should the fact that ever since 1948, the Arab world has called for the destruction of Israel, by whatever means possible. Unfortunately, this reality, with its broad and profound ramifications, is difficult to convey in a television report that lasts mere seconds, or at most just a few minutes.
News coverage of the Middle East usually provides a momentary snapshot of current events. Visuals can provide dramatic pictures, but in most cases they provide little insight into the broader circumstances in which the image was shown, indeed often taking events out of their context.
The image of a Palestinian youth facing an Israeli tank is a news story that stirs the emotions of the television viewers, a story that sells well. But this imagery is a gross distortion of the reality. In the picture the tank is seen as representing the "cruel and powerful occupier," the embodiment of a wrong that is supposedly the source of the Middle East conflict. However, reality is much more complicated than an image that captures a single moment - its before and after unknown to the viewer. Furthermore, the picture and its accompanying report generally say very little or nothing about the ongoing Palestinian terrorism which is the sole reason for the tank's being there in the first place. The media says very little about the Palestinian terrorists intentionally operating from urban centers. Little is shown about how the terrorists mingle with the Palestinian civilian population, cynically using children and other civilians as their pawns and shields behind which they launch their attacks against innocent Israelis. Very little if anything is said about the terrorists knowing that the Israel Defense Forces will do all that is possible to avoid harming innocent civilians, even at the expense of endangering the lives of Israeli soldiers.
Another reason for the imbalance in the media coverage is that on Israel's side the representatives of the international press work in an open and democratic society, in which freedom of the press and freedom of expression are guaranteed. The international press in Israel has access to every news source and to every opinion in the democratic political spectrum, as it should be. In contrast, Palestinian society and the societies in most of the Arab world have no freedom of expression, no freedom of the press. The opportunity in those societies to independently report events is virtually nonexistent, and, consequently, the ability of the foreign press to provide authentic, objective and credible reports is very limited.
In the past, there have been a number of known cases in which the Palestinians threatened to harm foreign reporters who sought to report events that might damage Palestinian interests. Likewise, there have been cases in which the Palestinians agreed to allow the press some "freedom" in doing their work on the condition that the reports would correspond to the views and message that the Palestinians wanted to convey.
The international media has severely criticized Israel for restricting the freedom of movement of the Palestinians and for the suffering of the Palestinians at roadblocks that were placed in the territories by the Israel Defense Forces since the outbreak of violence in September 2000. The scenes that appear on television screens are indeed hard-hitting. They show women and children waiting, often for long periods, for security checks at the roadblocks. These reports show a situation that is only part of the picture, for the most part ignoring the context and the fact that the only reason for the roadblocks being there is to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from reaching Israeli civilian populations. Also ignored is the Israeli government's obligation to defend its citizens from those who are on their way to blow themselves up and murder innocent bystanders in cafes, buses, shopping malls and other public places in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and other Israeli cities. Does the media's focus on the roadblocks give due consideration to the right of Israeli civilians to live free from the threat of terrorism and violent death? The answer generally is no.
One of the most prominent examples of the fundamentally biased and unfair approach taken by much of the international media was seen in its handling of the fierce battle between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian terrorists in Jenin in April 2002. A short time after the battle, most of the international media hastily jumped to conclusions and described the battle as an Israeli "massacre" of Palestinians. Israel was also immediately accused of having destroyed the city of Jenin. Israel was both tried and judged in the media, before even the most basic facts were known. Most of the international media swallowed hook, line and sinker the Palestinian propaganda version of what transpired. Had they verified the facts the media would have known that what was initially described as a "massacre" was actually a battle in which 56 Palestinians (the vast majority of them armed terrorists) were killed, as were 23 Israeli soldiers. What was initially described as the "destruction of Jenin" turned out to be a battle in only a very small area (about 100 x 100 meters), a tiny fraction of the entire city.
In the worst manifestations of media bias, particularly in some political cartoons and some opinion columns, the language and content vis-ą-vis Israel have gone to an extreme. The very legitimacy of Israel's existence is questioned and at times even antisemitic stereotypes and symbols, similar to those attacking the Jewish people in the past, have been used.
However, what has generally characterized the international media bias is the double standard it uses towards Israel. While as a democracy, Israel welcomes legitimate scrutiny, the media relentlessly scrutinizes Israel, out of proportion to any other western democracy. Totally and unjustifiably ignored is the fact that Israel faces an existential threat from a significant portion of the countries in the region. These states, who have not yet reconciled themselves to Israel's existence as a Jewish state, are themselves very far from meeting even the most basic standards of democracy and freedom. Moreover, while criticizing almost everything Israel does in fighting terrorism, the international media has often ignored the fact that other western democracies have used similar or even harsher measures when confronting threats to their national security and the safety of their citizens.
Index / Introduction / Conflict / Peace /
Delegitimization and Anti-semitism / Basic Issues / Appendix
