JOURNALfor the STUDYof ANTISEMITISM

jsa3-1_cv_jsa3-1_cv 9/12/2011 11:28 AM Page 2 Volume 3 Issue #1 JOURNAL for the STUDY of ANTISEMITISM JOURNAL for the STUDY of ANTISEMITISM Volume 3 Issue #1 2011 2011 JOURNAL for the STUDY of ANTISEMITISM Volume 3, Issue #1, 2011 Latin American Antisemitism Guest Editor, Shimon T. Samuels Dedicated to those who perished in the Buenos Aires bombings of the Israeli Embassy, March 17, 1992, the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina, July 18, 1994, and all victims of antisemitism and terrorism across the globe. Journal for the Study of Antisemitism (JSA) Steven K. Baum and Neal E. Rosenberg, Editors, Marlton, NJ Steven L. Jacobs, Associate Editor; Judaic Studies, University of Alabama Lesley Klaff, Associate Editor/Book Review Editor; Sheffield Hallam Univ., UK Shimon Samuels, Guest Editor; Chair, Simon Wiesenthal Centre, Paris Ayaan Hirsi Ali, AHA Foundation, AEI, Washington, DC Paul Bartrop, Historian, Bialik College, Melbourne, Australia Hadassah Ben-Itto, Author/Judge (Ret.), Tel Aviv Michael Berenbaum, Sigi Ziering Institute, Los Angeles Andrew Bostom, Brown University, Providence, RI Jonathan Boyd, Jewish Policy Research, London Israel W. Charny, Encyclopedia of Genocide, Jerusalem Florette Cohen, Social Psychology, College of Staten Island Richard L Cravatts, Education, Boston University Bernie Farber, Canadian Jewish Congress, Toronto Robert Fine, Sociology, University of Warwick, UK Manfred Gerstenfeld, JCPA, Jerusalem Sander Gilman, Humanities, Emory University, Atlanta Ari Goldberg, AIPAC, Washington DC Clemens Heni, Political Science—MEF Funded, Berlin Paul Iganski, Sociology, Lancaster University, UK Dennis L. Jackson, Statistics, University of Windsor Andras Kovacs, Sociology, Central European University, Budapest Neil J. Kressel, Psychology, William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ Richard Landes, Department of History, Boston University Walter Laqueur, Professor Emeritus, Georgetown University, Washington, DC Kenneth Lasson, Law, University of Baltimore Marcia Littell, Holocaust Studies, Stockton College of NJ Hubert G. Locke, University of Washington, Seattle Kenneth L. Marcus, Inst. for Jewish & Community Research, Washington, DC David Matas, Hon Counsel-B’nai B’rith Canada, Winnipeg Joanna B. Michlic, HBI, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA Fiamma Nirenstein, Italian Chamber of Deputies, Rome Darren O’Brien, Australian Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Sydney Andrei Oisteanu, Institute History of Religions, Bucharest John Pawlikowski, Catholic Theological Union, Chicago Winston Pickett, Communications, Brighton, UK Daniel Pipes, Middle East Forum, Philadelphia Dina Porat, Stephen Roth Institute, Tel Aviv University Lars Rensmann, Political Science, University of Michigan Richard L. Rubenstein, President Emeritus, University of Bridgeport Frederick Schweitzer, Manhattan College, NYC Milton Shain, History, University of Cape Town, South Africa Marc I. Sherman, Index/Bibliography, Jerusalem Philip J. Spencer, Helen Bamber Center, Kingston University, UK Pierre-Andre Taguieff, CNRS (Sciences Po), Paris Dina Siegel Vann, American Jewish Committee, Washington, DC James E. Waller, Cohen Chair, Keene State College, NH Shalva Weil, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Robert Wistrich, Sassoon Center/SICSA Hebrew University of Jerusalem Bat Ye’or, Independent Scholar, Switzerland JSA Submission Guidelines The Journal for the Study of Antisemitism (JSA) is the peer-reviewed work of a select group of independent scholars who examine antisemitism in traditional and emerging forms. This group is not affiliated with any institution or financially dependent on a single source of funding. We have in common an understanding of antisemitism as a social pathology that must be eradicated. We are an educationally based concern. E-mail submissions should be original, either on hard copy or an electronic copy in MS Word format. Citations should be in Chicago Manual of Style format. Send submissions and questions to the editors of the JSA via mail, telephone, or e-mail. Mailing address: Editors, JSA P.O. Box 726 Marlboro, NJ 08053 Telephone (856) 983-3247 Electronic journal submissions: [email protected] Electronic book reviews: Send book reviews, between 500-1000 words, to c/o Book Review Editor: [email protected]. The ideas represented in the JSA are those of the contributing authors, and not reflective of the JSA, its board members, or the author’s institution. The JSA welcomes unsolicited manuscripts. TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 3 Number 1 Guest Editor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shimon T. Samuels 1 A Note from the Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steven K. Baum and Neal E. Rosenberg 3 Special Envoy, U.S. State Department . . . . . . . . . . Hannah Rosenthal 7 Antisemitism in Latin America: Regional and Global Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dina Siegel Vann 13 Antisemitic Incidents from Around the World: January–June 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editors 19 Articles Mexico in a Region under Change. . . . . . . . . . Judit Bokser Liwerant México, en una Región bajo Cambio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 39 Latin America and the Middle East: The Political Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Julián Schvindlerman América Latina y El Oriente Medio: El Trasfondo Polı́tico . . . . . . . . 51 61 The New Judeophobia on the Left . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patricio Brodsky La Neojudeofobia en la Izquierda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 99 The Conversos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Seth Ward 129 El Conversos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Latin America and Iranian Terror Networks . . . . . . . . . Sergio Widder 141 América Latina y las Redes del Terror Iranı́ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Antisemitism in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alberto Milkewitz 157 Antisemitsmo en Brasil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Postcard from Venezuela . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sammy Eppel 179 Tarjeta Postal de Venezuela . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 Essays A French Intifada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nidra Poller 183 Israel’s Intent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yehuda Bauer 199 Delegitimizing the Jewish State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bat Ye’or 203 Doing the Yale Flip-Flop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amitai Etzioni 219 Arab Spring Sprung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fiamma Nirenstein 221 The Murder of Hugo Bettauer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Martin Kitchen 225 Antisemitism in Wagnerian Opera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dan Leeson 243 The Mosque at Rachel’s Tomb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shalva Weil 263 Journal of Contemporary Leftist Antisemitism? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mark Gardner 267 Reviews Schnabel’s Miral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Joanne Intrator and Scott Rose 271 Fatah’s The Jew Is Not My Enemy . . . . . . . . . . . .Khaleel Mohammed 275 Lindemann and Levy’s Antisemitism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leon Rosenberg 281 Patterson’s A Geneology of Evil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steven K. Baum 285 Dekel-Chen et al.’s Anti-Jewish Violence . . . . . . . . . Paul R. Bartrop 289 Bard’s The Arab Lobby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Samuel M. Edelman 293 Mallman and Cüppers’ Nazi Palestine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David Sokol 295 Deutsch’s Crossing Borders, Claiming a Nation . . . . . . . Donna Guy 305 From the Conference Floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neal E. Rosenberg 309 Antisemitica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Déme su reparten de las profundidades sembradas por sus dolores. Give me your hand, out of the depths sown by your sorrows. —Pablo Neruda, Chilean poet (1904-1973) Special Issue: Latin American Antisemitism Guest Editor, Shimon T. Samuels* As a British-born honorary Latino by marriage with four decades of affection and interaction with Latin America, I feel privileged to have the opportunity of editing this special edition of the JSA. A watershed experience, in the region, began in 1971 with a visit to Sosua, the moshav-style cooperative founded by the JDC for fugitives from Nazi Germany in 1940. Recall that at the 1938 Evian Conference, the Dominican Republic was the only voice to welcome desperate Jews. From the north coast of Sosua I was invited to Azua, the Israeli rural settlement assistance project, 50 miles to the south. Watching the Israeli team build a small Catholic church for Dominican peasants sharpened the poignancy of the moment—those 50 miles represented the decade from utter powerlessness in 1938 to the Jewish return to sovereignty in 1948. Post World War II, Latin America figured on our radar screen as the principal haven for Nazi war criminals, marked by the abduction of Adolf Eichmann in 1960. It was followed less than two decades later by the disproportionate number of disappeared Jews—victims of the junta and Argentina’s military dictatorship. This ended with the Falklands War in 1982. The politics of the day interrupted our routine as my ten-year-old granddaughter posed a moral dilemma to my Argentine-born wife and me: “What happens if grandpa’s planes in London bomb Grandma’s house in Buenos Aires?”—a concern characteristic of Jewish history but not posed since World War I. The 1990s brought the greatest post-Holocaust pogrom to the South American continent: the 1994 Buenos Aires Jewish Centre (AMIA) bombing, leaving 85 dead and over 300 maimed. The Iranian perpetrators, identified by Interpol, are still at large; the atrocity served as the prelude to the seeds of Hizbollah sowed from Venezuela to the Argentina–Brazil–Paraguay triple frontier. As this issue goes to press, former U.S. Under-Secretary for the Western Hemisphere Roger Noriega reported to a congressional committee on the “80 operative Hizbollah cells in the region.” In addition to those active cells, a Shahab-3 Iranian missile base is being built on the Venezuelan coast with a range of 2,000 km. Iran states that it wishes to cooperate with all investigations of AMIA. If Iran wishes to cooperate, it must agree to dismantle its terror and arms networks in Latin America. Its only duty regarding the AMIA must be to hand over its implicated citizens for trial under Argentine rule of law. As I told a senior Argentine official at the AMIA commemoration, quoting Win- 1 2 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:1 ston Churchill on appeasing tyranny: “Democracies feed the beast, hoping to be eaten last.” In the case of Iran, the beast is alive and living among us. The collection of pieces delineates a broad sweep of antisemitism across the Americas, from Mexico to the Southern Cone, from Seth Ward’s focus on the conversos to the terrorism nexus and hostility to Israel addressed by Julian Schvindlerman and Sergio Widder. Country profiles by Judit Liwerant on Mexico, Alberto Milkewitz on Brazil, Patricio Brodsky on Argentine intellectuals, and Sammy Eppel’s Postcard from Venezuela attest to national specificities and commonalities. Dina Siegel Vann’s message brings these strands together. May this special edition of the JSA be the first in a series of regional analyses and that the voices of Latin American Jews be heard. *Shimon T. Samuels is the director of international relations for the Simon Wiesenthal Foundation, Paris, and a Board member of the Journal for the Study of Antisemitism. A Note from the Editors There is clear joy that the JSA has finally put Latin American antisemitism on the map. This joy is juxtaposed against the advances extremist Islam has made throughout Latin America. It is also joyless against people who support anti-Israel agendas. Lately, it’s UK’s Sue Blackwell who tries to have the EUMC definition of antisemitism rejected from the University and College Union (UCU). The focus is to have the anti-Israeli provision removed from antisemitism. That definition, she said, was “created by Zionist organizations in order to conflate anti-Zionism with antisemitism.” Perhaps the Zionist elders did gather and force the EUMC’s hand to include anti-Israeli rhetoric. Possibly their tentacles twisted Martin L. King’s as well when he said: “So know also this: Anti-Zionist is inherently antisemitic, and ever will be so.” Why is this? “You know that Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land.” But forget Dr. King. Forget that Israel Arabs are never targeted and the objects of such derision. Forget as well that non-Israeli Jewish students are intimidated and threatened and physically assaulted on campuses around the globe by Muslim activists. Forget that British Jewish professors are leaving the universities and college unions, including JSA associate editor Lesley Klaff and others. (See the last page of this issue for Ronnie Fraser’s resignation.) Recall instead that Islamic jihad existed well before the State of Israel and continues with two Arab states marginally recognizing Israel’s right to exist. Now take a look at the above photo and then read what Jewish scholars in Latin America are trying to tell us about the problem. 3 4 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:3 The Latin American scholars are concerned that Islamist ideology has become so well entrenched that when a synagogue is desecrated, it is seen as justified for Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians. Yet, fear of militant Islam is what these scholars are writing about, and they should know—they live with it. In Caracas, they witnessed the city’s main synagogue vandalized with spray-painted messages that read “Death to the Jews,” and “Jews Get Out.” In Buenos Aires, they knew the 29 who were killed and the 85 who died at the hands of Iranians two years later. In Santiago, they knew that Chile’s Jewish community president, Gabriel Zaliasnik, was afforded police protection when a spate of eight antisemitic attacks occurred last year. “I am 43 years old, and I don’t recall something like this,” Zaliasnik said. Neither does anyone else—except perhaps those who lived in Berlin in 1933. This is a large volume, guest edited by Shimon Samuels, with the articles in both Spanish and English. The content of the essays are large as well. We have contributions from Italian minister the Honorable Fiamma Nirenstein on the Arab Spring, Amitai Etzioni on Yale’s politics and their closing the antisemitism program, Yehuda Bauer on Israel’s intentions, and Bat Ye’or’s notions of delegitimization. Nidra Poller’s essay tracks thorny Middle East politics as they arrive in France, and Shalva Weil observes the politics of shrines in Israel. And just when you thought it was safe to swim in the academy’s politics, Routledge announces the creation of a new journal dedicated to leftist anti-Zionist ideology; Mark Gardner of Britain’s key antisemitism monitoring group, the Community Security Trust (CST), ponders the new journal’s purpose. From a historical perspective, we have essays by musician Dan Leeson re-examining Wagnerian antisemitism. There is Martin Kitchen, Simon Fraser University, exploring the mystery surrounding German journalist Hugo Bettauer. New York reviewers Joanne Intrator and Scott Rose take another look at Julian Schnabel’s film Miral. San Diego State’s Khaleel Mohammed examines Tarek Fatah’s The Jew Is Not My Enemy. SPME’s Sam Edelman explains why Mitchell Bard’s The Arab Lobby is so worthwhile. From down under, Paul Bartrop tells us more about pogroms than we probably knew from his review of Dekel-Chen et al.’s Anti-Jewish Violence. There are Jersey shore psychiatrist Leon Rosenberg on Lindermann and Levy’s Antisemitism: A History, and Steve Baum’s examination of David Patterson’s fine work and his concern for academic incivility for all things Israeli. Finally, and in keeping with the Latin American theme, Ohio State historian Donna Guy reviews Sandra Deutsch’s Crossing Borders, Claiming a Nation—a book documenting Argentina’s pioneering Jewish women. A word about resources. The original seven manuscripts were com- 2011] A NOTE FROM THE EDITORS 5 pleted in Spanish and translated into English. Some of the footnotes did not transfer into English well, and I ask the reader’s indulgence and to contact the author for original references. In terms of book references and expanding the reader’s knowledge, good resources are the Web page for the Latin American Jewish Studies Association, http://www.utexas.edu/cola/ orgs/lajsa/, and their annual congress as well; Raanan Rein’s Argentine Jews or Jewish Argentines? (Brill, 2010) and Judit Bokser Liwerant, Eliezer Ben-Rafael, Yosef Gorny, and Raanan Rein (Eds.), Identities in an Era of Globalization and Multiculturalism (Brill, 2008). We welcome our Latin American readership and want to encourage future scholarly papers and extend our appreciation to our contributors. Whether it’s Latin America antisemitism or any other place in the world, let the scholars get busy; there is much work to be done. Steven K. Baum Neal E. Rosenberg, Editors Special Envoy, U.S. State Department Hannah Rosenthal* I want to share with you the strong commitment of the Obama administration to combat hate and promote tolerance in our world. The president began his administration speaking out against intolerance as a global ill. In his historic speech in Cairo, he talked about a new beginning and a vision of a world based on mutual interest and mutual respect, a world that honors the dignity of all human beings. We are attempting through diplomacy, public messaging, and on-theground programs all over the world to confront and combat hatred in all its ugly forms—whether it is hatred directed against people on account of their religion, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, differences of political opinion, or due to their country of origin. Antisemitism is one such form of hatred. As a child of a Holocaust survivor, antisemitism is something very personal to me. My father was arrested—on Kristalnacht, the unofficial pogrom that many think started the Holocaust—and sent with many of his congregants to prison and then to Buchenwald. He was the lucky one—every other person in his family perished at Auschwitz. I have dedicated my life to eradicating antisemitism and intolerance with a sense of urgency and passion that only my father could give me. President Obama and Secretary Clinton have honored me with this appointment and have elevated my office and integrated it into the workings of all other parts of the State Department. I have been on the job for more than a year now—and I have seen six significant trends in antisemitism around the world: Antisemitism is not history; it is today’s news. I run into people who think antisemitism ended when Hitler killed himself. More than six decades after the end of the Second World War, antisemitism is still alive and well, and evolving into new, contemporary forms of religious hatred, racism, and political, social, and cultural bigotry. FORMS OF ANTISEMITISM Traditional forms of antisemitism persist in societies worldwide, passed from one generation to the next, and updated to reflect current events. The first manifestations are the ongoing hostile acts such as the defacing of property and desecration of cemeteries with antisemitic graffiti. There are still accusations of blood libel, which are morphing from the centuries-old Church accusations that Jews killed Christian children to use their 7 8 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:7 blood for rituals, to accusations that Jews kidnap children to steal their organs. Conspiracy theories continue to flourish, such as supposed Jewish control of the U.S. media and the world banking system, or that Jews were involved in executing the September 11 attacks. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion continues to be a best-seller in many, many countries, and taught to religious students as truth. The “old fashioned” antisemitism is alive and well. On a visit to Chile in 2010, I saw swastikas spray-painted on university campuses. When I addressed an American Jewish Committee gathering of Jews from Latin America, Chileans present told me they feel uncomfortable wearing kippot and other outward symbols of Judiasm. And despite an Interpol Red Notice since 2007 that Argentina is seeking to arrest the Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi for the 1994 bombing of AMIA, Bolivia ignored Interpol and hosted Vahidi in early June. In April, the staterun radio in Venezuela urged everyone to buy and read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In May, the official was fired, a positive outcome. A second phenomenon is Holocaust denial. It is coming from religious leaders in some places, including some heads of state, such as in Iran; in academic institutions in some places; and is a standard on hateful Web sites and other media outlets. As the generation of Holocaust survivors and death camp liberators reaches their eighties and nineties, the window is closing on those able to provide live, eyewitness accounts and a heightened urgency to promote Holocaust education, create museums and memorials, and carry the memory and lessons of the Holocaust forward. A third disturbing trend is Holocaust glorification—which can be seen, for example, in parades honoring soldiers who fought in the Waffen SS— which glorifies Nazism under the guise of fighting the Soviets and obscures their roles in the Holocaust. After that March commemoration in Latvia, a notorious neo-Nazi made blatantly antisemitic statements, including incitements to violence against Jews, on a television talk show. Holocaust glorification and the growth of neo-Nazi groups is especially virulent in Middle East media—including some that are state owned and operated—calling for a new Holocaust to finish the job. Truly bone-chilling. A fourth concern is Holocaust relativism, in which some governments, museums, academic research, and the like are conflating the Holocaust with other terrible events that entailed great human suffering, like the Dirty War or the Soviet regime. No one wants to get into dueling atrocities. But to lump together these horrific chapters of history is not only historically inaccurate, but also misses opportunities to learn important lessons from each historic event even as we reflect on universal truths about the need to defend human rights and combat hatred in all of its forms. History must be precise: it must instruct, it must warn, and it must inspire us to learn the particular and universal values as we prepare to mend this fractured world. 2011] SPECIAL ENVOY 9 The fifth trend is the increasing tendency of opposition to the policies of the State of Israel to cross the line into antisemitism. In what I hear from our diplomatic missions around the world, and our close relationships with NGOs in the United States and in other nations, we know that this happens easily and often. I want to be clear: criticism of policies of the State of Israel is not antisemitism. But we record huge increases in antisemitism whenever there are hostilities in the Middle East. This form of antisemitism is more difficult for many to identify. But if all Jews are held responsible for the decisions of the sovereign State of Israel, when governments like Venezuela call upon and intimidate their Jewish communities to condemn Israeli actions—this is not objecting to a policy, it is antisemitism. When individual Jews are held responsible for Israeli policy, this is not objecting to a policy, it is antisemitism. Natan Sharansky identified the “three Ds” that cross the line: “It is antisemitic when Israel is demonized, held to different standards, or delegitimized.” The United States is often the only “no” vote in international bodies where countries seem to have an obsession with singling out Israel for disproportionate condemnation. The sixth trend is the growing nationalistic movements that target “the other”—be they immigrants or religious and ethnic minorities—in the name of protecting the identity and “purity” of their nation. When this fear or hatred of the “other” occurs or when people try to find a scapegoat for the instability around them, it is never good for the Jews. The history of Europe, with Russian pogroms and Nazism, provides sufficient evidence. And when government officials talk about protecting a country’s purity, we’ve watched that scenario before. The State Department monitors these trends and activities and reports on them in 194 countries—in two major annual reports: International Religious Freedom and Human Rights. I am now involved in developing a major training initiative for State Department employees so they can better monitor what is happening in their countries, and sensitize them to the various forms of antisemitism; this will make our annual reports more comprehensive, and allow us to do an even better job of monitoring and confronting antisemitism in all its forms. If we don’t chronicle it, if we don’t name it, we can’t fight it. ACTIVE RESISTANCE TO ANTISEMITISM Of course, it isn’t enough to study and monitor these deeply troubling trends. It is critical that we act to reverse them. My approach to combating antisemitism is not just to preach to the choir, so to speak, but to join in partnership with non-Jews in condemning 10 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:7 it—government, civil society, international institutions, business leaders, labor unions, and media—in condemning it. Last summer, Secretary Clinton launched an initiative to strengthen civil society across the globe, instructing all of us in the State Department and all our overseas posts to treat civil society as strategic partners. Partnering with opinion leaders from civil society and government—as well as building bridges among ethnic and religious groups—is the way to change a culture from fear and negative stereotyping to acceptance and understanding, from narrow-mindedness to an embrace of diversity, from hate to tolerance. Educating our young is a priority. They are our future; their values and opinions form at a very early age. No government should produce materials that are intolerant of members of any religious, racial, or ethnic group, or teach such intolerance as part of its educational curriculum. The State Department continues to focus on this important issue and express our concern to the governments about using such hateful lessons and textbooks, calling Jews the children of apes and pigs or promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Around the time of this journal’s publication, I am scheduled to travel to Saudi Arabia to discuss that issue. We sponsor teacher training on the Holocaust through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe—both its uniqueness and its universal lessons. The United States provides training to foreign law enforcement officials that covers crimes against vulnerable groups, including Jews, because these issues are of prominent concern in this country. We use old and new technologies to communicate with the public about human rights, tolerance, and democracy. We strongly support the freedoms for all people to express their views, even distasteful ones, both offline and online—but we also work to promote tolerance and to eradicate ignorance. We are enhancing our cultural and educational exchanges to showcase our civil society organizations, and to learn from the successes of other countries in confronting and combating hate in all of its forms. I want to mention two examples of efforts I am engaged in to combat the forms of antisemitism I have mentioned. BRINGING IMAMS TO THE DEATH CAMPS To combat the Holocaust denial, I went with eight leading imams, two of whom had been deniers, to Dachau and Auschwitz. My goal was to have them issue a statement condemning Holocaust denial. When we arrived at Dachau, Germany’s first concentration camp, the imams were overcome with the pictures they saw and immediately went to the ground in prayer at the sculpture commemorating the six million Jews exterminated. At that \\jciprod01\productn\J\JSA\3-1\JSA138.txt 2011] unknown Seq: 5 SPECIAL ENVOY 29-SEP-11 13:40 11 moment, I knew I was watching history being made. All passers-by—tourists, docents—stopped in their tracks to witness this spontaneous prayer of these leading imams. And when we got to Auschwitz, it was overwhelming for them, and for some transformational. We were walking amid ash and bone fragments from the 900,000 Jews exterminated there—solely because of who they were. We were facing the fact that unfettered and unanswered hatred can indeed create an Auschwitz. All the imams had their own catharsis there, and together they produced a statement strongly condemning Holocaust denial and all other forms of antisemitism. They are now urging colleagues and schools to join their statement. Some are planning to take their youth on the same trip, to become witness to history, to teach the power of hatred, and the power that condemnation can have to stop the hatred. INVOLVING YOUNG PEOPLE My colleague Farah Pandith, the special representative to Muslim communities, and I have just launched a virtual campaign called “2011 Hours Against Hate.” We are asking young people around the world to pledge a number of hours to volunteer to help or serve a population different from their own. We ask them to work with people who may look different, or pray differently, or live differently. For example, a young Jew might volunteer time to read books at a Muslim pre-school, or to Russian Orthodox at a Jewish clinic, or to a Muslim at a Baha’i food pantry. It is important to walk in another person’s shoes. We are using Facebook (the third largest country in the world) and other social media to connect the youth globally, and to engage them to go beyond words, speeches, or even lectures—providing a vehicle to do something to promote tolerance and practice mutual respect. We began meeting with hundreds of young people—students and young professionals—in Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Spain—countries that in their histories celebrated Jews and Muslims co-existing and thriving together. These countries are seeing a different culture these days and the youth we met with don’t like the direction in which things are going. They want to do something. They embraced the campaign, and we have already reached our goal of 2011 hours pledged against hate many times over. And we really have just begun. FIGHTING HATE So while I fight antisemitism, I am also aware that hate is hate. Nothing justifies it—not economic instability, not international events, not an 12 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:7 isolated pastor burning a Koran. Together, we must confront and combat the many forms of hatred in our world today. Where there is hatred born of ignorance, we must teach and inspire. Where there is hatred born of blindness, we must expose people to a larger world of ideas and reach out, especially to youth, so they can see beyond their immediate circumstances. Where there is hatred whipped up by irresponsible leaders, we must call them out and answer as strongly as we can—and make their message totally unacceptable to all people of conscience. When history records this chapter, I hope it will reflect our efforts to build a peaceful, fair, just, free world where people defend universal human rights and dignity. This is not a vision to be dismissed as kumbaya or naı̈ve idealism—it is a real goal that should never be far from our thoughts. Hate has been around since the beginning of humankind, but since then, too, good people of all faiths and backgrounds have striven to combat it. The Jewish tradition tells us that “you are not required to complete the task, but neither are you free to desist from it.” *Hannah Rosenthal is the special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State. Antisemitism in Latin America: Regional and Global Trends Dina Siegel Vann* Most Latin American countries today are full-fledged democracies, embracing a culture of human rights, diversity, and inclusiveness. Many key Latin American countries, such as Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil, have adopted forward-looking anti-racist legislation to curb hate speech and violence against minorities. Jewish communities were able to act as catalysts of these initiatives. Together with other segments of society, they worked to have them introduced and ratified by national legislatures and remain as watchdogs to ensure that they are implemented when warranted. Not long ago, the expression of antisemitism was allowed in public circles. Today, barring Venezuela, not only has antisemitism become “politically incorrect” but also is characterized as a crime sanctioned by law. Unfortunately, cyber antisemitism continues to be a problem in the region with the proliferation of Web sites in Spanish. Because of its global nature, however, this issue requires a global solution. The Organization of American States (OAS), the main multilateral regional forum, is in the process of adopting an Inter-American Convention against Racism to include antisemitism. This tool will aim to discourage those who insist on using prejudice to sow the seeds of discord among peoples and nations in the hemisphere. The Latin American Catholic Church, despite its conservative bent, has adopted the conclusions emanating from the Second Vatican Council and slowly but surely has introduced transformation in its teachings regarding attitudes toward Jews and in its relations with local Jewish communities. In addition, interfaith programs that involve outreach to the growing evangelical denominations and are sympathetic in general terms to Jews and to Israel, and more limited to Moslems, have multiplied. World War II and the Holocaust are hardly perceived as a central chapter in Latin America’s contemporary history, although Bolivia, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic opened their doors to Jewish refugees, and there are even a few cases of Latin American “righteous among the nations.” Holocaust awareness has increased over the last 20 years through institutional activity, the establishment of new memorials and museums, international days of remembrance, and growth in media coverage. In Argentina and Ecuador, the topic of the Holocaust is being taught in depth in public and private schools. Argentina remains to date the only Latin American country on the UN International Holocaust Task Force, 13 14 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:13 although there are attempts to expand regional membership. The two terrorist attacks against Jewish targets in 1992 and 1994 in Buenos Aires increased the topic’s relevance. The issue of the articulation of memory is seen not only as a Jewish, but also as a national, imperative to recall Argentina’s own dark, authoritarian chapters As part of a global trend, Jews generally seem to be losing their status as a persecuted minority subject to historical discrimination. Paradoxically, there seems to be a diminishing empathy or understanding of the pernicious and ingrained nature of antisemitism concurrently with a generalized recognition of the horror of the Holocaust as a pillar of the Jewish and universal contemporary collective experience. In some extreme cases, the victims become victimizers and Holocaust images and terminology become associated with Israel’s alleged treatment of Palestinians as part of ongoing efforts to question Israel’s moral compass. In contrast to other parts of the world, most antisemitic expressions and episodes in Latin America are tied mainly to the Middle East conflict. Chapters of violence in the region have been capitalized by the radical left and marginal groups that espouse rabid anti-American positions and seek to delegitimize Israel. Latin America’s historic ambivalence toward the United States—and Israel as its main ally—were strengthened by the Iraq War. During the 2006 Lebanon War and the 2009 Gaza Operation the quantity and intensity of anti-American/anti-Zionist rhetoric significantly increased, more in the published rather than in public opinion. During these instances, Latin American media was rife with negative anti-Israel coverage and with biased editorial comments reflecting a clear black-and-white attitude and little concern for the nuances of a most complex confrontation. Classic antisemitic stereotypes and prejudices were part of the narrative. Language, cartoons, and images that alluded to the analogy between Nazi behavior under the Holocaust and Israel’s were prevalent. Political parties and groups in civil society reacted according to their traditional positions and alignments. The most disturbing development was the confrontation between members of local Arab and Jewish communities and the ensuing fractures in society as a whole, importing a political conflict alien to regional and national agendas. The growing presence of Iran and its proxies, underestimated by many and heavily supported by Venezuela and its allies, contributed much to this heated climate. In general terms, though, physical violence is practically absent in the region, although threats of violence and vandalism of Jewish institutions do occur. This was recently the case with the Mariperez synagogue in Caracas, which was sprayed with antisemitic slogans during a demonstration the first week in June 2011 by ultra-leftists and President Húgo Chávez’s supporters. Two attacks against Caracas’ Hebraica Jewish community center in 2011] TRENDS IN LATIN AMERICAN ANTISEMITISM 15 2004 and 2007 also took place on the eve of popular referendums. In February 2009, the Tiferet Israel synagogue in Caracas was vandalized as a side effect of Chávez’s virulent anti-Israel/antisemitic rhetoric, which nurtured a permissive climate leading to the attack. Shortly after, at an OAS special session, several countries denounced these troublesome developments and several key countries played an important role in conveying to Chávez that he should refrain from attacking the Jewish community. Lately, Venezuela’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Temir Porras tweeted that “it’s alien for revolutionaries to attack religious institutions,” editorializing on the vandalism against the Mariperez synagogue and echoing Fidel Castro’s comments on antisemitism during an interview with American Jewish journalist Jeffrey Goldberg. Latin American Jewish communities remain deeply traumatized after the two unresolved attacks in Argentina in 1992 and 1994, sanctioned and executed by Iran and Hezbollah. These feelings of vulnerability and outrage became strengthened after the government of Evo Morales welcomed the current Iranian Minister of Defense Ahmad Vahidi in La Paz at the beginning of June 2011. Vahidi has an Interpol red alert for his capture; he is accused of masterminding the 1994 attack against the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires. After protestations from the government of President Cristina Kirchner, Vahidi left the country without being extradited to stand trial in Argentina. President Húgo Chávez’s use of antisemitism/anti-Zionism as a political tool has certainly acted as the prime catalyst for the expression of antisemitism at the regional level. He has also worked systematically to import the Middle East conflict into the region. The attacks in the official media—70% of which is owned by the government—facilitating permanent and systematic channeling of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish diatribes, the mobilization of state and political structures, and vandalism against Jewish institutions as measures of intimidation, and of course his growing alliance with Iran and the latter’s expansion in the region, are of grave concern. Venezuela’s and Bolivia’s severing of relations with Israel in 2009 brought this chapter to new lows. Venezuela remains today one of a few countries worldwide with state-sanctioned antisemitism. Until Chávez’s arrival, antisemitism was negligible. A crucial element that should be front and center in assessing the current state and future trends of antisemitism in Latin America is the growth of Iranian presence and influence, with Húgo Chávez as its chief patron. In 2005, the Venezuelan president established a strategic alliance with Iran that became an important turning point not only for Israel and for local Jewish communities but for the hemisphere as a whole. For the first time, the Middle East conflict is introduced and positioned as part of the regional 16 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:13 and national agendas and as an indicator of the desire for an independent foreign policy vis-à-vis the United States. Chávez has traveled to Iran many times; Iranian President Ahmanidejad has also visited on several occasions. This partnership and shared world views, including Ahmadinejad’s perspective on Israel, have undoubtedly played a role on the state of affairs in the region. Aided and abetted by Venezuela, Iran has pursued an aggressive policy of outreach to other countries in Latin America, particularly Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Ecuador, exploiting anti-American sentiment and offering sorely needed funding. Iran’s activities in the region are not confined to economic investment but extend to cooperation in the political, military, and cultural arenas. In the past several years, the Iranians inaugurated, reestablished, and increased their diplomatic representation in eleven nations. Some of the latter have strengthened their political ties with Iran despite its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons in defiance of the UN Security Council’s sanctions and the pleas of the international community, its grim human rights record, and its unequivocal involvement in planning and supporting two terrorist attacks against Latin Americans on Latin American soil. Brazil, Uruguay, and Chile exhibit outstanding regional and international profiles; all of them have positioned the issue of human rights as most relevant on their national agendas. Finally, in the last few months, Latin America has been on the global and Jewish radar screens more than usual not only due to news coming out from Venezuela and the tense dynamics that have been established between the Chávez administration and the local Jewish community, but also because there has been a spate of unilateral recognitions of an independent Palestinian state by several countries. As mentioned, the Middle East peace process is today very much part of the regional and national agendas and local constituencies are vying for influence. The global campaign is targeted to culminate at the UN General Assembly this coming September, where the Palestinians will ask the world community to accept their membership in this body, a step that will thwart future bilateral peace negotiations in the Middle East. This will probably affect Israel’s legitimacy and image significantly and as usual will be reflected in the regional media. This wave of recognitions was initiated by Brazil, the unquestioned South American leader, who is seeking an increased role as a global player. Several of the countries from the Mercosur trade block followed suit. Bolivia and Ecuador, both members of the Alba block led by Venezuela, made a pronouncement. Guyana, a close ally of President Chávez, joined the crowd. Chile is the most dramatic example. The media—mostly owned by 2011] TRENDS IN LATIN AMERICAN ANTISEMITISM 17 local Palestinians—widely reflected the debate. The Chilean Congress, with vocal Palestinian and Jewish legislators, also witnessed this confrontation. There were attacks by an influential Palestinian legislator labeling the president of the Jewish community, Gabriel Zaliasnik, and Chile’s Interior Minister Rodrigo Hinzpeter, who happens to be Jewish, as Israeli agents. Important hemispheric leaders such as Mexico and Colombia, plus most of the Central American countries, have refused to join this group, reaffirming their support for multilateral resolutions at the UN and different agreements upholding direct negotiations as the only realistic road to peace. Pressure by local Palestinian and Arab communities is also felt strongly in Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, and Central American countries such as El Salvador. This is a new reality the region will increasingly be facing in the coming years—one that can translate into the expression of anti-Zionist themes in Latin America’s published and public opinion. *Dina Siegel Vann is director of AJC’s Latino and Latin American Institute. She can be contacted at [email protected]. Antisemitic Incidents from Around the World— A Partial List January–June 2011 JANUARY Montreal, January 18: Jewish community leaders say they are alarmed by six attacks on Jewish institutions over the weekend, emphasizing that the incidents can’t be dismissed as simple acts of vandalism. “This [is not] vandalism perpetrated by teenagers out on a Saturday night binge,” said Rabbi Reuben Poupko, who serves as chairman of the Jewish Community Security Coordinating Committee. “This is a concentrated assault, not just on the Jewish community, but on the diversity and harmony of the city of Montreal. All Montrealers should take this seriously.” Five synagogues and a Jewish school were targeted by vandals, who hurled rocks through windows between 2 and 3 a.m. Sunday. Beth Rambam, Tifereth Beth David Jerusalem, and Beth Zion synagogues in Cote St. Luc, Dorshei Emet synagogue in Hampstead, and Congregation Shaare Zedek in Notre Dame de Grace were targeted. The Academie Yavne in Cote St. Luc was also hit. FEBRUARY Tunis, February 1: A synagogue was set on fire in Tunisia overnight and gangs rampaged through schools in the capital on Tuesday, prompting the army to fan out to calm fears of chaos after the revolt that toppled Zine alAbdine Ben Ali. Major street protests have dried up in Tunisia in recent days, after a reshuffle purged the interim government of most Ben Ali loyalists and appeased public opinion. But sporadic acts of intimidation and sabotage have broken out after weeks of protests forced Ben Ali to flee the country on January 14, ending 23 years of strict police rule. Peres Trabelsi, the spokesman for Tunisia’s Jewish community, said he did not know who was behind the attack on the synagogue, which is in the southern city of Gabes. “I condemn this action and I believe those who did it want to create divisions between Jews and Muslims in Tunisia who have lived for decades in peace,” Trabelsi said. Muslim Tunisia has one of the largest Jewish communities in North Africa, but attacks are rare. The last attack came in 2002, when al Qaeda killed 21 people in a synagogue attack on the island of Djerba. In a further sign of deteriorating security, witnesses said gangs marauded through several schools in Tunis, terrifying students. The army fired in the air in Carthage to disperse gangs that stormed two schools, they said. On Monday, youths armed with knives and sticks marauded through the streets of Gassrine, burning government buildings and intimidating residents, the state news agency said. 19 20 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:19 London, February 3: A total of 21 antisemitic incidents were recorded in Leeds last year, a Jewish security charity has said. More than 639 reports of bigoted violence and abuse were received in total by the charity. They included street attacks, hate mail, threats, and the vandalism and desecration of Jewish property. The charity, which monitors antisemitism in Britain, said the figures marked the second worst year since records began in 1984. They were a significant fall on 2009, when 926 antisemitic incidents were recorded, fueled by the ground invasion of Gaza by Israeli forces. But researchers said the incidents continued a long-term trend of rising numbers of physical and verbal attacks against Jews. There were 219 incidents in London, 216 in Manchester, and 40 in Hertfordshire. MARCH Tokyo, March 2: Sony Music and MTV Japan have issued apologies after a Japanese pop group sported Nazi uniforms during a prime-time television appearance in the country. The all-male band, Kishidan, which is known for wearing motorcycle-gang-inspired schoolboy uniforms, donned the SS gear during an interview on MTV Japan’s Mega Vector show last month. The appearance prompted backlash from the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that monitors antisemitic activity. “There is no excuse for such an outrage,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean at the SWC, in a statement issued last week. “I am fully aware that many young Japanese are woefully uneducated about the crimes against humanity committed during World War II by Imperial Japan in occupied Asia, let alone about Nazi Germany’s genocidal ‘Final Solution’ against the Jews in Europe. But global entities like MTV and Sony Music should know better.” MTV Japan issued an apology on Monday, promising not to broadcast images or clips from the offending broadcast. “We have duly received the words of advice from the Simon Wiesenthal Center and take them very seriously. Kishidan will never again use this costume and it will be disposed of immediately,” states a letter, signed by Sony Music Artists chairman Kimikazu Harada and president Akira Takahashi, on behalf of the company and the band. They said Kishidan’s costume “was not meant to carry any ideological meaning whatsoever.” MTV also apologized and removed the images from its Web site. London, March 3: Private Eye editor Ian Hislop has written that he received a rambling phone call from Wikileak’s boss Julian Assange, claiming that British journalists, including the editor of The Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, were engaged in a Jewish-led conspiracy to smear WikiLeaks. The Guardian reports on it here. Hislop said that Assange was especially angry about a Private Eye report that Israel Shamir was a Holocaust denier, and com- 2011] ANTISEMITIC INCIDENTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD 21 plained that the article was part of a campaign by Jewish reporters in London to smear WikiLeaks. Assange told Hislop he should be ashamed of himself for joining in the international conspiracy to smear WikiLeaks. He claimed that the article was an obvious attempt to deprive him and his organization of Jewish support and donations. When Hislop pointed out that Rusbridger was not Jewish, Assange backtracked and said that Rusbridger was ‘”sort of Jewish” because he and Leigh, who is Jewish, were brothersin-law. Ottawa, March 3: Pro-Israel students at Carleton University say they were harassed and intimidated by Students Against Israeli Apartheid (SAIA) members after the group’s anti-Israel motion was shelved at a student council meeting last month. “People were banging on the doors, screaming, calling us names . . . We had to wait until campus [security] sent more officers to make sure students could get safely from the council room out to the elevators,” said Emile Scheffel, 21, a fourth-year political science student who isn’t Jewish but is involved in the Israel Awareness Committee (IAC) at Carleton. London, March 10: “A few months ago,” recalls historian Ian Johnson, “I observed a fatwa council meeting and heard a Syrian-born German speaker explain the perceived moral lapses of young European Muslims by quoting from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, believing that the antisemitic tract was a reputable source. No one hooted him down; instead, his speech was published as one of the council’s working papers.” (See Ian Johnson, “Our Secret Connections with the Muslim Brotherhood,” The New York Review of Books [March 10, 2011, 15]). Jerusalem, March 13: The Simon Wiesenthal Center has labeled a neo-Nazi march of approximately 1,000 participants held this past Friday in the heart of the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius “the worst type of antisemitic and xenophobic incitement against Lithuania’s minorities” and harshly criticized the failure of the country’s political, intellectual, and religious leadership to condemn the march unequivocally. In a statement issued here today by its Israel director, Holocaust historian Dr. Efraim Zuroff, the center called upon Lithuanian elected officials to denounce such demonstrations and upon the leaders of the ruling Homeland Union party to sanction their MP, Kazimieras Uoka, who was among the marchers. Montreal, March 16: A McGill University student is under investigation by police after he allegedly made death threats using his Twitter account. The student, Haaris Khan, was watching a documentary screened by the Con- 22 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:19 servative Party’s campus arm, Conservative McGill, when he appeared to become increasingly agitated and expressed himself on Twitter using his BlackBerry. “I’ve infiltrated a Zionist meeting. I feel like I’m at a Satanist ritual,” he allegedly wrote at the March 8 screening. “I want to shoot everyone in this room,” another tweet said. “Never been this angry.” The tweets call the documentary a “Zionist/Conservative propaganda film” and the gathering, which attracted about 20 students, “a secret Zionist convention.” Then: “I should have brought an M16.” A spokesperson for the Montreal Police Service said the force is still investigating. It’s not clear what charges could be laid, if any. “We take the case very seriously,” the spokesperson said. “We don’t go with half-measures on this.” London, March 20: A pro-Israel protester has been taken to the hospital after being bitten on the cheek outside the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) today. Police arrested two men on suspicion of public fighting. They have been bailed without charges for dates in April. Four activists had decided to go to SOAS after learning that a Celebrate Palestine event was taking place as part of Israel Apartheid Week. Two of them, Tony Coren and Gili Brenner (of Stand with Us), went inside the university and had a number of conversations with the student participants. Coren said: “We had placards and some information packs, and we had some very interesting and civilized discussions.” Cairo, March 21: Accident, prophetic, or wishful thinking? Those are the questions swirling after it was discovered Egyptian airline Egypt Air does not include Israel on a destination map on its Web site. According to the outlet, looking past Israel’s existence is odd considering one of its subsidiaries, Air Sinai, regularly flies to the tiny country. “On the map are the names of the Mideast capitals—Amman, Beirut, and Damascus—but Israel is nowhere to be found,” the Israeli Web site YNet says. “The omission is especially odd seeing as the company continues to fly to Israel four times a week.” London, March 31: Labour MP Sir Gerald Kaufman has apologized for saying “Here we are, the Jews again” when a fellow Labour MP stood up in the Commons. He made the remark when Louise Ellman rose to make an intervention during the report stage of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill. Mrs. Ellman and Sir Gerald are both Jewish but hold differing views on the Israel-Palestinian conflict. The Manchester Gorton MP said he was sorry for any offense he had caused. Mrs. Ellman has not publicly commented on the remark, but the Conservative MP for Hendon, Matthew Offord, said he intended to make a complaint about the use of 2011] ANTISEMITIC INCIDENTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD 23 “unparliamentary language.” In a statement released by the Labour Party, Kaufman said: “I regret if any remarks I made in the chamber caused offense. If they did, I apologize.” The comments were made during a debate over plans to change the law on universal jurisdiction. APRIL Los Angeles, April 14: Police in Hollywood are looking for a suspect after a fire was intentionally set in a classroom at a temple and Jewish school. The incident is being investigated as a hate crime because it took place at a place of worship, fire officials said. Police arrived at Temple Israel of Hollywood shortly before school started Thursday morning after receiving reports of a suspicious package. School officials were forced to notify parents and evacuate the school for several hours. While parents and students were asked to refrain from speaking to the media, one young boy told KTLA he was scared and that “we were thinking that we might die or that the school might burn down.” Authorities swept the school for evidence and carried out the suspicious package in a brown paper bag. Pew Poll, April 26: Most Egyptians are in favor of annulling a peace treaty with Israel, according to a Pew Research Center poll released on Monday. The U.S.-based think tank polled 1,000 adults throughout Egypt between March 24 and April 7, finding that only 36 percent would maintain the treaty, while 82% of Egyptians view the United States unfavorably; the poll also noted that military leader Mohamed Tantawi is most popular man in Egypt. The percentage of Egyptians who support annulling the treaty (54%) does not vary among those who sympathize with Islamic fundamentalists and those who do not. Those with lower incomes, however, are less likely to support the peace with Israel than are those with higher incomes. MAY Buenos Aires, May 9: An Argentinian man is to be prosecuted to the fullest extent following the brutal assault on a headmaster of an Orthodox Jewish school in Buenos Aires. Moshe Cohen, director of Heichal Hatora, was hit in the head with an iron bar on May 9 as he was leaving the school. He was hospitalized with a serious head injury. The assailant, who was arrested a few blocks from the scene, allegedly shouted “Jew, Jew” during the assault. The incident took place on the eve of Israel’s Independence Day. New York, May 12: Two men allegedly trying to buy weapons, including three pistols and hand grenades, as part of a plot to attack Manhattan synagogues were arrested in New York City, averting a terror threat, law enforcement sources said. This is the 13th plot against the city thwarted 24 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:19 since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. The men were arrested as part of a police operation that had begun prior to Osama bin Laden’s death and was not a result of any retaliatory plan, sources said. Glasgow, May 24: A Scottish municipality has banned from its libraries books by Israeli authors and that were printed or published in Israel. The West Dunbartonshire Council, consisting of towns and villages west of Glasgow, ordered new books by Israeli authors to be banned from the council’s libraries, according to reports. “A place that boycotts books is not far from a place that burns them,” said Israel’s ambassador to the UK, Ron Prosor. European Jewish Congress President Moshe Kantor called the banning of Israeli books and the marking of Israeli products in Scotland “eerily reminiscent of darker times, and perhaps there is a level of hatred that connects them.” In a statement released Tuesday, Kantor noted that “While those behind the boycott will claim that this is not antisemitic, targeting the only Jewish state, a democracy, while ignoring serial human rights-abusing nations tells us that this is indeed antisemitic in intent and in effect.” Leicester, UK, May 26: The house and car of the rabbi of the Leicester Hebrew Congregation have been targeted by antisemitic vandals in three nocturnal attacks over the past three weeks. Bricks twice shattered windows of Rabbi Schmuli Pink’s shul-owned property, half a mile from the citycenter synagogue. On another occasion, a brick was thrown through his car window. Rabbi Pink said that although no one was injured, “this was not a pleasant experience. However, we are remaining strong.” The rabbi, who lives with his wife, Rifki, and their seven children, praised the efforts of the local police. “We are very happy with what the police are doing. They are responding excellently,” he said. Rabbi Pink has served the Midlands community for nearly 10 years. JUNE San Francisco, June 6: A cartoon called “Foreskin Man” has gained notoriety after an anti-male circumcision proposition was brought to San Francisco’s November ballot. The cartoon, created by Matthew Hess, president of the MGMbill.org group against what it calls male genital mutilation, features the handsome young Foreskin Man doing battle with Monster Mohel, an old, hook-nosed character, over a baby laid out on a blanket on a pool table in a billiard hall. The comic has been around for at least a year. A Foreskin Ma“ card set also is also being sold on the Internet. Channel Islands, UK, June 10: A legislator on Jersey, a British crown dependency off the coast of France, will not run for reelection because of 2011] ANTISEMITIC INCIDENTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD 25 antisemitic threats. “My family have been very upset by recent events and I feel that it would therefore be better not to stand for re-election at the end of the year,” said Sen. Freddie Cohen, who is also the island’s planning minister; he was quoted on June 7 by the London Jewish Chronicle. Cohen and his family received antisemitic threats after the Jersey Evening Post criticized one of his decisions. Cohen is a past president of the island’s 65family Jewish community. Jersey was the sole British territory occupied by Nazis during World War II. Rome, June 14: On the day of Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Rome, a member of the capital’s Jewish community, Raffi Coen, was stabbed through the heart. Coen was 74 years old and well loved in the Jewish community. The murderer did not steal his money, so there must be some other motive for the crime. Over the last few days in Italy there have been some disturbing episodes of propaganda against Jews and Israel, over Netanyahu’s visit, but also because of the “Unexpected Israel” festival in Milan. There may well be antisemitic motives surrounding this tragedy, and it is feared that the authorities will not take into account the hypothesis of racist murder, because that is their usual policy when such crimes are suspected. We believe a commitment against antisemitism (often in the form of exasperated anti-Zionism) is one of the top priorities in Italy and throughout the EU. Jerusalem, June 22: Jews and Israelis, or passengers carrying any nonIslamic article of faith, will not be able to fly code-share flights from the United States to Saudi Arabia under Delta Air Line’s new partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines, which is set to begin in 2012. Although Delta announced in January that the Saudi airline would join its SkyTeam network next year, the implications of the deal only came to light recently, according to people who have scrutinized the details. Saudi Arabia bans anyone with an Israeli stamp in his or her passport from entering the country, even in transit. Many Jews believe the kingdom has also withheld visas from travelers with Jewish-sounding names. Oslo, June 22: Earlier this month, a survey by the Oslo municipality found that 33% of Jewish students in the town are physically threatened or abused by other high school teens at least two to three times a month. The group that suffered the next highest amount of bullying was Buddhists at 10%. “Others” were at 7% and Muslims at 5.3%. Furthermore, the survey found that 51% of high school students consider “Jew” a negative expression and 60% had heard other students use the term. 26 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:19 Turin, June 22. It could be a picture from a Nazi textbook, but this hooknosed caricature of Israeli President Shimon Peres, with hands clasped around a Magen David and a pocketful of bleeding babies, was part of an Italian “cultural festival” last month. The sinister funfair game, in which Turin students paid one euro to throw shoes at the gurning (distorting one’s face) puppet, is one of a recent catalogue of incidents causing a climate of fear among Italy’s Jews. Cupertino, California, June 22: Apple pulled an app called “The Third Intifada” from its App Store. The app encouraged attacks on Israel and highlighted anti-Israeli news and opinion from around the Web. On Tuesday, the Simon Wiesenthal Center issued a statement urging Apple to immediately withdraw the app from its collection. Apple complied, citing a policy that apps that are “defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited or likely to expose the targeted group to harm or violence will be rejected.” Courtesy of ADL, www.adl.org Please send your nominations for Book of the Year to Lesley Klaff, Book Editor—[email protected] Mexico in a Region under Change Judit Bokser Liwerant* Latin America is a region undergoing radical and contradictory changes: an increasingly expansive force of democracy amid global cycles of economic crises and social conflicts and the emergence of new political and cultural scenarios that account for diversified outcomes. The recognition of differences, the politics of identity, and the emphasis on heterogeneity as well as the search for civic commonalities act as a substratum that widens the scope of the public sphere. Democratization has created favorable conditions for greater legitimation and visibility of the Jewish communities. However, channels for civic participation are accompanied by changing expressions of antisemitism. This article argues that antisemitism in Mexico, like most of the countries in the region, has seldom manifested itself through physical violence. It can be traced basically to the level of the narrative and the discursive realm. It is mainly through media discourses that negative representations are built, transmitted, and recreated. Classical expressions of antisemitism, anti-Israelism, and anti-Zionism converge and overlap through complex axes of argumentative articulation and chains of meanings. Key Words: Mexico, Jews, Latin America TRENDS AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN LATIN AMERICA Changes follow non-linear trends. When noting commonalities that cut across the different Latin America societies, one should be aware of the inner differentiations within the continent. Neo-liberal and growing institutionalized citizenship regimes coexist with corporatist political forms, popular mobilization, and plebiscitary democracy. Both the prevalence of historically complex relations with the United States and the widespread dissatisfaction with the effects of globalization opened new opportunities for radical movements in the region, including the neo-populist versions of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua. Thus, the region experiences contradictory trends: increasing civic participation of social and political actors coexists with the tendency of hegemonic sectors to substitute grassroot democratic participation. Processes of democratization develop along with trends of de-democratization. Pluralism today is related to culture as well as to political and institutional arrangements that provide the framework to resolve differences and to build consensus. The widening of the public sphere and the consolidation 27 28 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:27 of civil society have allowed the emergence of new actors and unprecedented forms of participation. Opportunities for collective recognition and new interactions between majorities and minorities are part of the prevailing scenarios. Different social movements attract vast middle-class sectors, including Jews and the Jewish community, as civic participants of the national arena. Jewish individuals have increasingly entered the political sphere by assuming high-ranking public roles. Simultaneously, Jewish communities have acquired more visibility and legitimacy, derived from a twofold complex process: the erosion of a national ethnic narrative, which provided the criteria for national belonging, and the increased recognition of minorities on religious grounds. Liberal policies have acknowledged the relevance of middle- and high-class social sectors as players in the public arena, thus creating favorable conditions for a stronger presence of Jewish communities in the national landscape.1 Paralleling these processes in countries like Mexico, in the Southern Cone, changes have enhanced the search for civic commonalities through a shift from the automatic valorization of cultural and ethnic differences to a renewed concern with integration into civil society and the public sphere. However, one cannot dismiss the centrality of the bombing of the communal building AMIA in Buenos Aires, Argentina; it brought to the forefront the convergence of old and new expressions of antisemitism. It also fostered the visibility of transnational Jewish links and solidarity and the affirmation of collective identity. New institutional channels of participation point to new sources and expression of the dynamics of acceptance and rejection and therefore to equally changing expressions of antisemitism. Thus, one has to approach antisemitism as part of a broader parameter of inclusion-exclusion. The overall picture in Latin America of democratization as well as economic crises, political instability, high levels of public violence, and lack of security has increasingly exposed the region and its Jewish communities to waves of migration. Although Latin American Jewry has historically grown out of large-scale immigration, during the last decades, migration patterns have tended to be outward. The number of Jews in Latin America dropped from 514,000 in the 1970s to 390,000 in 2010. Mexico’s community has maintained a stable demographic profile, due mainly to a relative equilibrium of emigration and immigration coming from other 1. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “Los judı́os de América Latina. Los signos de las tendencias: juegos y contrajuegos,” en Haim Avni et al. (eds.), Pertenencia y Alteridad. Judı́os en/de América Latina: cuarenta años de cambios (Madrid-Berlin: Iberoamericana), 2011:115-164. 2011] MEXICO IN A REGION UNDER CHANGE 29 countries in the region. Its current Jewish population totals 39,500.2 In a country with a population of 112, 336,538 people, the Jewish community has a visible presence that outreaches its numbers.3 When analyzing antisemitism, one has to take into account that concern has been voiced about an excessive focus on it as the primary characteristic of the region, warning against a simplistic and reductionist identification of Latin America with intolerance and anti-Jewish expression. This concern has led to calls for balance, demanding more nuanced distinctions between different times, places, and modalities of expression. Certainly, the interfacing between national, regional, and global antisemitism, its inner differentiation, and contemporary expressions have to be considered. Diffuse and latent prejudices, veiled and structural, as well as those rejected in the official semantics but evident in the rhetoric of individuals and of collective sectors are part of new, complex societies both in Latin America and elsewhere. The historical course of this rhetoric, which does not necessarily translate into discriminatory practices, needs to be contextualized within each country’s political culture and status of human rights. Understanding its manifestations emerges as a sine qua non when attempting to account for the actual extent of antisemitic danger as opposed to the symbolic violence of its expressions in the media. Antisemitism can be seen as a phenomenon that to a large extent is produced and reproduced discursively.4 Both at the level of attitudes, stereotypes, and prejudices on the one hand, and at the behavioral level manifest in acts, practices, and actual normative arrangement on the other, antisemitism had and has a broad impact on the representation of the “other.” It is precisely this dimension that acquires new relevance amid the changing trends of cultures that historically had expressed serious difficulties facing heterogeneity. This question is directly related to the dimension of the public sphere as the space for constructing shared civic-national foundations for the legitimate expression of difference. 2. Sergio DellaPergola, “¿Cuántos somos hoy? Investigación y narrativa sobre población judı́a en América Latina,” Ibid.:305-340. 3. 2010 Total Population, “México en Cifras” (Mexico in Numbers). INEGI (Mexican National Institute for Statistics and Geography), http:// www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/MexicoCifras.aspx?e=0&m=0&sec=M. 4. See Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak, Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetoric of Racism and Antisemitism (New York: Routledge), 2001. 30 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:27 ANALYZING ANTISEMITISM We still face the challenge of linking indicators and formalized criteria to comprehensive approaches that can account for the changing meanings of the phenomenon. This challenge becomes even more urgent in light of the new significance and connotations of antisemitism that are constructed in Latin America as well as in the Jewish world. By this we mean the convergences of its classic expressions with processes such as criticism of the Israeli government’s dealing with the Israel-Palestinian conflict and of Israel as a whole—beyond particular governments—the framing of an antiZionist language with antisemitic content. There are differences between antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and antiIsraelism; simultaneously, though, they overlap, carrying mutually referring meanings and significance. The socio-political, religious-cultural, and economic historical dimensions of antisemitism interact with the current political and ideological contexts. Latin America’s historical and ideational trajectory has articulated through the components of anti-Americanism, anti-colonialism, and anti-imperialism a specific dynamic that reinforces the mutually referring meanings.5 The fluid overlapping acts as a “cultural code” that identifies wide sectors of public thought and media.6 ECONOMICS AND DEMOCRACY IN MEXICO Mexico’s integration into the international economic system has been fragmented. In the framework of growing inequalities, the search for inclusive political forms parallels strong and persistent trends of exclusion, thus hindering democracy itself. The impact of economic crises on the Jewish community in Mexico, while not as acute as in the Southern Cone (e.g., Argentina), has also been a determinant of radical changes concerning organized Jewish life. Globalization processes, while deteriorating the economic standing of various sectors, have brought different segments of the higher- to-middle classes into the most dynamic venues and advantageous positions for tapping into transnational commerce, high technology, services, the sciences, academia and its institutions, and the financial sectors. Thus, Jews’ interaction with diverse sectors of society widens. 5. Cf. Robert S. Wistrich, Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred (London: Thames Methuen), 1991; Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry into Conflict and Prejudice (New York: Norton), 1986. 6. Shulamit Volkov, “Readjusting Cultural Codes: Reflections on Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism,” in Jeffrey Herf (ed.), Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism in Historical Perspective: Convergence and Difference (New York: Routledge), 2007: 39-43. 2011] MEXICO IN A REGION UNDER CHANGE 31 Mexico’s transition to democracy was signed by the end of seven decades of the ruling PRI party (Institutional Revolutionary Party) in 2000, and the arrival to power of the center-right PAN (National Action Party). The country’s consolidation of democracy is still an ongoing process. Vectors as essential as rule of law, transparency, and accountability still need to be fully established. In the realm of human rights, Mexico experienced both significant progress and setbacks. The National Commission of Human Rights (federal and state) has gained a progressive presence. In April 2010, the Mexican senate unanimously approved reforms that give human rights a constitutional status, widen their recognition and protection, and provide the commission with the resources to investigate serious violations to individual rights. According to the commission, however, a high percentage of its recommendations were not implemented within the deadlines specified and/ or were not accepted by public officials because of weaknesses endemic in the Mexican judicial system. The World Economic Forum warned that the cost of corruption in Mexico equals 9% of the national gross domestic product (PIB), while businesses need to spend 10% of their income on bribes. The so-called war against drugs and organized crime has resulted in a spiral of violence that has not been directly connected to ethnic or religious motives. ANTISEMITISM IN MEXICO While historically the national culture has faced difficulties dealing with the “other,” antisemitism has been mainly associated either with the most conservative forces or with extreme left-wing actors. In contemporary Mexico, antisemitism was initially prompted by debates surrounding immigration policies during the late 1920s. Groups such as the Anti-Chinese and the Anti-Jewish National League, founded in 1930, and the Honourable Traders, Industrialists and Professionals lobbied the government to restrict the immigration of Jews.7 In the 1930s, Mexico experienced outbursts of antisemitism focused on economic and racial grounds. Gradually, the racial theme became dominant amid right-wing groups. Among them, Mexican Revolutionary Action, founded in 1934, operated through its paramilitary units, the Golden Shirts. The antisemitic Pro-Race Committee and the Middle Class Confederation exerted pressure on the government and waged antisemitic campaigns, 7. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “El México de los años treinta: cardenismo, inmigración judı́a y antisemitismo,” en Xenofobias y Xenofilia en la Historia de México Siglos XVIII y XIX, Delia Salazar (Coordinadora), Dirección de Estudios Históricos, México, 2006: 379-416. 32 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:27 which reached their peak in 1938-9. But they were not the only antisemitic protestors; trade unions and left-wing labor organizations also became a platform for antisemitic expressions that were related mainly to immigration and exile policies.8 Thereafter, expressions of antisemitism associated mainly with economic- and class-related stereotypes were incorporated into political codes related to Israel and Zionism. The latter reached its maximal expression in 1975, when Mexico supported UN Resolution 3379, equating Zionism with Racism, condemning Zionism as a form of racism and discrimination while entering the international dynamics of delegitimization of Israel; due to the local circumstances, it also projected the stereotype of the Jewish community as lacking national loyalties.9 (The resolution was revoked in December 1991.) In the early 1990s, the Gulf War consolidated an intellectual atmosphere censoring Israel as an instigator of the war and a spearhead of Western imperialism. Moreover, the inversion of the victimizer-victim argument that was widespread in the seventies was further reinforced.10 Its dynamics continued to be closely associated with the gap between a bilateral relationship with the United States and the multilateral forum of ascription. In December 1991, changes in the bilateral relationship led to the revocation of the 1975 resolution. Progressively, the anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli discourse gained argumentative weight, as it was essentially connected to the ups and downs of the peace process in the Middle East. As such, it reflected a number of issues: the First and Second Intifada, the Gulf War, the Lebanon Wars, Operation Cast Lead, or the Gaza War, as well as the Oslo Accords, the Camp David Summit, and the Road Map for Peace negotiations. Antisemitism has not been a central issue for political parties and movements in Mexico’s modern history. The diversified organizational pattern within the extreme right has diminished in its public visibility and the intensity of its activities. Organizations such as the LaRouche-inspired Partido Laboral Mexicano (Mexican Labor Party), the Federación Mexicana Anticomunista (Anti-Communist Federation), and Los Tecos have taken a 8. Ibid. 9. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “Fuentes de legitimación de la presencia judı́a en México: El voto positivo de México a la ecuación sionismo = racismo y su impacto sobre la comunidad judı́a,” Judaica Latinoamericana, No. III (Jerusalem: AMILAT and Magnes Press), 1997: 319. 10. Luis Roniger, “Latin American Jews and Processes of Transnational Legitimization and De-Legitimization,” Journal of Modern Jewish Studies, 9 no. 2 (July 2010). 2011] MEXICO IN A REGION UNDER CHANGE 33 back role. The exception to this low-key approach has been the former Partido de las Águilas Mexicanas (Party of the Mexican Eagles), which in 1996 changed its name to Consejo del Pueblo de las Águilas Mexicanas (The People’s Council of Mexican Eagles). Its ideology, dubbed as “neo-Mexicanism,” promotes an idealized image of Mexico’s Indian past and scorns Europe’s role in forging the national identity. Its open activity declined and the Tribunal Federal Electoral (Federal Electoral Tribunal) denied its petition to be registered. The Instituto Federal Electoral (Federal Electoral Institute) issued an open letter condemning the group’s antisemitic, racist, and intolerant views. Mexican antisemitism, which has seldom manifested itself through physical violence, can be traced basically to the level of the narrative and the discursive realm. It is through media discourses that negative representations are built, transmitted, and recreated. The yearly report by Tribuna Israelita11 shows a significant decline from 2009 to 2010 in Mexico in the number of published notes (from 10,721 to 6,624, or –38.21%), including news reports, op eds, and newspaper editorials related to Jewish and Israeli issues. When looking at each classified category separately, only the number of cartoons increased (from 12 in 2009 to 64 in 2010).12 This pattern seems to be related to the decreased impact on Mexican public opinion that the “Flotilla Affair” had in comparison to the impact of Operation Cast Lead, which appears to be consistent with the 2010 World Report by the Stephen Roth Center at Tel Aviv University.13 According to the criteria developed by Tribuna Israelita, 11.37% of the classified published notes in 2010 were negative.14 In contrast, only 1.23% were positive (while 87.65% were considered neutral). The percentage of negative news in the corresponding section was far lower than the percentage of negative editorials (including opinion and newspaper editorials), cartoons, and letters (1.54% for news compared to 46.54% for editorials, 23.44% for cartoons. and 47.92% for letters). Here again there is a gap between the percentage of negative news reported and the percentage of 11. I thank Yael Siman for her valuable collaboration, Renée Dayán and Tribuna Israelita for the data provided. 12. Report on Antisemitism, 2010, México, Tribuna Israelita. 2010. 13. Cf. “General Analysis. Overview” in Antisemitism Worldwide 2010. General Analysis. The Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities, The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism, and The Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry. Tel Aviv University, European Jewish Congress. http://www.tau.ac.il/Antisemitism/. 14. In this classification, there is no explicit differentiation between antisemite, anti-Israeli, and anti-Zionist arguments. 34 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:27 negative editorials, cartoons, and letters—that is, few negative news regarding Jews and/or Israel have a significant, and disproportional, impact on Mexican public opinion. Regarding the contents of the media discourse, 2010 has shown both a continuation of previous patterns as well as changing trends. Zionism, which, as stated, has been identified with racism, colonialism, and imperialism, became an incorporated and implicit argument of the major focus— i.e., the State of Israel portrayed as a belligerent and war-prone state, oppressive and genocidal. The axis of human rights violation has gained an increased presence among the critical arguments; the Arab-Israeli conflict continued to be portrayed as part of the clash between the imperialist West and the Arab and Muslim Third World. Editorials published in the Mexican press in 2010 put emphasis on Israel’s conduction of “war crimes” in Lebanon and Gaza; Israel’s “terrorist” traits, and its implementation of “massacre,” “genocide,” and “collective punishment” in Gaza to a million and a half Palestinians; the building of a wall in the West Bank that seeks to “exterminate” 4.5 million Palestinians; Israel’s “violation” of international law in the occupied territories and worldwide; the Zionist Jewish state as a racist one on nationality and citizenship issues; and Israel as an “apartheid” state.15 Prejudice also may be found or revealed by omission of relevant information that could show Israel’s perspective as an actor/active player. While this omission differs from explicit prejudice association, it also has a meaningful impact. Insofar as the State of Israel became the main focus of the arguments, the fluid interconnections established between anti-Israelism and historical antisemitism, rather than between anti-Israelism and dilution of the Holocaust, became the radicalized point of departure of the dispute. To exemplify fluid interconnections of meanings, we may point to the overlapping of anti-Israelism/the Holocaust through analogies, parallels, 15. Andres Pascoe Pierce, “La década del terror” (A Decade of Terror), Crónica, January 2, 2010; Xavier Caño Tamayo, “Sobre una bomba de violaciones de derechos humanos” (About a human rights violations bomb), Rumbo de México, January 4, 2010; José Steinsleger, “¿Cuándo caerá el muro?” (When will the wall fall?), La Jornada. January 6, 2010; Héctor Delgado, “ONU monosabia, ignora la autodeterminación” (Mono-wise United Nations ignores self-determination), Uno más uno, February 11, 2010; Manu Dorberier (newspaper editorial), “El que se somete a la infamia, se convierte en infame” (He who puts himself under infamy becomes infamous), El Sol de México, February 20, 2010; “Lula en Israel” (Lula in Israel), La Jornada, March 16, 2010; José Steinsleger, “¿Israelı́es o judı́os?” (Israelis or Jews?), La Jornada, April 21, 2010; Juan Gelman, “Prohibido y ya” (Forbidden, that’s it), Milenio Diario, May 29, 2010. 2011] MEXICO IN A REGION UNDER CHANGE 35 and metaphors: according to José Steinsleger, the West Bank Wall was conceived out of a great strategic plan, the slow and sustained “extermination; . . . this time, without gas chambers.”16 The naqba, Steinsleger says, Israel’s “expulsion” of 700,000 Palestinians—which was preceded by “ethnic cleansing”—has a straightforward parallel with the Holocaust: the word naqba denotes the “oldest and most prolonged Holocaust” in contemporary history as a result of the creation of an “illegal Zionist State.”17 In his words, “Nazi-fascist wall, locked up alive Palestinians in ‘ghettos.’ ” Intermingled with the national/regional anti-American and anti-imperialist discourse that recurrently emphasizes the alliance between the United States and Israel, both the wall at the West Bank and at USA-Mexico border, were equated, yet differentiated: only the former was seen as a “genocide wall.”18 As stated, the Flotilla Affair reflected the ebb and flow of the conflict in the Middle East and its implications for antisemitic expressions.19 Its negative image reached an apex in this episode, which conveyed its “genocidal” and “anti-humanitarian” nature and an illegitimate code of action.20 One must also assess the impact on the national media of the transnational dynamics that feed information. Specifically, La Jornada and Uno más Uno—newspapers of the left—systematically reproduced editorial articles of The Guardian and Independent, and their own editorial perspective reinforced this stand. Also in the mainstream press—particularly in Milenio, El Financiero, and Excélsior—there has been an increased presence of articles critical of Israeli actions, mainly of Benjamin Netanyahu’s settlement policy.21 This heightened criticism certainly points to varying degrees of symbolic violence and its implications through the interplay of meanings and motivations (prejudice vs. critical voice). In contrast, the links of the Jewish community with Israel and other Jewish centers have gained legitimacy in the public sphere—reinforced by 16. José Steinsleger, “¿Cuándo caerá el muro?” (When Will the Wall Fall?), La Jornada, January 6, 2010. 17. José Steinsleger, “Palestina: orı́genes de la nakba” (Palestine: origins of the nakaba) La Jornada, May 5, 2010. 18. Héctor Delgado, “¡Bienvenida Señora Michelle Obama!” (Welcome, Ms. Michelle Obama), Uno más uno, April 15, 2010. 19. Esteban Beltrán (director, Amnesty International, Spain), “El asfixiante bloqueo de Gaza” (The suffocating blockade of Gaza), El Paı́s, June 1, 2010. 20. Héctor Delgado, “Israel asesina marinos civiles en Gaza” (Israel assasinates civil marines in Gaza), Uno más uno, June 1, 2010. 21. Emilio Menéndez del Valle, “Imponer la paz en Palestina” (Imposing peace in Palestine), April 9, 2010. Milenio and El Financiero have other examples. 36 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:27 the visible recognition of the existence of a Mexican diaspora—and have thus diminished the questioning of the transnational character of Jewish life. Arguments critical of the nexus between the Jewish community and Israel or the North American Jewish community have been largely absent in the public discourse. Though concrete political episodes awakened the argument of the particular interest over the national well-being, traditional stereotypes such as the control of the national or international financial system or the self-segregated group tropes have been minimal. As stated, antisemitism in Mexico has not reflected violence. While there were 67 antisemitic incidents in 2010 (mostly consisting of harassment actions: verbal threats and insults), there were only two incidents of physical aggression and one bomb threat. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS Anti-Zionism and anti-Israelism and their interconnection of meanings with antisemitism are components of a “cultural code” around which influent exponents of the progressive camp and leftist intellectuals identify. This theoretical and practical convergence fluctuates in consonance with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The globalization of this conflict reveals an interplay of international, regional, national, and local circumstances. The process involving the problematic social representation of Israel has acquired a new shared pattern in Latin America, although with national variations. In early December 2010, several Latin American countries announced their formal recognition of a Palestinian state based on borders in existence prior to the 1967 war. Brazil took the initiative, followed shortly by Argentina, Bolivia, and Ecuador. Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, laid the cornerstone for a Palestinian embassy in Brasilia on December 31, 2010. On January 28, 2011, Paraguay also announced its recognition of Palestine. Earlier that month, Chile and Peru stated that they would recognize a Palestinian state but that borders had to be mutually agreed upon by both sides of the conflict. Chile’s position followed strong pressure from its powerful Palestinian community, as revealed by motions introduced in the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies at the end of 2010 and the conduction of top-level meetings in the presidential palace with Palestinian diplomats, representatives of the Arab League in Chile, and members of the Palestinian communities and congressional groups. In its declaration, however, there was no formal reference to the 1967 borders. Colombia has said it will not recognize a Palestinian state until a mutual peace agreement is reached. Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, 2011] MEXICO IN A REGION UNDER CHANGE 37 Panama, and Belize have not indicated their positions. Several Latin American countries, including Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, had already recognized a Palestinian state prior to the most recent lobbying efforts. Mexico has not yet taken an official stand on this matter. It is likely, however, that the globalization of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will continue if these conditions are present: the stagnation of the peace process; the eruption of new cycles of violence in the Middle East; the strengthening of Islamic radical groups in countries that now experience political turmoil; the presence of neo-populist governments in the region; and the particular interaction between strategic decisions of international, regional, national, and local activists. *Judit Bokser Liwerant is a professor of political science at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), where she is the director of the Graduate School of Political and Social Sciences. She has published numerous books as author and editor and many scientific articles and chapters in the field of political theory, collective identities, and contemporary Latin American Jewry. She is a member of the Mexican Academy of Science. México, en una Región bajo Cambio Judit Bokser Liwerant* México, al igual que la mayorı́a de los paı́ses de América Latina, está experimentando profundas transformaciones de signo contradictorio: la creciente fuerza expansiva de la democracia convive con ciclos globales de crisis económicas y conflictos sociales y la aparición de nuevos escenarios polı́ticos y culturales diversificados. El reconocimiento de las diferencias, la polı́tica de la identidad y el énfasis en la heterogeneidad actúan como un sustrato que amplı́a el ámbito de la esfera pública. Simultáneamente, nuevas expresiones de esencialismos y de identidades primordiales actúan como fuente de exclusión. Los cambios siguen tendencias no lineales. Al tiempo que hay claros denominadores comunes que atraviesan las diferentes sociedades de América Latina, resulta evidente la diferenciación interna dentro del continente. Regı́menes neoliberales y crecientemente institucionalizados coexisten con formas polı́ticas corporativistas, movilizaciones populares y democracias plebiscitarias. Tanto la trayectoria de las relaciones históricas con los Estados Unidos, que han sido complejas, como la insatisfacción generalizada con los efectos de la globalización han abierto nuevas oportunidades para los movimientos radicales de la región, incluyendo las versiones neo-populistas de Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador y Nicaragua. Por lo tanto, la región experimenta tendencias contradictorias: el aumento de la participación cı́vica de los actores sociales y polı́ticos se junto a la tendencia de los sectores hegemónicos de sustituir la participación democrática de base. Los procesos de democratización se desarrollan junto con tendencias de des-democratización. La transición de México a la democracia fue marcada por el fin de siete décadas de gobierno del PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional) en el año 2000 y la llegada al poder del PAN (Partido Acción Nacional), de centro-derecha. La alternancia y el pluralismo han incidido en la cultura, ası́ como en los ordenamientos polı́ticos e institucionales que constituyen el marco en cuyo seno se busca canalizar las diferencias y construir consensos. La ampliación de la esfera pública y el fortalecimiento de la sociedad civil han permitido el surgimiento de nuevos actores y formas de participación sin precedentes. Nuevas oportunidades para el reconocimiento colectivo y nuevas interacciones entre las mayorı́as y las minorı́as forman parte de los escenarios actuales, al tiempo que diferentes movimientos sociales atraen a sectores de la clase media, entre los que se ubica la comunidad judı́a como 39 40 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:39 actor del ámbito nacional. A su vez, sus miembros han incursionado de manera creciente en la esfera pública asumiendo cargos públicos. La comunidad judı́a ha adquirido una mayor visibilidad y legitimidad derivadas de un complejo proceso: por una parte, de la erosión de una narrativa nacional que definió la pertenencia nacional a partir de criterios étnicos y, por la otra, de un creciente reconocimiento de las minorı́as en términos tanto religiosos como étnicos. El reconocimiento constitucional a la personalidad jurı́dica de las iglesias y la tradición clerical del partido gobernante, aún en un contexto público de laicidad, explican en parte este proceso. También la necesidad del nuevo régimen de entablar relaciones con importantes sectores de la sociedad—grupos empresariales, industriales, comerciales y profesionales- no mediadas por las estructuras en las cuales el PRI era hegemónico operó en este sentido. De este modo, y en el marco del proceso de ciudadanización que acompañó la transición polı́tica, las comunidades organizadas, entre ellas la judı́a, asumieron un nuevo protagonismo. A su vez, las polı́ticas neo-liberales le han conferido importancia pública a las clases medias y altas como actores de la escena nacional, todo lo cual ha creado condiciones favorables para una mayor presencia de la comunidad judı́a en la esfera pública.1 Nuevos canales institucionales de participación apuntan a nuevas fuentes de expresión de la dinámica de aceptación y rechazo y, por tanto, a manifestaciones igualmente cambiantes del antisemitismo. Este, por tanto, debe abordarse como parte de un parámetro más amplio de relaciones de inclusión-exclusión. El panorama general de la democratización en América Latina ası́ como las crisis económicas, la inestabilidad polı́tica, altos niveles de violencia pública y la falta de seguridad han expuesto cada vez más a la región y a sus comunidades judı́as a flujos de emigración. A pesar de que las comunidades judı́as del continente han tenido su origen en la inmigración, en las últimas décadas los patrones migratorios han revertido su dirección y has sido hacia el exterior. La población judı́a de América Latina se redujo de 514.000 en 1970 a 390.000 en el 2010. La comunidad de México ha mantenido un perfil demográfico estable, debido principalmente a un equilibrio relativo entre la emigración y la inmigración procedente de otros paı́ses de la región. Su población actual asciende a 39.500 judı́os.2 En un 1. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “Los judı́os de América Latina. Los signos de las tendencias: juegos y contrajuegos”, Pertenencia y Alteridad. Judı́os en/de América Latina: cuarenta años de cambios, Haim Avni et al (eds), Madrid-Berlin, Iberoamericana, 2011: 115-164. 2. Sergio DellaPergola, “¿Cuántos somos hoy? Investigación y narrativa sobre población judı́a en América Latina”, en Ibid.:305-340. 2011] MÉXICO, EN UNA REGIÓN BAJO CAMBIO 41 paı́s con una población de 112, 336 538 personas, su presencia, que es significativa, rebasa su alcance numérico.3 La representación social que de ella tiene la sociedad le confiere l la imagen y refuerza la percepción de ser sensiblemente más numerosa. Por su parte, la integración de México en el sistema económico internacional ha sido fragmentada. En el marco de crecientes desigualdades, la búsqueda de formas polı́ticas inclusivas se ha dado de manera paralela a fuertes y persistentes tendencias de exclusión, lo que dificulta los procesos de construcción democrática. El impacto de la crisis económica en la comunidad judı́a en México, aunque no tan agudo como en el Cono Sur (Argentina), también ha sido un factor determinante de cambios radicales en el perfil de la vida comunitaria. Paralelamente al deterioro de la situación económica de diversos sectores sociales, los procesos de globalización han llevado a que diferentes segmentos de las clases altas y medias a posiciones que les permiten insertarse en los ámbitos más dinámicos del comercio transnacional, la alta tecnologı́a, los servicios, las ciencias, la academia y sus instituciones y los sectores financieros. Por lo tanto, junto a su diferenciación interna, las interacciones de la comunidad judı́a con diversos sectores de la sociedad también se diversifica. La consolidación de la democracia en México sigue siendo parte de un proceso en marcha. Vectores tan esenciales como la vigencia del derecho, la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas distan todavı́a de ser plenamente establecidos. En el ámbito de los Derechos Humanos, México ha experimentado importantes avances ası́ como retrocesos. Las Comisiones de Derechos Humanos (nacional y estatales) han ganado presencia progresiva. En abril de 2010, el Senado de la República aprobó por unanimidad las reformas que les confieren a los Derechos Humanos un rango constitucional, amplı́an su reconocimiento y protección y le dan a la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos las facultades para investigar violaciones graves a los derechos individuales. Sin embargo, de acuerdo a esta última, un alto porcentaje de sus recomendaciones no se llevaron a cabo en los plazos previstos y/o no fueron aceptadas por los funcionarios públicos, debido a las deficiencias mismas que caracterizan al sistema judicial. El Foro Económico Mundial advirtió que el costo de la corrupción en México es igual al 9% del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB), mientras que las empresas deben gastar el 10% de sus ingresos en sobornos. La llamada guerra contra las drogas y el crimen organizado se ha traducido en una espiral de 3. 2010 Total Population , “México en Cifras” (Mexico in Numbers). INEGI (Mexican National Institute for Statistics and Geography). http:// www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/MexicoCifras.aspx?e=0&m=0&sec=M 42 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:39 violencia que, por otra parte, no se ha visto relacionado directamente con motivos étnicos o religiosos. Al analizar el antisemitismo, es necesario tomar en cuenta que voces muy serias han expresado la preocupación de que se ha puesto un énfasis excesivo en éste en lo que pretendidamente serı́a la principal caracterı́stica de la región, advirtiendo los riesgos de una identificación simplista y reduccionista de América Latina con la intolerancia y con expresiones antijudı́as. Esta preocupación ha llamado a mantener un equilibrio analı́tico, con deslindes y distinciones más matizada entre los diferentes tiempos, lugares y modalidades. Ciertamente, hay que considerar la interconexión entre las expresiones nacionales, regionales y globales del antisemitismo, su diferenciación interna y sus expresiones contemporáneas. Prejuicios difusos y latentes, velados y estructurales, ası́ como los rechazados en la semántica oficial, pero evidentes en la retórica de los individuos y de sectores sociales son parte de las nuevas sociedades complejas, tanto en América Latina como en otras regiones del mundo. El curso histórico de esta retórica, que no necesariamente se traduce en prácticas discriminatorias, tiene que ser contextualizado en la cultura polı́tica de cada paı́s y la situación de los derechos humanos. La comprensión de sus manifestaciones aparece como un requisito sine qua non cuando se trata de dar cuenta de la magnitud real del peligro antisemita de frente a la violencia simbólica de sus expresiones en los medios de comunicación. El antisemitismo puede ser visto como un fenómeno que en gran medida se produce y reproduce discursivamente.4 Tanto en el ámbito de las actitudes, estereotipos y prejuicios, por una parte, como en el nivel de comportamiento manifiesto en actos, prácticas y los marcos normativamente, por el otro, el antisemitismo ha tenido y tiene un gran impacto en la representación de “Otro.” Es esta dimensión precisamente la que adquiere nueva relevancia en el marco de los cambios en los patrones de culturas que históricamente han enfrentado serias dificultades par dar cuenta de la diversidad y de la heterogeneidad. Ello está directamente relacionado con la concepción de la esfera pública como espacio para la construcción compartida de bases cı́vico-nacionales que permitan la expresión legı́tima de la diferencia. Aún nos enfrentamos al desafı́o de vincular los indicadores y criterios formales de medición del antisemitismo con enfoques integrales que den cuenta de sus significados cambiantes. Este desafı́o se hace aún más urgente a la luz de los nuevos significados y las connotaciones del antisemitismo que se construyen hoy en América Latina, ası́ como en el resto del mundo. 4. See Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak, Discourse and discrimination: rhetoric of racism and anti-Semitism. New York: Routledge, 2001. 2011] MÉXICO, EN UNA REGIÓN BAJO CAMBIO 43 Con esto nos referimos a la convergencia de sus expresiones clásicas con procesos tales como la crı́tica al gobierno israelı́ por su manejo del conflicto Israel-Palestina, a la crı́tica de Israel como un todo-más allá de tal o cual gobierno particular, y el enmarcar un lenguaje anti-sionista con contenidos antisemitas. Existen diferencias entre el antisemitismo, el antisionismo y antiisraelismo; simultáneamente, se superponen y traslapan en un proceso de reenvı́os de sentidos y significados. Las dimensiones históricas socio-polı́tica, religiosa, cultural y económica del antisemitismo interactúan con las actuales dimensiones polı́ticas e ideológicas. En este sentido, la trayectoria histórica e ideológica de América Latina ha configurado alrededor de los ejes del anti-americanismo, el anti-colonialismo y el anti-imperialismo una dinámica especı́fica en la cual se ha visto reforzado el reenvı́o de significados de uno a otro.5 Este traslape fluido actúa como un “código cultural”, que identifica a amplios sectores del pensamiento público y de los medios de comunicación.6 EL ANTISEMITISMO EN MÉXICO, PASADO Y PRESENTE Si bien históricamente la cultura nacional se ha enfrentado a dificultades para lidiar con el “Otro”, el antisemitismo ha estado asociado principalmente con las fuerzas más conservadoras o con actores de extrema izquierda. En el México contemporáneo, el antisemitismo se vio inicialmente impulsado por los debates en torno a las polı́ticas de inmigración durante la década de 1920. Grupos como La Liga Nacional Anti-China y Anit-Judı́a, fundada en 1930, y la Agrupación de Honarables Comerciantes, Industriales y Profesionales presionaron al gobierno para restringir la inmigración judı́a al paı́s.7 5. Cfr. Robert S. Wistrich, Antisemitism. The Longest Hatred (London: Thames Methuen, 1991); Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry into Conflict and Prejudice. New York: Norton, 1986. 6. Shulamit Volkov, “Readjusting Cultural codes: Reflections on Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism” in Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism in Historical Perspective: Convergence and Difference, edited by Jeffrey Herf (New York, Routledge, 2007), 39-43; Orly Haimovich, “Between Local and Global Representations: Israel and Diaspora Jewish Communities . . .” Propuesta de Investigación Doctoral, Universidad Hebrea de Jerusalén, 2011. 7. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “El México de los años Treinta: Cardenismo, Inmigración Judı́a y Antisemitismo” en Xenofobias y Xenofilia en la historia de México siglos XVIII y XIX, Delia Salazar (Coordinadora), Dirección de Estudios Históricos, México, 2006: 379-416. 44 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:39 En la década de 1930, México experimentó brotes de antisemitismo con móviles y argumentaciones que se focalizaron en el terreno económico y racial. Poco a poco, el tema racial se convirtió en dominante entre los grupos de derecha. Entre ellos, Acción Revolucionaria Mexicana, fundada en 1934, operó a través de sus unidades paramilitares, las Camisas Doradas; Comité Pro-Raza y Confederación de la Clase Media ejercieron presión sobre el gobierno y llevaron a cabo campañas antisemitas que alcanzaron su pico en 1938-9. Pero no sólo ellos actuaron ası́. También sindicatos y organizaciones sindicales del ala izquierda se convirtieron en plataformas para las expresiones antisemitas relacionadas principalmente, como señalamos, con las polı́ticas de inmigración y de exilio.8 En una mirada panorámica, las expresiones de antisemitismo posteriores han estado asociadas principalmente con estereotipos económicos y de clase y progresivamente se catalizaron a través de códigos polı́ticos relacionados con Israel y el sionismo. Este último alcanzó su máxima expresión en 1975, cuando México dio su voto positivo en la ONU a la equiparación de sionismo con el racismo. La resolución 3379 que condenó al sionismo como una forma de racismo y discriminación, al tiempo que formó parte de la dinámica internacional de la deslegitimación de Israel, debido a las circunstancias locales, esencialmente relacionadas con las relaciones con el vecino del norte y el boicot turı́stico, también proyectó sobre la comunidad judı́a argumentos de falta de lealtad nacional, reforzando estereotipos de extranjerı́a.9 En la década de 1990, la Guerra del Golfo consolidó una atmósfera intelectual de censura a Israel como un instigador de la guerra y una punta de lanza del imperialismo occidental. Más aún, la inversión del argumento de vı́ctima- victimario, que comenzó a extenderse en los años setenta, se vio reforzada.10 Su dinámica continuó asociada a la brecha y tensión existentes entre la relación bilateral con los Estados Unidos y los foros multilaterales en los que México gravita. Progresivamente, el discurso anti-sionista y anti-israelı́ ganó peso, ya que estaba conectado a los altibajos del proceso de paz en el Medio Oriente. Como tal, reflejó los proceso y episodios de la región: la primera y la segunda Intifada, la guerra del Golfo, las guerras del Lı́bano, la Operación 8. Ibid. 9. Judit Bokser Liwerant, “Fuentes de legitimación de la presencia judı́a en México: El voto positivo de México a la ecuación sionismo=racismo y su impacto sobre la comunidad judı́a,” Judaica Latinoamericana, No. III. Jerusalem: AMILAT and Magnes Press, 1997, 319. 10. Luis Roniger, “Latin American Jews and Processes of Transnational Legitimization and De-Legitimization,” Journal of Modern Jewish Studies, vol. 9 No. 2 (July 2010). 2011] MÉXICO, EN UNA REGIÓN BAJO CAMBIO 45 Plomo Fundido o la guerra de Gaza, ası́ como los Acuerdos de Oslo, la Cumbre de Camp David y la Hoja de Ruta para las negociaciones de paz. En la historia del México moderno, el antisemitismo no ha sido un tema central para los partidos y movimientos polı́ticos. La extrema derecha, con su patrón de su organización diferenciada, ha disminuido en su visibilidad pública y en la intensidad de sus actividades. Organizaciones como el Partido Laboral Mexicano, inspirado en LaRouche, la Federación Mexicana Anticomunista y Los Tecos han asumido una existencia latente. La excepción a este patrón de bajo perfil ha sido el ex Partido de las Águilas Mexicanas, que cambió en 1996 su nombre por el de Consejo del Pueblo de las Águilas Mexicanas. Su ideologı́a, apodada como “neo-mexicanismo” promueve una imagen idealizada del pasado indı́gena de México y cuestiona el papel de Europa en la formación de la identidad nacional. Sin embargo, su actividad abierta se redujo y el Tribunal Federal Electoral le negó su solicitud de registro. El Instituto Federal Electoral (IFE) ha condenando el grupo por sus opiniones antisemitas, racistas e intolerantes. El antisemitismo en México raras veces se ha manifestado a través de la violencia fı́sica, y su desarrollo puede verse fundamentalmente a través de su narrativa. Es en el ámbito discursivo, principalmente a través de los discursos mediáticos, que las representaciones negativas se construyen, transmiten y recrean. El Informe Anual sobre Antisemitismo en México-2010 elaborado por Tribuna Israelita, muestra una disminución significativa en el número de notas de prensa publicadas del 2009 al 2010 en relación con temas judı́os e israelı́es, (de 10.721 a 6.624 o –38,21%), incluyendo informes, artı́culos de opinión y editoriales de los periódicos Cuando se observa cada categorı́a clasificada por separado, sólo el número de dibujos animados ha aumentado (de 12 en 2009 a 64 en 2010).11 Este patrón parece estar relacionado con el menor impacto en la opinión pública mexicana que el “asunto de Flotilla de la Paz” tuvo, en comparación con el impacto de la “Operación Plomo Fundido”, tendencia que parece ser consistente con el Informe Mundial para el 2010 del Centro Stephen Roth de la Universidad de Tel Aviv.12 De acuerdo con los criterios desarrollados por Tribuna Israelita, el 11. Reporte sobre el Antisemitismo-2010, México, Tribuna Israelita. 12. Cfr. “General Analysis. Overview” in Antisemitism Worldwide 2010. General Analysis. The Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities, The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism and The Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry. Tel Aviv University, European Jewish Congress. http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/ 46 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:39 11,37% de las notas publicadas en el 2010 fueron “negativas”.13 En contraste, sólo el 1.23% era “positivo” mientras que un 87,65% son clasificadas como “neutrales”. El porcentaje de noticias negativas en el apartado correspondiente fue mucho menor que el porcentaje de editoriales negativos (incluyendo la opinión y editoriales de los periódicos), dibujos animados y las cartas (1,54% para las noticias en comparación con el 46,54% de los editoriales, 23,44% de los dibujos animados y 47,92% para las cartas). Una vez más, existe una brecha entre el porcentaje de noticias negativas reportadas y el porcentaje de editoriales, caricaturas y cartas negativas. Es decir, pocas noticias negativas relacionadas con Judı́os y o Israel tienen un impacto significativo y desproporcionado sobre la opinión pública mexicana. En cuanto al contenido del discurso de los medios de comunicación, 2010 se ha caracterizado por una continuación de las pautas anteriores, ası́ como ciertas tendencias de cambio. El sionismo, que, como se dijo, se ha identificado con el racismo, el colonialismo y el imperialismo se convirtió en un argumento implı́cito y dependiente del foco temático principal, que es el Estado de Israel, mismo que es presentado como un Estado beligerante y propenso a la guerra, opresivo y genocida. El eje de la violación de los derechos humanos ha adquirido una mayor presencia entre los argumentos crı́ticos. El conflicto árabe-israelı́ sigue siendo presentado como parte del enfrentamiento entre el Occidente imperialista y el Tercer Mundo árabe y musulmán. Editoriales publicados en la prensa mexicana a lo largo del año han utilizado argumentos como los “crı́menes de guerra” perpetrados por Israel en Lı́bano y Gaza; el carácter “terrorista” de Israel; en su puesta en práctica de la “masacre”, “genocidio” y “castigo colectivo” en Gaza a un millón y un medio de palestinos; la construcción del muro en la Margen Occidental, que trata de “exterminar” a 4,5 millones de palestinos; la “violación” del derecho internacional en los territorios ocupados; y el Estado sionista judı́o como un Estado racista en materia de nacionalidad y ciudadanı́a, y como un Estado de “apartheid”.14 El prejuicio también se puede revelar por la omisión de información 13. En esta clasificación no hay una diferenciación explı́cita entre los argumentos antisemitas, anti-sionistas y anti-israelı́es. 14. Pascoe Pierce, Andrés. “La década del Terror”, en Crónica. 2 de enero, 2010; Caño Tamayo, Xavier. “Sobre una bomba de violaciones de derechos humanos” en Rumbo de México. 4 de enero; Steinsleger, José. “¿Cuándo caerá el muro?” en La Jornada. 6, Delgado, Héctor. “ONU monosabia, ignora la autodeterminación” en Uno más uno. 11 de febrero; Dorberier, Manu. “El que se somete a la infamia, se convierte en infame” en El Sol de México. 20 de febrero,; Editorial “Lula en Israel” en La Jornada. 16 de marzo; Steinsleger, José. “¿Israelı́es o 2011] MÉXICO, EN UNA REGIÓN BAJO CAMBIO 47 relevante que podrı́a mostrar la perspectiva de Israel como un actor y jugador activo. Mientras que este recurso difiere de la asociación explı́cita de prejuicios, tiene también un impacto significativo. En la medida en que el Estado de Israel se convirtió en el foco principal de la argumentación, las interconexiones fluidas entre el anti-israelismo y el antisemitismo histórico, o entre el anti-israelismo y la dilución del Holocausto, se dieron a partir de él Las conexiones de sentido y los reenvı́os de significado pueden ser ejemplificados en la superposición y traslape entre anti-Israelismo y Holocausto a través de analogı́as, metáforas y paralelismos: el Muro de Cisjordania habrı́a sido concebido como parte de un gran plan estratégico que persigue el “extermino” lento y sostenido del pueblo palestino “exterminio”, “Esta vez, sin cámaras de gas”.15 La Nakba es concebida como la expulsión por parte de Israel “de los 700.000 palestinos, precedida por l “limpieza étnica”, lo que tiene un paralelo directo con el Holocausto: la palabra Nakba denota el “Holocausto más antiguo y prolongado” de la historia contemporánea, como resultado de la creación de un “Estado ilegal sionista”.16 El muro nazi-fascista habrı́a sido un recurso para encerrar a los palestinos en “guetos”. Entrelazado con el discurso nacional/regional anti-estadounidense y anti-imperialista que recurrentemente hace hincapié en la alianza entre los EE.UU e Israel, el muro construı́do por Israel ha sido equiparado con el que divide la frontera de Estados Unidos con México pero también diferenciado: sólo el primero es calificado como un “muro de genocidio”.17 Tal como hemos afirmado, el episodio de la Flotilla refleja el modo como las expresiones anti-israelı́es y antisemitas fluctúan acorde a los altibajos del conflicto en Oriente Medio.18 La imagen negativa de Israel llegó al pico durante este episodio que transmitió y reforzó una imagen de un Estado cuya naturaleza es “genocida” y “anti-humanitaria” y su código de acción, ilegı́timo.19 También se debe evaluar el impacto en los medios de comunicación judı́os?” en La Jornada. 21 de abril, Gelman, Juan. “Prohibido y ya” en Milenio Diario. 29 de mayo, 2010. 15. Steinsleger, José. “¿Cuándo caerá el muro?” en La Jornada. 6 de enero, 2010. 16. Steinsleger, José. “Palestina: orı́genes de la nakba” en La Jornada. 5 de mayo, 2010. 17. Delgado, Héctor. “¡Bienvenida Señora Michelle Obama!”en Uno más uno. 15 de abril, 2010. 18. Beltrán, Esteban (Director de Amnistı́a Internacional en España). “El asfixiante bloqueo de Gaza”, en El Paı́s. 1 de junio, 2010. 19. Delgado, Héctor. “Israel asesina marinos civiles en Gaza”, en Uno más uno. 1 de junio, 2010. 48 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:39 nacional de la dinámica transnacional que alimenta y hace fluir la información. En concreto, La Jornada y Unomás Uno—periódicos de la izquierda—reproducen regularmente los artı́culos editoriales de The Guardian y The Independent y sus propios artı́culos de opinión refuerzan esta posición. También en la prensa mainstream—especialmente en Milenio, El Financiero y Excélsior—ha habido una mayor presencia de artı́culos crı́ticos de las acciones israelı́es, principalmente la polı́tica de asentamientos del gobierno de Benjamin Netanyahu.20 Ciertamente refleja el mayor o menor grado en que las posturas de análisis interactúan con la violencia simbólica y sus consecuencias a través del juego de significados y motivaciones ( voces crı́ticas vis-a-vis prejuicio). Por el contrario, los vı́nculos de la comunidad judı́a con Israel y con otros centros judı́os han ganado legitimidad en la esfera pública - reforzada por el reconocimiento y visibilidad de la existencia de una diáspora mexicana, negada en el pasado, y, por tanto, ha disminuido el cuestionamiento del carácter transnacional de la vida judı́a. Argumentos crı́ticos de los nexos entre la comunidad judı́a e Israel o la comunidad judı́a de América del Norte han estado ausentes en el discurso público. Estereotipos tradicionales, como el control del sistema financiero nacional o internacional o el tropos de grupo auto-segregado han sido mı́nimos, a pesar de que episodios polı́ticos concretos despertaron el argumento del interés particular o grupal por sobre el bienestar nacional. Como se ha dicho, el antisemitismo en México no ha reflejado violencia. Mientras que hubo 67 incidentes antisemitas en 2010 (en su mayorı́a compuesto por acciones de acoso: amenazas verbales e insultos), sólo hubo dos incidentes de agresión fı́sica y una amenaza de bomba. CONSIDERACIONES FINALES El anti-sionsimo y al anti-Israelismo y su conexión de significados con el antisemitismo son componentes de un “código cultural” en torno al cual exponentes del campo progresista y los intelectuales de izquierda se identifican. Esta convergencia teórica y práctica fluctúa en consonancia con los altibajos del conflicto palestino-israelı́. La globalización de este conflicto pone de manifiesto la interacción de las circunstancias internacionales, regionales, nacionales y locales. El proceso de la representación social de Israel ha adquirido un nuevo patrón común en América Latina, aunque con variaciones nacionales. 20. Menéndez del Valle, Emilio. “Imponer la paz en Palestina”, 9 de abril 2010. 2011] MÉXICO, EN UNA REGIÓN BAJO CAMBIO 49 A principios de diciembre de 2010, varios paı́ses de América Latina anunciaron su reconocimiento formal de un Estado palestino basado en las fronteras existentes antes de la guerra de 1967. Brasil tomó la iniciativa y fue seguido poco después por Argentina, Bolivia y Ecuador. El presidente de la Autoridad Palestina, Mahmoud Abbas, puso la primera piedra de una embajada palestina en Brasilia el 31 de diciembre de 2010. El 28 de enero 2011 Paraguay también anunció su reconocimiento de Palestina. A principios de ese mes de enero, Chile y Perú manifestaron que reconocerı́an un Estado palestino, aunque explicitando que las fronteras puedan ser negociados y pactadas por ambas partes del conflicto. La posición de Chile fue seguida por una fuerte presión de la comunidad palestina que es muy amplia en ese paı́s, tal como se dejar ver en las mociones presentadas en el Senado y la Cámara de Diputados a finales de 2010 y la realización de reuniones de alto nivel con diplomáticos palestinos, representantes de la Liga Árabe en Chile, y miembros de las comunidades palestinas. Sin embargo, en su declaración no hubo referencia explı́cita a las fronteras de 1967. Colombia ha dicho que no va a reconocer un Estado palestino hasta que un mutuo acuerdo de paz sea alcanzado. Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panamá y Belice no se han pronunciado. Cabe recordar que varios paı́ses de América Latina ya habı́an reconocido un Estado palestino con anterioridad a los recientes esfuerzos, entre ellos Cuba, Venezuela (2009), Nicaragua y Costa Rica (2008). México aún no ha tomado una posición oficial. Es probable que la globalización del conflicto palestino-israelı́, continúe expandiéndose y seguirá siendo ası́ se es que permanecen ciertas condiciones, tales como el estancamiento del proceso de paz, la irrupción de nuevos ciclos de violencia en el Medio Oriente, el fortalecimiento de los grupos islámicos radicales en los paı́ses que ahora experimentan agitación polı́tica, la presencia de neo-populista de los gobiernos de la región y la interacción particular entre las decisiones estratégicas de las organizaciones internacionales y regionales y actores polı́ticos nacionales y locales. *Agradezco a Yael Siman su valiosa colaboración y a René Dayan, por el acceso a la información de Tribuna Israelita. Latin America and the Middle East: The Political Background Julián Schvindlerman* Latin America does not have a geostrategic weight hitting strongly globally. With the exception of Brazil, it can leave its mark in the international community through votes. In the Western hemisphere, however, Latin America strives to expand its ideologies, to receive problematic countries and questioned groupings, and to affect the political climate and regional security. Latin America contains very different ideologies, and its destiny will depend much on the direction that, collectively, their inhabitants permit their leaders to give. Key Words: Latin America, Antisemitism, Hizbullah, Jews, Arabs, Iran Throughout Latin America, the flood of participation in oriental subjects was recently in evidence with the several expressions of formal support granted by all South America, minus Colombia, to a possible unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state. Brazil, by surprise, started up the response to a Palestinian key interest in obtaining formal recognition to a hypothetical reality that arose like fruit out of the bilateral negotiations. “I always have the hope of having the best form to solve the problems between the negotiating countries,” said the Argentine chancellor, Héctor Timerman, when explaining his justification for taking an action—facilitating the attainment of a political objective for the Palestine Authority but eluding the dialogue with the government of Israel—that in fact caused the opposite. Although the diverse official notices varied in some degree in their content—essentially about the stipulation of the final borders of the future—the certain thing is that altogether they constituted an important Latin American endorsement of the Palestine diplomacy. For February initially, soon delayed until March or April, and finally postponed indefinitely due to the massive protests in the Arab world, the Summit of Government and Chiefs of State was due to be held in Lima III of the America Forum of the Arab South-Countries (ASPA), where it was considered a collective expression of recognition of the Palestinian state. By the end of March, a meeting under the auspices of the UN “in support of La Paz PalestinianIsraeli,” attended by delegates of Latin America and the Caribbean, occurred in Montevideo, in which Palestinian representatives announced 51 52 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:51 that they will present/display for consideration in the General Assembly next September the approval of a resolution in favor of a Palestinian state. The official notices surely foretell the strategy that the Latin American nations in the UN will use if the Palestinians carry out their ambition. Another recent event that showed the regional involvement in Middle East concerns was the response of the Latin American nations to the crisis in Libya. Peru not only assumed a role of exemplary leadership when cutting diplomatic ties with the regime of Muammar Gaddafi, going ahead not only of its Latin brothers but also most of the entire world. If in this way Lima longed to produce a dominating effect, however, it did not obtain it. Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, and Paraguay, among others, quickly condemned the repression of the Libyan government but didn’t do much more than that. The Argentine Republic delayed its pronouncement, finally issuing a laconic official notice in a restrained judicial tone, later reinforced by a message in Twitter sent by the chancellor: “Libya: Deep preoccupation of the Argentine government. Official notice.” Once the rebel military action against Libya began, it was endorsed by Liga Arab (the Arab League) and validated by a resolution of the Security Council of the United Nations, Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner revealed her opposition when affirming “the great centers of presumed civilization continue solving differences with explosions and with violence.” De Kirchner chose the occasion of a reception given to the president of Venezuela, when he visited Argentina, to make her statement. (During a trip to Libya, in November 2008, the Venezuelan president had indicated his admiration of the Libyan leader, saying that “we have embraced very strong ideas and convictions . . .”). As anticipated, Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua supported Colonel Gaddafi. It was even speculated that the Libyan dictator would flee to Caracas. It must be remembered that presidents Daniel Grouse, Húgo Chávez, Fidel Castro, and Evo Morales were recipients of the Al-Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights ($250,000 US) granted by Tripoli in recent years. While Gaddafi sent tanks and airplanes to repress the population— which, according to him, loved it and was prepared to die in the defense of its country, and alleged that Al-Qaeda was behind the protests—Húgo Chávez chanted “the alive Libya and lives Gaddafi”; Daniel Grouse telephoned the colonel to support him; and Fidel Castro accused NATO, not Gaddafi, of causing the violence. With Gaddafi blaming Islamists and castrating forces of the North Atlantic, the commentator Moisés Naı́m ironically lamented the dilemma of the presidents of Nicaragua and Venezuela, saying that “To avoid having Fidel or Muammar taking over the party, the conclusion must be that the destabilization of Libya is a combined-arms operation of NATO and Al-Qaeda.” 2011] THE POLITICAL BACKGROUND 53 Even if Latin American attention to the Middle East were restricted to the scope of diplomacy, the impact of the occasional patetismo would still be felt. There are many moments when the interrelation between these two zones shines real and dangerous. At the beginning of April, a note published in the Brazilian magazine Veja achieved world-wide notoriety. The note denounced the presence of members of Muslim extremist groups in Brazil. According to the publication, members of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and Hizbullah operate on Brazilian ground, collect money, spread propaganda, recruit militants, and plan attacks. Based on documents of the local police, Interpol, and Veja, one of the people in charge of the propaganda apparatus of Al-Qaeda stated that Lebanese commander Khaled Hussein Alı́ has resided in Brazil for two decades. From San Pablo, Veja coordinates members in seventeen countries through the Mediatic Battalion Jihad and translates messages from AlQaeda. The magazine accounts for the presence of Hesham Amhed Mahmoud Eltrabily and Mohamed Alı́ Abou Elezz Ibrahim Soliman, both wanted by the Egyptian authorities for colluding in the Luxor tourist attack of 1997, which left sixty-two dead. One Lebanese and two Egyptians were taken into custody and later released. The Supreme Federal Court also denied the Egyptian extradition orders, alleging that the tests were insufficient and that errors of translation blocked the extradition. Veja indicated that in Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay, there are Hizbullah and Hamas cells that falsify passports for militants who arrived from the Middle East. They note that two Brazilians, Alan Cheidde and Anuar Pechliye, were Islamists trained in Afghanistan and returned to Brazil for passport falsification. In 2005, the federal police arrested twenty Foz do Iguaçu extremists and confiscated thousand two hundred false passports. Led by the Lebanese Chaim Baalbaki and the Jordanian Sael Basheer Yahya Najib Atari, the group also had fixed marriages of Arab terrorists with Brazilian single mothers for $500 US, which, by recognizing the children, allowed the terrorists to avoid extradition. The magazine also denounced the frequent trips to Brazil by Mohsen Rabbani, former cultural advisor to the Iranian embassy in Buenos Aires. Interpol’s “red notification” includes participation in the AMIA massacre of 1994, which killed and maimed Jews. Rabbani is believed to have recruited twenty young people from San Pablo, Pernambuco, and Parana for religious indoctrination in Tehran. The general solicitor of Brazil has apparently not noticed that “without anybody perceiving this, a generation is arising from Islamic extremists in the country.” Veja’s expose has not done more than adding a drumbeat of legitimate 54 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:51 alarm to the existing preoccupation with the noticeable Iranian presence in the zone. The Israeli academic Ely Karmon has been a pioneer in documenting the strong ties of the Islamic Republic of Iran with Latin America. Although Iran and the region enjoyed previous cordial relations, it was from the ascent of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power that these bonds were strengthened, especially with countries that conform to the armor-piercing core of populism and of anti-occidentalism—but not only with them. As of 2005, Iranian foreign policy favors a regional approach to Latin America, expanding from the bilateral. In his article “The Mideast Axis of Destabilization,” Karmon talks about the bond between “Tehran and Damascus” and cites its agenda: propagating Shi’ism (the Wayuu tribe in Venezuela and the Totxiles in Mexico were recruited), extending the operational base of Hizbullah (from the Opposite Triple toward Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, and other places); gaining diplomatic support in international forums for its illicit nuclear program (e.g., some Latin American nations have abstained or favored Iranian interests in UN votes); obtaining uranium, an essential raw material for its nuclear development (in May of 2009, The New York Times reproduced an Associated Press cable referring to Israeli denunciation of the provision of uranium from La Paz and Caracas to Iran); limiting the impact of worldwide economic sanctions when creating an alternative market (as it can be assessed from the multiple joint ventures between Iran and several countries of the region); and, generally, erecting a counterbalance to the United States—i.e., installing troops in border countries of Iran in a zone in retaliation for U.S. presence in the Middle East. Forums, congresses, and conferences have been focus points for the interrelation. Thus, the 2007 International Conference on Latin America in Tehran, titled “Development in Latin America: Its paper and its status in the future international system,” counted on the participation of Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Uruguay, and Venezuela (two children of Ernesto “Che” Guevara were invited). The same year the conference took place, the International Conference of Latin American Literature was held in Iran, in which the Iranian chancellor announced the opening or re-opening of Iranian embassies in several Latin American nations. In 2009, the forum was realized via the International Forum for Resistance, Anti-Imperialism, Solidarity between Peoples and Alternatives, which was held in January 2009. The event, organized by Hizbullah, included four hundred Latin American delegates. The forum may have been inspired by anti-globalization assemblies held in Jakarta, Bombay, Beirut, and Porto Alegre between 2003 and 2005; 2005 marks the first time that Hizbullah was invited to a meeting of this type. The Iranian president has also visited Venezuela, Bolivia, Nic- 2011] THE POLITICAL BACKGROUND 55 aragua, Ecuador, and Brazil. High-ranking Latin American civil servants traveled to Tehran reciprocally. Of all the Latin American nations, Venezuela has been the most hospitable host of Iran. In addition to the hundreds of signed economic agreements throughout the years, it is possible to mention other areas of cooperation. A transoceanic flight between Tehran and Caracas exists, with stops in Damascus. The flight is not commercially profitable, does not admit ordinary passengers, and is not subject to regular customs control. Some Venezuelan universities teach Farsi. Iranian factories, clearly dedicated to bicycles and tractor manufacture or to uranium processing, were built in the remote countryside and are guarded by Iranians. Recall that Chávez intended to support the nuclear program of ayatollahas and Hizbullah, while the extremist groups like the CRAF and Spain’s ETA receive Venezuelan state sponsorship. Last year, leaders of Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Islamic Jihad Palestine met with Húgo Chávez in Caracas’s Venezuelan military intelligence center. Hizbullah’s Tarek el-Aissami was placed in charge of the Venezuelan passport agency and named its minister of justice and interior and vice chancellor; his father has praised Sadam Hussein and Osama Bin-Laden publicly, and his brother is linked to Walid Makled, a Syrian-Venezuelan dealer. In 2008, Washington identified the Venezuelan diplomat in Damascus and Beirut, Ghazi Nasr al-Din, as an agent of Hizbullah, whereas Nawaf Musawi, director of international relations of the Party of Allah, participated that same year in the Venezuelan embassy in Beirut commemorating the failure of a coup d’etat against Chávez. (Recall that Chávez was the first world leader to congratulate Ahmadinejad’s electoral victory in 2009.) The island of Daisy, once a tourist paradise, has become a zone for training Islamist operatives. By the end of last April, The Arab Times reported that citizens of Kuwait, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia are being trained in Venezuela in armed violence, committing murders, kidnappings, and transporting hostages by members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Venezuela, which has expelled ambassadors from the United States and Israel, officially promotes antisemitism and anti-Zionism; close to 50 anti-Zionist or antisemitic items can be found daily in the Venezuelan press. “Damn you, State of Israel!” Chávez said on television just a short time back. In 2006, he accused Israel of being Nazi, called Colombia “the Israel of Latin America” in 2009, and in 2005, speaking to on an anniversary of the discovery of America, proclaimed that “You were expelled from your mother country like the heroic Palestinian town.” The Venezuelan Jewish community, lacking access or otherwise ignored by the government, has suffered the harassment of the chavista regime. In Caracas, a major Hebrew 56 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:51 institution in the capital was entered and searched under the pretext of looking for arms, and Tiferet Israel synagogue was profaned. In June 2008, the Venezuelan ambassador in Moscow denounced a coup d’etat against his government and blamed the Mossad and “Venezuelan but Jewish citizens” as participants in the plot. On Christmas 2005, Chávez expressed public regret that “some minorities, among them the descendants of the assassins of Christ, have seized the wealth of this world.” Ever since Chávez assumed power, nearly 50 percent of the Jewish community has emigrated from Venezuela. The relationship of Brazil with Iran has caused great surprise in some corners. Like other emergent world-wide regional powers, such as China, India, Russia, and South Africa, Brazil has positioned itself as a nexus between the First and Third Worlds, able to play a constructive global role. Between 2005 and 2010, Brazil gave millions in worldwide aid: million in loans and cancellations of debt to poor countries and millions in humanitarian aid, scholarships for study and technical qualification, and other supportive acts. Domestically, it has reaped appreciable profits: Brazil will host the 2014 World Cup, the world’s most highly anticipated and watched tournament, and the 2016 Olympic Games; its economy has grown remarkably, and Lula da Silva and his successor Dilma Rousseff have enjoyed high approval ratings (Lula had 80% of popular support when leaving office, and Rousseff, the first woman president of the country, is endorsed by 73% of Brazilians). Walt Disney Company even set one of his last animated films—River in Brazil—in this prospering environment! Nevertheless, toward the end of his second mandate, President Lula seemed to defy the interests of the United States in the region in several areas and consolidating a bond with Iran that seemed inconceivable just a short time before. Like Chávez, Lula endorsed the doubtful electoral results of Iran, invited the Iranian president to its country, and he himself visited Tehran. In addition, he supported the right of Iran to have a civil nuclear program. The ayatollah opposed the application of sanctions against the regime and opened a dialogue with Tehran that was seriously questioned by several global leaders. During the meeting of the Annual Assembly of Interpol in Morocco, in 2007, Brazil abstained in the voting that validated the emission of “red notifications” against prominent figures of the Iranian government for its role in the attack against the AMIA in Argentina, brother republic of Brazil, which had initiated the order. Again Brazil abstained, in the 2009 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conference in Vienna, when the Iranian nuclear question came up about the favorable votes of Argentina; the United States struggled with Russia, China, and the European Union. In May 2010, Brazil joined Turkey in an attempt to protect Iran, through diplomacy, from the imminent 2011] THE POLITICAL BACKGROUND 57 adoption of international sanctions sponsored by Washington. Even in symbolic aspects, there were broken ties with the Iranian question, such as visiting the tomb of Yasser Arafat in Ramallah, but refusing to visit the tomb of Theodor Herzl in Jerusalem, during a visit to the region in 2010. The ideological direction that Lula had given its foreign policy can be inferred. Brazil, through Lula, had also abstained in voting in the Commission of Human Rights against Sri Lanka, Congo, and North Korea, although it had voted against Sudan in the Security Council. Lula described Chávez as “without a doubt the best Venezuelan president in one hundred years.” His last visit to Fidel Castro was remembered as a great shame when he agreed with the death of an opponent jailed in a hunger strike. Lula, creator of the social forum Antiglobalización de Porto Alegre, avoided receiving the Global Statesmanship Award in Davos by alleging at the last moment that a medical impediment prevented him from traveling. In addition, Lula was in opposition to the White House when he supported the restoration of Cuba to the Organization of American States (OAS), whose explicit charter stated that only democracies can be a member; he gave diplomatic shelter to the demoted president of Honduras and Chávez ally Manuel Zelaya; he protested the agreement between the United States and Colombia for the American use of military bases in the Central American country; and he adopted a more intense, Third World tone in public that contrasted with his more moderate previous image. When assuming the presidency at the beginning of 2011, Dilma Rousseff aroused doubts given her guerrilla and Marxist past. Her closeness with Lula, who chose her as his successor, could suggest a continuation of the controversial policies of her mentor. But her first ventures in the international sand have turned out to be much more centrist than those of her predecessor, at least for the moment. Her past history of feminist commitment and being tortured as a guerilla moved her to condemn the practices of human rights in Cuba and Iran. In the last UN voting, Rousseff led Brazil to vote in favor of creating a representative of human rights for Iran, naming Antonio de Aguiar Patriota, a former and respected ambassador to Washington, as the minister of external relations. For its part, the United States indicated that it no longer had an interest in restoring Lula’s legacy in Brazil. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was present in the January 1 ceremony marking Rousseff as president, which surely meant that New Year celebrations were limited. President Barack Obama traveled to Brazil in the middle of March, even though the warlike fight in Libya was already initiated. The visit, part of a program that also included Chile and El Salvador, was interpreted as a sign of the friendliness of Washington toward Brasilia, Brazil’s capital. Lula, incidentally, was unique as a former Brazilian president in not attend- 58 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:51 ing the lunch in honor of Obama in Itamary Palace. Rousseff condemned the bombing of NATO on Libya, and Obama did not support the Brazilian aspiration to obtain a permanent seat in the Security Council, which together with pending commercial disagreements suggest that there will be tension in the relationship. It is evident, however, that Rousseff has separated from the whistle-blowing, populist diplomacy of last year, particularly around Tehran. Argentina as well has maintained an ambivalent policy toward Iran. Its relationship with the Islamic theocracy changed considerably from earlier times, when Hizbullah agents perpetrated the first Islamist attack in Latin America (the blast of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, in 1992; 29 died) and the worst antisemitic attack in the diaspora from the time of World War II—the AMIA attack, two years later, in which 85 died. Taking its direction from the government of Carlos Menem, who obstructed the progress of the investigation; the marriage of Néstor and Christina Férnandez de Kirchner gave a considerable impulse to the same, by denouncing Iran in international forums, asking for Interpol to capture Iranian suspects, and designating a Jewish public prosecutor, equipping him to make an effective judicial investigation. Some facts, however, have created a frame of doubt about the positioning of bureaucracy before Tehran, i.e.: a) The ideological proximity of Kirchner with countries allied to Iran—Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua especially; b) The suspicions of the political use of the AMIA attack to insult the Kirshner predecessor, Carlos Nemen—although Menem supporters and Kirchner supporters belong to the same political movement of Peronism, the little mutual love is public knowledge; c) The peculiar relationship of government officials with Luis D’Elı́a, the popular anti-Zionist leader situated extremely near the Iranian embassy; d) The fact that under the presidency of Cristina Kirchner bilateral commerce has grown 10,000 percent in less than a year; e) The Argentine delegation before the UN in Geneva had not left the room when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began to speak within the framework of the denominated meeting Durban II, in April of 2009; f) The lack of government support for Argentine diplomat Rogelio Pfirter in his nomination for an appointment in the Foreign Ministry; Washington was in favor, but Tehran was not. By the end of last March, the Argentinian daily Profile published a story that generated widespread controversy. One of its leading columnists, mentioning secret documents, denounced the existence of negotiations con- 2011] THE POLITICAL BACKGROUND 59 ducted by Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman between Buenos Aires and Tehran that would set aside investigations into the embassy and AMIA attacks in exchange for increased commercial ties with Iran. The Israeli government reacted angrily, labeling this news as “very serious” and warning that the Argentine conduct would constitute “a manifestation of infinite cynicism and dishonor to the dead,” thus putting in doubt the invitation previously extended to Timerman to visit Jerusalem. The public prosecutor of the AMIA cause, Dr. Alberto Nisman, joined by prominent Argentinians, denied the Profile story, but the government remained silent. The Israeli ambassador in Buenos Aires, Daniel Gazit, requested explanations from the Argentinian Ministry of Foreign Relations, but ten days later, he informed the Jerusalem Post, he had not received an official answer. Interrogated by the press, Timerman initially eluded the entire topic, invoking Talmudic rules and invoking the memory of his father, the famous journalist Jacobo Timerman. Finally, however, Timerman issued the following statement as a refutation of the Profile story: “There is no evidence that Argentina has changed its course of action, which began in 2003 with the election of Néstor Kirchner and in which the objective of our country is to investigate the attacks to the AMIA and the Israeli embassy.” Profile, by denying access to the documentation it used, further compromised the story. The Simon Wiesenthal Center issued an order to release the documentation, but Profile did not comply. In this atmosphere of doubts and serious denunciations, it was a situation that called for the written text, which would eliminate all ambiguity. Unfortunately, this text was never provided. The government also kept silent about another, related serious denunciation. Federal judge Daniel Rafecas revealed that the repeated attacks in front of the Israeli embassy were being organized by Luis D’Elı́a with financing from the Iranian embassy. Despite the profound implications of such a denunciation, the government chose not to comment on the matter; in fact, it made a video endorsement of the launching of a demonstration in Luna Park led by D’Elı́a. D’Elı́a had conducted a radio interview with Mohsen Rabbani, who is on Interpol’s list of terrorists, thus giving him—a fugitive from Argentine justice—a public platform to deny his trips to Brazil on a false passport. The Argentina of the Kirchners also disturbs in other ways. Néstor was able to organize a competing summit in 2005 with a U.S. president, George W. Bush, during his official visit (45,000 leftist activists crowded the stage for the occasion); Cristina ordered an “operation sweepings” when North American authorities indicated the existence of a chavista clandestine financing of her electoral campaign; the chancellor can preach to the United 60 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:51 States to bomb Libya at the same time as the official Argentinian news agency Télam makes an agreement to exchange information with the Syrian Arab News Agency while the regime of Bashar el-Assad militarily represses pro-democracy demonstrators; and the government can applaud a freedom of the press award given to Húgo Chávez by the University of La Plata—when Chávez is fiercely combatting freedom of expression in his country. These facts give an account of the ideological vision of a government for whom, benignly, the foreigner usually is characterized as “unclassifiable.” *Julian Schvindlerman is a political analyst and the author of Rome and Jerusalem (Random House Mondadori/Debate, 2010) and Land by Peace, Land by War (Ensayos del sud, 2002). He has spoken at conferences on contemporary political subjects throughout Latin America and is regularly interviewed in the region. His commentary can be read in Communities and heard on Radio Jai. América Latina y el Oriente Medio: El Trasfondo Polı́tico Julián Schvindlerman* América Latina no tiene un peso geoestratégico golpear fuertemente a nivel mundial. Con la excepción de Brasil, puede dejar su marca en la comunidad internacional a través de los votos. Sin embargo, en el hemisferio occidental, América Latina ejerce para expandir sus ideologı́as, para recibir los paı́ses problemáticos y agrupaciones cuestionadas y afectar a todo el clima polı́tico y de seguridad regional. América Latina alberga muy diferentes ideologı́as y su destino dependerá mucho de la dirección que, colectivamente, sus habitantes permite a sus dirigentes a dar. Palabras Clave: Latinoamérica, Antisemitismo, Hezbolá, Judı́os, Árabes, Irán; Primero: America Latina, Judio, Israel América Latina la participación de las inundaciones en temas orientales fue recientemente en evidencia con las varias expresiones de apoyo formal concedida por toda América del Sur, menos Colombia, a una posible declaración unilateral de un Estado palestino. Brasil, por sorpresa, puso en marcha la corriente que responde a un interés clave palestino en obtener reconocimiento formal a una hipotética realidad que tuvo que surgen como fruto de las negociaciones bilaterales. “Siempre tengo la esperanza de que se está negociando la mejor forma para resolver los problemas entre los paı́ses,” explicó el canciller argentino Héctor Timerman al querer extrañamente para justificar una acción que causó, en realidad, todo lo contrario, al facilitar a la Autoridad Palestina la obtención de un objetivo polı́tico eludir el diálogo con el Gobierno de Israel. Aunque los diversos comunicados variaban en cierto grado en su contenido—esencialmente sobre la estipulación de las fronteras finales del futuro Estado lo cierto es que, en conjunto, constituyen un importante respaldo a América Latina a la diplomacia Palestina. Para febrero inicialmente, pronto retrasaron para marzo o abril, y finalmente pospuesto indefinidamente debido a las masivas protestas en el mundo árabe, la Cumbre de Gobierno y jefes de estado fue debido a realizado en Lima III del Foro América del sur-paı́ses árabes (ASPA) donde se consideró que ser incluidos en la declaración final una expresión colectiva de reconocimiento del Estado palestino. A finales de marzo una reunión bajo el auspicio de las Naciones Unidas “en favor de La Paz israelo-palestino” con asistencia de 61 62 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:61 delegados de América Latina y el Caribe tuvo lugar en Montevideo, en que representantes palestinos anunciaron que se presentan a consideración de la Asamblea General el próximo mes de septiembre la aprobación de una resolución en favor de un Estado palestino. El funcionario avisos seguramente presagiar el papel que desempeñarán las Naciones de América Latina en la ONU si los palestinos realizan su ambición. Otro acontecimiento reciente que mostró la participación regional en temas de Oriente Medio, fue la respuesta de las Naciones de América Latina a la crisis en Libia. Perú no sólo asumió un rol de liderazgo ejemplar al cortar lazos diplomáticos con el régimen de Muammar Gaddafi, seguir adelante a sus hermanos latinos pero prácticamente a todo el mundo. Si de esta manera Lima anhelado para generar un efecto dominado, no consiguieron lo. Brasil, Chile, Costa Rica y Paraguay, entre otros, rápidamente condenaron la represión del Gobierno Libia, pero no eran mucho más allı́. La República Argentina retrasa su pronunciamiento finalmente a emitir un comunicado lacónico y de tono judicial, posteriormente reforzada por un mensaje en Twitter enviada por el Canciller: “Libia: profunda preocupación del Gobierno argentino. Notificación oficial.” Una vez que la acción militar contra Libia comenzó a pedido de los rebeldes libios, con aval de la Liga Árabe y validado por una resolución del Consejo de seguridad de las Naciones Unidas, el presidente argentino Cristina Fernández de Kirchner deja entrever su oposición al afirmar “los grandes centros de civilización presunto continúan le resolver las diferencias de las explosiones y con violencia.” El Presidente escogió la ocasión de una recepción dada al Presidente de Venezuela, de visita en el paı́s, para llevar a cabo su declaración de condena. (Durante un viaje a Libia, en noviembre de 2008, el Presidente indicó su admiración por el lı́der libio cuando diciendo que ambos “hemos abrazado ideas muy fuertes y convictions . . .”). Como se preveı́a, Venezuela, Cuba y Nicaragua apoyaron a coronel Gaddafi. Incluso se especuló con Caracas como destino de posible vuelo de dictador libio. Hay que recordar que los presidentes Daniel Grouse, Húgo Chávez, Fidel Castro y Evo Morales fueron los destinatarios del Premio Gadafi internacional para los derechos humanos ($250.000 dólares) concedida por Trı́poli en los últimos años. Mientras que Gaddafi envió tanques y aviones para reprimir a la población—lo que según él amaba, y estaba preparado para morir en su defensa y afirmó que Al-Qaeda estaba detrás de las protestas—Húgo Chávez coreaba “Libia vivo y vidas Gaddafi” Daniel Grouse telefoneó el coronel en su apoyo a él y Fidel Castro acusó a la OTAN, no a Gaddafi, en relación con la violencia. Con Gaddafi culpar a los islamistas y castró fuerzas del Atlántico Norte, el comentarista Moisés Naı́m irónicamente lamentó el dilema de los presidentes de Nicaragua y 2011] EL TRASFONDO POLÍTICO 63 Venezuela, “para evitar tener que tomar partido por Fidel o Muammar, concluirá que la desestabilización de Libia es una operación combinada de armas de la OTAN y Al-Qaeda.” Si la atención de América Latina a Oriente Medio se limitan al ámbito de la diplomacia, el impacto de su patetismo ocasional todavı́a podrı́a anotarse. Por momentos, la interrelación entre estas dos zonas brilla incluso real y peligroso. A principios de abril, una nota publicada en el brasileño revista Veja tomó notoriedad en todo el mundo y denunció la presencia de miembros de grupos extremistas musulmanes en Brasil. Según la publicación, los miembros de Al-Qaida, Hamas y Hezbolá operan en suelo brasileño, recaudan dinero, propagación y reclutan militantes y planean ataques. Según documentos de la policı́a local y la Interpol, Veja, una de las personas a cargo del aparato de propaganda de Al-Qaeda informó que libanés Khaled Hussein Alı́ resida allı́ durante dos décadas. Desde San Pablo coordinates miembros en 17 paı́ses a través de la Yihad mediática de batallón y traduce el mensaje de Al-Qaeda. La revista representa la presencia de Hesham Amhed Mahmoud Eltrabily y Mohamed Ali Abou Elezz Ibrahim Soliman, buscado por las autoridades egipcias por colusión en el ataque de turı́stica de Luxor de 1997, que dejó 62 muertos. Una dos egipcios y libaneses fueron detenidos y posteriormente puesto en libertad. La Corte Suprema Federal negó también los pedidos de extradición de Egipto alegando que las pruebas eran insuficientes y errores de traducción bloquearon la extradición. Veja indicó que en Argentina, Brasil y Paraguay, existen células de Hezbolá y Hamas que falsifiquen pasaportes para militantes llegados del Medio Oriente. Tenga en cuenta que dos brasileños Alan Cheidde y Anuar Pechliye fueron los islamistas entrenados en Afganistán y regresó a Brasil por falsificación de pasaporte. En 2005, la policı́a federal detuvo a veinte Foz do Iguaçu extremistas y decomisados pasaportes falsos de doscientos mil. Liderados por el Baalbaki Chaim libanés y el jordano saele Basheer Yahya Najib Atari, el grupo también habı́a fijado los matrimonios de terroristas árabes con las madres de la mujer brasileña, por 500 dólares y pronto reconoció los niños evitando ası́ la extradición. La revista también denunció los frecuentes viajes a Brasil por Mohsen Rabbani, ex Consejero cultural de la embajada iranı́ en Buenos Aires. Interpol’s “notificación roja” incluye la participación en la masacre de la AMIA de 1994, que asesinado y habı́a mutilado a los judı́os. Rabbani se cree que han contratado veinte jóvenes de San Pablo, Pernambuco y Paraná para el adoctrinamiento religioso en Teherán. Por nada, el procurador general de Brasil no ha notado que “sin que percibe a nadie, una generación es derivadas de los extremistas islámicos en el paı́s.” 64 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:61 Exposición de Veja no ha hecho más que para ya agregar una cuota de alarma legı́timo a la preocupación existente por la apreciable presencia iranı́ en la zona. El académico Karmon Ely israelı́ ha sido pionera en documentar los arcos fuertes de la República Islámica de Irán con América Latina. Aunque Irán y la región disfrutan de relaciones anteriores, fue desde el ascenso de Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a la potencia que se fortalecieron los lazos, sobre todo con los paı́ses que conforman el núcleo perforante del populismo y de anti-occidentalism; VUT no sólo con ellos. En el 2005, la polı́tica exterior iranı́ asiente hacia América Latina bajo un enfoque regional, ya no sólo bilateral. Entre Teherán, Karmon menciona su interés en la propagación del chiı́smo (tribus wayuu en Venezuela y totxiles en México colectivamente se volcaron), ampliar la base de operaciones del Hezbolá (de la Triple opuesto hacia Bolivia, Venezuela, Brasil y otros lugares), para obtener el apoyo diplomático en foros internacionales para su programa nuclear ilı́cito (por ej., algunos naciones de América Latina se han abstenido o favorecidos los intereses iranı́es en Naciones Unidas vota), para obtener uranio, la materia prima esencial para su desarrollo nuclear (en mayo de 2009, El New York Times reproduce un cable de la Associated Press que denuncia israelı́ para el suministro de uranio a Irán por parte de La Paz y Caracas), para limitar el impacto de todo el mundo las sanciones económicas, al crear un mercado alternativo (como puede apreciarse por varias empresas conjuntas entre Irán y varios paı́ses de la región), y generalmente para erigir un contrapeso a Estados Unidos—que tiene tropas en los paı́ses fronterizos de Irán en una zona de tradicional influencia de Washington ya ha sido históricamente Latino América. Foros, congresos y conferencias han sido marcas para la interrelación. Ası́, en el acuerdo de investigación israelı́ ha indicado al este, la Conferencia Internacional sobre América Latina en Teherán, titulado “desarrollo en América Latina: su papel y su estado en el futuro sistema internacional” en 2007, contó con colaboradores de Argentina, Cuba de Brasil, Colombia, Ecuador, Uruguay y Venezuela (dos hijos de Ernesto “Che” Guevara fueron invitados). El mismo año el primer Congreso tuvo lugar, el internacional de literatura latinoamericana en Irán, ocasión en que el Canciller iranı́ anunció la apertura o reapertura de las embajadas de su paı́s en varias naciones de América Latina. En 2009 el Foro se realizó a través de la Internacional de Beirut de la resistencia, el antiimperialismo, la solidaridad entre pueblos y alternativas. El evento, organizado por Hezbolá, incluidos a 400 delegados de América Latina. Estos encuentros pueden tener Asambleas de antiglobalización inspirados celebradas en Yakarta, Bombay, Beirut y Porto Alegre, entre 2003 y 2005—2005 marca la primera vez que Hezbolá fue invitado a una reunión de este tipo. Ası́, el Presidente iranı́ ha visitado Venezuela, 2011] EL TRASFONDO POLÍTICO 65 Bolivia, Nicaragua, Ecuador y Brasil. Alto ranking funcionarios de Latinoamericano viajó a Teherán mutuamente. De todas las Naciones de América Latina, Venezuela ha sido un mejor host de Irán. Agregado a los cientos de acuerdos económicos suscritos a lo largo de los años, es posible mencionar otras áreas de cooperación. Existe un vuelo transoceánico entre Teherán y Caracas, con escala en Damasco. El vuelo no es rentable comercialmente, no admite a pasajeros comunes y no está sujeto a control aduanero regular. Algunas universidades venezolanas enseñan Farsi. Fábricas iranı́es fueron montadas en zonas rurales remotas y estarán protegidas por Irán. Obviamente, dedicada a la fabricación de bicicletas, tractores o uranio. Recordemos que fue Chávez apoyar el programa nuclear de ayatollahas y Hezbolá, mientras los grupos extremistas como el CRAF y ETA de España reciben patrocinio del Estado venezolano. De todas las Naciones de América Latina, Venezuela ha sido un mejor host de Irán. Agregado a los cientos de acuerdos económicos suscritos a lo largo de los años, es posible mencionar otras áreas de cooperación. Existe un vuelo transoceánico entre Teherán y Caracas, con escala en Damasco. El vuelo no es rentable comercialmente, no admite a pasajeros comunes y no está sujeto a control aduanero regular. Algunas universidades venezolanas enseñan Farsi. Fábricas iranı́es fueron montadas en zonas rurales remotas y estarán protegidas por Irán. Obviamente, dedicada a la fabricación de bicicletas, tractores o uranio. Recordemos que fue Chávez apoyar el programa nuclear de ayatollahas y Hezbolá, mientras los grupos extremistas como el CRAF y ETA de España reciben patrocinio del Estado venezolano. El año pasado, los lı́deres de Hamas, Hezbollah y la Palestina Yihad Islámica se reunieron con Húgo Chávez en el centro de inteligencia militar venezolano de Caracas. Tarek el-Aissami de Hezbolá fue puesto a cargo de la Agencia venezolana de pasaportes, Ministro de Justicia e interior y vice canciller; su padre ha elogiado públicamente a Sadam Hussein y Osama Bin Laden y está vinculado a su hermano Walid Makled, un distribuidor de Siria-venezolano. En 2008, Washington solicitó al diplomático venezolano en Damasco y Beirut, Ghazi Nasr al-DIN, como agente del Hezbolá, mientras que Nawaf Musawi, director de relaciones internacionales del partido de Alá, participó ese mismo año en la Embajada de Venezuela en Beirut conmemorando el fracaso de un golpe de Estado contra Chávez. (Destitución de Chávez fue el primer lı́der mundial para felicitar a la victoria electoral de Ahmadinejad en el 2009. La isla Margarita, una vez paraı́so turı́stico se ha convertido en zona de entrenamiento de islamistas parte dispositiva. A finales de abril pasado, el Times árabe informó que el ciudadano de Kuwait, Bahrein y Arabia Saudita están siendo entrenados en Venezuela en el armado de bombas, la Comisión de asesinatos, secuestros y transporte de rehenes por miembros de la Guardia Revolucionaria iranı́. 66 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:61 En Venezuela, se promueve que años expulsadas a los embajadores copia de América y el israelı́, el antisemitismo y antiZionism oficialmente. Alrededor de cuarenta y cinco antiZionist o menciones antisemitas pueden ser diariamente en la prensa venezolana. “Joder que son Estado de Israel” el propio Presidente dijo poco tiempo atrás por televisión. Chávez etiquetados a Israel como un Nazi en el 2006 castigar a los definió a Colombia como “el Israel de América Latina” en el 2009 y en 2005, va a los nativos en ocasión de un aniversario del descubrimiento de América, Chávez afirmó “lo que fueron expulsados de su patria como el heroico pueblo palestino.” La propia comunidad judı́a, de acceso limitado o nulo para el Gobierno, ha sufrido el acoso del régimen chavista. Dos veces se suaviza una institución central de hebrea, en el calor de la capital, bajo el pretexto de la búsqueda de armas. La sinagoga Tiferet Israel fue profana. En junio de 2008, el embajador venezolano en Moscú denunció un golpe de Estado contra su Gobierno y culpó de la Mossad y “ciudadanos venezolanos pero judı́os” a participar en el complot. En la Navidad de 2005, Chávez fue perdón públicamente que algunas minorı́as, entre ellas los descendientes de los asesinos de Cristo, han incautado de las riquezas de este mundo.” Desde que Chávez asumió el poder, cerca del 50% de la comunidad judı́a emigraron de Venezuela. La relación de Brasil con Irán ha causado una gran sorpresa en algunas esquinas. Como emergente mundial regional y refiriéndose poder junto a China, India, Rusia y Sudáfrica, Brasil han posicionado como un nexo entre el primero y el tercer mundo capaz de un constructivo papel global. Sólo entre 2005-2010, Brasil dio millones en asistencia de todo el mundo: millones en préstamos y la cancelación de la deuda a los paı́ses pobres y millones en ayuda humanitaria de ayuda, becas de estudio y capacitación técnica. En el paı́s ha cosechado beneficios apreciables: Brasil será sede del Mundial de fútbol en 2014 y de los Juegos Olı́mpicos de 2016, su economı́a ha crecido notablemente, y tanto Lula da Silva como su sucesora Dilma Rousseff ha disfrutado levantó los ı́ndices de aprobación popular (Lula tenı́a un 80% de apoyo popular al dejar el poder que la primera mujer Presidente del paı́s es visada por el 73% de los brasileños). Walt Disney Company incluso una de sus últimas pelı́culas animadas—ha aclimatados rı́o en Brasil! Sin embargo, durante las secciones finales de su segundo mandato, Presidente Lula parece girar en O, a desafiar a los intereses de los Estados Unidos en la región en varias áreas y consolidar un vı́nculo con Irán que poco tiempo antes parecı́a inconcebible. Al igual que Chávez, Lula hizo suya los dudosos resultados electorales de Irán, invitada al Presidente iranı́ para su paı́s y él mismo visitó Teherán. También apoya el derecho de Irán a tener un programa nuclear civil, ayatolá fue contra la aplicación de san- 2011] EL TRASFONDO POLÍTICO 67 ciones contra el régimen y abrió un diálogo con Teherán que fue seriamente cuestionada por varios actores globales. Durante la reunión de la Asamblea anual de Interpol en Marruecos, en 2007, Brasil se abstuvo en la votación que valida la emisión de “notificaciones rojos” con prominentes figuras del Gobierno iranı́ por su relación con el ataque contra la AMIA en Argentina, hermano República del Brasil que habı́a iniciado el orden. Otra vez Brasil se abstuvo, en el 2009, la Agencia Internacional de Energı́a Atómica (OIEA), en Viena, cuando surgió la cuestión nuclear iranı́ de los votos favorables de Argentina, Estados Unidos luchó, Rusia, China y la Unión Europea. En mayo de 2010, Brasil se unió a Turquı́a en un intento de proteger diplomáticamente a Irán de la inminente aprobación de las sanciones internacionales, patrocinado por Washington. Incluso en aspectos simbólicos roto lazos con la cuestión iranı́, que sea para visitar la tumba de Yasser Arafat en Ramallah, pero negándose a visitar la tumba de Theodor Herzl, en Jerusalén, durante una visita a la región en 2010, la dirección ideológica puede apreciarse que Lula habı́a dado a su polı́tica exterior. Brasil de Lula también abstenido en las votaciones en la Comisión de derechos humanos contra Sri Lanka, el Congo y Corea del Norte, aunque votó contra Sudán en el Consejo de seguridad. Lula describió a Chávez como “sin duda el mejor presidente venezolano cien años.” Su última visita a Fidel Castro fue recordada como una gran vergüenza al llegar a un acuerdo con la muerte de un opositor encarcelado en huelga de hambre. Lula, creador del Foro Antiglobalización de Porto Alegre, evita el premio en Davos, alegando un impedimento médico para viajar a último momento. Además, Lula en oposición a la Casa Blanca al apoyo a la restauración de Cuba a la organización de Estados Americanos (OEA), cuya Carta Magna explı́cita que las democracias sólo pueden ser miembros; dio refugio diplomático el Presidente degradado de Honduras y chavista aliado Manuel Zelaya; protestaron por el acuerdo entre Estados Unidos y Colombia para el uso estadounidense de bases militares en el paı́s centroamericano. y adoptó un tono público del tercer mundo que contrasta con su imagen anterior más moderado. Al asumir la Presidencia a principios de 2011, Dilma Rousseff despertó dudas dadas su guerrilla y pasado marxista. Su proximidad con Lula, que eligió como sucesor, podrı́a sugerir una continuación de las controvertidas polı́ticas de su mentor. Pero sus primeros pasos en la arena internacional han resultado para ser mucho más centristas que las de su predecesor, hasta el momento al menos. Su pasado feminista y de militante torturado por la llevó a los militares a condenar las prácticas de los derechos humanos en Cuba e Irán y en un giro con respecto a la última votaciones en las Naciones Unidas, Dilma causó que su paı́s votaron a favor de la creación de un relator de derechos humanos de Irán. Se nombró como Canciller a 68 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:61 Antonio Patriótico, un buen famoso ex-Embajador en Washington. Por otra parte Estados Unidos marcó claramente su interés por rescatar a Brasil de la herencia de Lula. La Secretaria de Estado Hillary Clinton estuvo presente en la Asunción de Dilma como Presidente, un 1 de enero, lo que seguramente obligó a limitar las celebraciones del año nuevo. Presidente Barack Obama ha viajado a Brasil a mediados de marzo, a pesar de que ya se inició la lucha guerrera en Libia. Fue interpretado como un signo de acercamiento de Washington a Brasilia, primera capital visitada en un programa que incluı́a sólo a Chile y El Salvador además. Por cierto, Lula fue el único ex presidente brasileño en no asistir al almuerzo ofrecido en honor de Obama en el Palacio de Itamary. Dilma condenó el bombardeo de la OTAN a Libia y Obama no apoyaba las aspiraciones brasileñas para obtener un banco permanente en el Consejo de seguridad, que junto con pendientes desacuerdos comerciales sugiere será la tensión en la relación. Sin embargo, es evidente que Brasil de Rousseff se ha separado de la diplomacia populista de da silbidos de su último año, sobre todo en Teherán. Ası́, Argentina, ha mantenido una polı́tica ambivalente con respecto a Irán. Su relación con la teocracia islámica cambiado considerablemente desde épocas anteriores cuando agentes del Hezbolá perpetraron el primer ataque islamista en América Latina (explosión de la Embajada de Israel en Buenos Aires, en 1992, 29 murieron) y atacar la peor antisemita en la diáspora desde el fin de la Guerra Mundial atacar—the AMIA, dos años más tarde, en el que murieron 85. Tomando distancia del Gobierno de Carlos Menem, acusado de obstaculizar el progreso en la causa de la investigación, los Kirchner matrimonio dio un impulso considerable de los mismos, denunciando a Irán en los foros internacionales, pidiendo a la Interpol la captura de los sospechosos iranı́es y designar a un judı́o fiscal y equipar con los medios para poder llevar adelante una investigación judicial efectiva. Sin embargo, algunos hechos han creado un marco de duda con respecto a la posición de la burocracia antes de Teherán, es decir: un) la cercanı́a ideológica de Kirchner con los paı́ses aliados a Irán—Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador y Nicaragua especialmente; b) las sospechas del uso polı́tico de la causa AMIA insultar a predecesor—aunque el menemismo y el kirchnerismo pertenecen al mismo movimiento polı́tico, el peronismo, el poco amor mutuo es de conocimiento público; c) la peculiar relación de figuras del Gobierno con Luis D’Elı́a, el lı́der popular de antiZionist muy cerca de la embajada iranı́; d) el hecho de que bajo el Gobierno de Cristina el comercio bilateral ha crecido en apenas un año el % de 10.000; e) que la delegación Argentina ante la ONU en Ginebra no ha retirado de la sala cuando Mahmoud Ahmadinejad comenzó a hablar en el marco de la denominada reunión Durban II, en abril de 2009; y e) que el Gobierno no 2011] EL TRASFONDO POLÍTICO 69 apoya al diplomático argentino Rogelio Pfirter en su nominación como Director General del OIEA, finalmente siendo él entonces vista favorablemente por Washington y desfavorablemente por Teherán, entre otras consideraciones. A finales de marzo pasado, el diario perfil publica la noticia que generó una controversia de propagación. Uno de sus principales columnistas, mencionando un documento secreto, denunció la existencia de negociaciones en curso entre Buenos Aires y Teherán donde primero dejarı́a la causa judicial abierta contra el segundo a cambio de mejoras en el intercambio comercial. El Gobierno israelı́ reaccionó airadamente, etiquetado como “muy grave” a la noticia, advirtiendo que, para confirmar, el Argentina conducta constituirı́a “una manifestación de cinismo infinito y deshonor a muertos” y poniendo en duda la invitación extendida previamente el canciller argentino a visitar Jerusalén. El fiscal de la causa AMIA, Dr. Alberto Nisman, negó la petición periodı́stica plenamente y lı́deres comunitarios añadió a la denegación. El Gobierno, sin embargo, permaneció en silencio. El embajador israelı́ en Buenos Aires, Daniel Gazit, pidió explicaciones al Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores del paı́s, pero todavı́a diez dı́as más tarde, informó el Jerusalem Post, “no recibió ninguna respuesta oficial.” La primera reacción pública dio el canciller argentino desde Israel. Interrogado por la prensa, inicialmente eludió tocar el espinoso tema invocar las reglas de la Torá y apelando a la memoria de la murió el padre, el famoso periodista Jacobo, en parábolas inusuales que trajeron acerca de desacuerdo. Por último, Timerman afirmó lo siguiente repudia lo, que fue interpretada como el informe de perfil: “No hay ninguna prueba de que Argentina ha cambiado su curso de acción, que comenzó en 2003 con la elección de Néstor Kirchner, en el que el objetivo de nuestro paı́s es investigar el tema de los atentados a la AMIA y la Embajada de Israel.” Por otra parte, perfil no contribuyó a aclarar las cosas cuando se deniega el acceso a la documentación que se utilizó básica para la noticia antes de un pedido del Centro Simon Wiesenthal, que llevó a esta organización internacional judı́a al lamentar la decisión del diario porque ella “puede desacreditar la validez de las señales.” En esta atmósfera de dudas y ante una denuncia tan grave, era expectable oficial denegado contundente, acreditado en un comunicado cuyo texto escrito podrı́a disipar toda ambigüedad. Lamentablemente nunca sucedió. El Gobierno también mantiene silencio antes otro relacionado con la grave denuncia. El juez federal Daniel Rafecas reveló que las repetidas manifestaciones que se producen delante de la Embajada de Israel pueden ser organizadas por D’Elı́a con financiación de la embajada iranı́. A pesar de las graves consecuencias de la denuncia, el Gobierno prefirió no 70 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:61 comentar el asunto. Es posible observe en ocasión del lanzamiento de un movimiento que conduce a D’Elı́a, en el Luna Park, el Presidente ofreció su respaldo en un video. Entre los contendientes la ley era el representante de Irán en Argentina, y para esos mismos dı́as, D’Elı́a habı́a entrevistado radialmente a Mohsen Rabbani, le ha dado una plataforma pública a un fugitivo de la justicia Argentina para negar sus presuntas viajes a Brasil. La Argentina de los Kirchner también perturba en otras áreas. Néstor fue capaz de organizar una Cumbre concurrentes a un Presidente estadounidense de visita oficial en el paı́s, como ocurrió con el Presidente George W. Bush en 2005 (45.000 activistas de izquierda hacinados en un escenario para la ocasión); Cristina llegó a acusar a la empresa para llevar a cabo una “basura de operación” cuando las autoridades norteamericanas indicaron la existencia de un chavista clandestinos financiación de su campaña electoral; el Canciller puede predicar a EE.UU a bombardear Libia a la vez que la agencia oficial de noticias Télam suscribe un acuerdo de información con la Agencia árabe de la noticias de Siria (SANA), mientras que el régimen de Bashar el-Assad militarmente reprime a manifestantes pro democracia; y el Gobierno puede aplaudir un premio periodı́stico dado por la Universidad de la Plata a Húgo Chávez, mientras este un combate ferozmente a la libertad de expresión en su paı́s. Estos hechos dan cuenta de la visión ideológica de un Gobierno a quien, obediencia, desde el extranjero suele ser caracterizado como “inclasificable.” *Julián Schvindlerman es un analista polı́tico internacional y autor de Roma y Jerusalén (Random House/Debate: 2010) y De la Tierra de Tierra de Paz para la Guerra (Ensayos del Sud, 2002) y la introducción para el nuevo antisemitismo (B’nai Brith Latinoamérica 2010). Sus columnas han aparecido en las comunidades, Miami Herald, Oriente trimestral, ası́ como Jai Radio. http:// www.julianschvindlerman.com.ar/index-entrevistas.html. The New Judeophobia on the Left1 Patricio Brodsky* Brodsky investigates the left’s merging of anti-Zionism with Latin American antisemitism. Key Words: Antisemitism, Anti-Zionism, Israel, Judeophobia Argentine intellectuals Sergio Bagu, Gregorio Klimovsky, Ernesto Sabato, Leon Rozitchner, David Viñas, Noe Jitrik, Bernardo Verbitsky, Inda Ledesma, Gregory Selser, Abelardo Castillo, and Cesar Tiempo endorsed the 1967 manifesto. The manifesto stated: . . . [It] is the unquestionable right of the State of Israel to its existence. The independence of the Jewish people in Israel was the result of their effort of their sectors’ pioneers and Vanguard was a response to the inability of the world to solve the Jewish problem; it responds to the legitimate aspirations of national liberation, and was supported in this opportunity for worldwide progressive . . . I am from Argentina. I am Jewish. And I want to reflect on some events in this country and region. There is a long tradition of Judeophobia/ antisemitism dating back almost to the origins of the Jewish immigration to Argentina. Antisemitism was deeply rooted in the upper classes at that time. Some examples: In 1890, a furious antisemitic novel by Julián Martel called The Bag appeared; in January 1888 (only eight months before dying), Domingo Faustino Sarmiento published several anti-Jewish articles in The National; the newspaper La Prensa, on various occasions, expressed its opposition to the Jews’ forming agricultural communes in Entre Rı́os and Santa Fe; and, above all, the “action” of May 15, 1910, ten days before the Centennial, when upper-class young people, coming out of the very exclusive “society Sportive Argentina” under the leadership of Baron Demarchi, stormed the headquarters of the Avangard, the body of the Bund, the Jewish Socialist Workers Group, and the so-called “Russian library,” then burning its books 1. I’ve decided to explicitly avoid working on the speeches of President Húgo Chávez and Fidel Castro because they are the most well known. Instead, I have focused, above all, though not exclusively, on intellectual referents and political speeches of the Argentinian radical left. 71 72 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 at Congress Plaza. Referring to the antisemitic phenomenon of the repressors of the “tragic week,” the writer Juan José Sebreli (in the book The Jewish Question in Argentina, published in 1968 by Modern Times) presented an interesting thought to explain the xenophobia of the oligarchy of that time: the same racial hatred that the liberal bourgeoisie felt toward the mestizo, who tried to replace the European immigrant, later turned toward that immigrant when he unexpectedly revealed a dynamic element of social unrest.2 Among the direct background of the facts we could list, there are some that stand out for their qualitative importance: • During the tragic week of January 1919 until today, in the only pogroms of America, there were attacks on the Jewish neighborhoods in Buenos Aires, leaving dozens of dead and a large number of injured; this kind of violent event did not occur in any other country on our continent. • Identity cards issued to Jews by Argentina Federal Police during the 1910s and 1920s were stamped with a Star of David. • In 1937, Marcos Savon, Argentine Consul in Gdynia, Poland, sent several notes to Consul Carlos Saavedra Lamas under the title “Cemita problem.” In the note of July 14, 1937, on the eve of the Nazi invasion, Savon wrote: “The attacks on people and Jewish property continue . . . On the other hand, and along the lines of what you style in Germany, a conference of professionals will meet next September and discuss the inclusion of a clause in the statutes prohibiting Jews from entry into Christian associations. All these measures fester tempers, and reach the pogroms against war. Harassed, the Jew is driven to emigrate . . . I am of the opinion that it would oppose more barriers to immigration from that part of Poland animated by the deepest grudge against the Christian, and willing to commit the greatest excesses. In addition, no week passes without the Polish government finding centers of Communist organizations in which the majority are Jewish, which keeps alarming the authorities . . .” • The existence of a “secret instruction” prohibiting entry into Argentina for anyone persecuted by the Nazis (almost all of them Jews). In fact, the discovery of secret circular No. 11, signed by the then Argentinian Minister for Foreign Affairs José Marı́a Cantilo on July 12, 1938, is a clear example of how the Foreign Ministry handled these requests, by requiring that the consuls, without prejudice 2. Herman Schiller, “The First Pogrom in Argentina.” Published January 3, 1999; see http://www.salta21.com/+El-primer-pogrom-en-la-Argentina+.html. 2011] • • • • THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 73 to other provisions laid down for the selection of the travelers that come to this country, and with “special orders” from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, were to “deny visas to tourists or transit passenger to any person reasonably believed to have left his or her country of origin as undesirable or banned, whatever the reason for the expulsion.” (Then, after the war, the policy of “closed borders” to the survivors of the Shoah and the massive entry of Nazi war criminals and accomplices, i.e., Adolf Eichmann, Joseph Mengele, Erich Priebke, Ante Pavelic, Josef Schwammberger, Gerhard Bohne, Walter Kutschmann, Dinko Sakic, Radislaw Ostrowsky, Ferdinand Durcansky, Albert Ganzenmueller, and Hans Fischboeck.) Subsequent to the capture of Eichmann in Argentina, a wave of antisemitic attacks (carried out primarily by the right-wing terrorist organization and the Tacuara nationalist movement; the two most serious cases of antisemitism from Tacuara were: 1) The abduction of Graciela Sirota, June 21, 1962. The 19-year-old girl was beaten, dumped into a car when she expected the group to go to the Faculty Lounge, grossly tortured with cigarette burns all over her body, and had a swastika carved on her chest (this case caused great indignation in society and many reviews on the impunity with which Tacuara had acted); and 2) In 1964, as revenge for the deaths of two militants of the MNRT and for one of the Peronist youth in a confusing incident of association with the whole of the CGT in Rosario, Raul Alterman, a young militant Jewish leftist, was killed at the door of his home. It was never very clear why Alterman was chosen as the target of the attack, although it is assumed that his selection was because he was both a Jew and a socialist. After the murder, the Tacuara Organization sent a letter to Alterman’s parents, saying: “No one just kills without a reason; your son was killed because he was a Communist Jewish dog. If all dogs and Jewish exploiters do not return to their native Judea, what do they do in our country?” Argentina is the only country in the world that was “fabricated”—a Creole version of the infamous myth of the “Jewish conspiracy for universal domination.” I refer to the “Andean Plan,” a vernacular fantasy built on the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Then, during the military dictatorship of 1976, as reported in Never Again, the missing Jews had endured a heightened round of torture and humiliation by the profoundly antisemitic character of Argentine torturers. Finally, in the early 1990s, Argentina suffered two of the worst 74 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 antisemitic attacks of the postwar period—the attacks against the Embassy of Israel (1992) and the headquarters of the AMIA (1994). In both cases, the perpetrators could not have acted without local support, and would remain unpunished helped by the concealment provided by certain sectors of the state. Antisemitism is characterized by a perennial process of adapting beliefs and prejudices to changing situations, rather than analysis, and results in blaming the Jews for their failures. For example: The messianic eschatology of Christianity from the first century of the Common Era postulated that in a few years the Messiah would return and begin the messianic era of the redemption of mankind. When this prophecy failed to come to pass through several centuries, the leaders of the Catholic Church began to blame the “uncompromising stubbornness” of the Jews, who do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah, as the main cause for the postponement of the return of Jesus. Similarly, some of the founding fathers of socialism hoped that Judaism would disappear by melting into the internationalist Socialist humanism. On the contrary, however; instead of disappearing, Jewish identity revitalized with the development of the movement of Jewish national identity. Zionism, at its birth, developed and strengthened the Jewish people’s national liberation movement, a party of the left-wing attitude is boycotting him, and finally (instead of following the rest of the movements of national liberation) end up unfairly accusing him of being racist and genocidal. In the 19th and 20th centuries, some saw the Jews as creators of capitalism; they understood this social system as the triumph of a supposed “mercantilist spirit” of the Jew who would have migrated to Christianity (Marx)—a virtual “judenization” of Christianity. Today, others (heirs and later descendants of the first) changed their views and understand the Jews (embodied in Israel) as the power driver of globalization through the Jewish-American lobby (Petras), and others understand that the normalization of the Jews through the Israeli state and the government of that state’s adoption of neoliberal policies in the economic sector to be a Christianization of the Jews (Rozitchner). As you can see, the essence of the process is the same but the meaning of the equation is the reverse; the evil is that in both equations the Jews are placed as evil and holding conspiratorial attitudes. We see that this mechanism is repeated over and over again in Argentina. Yesterday, the Jews were convicted in the same way that Israel is convicted there today (regardless of its actions). What characterize the critical judeophobia are hubris, its disproportion, and its injustice. Today, anything is valid and credible in the case of Israel (the Jews); yesterday, it was said that Jews killed Christian children to knead bread for Easter, now, 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 75 Israel is a murderer of women and children. They said yesterday that the Jew had horns and a tail; today they argue that Israel is a colonialist and genocidal state. So we see that Argentina is a leading country when we draw the roadmap of antisemitism. It is a country with a particular importance in this regard. THE CURRENT JUDEOPHOBIA Four decades after the Declaration that I quote at the beginning of this article, the vision of its signers has varied substantially; today, some of them, as for example León Rozitchner, have had a radical change in their sights on Israel. What has happened so that the general progressive climate has become so hostile to Israel? This change of position comes at the point that everywhere we see the rise of statements and manifestos of famous intellectuals condemning Israel and appeals calling for sporting, social, political, academic, artistic, and cultural boycotts against the Jewish State, invoking, in many cases, the boycotts that were held during the 1970s and 1980s against the racist apartheid regime in South Africa, implying that Israel would be heir to the segregationist policies. In extreme cases, we are faced with the unusual reappearance of atavistic hatred, e.g., the religious myth of the Deicide, recycled as a political tool from Israel. An example of this is the use by the prestigious Marxist sociologist James Petras of the myth of the Deicide3 in a story of December 21, 2001, called “Christmas in the Occupied Territories”: Israeli radio announced that three suspected Arab terrorists who fled Afghanistan had been killed in a hideout in Bethlehem after having crossed the border. The Israeli Government apologized that there had been no civilian victim. The media in the United States repeated the same story at the time that Washington welcomed the Israeli government for its role in the fight against international terrorism. Jesus had lived only a day.4 Even renowned and respected Jewish intellectuals of the left, e.g., Hermann Schiller—who make statements explaining they do not demonstrate 3. In the Vatican II encyclical Nostra Aetate it was determined that the Jewish people did not have responsibility for the death of Christ, but the positions of the Marxist Petrás are as reactionary as Catholics. 4. See CSCA Web site, http://www.nodo50.org/CSCA/palestina/petras-21-1201.html. 76 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 to repudiate the actions of Israel in the Gaza Strip—are by nature antisemitic. Again and again, I repudiate the Gaza massacre. But I am not going to go with those who wield the same arguments (e.g., “international Judaism,” “rats,” “stateless”) used by Felipe Romero in El Caudillo and very soon thereafter by the military dictatorship when it tortures many Jews via the ERP and Montoneros and other organizations’ combatants.5 The key question that could be asked here is what could be the reason a rational atheist Marxist sociologist such as Petras calls for an irrational myth as that of the Deicide—which has only served to justify hundreds of massacres of Jews throughout history—as a political tool against Israel? The brutal and honest answer is that it is a consciously assumed radical hatred, and Petras has become what the sociologist Gino Germani termed an ideological antisemite. This is the route we have traveled since the outbreak of the Second Intifada. During the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbolla, Argentina produced a series of incidents that marked the strengthening of this trend: some demonstrations by the radical left with the insignia of Hezbolla; the threat of violence against Jewish youngsters who wanted to speak out against the Iranian Embassy from the patriotic revolutionary Quebracho movement6; and the appearance of “Stop the genocide of the State of Israel,” which was endorsed by León Rozitchner, Alejandro Horowicz, and Elsa Drucaroff and affirmed by dozens of intellectuals, including José Pablo Feinmann, Juan Gelman, Beatriz Sarlo, Horacio Verbitsky, Eduardo Grüner, Atilio Boron, Abelardo Castillo, and Eliseo Subiela, among others, stating that: The current massacre exceeds all known. Data are not with its overwhelming evidence, but the repetition in the midst of the silent accomplice of the so-called civilized world. It is necessary to stop that Jew and butcher did not become synonyms . . . Need to make the democratic, popular, and progressive forces around the world know that sooner or later the crimes against humanity will not go unpunished, that the military victory over the Palestinian people has an unambiguous name: genocide and the massacres only opened the new massacres . . .7 5. Herman Schiller, The other Israel. See EUTSI–left Anti-authoritarian–Palestinian http://eutsi.org/kea/pueblos/ page/the other–Israel.html. 6. Despite the flagrant contradiction between self-definition as a “revolutionary Patriot” and objectively, act as “shock strength” of a reactionary theocracy. 7. Argentine Jewish intellectuals appeal: stop the genocide of the State of Israel. Initiative of León Rozitchner, Elsa Drucaroff, and Alexander Horowicz, Buenos Aires, 07/20/06. Published online 9-8-2006 at http://www.iade.org.ar/ modules/noticias/article page.dophp?storyid=829. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 77 As we shall see below, there in this statement and in similar positions an evident overstatement of Palestinian suffering that is nothing more than the indicator of a high degree of irrationality in the treatment of this issue. This trend has been even stronger and more in depth during the war between Israel and Hamas that ended in 2008 and early 2009. The indicators that alerted us were several social and trade union organizations, articles and statements of intellectuals, and, for the first time, mobilizations of repudiation of Israel toward the Jewish community—institutions showing that, despite denying the relationship between Judaism and Zionism, in practice their speeches are binding and indivisible. What happens is that intellectuals who study social phenomena use in an arbitrary fashion concepts they are well aware ignore manipulating and trivializing categories—historical, sociological, political, and economic. And why is it that this arbitrary use happens when you analyze the Middle East conflict and only when it refers to Israel? What could be happening are two things: a) a prejudiced view that distorts the image of Israel; or b) a conscious choice to trivialize in order to delegitimize the state. In both cases, the objective result is a discriminatory situation against Israel, which ends up being considered unfairly (in relation to the facts produced by other states and social groups) and disproportionately (under facts for which this state is responsible). These two forms of undeserved treatment can be linked to the two forms of antisemitism that sociologist Gino Germani addressed: the first relates to unconscious antisemitism and implies a traditional antisemitism, while the second is more a voluntary and conscious disqualification and not merely a mechanical reproduction of stereotypes, and refers to what Germani defined as ideological antisemitism. If a part of the intelligentsia—supposedly the most critical social group—uncritically used concepts whose significance they know perfectly and without considering the consequences decides to use them to produce a banal distortion of its true meaning with the intention of forcing the interpretation of certain historical fact, then something profound is happening. If the criticism is one of the central intellectual characteristics, it makes a powerful call to the fact that academics, scientific enterprises, and social companies used Manichaean reductionism analysis techniques, messianic polar dualism, and the same uncritical thinking, creating as a result a demonization of Israel, shaping an image of this tranquilized, unconscious state of functioning (I hate Israel not because I am antisemitic but because Israel does “bad” or “evil” things) and creating a mental representation of Israel that needs to be justified. It is a before-the-event condemnation that works like self-justification. 78 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 Certainly, it is surprising to see renowned specialists in the social sciences—academics extremely serious and rigorous in their analyses and studies—but when they have to apply their knowledge to explain the conflict of the Middle East, employ instead badly used categories of emptied meaning, using them uncritically as jargon in the sense proposed by Theodor Adorno8 in his criticism of the Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger, using this conceptual language in a sense that it is intended with the clear purpose of generating political effects instead of other, more appropriate categories that can be used to describe a situation objectively. There is an implicit code that sets the politically correct in the thinking of the progressive intelligentsia. This code has crystallized a number of clichés that form a monopoly in representing the space formerly occupied by reflective praxis—the coherence between theory and practice (Gramsci). This standardized thought is expressed in two clearly defined axes: The Intertwined Interests of Israel and the United States This is due to the close political and commercial relationship between the two states (although this relationship is between us and many other states in the world, only Israel is linked indivisibly to that state). This axis will be presented in two ways: to (a) the heirs of the worst paranoid traditions of classic antisemitism (the explicit vision in the myth of the so-called “Jewish conspiracy” to the domination of the world, today expressed in the denunciation of the alleged “Jewish lobby” that would dominate the United States through its partnership with evangelists; and (b) the modern and progressive, who must subscribe to the myth that “Israel is the advanced imperialist in the Middle East.” These forms of expression are conflicting and mutually exclusive. While at first the dominant factor in the equation are Jews (Zionism, Israel), the second key factor would be the United States— and Israel a mere puppet of the designs of such a power. The Urgent Need to Break the Jewish Association of Jews as Victim This step is essential to produce a rupture of empathy with the Jews and power, which would allow living without guilt and hatred against “the Jew,” especially before his state and the ideology behind it (Israel and Zion8. “. . . the nature of slang would be extremely formal: it is responsible for what you want is felt and accepted by his exhibition, largely without taking into account the words’ content. Preconception and Mimetic element of language takes her under his direction, for the desired effect by it . . . .” Theodore Adorno, The Ideology as a Language. Taurus editorial: Madrid, 1992, 12, 13, 14. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 79 ism). This axis has two components: (a) minimizing the true dimension of the Shoah through banal comparison; in this respect, remember the words of the winner of the Nobel Prize for literature, José Saramago, who affirmed that Ramallah is Auschwitz, or the comparison of the anti-terrorist fence with the wall of the Warsaw Ghetto, etc.; and (b) comparing the “Nazi car” to Israel; this is a technical discursive developed in the North to not only break the association of Jews as victims, but also to move toward the opposite, motivating the perpetrator to generate a reverse of his alleged victims—Arab movement of Palestinians—to the place of absolute radical evil, causing a reinforcement of the empathy with the victims of a contemporary Nazi state. In reality, this partnership that makes the link between Jew/Israel on one side and Nazism on the other a rhetorical device and oxymoron.9 These two axes, then, set up a series of discursive myths that this “reality” is built from mere rhetoric and that it would constitute the jargon of the “politically correct” intellectual. This is expressed in many empty slogans, such as:10 • Israel is colonialist • Israel is the imperialist in the Middle East • Israel is racist, e.g., Zionism = racism • Israel is a Nazi state • Israel is a terrorist state • Israel is warmongering and expansionistic All these so-called “revealed truths” operate under the mode of religious dogma and progressive welfare. These categories were constructed to explain other social relations. The use of mechanical force banalizes them and empties them of content. Today, many intellectuals embark on this “adventure” with the intention of demonizing Israel and Zionism. The objective result of this is a double crime, because it not only assumes clearly antisemitic positions—something that undoubtedly does not worry the intellectuals—but that also goes against the historical memory of the crimes committed against the peoples really colonized, exploited, segregated, and subject to genocide. Intellectuals, particularly the progressives on the left, have always acted as the moral conscience of society, denouncing abuses and injustices of the powerful to the most vulnerable; Today, at least in relation to Israel, this mission seems to be modified. In Israel, in the speeches of the “politically correct,” progressivism is shifted to the place of “sinister,” a field of radical evil; this is apparent in the categories assigned to it. The categories 9. Footnote translation missing. 10. For amplification of this concept, see Patricio Brodsky, “Los Mantras del Antisionismo” (The Mantras of Anti-Zionism). 80 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 are the representation of all the bad things of modernity—e.g., colonialism, imperialism, racism, Nazism—that haunt the progressive fantasy. But not all the criticism of Israel should be considered part of the new Judeophobia. We must avoid falling into a position equivalent to the intellectuals here, criticizing and trivializing the antisemitic concept. We must avoid using criticism flippantly because, in the long run, this category loses its effectiveness to account for real-life situations. If you are using the antisemitic concept as a tool to avoid any criticism, it becomes meaningless in that if everything is antisemitism, then nothing is. In certain hard-core attacks, there is a tendency to label antisemitic criticism as anti-Israeli, but not all is. There are certain conditions that must be met for a valid criticism to become an open declaration of prejudice. Several authors raise these conditions that help us to draw the boundaries between the two. We must weigh each statement carefully to avoid falling into banal generalizations that render both as equally critical. To avoid these counterproductive accusations, we should establish clearly that Jew phobias, whatever their origin, have common qualitative elements that can synthesize a number of characteristics that define, namely: a) The “objective” nature: The Judeophobe will always find an excuse to make a hatred appear objective (detach from it and live it not as himself but as something objective—i.e., a bad thing in Jews that legitimizes the bitterness toward them). It is a mental process that sits the quality of the hatred in the hated object, leading to hatred is experienced as something generated by the object of hatred (“The Jew” “El Zionism” “Israel”) because of some objective fact—e.g., the Deicide, the desecration of the body of Christ, the global domination conspiracy, the cosmopolitan betrayal, racial pollution, Palestinian genocide. b) The unconscious character: Rarely and only in extreme cases does Jew phobia appear as a conscious element. It will generally form as hidden (repressed) consciousness and discomfort that generates as an unconscious manifestation; as such, it competes to emerge in consciousness through “flashes” that will assume an increasingly violent nature and become increasingly difficult to suppress. c) Suffering: A characteristic of the presence of Jew phobia is the compulsive obsession with those who suffer. The Jewish problem, e.g., an obsession with Israel, grows to occupy all space with its reasoning; there are only anti-Israel demonstrations, and solidarity is not motivated to confront tremendous humanitarian tragedies. d) The obsessiveness: It follows from the above that Jew phobia 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 81 reaches the degree of being a unhealthy obsession that atrophies and blurs the rational capacity. e) Their Manichaean character: The reality is seen in mutually exclusive polar oppositions—on the one hand the object of hatred as evil and on the other, the collective to which it belongs, such as the heavenly representation of the good. All of these features indicate the presence of a strong and deeply rooted prejudice; therefore, it will be hostile to any empirical evidence. Speeches in which you can see how these intellectuals operate is shown in this example: The Jewish people in Israel still bend to the strategy of the Empire whose model implemented in all aspects of life. Now the Palestinians do what Western Christendom did with us. . . . To do what they are doing in Palestine, Jews who are in power must maintain the moral secret of the origin of its right to a homeland and prolong their inhumane values of their own ancient pursuers. Hide, for example, that began with the Christian cross—ended with the European Shoah. They must hide the truth about the historical experience of his life in the West. To become accomplices of their murderers, not denounce them, already not say more than Christianity and capitalism were never their exterminators because now they had become his model and its allies. In the religious fundamentalists were made and ecumenical; economically, became globalizing capitalists; in politics, became a theocratic state colonialist; in the scientific field, they took as a model neutral logic of objectivity without the struggle enlightenment subject and in international, argue with their services the most sinister causes of Christian and imperial oppressors.11 Barbarism perpetrated by the Tel Aviv regime recognizes few in recent times: the American bombardment with napalm to the village’s peasant Vietnamese, “ethnic cleansing” of Milosevic, and other aberrations. It is difficult to find similar examples. What looks like more is the description of the infamous and cowardly aggression of the Nazi regime and its fascist ally in Italy downloaded on Guernica. In a small Basque town, Gaza produces an indiscriminate killing of women and children, under the false accusation that they were all terrorists, denied a thousand times; the thousands of photographs that afterward circulated around the world produced eternal condemnation of their perpetrators. Note that the Israeli regime learned very well the American pattern and art of lies and the tricks. . . . It is not an exaggeration to qualify evil and unworthy rulers of Israel as genuine heirs of Nazi barbarity, which also killed indiscriminately to terrorize the population. It also sought to ensure its “vital space” to 11. Footnote translation missing. 82 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 ensure impunity for their actions; they slaughtered defenseless populations with their superior military to and also lied, as Göring recommended (SIC!),12 because both do believe those lies become truths. . . . It is painful to observe the evolution of the State of Israel so far from the dreams of great Jewish thinkers, such as Martin Buber, who envisioned it as the completion of an original socialist model. A state whose illegitimacy of origin is now added to an illegitimacy even greater, emanating from the practiced carnage on a defenseless civilian population, elicits doubts about how democratic a state that perpetrated such crimes can be. Illegitimacy of origin, it is said—not because the Jewish people have no right to their state, since that right is unquestionable and Hamas must recognize it without further delay—but illegitimacy because it was stealing land from people who also claim it. The agreement between British colonialism and American imperialism that in the final days of WW II resulted in the creation of the State of Israel was possible because it was done before the Arab world could take over an Israeli territory that was claimed by both the Israelis and the Palestinians . . . these cowardly hawks, pathetic disciples of Hitler, are the worst enemies of the Jewish people.13 A good example to illustrate the irrational and contradictory features of common sense in terms of the criticism Israel receives can be seen in the quote from the economist Claudio Katz: Those who exalt the existing religious tolerance in this country against the closed the Hamas Islamic tend to forget the denominational character of the Jewish State. Also omitted the biblical basis, used to justify the extent of the territory to the sacred boundaries of Samaria and Judea . . . The painful legacy of the Holocaust is often used to silence the denunciation of a militarist state that humiliates the neighboring peoples. This censorship is exercised in identifying Judaism with Zionism and Israel, or in performing any criticism as an act of antisemitism. In reality, these three concepts differ significantly. Judaism is a religion, culture, or tradition of a people spread around many countries, whose tenure as a differential segment has varied in each time and region. Israel is a state built on the explicit primacy of the Hebrews, but currently includes several groups disconnected from that origin. Anti-Zionism is an ideology of colonial appropriation based on ancient and pragmatic bases. These differences allow us to distinguish the anti-Israeli, anti-Zionist, and anti-Jewish positions. The first attitude is racist, the second anticolonial, and the third does not present a sharp meaning. As the only anti-Americanism 12. Footnote translation missing. 13. Footnote translation missing. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 83 expresses a generic rejection of imperialist oppression.14 This statement not only shows a capricious interpretation of Judaism (there is a Judaism, but that there are in Judaism rites of religion, culture, and traditions that are not the same among Ashkenazi Jews, the sefardim, the mitzrahim, etc.) and Zionism (which has nothing to do with colonialism but on the contrary is a political-ideological movement that assumes the representation of national interests of the Jewish people, and therefore has perspectives ranging from the Zionism Marxist borojoviano to right-wing jabotinskiano, passing through expressions of religious Zionism—and even taking politico-military shapes such as those assumed during the fighting for national liberation against the British colonial occupation of Israel first and then against the Arab invasion during the War of Independence). It is also a clear example of what he is capable of mobilizing at this conflict level, without being aware of the flagrant break with tradition that occurred between two different paragraphs from this same text. This inconsistent and insurmountable contradiction holds, on the one hand, that Israel is a state of a Jewish denominational character and uses a biblical basis to justify the occupation, but on the other hand, then conflates Judaism with Zionism and Israel identification (or perhaps Katz does not endorse this identification to characterize Israel as a Jewish state?). This contradiction on the one hand criticizes Israel as a religious state (undoubtedly the author sees the religion with a negative connotation, so its description seeks to bestow negative meaning to the Jewish state), while on the other hand tries to divide Jewish Zionism and Israel (to neutralize a possible critique of antisemitism). So serious is this that Katz (similar to many others today) is not aware of this contradiction. For him it is coherent: both schemes co-exist on the same plane (this is an indicator of the lack of critical reflection as he assumes the contradictory characteristics in themselves that Gramsci gives to “common sense” by opposition here to the good sense and the philosophy of praxis). Katz also addresses a crucial issue when he says that any criticism against Israel is interpreted as an act of antisemitism. This is a common one to use with those who know that their criticisms against Israel, in many cases, are unfounded and lacking an empirical basis, and that they comply with the conditions that we have stated as inherent to the basic thoughts of antisemitism. The fact is that they can’t be categorized as antisemitic because they criticize Israel, not even because they distort historical categories to demon14. Claudio Katz, Raids to Bury the Peace. Published January 19, 2009, on the Internet: http://www.lahaine.org/index.dophp?p=35547. 84 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 ize this state; they have earned that distinction because they do this exclusively with Israel. Katz’s humanism, his solidarity, and his concern for the weak only occurs with the alleged victims of Israel. The result of this is the jump of this conflict to other conflicts where there is infinitely greater killings. Another collateral outcome, as mentioned above, is the exaggeration of Palestinian suffering, his elevation to the rank of “universal victim,” the paradigm of suffering (and all this “effort” is just a mere game of discursive representations that deform the real dimension of the conflict). An example as brutal as it is meaningless in this sense is the afirmation, assumed today as a “truth revealed,” that Jews (Israel) would do to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to the Jews. An example of this is the intellectuals’ urgent demand to “Stop the genocide of the State of Israel,” which we refer to above. When we contrast this empty rhetoric with historical facts comparing them both (the Shoah and the situation of the Palestinians under Israeli “occupation”), we found that during the six years of Nazi occupation the Jewish population of Europe, according to the estimates of Karady,15 declined from 9,480,000 people in 1939 to 3,780,000 afterward. This implies that during this period 5,700,000 Jews perished—60.1% of pre-war Jews. If we make an apportionment of the number of murders, we see that the Jewish victims totaled 950,000 per year; 79,166 per month; 2,602.7 per day; 108.5 per hour; 1.8 per minute. This represents a –10.5% negative demographic rate, a relative loss of 10.1% of the Jewish population of Europe during each year of war. In contrast, look at the status of the Palestinian population of the “occupied territories” by Israel, which, according to claims of some of these banalizing intellectuals, would represent a genocide (at least) equivalent (if not worse) to that suffered by European Jews. We find that the Palestinian population in the “occupied territories” (Gaza Strip and West Bank—a.k.a. Judea and Samaria), according to Palestinian sources, was 1,045,000 people around 2967,16 while in the year 2007, according to Palestinian sources, the population of the “occupied territories” was estimated at 4,000,000.17 These figures show a population growth 15. Victor Karady, The Jews in European Modernism. Madrid: Editors Spain 21st century. 2000, 294-295. 16. Source: http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/ story559.html. 17. Source: http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/ story559.html. #table 1; some estimates raise this figure up to 5,000,000 (data for year 2001 of the Palestinian academic society for the study of international affairs, which resulted in one greater number, cited in the article demographics of Palestine in the Wikipedia Encyclopedia: http://www.es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demografia-de- 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 85 of 2,955,000 over a period of 40 years between 1967 and 2007—a growth of 73,875 new settlers every year; 6,156.25 new settlers per month; 205.21 new settlers per day; 8.5 new people per hour. The population of the “occupied territories” multiplied by 400% in 40 years; this involves a monthly growth rate of 10% per year during these 40 years. It’s really amazing to find such immeasurable blindness; an example of someone (an intellectual yet) comes to mind who doesn’t see a problem with both situations (the killing of 10% per year from a population against a growth rate of 10% per annum of other populations). For another example, we can still say that if Europe’s Jewish population had grown at the same rate as the Palestinian demographic (10% for the past 64 years), today this population would be 70,280,000 people, while the current world Jewish population is just over 13,000,000 people. If the Palestinians had suffered an extermination equivalent to that suffered by European Jews (a population decrease of 10% a year), they would have completely disappeared by 1977. Adolf Eichmann states that 100 deaths are a tragedy, while 100,000 dead only are statistical. In view of the data compared above, the true progressive intellectual sector asserts that an average annual population growth of 73,000 new people in the Palestinian territories is a genocide. Truly absurd. There is no doubt that both situations are unique in a mental exercise of the virtualization of historical facts (worthless, as counterfactual exercises are nonsense). Despite this, too many intellectuals fall into the trap of uncritically repeating the propaganda slogan raised by Jews, who impose on the Palestinians what the Nazis previously did to them; moreover, it is even true that Israelis are implementing a genocide of Palestinians as they face their detractors. We need to understand genocide, as defined in 1948 at the convention for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide in a resolution, adopted under the number 260 (III), that was approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 9, 1948, and came into force on January 12, 1951. Article II says: In the present Convention, genocide any of the acts referred to below means perpetrated with the intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such: • Massacre of members Palestina), and even 5,500,000 (according to the article: Palestinians Se Han Multiplicado Por 7 times from the Nakba [catastrophe] of 1948.) Internet: http:// www.palestinalibre.org/articulo(php?a=8171). We decided to take the most conservative estimate, which is enough to show the absurdity of the comparison between two historical facts. 86 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 of the group; • Serious injury to the physical or mental integrity of members of the group; • Intentional submission of the group conditions of life and have calculated to bring about its physical destruction, total or partial; • Measures intended to prevent births within the group; • Transfer of children of the group to another group Those who do address these types of statements do not know what they are talking about; they do not speak from ignorance but from the irrationality of prejudice, not knowing the meaning of the concepts that arbitrarily distort meaning when applied capriciously; most of them not users with the explicit intention of demonizing Israel, but because they have a prejudiced view in their mental representations that deforms only the state of Israel. Despite this particular manifestation of the Jew phobia in some intellectuals, the majority of the intellectuals who think in this way can be considered antisemitic. And we speak not only of intellectuals who are not specialists in the field, as the example of the comparison between Ramallah and Auschwitz that caught the attention of the Nobel Prize winner José Saramago, but also of academic specialists in contemporary history who should know better but do this same kind of disproportionate and unfair comparison. It is distressing that in the beginning of the 21st century, we observe a similar situation to the one the Jews fought against the Nazis in the Warsaw ghetto, but on this occasion, the victims are Palestinians isolated in camps surrounded by Israelis, where there are many descendants of the Holocaust.18 . . . We are with the people of Palestine, at a time when Zionism exerts the most brutal campaign of military aggression that mankind can imagine, comparable only with the atrocities of Nazism and its racial policy of extermination against non-Aryans, during the Government of Adolf Hitler.19 . . . What terrible irony of history that the survivors and descendents of the victims of the Holocaust who carried out the Nazi-fascist dictatorship in 18. Beinusz Szmukler and Vanessa Ramos, Statement of the American Association of Jurists before the Israel mass attacks against the Palestinian people published on 3/18/2002 on the WebIslam.com Web site: http://www.webislam.com/ ?idt=2491. 19. In a statement called the Declaration of Principles and Solidarity with Venezuelan Palestine of Artists and Intellectuals, signed by more than 100 Venezuelan intellectuals. Published on the Internet 1/13/2009 at the LaClase site. Info at http:// laclase.Info/national/statement-of-principles-and-solidarity-with-Palestinian-of-theartists-e-intellectuals. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 87 Europe and the former Soviet Union played the sinister methods of their tormentors, for decades in Palestine, and now again in Lebanon.20 . . . Once again, as always, those who condemn the atrocities of Israel are accused by the Zionists as being antisemitic. Since the glorious bourgeois liberal revolution of 1789, the right to freedom of expression is sacred, but the Zionist movement would establish a rigid censorship to avoid convicting the Jews-Nazi Israel government. Poor devils. This evil prevents them from seeing who the new Nazis are, and to the horror of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Sobibor, there is need to add the names of Sabra, Shatila, and Qana, among others. Citizens, who defend liberal values, human rights, and respect for international legality, on top of any ideology, religion, nationality or ethnic group, have an obligation to condemn the German-Nazi horror on the Jews and the Israel-Nazi [horror] on the Palestinians.21 The quotes from these speeches is not knowledge or reason; on the contrary, this kind of arbitrary comparison is a symptom of a deep-rooted prejudice that “generated” a monster called Israel. It is a historical atrocity (which, I confess, I never thought to see) that a historian accused Israel of being a Nazi state (absurd contradiction, because the definition of Nazism was its radical antisemitism). There are intellectuals who build an anti-Israeli common sense with “subtlety,” and try to visualize the story creating “alternative realities” from the speeches that should be decoded between the lines; an example is the quote from Osvaldo Bayer: “From the first Israel war against Lebanese and Syrians, in May 1948, there is but the search for solutions through weapons.”22 Bayer’s statement is against the facts. He speaks of a first Israel war against the Syrians and Lebanese, but it seems to deliberately ignore that war broke out on the same day of the British withdrawal, May 15, 1948, when the armies of five countries (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, and Jordan)—backed by Libyan volunteers, Saudis, and Yemenis—began the invasion of the newly proclaimed state of Israel. On the other hand, it seems a joke in bad taste when he says that there was no search for solutions that 20. Gilberto López y Rivas, Israel: State Terrorist, La Jornada of UNAM, July 28, 2006, http://www.jornada.UNAM.MX/2006/07/28/026a1pol.PHP. 21. José Girón Garrote (professor of contemporary history, University of Oviedo): The Nazi Government of Israel, August 17, 2006, WebIslam http:// www.webislam.com/?idt=5521. 22. Osvaldo Bayer, If You Want Peace . . . Fight for It. Posted July 29, 2006, in Diario, 12; see http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/contratapa/index-2006-0729.html. 88 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 were not armed, since the call for coexistence in the Declaration of the independence of Israel through the 1967 Khartun Conference, when the Arab League, as a response to the Israel peace proposal, launched the slogan of the triple no (no to the recognition, no to the negotiation, no to peace), linking with the treaties of peace with Egypt, Jordan, and their own Palestinian national authority. Only someone very alienated in his prejudices can deny Israel’s negotiations. Peace will not be achieved through actions that lead to the destruction and slaughter of a people struggling to regain the land that was stripped by force and caught in a lock between the sea and an inhumane wall that isolates it from the world, deprives it of essential subsistence goods, prevents the free exercise of their sovereignty.23 Another sample of interventions from ignorance is the fragment of the statement cited above, in which the members of the South project say that: . . . they will not reach peace with actions that led to the destruction and slaughter of a people struggling to regain the land taken from them. What is referred to is the conflict in 2009 after more than 1,000 missile attacks on Israeli territory from a territory that Israel yielded in August 2005 (unless you consider that Israel must be removed from Israel, the statement doesn’t make sense). On the other hand, a claim that being subject to a lock between the sea and an inhumane wall isolates it from the world and deprives it of essential subsistence goods is more enigmatic, especially if we bear in mind that the war was in the Gaza Strip, which borders the Mediterranean Sea, Israel, and Egypt (a country that also maintains a blockade, which nobody is talking about). It not only wasn’t deprived of any goods, but on the contrary, despite the war, it received energy, water, medicines, food, etc.; otherwise, not clear who had died from starvation in a territory in which the only product is terrorists. Finally, we must say that preventing the free exercise of its sovereignty ts a claim that you have to make of Hamas, who took power in January 2006 after a bloody coup and imposed an Islamic dictatorship on the population by preventing democratic exercises. All such statements are flawed with prejudices and commonplaces that are clear indicators of the degree of superficiality in opinion on these issues. Some try to use subtle techniques, e.g., disqualification, in an attempt to portray Gaza as genocidal. In this respect, we can see the example of Jeanette Becerra-Acosta, who in her article “300 million dead, victims of power,” makes a point in referring to the classification of the types of genocide made by Professor Rudolf Rummel: 23. Claudio Lozano, Fernando Solanas, and Mario Mazzitelli, Fragment of a statement issued by the three members of the South project during the 2009 war against Hamas in Gaza. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 89 . . . The mega-genocide: the former Soviet Union, China and Nazi Germany, responsible for the extermination of more than 150 million people; under the genocidal seven Governments with a balance of 22 dead in set millions; the suspects Korea North, Mexico and Tsarist Russia with 4 million 145 thousand victims, and those accused of murdering less than a million people, as is the case of Israel, which since 1948 realized thousands of Palestinians in Shabra and Shatila, killing is 16 years.”24 In this paragraph, on the one hand, the author defines, when it concerns the 40,00025 or 59,00026 Arabs killed by Israel, these 54,900 victims (averaging two figures) and alchemy transforms them, in his own words, into “centiasesinos,” accused of murdering less than a million people, as it is the case of Israel, of course missing the truth that 54,900, less than one million people, represent exactly 5.49% of the million; clearly that is not the same, politically, as claiming that 54,900 is “less than a million.” In addition, he asserts the open, shameless, and infamous libel that “ . . . Israel, which since 1948 realized thousands of Palestinians in Shabra and Shatila, killing is 16 years”—an apparent act of propaganda, lying about the massacres in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982 in Lebanon, which were not carried out by Israel but by the Maronite Christian Falangist militia. These things said in passing, lightly and with impunity, will be incorporated into the imagination as if they were real and true; the collection and iteration ad infinitum of this propaganda technique eventually manages to affect the image of Israel presented to the public. Some authors need to build a Palestinian movement that justifies their positions, full of hollow rhetoric that has no basis in reality; an example of this is the following quote from Néstor Kohan, who asks: Why do the Palestinians hate us so [to the Jews, NB]? It is not true. It is a grave mistake to confuse Judaism with Zionism. Confusion is obviously false, if it wields in defense of the State of Israel as if makes it against Israel. The Palestinian resistance—at least on its slopes and more lucid organizations, which comes from a secular and socialist anti-imperialist 24. Jeanette Becerra-Acosta, 300 million dead, victims of power, originally published in El Excelsior Mexico, January 31, 1999, and reproduced on the Internet site analytics weekly. Venezuela analytical publications, at http://www.analitica .com/VAS/1999.02.1/Internacional/06.htm. 25. Gunnar Heinsohn and Daniel Pipes, The Verdadera Dimension of the ArabIsraeli War. October 23, 2007. 26. Piero Scaruffi, Wars and Genocides of the 20th Century. http:// www.scaruffi.com/politics/massacre.html. 90 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 branch—fights against the policy of State Israel, not against all the Jews in general.27 Then look at statements by some of the leaders that Kohan defines as: “. . . Palestinian resistance—at least on its slopes and more lucid organizations, which comes from a secular and socialist anti-imperialist branch.” The best way to dismantle these speeches of fantasy is to confront them with the direct words of the protagonists, and any development of fiction is disrupted. The following statements are by Anwar Raja, a representative of the Popular Front for the liberation of Palestine in Lebanon.28 Raja claims that: Let’s be realistic—Jews have been able to falsify the story, using a shameless mentality that sees the story according to the interests of one. Jews have been able to put pressure on the world, to bring history back to write as they wish. They extorted to the Pope during his recent visit to Palestine, mentioning the figure of six million of Palestinians . . . Jews in the Holocaust. I do not know who was standing at the gates of the crematorium and counted. I don’t know who proposed this figure. All that the facts point to is inflated, forged, and exaggerated.29 Another of the abundant examples of academics recklessly expressing an opinion on this subject from the place of the no-saber is found in Emilio Cafassi, who, speaking of the conflict in the Middle East, is of the view that: In the current ghetto of the Gaza Strip, the most important of all time by 27. Néstor Kohan: Antisemitism? To the memory of Simón Radowitzky and Raymundo Gleyzer. May 23, 2009, http://www.otromadrid.org/articulo/7814/ antisemitismo-memoria-simonradowitzky/. 28. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is a political organization and military Marxist-Leninist, secular, nationalist Palestinian movement founded in 1967 by George Habash, also the founder of the Arab nationalist movement. PFLP had usually been the second organization of size of the Organization for the liberation of Palestine (the largest being Fatah). Today PFLP is a political party in the Palestinian national authority. Usually, PFLP has hard-line policies with respect to the national aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs, in contrast to the more moderate Fatah. He opposed the Oslo accords, and for a long time opposed the proposal for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict through the creation of two states, but in 1999, he made an agreement with the PLO leaders giving their agreement to negotiate with Israel. 29. Anwar Raja, Fragments of an interview broadcast by Al-Alam TV on May 15, 2009. May 28, 28, 2009, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3319.htm (10/17/2009). 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 91 the magnitude of the concentration population, after his monumental wall guarded by compulsory militia of the State of Israel, the defenseless Palestinian population is again massacred in the name of peace and the future coexistence. “Some of the successors of the ancient inhabitants of the ignominious ghettos of Nazism have believed, as their former torturers, the solution for peace would be first in the running of the bulls and later extermination and terror.”30 Cafassi shows an absolute ignorance of reality when he starts affirming a prejudice established as truth when he says that: “in the current ghetto of Gaza Strip, the most important of all time by the magnitude of the concentration population . . .”31 If we proceed to distort the facts, we make a dubious assumption that the Gaza Strip is a ghetto in which approximately 1,551,859 people live (July 2009 estimate).32 The total surface of the Gaza Strip is 360 square kilometers, which gives an approximate figure of a population density of 4,310 people per square kilometer. In the Warsaw ghetto33 more than 400,000 Jews lived in an area of 3.37 Km2, which makes it a population density of 118.694 inhabitants per Km2, a population density 27,54 times greater than that of the Gaza Strip; in the Lodz ghetto,34 a population of 164,000 Jews was overcrowded in an area 10.36 Km2, of which only 2.4 Km2 was developed and habitable35—a population density of 15,830 persons per Km2, or 68,333 persons per Km2 if you look at only the habitable area. This is 3.67 (15.86) times the density of the Gaza Strip. We quote these examples as a sign of a system of institutions of confinement of Nazi Germany covering more than 400 ghettos. These places of confinement were designed with the aim of annihilating the majority of its population through hunger, cold, and disease; hence, the trivialization that makes Cafassi relate, from the left, with the denial of the Shoah. It has nothing to do with the historical facts. Then, to continue with Cafassi: “In the current ghetto of Gaza . . . Strip after his monumental wall guarded by compulsory militia of the State of Israel, the defenseless Palestinian population is again 30. Emilio Cafassi, Extermination After the Wall. The Republic, January 11, 2009, http://www.larepublica.com.uy/contratapa/348506-el-exterminio-tras-elmuro. 31. Emilio Cafassi, Extermination After the Wall. 32. Data source: http://www.indexmundi.com/gaza_strip/population.html. 33. Data source: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId= 10005069. 34. Data source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodz_ghetto http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Lodz_ghetto 35. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodz_ghetto. 92 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 massacred in the name of peace and the future coexistence.”36 It is really surprising that someone is issuing opinions so superficial about this conflict or any other social event. Talk about the wall of Gaza and ignoring that there are no walls in Gaza—there is a woven wire fence at other borders and the wall referred to is located in the West Bank. Only an ignoramus can issue such nonsense. But against Israel it is easy to say; it is free and gives “prestige.” On the other hand, calling the Defense Army of Israel (EDI) “compulsory militia” is a crude attempt to lower the category to delegitimize it, because in a consolidated statement, the use of the “militia” concept refers to a situation opposite an army of regular (as is the case of EDI) paramilitary types (armed civilians). As a contradiction, an example of the double standard of “Palestinian militias” is one of the euphemisms that critics of Israel use to “legitimize” murderous terrorists of civilians, because the absence of a state justifies the existence of armed “civilians” who “fight against ‘occupation’ and its ‘national liberation.’ ” Finally, Cafassi concludes that: “Some of the successors of the old inhabitants of the ignominious ghettos of Nazism have believed, as their former torturers, the solution for peace would be first in the running of the bulls and later extermination and terror,”37 which is the logical extension of his willful exaggeration about the alleged ghetto of the Gaza Strip, that this territory is “the largest Ghetto of history.” Then it is logical to blame the Jews (successors to the ancient inhabitants of the ignominious ghettos of Nazism) to be (or think) as the Nazis (have believed, as their former torturers), that the solution for peace would be first in the “running of the bulls” (and later in extermination and terror). This is simply illiteracy or malicious intention (whatever the situation is the militant year of the bias). This criticism of Israel quickly exaggerates and goes beyond the limits of the rational. In an interesting article, which I quote an excerpt from below, a professor at the Autonomous National University of Mexico described as “ideological discourse” the process that attends a part of the intelligentsia in relation to the actions of Israel: . . . I am concerned that, in the spirit of defending the Palestinian people, our intellectuals of the left end up supporting the Islamic fundamentalists. He does not, then, accept the bombardment or invasion of the Gaza Strip, nor much less justify the deaths of civilians. This is, to my taste, not forgetting the international and regional context in which these actions involved and not to fall into the ingenuity in the analysis . . . It is natural that the abuse in the use of force is sentenced. It is also natural that if one sees shelled unarmed populations and innocent victims, the first thing 36. Emilio Cafassi, Extermination After the Wall. 37. Emilio Cafassi, Extermination After the Wall. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 93 that comes to mind is an immediate condemnation and unquestionable . . . The sentence is also easily overblown. He immediately speaks of “genocide” and even intellectuals in beginning serious reveal assumptions plans to empty the West Bank and Gaza of Palestinians. The issue reaches antisemitic dyes with equal ease. Our leftist intellectuals can only see one side to the shameful state of Israel and the other to the unarmed victimized Palestinian people . . . The problem is that Hamas, like Iran, has vowed to take to the sea of Israel Jews and disappear from the map. That is, they did preach genocide and it is not difficult to know what you would do if they had the strength to carry out their plans . . . Many intellectuals of the left dislike the American imperialism that doesn’t care that it is aligned with whoever is opposed, even if these are octogenarian dictators with 50 years in power, populists bordering on insanity or Islamic fundamentalists. In any case, some positions end up defending Hamas, in order to oppose the United States and Israel. This mixes the just demands of the Palestinian people with the claims of Muslim extremists. They forget that the ideal of these groups is not the formal states that are democratic, tolerant, and peaceful; these intellectuals, secularized generally, would not survive even a month in a regime of this. Israel may have many flaws, but at least is a democracy, that defends the same values as we do. In his Parliament there are Arab representatives that speak for the million and a half of Israeli Arabs, and the press has freedom of expression. Its intellectuals may or may not be according to what their Government is doing and are free to say so. This is impossible in most of the Arab countries and Iran. Indeed, Israel is a piece of the West, with all its values, in the Middle East. That does not mean, of course, that we have to be in agreement and justified car what does the Israeli government, which holds a majority in favor of their acts of war. But at least this circumstance we should prevent a naive support of groups of Islamic fundamentalists.38 Israel, in the constructs of some intellectuals, would seem to be equivalent to the black hole in physics as a place with laws that may not be governed by the same universal laws that apply to the rest of the universe of the nations. There, everything acquires its own dimension and deserves a unique status. When we see this exclusive irrational obsession in relation to the conduct of the State of Israel, along with demands for its pristine conduct and monitored closely for its actions and unequal treatment in relation to what it gives to the other 200 nations of the world, we are led to the idea that the cause of antisemitism not must be sought in the Jew but in the antisemite. Israel is thus transformed into one of the most criminal states of history by an exercise in rhetoric that assigns adjectives to concepts that pro38. Roberto Blancarte, Politically incorrect; Hamas and Israel. iglhrc January 13, 2009, http://www.milenio.com/node/146603. 94 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 gressive discourse considers the embodiment of radical evil (Nazi, genocidal, colonialist, imperialist, terrorist state, racist, segregationist, etc.). But this cannot magically materialize these social relationships (even though for the “progressive,” Jew phobia has as much reality as did the “Jewish threat” to the Nazi or the “Jew-vampire” consumer ritual of human blood perpetrated by the medieval Jew phobia). “Christ killers” to “murderous rituals”; “murderous rituals” to “genocidaires,” collective fantasies about the Jews have the power to “translate,” and to assume a “credible” appearance. The fact is that the irrational fantasies of Jew phobia are reproduced and recycled. “Conspirators to kill Christ” to “plotters to betray the nation that the blanket”; “plotters to betray the nation that the blanket” to “conspirators to dominate the world”; “usurers” to “stars of the Holocaust.” These discursive axes are maintained throughout history and are recycled and adapted according to the new social conditions. The main characteristic of the new Judeophobia is the confluence of the three main antisemitic groups: radical left, Islamic fundamentalism, and extreme right wing, all present at a discursive level. THE “JEW-ZIONIST CONSPIRACY” MYTH According to U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz: “It is marked as the operator of the companies of the Jewish lobby in the business of the wars and the ‘reconstruction,’ and so union as the main introducer of the techniques of torture in Iraqi prisons of the occupation.”39 “Bush won and so did the Zionist lobby, which keeps him in each of its actions in support of the criminal Israeli premier Sharon”; “Lost Kerry and the Zionist lobby, which also handed out millions of dollars in their electoral basket, knows that he has an ally of iron to hinder any departure of self-determination of the Palestinian people, at the time the invaded, the attacked, the exile, but never defeated . . .”40 Personal current fundamentalism, among which is Zionism or Jewish fundamentalism interested in pushing through its Jew American lobby to the Bush administration, which carried out the war of imperialist aggression 39. Anonymous, Wolfowitz: Jewish Lobby “to the World Bank,” on the Web site of the Communist Party of Peru, http://www.patriaroja.org.pe/html/colaboraciones/wolfowitz_del_lobby_judio_al_banco_mundial.htm 40. Carlos Aznárez, When Bush and nearly 60 million reasons to not sleep peacefully on the web site of Gramma (official organ of the Communist Party of Cuba), http://www.granma.cu/espanol/2004/noviembre/sabado6/razones-e.html on January 22, 2002. 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 95 against Iraq to make this the Palestinian Holocaust background . . .41 The Israeli lobby, through the media that controls in the United States and other “Western” countries, tries to hide what a professor at the University of Jerusalem, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, expressed starkly as “the Jewish fist force comes from the glove of steel which covers, and the money to quilting.”42 The ambiguity in the application by the United States military means that in Somalia or Haiti, Panama or Iraq, for the exit policy negotiated, recalls largely—saving joints—the episode of Vietnam. Not reached many times to be the “strongest” to overcome. And this is especially true in this phase of total hegemony of the Jew American lobby. His extraordinary apparent power is his great weakness, since the foreign policy of this sui generis rule depends on the viability of a microstate: that of Israel. There is no possible analogy with Rome. The absence of strategic clarity is undoubtedly the greatest current enemy of the American nation.43 The Israeli lobby has many think tanks, which provide future advisers in various administrations, Republican and Democrats . . . It was a constant policy—part of the Israeli state and long before its independence as a state in May 1948—to maintain various pressure groups within us, and based on a large and often wealthy, Jewish collectivity.44 DENIAL/TRIVIALIZATION OF THE HOLOCAUST “Holocaust” is a word of biblical connotations that serves very well to the Zionist purposes, although it misrepresents the historical meaning of Nazi barbarism. Despite the apocryphal of much of the diary of Anne Frank, still presenting it as “historical documents.” As the Nazi repression against the Jews, “genocide” (“genocide” means the extermination of a people or an ethnic community, and the Jewish community was not exterminated but from 1945, met an extraordinary boom), and talk of the “greatest genocide in history” is used to delete the attention of major genocide that 41. Edward Nuñez, The Criminal State of Israel: A danger for the peace of the world, http://ecuador.indymedia.org/es/2003/07/3114.shtml 7 22, 2003. 42. Article philosopher Roger Garaudy alleged Zionist collaboration with the Nazi regime. Document of the “national left,” http://www.geocities.com/ izquierda_nacional/mundo004.html. 43. Norberto Ceresole (Argentine neo-Nazi now deceased; was advisor to the Jew-phobic Venezuelan President Húgo Chávez), Jewish Power in the West and East, Radio Islam, http://abbc2.com/islam/spanish/sion/poder/poder1.html. 44. Horacio Ricchiardelli, Report on Condor, May 2003, published on a Web site linked to the coup leader Mohammed Ali Seineld, http://documentos.seineldin. 8m.com/cn06052003.html. 96 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:71 pollutes the memory of the victors of the war: the decimated Indian in America, the killing of African slaves, the savage repressions of Stalin . . . 60 million indigenous people (out of a total of 80 million) were killed in South America since the conquest. And the second world war itself caused 50 million dead, 20 of whom were Soviet and almost 10 million German! Who remembers today the killing of Dresden on February 13, 1945, when Anglo-American phosphorus bombs claimed 200,000 civilian casualties in a few hours?45 Maneuvers that seem almost science fiction, especially to stifle any serious attempt to demonstrate their falsity, have been used to protect the sacred six million lie. Thus, when in 1995 the Japanese economy and business magazine Marcopolo published an innocent comment pointing out that “each time were less reason to believe that the Nazi Germany would have occurred in a Holocaust” of Jews and Gypsies, the all-powerful world of Judaism moved its threads and won. Both the magazine and the respective journalist were punished without invoking any existing legislation, and Marcopolo can cite, for the rest of its existence, any other reference on the Holocaust . . .46 THE “NAZIFICATION” OF ISRAEL Israel is behaving (with the Palestinians, I have to say), as Nazi Germany behaved in its time with the Jews. And I am not referring only to the Israeli government, presided over by the military right-wing Ariel Sharon— but also to the Israel people as a whole.47 “The Israel State is a State criminal, genocidal and terrorist, and their very existence is a problem for world peace.”48 “They can never claim Jews around the world, as well as his sponsor, did not know what was happening.” It’s Holocaust-like ancestors who suffered by the fact of belonging to a people. Palestinian citizens suffer this extermination today. The silence of people who hold to the Israeli state make them accomplices of a system of death with terrible consequences.49 45. Roger Garaudy, Denouncing Zionist Collaboration. 46. Anonymous, The evidence that the Holocaust Jew is a fantasy, http:// www.resistenciaria.org/revisionismo/MENTIRAS.htm. 47. Antonio Caballero, Human Nature, Semana.com Internet, http:// semana.terra.com.co/opencms/opencms/semana/articulo.html?id=74630. 48. Edward Nuñez, The Criminal State of Israel: A danger for the peace of the world, http://ecuador.indymedia.org/es/2003/07/3114.shtml 7 22, 2003. 49. José Carlos Garcı́a Fajardo, Holocaust of the Palestinian people, published on the page of the Complutense University of Madrid, in http://www.ucm.es/info/ solidarios/ccs/articulos/oriente_med/holocausto_del_pueblo_palestino.htm 2011] THE NEW JUDEOPHOBIA 97 “It is sad to see the almost parallel similarity between the treatment of Nazis dispensed to the Jews and that Jews dispense today ‘to the Palestinians and Arabs in general.’”50 “Israel is a militarized and genocidal people that want the expulsion of all Palestinians: a terminator attitude of these neo-Nazis with kaftan, that in spite of this new ‘road map’ is not vigilant in its efforts to seize the territory is continuing.”51 This discursive confluence, expression of the emergence, and consolidation of a common political space (anti-globalization movement) have delivered a new form of Judeophobia, giving form to what we might call neo-Judeophobia. The current situation between antisemitic groups gives reason to assert, paraphrasing Marx and Engels, in view of the events in recent years, that it seems as if “a ghost travels the world”—the Phantom of the Jew phobia. Antisemites of the world, unite! *Patricio Brodsky (b. 1962) is an Argentinian sociologist and former professor and researcher at the Universidad de Buenos Aires. A scholar in genocide, antisemitism, the Shoah, and discrimination, he is a contributor to several periodicals, including the Spanish Israeli daily Aurora, and the author of five books, the latest entitled Deconstruyendo la (Neo) Judeofobia (Deconstructing the New Judeophobia). Brodsky is completing doctoral studies at the Universidad de General Sarmiento, Argentina, with a dissertation, Social Representations of Jews in the Argentinian Print Media (1947-2007). 50. Anonymous, The False Hebrew Democracy, http://diosesdeburja.iespana.es/ la_falsa_democracia_hebrea.htm. 51. Anonymous, Freedom for Palestine, http://diosesdeburja.iespana.es/ libertad_para_palestina.htm. La Neojudeofobia en la Izquierda de América Latina: Algunos Elementos Para la Reflexión1 Patricio Brodsky De un manifiesto de Intelectuales Argentinos de 1967 firmado entre otros por: Sergio Bagú, Gregorio Klimovsky, Ernesto Sábato, León Rozitchner, David Viñas, Noe Jitrik, Bernardo Verbitsky, Inda Ledesma, Gregorio Selser, Abelardo Castillo y César Tiempo. “ . . . es incuestionable el derecho del Estado de Israel a su existencia. La independencia del pueblo judı́o en Israel fue resultado del esfuerzo de sus sectores pioneros y de vanguardia, fue respuesta a la incapacidad del mundo de resolver el problema judı́o; responde a legı́timos anhelos de liberación nacional, y fue respaldada en su oportunidad por todo el mundo progresista . . .” Soy de Argentina, soy judı́o, y para iniciar una reflexión acerca de algunos acontecimientos en este paı́s (y en esta región) no puedo eludir que existe una larga tradición de antisemitismo/judeofobia que se remonta prácticamente a los orı́genes de la inmigración judı́a a la Argentina. El antisemitismo estaba muy arraigado en las clases altas de entonces. Algunos ejemplos: en 1890 apareció en La Nación, en forma de folletı́n, una furiosa novela antisemita llamada La bolsa de Julián Martel; en enero de 1888 (apenas ocho meses antes de morirse), el mismı́simo Domingo Faustino Sarmiento publicó varios artı́culos antijudı́os en El Nacional; el diario La Prensa, en distintas oportunidades, manifestó su oposición a que los judı́os formen comunas agrarias en Entre Rı́os y Santa Fe; y, sobre todo, la “acción” del 15 de mayo de 1910, diez dı́as antes del Centenario, cuando jóvenes de clase alta, salidos de la muy exclusiva “Sociedad Sportiva Argentina” bajo la conducción del barón Demarchi, asaltaron las sedes del Avangard, órgano del Bund, agrupación obrera socialista judı́a, y la denominada Biblioteca Rusa, para quemar luego sus libros en la xenofobia de la oligarquı́a de aquélla época: “El mismo odio racial que la burguesı́a liberal sentı́a por el mestizo, al que trató de sustituir por el inmigrante europeo, se volcó después hacia el propio inmigrante cuando éste se reveló 1. He decidido expresamente evitar trabajar sobre el discurso de Hugo Chávez y de Fidel Castro pues son los más conocidos, me he enfocado, sobre todo, aunque no exclusivamente en los discursos de intelectuales, referentes y polı́ticos de la izquierda radical argentina. 99 100 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 inesperadamente con un dinámico elemento de agitación social.”2 Entre los antecedentes directos de los hechos que podrı́amos enumerar, hay algunos que se destacan por su importancia cualitativa: • Durante la Semana Trágica de Enero de 1919 se produjeron los, hasta hoy en dı́a, únicos pogromos de América, hubo ataques a los barrios judı́os en Buenos Aires dejando varias decenas de muertos y un número grande de heridos; en ningún otro paı́s de nuestro continente se produjeron este tipo de asaltos. • Las cédulas de identidad emitidas a judı́os por la Policı́a Federal Argentina en las décadas de 1910 y 1920 llevaban estampada una Estrella de David. • En 1937, Marcos Savon cónsul argentino en Gdynia, Polonia, envió varias notas al Cónsul Carlos Saavedra Lamas, bajo el tı́tulo “Problema Semita”. En la nota del 14 de julio de 1937, en vı́speras de la invasión nazi, escribió: Los ataques a personas y propiedades judı́as, continúan . . . Por otra parte, y a semejanza de lo que se estila en Alemania, se reunirá en setiembre próximo, un congreso de profesionales, en el que se discutirá la inclusión de una cláusula en los estatutos, por la que se prohı́ba a los judı́os la entrada a las asociaciones de cristianos. Debo agregar que en los trenes el judı́o tiene lugar reservado. Todas estas medidas enconan los ánimos, y fatalmente se llegará a los pogroms de ante guerra. Acosado, el judı́o trata de emigrar . . . soy de opinión que convendrı́a que se opusieran más trabas a la inmigración de esa raza, que parte de Polonia animada del más profundo rencor hacia el cristiano, y dispuesto a cometer los mayores excesos. Además, no pasa semana sin que el gobierno polaco no allane centros de organizaciones comunistas, en las que la mayorı́a son judı́os, cosa que mantiene en alarma a las autoridades. • La existencia de “instrucciones secretas” vedando el ingreso a Argentina a perseguidos por el nazismo (la casi totalidad de ellos judı́os), en efecto, el descubrimiento de la circular secreta N° 11 firmada por el entonces Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores José Marı́a Cantilo el 12 de julio de 1938, es un claro ejemplo de ello, en esta circular se instruı́a a los funcionarios de Cancillerı́a que: “sin perjuicio de las demás disposiciones establecidas para la selección de los viajeros” que venı́an a este paı́s, y “salvo orden especial” de la Cancillerı́a, los cónsules debı́an “negar la visa aún 2. Schiller, Herman: El primer “Pogrom” en la Argentina. Publicado el 3 de enero de 1999 en el diario Página 12. Reproducido en Internet http://www.salta 21.com/+El-primer-pogrom-en-la-Argentina+.html. 2011] • • • • LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 101 a tı́tulo de turista o pasajero de tránsito a toda persona que fundadamente se considere que abandona o ha abandonado su paı́s de origen como indeseable o expulsado, cualquiera sea el motivo de su expulsión.” Luego en la postguerra la polı́tica de “fronteras cerradas” a los sobrevivientes de la Shoá y el ingreso masivo de criminales de guerra nazis y cómplices como por ejemplo Adolf Eichmann, Joseph Mengele, Erich Priebke, Ante Pavelic, Josef Schwammberger, Gerhard Bohne, Walter Kutschmann, Dinko Sakic, Radislaw Ostrowsky, Ferdinand Durcansky, Albert Ganzenmueller y Hans Fischboeck Con posterioridad a la captura de Eichmann se vivió en Argentina una ola de atentados antisemitas (realizados fundamentalmente por la organización terrorista ultraderechista y “nazionalista” el Movimiento Nacionalista Tacuara; los dos casos más graves de antisemitismo de Tacuara fueron: 1) el secuestro de Graciela Sirota, el 21 de junio de 1962. La joven de 19 años fue golpeada, subida a un auto cuando esperaba el colectivo para ir a la facultad y torturada groseramente con quemaduras de cigarrillos por todo el cuerpo. Para terminar, le grabaron con una navaja una esvástica en el pecho. Este caso provocó gran indignación en la sociedad y muchas criticas por la impunidad con la que contaba Tacuara y 2) En 1964, como venganza por la muerte de dos militantes del MNRT y uno de la Juventud Peronista en un confuso incidente sindical en el Plenario de la CGT en Rosario, fue asesinado en la puerta de su casa Raul Alterman, un joven militante judı́o de izquierda. Nunca quedó muy claro por qué fue elegido Alterman como blanco del ataque, aunque se supone que su elección, fue solo por su condición de judı́o y socialista. Luego del asesinato, la organización Tacuara envió una carta a los padres de Alterman, diciendo: Nadie mata porque sı́ nomás; a su hijo lo han matado porque era un perro judı́o comunista. Si no están conformes que se retiren todos los perros y explotadores judı́os a su Judea natal ¿Qué hacen en nuestro paı́s?. Argentina es el único paı́s del mundo en el que se “fabricó” una versión criolla del infame mito del “complot judı́o para la dominación universal”, me refiero al “Plan Andina”, fantası́a vernácula construida sobre los infames “Protocolos de los Sabios de Sión”. Luego durante la Dictadura Militar de 1976, como se relata en el Nunca Más, los desaparecidos judı́os, tuvieron que soportar un “plus” de torturas y humillaciones debido al carácter profundamente antisemita de los torturadores argentinos. 102 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 • Finalmente, en la década de 1990, Argentina sufrió dos de los peores atentados antisemitas de la postguerra; los atentados contra la Embajada de Israel (1992) y contra la sede de la AMIA (1994), en ambos casos no se hubieran podido realizar sin apoyo local, y no permanecerı́an impunes sin el encubrimiento brindado desde ciertos estamentos del estado. El antisemitismo se caracteriza por una mutación perenne adecuando las creencias y los prejuicios a situaciones cambiantes, en vez de adaptar el análisis, terminan por culpar a los judı́os de sus fracasos, por ejemplo: La escatologı́a mesiánica del cristianismo del siglo I de la era común postulaba que en pocos años se producirı́a el retorno del mesı́as y comenzarı́a la era mesiánica de redención de la humanidad. Al transcurrir los siglos y ver fracasada esta profecı́a, los dirigentes de la iglesia católica comenzaron a culpar a la “tozudez intransigente” de los judı́os en no reconocer a Jesús como el mesı́as como principal causa de postergación del retorno de Jesús. En forma análoga algunos de los padres fundadores del socialismo pronosticaron que la “cuestión judı́a” serı́a resuelta el dı́a que los judı́os se asimilaran y el judaı́smo desapareciera; esperaba que el judaı́smo desapareciera fundiéndose en el humanismo socialista internacionalista. Cuando, por el contrario, en vez de desaparecer, la identidad judı́a se revitaliza con el desarrollo del movimiento de identidad nacional judı́a: el sionismo, al nacer, desarrollarse y fortalecerse el movimiento de liberación nacional del pueblo judı́o, la actitud de una parte de las izquierdas es oponérsele y, finalmente (en vez de sostenerlo como al resto de los movimientos de liberación nacional) terminan acusándolo injustamente de ser racista y genocida. En los siglos XIX y XX hubo algunos pensadores que veı́an a los judı́os como los “responsables” del capitalismo, mientras que entendı́an a este sistema social como el triunfo de un supuesto “espı́ritu mercantilista” del judı́o que habrı́a impregnado al cristianismo (Marx), una virtual “judeización” del cristianismo. Hoy en dı́a, otros (herederos y tributarios de los primeros) modificaron su mirada y entienden a los judı́os (encarnados en Israel) como el poder impulsor de la globalización a través del lobby judeo-norteamericano (Petras), y otros entienden que la “normalización” de los judı́os a través del estado de Israel y la adopción (por parte del gobierno de dicho estado) de polı́ticas neoliberales en lo económico serı́an una virtual “cristianización” de los judı́os (Rozitchner). Como se ve, la esencia del proceso es la misma pero el sentido de la ecuación es inverso; lo perverso es que en ambas ecuaciones se coloca a los judı́os en el lugar del mal y en actitud conspirativa. Vemos que este mecanismo se repite una y otra vez ya que ayer los judı́os eran condenados por existir de igual manera que hoy Israel es con- 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 103 denado por existir (independientemente de sus acciones). Lo que caracteriza a las crı́ticas judeófobas es su desmesura, su desproporción y su injusticia. Cualquier cosa es válida y creı́ble tratándose de Israel (los judı́os); ayer se decı́a que los judı́os asesinaban niños cristianos para amasar pan ácimo para pascuas, hoy plantean que Israel es un estado asesino de mujeres y niños. Ayer decı́an que el judı́o tenı́a cuernos y cola, hoy plantean que Israel es un estado genocida y colonialista. Por lo tanto vemos que Argentina es un paı́s destacado cuando trazamos la “hoja de ruta” del antisemitismo, es un paı́s con una importancia particular al respecto. Aclarado este punto pasaré a desarrollar el tema de la judeofobia actual. Cuatro décadas después de la declaración que cito a modo de epı́grafe el imaginario de algunos de los firmantes de estos manifiestos ha variado sustancialmente, hoy algunos de ellos, como por ejemplo León Rozitchner ha tenido un cambio radical en su mirada sobre Israel. ¿Qué es lo que ha ocurrido para que el clima general de la intelectualidad progresista hacia Israel se haya vuelto tan manifiestamente hostil? Este cambio de postura llega a tal punto que por todos lados vemos aflorar declaraciones y manifiestos de renombrados intelectuales condenando a Israel y llamamientos convocando al boicot deportivo, social, polı́tico, académico, artı́stico y cultural contra el estado judı́o invocando, en muchos casos, la campaña de boicot que se realizara durante los ’70 y los ’80 contra el régimen racista de apartheid en Sudáfrica (dando ası́ por sentado, implı́citamente, que Israel serı́a el heredero de sus polı́ticas segregacionistas). En casos más extremos e irracionales nos hallamos con la insólita aparición de odios atávicos, mitos de origen religioso (como la acusación de deicidio) reciclados como “herramienta polı́tica” de descalificación de Israel. Ejemplo de esto que decimos es la utilización por parte de un prestigioso sociólogo marxista, James Petrás, del mito del deicidio3 (los judı́os asesinos de Cristo), en un cuento fechado el 21 de diciembre de 2001 llamado “Navidad en los Territorios Ocupados” afirma: La radio israelı́ anunció que tres supuestos terroristas árabes que habı́an huido de Afganistán habı́an sido asesinados en un escondite de Belén tras haber cruzado la frontera. El gobierno israelı́ pidió disculpas en caso de que hubiera habido alguna vı́ctima civil. Los medios de comunicación en EE.UU. repitieron la misma historia, al tiempo que Washing3. Dado que en la Encı́clica “Nostra Aetate” el Concilio Vaticano II, deslindó a la totalidad del pueblo judı́o de responsabilidad por la muerte de Cristo, posturas como la del “marxista” Petrás son tan reaccionarias como la de los católicos preconciliares. 104 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 ton felicitaba al gobierno israelı́ por su papel en la lucha contra el terrorismo internacional. Jesús habı́a vivido solamente un dı́a.4 Inclusive en nuestro medio, renombrados y respetados intelectuales judı́os de la izquierda progresista como Hermann Schiller han llegado a tener que hacer declaraciones explicando que no participan de las manifestaciones de repudio a las acciones de Israel en la Franja de Gaza por el carácter marcadamente antisemita que asumieron algunos de los actores involucrados. Repudio una y otra vez la masacre de Gaza. Pero no voy a marchar con quienes esgrimen los mismos argumentos (“ judaı́smo internacional”, “sinarquı́a”, “ratas”, “apátridas”) que utilizaba Felipe Romero en la revista “El Caudillo” (órgano de la Triple A) y que muy poco tiempo después usaron los militares de la dictadura cuando torturaban a los muchos judı́os que pertenecı́an a ERP, Montoneros y demás organizaciones combatientes.5 La pregunta clave que cabrı́a hacerse aquı́ es ¿cuál es el motivo por el cual un sociólogo como Petras (por lo tanto racionalista) marxista (por lo tanto ateo) apela a un mito (por lo tanto irracional) como el del deicidio (por lo tanto de carácter religioso)—que ha servido para justificar cientos de matanzas de judı́os a lo largo de la historia—como una “herramienta polı́tica” en su “cruzada’ = “ contra Israel? La respuesta más honesta y “brutal” que podemos dar es que si alguien como este autor utiliza argumentos antisemitas no seremos tan ingenuos de creer que no sabe de lo que habla. Por el contrario, lo hace pues, concientemente asume un odio radical, se ha tornado en lo que Gino Germani llamó un antisemita “ideológico”. Sin llegar a este extremo este es el derrotero que vemos recorrer, al menos desde el estallido de la Segunda Intifada, parte de la intelectualidad “progresista”. Durante la guerra entre Israel y Hezbolla del año 2006 en Argentina se produjeron una serie de incidentes que marcaron el fortalecimiento de esta tendencia, como algunas movilizaciones de la izquierda radical con presencia de insignias de Hezbolla, la amenaza de violencia contra jóvenes judı́os que querı́an manifestarse frente a la Embajada de Irán por parte del Movimiento “Patriótico Revolucionario” Quebracho6; y finalmente, la aparición de una solicitada que se llamó: 4. Petras, James: Navidad en los Territorios Ocupados en la página de Internet: CSCA Web, http://www.nodo50.org/CSCA/palestina/petras-21-12-01 .html 5. Schiller, Herman: La Otra Israel. Artı́culo publicado en Internet el 10/2/ 2009 disponible en el sitio EUTSI—Página de Izquierda Antiautoritaria, http:// eutsi.org/kea/pueblos/palestina/la-otra-israel.html. 6. A pesar de la contradicción ?agrante entre autode?nirse como “patriota 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 105 “Paremos el genocidio del Estado de Israel” que fue redactada por León Rozitchner, Alejandro Horowicz y Elsa Drucaroff y que fue firmada por decenas de intelectuales, entre los que se encuentran José Pablo Feinmann, Juan Gelman, Beatriz Sarlo, Horacio Verbitsky, Eduardo Grüner, Atilio Borón, Abelardo Castillo y Eliseo Subiela que entre otras cosas dice: La masacre actual excede todo lo conocido. No son los datos con su abrumadora evidencia los que horripilan, sino la repetición en medio del silencio cómplice del mundo llamado civilizado. Es preciso detenerla para que judı́o y masacrador no se vuelven sinónimos . . . Es preciso que las fuerzas democráticas, populares y progresistas del mundo entero hagan saber que más tarde o más temprano los crı́menes contra la humanidad no quedarán impunes, que la victoria militar sobre el pueblo palestino tiene un nombre inequı́voco: genocidio, y que las masacres solo abren el curso de nuevas masacres . . .7 Como veremos abajo existe en esta frase y en posturas similares, un evidente sobredimensionamiento del sufrimiento palestino el cual no es más que el indicador de un alto grado de irracionalidad en el tratamiento de esta cuestión. Esta tendencia se ha visto aún más fortalecida y profundizada durante la guerra entre Israel y Hamas a fines de 2008 y principios de 2009. Los indicadores que apreciamos de esto fueron varias solicitadas de organizaciones sociales y gremiales, artı́culos y declaraciones de intelectuales, y, por vez primera movilizaciones de repudio a Israel encolumnadas hacia instituciones de la colectividad judı́a mostrando como, a pesar de negar en sus discursos la relación entre judaı́smo y sionismo, en la práctica, los ligan inescindiblemente. Qué es lo que ocurre para que intelectuales que estudian los fenómenos sociales, utilicen en forma arbitraria conceptos que conocen perfectamente, desvirtuando, manipulando y banalizando categorı́as históricas, sociológicas, polı́ticas y económicas. Y a qué se debe que este uso arbitrario ÚNICAMENTE acontece cuando analizan el conflicto de Medio Oriente, SÓLAMENTE cuando se refieren a Israel. Lo que podrı́a estar aconteciendo son dos cosas: a) o bien tienen una visión prejuiciosa que deforma la imagen de Israel ante sus ojos, b) o bien apelan a la banalización en forma revolucionario” y, objetivamente, actuar como “fuerza de choque” de una teocracia reaccionaria. 7. Llamamiento de intelectuales judı́os argentinos: Paremos el genocidio del Estado de Israel. Iniciativa de León Rozitchner, Elsa Drucaroff y Alejandro Horowicz, Buenos Aires, 20/07/06. Publicado en Internet el 9/8/2006 en la página http://www.iade.org.ar/modules/noticias/article.php?storyid=829. 106 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 consciente con el objetivo de deslegitimar a ese estado. En ambos casos objetivamente se produce una situación discriminatoria contra Israel, el cual termina recibiendo un trato injusto (en relación a los hechos producidos por otros estados y grupos sociales) y desproporcionado (en virtud de los propios hechos por los que este estado es responsable.) Estas dos formas de tratamiento inmerecido pueden ser ligados a las dos formas de antisemitismo de las que habló el sociólogo Gino Germani ya que el primero—la visión prejuiciosa—se relaciona con las formas de judeofobia más insconcientes esto implica una remisión a lo definido por este autor como “antisemitismo tradicional” mientras que la segunda—la banalización consciente—al tratarse de una descalificación voluntaria y consciente (y no la mera y mecánica reproducción de estereotipos) nos remite a lo que Germani definió como “antisemitismo ideológico”. Si una parte de la intelectualidad—supuestamente el grupo social más crı́tico—utiliza acrı́ticamente conceptos cuyo signifi cado conoce perfectamente y, sin medir las consecuencias, decide darles un uso banal, desvirtuando su verdadero sentido con la intención de forzar la interpretación de determinado hecho histórico, entonces algo profundo está sucediendo. Si la crı́tica es una de las caracterı́sticas centrales del intelectual, entonces llama poderosamente la atención el hecho que académicos, cientı́fi cos sociales, empleen como técnicas de análisis el reduccionismo maniqueı́sta, el dualismo polar mesiánico y el simplismo acrı́tico creando como resultado una demonización de Israel perfilando una imagen de este estado que funcione a modo de bálsamo “tranquilizador” de sus inconcientes (no odio a Israel porque soy antisemita, sino porque Israel es “malo” o hace cosas “malvadas”). Crean la representación mental de Israel que necesitan para justificarse. Una condena “ex-ante” que funciona como autojustificación. Sinceramente es sorprendente ver a reputados especialistas de las ciencias sociales, académicos sumamente serios y rigurosos en sus análisis y estudios pero que cuando tienen que aplicar sus saberes para explicar el conflicto de Medio Oriente, mal emplean categorı́as vaciándolas de contenido, empleándolas acrı́ticamente como una “jerga”—en el sentido propuesto por Theodor Adorno8 en su crı́tica del filósofo nazi Martin Heidegger—utilizando este lenguaje conceptual en un sentido forzado con 8. . . . el carácter de la jerga serı́a sobremanera formal: ella se encarga de que lo que desea sea sentido y aceptado por su exposición, en gran parte sin tener en cuenta el contenido de las palabras. El elemento preconceptual y mimético del lenguaje lo toma ella bajo su dirección, a favor de los efectos por ella deseados . . . Adorno, Theodore: La Ideologı́a como lenguaje. Editorial Taurus: Madrid, 1992, Págs. 12, 13 y 14. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 107 el evidente propósito de generar efectos polı́ticos en lugar de utilizar otras categorı́as más adecuadas para describir una situación objetiva. Existe un código implı́cito que marca lo ‘polı́ticamente correcto’ en el pensamiento de la intelectualidad progresista. Este código ha cristalizado una cantidad de clichés (frases hechas) que asumen monopólicamente la representación del espacio que antes ocupaba la reflexión praxı́stica (Gramsci). Este pensamiento estandarizado se expresa en dos ejes discursivos claramente definidos: Inescindibilidad del “Tandem” Sionismo (Israel)—EE.UU. Esto se debe a la estrecha relación comercial y polı́tica entre ambos estados (a pesar que esta relación existe entre EE.UU. y muchos otros estados en el mundo sólo Israel es ligado inescindiblemente a dicho estado). Este eje se presentará de dos maneras: a) la heredera de las peores tradiciones paranoicas del antisemitismo clásico (la visión explı́cita en el mito de la supuesta “conjura judı́a” para la dominación del mundo, hoy expresada en la denuncia del supuesto “lobby judı́o” que dominarı́a los EE.UU. mediante su alianza con sectores evangelistas) y b) la “moderna” y “progresista” que se expresará en el mito que “Israel es la avanzada imperialista en Oriente Medio”. Estas formas de expresión son contrapuestas y excluyentes, ya que mientras en la primera el factor dominante en la ecuación son los judı́os (el sionismo, Israel), en la segunda el factor dominante serı́a EE.UU. mientras que Israel apenas serı́a un mero tı́tere de los designios de dicha potencia. Apremiante Necesidad de Romper la Asociación Judı́o = Vı́ctima Este paso es indispensable para que se produzca la “ruptura” de la empatı́a con los judı́os y poder, entonces, vivir sin culpa el odio ante “lo judı́o”—en especial ante su estado y la ideologı́a que lo sustenta (Israel y el sionismo). Para la ruptura de esta asociación se deben construir dos mitos contrapuestos pero complementarios: a) Minimizar La Verdadera Dimensión De La Shoá Mediante Su Comparación Banal: Al respecto debemos recordar los dichos del Premio Nóbel de Literatura José Saramago cuando afirmó que Ramalá es Auschwitz, o la comparación de la valla antiterrorista con el muro del Ghetto de Varsovia, etc. y b) “Nazificar” a Israel: Esta es una técnica discursiva desarrollada con el norte de generar repulsa sobre dicho estado y por el otro, no sólo quebrar la asociación judı́o-vı́ctima, sino ir mucho más allá y desplazarlo hacia lo opuesto, colocándolo en el lugar del victimario (lo que por oposición genera un movimiento inverso de sus supuestas vı́ctimas—los árabes palestinos—al lugar de las vı́ctimas 108 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 absolutas—del mal radical—provocando un reforzamiento de la empatı́a con las “vı́ctimas” del “estado nazi” contemporáneo). En realidad esta asociación que se hace (entre judı́o, Israel o sionismo por un lado, y nazismo por el otro) es un recurso retórico llamado oxı́moron9. Sobre estos dos ejes, luego, se montarán una serie de mitos discursivos que actuarán retroalimentando esta “realidad” construida desde la mera retórica y que constituirán la “jerga” del intelectual “polı́ticamente correcto”. Esta se expresará en muchas consignas vacı́as, algunas de ellas las colocaremos a continuación10: ° ° ° ° ° ° Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel es es es es es es Colonialista; la “avanzada imperialista” en Oriente Medio; racista (sionismo = racismo); un estado nazi; un estado terrorista; una potencia belicista y expansionista. Todas estas “verdades reveladas” operan a modo de “dogma religioso” del progresista “bienpensante”. Estas categorı́as fueron construidas para explicar otras relaciones sociales. Su uso forzado y mecánico las banaliza y vacı́a de contenido. Hoy muchos intelectuales se embarcan en esta “aventura” con la intención de demonizar a Israel y al sionismo. El resultado objetivo de esto es un doble crimen pues no sólo asumen posturas evidentemente antisemitas (cosa que indudablemente no les preocupa) sino que además atentan contra la memoria histórica de los crı́menes cometidos contra los pueblos realmente colonizados, explotados, segregados y genocidados. Los intelectuales, particularmente los progresistas de izquierda siempre han actuado como la “conciencia moral” de la sociedad denunciando los abusos y las injusticias de los poderosos hacia los más débiles; hoy la cosa, al menos en relación con Israel, la cosa parece haberse modificado. Israel, en los discursos del progresismo “polı́ticamente correcto” es desplazado al lugar de “lo siniestro”, ámbito del mal radical; esto se aprecia claramente en las categorı́as que se le asignan a modo de adjetivo calificativo. Ellas son la 9. Oxı́moron es un recurso retórico-literario que consiste en armonizar dos conceptos opuestos en una sola expresión, formando ası́ un tercer concepto. Dado que el sentido literal de un oxı́moron es “absurdo” (por ejemplo, «silencio atronador»), se fuerza al lector a buscar un sentido metafórico. 10. Para ampliar este concepto ver mi artı́culo “Los Mantras del Antisionismo” en Brodsky, Patricio: Deconstruyendo la (Neo)Judeofobia. Crı́tica A Los Fundamentos Del Antisemitismo Actual (Mitos Y Realidades De Un Odio Reciclado). Buenos Aires: Editorial Dunken, 2010. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 109 representación de todo lo malo de la modernidad (colonialismo, imperialismo, racismo, nazismo) y que fantasmagóricamente atormenta al progresista. Pero no todas las crı́ticas a Israel deben ser consideradas parte de la neojudeofobia. Debemos evitar caer en una postura equivalente a la de los intelectuales que aquı́ criticamos banalizando el concepto “antisemita”. Hay que evitar utilizarlo frı́volamente ante cualquier crı́tica que no sea de nuestro agrado ya que al hacerlo esta categorı́a, a la larga, pierde su eficacia para dar cuenta de situaciones reales. Si se utiliza el concepto “antisemita” como una “herramienta” para eludir toda crı́tica el mismo se vuelve banal ya que si “todo” es antisemitismo, finalmente “nada” lo es ya que no se puede distinguir situaciones en forma objetiva y todo termina siendo cuestión de interpretación. En ciertos “núcleos duros” existe esta tendencia a rotular de antisemita cualquier crı́tica a Israel, pero no todas lo son. Existen ciertas condiciones que se deben cumplir para que una crı́tica válida se transforme en una descalificación abierta. Varios autores plantean estas condiciones que nos ayudan a trazar los lı́mites entre ambas. Hay que sopesar cuidadosamente cada declaración para evitar caer en las generalizaciones banalistas que tanto criticamos. Para evitar caer en estas canalizaciones contraproducentes debemos establecer claramente que la judeofobia, cualquiera sea su origen, tiene elementos cualitativos comunes que se pueden sintetizar una serie de caracterı́sticas que la definen, a saber: a. Su carácter “Objetivo”: Los judeófobos siempre hallarán una excusa “válida” para “objetivar” su odio (despréndelo de sı́ y vivirlo no como algo propio sino como algo “objetivo”, algo negativo en los judı́os que legitime el encono hacia ellos). Es un proceso mental mediante el cual se “coloca” la cualidad del odio en el objeto odiado, esto conduce a que el odio sea vivido como algo generado por el propio objeto de odio (“El Judı́o”, “El Sionismo”, “Israel”) a causa de algún “hecho objetivo” (el “asesinato” de Jesús, la “profanación” del cuerpo de Cristo—a través de las hostias—la conspiración global para la dominación, la traición cosmopolita, la contaminación racial, el genocidio palestino, etc.). b. Su carácter inconsciente: Raramente (sólo en casos extremos) la judeofobia se le aparece al judeófobo como un elemento consciente. Generalmente aparecerá como oculta a la consciencia (reprimida) y por el malestar que genera al ser una manifestación del inconsciente—que como tal pugna por aflorar a la consciencia a través de retoños—asumirá un carácter cada vez más violento en los crecientes e infructuosos esfuerzos por reprimir dichos retoños. 110 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 c. Su sobredimensionamiento: Una caracterı́stica de la presencia de la judeofobia es la obsesión compulsiva que posee quien la sufre. El “problema judı́o” (la obsesión con el sionismo e Israel) “crece” hasta ocupar todo espacio de su raciocinio; de allı́ que sólo se hagan movilizaciones antiisraelı́es y su solidaridad no se vea motivada ante tremendas tragedias humanitarias. d. Su obsesividad: De lo anterior se desprende que la judeofobia llega al grado de ser una obsesión malsana que atrofia y obnubila la capacidad racional. e. Su carácter maniqueo: La realidad es vista en oposiciones polares mutuamente excluyentes, de un lado el objeto de odio (como encarnadura del mal) y del otro el colectivo al que se pertenece (como representación “celestial” del bien). Todas estas caracterı́sticas indican la presencia de un fuerte y arraigado prejuicio, por lo tanto será refractario a cualquier evidencia empı́rica. A continuación mostraremos algunos discursos en los que se puede apreciar cómo operan estas caracterı́sticas en la palabra de algunos intelectuales, de igual forma el lector puede acudir a ver los discursos que exponemos: El pueblo judı́o en Israel sigue doblegado en su mayorı́a a la estrategia del Imperio cuyo modelo han aplicado en todos los órdenes de la vida. Hace ahora a los palestinos aquello que la cristiandad occidental hizo con nosotros . . . Para hacer lo que hacen en Palestina los judı́os que están en el poder deben mantener el secreto moral del origen de su derecho a una patria y prolongar allı́ los valores inhumanos de sus propios perseguidores milenarios. Ocultar, por ejemplo, que lo que comenzó con la Cruz cristiana terminó con la Shoá europea. Deben esconder la verdad sobre la experiencia histórica de su vida en Occidente. Debieron convertirse en cómplices de sus asesinos, no denunciarlos, ya no decir nunca más que el cristianismo y el capitalismo fueron sus exterminadores porque ahora ambos se habı́an convertido en su modelo y en sus aliados. En lo religioso, se hicieron fundamentalistas y ecuménicos; en lo económico, se hicieron capitalistas globalizadores; en lo polı́tico, se hicieron un Estado teocrático colonialista; en lo cientı́fi co, tomaron como modelo la lógica neutral de la objetividad sin sujeto del iluminismo antijudı́o y, en lo internacional, sostienen con sus servicios las causas más siniestras de los opresores cristianos e imperiales.11 La barbarie perpetrada por el régimen de Tel Aviv reconoce pocos 11. Rozitchner, León: ¿Podemos seguir siendo judı́os? Artı́culo publicado en Diario Página 12 el 23/7/2006, disponible en Internet: http://www.pagina12.com .ar/diario/elmundo/470359-2006-07-23.html 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 111 antecedentes en los últimos tiempos: el bombardeo estadounidense con napalm a las aldeas campesinas vietnamitas, la “limpieza étnica” de Milosevic y algunas pocas aberraciones más. Es difı́cil encontrar ejemplos parecidos. A lo que más se parece es a la infame y cobarde agresión que el régimen nazi y su aliado fascista en Italia descargaron sobre Guernica. Como en esa pequeña ciudad vasca, en Gaza se produce una matanza indiscriminada de mujeres y niños, bajo la falsa acusación de que eran todos terroristas, desmentida una y mil veces, para eterna condena de sus perpetradores, por las miles de fotografı́as que circulan por todo el mundo. Se nota que el régimen israelı́ aprendió muy bien de su patrón estadounidense las malas artes de las mentiras y los engaños . . . No es exagerado calificar a los indignos y malignos gobernantes de Israel como auténticos herederos de la barbarie nazi, que también asesinaban indiscriminadamente para aterrorizar a la población; que también buscaban asegurarse su “espacio vital” para garantizar la impunidad de sus acciones; que también masacraban con su superioridad militar a poblaciones indefensas, y que también mentı́an, como recomendaba Goering (¡SIC!)12, porque de tanto hacerlo creı́an que esas mentiras se convertirı́an en verdades . . . Es doloroso constatar la involución del Estado israelı́, tan lejos hoy de los sueños de grandes pensadores judı́os, como Martı́n Buber, que lo imaginaron como la realización de un original modelo socialista. Un Estado a cuya ilegitimidad de origen se le agrega ahora una ilegitimidad aún mayor, emanada de la carnicerı́a practicada sobre una población civil indefensa que obliga a preguntarse cuán democrático puede ser un Estado que perpetra tales crı́menes. Ilegitimidad de origen, decı́amos, no porque el pueblo judı́o no tenga derecho a tener su Estado, pues ese derecho es indiscutible y Hamas debe reconocerlo sin más dilaciones. Pero ilegitimidad porque se erigió robando tierras a otro pueblo al que también le asiste el mismo derecho. El acuerdo entre el colonialismo británico y el imperialismo norteamericano que al final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial se tradujo en la creación del Estado de Israel fue posible porque, ante la debilidad del mundo árabe, pudo apropiarse para Israel de un territorio que no era sólo suyo sino que se compartı́a con los palestinos . . . sus cobardes halcones, patéticos discı́pulos de Hitler, son los peores enemigos del pueblo judı́o.13 Un buen ejemplo para ilustrar lo irracional y contradictorio (carácterı́sticas del sentido común en términos gramscianos) de las crı́ticas que recibe 12. Suponemos aquı́ que se re?ere al Ministro de Propaganda de Hitler (Joseph Goebbels) y no a su lugarteniente (Hermann Göering). 13. Borón, Atilio: Gaza es Guernica. Artı́culo publicado en Diario Página 12 el 16/1/2009. Disponible en Internet: http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4118324-2009-01-16.html. 112 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 Israel lo podemos apreciar en la cita del economista Claudio Katz que coloco debajo; dice Katz: Quienes exaltan la tolerancia religiosa vigente en ese paı́s frente al cerrado islamismo del Hamas suelen olvidar el carácter confesional del estado judı́o. También omiten el fundamento bı́blico, utilizado para justificar la extensión del territorio a los sagrados lı́mites de Samaria y Judea . . . El doloroso legado del holocausto es frecuentemente utilizado para acallar la denuncia de un estado militarista que humilla a los pueblos vecinos. Esta censura se ejerce identificando al judaı́smo con el sionismo e Israel, o interpretando cualquier crı́tica como un acto de antisemitismo. En realidad esos tres conceptos difi eren significativamente. . . El judaı́smo es una religión, una cultura o una tradición de un pueblo diseminado por muchos paı́ses, cuya permanencia como segmento diferenciado ha variado en cada época y región. Israel es un estado construido con la explı́cita preeminencia de los hebreos, pero actualmente incluye varios grupos desconectados de ese origen. El sionismo es una ideologı́a de apropiación colonial basada en fundamentos milenarios y pragmáticos. Estas diferencias permiten distinguir las posturas antijudı́as, anti-sionistas y anti-israelı́es. La primera actitud es racista, la segunda anticolonialista y la tercera no presenta un significado nı́tido. Al igual que el antinorteamericanismo solo expresa un genérico rechazo de la opresión imperialista.14 No sólo muestra una interpretación caprichosa de judaı́smo (no existe un judaı́smo, sino que existen judaı́smos ya que los ritos religiosos, la cultura y las tradiciones no son las mismas entre los judı́os ashkenazim, los sefaradim, los mitzrahim, etc.) y del sionismo (el cual nada tiene que ver con el colonialismo sino que por el contrario, es un movimiento polı́ticoideológico que asume la representación de los intereses nacionales del pueblo judı́o—y por ello tiene expresiones que van desde el sionismo marxista borojoviano hasta el derechismo jabotinskiano pasando por expresiones del sionismo religioso—y teniendo inclusive formas polı́tico-militares como las asumidas durante los combates por la liberación nacional de Israel contra la ocupación colonial británica primero y luego contra la invasión árabe durante la guerra de independencia). Además es un claro ejemplo de lo que es capaz de movilizar este conflicto a nivel inconsciente ya que, sin darse cuenta de la flagrante contradicción en la que incurre entre dos párrafos diferentes de este mismo texto, plantea la incoherente e insalvable contradicción que, por un lado, Israel es un estado que tiene un carácter confesional judı́o y que tiene un fundamento bı́blico utilizado para justifi14. Katz, Claudio: Incursiones para sepultar la paz. Publicado el 19/1/2009 en Internet: http://www.lahaine.org/index.php?p=35547 (los destacados son mı́os P.A.B.). 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 113 car la ocupación pero, por otro lado, luego critica la identificación del judaı́smo con el sionismo e Israel (¿acaso el mismo autor no avala esta identificación al caracterizar a Israel como un estado confesional judı́o?). Esta contradicción nace, por un lado de criticar a Israel como un estado religioso (indudablemente el autor ve a la religión con una connotación negativa por lo tanto su adjetivación busca investir de sentido negativo al estado judı́o) mientras que por otro intenta escindir judaı́smo de sionismo e Israel (esto lo harı́a para neutralizar una posible crı́tica de antisemitismo), lo grave de esto es que este autor (al igual que muchos otros hoy) no es consciente de esta contradicción y para él es coherente que ambos planteos coexistan en un mismo plano (este es un indicador de la falta de una reflexión crı́tica ya que asume las caracterı́sticas contradictorias en sı́ mismas que Gramsci le asigna al “sentido común” por oposición, en este punto, al buen sentido y la Filosofı́a de la Praxis). Katz aborda también un tema crucial cuando afirma que cualquier crı́tica contra Israel es interpretada como un acto de antisemitismo, este es un lugar común que utilizan quienes saben que sus crı́ticas contra Israel, en muchos casos, son desmedidas y carentes de base empı́rica y que cumplen con las condiciones que enunciamos más arriba como inherentes al pensamiento de base antisemita. El hecho concreto es que no se los cataloga de antisemitas porque critican a Israel, ni siquiera porque desvirtúan categorı́as históricas para demonizar a este estado, sino que se han hecho acreedores de esa “distinción” porque hacen esto EXCLUSIVAMENTE con Israel. Todo su humanismo, toda su solidaridad y su preocupación por los débiles se da sólo con las supuestas vı́ctimas de Israel. El resultado de esto es el sobredimensionamiento de este conflicto en relación a otros conflictos donde hay matanzas in?nitamente mayores. Otro resultado colateral, al cual nos referimos más arriba es la exageración del sufrimiento palestino, su elevación a la categorı́a de “vı́ctima universal”, el paradigma del sufrimiento (y todo este “esfuerzo” se realiza sólo por un mero juego de representaciones discursivas que deforman la dimensión real del conflicto). Un ejemplo tan brutal como carente de sentido de esto que venimos sosteniendo es la afirmación, asumida hoy como una “verdad revelada” que los judı́os (Israel) le harı́an a los palestinos lo que los nazis, antaño, le hacı́an a los propios judı́os. Ejemplo de esto es la solicitada de intelectuales llamada “Paremos el genocidio del estado de Israel” a la que nos referimos arriba. Cuando contrastamos esta retórica vacı́a con los hechos históricos comparando vis a vis ambos hechos históricos (la Shoá y la situación de los palestinos bajo la “ocupación” israelı́), hallamos que durante los 6 años de 114 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 ocupación nazi la población judı́a de Europa—según las estimaciones de Karady15—descendió de 9.480.000 personas en 1939 a 3.780.000 luego de la misma, esto implica que en este perı́odo perecieron 5.700.000 judı́os. Un 60,1% de los judı́os de la preguerra. Si hacemos un prorrateo de la cantidad de asesinatos, vemos que las vı́ctimas judı́as ascendieron a 950.000 por año; 79.166 por mes; 2.602,7 por dı́a; 108,5 por hora; 1,8 por minuto. Esto representa una tasa demográfica negativa del orden del –10,1%; esto es una pérdida relativa del 10,1% de la población judı́a de Europa durante cada año de guerra. En contraste, veamos cual es la situación de la población palestina de los “territorios ocupados” por Israel, la cual, según afirmaciones de algunos de estos intelectuales banalistas, estarı́a viviendo un genocidio (como mı́nimo) equivalente (sino peor) al sufrido por los judı́os europeos. Hallamos que la población palestina de los “territorios ocupados” (Franja de Gaza y Cisjordania—a.k.a. Judea y Samari—), según fuentes palestinas, alrededor de 1967 era de 1.045.000 personas.16 Mientras que en el año 2007, también según fuentes palestinas, la población de los “territorios ocupados” se estimaba en 4.000.000.17 Estas cifras indican un crecimiento poblacional de 2.955.000 en el lapso de los 40 años transcurridos entre 1967 y 2007, esto implica un crecimiento de 73.875 nuevos pobladores cada año; 6.156,25 nuevos pobladores por mes; 205,21 nuevos pobladores diarios; 8,5 nuevos pobladores por hora. La población de los “territorios ocupados” se multiplicó en 400% en 40 años; esto implica una tasa mensual de crecimiento demográfico del 10% anual durante estos 40 años. Es realmente increı́ble, sı́ntoma de una ceguera inconmensurable, que a alguien (y a un intelectual más aún) se le ocurra establecer equivalencias entre ambas situaciones (la matanza del 10% anual de una población con una tasa de crecimiento del 10% anual en otra población). Para mayor ilustración aún podemos decir que si la población judı́a 15. Karady, Vı́ctor: Los Judı́os En la modernidad Europea. Madrid: Siglo XXI de España Editores. 2000. Pág. 294-295. 16. Fuente: http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/ story559.html#table1 17. Fuente: http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/ story559.html#table1; algunas estimaciones elevan esta cifra hasta 5.000.000 (datos para el año 2001 de la Sociedad Académica Palestina para el Estudio de Asuntos Internacionales—lo cual resultarı́a en una cifra mayor—citados en el artı́culo Demografı́a de Palestina en la Enciclopedia Wikipedia: http://www.es.wikipedia .org/wiki/Demogra?a-de-Palestina), y hasta 5.500.000 (según el artı́culo: Palestinos Se Han Multiplicado Por 7 Veces Desde La Nakba (Catástrofe) de 1948. En Internet: http://www.palestinalibre.org/articulo. php?a=8171). Decidimos tomar la estimación más conservadora ya que de todas formas ella basta para mostrar el absurdo de la comparación entre ambos hechos históricos. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 115 europea hubiese crecido al mismo ritmo de crecimiento demográfico de los palestinos (10% anual durante los últimos 64 años), hoy esta población serı́a de 70.280.000 personas, mientras que la población judı́a mundial actual apenas supera los 13.000.000 de personas. En oposición, si los palestinos hubieran sufrido un exterminio equivalente al sufrido por los judı́os europeos (un decrecimiento poblacional del 10% anual) hubiesen desaparecido por completo en 1977. Adolf Eichmann afirmó que 100 muertos son una tragedia, mientras que 100.000 muertos sólo son estadı́stica, en vistas a los datos comparados de más arriba debiéramos afirmar que para cierto sector de la intelectualidad progresista un promedio anual de crecimiento poblacional de 73.000 nuevas personas en los territorios palestinos “ES” un “GENOCIDIO”. Un verdadero absurdo. No cabe ninguna duda que ambas situaciones sólo tienen parangón en un ejercicio mental de virtualización de los hechos históricos (sin valor alguno ya que los ejercicios contrafácticos son un sinsentido). A pesar de ello muchos (demasiados) intelectuales “caen en la trampa” de repetir acrı́ticamente la consigna propagandı́stica que plantea que los judı́os le “hacen” a los palestinos lo que antes los nazis le hicieron a ellos; más aún, ni siquiera es cierto que los israelı́es estén implementando un genocidio de palestinos como plantean sus detractores. No al menos si entendemos por genocidio la definición que en el año 1948 la Convención para la Prevención y la Sanción del Delito de Genocidio aprobó en una resolución que, bajo el número 260 (III) A, fue aprobada por la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas el 9 de diciembre de 1948 y que entró en vigencia el 12 de enero de 1951. En su Artı́culo II dice: “Artı́culo II: En la presente convención, se entiende por genocidio cualquiera de los actos mencionados a continuación, perpetrados con la intención de destruir, total o parcialmente, a un grupo nacional, étnico, racial o religioso, como tal: Matanza de miembros del grupo; • Lesión grave a la integridad fı́sica o mental de los miembros del grupo; • Sometimiento intencional del grupo a condiciones de existencia e que hayan de acarrear su destrucción fı́sica, total o parcial; • Medidas destinadas a impedir los nacimientos en el seno del grupo; • Traslado por la fuerza de niños del grupo a otro grupo”. No se puede afirmar que intelectuales como los que realizan este tipo de declaraciones forzando conceptos no saben de lo que hablan; no hablan desde la ignorancia sino desde la irracionalidad del prejuicio pues ellos no 116 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 desconocen el significado de los conceptos que utilizan arbitrariamente tergiversando su significado en su caprichosa aplicación, más—la mayorı́a de ellos—no los utilizan con la intención explı́cita de demonizar a Israel, sino porque tienen una mirada prejuiciosa la cual en sus representaciones mentales deforma a Israel y sólo a este estado. A pesar de la judeofobia presente en esta permanente segregación que sufre este estado, en el caso de la mayorı́a de los intelectuales que opinan de esta manera, uno no puede afirmar que se ha tornado antisemita, sino que más bien serı́a más correcto afirmar que han perdido el pudor en expresarlo (o han hallado una justificación “valida” para ejercerlo desembozadamente). Y no hablamos sólo de intelectuales que no son especialistas en el tema como el ejemplo de la comparación entre Ramalá y Auschwitz que realizó el Premio Nóbel de Literatura José Saramago, sino que hoy podemos hallar que académicos especialistas en historia contemporánea que se supone saben del tema realizan este mismo tipo de desproporcionada y abusiva comparación. Es desolador que en los comienzos del siglo XXI, observemos una situación similar a la que los judı́os enfrentaron contra los nazis en el guetto de Varsovia, pero en esta ocasión, las vı́ctimas son los palestinos aislados en campos de refugiados rodeados por israelı́es, en muchos casos descendientes del holocausto.18 . . . NOS SOLIDARIZAMOS CON EL PUEBLO DE PALESTINA, en momentos que el sionismo ejerce la más brutal campaña de agresión militar que la humanidad pueda imaginar, comparable solo con las atrocidades cometidas por el nazismo y su polı́tica racial de exterminio contra los no arios, durante el gobierno de Adolfo Hitler . . .19 Qué terrible ironı́a de la historia que los sobrevivientes y descendientes de las vı́ctimas del Holocausto que llevó a cabo la dictadura nazi-fascista en Europa y la antigua Unión Soviética reproduzcan los métodos siniestros de sus victimarios, por décadas en Palestina, y ahora otra vez en Lı́bano.20 18. Szmukler, Beinusz y Ramos, Vanesa: Declaración de la Asociación Americana de Juristas ante los ataques masivos de Israel contra el pueblo palestino publicada el 18/3/2002 en el sitio WebIslam.com en Internet: http://www.web islam.com/?idt=2491 19. De una declaración llamada Declaración de Principios y Solidaridad con Palestina de los Artistas e Intelectuales venezolanos rubricada por más de 100 intelectuales venezolanos. Publicada en Internet el 13/1/2009 en el sitio LaClase. info en http://laclase. info/nacionales/declaracion-de-principios-y-solidaridad-conpalestina-de-los-artistas-e-intelectuales-ven 20. López y Rivas, Gilberto: Israel: Estado Terrorista, publicado el 28 de julio 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 117 . . . Una vez más, como siempre, los que condenamos las atrocidades de Israel somos acusados por los sionistas como antisemitas. Desde la gloriosa revolución liberal burguesa de 1789, el derecho a la libertad de expresión es sagrada, pero el movimiento sionista desearı́a establecer una rı́gida censura para evitar que el Gobierno judı́o-nazi de Israel sea condenado. Pobres diablos. Su maldad les impide ver que ahora los nuevos nazis son ellos y que al horror de Auschwitz, Treblinka, y Sobibor, hay que añadir los nombres de Sabra, Chatila, y Qana, entre otros. Los ciudadanos que defendemos los valores liberales, los derechos humanos, y el respeto a la legalidad internacional, por encima, de cualquier ideologı́a, religión, nacionalidad o etnia, tenemos la obligación de condenar el horror alemán-nazi sobre los judı́os, y también el israelı́-nazi sobre los palestinos.21 Lo que “habla” en los discursos de las citas arriba no es el saber, la razón; sino que, por el contrario, este tipo de comparación arbitraria es sı́ntoma de un profundo y arraigado prejuicio que “genera” un monstruo llamado Israel. Es una barbaridad histórica (que, confieso, nunca creı́ llegar a ver) que un historiador acuse a Israel de ser un estado nazi (contradicción absurda ya que lo definitorio del nazismo fue su antisemitismo radical). Hay intelectuales que construyen un sentido común antiisraelı́ con “sutileza”, intentan virtualizar la historia creando “realidades alternativas” desde los discursos que deben ser decodificados entrelineas, un ejemplo es la cita de debajo de Osvaldo Bayer: “Desde aquella primera guerra de Israel contra sirios y libaneses, en mayo de 1948 no hubo sino la búsqueda de soluciones por medio de las armas.”22 Esta frase de Bayer es, por un lado, contrafáctica pues habla de una primera guerra de Israel contra sirios y libaneses, parece ignorar deliberadamente que la guerra se desata el mismo dı́a de la retirada británica, el 15 de mayo de 1948, cuando los ejércitos de cinco paı́ses (El Lı́bano, Siria, Irak, Egipto y la Legión Árabe de Transjordania—hoy Jordania—apoyadas por voluntarios libios, saudı́es y yemenı́es, comenzaron la invasión del recién proclamado Estado de Israel; mientras que por otro lado parece una broma de mal gusto cuando dice que no hubo búsqueda de soluciones que no fueran armadas, desde el llamamiento a la convivencia en la propia declarade 2006 en el periódico La Jornada de la UNAM http://www.jornada.unam.mx/ 2006/07/28/026a1pol.php 21. Girón Garrote, José (profesor titular de Historia Contemporánea de la Universidad de Oviedo): El Gobierno nazi de Israel, publicado en WebIslam el 17 de agosto de 2006 http://www.webislam.com/?idt=5521 22. Bayer, Osvaldo: Si Quieres La Paz . . . Lucha Por Ella. Publicado en Diario Página12 el 29 de julio de 2006, disponible en http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/ contratapa/index-2006-07-29.html 118 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 ción de Independencia de Israel pasando por la Conferencia de Khartun cuando la Liga Árabe en 1967 como respuesta a la propuesta de paz de Israel lanzó la consigna del triple no (no al reconocimiento, no a la negociación, no a la paz) pasando por los tratados de paz con Egipto, Jordania y la propia Autoridad Nacional Palestina, sólo alguien muy alienado en sus prejuicios puede negar la vocación negociadora de Israel. No se alcanzará la paz con acciones que llevan a la destrucción y masacre de un pueblo que lucha por recuperar la tierra de la cual fue despojado por la fuerza, sometido a un bloqueo entre el mar y un muro inhumano que lo aı́sla del mundo privándolo de los bienes esenciales para la subsistencia, que lo encierran y que se le impide el libre ejercicio de su soberanı́a.23 Otra muestra de las intervenciones desde el desconocimiento es el fragmento de declaración que reproducimos arriba, en ella los diputados del Proyecto Sur afirman que: No se alcanzará la paz con acciones que llevan a la destrucción y masacre de un pueblo que lucha por recuperar la tierra de la cual fue despojado por la fuerza a qué tierra se refieren si el conflicto de 2009 se produce luego de más de 1.000 ataques con misiles sobre territorio israelı́ desde un territorio del cual Israel se retiró en agosto de 2005 (a menos que consideren que Israel debe retirarse de Israel no se entiende su declaración). Por otro lado afirman que: sometido a un bloqueo entre el mar y un muro inhumano que lo aı́sla del mundo privándolo de los bienes esenciales para la subsistencia esta frase es de lo más enigmático, sobre todo si tenemos en cuenta que la guerra fue en la Franja de Gaza, lindante con el Mar Mediterráneo, Israel y Egipto (paı́s que también mantiene un bloqueo del que nadie habla), que no lo priva de ningún bien, sino que por el contrario, a pesar de la guerra le provee energı́a, agua, medicamentos, alimentos, etc.; de lo contrario hace rato que hubieran desaparecido muertos por inanición en un territorio que lo único que produce es terroristas, y por último afirman: que se le impide el libre ejercicio de su soberanı́a ese es un reclamo que le tienen que hacer a Hamas, quien tomó el poder en enero de 2006 luego de un cruento golpe de estado e impuso una dictadura islámica a la población impidiendo el ejercicio democrático. Todo este tipo de declaraciones están viciadas con este tipo de prejuicios y de lugares comunes que son claros indicadores del grado de liviandad con que se opina sobre estas cuestiones. Algunos intentan utilizar técnicas muy “sutiles” de descalificación de Israel en su intento de construirlo (discursivamente) como genocida (o 23. Lozano, Claudio; Solanas, Fernando; Mazzitelli, Mario: Fragmento de una Declaración emitida por los tres diputados del Proyecto Sur durante la guerra de 2009 contra Hamas en Gaza. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 119 democida), al respecto podemos ver el ejemplo de Jeanette Becerra Acosta, quien en su artı́culo “300 Millones de Muertos, Vı́ctimas del Poder”, hace un “sutil’=” comentario refiriéndose a la clasificación de los tipos de genocidios que realizó el Profesor Rudolf Rummel: Los “mega-genocidas”: la ex Unión Soviética, China y la Alemania nazi, responsables del exterminio de más de 150 millones de personas; los “genocidas menores”: siete gobiernos con un saldo de alrededor de 22 millones de muertos en conjunto; los “sospechosos”: Corea del Norte, México y la Rusia zarista con 4 millones 145 mil vı́ctimas, y los “centiasesinos”, acusados de asesinar a menos de un millón de personas, como es el caso de Israel, que desde 1948 dio cuenta de miles de palestinos en matanzas como las de Shabra y Chatila, hace 16 años.24 En este párrafo, por un lado, la autora hace toda una definición cuando se refiere a los 40.00025 ó 59.00026 árabes muertos por Israel, estos 54.900 vı́ctimas (promediando ambas cifras) y por alquimia las transforma, según sus propias palabras, en ““centiasesinos”, acusados de asesinar a menos de un millón de personas, como es el caso de Israel”, claro, no falta a la verdad, 54.900 son menos que un millón de personas, representan exactamente el 5,49% de ese millón, claro que no es lo mismo, polı́ticamente, afirmar 54.900 que “menos de un millón”; asimismo, afirma la abierta, desvergonzada e infame calumnia que “. . . Israel, que desde 1948 dio cuenta de miles de palestinos en matanzas como las de Shabra y Chatila, hace 16 años.”, en un evidente acto de propaganda goebelsiana, miente acerca de las matanzas de los Campos de Refugiados de Sabra y Chatila de 1982 en El Lı́bano las cuales no fueron llevadas a cabo por Israel sino por las milicias falangistas de cristianos maronitas. Estas cosas dichas al pasar, a la ligera e impunemente van a quedar incorporadas al imaginario como si fueran reales, la acumulación, la iteración ad-infinitum de esta técnica de propaganda, logra, a la larga, afectar la imagen de Israel ante la opinión pública. Algunos autores necesitan construirse un movimiento palestino que justifique sus posturas, plenos de una retórica hueca que no tiene asidero en 24. Jeannette Becerra Acosta: 300 Millones de Muertos, Vı́ctimas del Poder. Publicado originalmente en El Excelsior de México, el 31 de enero de 1999 y reproducido en Internet en el sitio Analı́tica Semanal. Venezuela Analı́tica Publicaciones, en http://www.analitica.com/vas/1999.02.1/internacional/06.htm. 25. Según Gunnar Heinsohn y Daniel Pipes: La Verdadera Dimensión de la Guerra Árabe-Israelı́. Publicado el 23 de octubre de 2007 en http://www.gees.org/ imprimir.php?id=4612. 26. Según Piero Scaruf?: Wars and Genocides of the 20th Century. http:// www.scaruf?.com/politics/massacre.html. 120 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 la realidad, sino que son fantası́as necesarias para justificar sus posturas, ejemplo de esto es la frase siguiente de Néstor Kohan, quien afirma que: ¿Los palestinos nos odian? [a los judı́os, N.B.] No es cierto. Gravı́simo error confundir judaı́smo con sionismo. Confusión que resulta falsa a todas luces, si se la esgrime en defensa del estado de Israel como si se lo hace en contra de Israel. La resistencia palestina —al menos en sus vertientes y organizaciones más lúcidas, las que provienen de un tronco antiimperialista laico y socialista—lucha contra la polı́tica de estado de Israel, no contra todos los judı́os en general.27 A continuación veamos declaraciones de algunos de los lı́deres de lo que Kohan mismo define como: “. . . resistencia palestin —al menos en sus vertientes y organizaciones más lúcidas, las que provienen de un tronco antiimperialista laico y socialista”, la mejor forma de desarticular estos discursos de fantası́a es confrontarlos con las palabras directas de los protagonistas, con esta prueba cualquier elaboración ficticia es desbaratada. Las siguientes declaraciones son de Anwar Raja, representante del Frente Popular para la Liberación de Palestina28 en el Lı́bano, este polı́tico afirmó que: “Seamos realistas—los judı́os han podido falsificar la historia, usando la desvergonzada mentalidad que ve a la historia según los intereses de uno. Los judı́os han podido ejercer presión sobre el mundo, para que la historia se vuelva a escribir tal como lo deseen. Ellos extorsionaron al papa durante su reciente visita a Palestina, para que mencione la cifra de seis millones de palestinos . . . judı́os en el Holocausto. Yo no sé quién estuvo de pie a las puertas del crematorio y contó. Yo no sé quién propuso esta cifra. Todos los hechos apuntan a que es infiada, a la fal27. Kohan, Néstor: ¿Antisemitismo? A la memoria de Simón Radowitzky y Raymundo Gleyzer. Publicado el 23 de mayo de 2009 en Internet http://www.otro madrid.org/articulo/7814/antisemitismo-memoria-simon-radowitzky/(17/10/2009). 28. El Frente Popular para la Liberación de Palestina es una organización polı́tica y militar marxista-leninista, secular, nacionalista palestina fundada en 1967 por George Habash, también fundador del Movimiento Nacionalista Árabe. FPLP habı́a sido habitualmente la segunda organización de tamaño de la Organización para la Liberación de Palestina (Fatah siendo la más grande). Hoy en dı́a FPLP es un partido polı́tico en la Autoridad Nacional Palestina. Generalmente FPLP tiene polı́ticas de lı́nea dura en respecto a las aspiraciones nacionales de los árabes palestinos, en contraste de la tendencia más moderada de Fatah. Se opuso a los Acuerdos de Oslo, y por mucho tiempo se opuso a la propuesta de solucionar el Con?icto árabe-israelı́ mediante la creación de dos estados, pero en 1999 hizo un acuerdo con los lı́deres de la OLP dando su acuerdo en negociar con Israel. De la de?nición de Wikipedia, en Internet: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frente_Popular_para_la_Liberaci%C3% B3n_de_Palestina) (17/10/2009) 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 121 sificación y la exageración.”29 Otro de los abundantes ejemplos de académicos que temerariamente se lanzan a opinar sobre este tema desde el lugar del no-saber, desde los prejuicios, lo hallamos en la pluma de Emilio Cafassi, quien, hablando del conflicto en Medio Oriente opina que: En el ghetto actual de la Franja de Gaza, el más importante de toda la historia por la magnitud de la concentración poblacional, tras su monumental muro custodiado por las milicias obligatorias del Estado de Israel, la población palestina indefensa es nuevamente masacrada en nombre de la paz y la futura—convivencia. Algunos de los sucesores de los antiguos habitantes de los ghettos ignominiosos del nazismo han creı́do, como sus antiguos verdugos, que la solución para la paz se encontrarı́a primero en el encierro y posteriormente en el exterminio y el terror.”30 Cafassi, haciendo gala de una desconocimiento absoluto de la realidad cuando comienza afirmando, un prejuicio establecido como verdad cuando dice que: “En el ghetto actual de la Franja de Gaza, el más importante de toda la historia por la magnitud de la concentración poblacional . . .31 Si procedemos a desvirtuar los hechos suponiendo, como afirma temerariamente, que la Franja de Gaza es un Ghetto, allı́ viven aproximadamente 1.551.859 personas (estimación de julio de 2009)32. La superficie total de la Franja de Gaza son 360 kilómetros cuadrados, lo que da una cifra aproximada de una densidad poblacional de 4.310 personas por kilómetro cuadrado. En el Ghetto de Varsovia33 vivı́an más de 400.000 judı́os en un área de 3,37 Km2, lo que hace una densidad poblacional de 118.694 habitantes por Km2, esto es una densidad poblacional (un hacinamiento) 27,54 29. Raja, Anwar: Fragmentos de una entrevista emitida por Al-Alam TV el 15 de Mayo de 2009. Publicada el 28/5/2009 en http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/ 0/0/0/0/3319.htm (17/10/2009). 30. Cafassi, Emilio: Exterminio Tras El Muro publicado en el Diario La República AÑO 1—Nro. 3146, Montevideo, Uruguay el 11 de enero de 2009, disponible en Internet: http://www.larepublica.com.uy/contratapa/348506-el-exterminio-trasel-muro. 31. Cafassi, Emilio: Exterminio Tras El Muro publicado en el Diario La República AÑO 11—Nro. 3146, Montevideo, Uruguay el 11 de enero de 2009, disponible en Internet: http://www.larepublica.com.uy/contratapa/348506-el-exterminio-trasel-muro. 32. Fuente de los datos: http://www.indexmundi.com/gaza_strip/population .html. 33. Fuente de los datos: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId= 10005069. 122 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 veces mayor que la de la Franja de Gaza; en el Ghetto de Lodz34 una población de 164.000 judı́os fue hacinada en un área de 10,36 Km2, “de los cuales sólo 2,4Km2 estaban desarrollados y habitables”35, lo que hará una densidad poblacional de 15.830 personas por Km2 (ó 68.333 personas por Km2 si contemplamos sólo el área habitable), esto es 3,67 (15,86) veces la densidad de la Franja de Gaza; citamos estos dos ejemplos como muestra de un sistema de instituciones de encierro de la Alemania nazi que abarcó más de 400 ghettos, estos lugares de encierro estaban pensados con el objetivo de aniquilar a la mayorı́a de su población, de hambre, de frı́o y de enfermedades, de allı́ que la banalización que hace Cafassi se relaciona, por izquierda, con el negacionismo de la Shoá, no tiene nada que ver con los hechos históricos. Luego seguirá Cafassi: “En el ghetto actual de la Franja de Gaza . . . tras su monumental muro custodiado por las milicias obligatorias del Estado de Israel, la población palestina indefensa es nuevamente masacrada en nombre de la paz y la futura-convivencia.”36. Es realmente sorprendente que alguien que se lance a emitir opiniones tan superficiales sobre este conflicto o sobre cualquier otro hecho social. Hablar del Muro de Gaza ignorando que en Gaza no hay ningún muro, hay un cerco de alambre tejido como en otras fronteras y que el muro al que se refiere se encuentra en Cisjordania. Sólo un ignorante puede emitir semejante disparate. Pero contra Israel es fácil opinar, es gratis y da “prestigio”. Por otro lado, llama “milicias obligatorias” al Ejército de Defensa de Israel en un burdo intento de rebajar la categorı́a del Ejército de Defensa de Israel (EDI), de des-legitimarlo, ya que en un estado consolidado, el uso del concepto “milicia” refiere a una situación opuesta a un ejército regular (como es el caso del EDI) de tipo paramilitar (civiles armados). Contradictoriamente, y como ejemplo del doble estándar “Milicias palestinas” es uno de los eufemismos que los detractores de Israel utilizan para “legitimar” a los terroristas asesinos de civiles, ya que al no existir un estado se justifica la existencia de “civiles” armados que “luchan contra la ‘ocupación’ y por su ‘liberación’ nacional”. Finalmente Cafassi concluye que: “Algunos de los sucesores de los antiguos habitantes de los ghettos ignominiosos del nazismo han creı́do, como sus antiguos verdugos, que la solución para la paz se encontrarı́a 34. Fuente de los datos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodz_ghetto. 35. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodz_ghetto. 36. Cafassi, Emilio: Exterminio Tras El Muro publicado en el Diario La República AÑO 11—Nro. 3146, Montevideo, Uruguay el 11 de enero de 2009, disponible en Internet: http://www.larepublica.com.uy/contratapa/348506-el-exterminio-trasel-muro 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 123 primero en el encierro y posteriormente en el exterminio y el terror”37. Lo que no es más que la prolongación lógica de su intencionada exageración acerca del supuesto carácter ghéttico de la Franja de Gaza, si este territorio es “el mayor Ghetto de la historia”, entonces es lógico acusar a los judı́os (sucesores de los antiguos habitantes de los ghettos ignominiosos del nazismo) de ser (o pensar) como los nazis (han creı́do, como sus antiguos verdugos, que la solución para la paz se encontrarı́a primero en el encierro y posteriormente en el exterminio y el terror) esto es lisa y llanamente analfabetismo o malintención (sea cual fuere la situación es el ejecicio militante de los prejuicios). La crı́tica a Israel rápidamente se sobredimensiona y cruza los lı́mites de lo racional. En un interesante artı́culo—del cual cito una parte abajo—un profesor de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México describe correcta mente cual es el proceso “ideológico-discursivo” que recorre una parte de la intelectualidad en relación a las acciones de Israel: . . . me preocupa que, en el ánimo de defender al pueblo palestino, nuestros intelectuales de izquierda terminen apoyando a los fundamentalistas islámicos. No se trata, entonces, de aceptar el bombardeo o la invasión de la Franja de Gaza, ni mucho menos de justificar las muertes de civiles. Se trata, para mi gusto, de no olvidar el contexto internacional y regional en el que estas acciones se desenvuelven y de no caer en la ingenuidad en el análisis . . . Es natural que el abuso en el uso de la fuerza sea condenado. Es natural también que si uno ve a poblaciones inermes bombardeadas y vı́ctimas inocentes, lo primero que venga a la mente sea una condena inmediata e incuestionable . . . La condena es además fácilmente exagerada. Se habla inmediatamente de “genocidio” e incluso intelectuales en principio serios develan supuestos planes para vaciar Cisjordania y Gaza de palestinos. El asunto alcanza con igual facilidad tintes antisemitas. Nuestros intelectuales de izquierda sólo alcanzan a ver de un lado al oprobioso Estado de Israel y del otro al inerme y victimado pueblo palestino . . . El problema es que Hamas, al igual que Irán, ha jurado echar al mar a los judı́os de Israel y desaparecerlos del mapa. O sea, ellos sı́ predican el genocidio y no es difı́cil saber lo que harı́an si tuvieran la fuerza necesaria para llevar a cabo sus planes . . . A muchos intelectuales de izquierda les disgusta tanto el imperialismo estadounidense que no les importa terminar alineados con quien sea que se le oponga, aún si éstos son dictadores octogenarios con 50 años en el poder, populistas rayando en la locura o fundamentalistas islámicos. En el caso que nos ocupa, algunas posi37. Cafassi, Emilio: Exterminio Tras El Muro publicado en el Diario La República AÑO 11—Nro. 3146, Montevideo, Uruguay el 11 de enero de 2009, disponible en Internet: http://www.larepublica.com.uy/contratapa/348506-el-exterminio-trasel-muro. 124 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 ciones terminan defendiendo a Hamas, con tal de oponerse a Estados Unidos e Israel. Se mezclan ası́ las justas demandas del pueblo palestino con las pretensiones de los extremistas musulmanes. Se les olvida que el ideal de estos grupos no es el de constituir Estados democráticos, tolerantes y pacı́ficos; que ellos (estos intelectuales, generalmente secularizados) no sobrevivirı́an ni un mes en un régimen de ese tipo . . . Israel puede tener muchos defectos, pero por lo menos es una democracia, que defiende los mismos valores que nosotros. En su parlamento hay representantes árabes, que hablan por el millón y medio de árabes israelı́es, y la prensa tiene libertad de expresión. Sus intelectuales pueden estar o no de acuerdo con lo que su gobierno está haciendo y tienen libertad para decirlo. Eso es imposible en la mayor parte de los paı́ses árabes y en Irán. Israel es, en efecto, un pedazo de Occidente, con todos sus valores, en el Medio Oriente. Eso no quiere decir, por supuesto, que tengamos que estar de acuerdo y justificar todo lo que hace el gobierno israelı́, el cual se sostiene en una mayorı́a favorable a sus actos de guerra. Pero por lo menos esta circunstancia nos deberı́a prevenir contra un apoyo ingenuo a los grupos fundamentalistas islámicos.38 Israel, en el imaginario de cierta intelectualidad, parecerı́a asumir un topos equivalente al del agujero negro en la fı́sica, esto es, un lugar con leyes propias que no puede ser aprehendido por las mismas leyes universales que se aplica al resto del “universo” de las naciones. Allı́ todo adquiere una dimensión propia, merece un estatus único. Cuando vemos esta exclusiva obsesión irracional en relación a las conductas del estado de Israel, las exigencias de una conducta prı́stina, el monitores estrecho de sus acciones y el tratamiento desigual en relación al que se le brinda a los otras 200 naciones del mundo nos remite necesariamente a aquella idea que la causa del antisemitismo no hay que buscarla en el judı́o sino en el antisemita Israel es transformado en uno de los estados más criminales de la historia por un ejercicio de retórica consistente en asignarle a modo de adjetivos los conceptos que el discurso progresista considera la ‘encarnación’ del mal radical (nazi, genocida, colonialista, imperialista, terrorista de estado, racista, segregacionista, etc.) Pero esto no logra mágicamente que se materialicen esas relaciones sociales (a pesar que para el judeófobo ‘progresista’ tienen tanta realidad como lo tenı́a la ‘amenaza judı́a’ para el nazi o el ‘judı́o-vampiro’ consumidor ritual de sangre humana para el judeófobo medieval). De “asesinos de Cristo” a “asesinos rituales”; “de asesinos rituales” a 38. Blancarte, Roberto: Polı́ticamente Incorrecto; Hamas e Israel. Publicado en el sitio de Internet Milenio.com el 13/1/2009 en http://www.milenio.com/node/ 146603. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 125 “genocidas”, las fantası́as colectivas acerca de los judı́os tienen el poder de “materializarse”, de “asumir” una apariencia “creı́ble”. El hecho es que las fantası́as irracionales de los judeófobos se reproducen y se reciclan. De “conspiradores para asesinar a Cristo” a “conspiradores para traicionar a la nación que los cobija”; de “conspiradores para traicionar a la nación que los cobija” a “conspiradores para dominar al mundo”. De “usureros” a “rentistas del Holocausto”. Estos ejes discursivos se mantienen a lo largo de la historia y se reciclan y adaptan según las nuevas condiciones sociales. La base de estos mitos siempre es la misma: la perenne judeofobia. La principal caracterı́stica de la neojudeofobia es la confluencia de los tres principales grupos antisemitas de la actualidad (izquierda radical, integrismo islámico y extrema derecha) en espacios comunes a nivel discursivo (tres ejes judeofóbicos). MITO DE LA “CONSPIRACIÓN JUDEO-SIONISTA” El subsecretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos, Paúl Wolfowitz: “Está señalado como el operador de las empresas del lobby judı́o que actúan en el negocio de las guerras y de la “reconstrucción”, y se lo sindica como el principal introductor de la técnicas de tortura en la prisiones iraquı́es de la ocupación.”39 Ganó Bush y también lo hizo el lobby sionista que lo sostiene en cada una de sus acciones de apoyo al criminal premier israelı́ Sharon. Perdió Kerry y el lobby sionista que también repartió millones de dólares en su canasta electoral, sabe que cuenta con un aliado de hierro a la hora de entorpecer cualquier salida de autodeterminación del pueblo palestino, a la sazón el invadido, el agredido, el desterrado, pero jamás el vencido . . .”40 . . . las corrientes fundamentalistas, entre las cuales está el sionismo o fundamentalismo judı́o interesado en presionar mediante su “lobby” judeoamericano a la Administración Bush en que lleve a cabo la guerra de agresión imperialista contra Irak para que ası́ el holocausto palestino pase a un segundo plano . . .41 39. Anónimo: Wolfowitz: del lobby judı́o “al Banco Mundial” en el sitio web del Partido Comunista del Perú http://www.patriaroja.org.pe/html/colaboraciones/ wolfowitz_del_lobby_judio_al_banco_mundial.htm. 40. Aznárez, Carlos: Cuando Bush y casi 60 millones de razones para no dormir tranquilos en el sitio web del periódico Gramma (órgano oficial del Partido Comunista de Cuba) en http://www.granma.cu/espanol/2004/noviembre/sabado6/ razones-e.html el 22 de enero de 2002. 41. Nuñez, Eduardo: El Estado Criminal De Israel: Un Peligro Para La Paz Del Mundo, publicado en http://ecuador.indymedia.org/es/2003/07/3114.shtml el 22/7/2003. 126 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 . . . el lobby israelı́, a través de los medios de comunicación que controla en EEUU y otros paı́ses “occidentales”, pretende ocultar lo que el profesor de la Universidad de Jerusalén Yeshayahou Leibowitz expresó descarnadamente: “La fuerza del puño judı́o proviene del guante de acero que le recubre, y de los dólares que le acolchan.”42 El equı́voco en la aplicación por parte de los EEUU de la vı́a militar en Somalı́a o en Haitı́, en Panamá o Irak, por sobre la salida polı́tica negociada, recuerda en buena medida—salvando coyunturas—el episodio de Vietnam. No alcanza muchas veces con ser el “más fuerte” para vencer. Y ello es especialmente cierto en esta fase de total hegemonı́a del lobby judı́o-norteamericano. Su extraordinaria potencia aparente es su gran debilidad, ya que la polı́tica exterior de este imperio sui generis depende de la viabilidad de un micro-Estado: el de Israel. No hay ninguna analogı́a posible con Roma. La ausencia de claridad estratégica es, sin dudas, el mayor enemigo actual de la misma nación norteamericana.43 El lobby israelita tiene muchos “tanques de pensadores” que proveen los futuros consejeros a las varias administraciones, republicanas y demócratas . . . Fue una polı́tica constante—por parte del Estado de Israel y desde mucho antes de su independencia como Estado en May.48, el mantener distintos grupos de presión dentro de EEUU, y con base en una numerosa, y muchas veces adinerada, colectividad judı́a.44 NEGACIÓN/BANALIZACIÓN DEL HOLOCAUSTO “Holocausto” es una palabra de connotaciones bı́blicas que sirve muy bien a los propósitos sionistas, aunque tergiversa el sentido histórico de la barbarie nazifascista. A pesar del carácter apócrifo de gran parte del Diario de Ana Frank, sigue presentándoselo como “documento histórico”. Presentar como “genocidio” a la represión nazi contra los judı́os (“genocidio” significa el exterminio de un pueblo o una comunidad étnica, y la comunidad judı́a no fue exterminada sino que a partir de 1945 conoció un auge extraordinario), y hablar del “mayor genocidio de la historia”, sirve 42. Del artı́culo El filósofo Roger Garaudy denuncia la colaboración del Sionismo con el régimen Nazi. Documento de la “Izquierda Nacional” en http://www. geocities.com/izquierda_nacional/mundo004.html 43. Ceresole, Norberto (neonazi argentino ya fallecido, fue asesor del judeófobo presidente venezolano Hugo Chavez): El poder judı́o en Occidente y en Oriente publicado en un sitio neonazi de Internet llamado Radio Islam en la dirección http:/ /abbc2.com/islam/spanish/sion/poder/poder1.htm. 44. Ricchiardelli, Horacio: Informe Cóndor Mayo 2003 publicado en un sitio web vinculado al golpista Mohammed Alı́ Seineldı́n http://documentos.seineldin .8m.com/cn06052003.htm. 2011] LA NEOJUDEOPHOBIA 127 para borrar la atención de los grandes genocidios que ensucian la memoria de los vencedores de la guerra: la diezma de indios en América, la matanza de esclavos africanos, las represiones salvajes de Stalin . . . ¡60 millones de indı́genas (sobre un total de 80 millones) fueron asesinados en Sudamérica desde la conquista! ¡Y la propia segunda guerra mundial causó 50 millones de muertos, 20 de los cuales eran soviéticos y casi 10 millones alemanes! ¿Quién se acuerda hoy de la matanza de Dresde del 13 de febrero de 1945, cuando las bombas de fósforo anglonorteamericanas se cobraron 200.000 vı́ctimas civiles en pocas horas?45 Para proteger la sagrada mentira de los seis millones, se ha utilizado maniobras que parecen casi de ciencia ficción, especialmente para ahogar cualquier intento serio de demostrar su falsedad. Ası́, cuando en 1995 la revista japonesa de economı́a y negocios “Marcopolo” publico un inocente comentario señalando que “cada vez eran menos las razones para creer que en la Alemania Nazi habrı́a tenido lugar un Holocausto” de judı́os y gitanos, el todopoderoso judaı́smo mundial movió sus hilos y consiguió que tanto la revista como el periodista respectivo fueran sancionados sin ajuste a ninguna legislación existente, y que la revista Marcopolo no pueda hacer por el resto de su existencia, cualquier otra referencia sobre el Holocausto . . .46 “NAZIFICACIÓN” DE ISRAEL Israel se está comportando con los palestinos, siento tener que volverlo a decir, tal como la Alemania nazi se comportó en su tiempo con los judı́os. Y no me refiero sólo al gobierno de Israel, presidido por ese militar ultraderechista que es Ariel Sharon. Sino también al pueblo de Israel en su conjunto.47 “El Estado de Israel es un Estado criminal, genocida y terrorista, y su misma existencia es un problema para la paz mundial.”48 “Nunca podrán alegar los judı́os del mundo entero, ası́ como su 45. Del artı́culo El filósofo Roger Garaudy denuncia la colaboración del Sionismo con el régimen Nazi. Documento de la “Izquierda Nacional” en http:// www.geocities.com/izquierda_nacional/mundo004.html. 46. Anónimo: Las Pruebas De Que El Holocausto Judı́o Es Una Fantası́a publicado en el sitio neonazi Resistencia Aria, http://www.resistenciaria.org/revisionismo/MENTIRAS.htm. 47. Caballero, Antonio: La Naturaleza Humana publicado en el sitio de Internet de La Semana.com, dirección en la red http://semana.terra.com.co/opencms/ opencms/semana/articulo.html?id=74630. 48. Nuñez, Eduardo: El Estado Criminal De Israel: Un Peligro Para La Paz Del Mundo, publicado en http://ecuador.indymedia.org/es/2003/07/3114.shtml el 22/7/2003. 128 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:99 patrocinador EEUU, que no sabı́an lo que estaba sucediendo. Se trata de un holocausto semejante al que padecieron sus antepasados por el hecho de pertenecer a un pueblo. Como hoy padecen ese exterminio los ciudadanos palestinos. El silencio de las personas que sostengan al Estado de Israel los hará cómplices de un sistema de muerte con terribles consecuencias.”49 “Es triste ver la similitud casi paralela entre el trato que los nazis dispensaron a los judı́os y el que dispensan hoy los judı́os a los palestinos y árabes en general.”50 “Israel es un pueblo militarizado y genocida que quiere la expulsión de todo palestino: es continua la actitud exterminadora de estos neonazis con caftán, que a pesar de esta nueva “hoja de ruta” no cejan en su empeño de apoderarse de todo el territorio.”51 Esta confluencia discursiva, expresión del surgimiento y consolidación de un espacio polı́tico común (el movimiento antiglobalización), han parido una nueva forma de odio judeofóbico, han dado entidad a lo que podrı́amos llamar neojudeofobia. La situación actual de afluencia entre los grupos antisemitas nos da pie para afirmar, parafraseando a Marx y a Engels, que en vistas de los hechos acontecidos en los últimos años parecerı́a que: “un fantasma recorre el mundo”, el fantasma de la judeofobia . . . ¡Antisemitas del mundo, unı́os! 49. Garcı́a Fajardo, José Carlos: Holocausto Del Pueblo Palestino, publicado en la página de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, http://www.ucm.es/info/ solidarios/ccs/articulos/oriente_med/holocausto_del_pueblo_palestino.htm. 50. Anónimo: La Falsa Democracia Hebrea, http://diosesdeburja.iespana.es/ la_falsa_democracia_hebrea.htm. 51. Anónimo: Libertad Para Palestina en el sitio, http://diosesdeburja. iespana.es/libertad_para_palestina.htm. The Conversos Seth Ward* In the 14th and 15th centuries, many Iberian Jews were forced to convert to Catholicism. These Jews, called conversos, were loyal to their new faith, although some retained Jewish beliefs or practices and passed them along to their descendants. While memory of Jewish ancestry faded, there was a reawakening of interest in Judaism, including what was seen as a return to the Judaism of their ancestors in the late 20th century. Three elements are key to understanding the conversos phenomenon: genetic and genealogical considerations, the canon of evidence of survival of crypto-Judaic practices and beliefs, and a major shift in attitudes toward Judaism, which includes identification with the Judaic past. Key Words: Converso, Jew, Catholic, Spain Judaism flourished in medieval Spain, but after the riots of 1391, Jews came under increasing pressure to convert to Christianity. When Ferdinand and Isabella expelled their Jewish populations from Aragon and Castile in 1492, many chose to convert to Christianity; others moved to Portugal, where they essentially were forced to accept Christianity in 1497. Many persons in the Iberian peninsula in 1500 had Jewish ancestry, although it is hard to assess how many of them were forcibly baptized, and how many had freely chosen Christianity or had ancestors who had.1 More to the point, it is not possible to ascertain how many were ardent, believing Catholics. In some cases, Catholics who were confirmed Christians, rejecting Jewish belief and practice, nevertheless were proud of their Jewish heritage, by which they were linked to Christ in the flesh, as well as in faith. Nevertheless, Spanish anti-Jewish sentiment was extended to the New Christians, and Spain adopted blood purity laws, e.g., limpieza de sangre, requiring proof of pure Christian ancestry, increasing the likelihood of Spaniards suppressing any knowledge of their Jewish roots. 1. Estimates range from 100,000-200,000 of Jews converted to Christianity in the Iberian Peninsula. 129 130 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:129 Moshe Maimon’s The Marranos (1893) In the 16th and 17th centuries, there were opportunities for converso descendants to live openly as Jews—in the Americas, in the Ottoman Empire, and in some European countries. In some of these places, these returnees to Judaism were often called Spanish-Portuguese Jews. But open practice of Judaism was not possible in Spain or Portugal or areas controlled by them. Indeed, the Spanish Inquisition, adopted in 1480, and the Portuguese Inquisition, founded in the 1530s, were often particularly vigilant about Judaizing among persons known to have converso ancestry. These inquisitions were perhaps most concerned with Judaizing in the first decades of their existence. Although later they more often prosecuted Protestants, blasphemers, and other heretics, they turned their attention to Jews from time to time; in New Spain, for example, most notably in 1591 and 1640. The last Spanish Inquisition persecution for secret Jewish practices was in the 19th century. Except in isolated communities, practices among New Christians and their descendants reflecting ancient Jewish customs or strategies adopted to avoid inquisitorial suspicion vanished; those that differed in any way from the typical Catholic practice of the region were kept private and generally were maintained without specific reference to any connection to Judaism. In the first three quarters of the 20th century, there were a few reports of Jewish identity retention among converso descendants, and some attempts to revive some form of Judaism. Among the more notable of such campaigns was that of Portugal’s Barros Bastro.2 Indeed, a few remote communities in Portugal retained distinctive elements of belief, liturgy, and practice from their Jewish heritage, although Barros’ endeavors did not meet with much success. In North and South America there were individual families of largely Spanish colonial or mestizo heritage who maintained 2. Capt. Artur Carlos de Barros Basto (1887-1961) was a decorated Portuguese military hero and leader of the return to Judaism movement for the crypto-Jews. 2011] THE CONVERSOS 131 they had Jewish ancestry, had practices considered consistent with a Jewish heritage, or reported traditions about only marrying with certain families (historian Cecil Roth, for example, was aware of only faint echoes and individual persons who claimed Marrano ancestry). For the most part, persons of converso heritage were unaware of any Jewish practices or beliefs in their families, and if they had unusual practices would not have described them as Jewish, at least in public, nor did they establish formal communities. Venta Prieta in Mexico was a rare exception. Raphael Patai published two important studies on the Indian Jews of Venta Prieta; he discounted converso heritage in his first published study, although he modified his views in a later study. Otherwise, there was little general awareness of the survival of any Jewish elements of belief, practice, or identity among populations that might have included descendants of conversos. In the final quarter of the 20th century, persons of Hispanic heritage in general came into more contact with Jews and more into the American mainstream. There was a growing acceptance of multiculturalism in America, television programs such as Roots emphasized the search for heritage, and, perhaps most relevant for readers of this journal, the level of antisemitism appears to have declined among Hispanos and everyone else—at least in the United States. It is hardly surprising that there was a major change in attitudes and openness: The persistence of Jewish heritage among persons of Hispanic heritage began to be discussed more frequently with outsiders, at first only behind closed doors, and appeared in popular accounts and in research. Hispanos who came into contact with Jewish families wondered whether some of their own family practices had a Jewish source.3 One component of this phenomenon involves the discovery or determination of Jewish ancestry. It seems to me that the sheer number of conversos and their descendants’ eventual intermarriage with all ranks of Spanish society make it statistically improbable that any person of predominantly Spanish heritage alive today is totally devoid of Jewish ancestors. This fact—or at least the high likelihood of common ancestry between modern Jews and Spaniards or Hispanos—is not only indicated by research suggesting a high preponderance of common Y-chromosome haplotypes, but also somewhat obscured by this research. Suppose there are some 20 generations since the late 1300s—and thus 220, or over one million, distinct possi3. I discussed the literature up to the mid-1990s and noted its growth elsewhere. See Seth Ward, “Converso Descendants in the American Southwest: A Report on Research, Resources, and the Changing Search for Identity,” Proceedings of the 6th EAJS Toledo, 1998. 132 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:129 ble strands; male-only genetic heritage examines only one of these lineages. Interest in crypto-Judaism has also been sparked by advances in the availability of genealogical resources, making it easier to trace ancestry to specific persons of known Jewish heritage. There has also been research suggesting some possible converso-descendant communities have a higher incidence of genetic defects often associated with Jewish communities, such as the autoimmune Pemphigus vulgaris and the breast cancer gene mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Another issue sparking much debate is what may be termed the canon of evidence of practices said to reflect Jewish ancestry in such populations. These include reports about lighting candles on Friday nights, avoidance of pork (in some cases only on special occasions), prayer meetings on Saturdays, objects or symbols thought to be Jewish, or even the transmission of family traditions that “we are Jews.” In most cases, it is possible to explain these traditions in various ways—even the transmission of Jewish family identification. Nevertheless, these practices, symbols, and transmissions occur in a well-defined population, which has been demonstrated to have at least some crypto-Jewish ancestry. A third component—to this author the most important—is a sense of increased identification with a Jewish heritage among Hispano populations. Until the first generation born after World War II came of age, there was little interest in claiming this heritage. On the contrary, more frequently the foundation story was that Jews and Muslims were intruders who were active in Spain for eight centuries, and, thankfully, expelled or converted without a trace. In Jewish circles, also, it was usually assumed that the descendants of conversos who had not managed to escape to places such as Amsterdam, Salonica, or New York had lost any traces of the memory of a Jewish past. The publication and broadcast of accounts of crypto-Judaism starting in the 1970s, increasing substantially in the 1980s, changed this assumption both among Jews and Hispanos. Jews were fascinated by stories of Jewish persistence in the face of antisemitism, assimilation, and prejudice. Individuals of Spanish ancestry, having more contact with Jews, a more positive attitude toward them, and becoming part of a society that valued multiculturalism, also were drawn to consider the possibility that their heritage was more complex than they might have thought. Some converso descendants have chosen to practice Judaism openly. In some populations, rabbinic authorities have decided to the communities were sufficiently endogamous to allow those wishing to live as Jews to be accepted as such without worrying about conversion or ceremonies of return; such a decision has been rendered about the Chuetas of Majorca, according to news reported as this article is being written. In other cases, converso descendants have chosen to formally convert to Judaism, or to 2011] THE CONVERSOS 133 identify as Jews without the conversion requested by rabbinic authorities. In some communities, Spanish speakers in Mexico and the United States have chosen to identify with Messianic congregations, explaining their mixture of Jewish and Christian beliefs and customs as reflecting their converso heritage. CONCLUSION Recently, Latin American and Hispano-American identity has included the “return” of Judaism. Studies by anthropologists and sociologists preserve the anonymity of the statements of their subjects, so sometimes it is difficult to assess the extent to which the attitudes and choices expressed in the studies reflect a small number of respondents or the views of a larger group. But there seems little doubt that many persons of Hispanic background have been attracted to Jewish beliefs and practices, and in some cases have undergone formal conversions, in others asserting that their families have always been Jewish—and thus they identify as Jews and have adopted lifestyles based on Judaism. Some communities have sought rabbinic guidance, adopting practices more like those of mainstream Judaism. Other communities adopted a crypto-Jewish tradition, reflecting primarily practices reported in these communities, or have asserted an identity they see as both Jewish and Christian by joining messianic congregations. In many more cases, there is an openness to the element of Jewish and Islamic heritage among Hispanics, even when this is not their primary religious or community identity. Half a century ago, persons of Hispanic heritage would have argued that the Jewish and Muslim presence on the Iberian peninsula was an 800year aberration. They might have acknowledged some mestizo or European ancestors but would have made antisemitic statements. Today, it would seem that many of those with an Hispanic heritage are proud of Jewish contributions to Spain and value this contribution as part of their own heritage. They openly identify themselves as descendants of conversos, in ways unthinkable a generation or two ago. *Seth Ward teaches in the religious studies at the University of Wyoming, Laramie. He is a research associate of the Institute for the Study of Israel in the Middle East at the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver, a Coolidge Fellow at the Association for Religion and Intellectual Life, and vice president for programs of the Society for Crypto Jewish Studies. 134 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:129 REFERENCES Carvajal, Doreen, “Majorcan Descendants of Spanish Jews Who Converted Are Recognized as Jews,” New York Times, July 10, 2011, http://www.nytimes. com/2011/07/11/world/europe/11iht-conversos11.html. Hordes, Stanley M., To the Ends of the Earth. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. Patai, Raphael, “The Jewish Indians of Mexico” [originally published 1950], Jewish Folklore and Ethnology Review 18 1-2 (1996): 2-12, and “Venta Prieta Revisited” [originally published 1965], Jewish Folklore and Ethnology Review 18:1-2 (1996): 13-18. Roth, Cecil, A History of the Marranos, Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1975. Ward, Seth, “Converso Descendants in the U.S. Southwest: A Report on Research, Resources, and the Changing Search for Identity,” Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the European Association for Jewish Studies, ed. Angel SaenzBadillos. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999, 677-86. El Conversos Seth Ward* Los judı́os y el judaı́smo florecieron en la España Medieval, pero judı́os llegaron bajo una creciente presión para convertir al cristianismo, especialmente después de disturbios en varias ciudades en 1391. Cuando Fernando e Isabel expulsaron a sus poblaciones judı́as de Aragón y Castilla en 1492, muchos decidieron convertirse al cristianismo. Muchos se trasladaron a Portugal, donde esencialmente fueron obligados a aceptar el cristianismo en 1497. Muchas personas en la Penı́nsula Ibérica en 1500 han tenido ascendencia judı́a, aunque es difı́cil evaluar cuántos de ellos por la fuerza fueron bautizados y cuántos habı́an elegido libremente cristianismo, o tenı́an antepasados que tenı́an. Más al punto, no es posible determinar cuántos eran ardientes, creyendo que los católicos. En algunos casos, católicos que fueron confirmaron a cristianos, rechazando la creencia y la práctica, sin embargo fueron orgullosos de su herencia judı́a, por que ellos estaban vinculados a Cristo “de carne y hueso”, ası́ como en la fe. Sin embargo, sentimiento antisemita español se extendió a los cristianos nuevos, y España una serie de normas sobre limpieza de sangre “pureza de sangre,” que requieren prueba de puro viejo cristiano ascendencia, y que hizo españoles más probable serı́an suprimir conocimiento de raı́ces judı́as. Moshe Maimon’s The Marranos 1893 En los siglos XVI y XVII, hay oportunidades para descendientes de conversos a vivir abiertamente como los judı́os, en las Américas, en el Imperio Otomano y en algunos paı́ses europeos. En algunos de estos lugares, estos repatriados al judaı́smo se denominaban a “Hispano-portugués” judı́os. Pero no fue posible práctica abierta del judaı́smo en España o Portugal o en zonas controladas por ellos. De hecho, la Inquisición española, aprobada en 1480 y la Inquisición portuguesa, fundada en 1530, eran a 135 136 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:135 menudo preocupa particularmente “Judaizar” entre las personas que tienen ascendencia de conversos. Estas inquisiciones tal vez estaban más preocupados por judaizar en las primeras décadas de su existencia; Aunque procesa a los protestantes, blasfemos y otros herejes, dirigieron su atención a los judı́os de vez en cuando; en la Nueva España, por ejemplo, sobre todo en 1591 y 1640, tratada en detalle por hordas de Stan; el último enjuiciamiento Inquisición española prácticas secretas de judı́os fue en el siglo XIX. Por lo tanto, excepto en las comunidades muy aisladas, las prácticas de los nuevos cristianos y sus descendientes que refleja la antigua costumbre judı́a o estrategias adoptadas para evitar sospechas inquisitoriales desaparecieron; los que difieren en absoluto la práctica católica tı́pica de la región se mantienen en privado y generalmente se mantuvieron sin referencia especı́fica a cualquier conexión con el judaı́smo. En los primeros tres trimestres del siglo 20th, habı́a pocos informes de retención de la identidad judı́a entre los descendientes de conversos y algunos intentos de revivir de alguna forma del judaı́smo. Entre los más notables de estas campañas fue la de Barros Bastro en Portugal. de hecho, algunas comunidades remotas en Portugal mantuvo elementos distintivos de la creencia, la liturgia y la práctica de su herencia judı́a, aunque los esfuerzos de Barros no tuvieron mucho éxito. En América del Norte y del Sur habı́a familias individuales de en gran medida española colonial o patrimonio mestizo, quien mantuvo tenı́an ascendencia judı́a, o habı́an prácticas considera coherente con una herencia judı́a, o informó tradiciones acerca de casarse sólo con algunas familias. Cecil Roth conocı́a sólo ecos débiles y las personas individuales que reclamó la ascendencia de Marrano. En su mayor parte personas de conversos patrimonio desconocen cualquier judı́as prácticas o creencias en sus familias, y si tenı́an prácticas inusuales no habrı́a describió como judı́o, al menos en público, ni establecen comunidades formales. Venta Prieta en México fue una rara excepción. Raphael Patai publicado dos estudios importantes sobre los “judı́os de India” de Venta Prieta; descontó conversos patrimonio en su primer estudio publicado, aunque modificó sus puntos de vista en un estudio posterior. De lo contrario, fue poco conocimiento general de la supervivencia de cualquier judı́os elementos de convicción, práctica o identidad entre la población que podrı́a incluir a descendientes de conversos. En el último trimestre del siglo 20th, especialmente en los Estados Unidos, las personas de la herencia hispana en general llegaron en más contacto con los judı́os y más en la corriente estadounidense. Habı́a una creciente aceptación del multiculturalismo en América, programas de televisión como raı́ces hizo hincapié en la búsqueda de patrimonio y, quizá más relevante para los lectores de este diario, el nivel de antisemitismo parece disminuyeron entre Hispanos y todos los demás, al menos en los Estados 2011] EL CONVERSOS 137 Unidos. No es nada sorprendente que hubo un gran cambio en las actitudes y la apertura: la persistencia de la herencia judı́a entre personas de herencia hispana comenzó a discutir con más frecuencia con los de afuera, al principio sólo a puerta cerrada y apareció en las cuentas de populares y en la investigación. Hispanos que entraron en contacto con familias judı́as se pregunta si algunas de sus prácticas de familia tenı́an un origen judı́o. Examinó la literatura hasta mediados de la década de 1990 y señaló su crecimiento en un artı́culo publicado en el procedimiento de EAJS. Uno de los componentes de este fenómeno implica el descubrimiento o la determinación de ascendencia judı́a. Me parece que el número de conversos y matrimonios eventual de sus descendientes con todos los rangos de la sociedad española hace estadı́sticamente subsidiada que cualquier persona de patrimonio predominantemente español vivo hoy es totalmente carente de antepasados judı́os. Este hecho, o al menos la alta probabilidad de ascendencia común entre los judı́os y españoles o Hispanos moderno: se indica no sólo por la investigación, lo que sugiere una alta preponderancia de haplotypes común de cromosoma Y, pero también algo oscurecida por esta investigación. Supongamos que hay unos 20 generaciones desde los finales del siglo XIV y ası́ 220 o un millón distintas hebras posibles; patrimonio genético sólo macho examina sólo uno de estos linajes. Interés en crypto-judaı́smo también ha sido provocado por avances en la disponibilidad de recursos genealógicos, haciendo más fácil su ascendencia de seguimiento a personas especı́ficas del patrimonio judı́o conocido. También ha habido investigación sugerir que algunas posibles comunidades de descendientes de conversos tienen una mayor incidencia de ciertos defectos genéticos asociados a menudo con las comunidades judı́as, como el Pénfigo vulgar y las “Judı́o” mutaciones de gen de cáncer de mama en BRCA1 y BRCA2. Otra cuestión provocando mucho debate es lo que puede llamarse el “canon de pruebas” de prácticas para reflejar en esas poblaciones de ascendencia judı́a, dijo. Estos incluyen informes acerca de iluminación velas el viernes por la noche, evitar la carne de cerdo, en algunos casos sólo en ocasiones especiales, reuniones de oración los sábados, objetos o sı́mbolos que piensa que es judı́o, o incluso la transmisión de las tradiciones familiares que “somos judı́os”. En la mayorı́a de los casos, es posible explicar estas tradiciones de diversas maneras, incluso la transmisión de identificación familiar judı́a. Sin embargo, estas prácticas, los sı́mbolos y las transmisiones se producen en una población bien definida, que se ha demostrado que tienen al menos algunas ascendencia judı́a crypto. Un tercer componente, este autor más importante—es una sensación de mayor identificación con una herencia judı́a entre las poblaciones de Hispano. Hasta la primera generación nacida después de la Segunda Guerra 138 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:135 Mundial la mayorı́a de edad, hubo poco interés al reclamar este patrimonio de la humanidad. Por el contrario, más frecuentemente, la “historia de la Fundación” fue que los judı́os y los musulmanes eran intrusos que estaban activos en España durante ocho siglos y afortunadamente, expulsados o convierten sin dejar rastro. También, en cı́rculos judı́os, normalmente se asumió que los descendientes de conversos que no habı́an conseguido escapar a lugares como Amsterdam, Salónica o Nueva York habı́an perdido cualquier rastro de la memoria de un pasado judı́o. La publicación y difusión de las cuentas de crypto-judaı́smo, a partir de la década de 1970, aumentando sustancialmente en la década de 1980, cambian esto tanto entre los judı́os y los Hispanos. Los judı́os estaban fascinados por las historias de judı́o persistencia de asimilación, antisemitismo y los prejuicios. Personas de ascendencia española, tener más contacto con los judı́os, una actitud más positiva hacia ellos y formar parte de una sociedad que valora la multiculturalidad, se señalan también a considerar la posibilidad de que su patrimonio fue más compleja de lo que podrı́an haber pensado. Algunos descendientes de conversos han elegido práctica judaı́smo abiertamente. En algunas poblaciones, decidieron las autoridades rabı́nicas las comunidades fueron endógamos suficientemente como para permitir que aquellos que desean vivir como judı́os para ser aceptado como tal sin preocuparse de conversión o ceremonias de retorno; esa decisión ha quedado sobre los Chuetas de Mallorca, segun noticias informados que se está escribiendo este ensayo. En otros casos, los descendientes de conversos han elegido formalmente convertir al judaı́smo o identificar como judı́os sin la conversión solicitada por las autoridades rabı́nicas. En algunas comunidades hispanohablantes en México y Estados Unidos han optado por identificar con congregaciones mesiánicas, explicando su mezcla de creencias judı́as y cristianas y costumbres como el reflejo de su herencia de conversos. CONCLUSIÓN Muy final del siglo XX (20th) y principios del XXI (21st), esto ha llevado a una mayor conciencia de un componente judı́a en América Latina y el hispanoamericano de identidad e incluso a un movimiento de “regreso”. Estudios realizados por antropólogos y sociólogos tienden a ocultar las declaraciones de sus súbditos, por lo que a veces es difı́cil evaluar la medida en que las actitudes y decisiones expresadas en los estudios reflejan un pequeño número de encuestados o las opiniones de un grupo más grande. Pero parece que hay pocas dudas de que muchas personas de origen Hispano han sido atraı́das por las prácticas y creencias judı́as y en algunos casos han sido sometidos a conversiones formales, en otros afirmando que sus familias han sido siempre judı́os—y ası́ identificar 2011] EL CONVERSOS 139 como judı́os y han adoptado el estilo de vida basado en el judaı́smo. Algunas comunidades han buscado orientación rabı́nica, adopción de prácticas más como las del judaı́smo principal; otros han afirmado una especie de tradición “Cripto-judı́o”, que refleja principalmente las prácticas en estas comunidades, o han afirmado una identidad ven como judı́os y cristianos uniéndose a congregaciones mesiánicas. En muchos casos más, hay una apertura para el elemento del patrimonio judı́o (y Islámica) entre los hispanos, incluso cuando no es su principal identidad religiosa o comunidad. Hace medio siglo la mayorı́a de las personas de herencia hispana habrı́a argumentó que la presencia judı́a y musulmana en la Penı́nsula Ibérica fue una aberración del año 800, y aunque podrı́a han indicado algunos mestizos o antepasados europeos, no habrı́a reconocido a cualquier antepasados como judı́o y probablemente hubiera anotado alto sobre ı́ndices de antisemitismo. Hoy, sin embargo, parece que muchas personas del patrimonio hispano están orgullosos de las contribuciones de los judı́os de que España lo que era y esta contribución como parte de su propio patrimonio de valor y abiertamente identificar como descendientes de conversos, de manera impensable una generación o dos hace. *Seth Ward se enseña en los estudios religiosos en la Universidad de Wyoming en Laramie. Es un investigador asociado del Instituto para el estudio de Israel en el Medio Oriente en la escuela de posgrado de estudios internacionales en la Universidad de Denver. REFERENCES Doreen Carvajal, “Majorcan Descendants of Spanish Jews Who Converted Are Recognized as Jews,” New York Times, July 10, 2011 http:// www.nytimes.com/2011/07/11/world/europe/11iht-conversos11.html. Stanley M. Hordes, To the Ends of the Earth. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. Raphael Patai, “The Jewish Indians of Mexico” [originally published 1950], Jewish Folklore and Ethnology Review 18 1-2 (1996), 2-12, and “Venta Prieta Revisited” [originally published 1965] 555518:1-2 (1996), 13-18. Cecil Roth, A History of the Marranos. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1975. Seth Ward, “Converso Descendants in the U.S. Southwest: A Report on Research, Resources, and the Changing Search for Identity,” Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the European Association for Jewish Studies, ed. Angel Saenz-Badillos. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1999, pp. 67786. Latin America and Iranian Terror Networks— Land of Opportunity Sergio Widder* The New Antisemitism has found ways to express itself in Latin America. This renewed hostility is expressed by political coalitions that bring together radical left-wing elements and religious fundamentalist groups, which are the main voices that promote ancient antisemitic rhetoric and conspiracy theories about Jewish and/or Zionist control of the world. Key Words: Jews, Antisemitism, Argentina, Latin America, Iran A FERTILE ARENA The main regional hub for antisemitic groups is the Brazil-based World Social Forum (WSF). Gathered under the slogan “Another world is possible,” the WSF was founded in 2001 by leaders from the then-opposite, now ruling Partido dos Trabalhadores (Laborers Party, currently undergoing its third consecutive presidential term). The founding purpose was to provide a kind of response to the “neo-liberal, economic globalization,” promoting a “globalization of international solidarity” instead. The WSF holds annual meetings, but regional forums are scheduled throughout the year. Several legitimate grievances are addressed at those meetings (e.g., environment care policies, sexual exploitation, child labor), but a quick look at a program shows that no less than 10 to 15 percent of the activities are devoted to the Middle East and particularly “the Palestinian cause,” the delegitimization of Israel, and the justification of terrorism as “legitimate resistance.” Whatever happens in the main meeting of the WSF has an impact in the regional forums, and contributes to shape the agenda of radical leftwing groups all over the world. To offer just one example, it was there that the Simon Wiesenthal Center learned about the patterns of the initiative by pro-Palestinian groups against the Israeli security fence, half a year before its actual presentation at The Hague. The WSF also provides the framework for the coordination of the global “Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions” (BDS) campaign against Israel. The impact in Latin America was visible during the 2006 Israel- 141 142 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:141 Hizbollah and the 2009 Israel-Hamas wars, when virulent antisemitic hostility, disguised as “anti-Zionism,” reached its peak. This context is providing an appealing opportunity for the radical Iranian regime in its search for new allies that could help to combat its isolation. “21ST-CENTURY SOCIALISM”—OR ANTISEMITISM? Most of the Latin American groups active at the forums find their political reference in the ALBA (Bolivian Alternative for the Americas)1 bloc, led by Venezuela’s Húgo Chávez and joined by Evo Morales (Bolivia), Rafael Correa (Ecuador), Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua), and Fidel and Raul Castro (Cuba). This bloc is also the main partner for the growing Iranian penetration in Latin America. It is interesting that all of these leaders have reached power by building their legitimacy from outside the traditional political systems and/or in connection to institutional crisis in their countries: Chávez is an army colonel whose first attempt to get to the presidency was a failed coup d’etat; Morales was a leader of indigenous peasants working at coca plantations; Correa is the first stable Ecuadorian president in years; Ortega and the Castro brothers were leaders of armed revolutions, although Ortega later ran for and won free elections. All of them have also provided a warm reception to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and have established diverse cooperation initiatives. In the case of Bolivia, beyond the common interests regarding energy resources, Iran has also financed humanitarian projects. A new hospital, named “Islamic Republic of Iran—The Red Crescent Society,” was inaugurated by presidents Morales and Ahmadinejad in November 2009. The hospital provides health services for over 800,000 people of El Alto, a modest neighborhood, 40 minutes away from the capital city, La Paz, and home to a wide constituency of President Morales.2 But beyond Iran’s generosity, a controversy arose with the suggestion that nurses and other female staff wear a veil while on duty.3 1. The acronym ALBA was created by Húgo Chávez as a counter to the ALCA (Área de Libre Comercio de las Américas—FTAA, the U.S. initiative for a Free Trade Agreement of the Americas). In Spanish, the word “alba” means “dawn,” so the bloc’s name is intended to proclaim a “new era” for Latin America. 2. “Se afianzan los vı́nculos con Irán,” La Nación, December 6, 2009, http:// www.lanacion.com.ar/1208421-se-afianzan-los-vinculos-con-iran. 3. “Velo islámico en Bolivia,” http://www.bbc.co.uk/mundo/america_latina/ 2009/11/091126_2328_bolivia_islam_gm.shtml. 2011] TERROR NETWORKS 143 We should remember that Evo Morales’ decision to expel the Israeli ambassador under the pretext of the war in Gaza was made prior to Venezuela’s decision for the same reason. Morales’ anti-Israeli rhetoric is permanent, and he uses it as a starting point to criticize other “enemies”: prior to being elected president, he had labeled Chile “the Israel of Latin America,” referring to the neighboring country’s alleged “expansionism.” Having said this, it is also fair to say that, so far, the small Bolivian Jewish community has not suffered a direct impact from this situation. The case of Venezuela is different. There, it is evident that antisemitism has become a state policy. Attacks against Jewish targets have become usual and remain uninvestigated and, of course, unpunished. Some relevant incidents include: • Two police raids against the Hebraica Jewish Center of Caracas. The pretext was that judicial authorities were looking for hidden weapons and explosives. In January 2009, Tiferet Israel synagogue was vandalized. • On Christmas Eve 2005, President Chávez delivered a long speech. during which he said that “the world has wealth for all, but some minorities, among them the descendants of the murderers of Christ, have seized the wealth of the world.”4 • Frequent attacks from state-sponsored media, notably from a TV show, The Razor Blade, and a Web site, “Aporrea.org.”5 During the 2009 Israel-Hamas war, Aporrea published a “plan of action” against the Venezuelan Jewish community, which included the “confiscation of Jewish properties” and boycotts of supermarkets where kosher food could be bought. Aporrea’s editors later disassociated from the content of the article, but this step was taken only after they received strong criticism. • A close advisor to Chávez in his early days was the late Argentine sociologist Norberto Ceresole, an antisemitic propagandist, Holocaust denier, and author of Terrorismo fundamentalista judı́o (Jewish Fundamentalist Terrorism), in which he blames Jews for the bombing of the AMIA Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, in 1994. Another advisor was the late Argentine Colonel Mohammed Ali Seineldin, a far-right nationalist who used to say to his troops that “green horses do not exist, nor decent Jews.” The scope of the attacks against the Jewish community led to an 4. The French newspaper Liberation harshly criticized Chávez for this speech, in an article titled “Le credo antisémite de Hugo Chávez,” http://www.liberation.fr/ monde/010134744-l3-credo-de-hugo-ch-vez. 5. The word aporrea means “beat” in English. 144 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:141 unprecedented criticism from the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR), a body of the Organization of American States (OAS). In February 2010, the IACHR issued the report “Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela,” which describes the current status quo in that country, including references to antisemitic incidents6: • Paragraph 780: “. . . the Commission is concerned by reports claiming that the Jewish community in Venezuela is being especially affected by violent incidents, including antisemitic statements and incidents in various media outlets, together with graffiti painted on the walls of various Jewish institutions and homes.” • Paragraph 781: “( . . . ) on December 2, 2007, police officers raided the headquarters of the Hebrew Social, Cultural and Sports Center (“La Hebraica”) in Caracas. . . . [S]ome 30 officers of the Intelligence and Prevention Services Directorate forced their way into the Center . . . [A]bsent a prosecutor from the Attorney General’s Office, the police officers presented an order ( . . . ) that allegedly gave no grounds for the operation . . .” • Paragraph 782: “In response to the situation ( . . . ) the Commission asked the State to submit information on the incident and on the reasons for the operation carried out at La Hebraica. ( . . . ) [T]he State told the Commission that “the operation in question was intended to conduct a detailed search of all the facility’s rooms in order to locate evidence of criminalistic interest related to the alleged commission of a crime against public order . . .” ( . . . ) The IACHR believes that the information furnished by the state regarding the operation at the Hebrew Center is inadequate to explain the incident that occurred at the institution’s headquarters. • The report also refers to the desecration of the Tiferet Israel synagogue in January 2009, as well as the series of incidents that happened in that month (Paragraph 783). It also mentions, as a precedent, the speech given by President Chávez on Christmas Eve in 2005, in which he stated that “the world has enough for everyone, indeed, but it happens that some minorities, the descendants of those who crucified Christ ( . . . ) seized the world’s riches” (Paragraph 784). The Caracas–Tehran axis is also trying to influence regional politics. In June 2010, the ALBA bloc proposed to pass a condemnation against Israel at the 2010 OAS General Assembly in Lima, Peru. This initiative was presented at the opening of the first plenary and was voiced by Ecuador, a 6. The complete report can be found at http://www.cidh.oas.org/pdf%20files/ VENEZUELA%202009%20ENG.pdf. 2011] TERROR NETWORKS 145 few days after the “Gaza Flotilla” incident. The proposal was rejected, but almost one third of the member states supported it. Even more sensitive—and, indeed, a threat to regional stability—is the permission granted by Chávez for the construction of an Iranian missile base on Venezuelan soil. According to a report originally published by the German daily Die Welt in November 2010, the facilities will include the deployment of platforms for storage of missiles with diverse ranges, plus four mobile platforms, which will be operated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The agreement grants permission to Iran to open fire “in case of emergency.” The installations are scheduled for activation by the end of 2011. NAZI SAFE HAVEN FOR TERRORISTS Opposite ALBA’s partnership with Iran is Argentina’s judicial case against a group of high-level Iranian officials for their alleged responsibility in the bombing of the AMIA Jewish Center on July 18, 1994, which left 85 people dead and hundreds injured. A special investigation unit, led by Chief Prosecutor Alberto Nisman, has concluded that the attack was decided by the highest Iranian political leadership, including former president Hashemi Rafsanjani and former foreign minister Alı́ Akbar Velayati. A key role was played by the former cultural attaché to Argentina, Sheikh Mohsen Rabbani, who played the part of a field commander. The warrants were endorsed by Interpol with “Red Notice” status, with the exception of Rafsanjani, Velayati, and Hadi Soleimanpour (former Iranian ambassador to Argentina), because they were considered “high authorities.” This does not diminish their alleged responsibility.7 The Argentine government backed the judicial case actively. Both the late former president Néstor Kirchner and current president Cristina Kirchner condemned Iran’s protection to the suspects at successive editions of the UN General Assembly, and demanded that they be submitted to a court trial. These initiatives from the Argentine authorities have caused a reaction from Iran: they of course dismissed the charges, started to co-opt Argentine 7. According to the prosecutor’s indictment, the AMIA attack was decided on August 13, 1993, in Mashad (Iran). In addition to the names mentioned above, warrants were issued against Mohsen Rezai (commander of the Pasdaran–Iranian revolutionary guard), Ahmad Vahidi (commander of the Al Quds force), Ali Fallahijan (former intelligence and security minister), Ahmad Reza Asghari (third secretary of the Iranian Embassy to Argentina, between 1991 and 1994), and Imad Mougnieh (Hizbollah security chief, murdered February 2008). 146 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:141 activists, and eventually selected scholars to advocate in their favor. A radical left-wing leader, Luis D’Elı́a, has become an actual spokesman for Iran, and has publicly endorsed the theory that “the AMIA Center might have been bombed by ‘the Jewish far right’; remember that they were the ones who murdered [Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak] Rabin.” D’Elı́a has recently launched his campaign for the 2011 Parliamentary elections; joining him was the Iranian chargé d’affaires. He has also led solidarity missions to Tehran. Although his constituency is not very wide, D’Elı́a has a very high profile in the media, and has been an ally of both Néstor and Cristina Kirchner. When the Argentine justice issued the indictment against Iranian officials, in 2006, the then Venezuelan Ambassador to Argentina instructed D’Elia to organize in Buenos Aires a demonstration in support of Iran.8 The incident ended with Argentina requesting that Venezuela changed its ambassador (Chávez had no other option than accepting). Another example of Iran’s counter action in Argentina is an academic agreement between the University of La Plata (a public university, 40 miles away from Buenos Aires), and the University of Tehran, whose chairman, Farhad Rahbar, is a former deputy minister of intelligence of the Iranian regime. The agreement was fostered by the Asociación Argentina Islámica (Argentine Islamic Association). WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM THE “MODERATES” If Venezuela is the closest ally for Iran in Latin America and Argentina is currently the country holding coldest relations with it, there are others who are playing a more ambiguous role. In this sense, probably the most disturbing and worrying situation was the warm reception by former Brazilian president Lula da Silva to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a fantastic PR opportunity for Ahmadinejad and Iran. Lula even praised the “legitimate elections” won by Iran’s president in 2009 (we only need to remember the brutal oppression against dissidents in Tehran’s streets). The motivations were not only economic—Iran is an interesting market for Brazilian goods—but also political: Lula had explained that he wanted to “bring Iran to the negotiations table and help building bridges for dialogue” with the Western world. The businesses continue; the mediation initiative was a fiasco. We must add that there is a Brazilian connection to the AMIA attack: according to the investigation, Samuel Salman El Reda, a Colombian of Lebanese origin accused of being the local leader of the operative terrorist 8. See http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2006/11/15/elpais/p-00315.htm. 2011] TERROR NETWORKS 147 cell, had an apartment—a safe house—in Foz do Iguaçu, on the Brazilian side of the Triple Frontier (Argentina–Brazil–Paraguay). The new president of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff, has stated that her government will consider the respect for human rights as a guideline for her foreign policy. Although it is still early for a deep analysis (she took office on January 1, 2011), there are some alarming signals: in a series of articles published in April 2011 issue of Veja magazine, a weekly with the widest circulation in Brazil, denounced the existence of a “terrorist network” in the country. Such network includes elements from al Qaeda’s “Jihad Media Battalion,” as well as some twenty “militants” from al Qaeda, Hizbollah, Hamas, the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, and the Egyptian Gama’a al-Islamiyya. Veja also denounced frequent visits to Brazil of Sheikh Mohsen Rabbani, for whom there is an Interpol “red notice” as a suspect for the AMIA Jewish Center bombing. Rabbani was also exposed as a host for at least eight Brazilians who went to Qom (Iran) for a “religious studies seminar.” Beyond its own borders and interests, Brazil’s relations with Iran also provide legitimacy for other countries to follow this path. The governments of Uruguay and Chile already expressed their interest in fostering commercial relations, without a proper evaluation of the political implications. CONCLUSION Iran’s network is likely to continue growing in Latin America, based on its relationship with the ALBA bloc but, more strategically, connected to an eventual partnership with Brazil. Dilma Rousseff has stated that her foreign policy will not automatically follow the patterns built by her predecessor, Lula Da Silva; at the same time, observers should also pay attention to the actual “Itamaraty” (the Foreign Ministry Palace) guidelines. Brazil has gradually become a relevant global player, and wants to strengthen this position. It would be legitimate to suggest that such role demands a dose of responsibility. In the meantime, Caracas is providing a window for Iranian radical elements to enter the region via Venezuela and then move freely throughout the continent. The experience proves that their freedom of movement was the antechamber for terror. *Sergio Widder is the director for Latin America of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. He has been active in confronting neo-Nazi activity in Latin America: proposing regional legislation to government officials in Chile and Bolivia; stopping the International neo-Nazi Congress from convening in Chile in 2000, testifying against a 148 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:141 hate video and book publisher that promoted its catalog online, resulting in their prosecution; and identifying an Uruguayan neo-Nazi group, “Orgullo Skinhead” (“Skinhead Pride”). América Latina y las Redes del Terror Iranı́— Una Tierra de Oportunidades Sergio Widder* El “Nuevo antisemitismo” ha encontrado su vı́a de expresión en América Latina. Esta renovada hostilidad se expresa a través de coaliciones polı́ticas que reúnen a grupos de la izquierda radicalizada con elementos religiosos fundamentalistas, quienes son los principales voceros de una retórica antisemita clásica y de teorı́as conspirativas acerca del control mundial por parte de un “poder judı́o o sionista”. UN CAMPO FÉRTIL Uno de los ámbitos regionales más destacados para la circulación de estos grupos es el Foro Social Mundial (FSM), con sede en Brasil. Bajo la consigna “Otro mundo es posible”, el Foro fue fundado en 2001 por lı́deres del Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT—entonces en la oposición y hoy atravesando su tercer perı́odo consecutivo en el gobierno. en el gobierno). El propósito fundacional era dar una respuesta a la “globalización económica neoliberal”, y proponer, en cambio, una especie de “globalización de la solidaridad internacional”. Los encuentros del FSM tienen lugar una vez al año, pero a lo largo del año se suceden diversos foros regionales. El FSM engloba una amplia agenda de reclamos, algunos de ellos absolutamente legı́timos (polı́ticas que preserven el medio ambiente, luchar contra la explotación sexual o laboral infantil, etc.); pero dentro del programa de actividades, un porcentaje de entre el 10 y el 15 % está dedicado al conflicto en Medio Oriente, a la “causa palestina” en particular, a la deslegitimación del Estado de Israel, y a la justificación el terrorismo como “resistencia legı́tima”. Todo lo que ocurre en el encuentro central del FSM tiene impacto en los foros regionales, y contribuye a moldear la agenda de los grupos radicalizados alrededor del mundo. A modo de ejemplo, fue allı́ donde el Centro Simon Wiesenthal tuvo acceso a los parámetros de la presentación que harı́an los grupos pro-palestinos ante La Haya, en relación con la cerca de seguridad israelı́, con seis meses de anticipación a que la presentación se hiciera efectiva. El FSM provee también el encuadre apropiado para la coordinación de la campaña mundial de “Boicot – Desinversión – Sanciones” (BDS) contra Israel. El impacto fue muy visible en América Latina durante la guerra entre 149 150 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:149 Israel y Hezbollah (2006) y entre Israel y Hamas (2009), cuando la virulencia de la hostilidad antisemita presentada como “antisionismo” alcanzó su punto máximo. Este contexto ofrece una oportunidad muy atractiva para el régimen radicalizado iranı́ en su búsqueda de nuevos aliados que lo ayuden a combatir su aislamiento. VENEZUELA: ¿“SOCIALISMO DEL S XXI” O “ANTISEMITISMO DEL S XXI”? EL BLOQUE ALBA COMO SOCIO IDEAL PARA IRÁN La mayorı́a de los grupos latinoamericanos que participan en el FSM tienen como referente polı́tico el bloque ALBA,1 liderado por Hugo Chávez (Venezuela), acompañado por Evo Morales (Bolivia), Rafael Correa (Ecuador), Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua), y Fidel y Raúl Castro (Cuba). Este bloque es también el socio principal para la creciente penetración iranı́ en América Latina. Es interesante señalar que, para llegar al poder, todos estos lı́deres construyeron su legitimidad desde fuera de los sistemas politicos tradicionales de sus paı́ses, o en relación con procesos de crisis institucionales: Chávez es un coronel del ejército cuya primera intención de llegar a la presidencia fue a través de un fallido golpe de estado; Morales era un lı́der sindical de un grupo de campesinos cocaleros; Correa es el primer presidente ecuatorianoque se mantiene estable en años; Ortega y los hermanos Castro fueron lı́deres de revoluciones armadas, si bien Ortega se presentó luego como candidato y ganó en elecciones libres. Todos ellos han ofrecido cálidas bienvenidas al presidente iranı́ Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, con quien han establecido diversas iniciativas de cooperación. En el caso de Bolivia, más allá de los intereses compartidos en el campo de los recursos energéticos, Irán también ha financiado iniciativas sociales. En noviembre de 2009, los presidentes Morales y Ahmadinejad inauguraron el hospital “República Islámica de Irán—Sociedad de la Media Luna Roja”, que atiende las necesidades de salud de una población de 800.000 personas en El Alto, cerca de la ciudad capital La Paz, una zona donde abunda la pobreza y la popularidad de Morales es abrumadora.2 Este generoso aporte de Irán estuvo acompañado de una controversia, cuando las enfermeras y otro personal femenino recibieron la sugerencia de utilizar un 1. Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas, surgido como oposición a la inciativa estadounidense del Area de Libre Comercio de las Américas—ALCA. 2. “Se afianzan los vı́nculos con Irán”, La Nación, December 6, 2009, http:// www.lanacion.com.ar/1208421-se-afianzan-los-vinculos-con-iran 2011] REDES DEL TERROR 151 velo mientras se encontraran en servicio.3 Es importante recordar que la decision de Evo Morales de expulsar al embajador israelı́ utilizando como pretexto la guerra en Gaza fue previa a la decisión que tomó Venezuela en ese mismo sentido. Su retórica anti-israelı́ es permanente: en vı́speras de ser electo presidente, habı́a calificado a Chile como “el Israel de América Latina”, en referencia a la polı́tica supuestamente “expansionista” del paı́s vecino. Dicho todo esto, es justo decir, también, que hasta el momento la comunidad judı́a boliviana no ha sufrido un impacto directo como resultado de esta situación. El caso venezolano es muy distinto. Resulta evidente que allı́ el antisemitismo forma parte de la polı́tica del Estado. Los ataques contra objetivos judı́os son usuales, y no se investigan ni se castigan. Esta es apenas una lista acotada de incidentes: • Dos allanamientos policiales contra la Hebraica de Caracas. El pretexto fue que las autoridades judiciales estaban buscando armas y explosivos que podrı́an haberse escondido allı́. En enero de 2009, fue profanada la sinagoga Tiferet Israel. • En la vı́spera de la Navidad de 2005, el presidente Chávez dio un extenso discurso, durante el cual dijo que “el mundo tiene riquezas para todos, pero algunas minorı́as, entre ellos los descendientes de los asesinos de Cristo, se han apoderado de las riquezas”.4 • Ataques frecuentes a través de medios de comunicación estatales, entre ellos un programa televisivo, “La Hojilla” (en referencia a una hoja de afeitar), y un sitio web, “Aporrea.org”. Durante la guerra entre Israel y Hamas, en 2009, Aporrea publicó un “plan de acción” contra la comunidad judı́a venezolana, que promovı́a “la confiscación de propiedades de judı́os” y boicots contra supermercados que vendieran productos kosher. Los editores de Aporrea se desasociaron del contenido del artı́culo, pero eso ocurrió recién después de haber recibido duras crı́ticas. • En los inicios de su presidencia, Chávez tuvo como asesor a Norberto Ceresole, un fallecido sociólogo argentino, negador del Holocausto y promotor del antisemitismo, autor del libro Terrorismo fundamentalista judı́o, en el que sostuvo que el ataque terrorista contra la Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA) fue perpetrado por judı́os. Otro de sus asesores fue el difunto coronel 3. “Velo islámico en Bolivia”, http://www.bbc.co.uk/mundo/america_latina/ 2009/11/091126_2328_bolivia_islam_gm.shtml 4. El diario francés “Liberation” criticó enérgicamente a Chávez por este discurso, en un artı́culo titulado “Le credo antisémite de Hugo Chávez”, http:// www.liberation.fr/monde/010134744-le-credo-antisemite-de-hugo-ch-vez 152 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:149 argentino Mohammed Ali Seineldin, un ultranacionalista a quien se atribuı́a arengar a sus tropas con la consigna “no existen caballos verdes ni judı́os decentes”. El alcance de los ataques contra la comunidad judı́a provocó una crı́tica sin precedentes por parte de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), que forma parte de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA). En febrero de 2010, la Comisión publicó el informe “Democracia y Derechos Humanos en Venezuela”, que describe el actual status quo en ese paı́s, incluyendo referencias a incidentes antisemitas:5 • Parágrafo 780: “. . . la Comisión considera preocupante la información según la cual la comunidad judı́a estarı́a siendo particularmente afectada por incidentes de violencia en Venezuela. La información recibida por la CIDH hace referencia a pronunciamientos e incidentes antisemitas por parte de diversos medios de comunicación, como ası́ también sobre la inscripción de graffiti en las paredes de diversas instituciones y residencias de la religión judı́a”. • P. 781: “( . . . ) el 2 de diciembre de 2007, funcionarios policiales habrı́an llevado a cabo un allanamiento en la sede del Centro Social Cultural y Deportivo Hebraica de Caracas. Conforme se indicó, aproximadamente 30 funcionarios de la Dirección de los Servicios de Inteligencia y Prevención habrı́an forzado la puerta de acceso de la mencionada sede ( . . . ) [S]in la presencia del Fiscal del Ministerio Público, los efectivos policiales habrı́an presentado una orden ( . . . ) presuntamente carente de motivación . . .” • P. 782: “Ante la mencionada situación, la CIDH ( . . . ) solicitó información al Estado con relación a los hechos descritos y los motivos del procedimiento llevado a cabo en la sede de Hebraica ( . . . ) [E]l Estado informó a la CIDH que ‘el referido allanamiento tenı́a por finalidad realizar un rastreo minucioso en todos los ambientes del lugar, con el objeto de ubicar evidencias de interés criminalı́stico que guardan relación con la presunta comisión de uno de los delitos contra el Orden Público . . .’ ( . . . ) La Comisión considera que la información aportada por el Estado respecto al procedimiento llevado a cabo en la sede Hebraica resulta insuficiente para aclarar las circunstancias suscitadas en la sede de esa institución”. • El informe también hace referencia a la profanación de la sinagoga Tiferet Israel, en enero de 2009, y a otros incidentes ocurridos 5. El informe complete está publicado en http://www.cidh.oas.org/pdf%20 files/VENEZUELA.2009.ESP.pdf. 2011] REDES DEL TERROR 153 durante ese mismo mes (P. 783). Asimismo, menciona como un precedente el discurso de Chávez en la vı́spera de la Navidad de 2005, en el cual manifesto que “el mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorı́as, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo ( . . . ) se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo . . .” (P. 784). El eje Caracas—Teherán también pretende influir en la polı́tica regional. En junio de 2010, el bloque del ALBA propuso que la Asamblea General de la OEA reunida en Lima, Perú, aprobara una resolución de condena contra Israel, a pocos dı́as del incidente con la “flotilla de Gaza”. La propuesta fue rechazada, pero contó con el apoyo de casi un tercio de los estados miembros. Más preocupante y, de hecho, una amenaza contra la estabilidad de la región, es el permiso otorgado por Chávez para la construcción de una base misilı́stica iranı́ en suelo venezolano. Según un informe publicado originalmente por el periódico Die Welt, en noviembre de 2010, dicha infraestructura permitirá el emplazamiento de misiles de diverso alcance, más cuatro plataformas móviles que serán operadas por miembros de la Guardia Revolucionaria iranı́. El acuerdo permite a Irán abrir fuego “en caso de emergencia”. Se prevé que estas instalaciones comiencen a estar activas hacia fines de 2011. LA TRANSFORMACIÓN: DE PARAÍSO PROTECTOR DE NAZIS A LIDERAR UNA ACUSACIÓN CONTRA EL TERRORISMO FUNDAMENTALISTA En las antı́podas de la sociedad del bloque ALBA con Irán encontramos la acusación contra un grupo de altos funcionarios iranı́es por su aparente responsabilidad en el ataque terrorista contra la AMIA, el 18 de julio de 1994. que provocó la muerte de 85 personas y centenares de heridos. La Unidad Especial de Investigación, a cargo del fiscal Alberto Nisman, concluyó que la decision de ejecutar el atentado fue tomada por funcionarios de muy elevado rango del gobierno iranı́, incluyendo el expresidente Hashemi Rafsanjani y el excanciller Alı́ Akbar Velayati. Otro personaje clave fue el entonces Agregado Cultural de la embajada iranı́ en Argentina, sheij, Mohsen Rabbani, acusado de haber coordinado la operación. Los pedidos de captura fueron refrendados por Interpol con el grado de “circulares rojas”, excepto para los casos de Rafsanjani, Velayati y Hadi Soleimanpour (exembajador iranı́ en Argentina), por tratarse de “altas autoridades”. Esto no disminuye en modo alguno su supuesta responsabilidad.6 6. Según el dictamen del fiscal, la decisión de atacar la AMIA se tomó durante 154 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:149 El gobierno argentino ha apoyado activamente la investigación judicial. Tanto el fallecido expresidente, Néstor Kirchner, como la actual presidenta, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, formularon enérgicas condenas contra Irán durante sucesivas ediciones de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, reclamaron que los sospechosos fueran entregados a la justicia. Estas iniciativas de las autoridades argentinas provocaron una reacción por parte del régimen iranı́: además de rechazar las acusaciones, comenzó a cooptar a activistas argentinos ası́ como a algunos académicos para que se pronunciaran en su apoyo. Uno de estos individuos es Luis D’Elı́a, un dirigente social que se ha transformado, de hecho, en vocero de Irán, y ha sostenido públicamente la teorı́a según la cual “la AMIA pudo haber sido atacada por ‘la derecha judı́a’; recuerden que ellos fueron los que asesinaron a [Primer Ministro israelı́ Yitzhak] Rabin”. D’Elı́a inició recientemente su campaña para las elecciones parlamentarias de 2011, en presencia del Encargado de Negocios iranı́. Ha encabezado delegaciones solidarias que viajaron a Teherán. Aunque su base electoral es limitada, D’Elı́a adopta un alto perfil en la prensa, y ha sido un aliado tanto de Néstor como de Cristina Kirchner. Cuando la justicia argentina emitió el dictamen contra los funcionarios iranı́es, en 2006, el entonces embajador venezolano en argentina instruyó a D’Elı́a para que organizara una manifestación en apoyo a Irán.7 Esto provocó un incidente entre Argentina y Venezuela y el reclamo por parte del gobierno argentino para que Caracas cambiara su embajador (cosa que Chávez debió conceder). Otro ejemplo de las acciones de Irán en Argentina es un convenio suscripto entre la Universidad de La Plata (ciudad situada a 60 km de Buenos Aires) y la Universidad de Teheran, cuyo Presidente, Farhad Rahbar fue anteriormente viceministro de Inteligencia. El acuerdo fue promovido por la Asociación Argentina Islámica—ASAI. CON UNA PEQUEÑA AYUDITA DE LOS “MODERADOS” Si Venezuela es el aliado más próximo a Irán en América Latina, y una reunión en Mashad (Irán), el 13 de agosto de 1993. Además de las personas mencionadas más arriba, se libraron pedidos de captura contra Mohsen Rezai (Comandante de los Pasdaran—-Guardia Revolucionaria Iranı́) Ahmad Vahidi (Comandante de las fuerzas Al Quds, y actualmente ministro de Defensa de Irán), Ali Fallahijan (exministro de Inteligencia y Seguridad), Ahmad Reza Asghari (Tercer secretario de la embajada de Irán en Argentina entre 1991 y 1994) e Imad Mougnieh (Jefe de Seguridad de Hezbollah, muerto en febrero de 2008). 7. Ver http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2006/11/15/elpais/p-00315.htm. 2011] REDES DEL TERROR 155 Argentina es el paı́s que mantiene las relaciones más frı́as, hay otros que juegan un papel más ambiguo. En este sentido, la situación que quizás resulte más preocupante es la cálida bienvenida que brindó el expresidentes brasileño Lula da Silva a Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, una maravillosa operación de relaciones públicas para el presidente iranı́. Lula llegó a elogiar las “elecciones legı́timas” que consagraron la reelección de Ahmadinejad en 2009. (recordemos la brutal represión contra los disidentes en las calles de Teherán). Las motivaciones fueron, por una parte, económicas: Irán es un mercado muy atractivo para los productos brasileros. Pero también polı́ticas: Lula explicó que pretendı́a “acercar a Irán a la mesa de negociaciones y ayudar a construir puentes de diálogo” con el mundo occidental. Los negocios se mantienen; la iniciativa de mediación resultó un fiasco. Debemos agregar que existe una conexión brasilera en el atentado contra la AMIA: según la investigación judicial, Samuel Salman El Reda, un colombiano de origen libanés acusado de ser el lı́der local del grupo operativo, tenı́a un departamento—refugio—en Foz do Iguaçu, sobre el lado brasilero de la Triple Frontera (Argentina–Brasil–Paraguay). La nueva presidenta, Dilma Rousseff, ha dicho que su gobierno tomará en consideración el respeto por los derechos humanos como un lineamiento de su polı́tica exterior. Aunque todavı́a es temprano para un análisis profundo (asumió el 1˚ de enero de 2011), ya hay algunas señales de alarma. La revista Veja, el semanario de mayor circulación en Brasil, publicó en abril último una serie de artı́culos que denunciaban la existencia de una “red terrorista” en el paı́s. La red incluirı́a elementos del “Jihad Media Battalion” de al Qaeda, otros veinte integrantes de al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, el Grupo Combatiente Islámico de Marruecos y el grupo Gama’a al-Islamiyya, de Egipto. Veja denunció también que un visitante frecuente de Brasil es el sheij Mohsen Rabbani, sobre quien pesa una “circular roja” de Interpol como sospechoso por el ataque contra la AMIA. Según la revista, Rabbani ofició de anfitrión para al menos ocho brasileros que viajaron a Qom (Irán) para “estudiar en un seminario religioso”. Más allá de sus propios intereses y fronteras, las relaciones de Brasil con Irán ofrecen una legitimación para que otros paı́ses de la región sigan sus pasos. Los gobiernos de Uruguay y de Chile ya han manifestado su interés en fortalecer relaciones comerciales con Teherán, sin considerar las implicaciones polı́ticas de tales vı́nculos. CONCLUSIÓN Es muy probable que la red iranı́ en América Latina siga creciendo, apoyada en sus relaciones con el bloque ALBA pero, de modo más estratégico, a partir de su eventual sociedad con Brasil. 156 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:149 La presidenta Rousseff ha dicho que su polı́tica exterior no se guiará automáticamente por los mismos parámetros fijados por su predecesor, Lula da Silva; al mismo tiempo, los observadores más experimentados sugieren prestar atención a los lineamientos que fije Itamaraty (la sede de la Cancillerı́a). Brasil se ha convertido gradualmente en un jugador a escala global, y anhela fortalecer esa posición. Serı́a legı́timo sugerir que tal rol requiere una dosis de responsabilidad. Entretanto, Caracas ofrece una ventana de oportunidad para los elementos radicalizados iranı́es para penetrar en la región a través de Venezuela y dispersarse por todo el continente. La experiencia indica que su libertad de circulación ha sido la antecámara del terror. *Director para América Latina del Centro Simon Wiesenthal. Antisemitism in Brazil Alberto Milkewitz* Brazil, a nation with 190 million people, has grown in the last years to be an emerging global leader with influence and participation in key global issues. This article presents the current state of antisemitic affairs in that country. Key Words: Jews, Antisemitism, Brazil Sao Paulo is one of the three largest cities in the world, and the most populated of Brazil and South America. It is home to a very active Jewish community, comprising more than 60,000 people; the total size of the Jewish community in Brazil is estimated at 110,000. The country is a democracy, an open and free society with a stable currency, and is making a quiet and peaceful transition from the government of Luiz Inácio (Lula) da Silva to his successor, Mrs. Dilma Rousseff, who is from the same party, the Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT)—the Workers Party. During the last eight years of Lula’s tenure, the Brazilian government looked for a place in the Security Council of the UN. Lula was very vocal in pursuing a special place for Brazil in the international community arena. In that regard, he tried to show that Brazil became a serious partner in the discussion of international security issues—pointing out that Brazil helped Haiti and pursued a special role when the Portuguese-speaking African countries needed help. Lula’s foreign policy looked for an international role through placing dialogue as a top strategy to manage critical issues and disputes. That was the case in regard to Iran and to Venezuela. At the same time, to establish a balance with the Jewish community, Lula was first to sign for the creation of the UN International Holocaust Day. Lula is not considered an antisemite, but his party and their allies of the government coalition have adopted a permanently critical position against Israel. That is consistent with the traditional Brazilian anti-Israel vote in UN forums and committees. Itamaraty, the Brazilian Chancellery, systematically maintains a critical attitude to the Jewish state, even before President Lula’s tenure. In the past, the 1930s were a decade where the Integralists, the Brazilian fascists, generated in Brazil a climate of anti-Jewish hostility by creating the metaphor of the Jew who threatens Brazil and “equating Jews with 157 158 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:157 Communists.”1 It was the time of the Getulio Vargas government, and at those times, Brazilian official diplomacy told to the American authorities they would help the Jewish refugees, but used secret documents to forbid the entrance of Jews fleeing from Europe. During those times, Brazil reduced its immigration quotas and explicitly ordered its consuls in Europe to deny entry visas to anyone of “Semitic origin.”2 The background of Brazilian politics related to Jews shows that there is a need to look deeper into the situation in order to better understand about antisemitism in our country. UNDERGROUND AND NOT SO UNDERGROUND Even though this might sound strange to some Brazilians, intolerance and antisemitism can also flourish or show its face in the country in times of democracy and freedom. Most Brazilian citizens and politicians, however, think that racism and antisemitism are not serious problems in the country. Immigrant Jews who arrived in Brazil after being persecuted in Europe and the Arab countries thought that the country would always be friendly to the Jews. In this scenario, the issue of handling antisemitism becomes very complex. The Jewish community knows that underground movements can change a country and that some new geopolitical arrangements like the situation in Venezuela can be the breeding ground for antisemitism but don’t feel this in their daily lives, and sometimes don’t want to admit the risks. Until recently, independent Jewish organizations and rabbis worked in a quiet and isolated way against antisemitism. But as an answer to the demand of the community leaders, antisemitism and all kinds of discrimination and bigotry began to be a priority for the Jewish Federation of the state of Sao Paulo, the umbrella organization of the biggest Jewish community in the country. RIGHT-WING ACTIVITY Let’s reveal some facts. Favored by the opening afforded by democracy, violence and intolerance began to flourish and grow stronger, as some events in the last few years show. In 2009 in Sao Paulo, during the Gay Parade, a bomb was dropped, wounding 21. Young neo-Nazis were the instigators. 1. Hélgio Trindade, Integralismo, o fascismo brasileiro na década de 30 (Sao Paulo: Difel, 1979). 2. Graciela Ben Dror, The Catholic Elites in Brazil and Their Attitude Toward the Jews, 1933-1939 (Shoah Resource Center, www.yadvashem.org). 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN BRAZIL 159 Another example of what is happening is a recent series of controversies involving a right-wing congressman in a television show, answering a famous black singer, daughter of the renowned musician Gilberto Gil, who asked him: “If your child were to fall in love with a black person, what would you do?” The congressman answered: “I will not discuss promiscuity with anyone. I do not run that risk. My children are educated people and they did not live in environments as unfortunate as yours.” Since this hostile and racist episode, this congressman gave a series of interviews in which he criticized homosexuals openly. A demonstration in support of that congressman was released through a forum with the name of “Stormfront.org,” administered by the neo-Nazi movement White Pride World Wide, that ends its messages with the numbers “14/88,” Nazi symbolism that refers to Hitler and the American white supremacists. Other events show that violence against blacks, homosexuals, and Jews in Sao Paulo is increasing. In its central region, there is the highest risk with racist groups. Two hundred people from 25 different gangs have been identified by the staff of the special police force on crimes of intolerance. The reasons for concern are not only in Sao Paulo, as stated by the members of another police group. As mentioned above, a fascist Brazilian party, the Integralist movement, was born in the 1930s in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul. In Parana, another Brazilian state in the south of the country, two young men of Curitiba were sentenced to two years of prison for racist statements against blacks and Jews on a Web site, already taken off the air. The punishment, as always, was community services and a monetary penalty. The defense attorney said his clients expressed only an “opinion”; it was only “free speech, granted by the Brazilian Constitution.” Another concern in a huge and multifaceted country like Brazil is the possibility of a connection between neo-Nazis and other types of criminals, like the Red Commando, a famous crime organization that operates in Rio de Janeiro. THE DANGER OF MUSLIM EXTREMISM The antisemitic risks don’t come only from the right. According to the Federal Police, seven Islamic terrorist organizations operate in Brazil, among them Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. In the country, they fund operations, recruit militants, and plan attacks. This denunciation has recently been made by the respected magazine Veja, which has the biggest circulation in South America. The Muslim population is also growing, particularly in the region of the frontiers between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay, where the Jewish presence is quite small. Until now, there is 160 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:157 no report of any kind of problem between them and the Jews of Sao Paulo, Rio, and the other Jewish communities. There is also information showing that Muslims are trying to approach poor people and are doing mass conversions in some favelas (slums) to bring them to Islam. That also happens inside Brazilian prisons, where Muslims try to occupy the place of the evangelic church, and quickly recruit and convert those people for Islam. From the political point of view, it is important to know that Christian Arabs have elected members in every parliament of the states of Brazil; this helps the Arab Muslims to have more influence or protection if needed. In this context, it is difficult to advocate for Israel, and sometimes condemnation of the Jewish state is automatic. CATHOLIC ROOTS As in any place of the world where there was and there is a strong Catholic presence, the Church contributed in the past to make antisemitic myths part of Brazilian Catholic culture. After the encyclical document Nostra Aetate (Second Vatican Council), when the Catholic Church recommended the dialogue with the Jews and other religions, the Church and some members of the Jewish community began to approach each other and the situation changed. Today, there are groups of dialogue and fraternity that work together to educate their communities. The best allies to combat the antisemitism with Catholic roots are inside the same church. However, a big number of Catholic clergymen, laypersons, priests, and activists were educated before the Second Vatican Council. Those Catholics haven’t changed their way of thinking about the Jews and are not shy in expressing their opinions. Therefore, even though Jews and Catholics do work together, it will take a long time to heal the wounds between the two communities. Jewish leaders now avoid being naı̈ve, as what happened in the past with some local rabbis, who thought that a good relationship with the high echelons of the Church will be enough to counter Brazilian Catholic antisemitism. In Brazil, the Catholic Church struggles against the evangelic church and also with religions that descended from Africa for the faiths of Brazilian people, so their authorities don’t want to also have a “Jewish front.” The evangelic church is the fastest growing religious group in a country with 26 states (there is a parliament in each state) and a Federal District (the National Parliament is in Brasilia D.F.), where they have increasing power. There is a very good link between Jewish authorities and some evangelic authorities. These groups are strong supporters of Israel and potential allies. When the Jewish Federation organized rallies in favor of Israel and against 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN BRAZIL 161 Ahmadinejad’s visit to Brazil, the evangelic groups were the main partners on this kind of initiative. ANTISEMITIC MYTHS OF THE LEFT Traditional Jewish stereotypes are part of Brazilian culture. Before her election, Rousseff told a group of leaders in the Jewish community that she thinks her family was crypto-Jewish because all of her uncles had a “hooked nose.” So there is a lot of educational work to do, particularly in the higher echelons. The left is very strong in the country. Most of its members think the Palestinians are the “victims.” Israel, the Jews, and the United States are perceived as the same group, and are the “perpetrators,” the Empire, the colonialists, and the genocides. The general Brazilian public follows the global population in the process of considering Israel the villain and the Palestinians the weak and frail people, an oppressed minority. The community leadership agrees that everybody has the right to criticize Israel, and lots of Jews do this, but when we analyze some positions it becomes clear that the border between anti-Zionism, being against Israel and its government and antisemitic point of views, is blurred. And this applies especially to the critics that come from the left. In Sao Paulo, the Jewish Federation went to Justice against a union of workers in the University of Sao Paulo that accused Israel of genocide against the Palestinian people, and the legal way was to show that they publicly made this accusation against the Jews, and this for Brazilian law is discrimination. To say this against a country is protected by the right to free speech and is seen as a political expression. Therefore, the discussion becomes very tough when the more leftist groups in the government party or some unions need something to unite their workers against a common enemy—and the Jews are always the best candidates. But the understanding of these kinds of mechanisms between those who work against antisemitism or study it is not enough to avoid the use of them. Dilma Rousseff said recently, in a meeting in the Jewish Federation of the State of Sao Paulo, that her government will continue Lula’s foreign policy—which means to be friendly to Iran and to Venezuela. But Rousseff shows an independent way of thinking and because of this, Brazil began to separate the Iranian nuclear aspirations from the human rights situation in Iran. CLOUDY BORDERS There are cloudy borders between the critics to Israel and antisemitism 162 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:157 on campuses, in the press, and on the Internet. Brazil has a huge network of public and private universities all over the country. In the university culture, it is politically correct to be on the left; being supportive of Israel now means to be with the right wing from the political point of view. On university campuses, it became “cool” between scholars to be against “imperialist Israel.” It is not easy to be a Jewish student in a Brazilian university and defend Israel. In most of the universities, the Jewish students are a very small minority. Anti-Zionism is as real in Brazil as it is all over the world. ANTI-ZIONISM AND THE PRESS The campaign against Israel in our country has found expression in the press. Most of the journalistic programs use news agencies with a strong bias against Israel. Foreign policy is not the main interest of the largest part of Brazilian public; therefore, the space in the open media for that issue is pretty reduced. Israel typically is mentioned only when something bad happened. The strategy used to face this situation is to stress the fact that Israel is a democratic country with essential contributions to humanity in fields like life sciences, technology, business, arts, and many other vital human concerns. The Jewish Federation works permanently to build good will for Israel. At every Jewish holiday, the public finds helpful interviews and explanations in the press about the meaning of each Jewish celebration. THE INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA As in every part of the world, there is in Brazil a growing use and influence not only of the traditional sites in the Internet but also of the social network in places like Twitter, Linkedin, Orkut, Facebook, and others. This is the way of communication for an increasing number of Brazilian youth and young adults, bringing a style of communication that uses very short messages, almost no explanations, and telegraphic discussion. Analysis of this kind of underground media shows that a relevant part of the public opinion is against Israel, and this also brings together the Jews as a group. In the social network sites where most of the young Jews navigate, the search for words like Israel, Jew, Flotilla, Gaza, and similar terms shows a lot of critical messages that slide in some cases immediately to antisemitic commentaries. The Jewish community is trying to learn how to deal with this and continue to fight this battle. The government of the state of Sao Paulo recently announced a location for a new underground station in a neighborhood known for its Jewish population. The neighbors’ association filed a complaint to the official 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN BRAZIL 163 authorities requesting a relocation because of concerns about potential security issues connected with an underground station. This issue became a big argument between those in favor and those opposed, with a strong amplification through social networks. A self-styled “humorist” posted on Twitter a heavily antisemitic comment—“The Jews are opposed to the station because the last time they got close to a train was on the way to Auschwitz”—claiming that the Jews of the area were opponents of the poor population, who actually would be the beneficiaries of the new underground station. He twitted a phrase that provoked both a heavy traffic of additional antisemitic postings as well as intense reaction from the Jewish community and the general public. IRANIAN INFLUENCE Lula was warm with the Iranians, as part of his aspiration for a place in the UN’s Security Council. The visit of Iran’s president in 2010 generated tensions between him and the authorities of the Jewish community. Lula’s declaration saying that Iran had “free elections” was much criticized. With Rousseff, there are some indications of slight changes in the Brazilian position related to Iran. She criticized in the press the execution of women by Iranians. In the past, she herself suffered human rights abuses during the times of dictatorship in Brazil, so she is actually sensitive to this issue. Recently, Brazil’s new government for the first time did not agree to participate in an international mission to monitor Iranian nuclear installations. Rousseff said that her administration is going to segregate between Brazilian position on the nuclear issue with Iran and on the human rights issue. Brazilian borders are huge and very open and we have frontiers with Venezuela, where Iranians can enter freely. This worries the Jewish community. Húgo Chávez, the president of Venezuela, was a good friend of Lula. The concerns with the free entrance to his neighbor country for Iranian terrorists is serious for the Jewish communities, but it is not the point of view of Brazilian authorities, and most Brazilian politicians find very difficult to accept that terrorism can happen in our country. Jewish authorities in Sao Paulo are working very hard to show to the security command of the state that there are increasing risks of having problems during the next Olympic Games and the World Cup. 164 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:157 BRAZILIAN JEWISH IDENTITY Contemporary Brazilian Jews do not suffer any restriction about their Jewish identities, but Judaism is not necessarily their priority. Identity, in all its facets, is something that does not happen in the air or in a vacuum. Since the Holocaust and the establishment of the state of Israel, the unity of the people and the Jewish identity of the biggest part of the Jews in Israel and other places have been based on a shared memory of national tragedy, a sense of a tribal bond, and a mutual interest in the building and future of Israel. But not enough on the study and knowledge of original Jewish sources like Torah, Talmud, Midrash, and the commentaries and contributions of the Sages; not on the study of Torah for its own sake (Torah Lishmah); and also on a daily Jewish life. Synagogues, Jewish daily schools, community centers, young-people movements, women’s institutions, and other organizations concentrate all the responsibility for the transmission of Judaism. They try to transmit Judaism and Zionism, but there is an increasing number of marriages where one of the members was not born a Jew. In Sao Paulo, most Jews go to the synagogue two days a year and don’t speak Hebrew, so their self-image as Jews depends a lot of what the press and the non-Jews say about Israel. Therefore, our diagnosis is that in the Brazilian Jewish community the Jewish illiteracy that brings inner erosion and assimilation is a more serious danger than antisemitism. THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST ISRAEL Delegitimization is not new for the Jewish people, for Israel, or for the memory of a Jewish community. The ultimate difference nowadays seems to be that this campaign aims to destroy the right of Israel to exist. This campaign against Israel directly affects its young people, particularly the university students. Sao Paulo does not have vital Jewish student centers inside the universities like Hillel in the United States. Hillel Rio and a similar organization in Sao Paulo work with the same segment of the population but their headquarters are located in Jewish neighborhoods, not on campus. In order to meet this situation, the Jewish Federation works with information and education in support of Jewish schools and Jewish organizations as well. The Federation also takes responsibility for launching campaigns and information initiatives to the general public, developing two programs, Lifnei HaMashber (Before the Crisis Arrives), and Esser Dakot (Ten Minutes). Through Lifnei HaMashber, experts are invited to explain and discuss deeply important issues like Iran, Hezbolla, Hamas, and others. The Esser 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN BRAZIL 165 Dakot program takes Hasbara3 professionals for a short talk (therefore the program name) with university students about the campaign against Israel in the media. Both programs aim at helping the young people develop an effective response to the challenges they face in their university lives by providing students with facts and strategies to counter false allegations against Israel. LAST BUT NOT LEAST Our country may not exhibit violent antisemitism, but Jewish community leaders are worried when the Jewish authorities show them that what is actually happening is not so nice. Because of this, the work of the Jewish leadership is to show the problems to the government authorities, the politicians, and to its own community. It is very important to prepare Brazilians to criticize and condemn racism, and how to respond to a demagogueinspired dissemination of hatred against Jews. In this context, it is essential for Israel to enhance its communication channels with the diaspora and to better balance its focus to places like Brazil. A first step in that direction was taken with the reopening of the Israel consulate in Sao Paulo. One part of the strategy in facing this situation is to stress the fact that Israel is a democratic country with essential contributions in fields like life sciences, technology, business, arts and many others. The Jewish Federation works permanently to build good will for Israel. As an example, in every Jewish holiday the public finds interviews and explanations about the meaning of each Jewish celebration. And when necessary, especially when Israel receives strong criticism, the leadership tries to provide a consensual answer. The Jewish leadership has a universal approach against bigotry, and not a parochial one. In this way, we battle antisemitism together with allies of other groups with whom we worked before, combating racism and other forms of discrimination. We don’t think that we can eliminate or obliterate antisemitism. We try to manage it through the democratic and legal ways and mechanisms. As policy advisor Stuart Eizenstat has said about the issue of the new antisemitism: “It is important to keep all of this in context and not overreact.” There are very few antisemitic acts in Brazil, but community leaders must be prepared to react and specially be proactive in supporting Israel. This is also highly relevant for Jewish identity in times where the funda3. Hasbara, from the Hebrew verb lehasbir, explain. Can be used to mean “diplomacy, explanations and information in favor of Israel.” 166 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:157 mentals are being challenged and the winds are against Israel and the Jewish people. *Alberto Milkewitz is the executive director of the Jewish Federation of the state of Sao Paulo, the umbrella organization of the biggest Jewish community in Brazil. Together with Mario Fleck, he coordinates the Working Group for Combating Antisemitism. He is pursuing a PhD in education at the University of Sao Paulo. BIBLIOGRAPHY Carneiro, Maria Luiza Tucci. O Antisemitismo na Era Vargas. São Paulo: Editorial Brasiliense, 1988. Lesser, Jeffrey. Brazil and the “Jewish Question”: Immigration, Diplomacy and Prejudice. Tel Aviv: University Enterprises, 1998. Una aproximación al tema de la intolerancia y del antisemitismo en tiempos de libertad y democracia en Brasil Alberto Milkewitz* Brasil, un paı́s con 190 millones de habitantes, ha crecido en los últimos años transformándose en un nuevo lı́der mundial, con influencia y participación en algunos de los principales problemas globales. LA SITUACIÓN DE BRASIL: UNA VISIÓN GENERAL San Pablo, desde donde se escribe este texto, es una de las tres ciudades más grandes del mundo, y es la más poblada de Brasil y de América del Sur. Es el hogar de una muy activa comunidad judı́a, que abarca unas 60.000 personas. El tamaño total de la comunidad judı́a en Brasil se estima en 110.000. El paı́s es una sociedad abierta y libre, con moneda estable y está haciendo, como ha sido habitual en los últimos veinticinco años de democracia, una transición tranquila y pacı́fica del gobierno de Lula a su sucesora, la Sra. Dilma Rousseff, del mismo partido (PT— Partido de los Trabajadores). Durante los últimos ocho años de su mandato, Lula, el presidente anterior, buscó para el Brasil un lugar en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU. Lula fue muy activo en la búsqueda de un espacio destacado para Brasil en el ámbito de la comunidad internacional. En ese sentido, trató de mostrar que Brasil se convirtió en un socio serio en la discusión de cuestiones de seguridad internacional. Brasil ha ayudado a Haitı́ y tuvo una función especial cuando los paı́ses africanos de habla portuguesa precisaron ayuda. La polı́tica exterior de Lula buscó su inclusión internacional a través de colocar el diálogo como una estrategia prioritaria para administrar las cuestiones crı́ticas y controversiales del panorama mundial. Ese fue el caso con respecto a Irán y Venezuela. Al mismo tiempo, para establecer un equilibrio con la comunidad judı́a, Lula fue el primer presidente en firmar el pedido de creación del Dı́a Internacional del Holocausto de las Naciones Unidas. Lula no es considerado anti-semita, pero su partido y sus aliados de la coalición de gobierno han adoptado una posición crı́tica permanente contra Israel. Eso es coherente con el voto tradicional de Brasil en contra de Israel en las Naciones Unidas. Itamaraty, la Cancillerı́a brasileña, sistemática- 167 168 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:167 mente, mantiene una actitud crı́tica al Estado Judı́o, incluso desde antes del mandato del Presidente Lula. En el pasado, los años 30 fueron una década en la cual los integralistas, que eran el partido fascista brasileño, generaron en Brasil un clima de hostilidad contra los judı́os mediante la creación de la imagen del judı́o que amenaza Brasil y “equiparar a los judı́os con los comunistas”1 que eran el paradigma del enemigo público del gobierno. Era la época del dictador Getulio Vargas, y en aquella etapa, la estrategia diplomática brasileña era decir a las autoridades estadounidenses que Brasil ayudarı́a a los refugiados judı́os, al mismo tiempo que, a través de documentos secretos, prohibı́a la entrada a los judı́os que huı́an de Europa. En aquel periodo el Brasil redujo sus cuotas de inmigración y explı́citamente ordenó a sus cónsules en Europa que debı́an negar vistos de entrada a cualquier persona de “origen semita”.2 Este caso muestra que hay diferencias entre el discurso “oficial” y aspectos poco visibles de la opinión nacional sobre los judı́os. El trasfondo de la polı́tica brasileña relacionada con los judı́os muestra que siempre hay que más allá de la superficie si se quiere comprender el antisemitismo en nuestro paı́s. SUBTERRÁNEO Y NO TAN SUBTERRÁNEO Aunque le suene extraño a algunos brasileños, la intolerancia y el antisemitismo pueden florecer y mostrar su cara en el Brasil, mismo en tiempos de democracia y libertad. La mayorı́a de los ciudadanos y polı́ticos brasileños piensan que el racismo y el antisemitismo no son un problema significativo en el paı́s. Inclusive los judı́os inmigrantes que llegaron al Brasil después de haber sido perseguidos en Europa y en los paı́ses árabes, piensan que el paı́s siempre será un “amigo de los judı́os”. En este escenario el tema de cómo tratar el antisemitismo se vuelve muy complejo. La comunidad judı́a sabe que los cambios geopolı́ticos pueden modificar un paı́s y que algunas nuevas circunstancias regionales como la situación en Venezuela pueden ser el caldo de cultivo para el antisemitismo, pero no sienten casi nunca esto en su vida cotidiana y, a veces, no quieren ni reconocer los riesgos. Hasta hace poco, unas pocas organizaciones judı́as independientes y algunos rabinos trabajaban por su propia cuenta e iniciativa, de una manera tranquila y aislada, contra el antisemitismo. Pero como respuesta a cambios 1. Hélgio Trindade. Integralismo, o fascismo brasileiro na década de 30; Ed. DIFEL; S. Paulo:1979. 2. Graciela Ben Dror. La elite católica en Brasil y su actitud hacia los judı́os, 1933-1939. Centro de Recursos de la Shoah; www.yadvashem.org. 2011] 169 ANTISEMITISMO EN BRASIL de las circunstancias y a la demanda expresada por los lı́deres de la comunidad, el antisemitismo y toda forma de discriminación e intolerancia subieron en el nivel de prioridades de la Federación Judı́a del Estado de S. Paulo, la organización que agrupa a la mayor comunidad judı́a del paı́s. LA PREOCUPACIÓN CON LAS ACTIVIDADES DEL ALA DERECHA EN BRASIL Vamos a exponer algunos datos. Favorecidas por la apertura que ofrece la democracia, la violencia y la intolerancia empezaron a florecer y crecer más como lo muestran algunos eventos de los últimos años. En 2009 en San Pablo, durante la Parada Gay en una acción atribuida a jóvenes neonazis, fue explotada una bomba en un ataque que dejó 21 heridos. Otro ejemplo de lo que está sucediendo es la reciente serie de controversias provocada por la participación de un congresista de derecha en un programa de televisión. Respondiendo a una renombrada cantante negra, hija del famoso Gilberto Gil, que le preguntó: “Que harı́a usted si su hijo se enamorase de un negro?”, el congresista respondió: “No voy a discutir promiscuidad con nadie. Yo no corro ese riesgo. Mis hijos viven entre personas educadas y no en ambientes tan desafortunados como el suyo”. Desde este episodio agresivo y racista, este diputado dio varias entrevistas en las que critica abiertamente la homosexualidad. Una manifestación en apoyo al congresista fue lanzada a través de un foro con el sugestivo nombre de “Stormfront.org” administrado por el movimiento neo-nazi “White Pride World Wide”, que finaliza su mensaje con los números de “14/88”, un simbolismo nazi que se refiere a Hitler y a la supremacı́a blanca americana. Otros eventos confirman también que la intolerancia contra los negros, los homosexuales y los judı́os en San Pablo está en aumento. La región central de la ciudad es la de más alto riesgo por la presencia de grupos racistas. Doscientas personas de 25 diferentes pandillas ya han sido identificadas por el equipo técnico de la Comisarı́a de Policı́a Especializada en Delitos de Intolerancia. Los motivos de preocupación no se restringen únicamente a San Pablo, como lo han dicho los miembros de otro grupo de la Policı́a dedicado a la lucha contra los movimientos neo-nazis en Rı́o Grande del Sur. En la década de 1930 el Estado brasileño de Rio Grande do Sul tuvo un partido nazi, y allı́ también nació el movimiento integralista, el partido fascista brasileño, ya mencionado. En Paraná, otro Estado brasileño en el sur del paı́s, recientemente dos jóvenes de Curitiba fueron condenados a dos años de prisión por haber hecho declaraciones racistas contra los negros y los judı́os en un sitio web que ya fue retirado del aire. El castigo, como siempre ha sucedido en el paı́s, fue substituido por la prestación de servicios comunitarios y una multa 170 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:167 monetaria. El abogado defensor dijo que sus clientes sólo expresaron una “opinión”, haciendo uso del derecho a la “libertad de expresión”, otorgado por la Constitución brasileña. Aún otro motivo de preocupación en un paı́s enorme y multifacético como es el Brasil son los indicadores de posible conexión entre los neonazis y otros tipos de criminales, tales como el Comando Rojo, una famosa organización criminal que opera en Rı́o de Janeiro. EL PELIGRO DEL EXTREMISMO MUSULMÁN Los riesgos antisemitas no vienen sólo desde el lado de la derecha. De acuerdo con la Policı́a Federal, siete organizaciones terroristas islámicas operan en Brasil, entre ellas Al Qaeda, Hezbolá, Hamas y la Jihad Islámica. En el paı́s, estos grupos recaudan fondos, reclutan militantes y planean ataques. Esta denuncia ha sido hecha recientemente por la prestigiosa revista Veja, que es la de mayor circulación en América del Sur. La población musulmana está creciendo, particularmente en la región de la frontera entre Brasil, Argentina y Paraguay, donde la presencia judı́a es muy pequeña. Hasta ahora no hay informes de ningún tipo de problema entre ellos y los judı́os de San Pablo, Rı́o de Janeiro y de las otras comunidades judı́as. Se dispone de información que indica que los musulmanes están tratando de acercarse a los niveles más pobres de la población y están haciendo conversiones en masa en algunas favelas atrayéndolos para el Islam. Eso pasa también en el interior de las cárceles brasileñas, donde los musulmanes tratan de ocupar el lugar de la Iglesia, y reclutar y convertir para el Islam en una forma muy rápida. Desde el punto de vista polı́tico un dato relevante es que, por muchos años, los árabes cristianos han conseguido elegir diputados en varios Parlamentos de los Estados de Brasil, y esto ayuda también a los musulmanes árabes que, a través de ellos tienen más influencia o protección si les es necesario. En este contexto en que los judı́os son tan minoritarios, es difı́cil abogar por y defender Israel, lo que hace que a veces la condena al Estado Judı́o sea automática. RAÍCES CATÓLICAS DEL ANTISEMITISMO BRASILEÑO Al igual que en cualquier lugar del mundo donde ha habido y hay una fuerte presencia católica, la Iglesia ha contribuido en el pasado a construir mitos antisemitas de la cultura católica brasileña. Después de la encı́clica Nostra Aetate (Concilio Vaticano II), en la cual la Iglesia Católica recomendó el diálogo con los judı́os y con otras religiones, la Iglesia y algunos miembros de la comunidad judı́a comenzaron a acercarse y la situa- 2011] ANTISEMITISMO EN BRASIL 171 ción se modificó. Hoy en dı́a hay grupos de diálogo y fraternidad que trabajan juntos para educar a sus comunidades. Los mejores aliados para luchar contra el antisemitismo con raı́ces católicas están dentro de la propia Iglesia. Sin embargo, un gran número de clérigos católicos, laicos, sacerdotes y activistas fueron educados antes del Concilio Vaticano II. Ası́, algunas personas católicas no han cambiado su forma de pensar acerca de los judı́os y no se intimidan en expresar sus opiniones. Por lo tanto, a pesar de que judı́os y católicos trabajan juntos, se necesitará un tiempo aún para sanar las heridas entre las dos comunidades. Hoy en dı́a el liderazgo judı́o evita ser naı̈f como sucedió en el pasado cuando algunos pensaban que una buena relación con los niveles más altos de la Iglesia serı́a suficiente para hacer frente en Brasil al antisemitismo católico. En Brasil, la Iglesia Católica compite con la Iglesia Evangélica y también con las religiones de matriz africana, para conquistar la fe del pueblo brasileño. Ello hace que sus autoridades no quieran agregar también un “frente judı́o”. La Iglesia Evangélica es el grupo religioso que más crece en un paı́s con 26 Estados (existe un Parlamento en cada Estado) y un Distrito Federal (el Parlamento Nacional se encuentra en Brasilia el Distrito Federal), donde poseen un poder creciente. Estos grupos son firmes partidarios de Israel y sus aliados potenciales. Cuando la Federación Judı́a organizó manifestaciones en favor de Israel y contra la visita de Ahmadinejad a Brasil, los grupos evangélicos fueron los principales aliados en este tipo de iniciativas. Existe una relación muy buena entre las autoridades judı́as y algunas autoridades evangélicas, que diferente de la Iglesia Católica, no poseen una autoridad central. MITOS ANTISEMITAS, TAMBIÉN DENTRO DE LA IZQUIERDA BRASILEÑA Los estereotipos tradicionales sobre los judı́os forman parte de la cultura brasileña, inclusive entre la izquierda. Antes de su elección, Dilma dijo a un grupo de lı́deres de la comunidad judı́a que ella piensa que su familia era cripto-judı́a3 porque todos sus tı́os tenı́an una “nariz ganchuda”. Tal comentario demuestra que aún hay mucho trabajo educativo que debe ser hecho, comenzando por los niveles más altos del gobierno. La izquierda es muy fuerte en el paı́s. La mayorı́a de sus miembros piensa que los palestinos son las “vı́ctimas”. Israel, los judı́os y los Estados Unidos son percibidos como un mismo y único grupo, y como los “agresores”, el Imperio, los colonialistas, y también los genocidas. Los brasileños en general acompañan a la opinión pública mundial en la forma 3. Cripto-judı́os, cristianos nuevos o marranos son formas de denominar a los judı́os que aceptaron la conversión forzada al cristianismo. 172 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:167 de ver a Israel como el villano y a los palestinos como un pueblo débil y frágil, una minorı́a oprimida. El liderazgo de la comunidad judı́a está de acuerdo en que todo el mundo tiene derecho a criticar a Israel, y también judı́os lo hacen, pero cuando se analizan algunas posiciones de grupos de izquierda se percibe que es poco clara la frontera entre el anti-sionismo, o sea, estar en contra de posiciones y acciones de Israel y de su gobierno y perspectivas anti-semitas. Y esto se aplica especialmente a las crı́ticas que vienen de la izquierda. En San Pablo, la Federación Judı́a está procesando legalmente en la Justicia brasileña un sindicato de trabajadores funcionarios de la Universidad de San Pablo, que acusó a Israel de genocidio contra el pueblo palestino, y la forma legal para poder promover esta acción jurı́dica fue demostrar que el sindicato hizo públicamente en un diario una acusación contra los judı́os y no contra un paı́s, y esto, para la legislación brasileña, es considerado discriminación. Hacer crı́ticas contra un paı́s está protegido por el derecho a la libertad de expresión y es considerado una manifestación polı́tica. Por lo tanto, la discusión se vuelve muy difı́cil cuando los grupos más marcadamente de izquierda en el partido de gobierno o de algunos sindicatos necesitan de argumentos que les sirvan para unir a sus seguidores en contra de un enemigo común. Los judı́os son siempre los mejores candidatos y un blanco fácil. Pero la comprensión de este tipo de mecanismos entre los que estudian y trabajan contra el antisemitismo, no es suficiente para evitar el uso de ellos. Dilma dijo recientemente en una reunión en la Federación Judı́a del Estado de San Pablo, que su gobierno continuará la polı́tica externa de Lula. Eso significa continuar la amistad con Irán y Venezuela. Sin embargo, Dilma muestra una forma independiente de pensamiento y debido a esto, recientemente, Brasil comenzó a tratar separadamente las aspiraciones nucleares iranı́es de la situación de los derechos humanos que sufre Irán. LAS FRONTERAS NUBOSAS ENTRE EL ANTISEMITISMO Y EL ANTISIONISMO En el Campus, en la prensa y en la Internet hay fronteras nubosas entre las crı́ticas a Israel y el antisemitismo. Brasil tiene una enorme red de universidades públicas y privadas, en todo el paı́s. En la cultura universitaria lo polı́ticamente correcto es situarse a la izquierda. Hoy en dı́a apoyar a Israel significa estar con la derecha desde el punto de vista polı́tico. En las Universidades, en el Campus, entre los académicos es “cool” estar en contra del “imperialismo israelı́”. No es fácil ser un estudiante judı́o y defender a Israel en una universidad brasileña. En la mayorı́a de las universidades los estudiantes judı́os son una minorı́a muy pequeña. El antisionismo es una situación real en Brasil, como lo es en todo el mundo. 2011] ANTISEMITISMO EN BRASIL LA SITUACIÓN EN LA 173 PRENSA La campaña en contra de Israel en nuestro paı́s también se expresa en la prensa. La mayorı́a de los programas periodı́sticos utilizan agencias de noticias que tienen una fuerte tendencia en contra de Israel. La polı́tica exterior no es el interés principal de la mayor parte del público brasileño, por lo tanto, el espacio en los medios de comunicación que es abierto a esta cuestión es bastante reducido. Israel suele aparecer sólo cuando algo malo ha pasado. La estrategia utilizada para hacer frente a esta situación es hacer hincapié en el hecho de que Israel es un paı́s democrático, que hace contribuciones esenciales a la humanidad en campos como las ciencias de la vida, la tecnologı́a, los negocios, las artes y muchos otros campos. La Federación Judı́a trabaja permanentemente para construir una actitud positiva en relación a Israel. Para aumentar el conocimiento que la sociedad brasileña tiene sobre Judaı́smo, en cada fiesta judı́a el público brasileño encuentra en la prensa entrevistas y explicaciones sobre el significado de cada celebración judı́a. EL COMBATE EN LA INTERNET Al igual que en las cuatro esquinas del mundo, existe en Brasil un uso cada vez mayor y una influencia creciente no sólo de los sitios tradicionales de la Internet, sino también en la red social en sitios tales como Twitter, Linkedin, Orkut, Facebook y otros. Esta es la forma de comunicación de una parte significativa de la juventud y de los adultos jóvenes brasileños. Y esto crea un estilo que utiliza mensajes muy cortos, casi sin explicaciones y una discusión que se puede llamar “telegráfica”. El análisis de este tipo de medios de comunicación subterráneo muestra que una parte importante de la opinión pública está en contra de Israel, y esto incluye también a algunos judı́os. En los sitios de la red social donde la mayorı́a de los judı́os jóvenes navegan, la búsqueda de palabras como Israel, judı́o, Flotilla, Gaza y similares, muestran una gran cantidad de mensajes crı́ticos que en algunos casos se deslizan y se transforman en comentarios antisemitas. La comunidad judı́a está tratando aún de aprender a lidiar con esto y enfrentar esta batalla. En otro caso reciente que muestra la existencia de ciertas corrientes subterráneas de antisemitismo, el gobierno del Estado de San Pablo anunció la localización de una nueva estación de Metro en un barrio conocido por poseer numerosa población judı́a. La Asociación de Vecinos presentó un pedido ante las autoridades competentes, solicitando su reubicación ya que los vecinos miembros de la institución estaban preocupados con potenciales problemas de seguridad relacionados con una estación de Metro. Este problema se convirtió en una gran discusión entre los partidarios y los 174 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:167 opositores a la estación, y tuvo fuerte amplificación a través de las redes sociales. Entonces un conocido humorista publicó un comentario con la pretensión de ser jocoso, pero con fuertes connotaciones antisemitas. Él escribió: “Los judı́os se oponen a la estación porque la última vez que subieron a un tren fue en camino a Auschwitz”. Colocado esto en el Twitter provocó un gran número de frases antisemitas, ası́ como la reacción intensa de la comunidad judı́a y público en general. A partir de allı́ algunos alegaron que los judı́os de la zona se oponen a la población pobre, que en realidad serı́an la beneficiaria de la nueva estación de Metro. LA INFLUENCIA DE IRÁN EN BRASIL Y AMÉRICA LATINA Lula, durante su gobierno, fue cálido con los iranı́es, como parte de su aspiración a obtener un lugar para el Brasil en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU. La visita del presidente de Irán al Brasil en 2010 provocó tensiones entre él y las autoridades nacionales de la comunidad judı́a, las cuales fueron explı́citas en su cuestionamiento y lo hicieron públicamente. Inclusive en una declaración Lula llegó a decir que Irán habı́a tenido “elecciones libres”, y eso también fue muy criticado. Con Dilma hay algunos indicadores de ligeros cambios en la posición de Brasil relacionadas con Irán. Dilma critico en la prensa la ejecución de mujeres en Irán. En el pasado, ella misma sufrió abusos contra los derechos humanos durante los tiempos de la dictadura en Brasil. Ası́ que ella se ha mostrado realmente sensible a esta cuestión. Recientemente el nuevo Gobierno de Dilma, por primera vez, no aceptó participar en una misión internacional para vigilar las instalaciones nucleares iranı́es. Dilma dijo que a partir de ahora su Administración va a diferenciar entre la posición de Brasil sobre la cuestión nuclear con Irán y sobre el tema de los Derechos Humanos en aquella nación. Brasil es enorme y de fronteras extremamente permeables y el paı́s tiene lı́mites con Venezuela, paı́s en donde Irán tiene las puertas abiertas. Esto preocupa a la comunidad judı́a. Chávez, el presidente de Venezuela es hasta hoy un buen amigo de Lula. Las preocupaciones con la entrada libre para los terroristas de Irán a este paı́s vecino son graves para las comunidades judı́as. Pero no es ese el punto de vista de las autoridades brasileñas y para la mayorı́a de los polı́ticos brasileños que encuentran muy difı́cil aceptar que el terrorismo pueda suceder en nuestro paı́s. Las autoridades judı́as de San Pablo están trabajando muy duro para mostrar al comando de Seguridad del Estado que hay cada vez más riesgos de tener problemas de esta ı́ndole durante los próximos Juegos Olı́mpicos y la Copa del Mundo. 2011] ANTISEMITISMO EN BRASIL 175 LA IDENTIDAD JUDÍA BRASILEÑA Los judı́os brasileños contemporáneos no sufren ninguna restricción acerca de su identidad judı́a, pero el judaı́smo no es necesariamente su prioridad. La identidad, en todas sus facetas, es algo que no sucede en el “aire” ou en el vacı́o. Desde el Holocausto y el establecimiento del Estado de Israel, la unidad del pueblo y la identidad judı́a de la mayor parte de los judı́os en Israel y en otros lugares se han basado en una memoria compartida de la tragedia nacional, un sentido de unión tribal, y un interés mutuo en la construcción y en el futuro del Estado de Israel. Pero no se ha apoyado lo suficiente en el estudio y conocimiento de las “fuentes” originales judı́as tales como la Torá, el Talmud, el Midrash y los comentarios y las contribuciones de los Sabios. Tampoco en el estudio de la Torá por sı́ misma (Torá Lishmah). Ni en la vida diaria judı́a. Sinagogas, escuelas judı́as, centros comunitarios, movimientos de jóvenes, instituciones de mujeres y otras organizaciones cargan buena parte de la responsabilidad por la transmisión del judaı́smo. Estas instituciones tratan de propagar el judaı́smo y el sionismo, pero es creciente en esta comunidad el número de matrimonios en que uno de los miembros no ha nacido judı́o. En San Pablo, la mayorı́a de los judı́os va apenas dos dı́as al año a la sinagoga (en las grandes fiestas de Año Nuevo y del Dı́a del Perdón) y no hablan hebreo. La imagen de sı́ mismos como judı́os depende mucho de lo que la prensa dice de los judı́os y de Israel. Por lo tanto nuestro diagnóstico es que en la comunidad judı́a de Brasil lo que se llama de analfabetismo judı́o, o sea la falta de formación judı́a de los propios judı́os, trae la erosión interna y la asimilación que en ciertos sentidos es más grave aún que el antisemitismo. LA CAMPAÑA EN CONTRA DE ISRAEL EN NUESTRO PAÍS La deslegitimación no es una novedad para el pueblo judı́o ni para Israel y también no lo es para la comunidad judı́a. La diferencia más marcada en la actualidad parece ser que esta campaña tiene como objetivo destruir el derecho de Israel a existir. Esta campaña en contra de Israel afecta directamente a los jóvenes, en particular a los estudiantes universitarios. San Pablo no tiene centros para estudiantes judı́os en el estilo de los centros Hillel dentro de las universidades en Estados Unidos. Hillel Rı́o y una organización similar que trabaja en San Pablo, con el mismo segmento de edad, tienen sus sedes ubicadas en los barrios judı́os, y no en el Campus. Para hacer frente a esta situación, la Federación Judı́a, trabaja buscando informar y educar, apoyando a las escuelas y a las organizaciones 176 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:167 judı́as. La Federación también asume la responsabilidad de lanzar campañas e iniciativas de información al público en general. La Federación ha desarrollado dos programas, uno es Lifnei HaMashber (Antes de que llegue la crisis) y el otro es Esser Dakot (Diez Minutos). A través del primero, algunos especialistas son invitados a explicar y discutir profundamente algunas cuestiones importantes como Irán, Hezbollah, Hamas y otros. El programa Esser Dakot lleva profesionales de Hasbará4 para una breve charla (por ese motivo es el nombre del programa) con estudiantes universitarios, en los horarios de recreo entre las clases en sus propias facultades y universidades y se abordan aspectos relevantes de la campaña en contra de Israel en los medios de comunicación. Los programas Esser Dakot y Lifnei HaMashber tienen por objetivo ayudar a los jóvenes a desarrollar una respuesta eficaz a los desafı́os que enfrentan en la vida de su universidad. Los programas se centran en proporcionar a los estudiantes los hechos y las estrategias para contrarrestar las acusaciones falsas en contra de Israel. POR ÚLTIMO PERO NO MENOS IMPORTANTE La comunidad sabe que nuestro paı́s no sufre antisemitismo violento, pero se preocupa e incómoda cuando las autoridades judı́as evidencian que lo que realmente está sucediendo no es tan agradable. El trabajo de la dirigencia judı́a muestra los problemas a las autoridades gubernamentales y a los polı́ticos bien como a algunos sectores de la propia comunidad. Es muy importante, preparar a los brasileños para criticar y condenar el racismo, y sensibilizar a la población para que no sea seducida por manipulaciones demagógicas en la difusión del odio anti-judı́o. En este contexto, es esencial para Israel, mejorar sus vı́as de comunicación con la diáspora y prestar más atención a lugares como Brasil. Un primer paso en esa dirección se dio recientemente con la reapertura del Consulado de Israel en San Pablo. Una parte de la estrategia para hacer frente a esta situación especialmente cuando Israel recibe fuertes crı́ticas es dar una respuesta comunitaria consensuada. El liderazgo judı́o tiene un enfoque universal contra la discriminación y la intolerancia, y no una visión parroquial. De esta manera, la comunidad lucha sus batallas contra el antisemitismo, junto con aliados de otros grupos con los que se ha trabajado antes en el combate al racismo y a otras formas de discriminación. No creemos que podemos eliminar o borrar el antisemitismo. Tratamos de administrarlo a través de los medios democráticos y los mecanismos legales disponibles en nuestro paı́s. 4. Hasbará, del verbo hebreo lehasbir que significa explicar. Puede ser utilizado como “diplomacia, explicaciones e información a favor de Israel”. 2011] ANTISEMITISMO EN BRASIL 177 Se busca evitar reacciones exageradas. Hay muy pocos actos antisemitas en Brasil, pero los lı́deres de la comunidad deben estar preparados para reaccionar y especialmente ser pro-activos en el apoyo a Israel. Esto también es muy significativo para la identidad judı́a en tiempos en que los fundamentos están siendo desafiados y los vientos están en contra de Israel y del pueblo judı́o. *Alberto Milkewitz es el Director Ejecutivo de la Federación Judı́a del Estado de S. Paulo, organización que agrupa a la mayor comunidad en Brasil y coordina, junto con Mario Fleck el Grupo de Trabajo para Combatir el Antisemitismo. Psicólogo, cuenta con una Maestrı́a en Educación y próximamente defenderá su tesis de Doctorado en Educación en la Universidad de Sao Paulo. BIBLIOGRAFÍA Jeffrey Lesser. Brasil y la “cuestión judı́a,” La inmigración, la diplomacia, y el prejuicio (en hebreo). Tel Aviv: Empresas Universitarias, 1998. Maria Luisa Tucci Carneiro. Anti-Semitismo na era Vargas. São Paulo: Brasiliense Editorial, 1988. Postcard from Venezuela Sammy Eppel* Hi, everyone. Sammy Eppel here. The weather is great! Let me tell you a little about how it is to be a Venezuelan Jew. First, the history. The presence of Latin American Jews begins with the colonial period, and as the region developed so did their numbers. Some Jews even participated in the independence movements of the 18th and 19th centuries. In my country, Venezuela, Mordechai Ricardo, a Jew in the Dutch island of Curacao, took care of the family of Simon Bolivar during a period of exile. With time, Latin America became the home of almost a million Jews that in general got a friendly welcome and were able to establish communities and contribute to the betterment of their respective countries. The Latin American people that came out of the mixing of the native population, black slaves, and white immigration are known for their tolerance and respect and are referred to as the “Cosmic Race.” Under such circumstances, antisemitism was minimal. One noted difference could be Argentina, which is more of a European-type country that imported some of the prejudices of that area. The Latin American Jews that have lived for generations in their respective countries are so well integrated that a Jew from Mexico considers himself totally and first of all as Mexican—and the same goes for the other countries of the continent. Having said that, it would seem incongruous that in September 2006, at the Tel Aviv University conference in Budapest, I declared that “for the first time in recent history there is government-sponsored antisemitism in a Western country” in reference to the new political antisemitism that has risen in Venezuela. The hundreds of antisemitic acts sponsored by the regime of Húgo Chávez have been duly presented in many international conferences. One such event took place on January 20, 2009, with the publication in official principal Web sites of a blueprint for attacking the Jews in Venezuela. It was written by Emilio Silva Chapellin, a professor at Venezuelan Bolivarian University and a prominent member of Chavez’s PSUV party. In it, he calls for action—and the Caracas Synagogue was desecrated ten days later (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1L34I7TFws). Incredibly, the professor was not called by any investigation team and instead was treated as a hero of the revolution and paraded as such in government radio and TV media. But this is even more alarming. On April 4, 2011, the director of a Venezuelan government-owned radio station, Cristina Gonzalez, dedicated almost all her time on the government’s radio station, to the reading of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. She asserted that the contents of the book 179 180 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:179 were approved by the Zionist Congress of 1897 in Basel, and concluded with the statement that all past and present ills are attributed to the “world Jewish conspiracy.” If you add the Muslim embracing of Chávez and the influence of petro dollars, we obviously have a situation of concern for the future of Latin American Jews. P.S. Come visit! The weather is great! *Sammy Eppel (www.eppel.net) is a Venezuela-based journalist who tracks government-sponsored antisemitism. Eppel was a correspondent for World Press Review magazine and worldpress.org, and columnist for El Universal. He is the founder and president of Madre Maria Luisa Casar (www.madreluisa.org), a member of Venezuelan Jewish community (CAIV), and director of DDHH of B’nai B’rith Venezuela. Tarjeta Postal de Venezuela Sammy Eppel* La presencia de judı́os en America Latina es de vieja data y comenzó en el periodo colonial. A medida que la región se desarrollo también los números de Judı́os. Algunos participaron en los movimientos independentistas de los siglos 18 y 19. En mi paı́s Venezuela, un judı́o en la isla de Curazao, Mordechai Ricardo le dio cobijo a la familia de Simon Bolı́var durante un periodo de exilio. Con el paso del tiempo America Latina se convirtió en el hogar de casi un millón de judı́os, donde en general fueron bien recibidos, tuvieron la oportunidad de fundar comunidades religiosas y contribuir al desarrollo y mejoramiento de sus respectivos paı́ses. El pueblo Latino Americano que surgió de la mezcla de la población nativa, los negros esclavos y la inmigración blanca es conocido por su tolerancia y respeto, por lo tanto no es de extrañar que se le mencione como la Raza Cósmica. Bajo esas circunstancias el antisemitismo fue mı́nimo. Una notable diferencia pudiese ser Argentina que tiene gran similitud con paı́ses Europeos y que importo algunos de los prejuicios del Viejo continente. Los Judı́os Latino Americanos que por generaciones han vivido en sus respectivos paı́ses están tan bien integrados que por ejemplo, un mexicano de fe Judı́a se considera primero totalmente mexicano, lo mismo aplica para los otros paı́ses del continente. Habiendo dicho lo anterior, parecerı́a incongruente que yo hubiese declarado en septiembre 2006 en Budapest, en la conferencia sobre antisemitismo de la Universidad de Tel Aviv que “por primera vez en la historia moderna tenemos antisemitismo de estado en el hemisferio occidental”, refiriéndome al Nuevo antisemitismo polı́tico que ha tomado forma en Venezuela. No entrare en los detalles de los cientos de actos antisemitas promovidos por el régimen de Hugo Chávez, ya han sido profusamente presentados en diferentes conferencias internacionales. Uno de esos eventos ocurrió el 20 de Enero de 2009 con la publicación en la principal pagina Web del régimen de una “hoja de ruta” para atacar a los judı́os en Venezuela, escrita por un profesor de la Universidad Bolivariana y prominente miembro del PSUV, partido polı́tico de Chávez. Donde menciona como “blanco” especial a la sinagoga principal de caracas, la cual fue desecrada 10 dı́as después (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1L34I7 TFws) Increı́blemente esa persona no fue llamada a declarar en las investigaciones, todo lo contrario, desfilo como un héroe de la revolución por todos los medios del estado. Uno de los últimos eventos merece especial atención: El 4 de abril de 181 182 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:181 2011, la directora de una radio oficial del gobierno, Cristina González, le dedico su programa diario a la lectura y recomendación a los oyentes al estudio de los “PROTOCOLOS DE LOS SABIOS DE SION”, aseverando que tal escrito habı́a sido aprobado en Basilea en 1897 durante la celebración del primer congreso sionista y finalizando con la tı́pica acusación que presenta a una conspiración judı́a como los causante de todos los males del mundo pasados y presentes. Si le sumamos el irrestricto apoyo a los más radicales paı́ses musulmanes y sus grupos terroristas a la gran influencia vı́a Petro dólares que Chávez detenta sobre muchos paı́ses de nuestra región, es obvio que los Latino Americanos de fe Judı́a se enfrentan a un terrorı́fico e incierto futuro. *Sammy Eppel (www.eppel.net) es periodista basado Venezuela. Él era correspondiente para el compartimiento y worldpress.org, columnista de la revisión de la prensa del mundo para el universal del El. Él es fundador y presidente de Madre Maria Luisa Casar (www.madreluisa.org) un miembro de la comunidad judia venezolana (CAIV) y del director de DDHH de B’nai B’rith Venezuela. Desde 2004 él estudia antisemitismo con apoyo dell Gobierno. A French Intifada Nidra Poller* A process described by some as the Islamization of Europe, by others as the failure of Europeans to integrate Muslim immigrants, has reached a breaking point in France. One of the most troubling manifestations of this discord is the development of a particular type of violence that is more than the sum of its parts. A sampling of this year’s news reports reads like a catalogue of stomping, stabbing, shooting, torching, and sacking; attacks on teachers, policemen, firemen, old ladies, and modest retirees; turf wars, tribal fights, murder over women, over attitude, over nothing; dead youths, murderous youths, bodies scattered across a national battlefield. Is there a connection between the endless series of seemingly disparate criminal incidents and markers openly displayed in insurrectional riots and demonstrations—keffiyeh face masks, Hezbollah flags, intifada slogans, Islamic chants? A general French tendency to withhold information and a deliberate decision to avoid ethnic and religious symbols leads to white noise coverage of criminality. Names, photos, and background information about perpetrators, suspects, and victims are usually suppressed, especially those that might create a negative image of Muslims. Yet there is ample evidence that immigration has brought specifically Islamic antipathy to Jews, contempt for Western values, and other antisocial attitudes reinforced by religious zeal and aggravated by the clash between an authoritarian family structure and permissive French society. Many second- and third-generation French-born Muslims, anxious to separate themselves from a “French” identity they reject, are no less vulnerable to these influences than recent immigrants. A supposedly reassuring “it’s not Chicago” occasionally tacked on at the end of a report about a lawless neighborhood adds to the confusion. In fact, it is not Chicago but more like Algiers, Jenin, or Bamako. GAZA ON THE SEINE “We don’t want to import the Mideast conflict.” These soothing words were repeated by officials from Left to Right every time Muslim rage over supposed Zionist persecution of Palestinians was “avenged” by violence against Jews in France, notably the countless attacks against Jews tallied since the outbreak in September 2000 of the “al-Aqsa intifada.” Initially dismissed as “insults and bullying,” the worst wave of anti-Jewish aggression since World War II was subsequently attributed to the quirky import of 183 184 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 a “foreign bug” that troubled harmonious relations between local Jewish and Muslim communities. Meanwhile, the media were importing the conflict with all their might, pro-Palestinian nongovernmental organizations were agitating, and peace marches against the Iraq war blossomed into punitive actions against Jews. Though ethnic and religious statistics are prohibited in France, it is estimated to have the largest populations of Muslims, anywhere from five to ten million, and Jews, around 550,000, in Western Europe. Over half of the Jewish population is Sephardic, mainly refugees from North Africa. The Muslim population, most of which arrived since the early 1970s, is primarily from the Maghreb and sub-Saharan Africa with large contingents from Turkey, smaller communities from the rest of the Muslim world, and a growing number of converts. The ethnic or religious identities and underlying motives of individuals who attack Jews in France are no more mysterious than those of jihadists who strike elsewhere, from the smooth World Trade Center terrorists to the bungling Times Square bomber, and tens of thousands of the same stripe. A French Muslim thug does not bash the head of a French Jew because he cannot vent his rage against anIsraeli: His feet, fists, iron bar, and knife, in fact, slash the false distinction between antiZionism and antisemitism. In May 2004, tens of thousands of mostly Jewish marchers protesting terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and assaults on Jews in France chanted “Synagogues brûlées, République en danger (torched synagogues, endangered republic).”1 Today, when the situation of French Jews has jelled into an uneasy truce—with a slow but steady decrease in population, sustained immigration to Israel, and avoidance when possible of heavily Muslim neighborhoods—the French republic is in danger as the anti-Jewish thuggery has been extended to the general population, the “dirty Frenchies” and “filthy whities.” France’s politique arabe (pro-Arab policy) has been unwittingly transposed to the domestic scene. The twisted logic and adulterated ethics devised to blame Israel for failing to bring peace on earth has come back to haunt the French. A compassionate discourse that excuses Palestinian atrocities against Israeli civilians as a reaction to “injustice” also excuses French domestic criminality as payback for colonization, discrimination, exclusion, unemployment, and police harassment. Confusion between avowed genocidal intentions and elusive legitimate aspirations—a Palestinian state living side by side in peace with Israel—breeds confusion at home between insurrectional thugs and frustrated but law-abiding immigrants. The “disproportionate reaction” accusation played like the ace of 1. Pierre Birnbaum, “Le recul de l’État fort et la nouvelle mobilisation antisémite dans la France contemporaine,” Pôle Sud, November 2004, 15-29. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 185 spades against Israel turns into a joker when riot police are portrayed as Robocops oppressing a “Palestinized” immigrant population. Having expropriated the moral high ground by rough riding over the heads of Israeli soldiers, French authorities are disarmed in confrontations with homegrown shabab, or youths. So Palestinian terrorists are called “militants,” Gaza Flotilla jihadists are presented as “humanitarians,” and the young French criminals are “youths.” This deceivingly generic term, used to mask the identity of local Maghrebi and African thugs, is a paradoxical translation of the Arabic shabab. Indeed, it is not rare to read of a “36-year-old adult youth” involved in a rumble or suspected of murder. Have French youngsters become savages? Do they steal handbags from elderly women and kill a man who will not give them a cigarette? Are these the same youths who join peace marches, live ecologically, hate religion, and worship diversity? Are French youth running the drug traffic while studying for the baccalaureate exam? Do they break into schools to kill rival dealers or stab uppity teachers? Are the French youth who sit in cafes with their iPhones and sunbathe naked on beaches the same ones that gang up twenty to one on a man who looked twice at their girlfriends or complained when cut in front of in line at an amusement park? What about the youthful French boy couples strolling hand in hand on rue Ste. Croix de la Bretonnerie in the Marais? Do they meet rivals for knife fights at Paris’s north station? Hardly. During the 2005 uprising, when rioting Muslim youths torched cars and public buildings in housing projects throughout the country and clashed with the security forces trying to restore law and order, Parisians believed they were safe inside invisible walls as fires burned on the other side of the ring road. “It’s just the banlieue (working class suburb),” they said. A second round of discourse about the urgent need to improve housing, infrastructure, transportation, and job opportunities circumscribed the problem. Before the year was out, flames were rising in the center of the city and the banlieue problems spread like wildfire.2 NAKED EYE AND MEDIA EYES Five years later, as France is being rocked by another, if more diffuse and elusive, wave of violence, the discourse is similarly sterile. Newspapers string out a litany of violent incidents in a repetition of stock phrases and opaque vocabulary. Honey-voiced newscasters warble little tunes of tribal violence as if turf wars and fatal stabbings in retaliation for a look, an atti2. TCS Daily, Public Broadcasting Service, September 20, 2005. 186 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 tude, or a woman were all in a day’s work. Bucolic place names redolent with memories of Impressionist boating parties are now the sites of bloody murder. Fatal stabbings in schools named after resistance heroes are attributed to the influence of video games and a hunger for consumer products stimulated by capitalism. A small sample paints the grim picture: • January 14, 2010: Adrien, an 18-year-old from Sannois (Val d’Oise), is savagely murdered by a gang of youths armed with sticks, knives, golf clubs, and a Japanese saber. He tried to find refuge in a car repair shop, but the manager, who was ordered out, stood by helplessly as the youths beat and stabbed Adrien to death. Subsequent reports reveal that the murder was the last act in a day of fights between two groups. The victim’s distraught mother berates the youths for making trouble and giving the neighborhood a bad name, yet blames their aggression on police harassment.3 • January 23: A “26-year-old young man” stabbed to death is found in the street in the Orgemont project at Epinay-sur-Seine (Seine Saint-Denis). A suspect turned himself in, yet the circumstances have not been elucidated. That same day, four people are wounded by BB guns, in a fight in Tremblay en France (Seine Saint-Denis), again without elucidation.4 And a 16-year-old girl in Saint Gratien (Val d’Oise) is severely beaten by her two brothers and strict Muslim parents for chatting on the Internet; doctors fear she will lose an eye.5 • January 31: A gang fight involving a hundred youths, some armed with knives, takes place in the Boissy-Saint-Léger RERcommuter train station, apparently connected to a hip-hop concert.6 • February 6: A 17-year-old youth is stabbed to death near the Parc des Princes stadium in the sixteenth arrondissement of Paris.7 • February 7: Youths fight the police for two hours in Chantelouples-Vignes (Yvelines). The next day, two men “of African origin,” probably gangsters, are shot in the ninth arrondissement of Paris, and on February 20, a man is shot dead in broad daylight on rue des Pyrénées in the twentieth arrondissement.8 • February 21: In Conteville (Seine-Maritime), a 73-year-old man visiting a friend, a retired scrap-iron dealer, is killed by robbers, 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Le Parisien, February 12, 2010. Ibid., January 23, 2010. Ibid., January 23, 2010. Le Figaro (Paris), January 31, 2010. Ibid., February 6, 2010. Ibid., February 20, 2010. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 187 who broke into the home.9 What happened next? Were the circumstances elucidated? The perpetrators apprehended? Convicted? We may never know. Convinced that the identity of culprits is withheld for ideological reasons, readers do the detective work with telltale clues and exasperating similarities. Youths, knives, the banlieue? Twenty against one? Drug wars? Turf wars? Gang fights? The puzzled citizen situates each incident somewhere on a line traced from the intimidating rowdiness observed in public to mass revolts seen on television: • February 28: An African widow beloved by her neighbors is stabbed to death in a bank, to the horror of helpless customers and personnel. The next day, a retired couple, aged 76, are brutally murdered in their home in Pont-Saint-Maxence (Oise), just north of Paris.10 • March 1: A sixteen-year-old boy drowns in the Yerres River at Villeneuve-Saint-Georges (Val de Marne) trying to escape assailants who chased him as he came out of a hospital after treatmentfor injuries sustained in an earlier episode.11 • March 10: Four masked youths armed with knives and a fake gun sneak through the handicapped entrance into an amphitheater at the University of Paris XIII Villetaneuse (Seine Saint-Denis) and steal a total of nine cell phones and = C 40 from the students and professor.12 • April 3: Fifteen youths are kicked off the tramway in the center of Grenoble. Three young men and a woman get off at the same stop. The youths harass them, ask the woman for a cigarette; she says she does not have any more. They knock over one of the young men, stomp his head, bash him senseless, stab him, perforating his lung, and run, leaving the victim, a 24-year-old cartographer identified as Martin, hovering between life and death.13 • April 30: A man wearing a yarmulke was attacked in the center of Strasbourg by two Muslims who knocked him down with a heavy iron bar and stabbed him twice in the back.14 • July 14: Nantes: A 52-year-old handicapped man is beaten to death by four “African type” youths scrounging for cigarettes and a few 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Ibid., February 21, 2010. Le Figaro, February 28, 2010. Le Parisien, March 1, 2010. Le Figaro, March 10, 2010. Ibid., April 14, 2010. Les Dernières Nouvelles d’Alsace, April 30, 2010. 188 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 euros. The police are looking for witnesses.15 • August 4: A 64-year-old man was kidnapped by three youths in front of his house, forced into a car, taken to a secluded place, beaten, and tortured until he told them where he hid his savings—a few thousand euros. The victim was hospitalized in serious condition, his face slashed, a piece of a finger chopped off.16 LOW-INTENSITY WARFARE Wherever punk jihadists decide to stake out a territory—a street corner, a park bench, a place in line, or a housing project—they punish intruders with merciless violence. A young couple living in the center of the southwestern city of Perpignan who dared to protest the ear-splitting noise of motorcycle rodeos under their windows in the middle of the night almost paid with their lives. Fifteen youths shouting, “We’re going to kill you,” broke into their building, raced up the stairs, and pounded on their door with such force that the adjoining wall started to collapse. They scattered and ran when the police approached.17 Youths from l’Essonne punished a family because one of the boys made a remark when they pushed ahead of the family in line at the Asterix theme park, thirty kilometers north of Paris. They called in reinforcements, caught up with the family in the parking lot, beat up the boys, and hit their mother.18 July 13, the eve of French Independence Day, is traditionally celebrated with dancing in the streets. Youths shooting prohibited firecracker missiles caused at least forty-seven fires. A 63-year-old woman died when a missile, shot through an open window, set fire to her modest apartment. The second floor of a nineteenth arrondissement fire station, hit by missiles, went up in flames as people danced on the ground floor.19 A minor traffic accident on a highway outside Paris ended in a bloody murder because the victim, a young family man named Muhammad, asked the woman responsible for the damage to sign an insurance declaration. “You trying to act French?” she objected, before calling for help from friends from les Mureaux, a nearby project. The youths, identified in one article as “black,” arrived in force, shouting, “We’re going to kill you in front of your mother,” and proceeded to bash the man’s head with unrestrained savagery, killing him on the spot, in front of his family, as promised. Two of the killers were identified by name and Senegalese origin 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. RTL.fr (Paris), July 14, 2010. Le Figaro, August 4, 2010. Ibid., August 3, 2010. Libération (Paris), May 25, 2010. Libération, July 14, 2010; Paris Match, July 22, 2010. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 189 on a Senegalese Web site.20 Several weeks later, an American journalist investigating the problems of minorities in French housing projects was assaulted by youths in les Mureaux. Described as a 50-year-old evangelical, he was taken to a nearby hospital, unconscious. He had been given a head bashing and robbed of equipment worth more than $15,000. The circumstances have not yet been elucidated.21 ECHO CHAMBER In a transposition of the Middle East peace-process mentality, the failure of integration is blamed on France, just as the failure to create a Palestinian state is blamed on Israel. The Palestinian cause is forgiven for sixty years of aggression; delinquent immigrants are acquitted of responsibility for their antisocial behavior and self-destructive strategies. Hamas attacks Israel for years on end; Israel finally retaliates and gets its nose rubbed in the rubble; housing projects are dilapidated by their own delinquent residents, only to be displayed as proof of social injustice. International opinion looks the other way as Hamas imposes Shari‘a law in Gaza; the media close their eyes as thugs impose their law in the projects. BanlieueGaza-on-the-Seine for the domestic insurgents, Banlieue-Gaza-open-airprison for the compassionate choir. No matter how much is done or given, it is never enough; no matter how wild the behavior, it is always explained away. Here, there, and everywhere, ethical boundaries are erased and logic surrenders to magical thinking. When mothers offer their children to die as shahids—martyred murderers—the very horror of their vengeance is held as a measure of the degree of oppression they endure. In France, every form of brutality, including the murder of Ilan Halimi—a young French Jew kidnapped by a banlieue gang in January 2006 and tortured to death over a period of three weeks22—is attributed to some form of “exclusion.”23 The unashamed antisemitism of gang leader Youssouf Fofana, a rabid Muslim Jew hater, was used to mask the motives of some twenty gang members of varied origins who participated in the crime. Lawyers for the defense organized press conferences and wrote op-eds to deny banlieue antisemitism and portray their clients as misguided underprivileged youths. The same reverse chronology, explained in the first week of the al-Aqsa intifada that Palestinians had gone from throwing stones to shooting guns because Israeli 20. RMC.fr (Paris), June 30, 2010; Xibar (Senegal), July 6, 2010. 21. Libération, July 30, 2010. 22. The New York Sun, February 22, 2006. 23. The Wall Street Journal, February 23, 2006; Nidra Poller, “Paris: Prisoner of the Barbarians,” Standpoint, July/August 2009; Nidra Poller, “French Justice Goes Easy on the Gang of Barbarians,” New English Review, July 11, 2009. 190 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 forces overreacted to the initial—justified—“revolt,” now explains that banlieue youth have started shooting at the police with automatic weapons because law enforcement has gone quasi-military. Identification with the Palestinian “resistance” emboldens French-born delinquents. Punk jihadists who drink alcohol, wear sweat suits, hardly ever set foot in a mosque, and cannot read the Qur’an in classic Arabic establish their dominion as if it were a waqf (religious endowment). No French outlet would touch the “Hamas on the Seine” report by photojournalist Jean-Paul Ney, published by the French-language, Israel-based Metula News Agency on May 31, 2010, describing enraged keffiyeh-masked, pro-Palestinians chanting, “Zionist sellout media,” “Jews to the ovens,” “F—k France,” “Sarkozy the little Jew,” “Obama the Jew’s n___r,” repeatedly breaking police lines, determined to reach the Israeli embassy and vent their rage over the Gaza flotilla incident. Joined by anarchist “black blocks,” the insurgents destroyed property, threw paving stones at the police, and wreaked havoc for several hours at the Champs Elysées Circle. Ney distinctly heard orders broadcast to the riot police: “Don’t try to stop them.”24 The Marseille Bondy blog celebrated French Independence Day in its fashion by featuring a T-shirt emblazoned with an Algerian flag in the shape of France—the spitting image of a map of Israel covered with a Palestinian flag. “Secondor third-generation immigrant youths from the Maghreb, Comores, etc.,” says a young woman identified as Sonia, “are trying to find themselves.” The T-shirt is the answer to their quest. “We really have a double culture; we are both [French and Algerian].”25 French media automatically favor the other version of any clash involving Israel. Journalists can write with their eyes closed—or simply swallow what they are fed from Agence FrancePresse dispatches. The story of the clash in August 2010 on Israel’s border with Lebanon—when an Israeli officer, three Lebanese soldiers, and one Lebanese journalist were killed when Lebanese forces opened fire on Israel Defense Forces soldiers performing routine maintenance work within Israel—broke in France, of course, with the Lebanese narrative. The falsification was revealed within twenty-four hours and confirmed in full reliable detail,26 but media alchemists turned the dirty facts into ambiguous gold.27 Why believe Israeli sources, even when corroborated by U.N. troops on the scene? 24. 25. 26. 27. Metula News Agency (Luxembourg), May 31, 2010. Marseille Bondy blog, July 14, 2010. Ha’aretz (Tel Aviv), August 4, 2010. Le Figaro, August 3, 2010; Le Monde (Paris), August 4, 2010. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA HALL OF 191 MIRRORS Given that the Muhammad al-Dura hoax—the staged death scene and subsequent martyrization of the 12-year-old Gazan allegedly killed in cold blood by Israeli soldiers on the second day of the “Aqsa intifada”28—was produced by Charles Enderlin, long-time Jerusalem correspondent of the state-owned France 2 television channel, the French authorities understandably live in dread of a real Dura on their own soil, not least since the youths readily fabricate their own child martyrs and go on the rampage in revenge. The 2005 riots were triggered by the death of two minors who sought refuge in an electrical substation, allegedly pursued by the police, allegedly for no good reason.29 In November 2007, several policemen were wounded by gunfire in a battle with some 200 youths in Villiers le Bel (Val d’Oise) after two youths without helmets sped down the street on a prohibited minicycle, crashed into a police car, and were killed.30 There is no way of knowing if Abu and Adama Kamara, Ibrahim Sow, Maka Kante, and Samuel Lambalamba, sentenced in July 2010 to prison terms ranging from three to fifteen years, are innocent as they claim, or fall guys for fellow youths;31 it is as if the court were judging an incident that occurred in a distant foreign land. After a similar accident in the Woippy banlieue of Metz, gendarmes were pelted with stones, fourteen vehicles including a bus were torched, telephone booths and a school were sacked. These are but a few of many incidents where youths in stolen cars or motorcycles, running away from the police, crash and kill themselves. Yet, no matter how far-fetched the version of the “aggrieved” party, it always takes precedence over the official version in French media. Any police investigation is, by the media’s definition, suspect. The police, media suggest, should not engage in hot pursuit. One sympathizer explained in front of TV cameras that the police knew the names of the joy riders in the stolen car and could have let them go home and then arrested them the next day. After all, who cares if the boys cause a fatal accident in the meantime? The media offered a brief tour when the police raided a housing project in the Parisian banlieue of Sevran (Seine Saint Denis) controlled by drug dealers. Graffiti arrows indicate “shops”; residents tell how they pass through checkpoints to access their buildings, and TV cameramen were lucky to escape with their footage. 28. Philippe Karsenty, “We Need to Expose the Muhammad al-Dura Hoax,” Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2008, 57-65; Nidra Poller, “Myth, Fact, and the AlDura Affair,” Commentary, September 2005. 29. The Guardian (London), November 6, 2005. 30. The New York Times, November 28, 2007. 31. Le Parisien, July 3, 2010. 192 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 “Militants” responded to the raid with the now familiar torching, sacking, and shooting at policemen. Government promises to enforce the law provoke an outcry from compassionate sociologists, left-wing magistrates and mayors, and members of do-good associations who protest that “repression is not the solution.” Imposing undue restraint on the police has simply emboldened their adversaries. Over 5,000 were injured in the line of duty in 2009, and in January-February 2010, some 1,100.32 In recent incidents, police have been surrounded, pelted with paving stones, kicked, punched, hit on the head with hammers, humiliated, and treated like mugging victims, not agents of law enforcement. International media, relying heavily on Agence France-Presse and Associated Press wire services, have shown little interest in France’s delinquency problem. The November 2005 “intifada” was mistakenly equated with the Watts riots; the recent anti-niqab (full-face veil) law is attributed to intolerance. The grievances of minorities are taken at face value, and government efforts to enforce the law are denounced as concessions to far right extremism. In fact, and contrary to what has been written about French society, there is no tradition of segregation or ghettoes. People are constantly in motion; public transportation carries passengers from banlieue to city centers, and neighborhoods are mixed. The recent ghettoization of certain housing projects—always incomplete—is a function of their criminalization. When the caı̈ds (criminal bosses) rule the roost, those who can, leave; those who cannot, submit. It’s a small-time jihad. THE GANGSTER AS VICTIM The holdup of a gambling casino in Uriage on the night of July 15, 2010, would have been one more item on the long list of unresolved crimes if the police in hot pursuit had not been led deep into the gangsters’ turf in Villeneuve en Isère, a housing project in the banlieue of Grenoble. The two gangsters, wearing bulletproof vests, opened fire with automatic weapons. The police returned fire, killing one with a shot to the head. His accomplice escaped. All hell broke loose in the project. The “victim” this time was not a youngster on a motorcycle but rather a 27-year-old repeat offender, Karim Boudouda, already convicted of three separate incidents of armed robbery but still on the loose. Ninety cars were torched the first night, twenty the next night. Armored cars, commandoes, and riot police were brought in, but Boudouda’s friends fired on the police while his mother announced her intention to sue the police. The owner of a bar, said to be Karim Boudouda’s cousin, was arrested after an arms cache and shooting range 32. Le Figaro, March 30, 2010; L’Express (Paris), August 13, 2010. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 193 were discovered on the premises. Several people were detained and released in connection with the search for Boudouda’s accomplice, whose name and description were not made public. In the first week of September, the alleged accomplice, repeat offender Monsif Ghabbour, was finally located, arrested, and arraigned, then immediately released under supervision. The police are outraged, and the prosecutorhas appealed the release. Some officers directly involved in the shootout were transferred to other regions or sent out to pasture in what looked like a shameful retreat. Heady with victory, Karim’s men pursued them with personalized death threats.33 Eleven days later in Saint Aignan, Luigi B. crashed through a barrier, dragging a gendarme on the hood of his car for 500 meters, then pretended to stop at a second barrier, suddenly sped up, heading straight for two gendarmes. One of them shot at the speeding car as it whizzed by. When Luigi’s body was found ten kilometers further on, his gens du voyage community (nomads of various origins, some now sedentary) went on the rampage. Vandals sacked a police station, terrified a baker, chopped down a dozen trees, and attacked public buildings in half a dozen different localities in the following days. Sociologist Michel Wieviorka analyzed the two situations with typical French rhetoric: “The nomads don’t expect anything from society; the banlieue’s expectations are disappointed.” He added, “It’s territorial, not ethnic or religious.”34 No one in Saint Aignan expected to be shot in the head as was the Israeli officer in a Lebanese incident for cutting down a dozen trees on the Israeli side of the border. The familiar pattern of retreat on the home front was matched with reversals in foreign lands. In August, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb threatened to punish “the treasonous apostates, the children and agents of Christian France . . . [and] Sarkozy—the enemy of Allah” for a bungled attempt to rescue a French hostage—beheaded one week later—in Mali.35 Two French reporters have been hostages in Afghanistan since December 2009. Lebanese villagers surrounded, disarmed, stoned, and threatened to kill members of a French U.N. contingent as if they were policemen in a French housing project. Contrary to expectations, the government did not slip away for the August vacation, hoping heads would cool in Villeneuve en Isère by September. The president, flanked by Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux and Immigration Minister Eric Besson, stepped into the ring, announced a series of tough measures, and dared to link crime with immigration. Not all crime, not all immigrants. But he broke the taboo, simply by stating the obvious and followed with a promise of harsh measures for criminals who shoot at the 33. Le Figaro, July 19, September 3, 2010. 34. Le Point (Paris), July 19, 2010; France 5 TV, July 20, 2010. 35. Reuters, August 16, 2010; Le Parisien, August 17, 2010. 194 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 police. Moreover, naturalized cop killers will lose their citizenship. Tax officials will be sent into the projects to crack down on people living in luxury while on the dole. The drug market will be dismantled. Severe delinquency, polygamy, and female circumcision will also be grounds for withdrawal of nationality (this provision was subsequently withdrawn). Illegal Roma camps will be dismantled, and illegal residents sent back to Romania, Bulgaria, etc.36 Suddenly, the media came forth with in-depth reports on Villeneuve en Isère, developed thirty years ago as a model of social harmony with public and private housing nestled side by side in a beautifully landscaped setting outside the college town of Grenoble. What went wrong? The crisis, officials said, caused deterioration; middle-class property owners left. More to the point, it was revealed that Boudouda was a “lieutenant” in one of the crime families. The current crop of Maghrebi kingpins are more ruthless and savage than earlier generations of Grenoble gangsters—Italian Mafiosi followed by French-Italian neo-Mafiosi.37 Their operations are all the more brutal for being poorly planned and executed. They settle misunderstandings with sequestration, torture, or bursts of automatic gunfire. XENOPHOBIA, “ISLAMOPHOBIA,” OR DHIMMITUDE? The government’s straight talk has shaken France to the timbers. President Sarkozy was accused of cynically fishing for right-leaning-populist Front National voters, replaying the disgraceful Vichy past collaboration, separating the French-French from the foreign-French (akin to death-camp selections), and trying to draw attention away from his administration’s perfidious scandals.38 In the rush to condemn the government for saying the unspeakable, critics have blithely stampeded over the distinction between a misguided 12-year-old bicycle thief and a 27-year-old repeat offender who shoots at policemenwith an automatic weapon. Not a day goes by without a barrage of statements condemning the president. Former Socialist prime minister Michel Rocard—remembered for declaring in the early 1980s that “France cannot take in all the world’s misery”39—stuck the Nazi label on President Sarkozy and accused him of fomenting civil war. Every opposition leader, big or small, took up the keyboard or microphone to vilify the president in the most emphatic terms. No Holocaust metaphor is left unturned. Deporting illegal Romas is equated 36. 37. 38. 39. Nicolas Sarkozy, Public address in Grenoble, July 30, 2010. Le Figaro, August 5, 2010. See, for example, The Herald Scotland (Glasgow), July 25, 2010. Associated Press, November 15, 2002. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 195 with roundups of Jews in the 1940s. The rhetoric has come full circle: “immigrants” (meaning Arab-Muslim and sub-Saharan Africans) are today’s Jews—when in fact the people who are now persecuting Jews belong to that lawless class loosely defined as “immigrants.” The media are giving wall-to-wall coverage to the president’s most severe critics while limiting the defense of strict law enforcement to officials, giving the impression that the government stands alone—the 2 percent increase in approval ratings for the president and Prime Minister François Fillon notwithstanding. Dominique de Villepin, the president’s arch-rival within the governing Union for a Popular Movement party, accused the president of “transgression.”40 With his customary grandiloquence, Villepin declared that Sarkozy has stained the French flag with shame.41 Can the truth about the Maghrebi gangsters of Villeneuve en Isère be extrapolated to other banlieues, other crimes, other nights of flame and destruction? Are law-abiding citizens, Muslims included, supposed to grin and bear it? If this criminality is not strictly delinquent but is rather allied with a wider assault on Western values and way of life, French society must look it in the face. Thugs, the lumpenproletariat, and juvenile delinquents are easily enrolled as foot soldiers in totalitarian enterprises. These not-soFrench, lawless youths play their role in a conflict that radiates outward from a flash point in the Middle East. While disillusioned advocates of law and order think that none of the tough measures announced will ever be applied, defenders of the downtrodden swear that every criminal case involving immigrants is deliberately highlighted to foment hostility and justify repression. Such accusations may seem plausible as long as the issues are debated in the abstract. But concrete realities are stubborn. Thirty-five-year-old Lies Hebbaj came to public attention in April 2010 when he called a press conference in Nantes to contest a traffic ticket issued to his wife for driving with obstructed vision in a niqab.42 He has since been charged with welfare fraud, financial irregularities, violation of labor law, and rape and assault on a wife he repudiated in 2007. It is alleged that Hebbaj, who has four niqabclad wives and sixteen children, has control of annual receipts of more than = C 300,000 in welfare payments, a third of which is fraudulently granted to his polygamous wives, declared as single mothers. Should he be divested of the French nationality he acquired by marrying a Frenchwoman?43 Two 40. 41. 42. 43. Le Figaro, August 24, 2010. France 3 TV, August 25, 2010. The Daily Telegraph, June 3, 2010. Le Figaro, May 4, June 10, 2010. 196 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:183 veiled women, lost in yards of black fabric, appeared on television to complain that Hebbaj—their husband and companion respectively, and the father of their children—is a scapegoat. Sarkozy’s critics say the Hebbaj case was pulled out of a hat to serve the government’s nefarious projects. But it is Hebbaj who came to public attention with a controversial press conference. Why, when there is ample evidence of polygamy and welfare fraud, did he feel invulnerable? Why do the bandits of Villeneuve en Isère think they are more powerful than the police? They feel invulnerable because they are not apprehended or punished and, furthermore, they cannot be criticized or identified without raising a hue and cry. Hundreds of punk jihadists screaming “F__k France” can go amok, but no one has the right to say they belong to a specific group or current. No one is even allowed to speculate on what they might have in common with other lawbreakers—unless one portrays them as hapless victims of injustice. CONCLUSION Does the French government have the ways and means or will to impose law and order? Every law enforcement effort entails the danger of igniting a generalized insurrection on an overwhelming scale. It is easy to scold President Sarkozy as did The New York Times,44 parroting the French leftists or, on the other hand, mocking the president with a long list of unfulfilled law-and-order promises. But it would be wiser to ask why authorities in this western European nation with so much to lose keep mollifying antagonistic elements in the vain hope of avoiding a confrontation. And how is this any different from the free world hiding under the cover of peace processes while Iran moves inexorably to the point of no return? The Islamic factor in both domestic strife and international conflicts is denied. Genocidal intentions inscribed in the charters of Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organization, Muslim Brotherhood documents, mosque sermons, and statements by Arab and Muslim leaders, as well as the Qur’an and the Hadith, are ignored. Criminal acts and jihadist actions are treated as miscellaneous aberrations. Coherent evidence is smashed into a thousand pieces and thrown to the winds, and thinkers who try to put the puzzle together are slapped down. There are no images of the brutal attacks cited here, or of the hundreds of others committed day in and day out. France’s video surveillance network is underdeveloped, in part because of opposition from socialist may44. “Xenophobia: Casting Out the Un-French,” International Herald Tribune, August 5, 2010. 2011] A FRENCH INTIFADA 197 ors and civil libertarians. But one can find a mirror image of the savage gestures, primitive weapons, and murderous rage of those youths in video footage from the latest Middle East reality show—the Gaza flotilla. The free world’s Everyman is a deliberately unprepared soldier rappelling to the decks of the Mavi Marmara. French radio reported that Nicolas Sarkozy urged Benjamin Netanyahu to exercise restraint after the August 2010 sneak attack from Lebanon. Even if this is false, it remains plausible, and would show that, for all his tough talk, the president has not yet grasped the connection between his weakness against the insurgency in France and misguided peacemaking in the Middle East. *Nidra Poller is an American novelist and journalist who has lived in Paris since 1972. A collection of her short stories, Karimi Hotel et autres nouvelles d’Africa, will soon be published by l’Harmattan. Israel’s Intent Yehuda Bauer* What happened in Palestine in 1948 was a war between two ethnic/ national groups about a piece of land. A typical ethnic/national fight, one that humanity has unfortunately witnessed innumerable times. To refer to the Convention1 (or any other attempt at defining genocide) in cases like this creates difficulties. Was there an intent to annihilate the other group? On the Arab side, certainly yes, and anyone who reads Arabic or has access to the propaganda of the time will have to agree. Incitement to genocide is, according to the Convention, part of the crime of genocide, as we all know. But the intent was not translated into action, because the Arabs lost the war. On the Jewish side, there were voices that advocated what we would now call ethnic cleansing, not with the intent to annihilate the Palestinian Arab population (the term Palestinians was not then in use) but with the intent to settle Jews instead of them, and thus cause grave physical and mental harm. Benny Morris and others have shown that the official Jewish leadership was of two minds, and issued contradictory orders. Part of the Arab population in what was to become Israel were evicted; an example is Ramlah/Ramle. Part fled as civilian populations do in times of war—in this case, some in the expectation of returning after victory; some simply in panic and fear of the Jews who were presented, in Arab propaganda, as devils in human form; and some because they were forced by Arab commanders to do so, as in the area around Mishmar Haemek, Beersheva. Others were asked by the Jews to stay, and refused: Tiberias, Haifa, Jaffa. Part were simply left alone, or were permitted to stay if they chose, and did: Galilee, part of the Jaffa Arab population, part of the Haifa Arab population, and the same in Lod/ Lydda. In part, the intent depended on the local Jewish commanders. For example, a Jewish commander who hailed from South Africa gave an order to the inhabitants of E-Rameh in the Lower Galilee to get out; a command car with an officer sent by the commander of the “Front” (Brigadier Moshe Carmel), by then ensconced in Nazareth, threatened to shoot the other officer if he did not rescind the order. But yet another officer managed to evict, brutally, the inhabitants of another large village, Hunin, in the Upper Galilee. Does all this amount to ethnic cleansing à la Kosovo? Was there an intent to annihilate a group as such by eviction/deportation/expulsion? Ben Gurion wanted to have as few Arabs as possible in Israel, but he never initiated a policy that would lead to that result; a majority of the military 1. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, New York, December 9, 1948. 199 200 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:199 commanders (Avidan, Sadeh, Carmel, and the CoS Yadin) opposed this. Some didn’t, and expelled Arabs—Alon, Even. In the few cases where Arabs had the upper hand, nothing remained of the Jewish villages (Gush Etzion, Kalia). I think academics should be careful. There is a difference between conflict and genocide. Kashmir is a conflict, not a genocide. Sri Lanka could have become a genocide, but didn’t; it remained a bloody, horrible conflict. Chechnya is a frightful conflict that could, and did, almost become a genocide, but caused many thousands of casualties. In Palestine/Israel, there were two massacres: Deir Yassin, with more than 100 victims (no one has exact figures), committed by a Jewish group; and the medical Jewish convoy to Mount Scopus, with 46 doctors and nurses, committed by Arabs. Neither was a genocidal act. These were massacres, though compared with Kashmir, for instance, or Zimbabwe, or the mass murder in Hama in Syria in 1982 (some 10.000 civilian dead), or Chechnya, they pale into relative insignificance. If we are humanists, however, we have to deal with every case like this, whether we talk about tens, or hundreds, or thousands; they were live people who wanted to live. But one has to keep proportions, nevertheless. The 1948 war was a war—which is a tautology, but tautologies have the advantage of being true. It was, and continues to be, a bloody conflict. Israeli invasions of the Lebanon in 1982 and 2006 were incursions causing a large number of civilian casualties on both sides, but mostly on the Lebanese side; you can argue until you are blue in the face about who was responsible, and where right and wrong are. But people were killed, so that makes it a conflict. Conflicts can, and sometimes do, deteriorate into genocidal situations; genocidal situations can, and sometimes do, become conflicts. Conflicts can, sometimes, usually, mostly be settled. Genocides have to be prevented, stopped. There is a difference. The 1948 war was, in my view, a typical case of a conflict. It could have become a genocide, on either side. It didn’t. In a conflict situation, we very rarely have a back-and-white picture. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, I think both sides are absolutely right, and that both sides are dead wrong. The moment you take one side only, you help the conflict to bleed further, and increase the danger of its becoming genocidal. Should genocide scholars become involved in attempts to help settle conflicts? That, it seems to me, is up to every individual. To say, as some have implied in this current argument, that Israel is an illegitimate entity means in fact that as it is illegitimate it should be somehow abolished, which of course is a genocidal statement, because it means that the 6.2 million Jews there should be either killed or expelled (or both). When you say that Palestinians have no right to their independence, or you want to 2011] ISRAEL’S INTENT 201 perpetuate the effective Israeli rule on the West Bank, you may not be implying genocide, but you are exacerbating a conflict and making it even more insoluble than it already is. Solutions of conflict are usually, almost inevitably, messy. Different shades of gray fight it out. Nobody is satisfied at the moment when a compromise is reached; satisfaction comes much later. But messy compromises are better than people losing their lives. *Dr. Yehuda Bauer is a professor of Holocaust studies at the Avraham Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry at Hebrew University, Jerusalem. A world authority on the Holocaust, antisemitism, and Jewish resistance in Nazi Germany, he is the author of many books and articles about these topics. Dr. Bauer was the founding editor of the Journal for Holocaust and Genocide Studies and served on the editorial board of the Encyclopaedia of the Holocaust and Genocide Studies. His awards and honors include the Israel Prize and Jerusalem’s Yakir Yerushalayim. He is a member of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Delegitimizing the Jewish State Bat Ye’or* In a move that caught the Israeli government and the Jewish world by complete surprise, on October 21, 2010, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) declared the Tomb of the Hebrew Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem (see essay in this issue by Shalva Weil) “an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territories,” admonishing the Israeli decision to add these biblical shrines to the list of Jewish historical and archaeological sites as “a violation of international law.”1 What is less known, however, is that the driving force behind “the attempt to detach the Nation of Israel from its heritage” (to use Israeli prime minister Netanyahu’s words)2 was the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which pressured UNESCO to issue the declaration and drafted its initial version.3 United Nations secretary-general Ban Kimoon has described the OIC as “a strategic and important partner of the UN.”4 In fact, it has been the OIC that has successfully exploited its marked preponderance at the UN—where it constitutes the largest single voting bloc—to turn the world organization and its specialized agencies into effective tools in the attempt to achieve its goals, two of which are to bring about Israel’s eventual demise and to “galvanize the umma [Islamic world] into a unified body.”5 THE OIC’S ISRAEL OBSESSION Established in September 1969 as the “collective voice of the Muslim world,” the OIC has evolved into the second largest intergovernmental organization after the UN, bringing together fifty-six Muslim and other states, as well as the Palestinian Authority.6 Though boasting a global range 1. “Executive Board Adopts Five Decisions Concerning UNESCO’s Work in the Occupied Palestinian and Arab Territories,” UNESCO Media Services, Paris, October 21, 2010. 2. Jerusalem Post, October 29, 2010. 3. See, for example, International Islamic News Agency (Jeddah), March 3, 2010; “Decisions Adopted by the Executive Board at Its 184th Session,” UNESCO, Paris, May 14, 2010. 4. World Bulletin (Istanbul), September 28, 2010. 5. “About OIC,” Organization of the Islamic Conference, Jeddah. Accessed November 7, 2010. 6. Ibid. 203 204 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 of objectives from the “promotion of tolerance and moderation, modernization, [and] extensive reforms in all spheres of activities,” to the cultivation of “good governance and promotion of human rights in the Muslim world,”7 this body has constantly and disproportionately focused on Israel and its supposed misdeeds. It was established in response to an attempt by a deranged Australian to set fire to the al-Aqsamosque, which was duly blamed on “the military occupation by Israel of Al-Quds—the Holy City of Jerusalem.”8 The “State of Palestine” (i.e., the then five-year-old Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO], established as a tool for promoting the expansionist ambitions of Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser) was among the OIC’s original twenty-five founding members, and the pledge of “full support to the Palestinian people for the restitution of their rights, which were usurped”9—the standard Arab euphemism for Israel’s destruction—has become a central plank of the organization’s policy, reiterated in countless decisions and resolutions on issues that have nothing to do with questions concerning the Palestinians.10 The Islamic Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (ISESCO), an OIC organ mandated “to strengthen cooperation among member states in the field of education, science, and culture,”11 has occupied pride of place in the campaign to delegitimize Israel. Since its inception in 1982, it has run dozens of programs and symposia on the Jewish state’s supposed desecration of Islamic and Christian holy sites and the attendant need to wrest them from the Israelis’ control. The most important of these were the international conferences on the “Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine,” held in Rabat in 1993 and 2002 and in Amman in November 2004 respectively under the patronage of the Moroccan and Jordanian monarchs. An examination of conference activities reveals a systematic effort to devise an anti-Israeli media strategy that was to be adopted not only by Arab and Muslim states but also by international groups and organizations, including some of the UN’s most powerful agencies. 7. Ibid. 8. “Declaration of the First Rabat Islamic Conference,” Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Rabat, September 1969. 9. Ibid. 10. “Resolutions,” Second Islamic Conference of the Ministers of Health, OIC, Tehran, March 1-4, 2009. 11. “Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO),” Specialized Institutions and Organs, OIC, Rabat, 2009. Accessed November 7, 2010. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE UNIFYING THE UMMA, BASHING THE 205 JEWS In his address to the 2002 Rabat conference, King Muhammad VI of Morocco stated: “The acts of destruction and distortion committed by the occupation authorities to distort the facts and truths of history cause serious damage to the Islamic and Christian holy sites and violate their sanctity and the values they embody for all the believers of the different religions.”12 For the Moroccan monarch, as president of the OIC’s al-Quds Committee, such actions as archaeological excavations and the placement of artifacts in museums constituted an attack against all believers. In fact, Christian churches that had been reduced to ruins by centuries of Islamic occupation were restored by successive Israeli governments because, unlike Shari‘a or Islamic law, the Jewish state has no laws prohibiting the restoration or construction of churches. The king could have also benefited from a measure of introspection: Morocco, like the other Maghreb states, is a place where virtually no vestiges of pre-Islamic Christian history have survived. Abdulaziz Othman Altwaijri, the Saudi-born, University of Oregon educated ISESCO director general, went a step further, asserting that “the crimes against humanity committed by Israel have reached an extent of oppression, injustice, and aggression that humanity has never witnessed, neither in this age nor in previous ages.”13 He amplified this diatribe at the Amman conference, where he claimed that Muslim responsibilities toward the Islamic and Christian holy sites in the Palestinian territories sprang from ISESCO’s commitment to the Palestinian cause, which in his opinion constituted the essence of all issues and the supreme task of both the Muslim world and those Eastern Christian circles that were part of the Arab and Islamic civilization.14 The proceedings of the Rabat and the Amman conferences represent a monument to anti-Jewish hatred and incitement, featuring such assertions as “Jews are the enemies of Allah, the enemies of faith, and of the worship of Allah.”15 They also brim with denials of Jewish attachment to the Land of 12. Message of His Majesty Mohammed VI, King of Morocco, Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine First International Conference, Rabat, June 7-8, 2002 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2004), 11. 13. Address by Dr. Abdulaziz Othman Altwaijri, Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine, First International Conference, Rabat, June 7-8, 2002 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2004), 15. 14. Address by Dr. Abdulaziz Othman Altwaijri, Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine, Second International Conference, Amman, November 23-25, 2004 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2007), 18. 15. Adnan Ibrahim Hassan al-Subah, “Role of Palestinian Civil Society in the Protection of Holy Sites in Palestine,” Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy 206 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 Israel and claims to its Arab (and later Muslim) character since the third millennium BCE. The Jews are accused of having “judaized” the biblical prophets who were in fact Muslim and of having usurped the antiquity of other peoples since they themselves have no history. In the words of Adnan Ibrahim Hassan al-Subah, president of the Jenin Information Center: People familiar with the Torah, which we believe to have been distorted, know the extent of the evils they attribute to their prophets: corruption, treachery, fornication or approval of it. It is with these facts that we need to arm ourselves when we confront the Zionist propaganda in the world with tangible facts, as part of our defence of the faith and the faithful on earth, wherever they may be.16 These examples of incitement to religious hatred were on display at the UN’s Palais des Nations in Geneva at a reception given by the OIC on December 19, 2008, to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And why not? After all, the OIC is not only “the collective voice of the Muslim world”17 but also the UN’s largest single voting bloc and a prominent collaborator with many of its specialized agencies. INFLUENCING THE UN It is hardly surprising, therefore, that these conferences did not content themselves with anti-Jewish diatribes but sought to devise a strategy to harness the international community to the anti-Israel campaign in general and the re-Islamization of Jerusalem (al-Quds) in particular. As one of the speakers explained, “Jerusalem is the cornerstone of the spiritual edifice and the Zionist Jewish entity. Were it to be dislodged, the whole edifice and the Zionist entity itself would crumble like a deck of cards.”18 Action plans show a media strategy of employing an attractive style and scientific language and magnifying Palestinian suffering since the establishment of the “racist Zionist entity” in 1948. These plans would be effectively replicated by the UN’s Alliance of Civilizations’ Report of the Sites in Palestine, Second International Conference, Amman, November 23-25, 2004 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2007), 253. 16. Ibid., 254. 17. “About OIC.” 18. Abdullah Kan’an, “Media Plan for Publicising the Cause of Al Quds, Al Sharif in the West and Mechanisms for Its Implementation,” Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine, Second International Conference, Amman, November 23-25, 2004 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2007), 195. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 207 High Level Group (HLG), which would endeavor to “make it clear to the Palestinian people that the price of decades of occupation, misunderstanding and stigmatization is being fully acknowledged,” although this “story had been left untold or deliberately ignored by the community of nations.”19 This assertion is not merely false but the inverse of the truth. The Palestinians have benefited like no other nation from world indulgence. Europe, for one, has vigorously championed their cause since 1973, devising a string of political schemes on their behalf and pouring immeasurable sums of money into the bottomless Palestinian pit. If anything, it was the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Jews from the Arab countries during and after the 1948 war and the expropriation of their worldly possessions that was entirely ignored by the Alliance of Civilizations, as was the history of the Jews in their ancestral homeland, where they had suffered ethnic and religious oppression by a long succession of foreign occupiers. While claiming to promote peace, the HLG report added yet another page to both the defamation of Israel and the perennial Palestinian sense of victimization. One wonders what prompted it to begin the historical survey with the establishment of the state of Israel, ignoring the millenarian Jewish attachment to the Land of Israel that had been acknowledged as early a1920 by the UN’s predecessor—the League of Nations. Moreover, the report sought to rewrite, under the UN aegis, the story of the nakba (the “catastrophe,” as Palestinians and Arabs call their 1948 failure to destroy Israel at its birth) as a counterweight to the Holocaust, and to impose this narrative on Israel and the international community. In the words of the report, it is “essential for Palestinians as well as for the ArabMuslim world and Muslims in general to understand and acknowledge the fact that we . . . now know and take responsibility for ensuring everyone knows the price and weight of these sixty years of misunderstanding, stigmatization, as well as veiled and abused truths.”20 Indeed, while the Alliance was established in 2005 with the specific goal “to explore the roots of polarization between societies and cultures today and to recommend a practical program of action to address this issue,” it has quickly become an antiIsrael lobbying machine on a global scale. This is evidenced not only from its implementation plan, which places “a priority on addressing relations between Western and Muslim societies”21 at the expense of other faiths and 19. “Report of the High Level Group,” Alliance of Civilizations, United Nations, New York, November 13, 2006, 18, art. 5.7. 20. Ibid., 53. 21. “Implementation Plan, 2007-2009,” Alliance of Civilizations, United Nations, New York, 2. 208 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 civilizations, but also by its close collaboration with numerous anti-Israel nongovernmental organizations and bodies, notably the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The OIC’s influence on the Alliance has been manifested in a wide range of historical and cultural issues, including the presentation of Islam as the source of modern Western civilization; the contrasting of Islamic tolerance with European culpability for the Crusades, imperialism and colonization; and the whitewashing of jihad’s true nature and its misrepresentation as a struggle for individual self-improvement.22 The Alliance’s views on social issues often echo OIC charges about the pervasive discrimination against Muslim migrants in the West and the Western media’s deliberate dissemination of “Islamophobia.” This state of affairs required, in the words, of the HLG report, that “American and European universities and research centers should expand research into the significant economic, cultural, and social contributions of immigrant communities to American and European life. Likewise, they should promote publications coming from the Muslim world on a range of subjects related to Islam and the Muslim world.”23 Such recommendations follow the injunctions of the religious scholars (ulema) who attended the OIC’s 2005 summit in Mecca.24 PLOTTING THE ANTI-ISRAEL CAMPAIGN Speakers at the OIC’s Amman conference stressed the media’s crucial role and importance in the fight against Israel. They recommended that the Islamic world should demonstrate its unwavering commitment to Arab and Palestinian rights, alongside the conviction that the re-Islamization of Jerusalem would restore the city’s spiritual preeminence and peaceful religious coexistence, enable the flourishing of faith, and make Jerusalem a worldwide agent of culture and civilization.25 In fact, this picture in no way corresponds to the actual Islamic history of Jerusalem, which for most of the time was a sleepy and neglected backwater. Rather, it is a usurpation of the Biblical vision of Jerusalem as “a light unto the nations,” developed by generations of Hebrew prophets more than a millennium before Muhammad. 22. “Report of the High Level Group,” 11, 15. 23. Ibid., 39; italicized in the text. 24. “Recommendations of the OIC Commission of Eminent Persons (CEP),” Makkah al-Mukarramah, Saudi Arabia, December 7-8, 2005. 25. Protection of Islamic and Christian Holy Sites in Palestine, Second International Conference, Amman, November 23-25, 2004 (Rabat: ISESCO, 2007), 175. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 209 Abdullah Kan’an, secretary-general of the Royal Committee for alQuds Affairs in Jordan—whose government signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1994—presented a comprehensive plan for inculcating Islamic policy into all Western cultural and media sectors and delegitimizing the Jewish state, starting with turning the Muslim and Christian holy places in Jerusalem into a central world problem. As a first step, he suggested publicizing the history of Jerusalem as he saw it—from the city’s foundation by the “Canaanite Jebusites” to date—so as to negate “the Torah-based history.” He also proposed to popularize Islamic and Christian holy sites in the same manner, starting with al-Aqsa mosque, which, “according to the noble Hadith, is only forty years older than the first shrine ever created for humanity, al-Haram mosque in Makkah.”26 In enumerating the themes of ISESCO’s media war against Israel in the West, Kan’an evoked arguments repeated by many Western journalists, intellectuals, ministers, and heads of state. These included: • Convincing the EU that a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict was in its vital interest, thus helping Europeans (especially Germans) free themselves of their guilt complex vis-à-vis the Jews and the weight of history more generally. • Persuading Western leaders that as long as the Palestinians did not have their own state, relations between the EU and the Arab world would remain unstable. Once this goal had been achieved, Europe could look forward to an expanded partnership with the Arab world and full access to its markets. • Emphasizing that America’s pro-Israel position was in contravention of international law, threatened U.S. vital interests as well as those of Europe, and jeopardized world peace and security. This argument, consistently inculcated in European leaders and journalists by the OIC, was hammered home by the Western media and became an important catalyst of European hostility toward the United States, especially during the George W. Bush administration. • Underscoring the alleged threats to Western interests as a result of supporting Israel. This support had to be presented as one of the foremost causes of anti-Western violence, both in the Middle East and in the Western countries themselves, by individuals and groups who reacted emotionally to personal and collective tragedies. This argument was frequently used by Romano Prodi, then president of the European Commission, and French president Jacques Chirac, among other European politicians, to explain away the resurgence 26. Kan’an, “Media Plan,” 201. 210 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 of European antisemitism during 2000-2005, and was also invoked by President Obama in March 2010, when he publicly humiliated Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.27 • Convincing Westerners that peace was only possible through the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the entire territory occupied in 1967 with al-Quds as its capital, the “return” of Palestinian refugees, and the abandonment of Israel’s “Zionist, racist character”—standard Arab and Muslim euphemisms for the destruction of the Jewish state. • Persuading Westerners that their shared interests with Arabs and Muslims far exceeded those they shared with Israel.28 Kan’an then summarized the long-term objectives of the media plan, two of which are of special note: • Persuading the EU to abandon its slavish trailing of Washington and to form its own independent vision and positions, which “would be more in harmony with the international will vis-à-vis the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Israeli occupation of Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and the right of the Arab Palestinian people to self-determination and to the establishment of its independent state with Al-Quds as its capital.”29 • Transforming the Palestinian question and the Arab-Israeli conflict from internal U.S. issues to external problems, primarily governed by the mutual interests of Americans, Muslims, and Arabs. This would break the immunity of the Israeli policies and force the Israeli government to bow to the will of the international community and adhere to all of the UN resolutions.30 To achieve these goals, Kan’an recommended obtaining the support of certain intellectuals, literary figures, and influential political movements that were capable of molding Western public opinion within the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict and especially with regard to the Jerusalem question. This campaign would refer to UN resolutions that formed the basis for the media plan. Here, too, EU support for the UN’s international law amounted to endorsement of the strategy and policies of the OIC, whose position as the UN’s largest single voting bloc gave it the unrivaled ability to predominate the world organization and its specialized agencies. Another proposed tactic was to infiltrate the media as well as influential cultural, intellectual, and economic circles with a view to exposing them to the Arab 27. 28. 29. 30. The Sunday Times (London), March 26, 2010. Kan’an, “Media Plan,” 202-203. Ibid, 205. Ibid. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 211 perspective and convincing them that their countries’ policies were subservient to “the interests of the Zionist movement with its various formations and bodies and not [to] the interests of their own countries.”31 Other themes included: • Discreetly and indirectly encouraging trends critical of Zionism and the Israeli government’s “judaization policies” in Jerusalem within Western circles, so as to make them effective opponents of the “Zionist lobby and the coalition of Jewish and Christian Zionists” and defenders of their countries’ vital interests. • Delegitimizing laws against antisemitism, such as France’s 1990 Gayssot Act, which made it an offense to question the occurrence or scope of crimes against humanity,32 and George W. Bush’s 2004 law requiring the Department of State to monitor global antisemitism,33 as laws that have no bearing on Western interests but are rather a part of a Zionist ploy to feed Westerners’ guilt feelings to keep them subservient to Zionist machinations. MOBILIZING WESTERN MUSLIMS No less important, the ISESCO campaign envisaged the mobilization of members of Arab and Muslim communities in the West, especially in the United States, who were to be enticed into becoming politically active so as to end their marginalization and gain major political weight. This was believed to be feasible given that these communities, comprising high-quality populations, including important scientists, intellectuals, and politicians. Arab and Muslim thinkers, religious scholars, and intellectuals living in Western societies, ought to recommend to Muslims to reject extremism, fanaticism, and violence, “as this tends to be detrimental and generates negative reactions to Arab and Islamic issues.”34 Another step would involve blocking attempts in Europe and the United States to ban Islamist charitable societies, which according to Kan’an were purely humanitarian organizations but in fact were funneling funds for jihadist and terrorist groups.35 Within this framework, he 31. Ibid., 204. 32. “Tendant à réprimer tout acte raciste, antisémite ouxénophobe,” République Française, Paris, July 13, 1990. 33. Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004, PL 108-332, U.S. Congress, October 16, 2004; BBC News, October 20, 2004. 34. Kan’an, “Media Plan,” 205-206. 35. See, for example, Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha, “CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment,” Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2006, 3-20. 212 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 recommended: • Encouraging the investment of Arab and Muslim capital in all forms of the media (written, audio, and visual), especially in the United States, thus paving the way for breaking the alleged Jewish monopoly in the field. Arab radio stations and satellite television channels such as al-Jazeera and al-Arabia should broadcast “weekly programs in English [about al-Quds], targeting Western public opinion, benefiting from media personalities knowledgeable about the Western mentality and capable of influencing it to the benefit of the issue of al-Quds with the help of UN resolutions.” Programs about al-Quds in English, French, Spanish, German, Russian, and other languages should be created, and a multilingual satellite channel called al-Quds would be created, “staffed with a media, information, intellectual, and historical team knowledgeable about the question of al-Quds and its various dimensions.”36 • Encouraging Muslim and Arab investments in modern information and communication technologies, notably the Internet, and filming television and cinema documentaries with a view to shaping Western public opinion, which is heavily reliant on this type of educational and media sources. A special emphasis should be placed on the possibilities of “utilizing modern communication technologies, especially the opening of Web sites dedicated to al-Quds, and encouraging Muslims to embark on an Internet-supported war for al-Quds to counterbalance the activities of the Zionist movement and its octopuslike formations, the most dangerous of which is Christian Zionism and its mastermind, the neo-conservatives.”37 On a broader level, Kan’an advised Arab and Muslim communities “to integrate as much as possible within the societies where they live, in order to gain credibility,” especially in universities and institutions of higher learning. “Friends of al-Quds” associations in U.S. and European universities, organizations, and working places were to be established to support those NGOs working for the cause of al-Quds. To this would be added the worldwide distribution of propaganda materials “issued by Americans, Europeans, and Jews against Israel, its policies, and Zionism,” including specifically produced films that “reveal the barbarity of Israel, the dangers inherent in the policy of demolishing houses, murder, and massacre of the Arab Palestinian people, and distributing these films as widely as possible in the Islamic world.”38 36. Kan’an, “Media Plan,” 206-207. 37. Ibid. 38. Ibid., 207-208. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 213 Finally, specialists and experts in Western affairs should be drawn into “the discussion of the broad lines of the media plan in order to enrich it and guarantee all conditions of its success.” Such experts would specialize in Western media, politics, public opinion, psychology, religions, law, and culture, as well as in history of al-Quds. In two notes that appear in the French text but are omitted from the English proceedings, the lecturer ridicules the “Zionist stories of alleged Nazi slaughters.”39 THE OIC’S WORLD COLLABORATORS These were by no means novel, let alone maverick, ideas. The intention to extend the OIC’s influence to Western countries through immigrant populations and their growing weight in the host societies had been insinuated on previous occasions, notably by OIC secretary-general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu at the European parliament in 200540 and by the founders of the Euro- Arab Dialogue, which evolved from a French initiative in the late 1960s.41 According to unpublished sources from the Euro-Arab Dialogue movement,42 in November 1973, Christopher Mayhew, a member of the British parliament, and Raymond Offroy, a member of the French national assembly, envisaged the creation of an association for improving Europe’s relations with the Arab world.43 Its launching coincided with the European Commission (EC)’s Brussels declaration that urged Israel to return to the pre-1967 lines and, for the first time, recognized the PLO.44 Mayhew and Offroy, now supported by the EC, were the first to create a Euro-Arab network, the European Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC), at a conference in Paris March 23-25, 1975. Its secretary-general, Robert Swann, a former foreign office diplomat, had been a secretarygeneral of Amnesty International. The funds for PAEAC came from a Swiss foundation, ANAF, set up in 1969 and managed by an administrative committee consisting of European political personalities. PAEAC benefited from the financial aid and support of the EC and its networks, in liaison 39. Ibid., 208. 40. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general, Organization of the Islamic Conference, address to Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe, October 4, 2005. 41. Roy H. Ginsberg, The European Union in International Politics: Baptism by Fire (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001), 112-113. 42. Association Parlementaire pour la Coopération Euro-Arabe, 1974-1994 association archives, unpublished document in author’s possession, 6-12. 43. Ibid. 44. Joint statement, European Economic Community, Copenhagen, November 6, 1973. 214 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 with the Council of Europe. The minutes of the PAEAC meetings were published over the years in the Documents d’Actualité Internationale by the French foreign office. These reveal the effective extension of OIC strategy to Europe, combining a policy of immigration with the cultural and political Islamization of Europe.45 Extensive U.N.-sponsored networks, bringing together the EU, the OIC, and ISESCO, would effectively implement this strategy in all Western countries. Europe, for example, has lavished millions of Euros on Palestinian NGOs and organs of “civil society,” which advocate the economic, political, educational, and cultural boycottingof Israel and which have systematically demonized and delegitimized the Jewish state inschools, the media, Palestinian publications, and on the international scene.46 Since 2005, a “Palestinian Week against Israeli Apartheid” has become a regular feature on campuses and in major cities throughout Europe, Canada, and the United States, calling for divestments, sanctions, and boycotts against Israel. According to NGO Monitor, most speakers at these demonstrations belong to organizations financed by European governments, the European Commission, and the New Israel Fund, created following Obama’s election.47 To these NGOs must be added “The Elders”—a newly established “independent group of eminent global leaders brought together by Nelson Mandela, who offer their collective influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering, and promote the shared interests of humanity.”48 Generating much international influence and considerable funds, the group comprises twelve leaders and dignitaries, quite a few of whom—notably former U.S. president Jimmy Carter and former Irish president Mary Robinson of Durban conference infamy— are harsh critics of Israel. It is chaired by former South African archbishop Desmond Tutu—the spiritual instigator of the world campaign of cultural and economic apartheid against Israel. Small wonder that the group, in line with the former policies of its members while in power, has consistently misrepresented the Israelis as the unjust and warlike party and the Palestinians as hapless victims of their 45. Bat Ye’or, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis (Cranbury, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2005), 93-95. 46. Gerald M. Steinberg, “Europe’s Hidden Hand. EU Funding for Political NGOs in the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Analyzing Processes and Impact,” NGO Monitor Monograph Series, April 2008. 47. “Israeli Apartheid Week 2010: NGO Involvement,” NGO Monitor, updated March 3, 2010. 48. “About the Elders,” The Elders Web site. Accessed October 13, 2010. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 215 predatory neighbor. For The Elders, the Palestinian denial of Israel’s right to exist embodies natural justice (hence, for example, their advocacy of “engaging” Hamas), while Israel’s attempts to protect its citizens from sustained terror attacks—from the erection of the security fence, to Operation Cast Lead, to the naval blockade of Hamas—are illegal and disproportionate uses of force. Tutu congratulated Turkey for having sent its flotilla of supposed humanitarians in May 2010 while the Elders condemned Israel’s attempt to stop this effort on behalf of Hamas, a terror organization, whose constitution openly calls for Israel’s destruction.49 They also urged the UN Security Council “to debate the situation with a view to mandating action to end the closure of the Gaza Strip.”50 In what had by now become an instinctive reaction, the European parliament joined the Elders and condemned Israel by a crushing majority, insinuating its massive support for Hamas. Catherine Ashton, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy and vice president of the European Commission, argued that lifting the blockade would bring peace,51 conveniently overlooking the fact that the blockade was a defensive response to Hamas’ genocidal policies rather than their catalyst. EXPLOITING THE PALESTINIAN CHRISTIANS Nor has the OIC, together with its willing international collaborators, shied away from exploiting West Bank and Gaza Christians—discriminated against and oppressed by both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, which have ruled over them for the past fifteen years—for its anti-Israel propaganda campaign. Consider the document titled Kairos Palestine, drawn up by Palestinian theologians and published in Bethlehem on December 11, 2009, by the Geneva World Council of Churches.52 In the name of love, peace, and justice, the paper portrays Israel as the epitome of evil and oppression, urging all Western churches to initiate a policy of economic strangulation and defamation of the Jewish state. This was followed by a letter from the Greek Catholic patriarch of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem, Gregorios III, to 49. “Hamas Covenant 1988,” Yale Law School Avalon Project. Accessed November 4, 2010. 50. “The Elders Condemn Israeli Attack on Gaza Relief Ships,” The Elders, May 31, 2010. 51. Catherine Ashton, speech to the European Parliament, Strasbourg, June 16, 2010. 52. Kairos Palestine, Bethlehem, December 11, 2009; Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding (Dalton, GA), December 15, 2009. 216 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:203 Pope Benedict XVI53 in preparation for the October 2010 Synod, planned to bring together the Catholic churches of the Middle East to discuss the greater problems facing the local Christians and to devise ways and means for stopping their ongoing flight from the region. Invoking his duty to inform the pope on the dangers in the region, the patriarch had no qualms about blaming Israeli actions for the surge of militant Islamism throughout the region and its adverse implications for the local Christian communities. He wrote: There is a diffuse but sure rise of Islamic extremism, provoked by the threats of the Israeli government against Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria, [and Iran], which is spreading throughout all the countries in the region. Even in Syria, where such extremism has been up to now very limited, its advance has become more and more evident, despite efforts from the government against it. Gregorios lamented the widespread terror attacks by these Islamists on local Christians, especially in Iraq and Egypt. Yet, rather than ask the pope to help restrain the perpetrators of this violence, he begged that the Holy See’s diplomacy redouble its efforts to persuade the Tel Aviv government, despite the views of its most intransigent wing—probably via the United States and those European countries that, having sponsored the birth of the State of Israel and supported it ever since, should be able to exert effective pressure on it—of the grave danger of this development, which in the medium and perhaps short term runs against the interests and future of the State of Israel itself, a country that needs peace in the region just as much as Arab countries do to be able eventually to live normally all together.54 CONCLUSION Judging by Israel’s growing international isolation, the OIC’s sustained effort to delegitimize the Jewish state has borne substantial fruit. Not only is Israel’s right to exist constantly debated and challenged in Western public opinion forums, but sixty-three years after establishing the Jewish state in an internationally recognized act of self-determination, the United Nations has become a foremost purveyor of anti-Israel and antisemitic incitement. Time and again, year after year, its Commission on Human Rights 53. Gregorios III, Patriarch to Pope Benedict XVI, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East of Alexandria and of Jerusalem, March 1, 2010. 54. Ibid. 2011] DELEGITIMIZING THE JEWISH STATE 217 discusses Israel’s supposed abuses while turning a blind eye to scores of actual atrocities around the globe. This world organization has 192 member nations, but its Security Council has devoted about a third of its activity and criticism to only one of those states—Israel. Nowhere has this obsession been more starkly demonstrated than in the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held September 2001 in the South African town of Durban, where, for eight full days, delegates from numerous countries and thousands of nongovernmental organizations indulged in a xenophobic orgy of anti-Israel and antisemitic incitement that made a mockery of the conference’s original purpose.55 As UNESCO follows suit by denying the Jews some of their most cherished historical and religious symbols, the OIC scores yet another palpable hit in its ceaseless hate campaign. *Bat Ye’or is the author of Eurabia (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2005). This article contains extracts from her forthcoming book, Europe, Globalization and the Coming Universal Caliphate (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2011). 55. Gerald M. Steinberg, “NGOs Make War on Israel,” Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2004, 13-25. Doing the Yale Flip-Flop Amitai Etzioni* Yale University announced this month that it would close an institute dedicated to the study of antisemitism, the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism. In the wake of controversy over that decision, Yale has now announced that it will open a new center dedicated to the same subject. Between the closing and opening lies a telling tale about research in a politically charged world. Yale initially stated that it decided to close the original center after a routine five-year review because it “failed to meet high standards for research and instruction,” and “no core of faculty research or student interest has developed around the center.” Questions were immediately raised about whether academic performance was the only thing on Yale’s mind. The institute’s critics charged last year that it was defaming Muslims. Nobody claims that the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism desecrated a holy place, marred a mosque or otherwise acted inappropriately. The critics merely pointed to papers delivered at a center conference on topics such as “The Central Role of Palestinian Antisemitism in Creating the Palestinian Identity,” “Lawfare, Human Rights Organizations and the Demonization of Israel,” and “Self Hatred and Contemporary Antisemitism.” The conference included scholars from more than a dozen countries. Maen Rashid Areikat, the Palestine Liberation Organization representative to the United States and one of center’s most vocal critics, sent a letter in August 2010 to Yale’s president, urging him to dissociate the university from the institute. Areikat’s letter, however, does not quote from the papers themselves but merely expresses disapproval of the speakers and of their chosen topics. There are many scores of papers in the academic world at large delivered each year, many of them critical of Muslims or of Jews, that are truly inflammatory, yet — in the West — one does not close down the places where they have been delivered. Defamation is the same charge that was leveled against a Danish newspaper that published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. Denmark protected the paper, its editors and cartoonists, and other papers across the world continued to publish them. It is the same charge leveled against Salman Rushdie for his novel The Satanic Verses, only instead of censoring him, Britain provided him shelter and enabled him to continue publishing. Yale should not have closed the institute if only not to seem even to yield to such pressures. Imagine what we would have said if Britain 219 220 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:219 expelled Rushdie because he did not have a permit to work or some other such reason we could not disprove. Defenders of the closure argue that whenever they criticize Israel, they are charged with antisemitism. As I see it, assuming they are criticizing the policies of Israel rather than seeking to delegitimize it by claiming that the Jewish people are not entitled to a homeland, they are free to say all they want. And they, and all other critics of the Yale center’s papers, are free to counter speech of which they disapprove with more speech—but not with closing down one of the few institutes dedicated to the study of antisemitism. In my 50 years on campuses—including at similarly highly regarded universities such as Harvard, Columbia, and Berkeley—I have seen plenty of institutes that produced little and are still functioning. Universities that consider the mission of an institute to be an important one, but its output weak, can and do replace the director and beef up the faculty. In some cases, they even put the institute in what is called a “receivership,” which gives the university a free hand to reconstitute the institute. This is essentially what Yale finally did—by announcing that it will open a new center for the study of antisemitism this fall. It matters little to me if Yale acted properly because it responded to a chorus of criticism or showed particular sensitivity to the issue because it maintained quotas that discriminated against Jewish students into the 1960s, or because it took into account that antisemitism is flourishing in many parts of the world, including in several Muslim nations. It did the right thing. Now it is up to the new team to show that they will go wherever their research points them, disregarding what critics who have pro-Palestinian or pro-Jewish agendas demand. *Amitai Etzioni is a sociologist and professor of international relations at George Washington University. He was a senior adviser to the Carter administration, founder of the Communitarian movement, and the author of several books, including Security First (Yale, 2008). Published as “Yale’s Flip-Flop on Anti-Semitism,” CNN International June 28, 2011; reprinted here with Etzioni’s permission. Arab Spring Sprung Fiamma Nirenstein* There is something that prevents us from understanding where the waves of the greatest revolutions since anti-communism will lead. It is a damn stupid bias that has different colors, incoherent and bombastic tones, and feeds on Nazi lies, refined pacifist ideologies, or simply cliches. There is a strategy—to bash Israel and focus on the Palestinians. Not the freedom of people, or their well-being, or their progress toward modernity. No—Israel must be “wiped off the map.” From Saddam to Qaddafi, from Assad to Ahmadinejad, this invention has been the best weapon. And now, here we go again. Using Israel as an excuse is again the weapon of consensus that can disrupt any process of modernization. The Muslim Brotherhood, in fact, has presented again its official candidacy in Egypt when Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi suggested to a million people in Tahrir Square the conquest of Jerusalem. Shouts of joy, to which no one in the West raised an eyebrow. Amr Mussa, the Arab League’s historic Pharaoh and the main candidate for the country presidency, has immediately understood the lesson, which wasn’t difficult for him given his record of antiIsrael hatred. He opened his campaign by saying that his relationship with Israel is not that of Mubarak, and that the Jewish lobby is conspiring to prevent him from entering his desired role. From Yemen comes another typical conspiracy theory: President Ali Abdullah Saleh has accused Israel and the United States of fueling the revolt against his regime. The crowds regurgitate the antisemitic venom— during the protests, leaders were violently accused of collusion with Israel. Mubarak was portrayed with stars of David and American flags on his forehead. In Bengasi and Tripoli, crowds shouted “Jew” at Qaddafi(!)—the Libyan dictator who asked “all Arab warriors” to destroy Israel will be displeased. The theory goes like this: Anti-Israelism, with lively antisemitic hues (see www.memri.org, which translates documents from all the Arab world), was the main flag behind which Arab suffering has been hiding. Remember the Nasser trade-off—I will starve you, I will use you, I will support crowds of courtiers who will rob you of your money and police who will block your ideas—and in return I promise to restore the power of the Arab and Muslim world destroyed by Western conspiracy. The first stage is not one of freedom and justice, but to expel—from Arab and Muslim Ummah, our community, our land—the Jews, sons of dogs and pigs, and restore justice for our Palestinian brothers. Many propa- 221 222 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:221 gandist inventions were made to support this thesis: remote-controlled Zionist rats and vultures, children killed intentionally, organs of killed Palestinians explanted by Israeli soldiers and a genuine suicide cult (shahid) was born. Each and every anti-Western terrorist has been raised and glorified, in Libya, in Iraq, and in Lebanon or in Syria. The criminalization has convinced the Middle East that Israel is merely the result of an imperialist conspiracy, and that a nation nine miles wide is the biggest problem. And we Europeans don’t know any other song about freedom than that of the Palestinians. Ah, really, the Arab world was oppressed? It was poor? It was also in great part politically extremist? And now? Help! What to do with all this freedom that looks inside our house, shouting? I would say, since I don’t know what to stutter, that it is urgent that Israel return to its 1967 borders, whatever it takes . . . Mrs. Catherine Ashton, the foreign minister of the European Union, didn’t realize that the people she visited during her recent Middle East tour suffered under the heel of their tyrants, and so she pronounced the word “freedom” only when speaking of the Palestinians. Jean Asselborn, the foreign minister of Luxembourg on an official state visit to Jerusalem repeated like a trained parrot that for him the most crucial problem of the Middle East is that of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that only Israel is to blame for its failure to resolve it. Barack Obama, in a meeting at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, seems to continue to think that a few houses built in Jerusalem are the most crucial issue, while the Middle East burns. Meantime, the EU, instead of working on the wave of refugees who are approaching its coasts, or the possibility of military intervention in Libya, or on the problems of energy supply or on the mullah who are sharpening their weapons in preparation for a new conquest of power—instead of dealing with any of these issues, instead plans for a meeting of the Quartet—the UN, the EU, the United States, and Russia—that should choke Israel and bypass the United States (the everlasting dream of Europe) is now in a state of confusion. But does it make sense, a normal person would ask, to rekindle old obsessions while the world burns with a new fire? Shouldn’t we be suspicious of the fact that, in a world indifferent to the suffering of hundreds of millions of people, the only democracy in the Middle East is depicted with the image of oppression? The leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, has declared on the Libyan war: “The Jews and the Zionist lobby, which dominate the U.S. government and banks, are pushing the U.S. towards a new war . . . my work is to discover the plots of Satan so they do not deceive you and people all over the world again.” We would respond to the usual nonsense of Farrakhan with a yawn of boredom, but we cannot: his words find listeners, and they become politi- 2011] ARAB SPRING SPRUNG 223 cally acceptable not only by people in the Muslim world, but also by liberals in the West. So it was during the time of the war in Iraq, so it is with Afghanistan. If we permit this Middle East crisis to be tainted by anti-Israel rhetoric, the first to be affected will be us: hundreds of millions of people have been oppressed for decades, and today they can be guided to extremism and war. *Fiamma Nirenstein is a journalist and author and member of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, where she serves as vice president of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and chair of the Committee for the Inquiry into Antisemitism. A Board member of Journal for the Study of Antisemitism, she blogs regularly on her Web site: http://fiammanirenstein.com. This essay was originally published March 6, 2011, in Il Giornale daily. Reprinted by permission. The Murder of Hugo Bettauer Martin Kitchen* Hugo Bettauer, a journalist and highly successful author of countless popular novels, was assassinated on March 26, 1925, by Otto Rothstock, an Austrian nationalist and a dental technician closely associated with the Austrian Nazi party. The murder was inspired by the Nazi press, which had mounted a relentless campaign against this “scabiesious Talmudic soul,” this “perverted sewer rat.” calling for him to be “eliminated” or “lynched.”1 The assassin was ably defended by a prominent Nazi attorney, Dr. Walter Riehl, who waived his fee and succeeded in getting his client acquitted on a plea of temporary insanity. Riehl had been the leader of the German National Socialist Worker’s Party (DNSAP), founded soon after the end of the war, but as an opponent of the idea of Austria uniting with Germany and an advocate of a broadly based people’s party, he had broken with Adolf Hitler in 1923, and founded a new party—the German Social Association (Deutschsozialen Verein).2 Riehl’s defense of Rothstock brought him back into favor among Nazis and other radical antisemites, but Hitler never forgave him for his opposition to the idea of an Anschluss. He rejoined the Austrian Nazi Party in 1930, but remained critical of the excesses of the leadership. After he was arrested by the Gestapo in 1938 and released, he sank into relative obscurity. Rothstock, a fervent antisemite, having followed Riehl into the wilderness, enjoyed his brief moment of notoriety, spent eighteen months in a psychiatric institution, and then vanished into anonymity. Bettauer, a provocative, disputatious, and publicity-seeking character with a somewhat murky past, had survived bankruptcy in New York before being expelled from Prussia, where, as a scandal-mongering journalist, he had driven the director of the Hoftheater to suicide, before returning to Vienna in 1910.3 His novels, most of which were originally published as serials, were hugely successful, while his journalistic activities gave him an 1. “Über Leichen,” Der Spiegel, February 15, 1982. 2. For details, see F. L. Carsten, The Rise of Fascism, London 1982, and Fascist Movements in Austria, London 1977; Bruce F. Pauley, From Prejudice to Persecution: A History of Austrian Anti-Semitism, Chapel Hill 1998; Rudolf Brandstötter, Dr. Walter Riehl und die Geschichte der nationalsozialen Bewegung, Vienna 1969. 3. Murray G. Hall, Der Fall Bettauer, Salzburg 1978; Beth Noveck, “Hugo Bettauer and the Political Culture of the First Republic,” in Günter Bischoff, Anton Pelinka, and Rolf Steiniger, Austria in the Nineteen Fifties (Contemporary Austrian Studies, vol. 3), New Brunswick 1995; Magdalena Lueger, Die Funktion der Stadt: 225 226 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 increasingly hazardous prominence that resulted in his receiving a number of murder threats. Bettauer’s best-known novels were The City Without Jews (Stadt ohne Juden), 1922, and The Street of Sorrow (Die freudlose Gasse), 1924. Both were made into successful motion pictures: the former, a journeyman’s effort by H. K. Breslauer, now only of interest in that it marks the film debut of the popular character actor Hans Moser; the latter was made into an impressive effort by G. W. Pabst in which Greta Garbo made her first appearance in a major production, playing alongside the superstar Asta Nielsen. Shortly after finishing the film, in September 1925, Garbo went to Hollywood. Five other movies were based on Bettauer’s novels. He was also well known as the editor of the deliberately provocative Bettauers Wochenschrift, described as a “weekly for lifestyle and eroticism,” as well a short-lived weekly Er und Sie (Him and Her), which was obliged to fold after five issues.4 In 1924, Bettauer was charged with pimping on the grounds that the lonely-hearts column in Er und Sie provided cover for prostitutes to advertise their wares. He was acquitted amid howls of protest from the respectable Viennese. The case triggered a heated debate in City Hall in which insults and even blows were exchanged. Bettauer was an outspoken and frequently immoderate advocate of sexual liberation as well as being a leading advocate of rescinding article 144 of the criminal code, which banned abortion. He was a tireless advocate of social reform, addressing such issues as the housing crisis, the steadily increasing number of the homeless, the problems faced by single mothers, discrimination against homosexuals, the harsh treatment of drug addicts and prostitutes, and the vulgarity of the nouveaux riches. In so doing, he further enflamed the struggle between the arch-reactionary chancellor Ignaz Seipel, a Catholic priest and leader of the Christian Social Party, and the Social Democrat Karl Seitz, the mayor of “Red Vienna,”5 But it was The City Without Jews that caused the greatest outrage and provided Rothstock with a powerful motive for his crime. The book, designed as a light-hearted satire, was horribly prescient. It tells the tale of an Austria with the Christian Social Party in power led by a fanatical antisemite, Dr. Schwerdtfeger, a character bearing the closest imaginable resemblance to Ignaz Seipel. The government passed an immensely popular law that called for the expulsion Wien in der Österreichischen Literatur. Theorie, Tradition und Analyse in ausgewählte Beispiele (master’s thesis, Vienna 2010). 4. Melanie Hacker (ed.) “Er und Sie.” Wochenschrift für Lebenskultur und Erotik: Hugo Bettauers Zeitschrift und die Sexualmoral der 1920er Jahre, Saarbrücken 2009. 5. Seipel resigned as chancellor in 1924 after an assassination attempt, but remained party chairman. He resumed the chancellorship in 1926. In the meantime, a Christian Socialist, Rudolf Ramek, served as acting chancellor. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 227 of all Jews by year’s end. But enthusiasm for this measure soon waned. Cultural life became insufferably dull. Playgoers soon tired of a meager diet of the alpine idylls of Ludwig Ganghofer and the sentimental village sagas of Ludwig Anzengruber. Deprived of their Jewish patrons, elegant cafés were obliged to convert into snack bars selling sausages. Jewelers, couturiers, and furriers, no longer patronized by wealthy Jews, were forced to move to Prague and Budapest. Unemployment rose steeply. Inflation was rampant. The once vibrant and exhilarating Vienna rapidly sank to the level of a dull provincial town. Leo Strakosch, one of the Jews who had been expelled, disguises himself as a French artist and returns to Vienna to visit his wealthy girlfriend. He immediately starts a poster campaign to repeal the expulsion order. The government is toppled and the Jews return amid general jubilation. The film differs substantially from the book, causing a severe altercation between Bettauer and Breslauer because the political message was blunted. Vienna becomes Utopia, the entire story a nightmare dreamt by an antisemitic member of parliament, whose waking words are: “Thank heavens that this stupid dream is over! We are all human beings and do not want hate. We simply want to live together in peace and quiet.” Jews are seen as a necessary evil, the “world’s yeast.” The film is further distanced from reality by expressionistic sets in the manner of Robert Wiene’s classic The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Yet even in this anodyne form, the film caused an outrage. Much of the satire backfired. Did the novel as well as the film not show that Austria’s culture and economy were dominated by the Jews, just as the antisemites claimed? Nazis rioted and threw stink bombs into cinemas. It was banned in Linz. There were calls for “self-help” against the Jewish pornographer Bettauer, which Otto Rothstock promptly answered, thereby becoming a popular hero. Amid the uproar over the Bettauer assassination, a hastily prepared book appeared that provides remarkable testimony to the strength of antisemitic sentiment in the Vienna of the 1920s. Herwig Hartner-Hnizdo’s Erotik und Rasse: eine Untersuchung über gesellschaftliche, sittliche und geschlechtliche Fragen (Eroticism and Race: A study of the social, moral and sexual question) provides an exhaustive and disturbing justification for Bettauer’s assassination, by detailing the charges laid against him and Vienna’s Jewish community.6 The author starts from the premise that contemporary theater and film, both of which were dominated by Jews, emphasized the sexual at the expense of the intellectual. While both mediums of entertainment claimed to be realistic they failed, for the obvious reason that all were written by Jews, to take account the destructive influence of Jewry. 6. Herwig Hartner-Hnizdo, Erotik und Rasse: eine Untersuchung des gesellschaftliche, sittliche und geschlechtliche Frage, Munich 1925. 228 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 Contemporary dance comes from primitive “coloured people.” With an unmistakable reference to Josephine Baker, who had just opened at the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées in Paris, Hartner-Hnizdo claimed that France was particularly taken by this degenerate Negro culture. Germany was already following along this path to decline. A further threat to German culture came from bobbed hair, with its variants the Dutch Boy, the Eton Crop, and the Shingle, all said to have originated in homosexual circles in New York and enthusiastically taken up by Jewish women in Europe. Short hair and the slightly androgynous style of dress pioneered by Coco Chanel was, Hartner-Hnizdo argued, part of an absurd and unnatural attempt to make women more like men, which was bound to lead to a perverse amorphousness. It was also an expression of an individualism that was encouraged by Jews in order to destroy non-Jewish ethnicity, while Jews knew full well that their strength lay in their sticking together. Hartner-Hnizdo found himself in something of a bind in that he realized that antisemitism, for which he was a strident advocate, served to strengthen Jewish determination to defend their identity, thereby steeling their “racially conscious” religion. Jews were gradually but relentlessly taking over the arts and sciences, which are in turn the “source of all life.”7 Using Martin Luther’s misquotation of Genesis 26:3 to the effect that the Lord exhorted the Jews to be “a stranger in this country,” Hartner-Hnizdo claimed biblical support for his conviction that Jews are not only an alien body within Christian society, but also one that is positively harmful.8 In former times, Christians were well aware of the danger posed by the Jews; canon 78 of the Lateran Council of 1215, for example, called for Jews to wear distinctive clothing and exhorted Christian princes to take strict measures against blasphemies against Jesus Christ. This measure was necessary, we are confidently told, because Jews made a habit of dressing as Christians to seduce Christian girls and also because Jewish moneylenders reduced interest rates when permission was granted to sleep with their clients’ wives.9 Pope Gregory IX was particularly concerned that Jews were seducing Christian wet nurses and maids, while Honorius IV was appalled at the debauchery that occurred when Christians and Jews lived in close proximity. Hartner-Hnizdo managed to convince himself that Jews were an innate danger to Christian society and that it was simply not possible for them to change their malicious ways. 7. Erotik und Rasse, 25. 8. Luther wrote: “Sei ein Fremdling in diesem Land,” which is translated by The New Jerusalem Bible as: “Remain for the present in that country.” The King James Bible’s version is: “Sojourn in this land.” 9. Erotik und Rasse, 30ff. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 229 “Racial studies” (Rassenkunde) clearly showed that character is inborn and not affected by surroundings, as was boldly claimed at the time of Jewish emancipation. The notion that nurture was more important than nature was simply used as an alibi for Jewish malevolence.10 Race is the key determinant and cannot be overcome, Hartner-Hnizdo contends. Most history is unscientific in that it does not take account of racial factors, thereby disguising the true motive forces determining the historical process. The threat posed by Jews should be as much a concern to contemporaries as it was to thirteenth-century popes. It is still essentially the menace: an unbridled and perverse sexuality intent on destroying the Christian sense of community and civil virtue. This is clearly evident in contemporary Jewish literature, the essential characteristics of which, Hartner-Hnizdo claims, are a cynically negative sense of satire, sensationalism, and unrestrained sexuality. He depicts Bettauer as an exemplary instance of this noxious type of literary figure. The sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld was another of his bêtes noirs, although he completely misunderstood Hirschfeld’s theory. Hirschfeld was a eugenicist and member of the Society for Racial Hygiene (Gesellschaft für Rassenhygiene) who believed that homosexuals should not be permitted to have children, on the grounds that their condition was attributable to a genetic defect. On the other hand, he was a passionate opponent of article 175 of the German criminal code, which banned male homosexual acts. and he called for a sympathetic understanding of gays and lesbians. Hartner-Hnizdo attacked Hirschfeld for claiming that since homosexuality was “natural” and inborn it should therefore be permitted. For HartnerHnizdo, homosexuality was blatantly unnatural and had to be stopped, because if allowed to go rampant it would lead to the end of the human race. Homosexuality, he was convinced, was particularly prevalent in the Jewish community and was symptomatic of the Jewish emphasis on an individualism that posed a mortal threat to the Christian community and the Aryan race. He claimed that there were three times more cases of psychosis among Jews than non-Jews, hence the rise of the sex-obsessed Jewish pseudo-science of psychoanalysis.11 Throughout the Jewish community there was a neurotic drive toward “planation”—the gradual reduction of intellectual and physical distinctions between the sexes—coupled with a missionary zeal to encourage homosexuality among non-Jews so their birth rate would be lowered while they, particularly the Ostjuden, bred prolifically. Here were further powerful arguments for a strict apartheid between Jews and non-Jews. The counter-measures proposed by Hartner-Hnizdo came from the 10. Erotik und Rasse, 33. 11. Erotik und Rasse, 46. 230 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 familiar repertoire of the extreme right; some were also advocated by leftwing eugenicists. Abortions should be performed wherever there was a suggestion of a genetically determined physical or mental deficiency. The asocial and criminally inclined should not be permitted to have children. The imperatives of “racial hygiene” should be rigorously enforced. Sex education should be taken out of the hands of Jews and be entrusted to those who were clearly aware of “racial necessity.” Before launching a broadside against Hugo Bettauer, Hartner-Hnizdo selects a number of Austria Jewish literati for special opprobrium. Studiously avoiding such important figures as Stefan Zweig and Alfred Döblin, he fastens instead on obscure writers. First on the list was Emmerich Békessy, publisher of Austria’s first tabloid newspaper Die Stunde (The Hour). Békessy, a notorious morphine addict, somehow managed to get Austrian citizenship in 1923, in spite of facing charges of blackmail, libel, and fraud in his native Hungary. Die Stunde was an appalling scandal sheet, a pristine example of what was known as “revolver journalism” (“gutter journalism”), but it was resolutely democratic and initially enjoyed the support of the Social Democratic Party. It had some impressive contributors, including the 18-year-old Billy Wilder. In 1924 Békessy founded a theatrical journal, Die Bühne (The Stage). From the very outset, Békessy was a controversial figure. His vicious attacks on prominent citizens, his unscrupulous gossip mongering and shameless attention seeking prompted the Austrian writer Karl Kraus to launch a ferocious counterattack in his journal Die Fackel (The Torch). Kraus’ slogan, “Chuck the scoundrel out of Vienna,” was echoed throughout the city. Békessy’s unprincipled methods, which included outright blackmail, was too much even for the paper’s editor, Ernst Spitz, who revealed all to his colleagues, including young Billy Wilder, who in turn informed the management. An editor was arrested for blackmail, but the charges were dropped. Békessy was taking the waters in France when his backers went bankrupt as a result of some hazardous speculation in foreign currencies. He remained in France before returning to Hungary, where he was active as a journalist. In 1938 he moved to Switzerland and in 1940 to the United States, returning to Hungary after the war. After numerous botched attempts he finally committed suicide in 1951, alongside his wife, by a morphine overdose. Békessy was for Hartner-Hnizdo little more than a typical example of “Jewish journalism,” with its emphasis on sex and its attacks on the “scientifically based and historically proven” importance of race, all dressed up as an attack on prejudice and a call for freedom. The intended result would be an unbridling of the sex drive and the domination of the masses—in other 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 231 words, Bolshevism.12 There was nothing exceptional therefore about Hartner-Hnizdo’s attack on Békessy, apart from its strident antisemitism and his denunciation of Békessy’s avid “anti-swastika-ism,” his abortion advocacy, and his propagation of free love. Hartner-Hnizdo also went on the attack against several prominent anti-racists. Dr. Ignaz Zollschan, a physician and anthropologist, set out to destroy the racist views of British-German philosopher Houston Stewart Chanberlain, an effort that Hartner-Hnizdo poohpoohed on the grounds that Jews themselves have a genuine and in a certain sense admirable awareness of racial identity.13 The gynecologist and demographer Felix Aaron Theilhaber was another target for HartnerHnizdo’s vitriol. Theilhaber bemoaned the fact that German Jewry was gradually disappearing due to emigration to the urban centers, intermarriage, and a drop in the birth rate to less than one child per family.14 As a passionate Zionist, Theilhaber believed that the only solution was a Jewish state. As a physician, he was a birth control advocate and called for decriminalization of abortion and homosexuality. He was closely associated with Magnus Hirschfeld and later with Wilhelm Reich. Another intimate colleague was Arthur Ruppin, a sociologist and Zionist, who was one of the founders of Tel Aviv and professor of “Jewish sociology” at Hebrew University. In addition, Ruppin, a eugenicist who believed that settlers should meet rigorous “bodily, professional and moral criteria,” was known as the “father of the Jewish settler movement.” He insisted that the biological singularity of the Jews necessitated strict ethnic separation from the Palestinians. In an outburst of social-Darwinist fervor, he argued that: “It is not simply that the Jews (during the Diaspora) preserved the exceptional inherited traits of their race, they were actually strengthened by a lengthy process of selection. The exceptionally difficult conditions under which the Jews were forced to live during the last five hundred years resulted in a struggle 12. Erotik und Rasse, 62. 13. Erotik und Rasse, 66. Zollschan’s attack on Houston Stewart Chamberlain is found in Das Rassenproblem unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der theoretischen Grundlagen der jüdischen Rassenfrage, Vienna 1910, reprinted 1925. Zollschan devoted his life to the struggle against racialism, summarizing his thoughts on the topic in Racialism against Civilization, London 1942. See Paul J. Weindling, “Central Europe Confronts German Racial Hygiene: Friedrich Hertz, Hugo Iltis and Ignaz Zollschan as Critics of German Racial Hygiene,” in Blood and Homeland: Eugenics and Racial Nationalism in Central and Southeast Europe, 1900-1940, ed. Marius Turda and Paul Julian Weindling, Budapest 2006. 14. Felix Aaron Theilhaber, Der Untergang der deutschen Juden: eine volkswirtschaftliche Studie, Munich 1911. Theilhaber was arrested by the Gestapo in 1933 and lost his license to practice medicine. He managed to escape to Palestine in 1935, where he helped organize the private medical insurance company Kupat Cholim Maccabi. He died in 1956. 232 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 for existence in which only the cleverest and economically shrewd survived. For this reason today’s Jews can, in a certain sense, be seen as a particularly valuable human species. Other races may have other merits, but as far as intellectual ability is concerned they can hardly outdo the Jews.”15 Ruppin caused further embarrassment to liberal Zionists by claiming that the Ashkenazim were superior “with regard to energy, intelligence and scientific curiosity” to Jews from Yemen, Morocco, and the Caucasus.16 He asked whether such inferior material should be permitted to immigrate to Palestine because “the intellectual and cultural level of these Jews is so low that mass immigration of these elements would lower the average cultural standards of the Jews in Palestine.”17 Ruppin’s insistence that Jewishness was due to ethnicity rather than religious affiliation or the result of shared experience excited the interest of Hans F. K. Günther, a prominent Nazi racial ideologue and expert in “racial hygiene,” who argued that Jews should be forced to emigrate “to Palestine, or some other part of the world suited to their hereditary traits.”18 Hartner-Hnizdo saw all these efforts to strengthen a sense of Jewish identity as particularly alarming in that they were, particularly in the case of Arthur Ruppin, mirror images of the intellectual heritage of Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Perhaps for this reason he hastily moved on to attack a series of Austrian Jewish writers before focusing his full attention on Hugo Bettauer. First on the list was Arthur Schnitzler, whom he characterized, along with Jakob Wassermann, as leading examples of the pernicious species of assimilated Jew.19 He was particularly incensed by Schnitzler’s frequent attacks on the antisemites, which he found to be “narrow-minded, spiteful, and pettily one-sided: now the Jew is awake and strikes back.” As a prime example of this attitude, he pointed to Schnitzler’s sensitive treatment of antisemitism in his play Professor Bernhardi. Hartner-Hnizdo dismissed the rest of Schnitzler’s work as superficially witty and sex-obsessed, in which the concept of public decency was mocked as prejudice, narrow-mindedness, and intolerance. In spite of this diatribe, he was in danger of coming under Schnitzler’s irresistible spell and grudgingly admitted that the object 15. Arthur Ruppin, Die Juden der Gegenwart, Berlin 1904, reprinted 1920, p.191ff. Ruppin received the Haeckel Prize in 1903 for his social-Darwinist study Darwinismus und Sozialwissenschaft. 16. Ruppin, Die Juden, 191. 17. Ruppin, Die Juden, 260. 18. Günther, the author of Rassenkunde des deutschen Volkes (1922), was a leading light in the pseudo science of “Racial Hygiene,” thereby earning the nicknames “Rassen-Günther” and “Rassenpabst.” 19. Erotik und Rasse, 68-83. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 233 of his outrage was an assimilated Jew who had lost much of what made the Ostjuden so repulsive. It is hardly surprising that Hartner-Hnizdo had considerably less to say about Jakob Wassermann. Wassermann was a paradigmatic example of the “collar and tie” assimilated Jew (Krawattenjude) whose novel Die Juden von Zirndorf was a blistering attack on the suffocating monotony, bigotry, and backwardness of an orthodox Jewish community. Wassermann said of these Jews that they were “worms, snakes and rubbish,” adding that “our entire cultural sickness is called Jewry.” He went even further by insisting that Christianity was even worse than Judaism, because it was solidly based on all that was worst in the latter. Therefore, he said, a passionate antisemite should be even more fanatical in his hatred of Christianity. Hartner-Hnizdo rather lamely claimed that Wassermann was not against “German-ness as such,” merely against “anti-Jewish sentiment.” He argued that Wassermann was not really a German, but that was not his fault—it was racially determined. Next on the list came Gustav Meyrink, author of the novel Der Golem. The illegitimate son of Karl von Varnhagen, minister of state in Württemberg, and a Viennese actress, Maria Meier, he was a restless soul, who lingered on the wilder shores of the occult. Gershom Scholem, who had visited him to discuss details of Der Golem, later said that Mayrink was “at that time a famous writer, who combined an exceptional ability for antibourgeois satire with an equally remarkable facility for mystical puffery that was expressed in hair-raising, often very impressive, but hardly serious short stories, the quality of which today has only been surpassed by Jorge Luis Borges.”20 For his part, Borges admired the book as a memorable horror story. Hartner-Hnizdo attributed Meyrink’s obsession with the occult to his affinity with the kabala, inherited from his Jewish mother. Meyrink’s anti-bourgeois satire, most clearly evident in his collection of short stories, published in 1913 under the title Des deutschen Spiessers Wunderhorn (The Philistine’s Cornucopia), shows good and bad Jews, but all non-Jews are represented as evil, apart from a few criminals who are represented as being decent, sensitive, generous, and unselfish. Hartner-Hnizdo dismisses this work as “repugnantly coarse” and nothing but “derisive mockery.” Arnolt Bronnen, author of a successful play, Vatermord (Patricide), was for Hartner-Hnizdo an exemplary case of a “half-Jew” adopting the protective mimicry of assimilation. At the time that Erotik und Rasse was written, Bronnen was on the left, cooperating with Brecht and friendly with Friedrich Murnau. Later he moved sharply to the right, joined the Nazis, 20. Roland Reuss, “Was man in Gespensterkreisen gerade so trägt,” Frankfurter Allegemeine Zeitung, September 21, 1910. 234 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 and became closely associated with Otto Strasser and Goebbels. For a while he lived in a ménage à trois with Goebbels and his mistress, a young actress who also happened to be an NKVD agent.21 Hartner-Hnizdo denounced Bronnen as a representative of “the victory of the vanguard of the sexual revolution over the German world of order, intellect and morality”—in other words, of Bolshevism. This led him to the observation that “we should not overlook the fact that there is a remarkable resemblance between the Jewish and the Mongol-Tartar temperament as far as the libidinal is concerned. Thus we see in the Bolshevik revolution in Russia the leadership divided between the Jew Trotsky and the Mongol Lenin, who incidentally has Jewish blood in his veins from his mother’s side.”22 Hartner-Hnizdo’s final victim before turning to Hugo Bettauer was Max Glass, author of Die entfesselte Menschheit (Humanity Unchained), a novel about the revolution in Germany in November 1918. All the characters in the book are described as violently aggressive, pathologically criminal, and determined to free themselves from all moral, cultural, and social restraints. It was a ferocious condemnation of middle-class attitudes toward the “other”—the “November criminals” who had stabbed the fatherland in the back, proletarians, and Jews. Glass’ novel was promptly turned into a successful film, beginning for him a meteoric career as a screenwriter and producer.23 It was for Hartner-Hnizdo a prime example of the “hair-splitting philosophy,” “Talmudic writing,” and “purely economic and libidinal attitude” typical of his race. Such trumpeting of “lack of prejudice” was a destructive attitude that posed a serious danger to German civilization. Hartner-Hnizdo’s condemnation of Die entfesselte Menschheit was warmly endorsed by the prominent racist ideologue Franz Schattenfroh in a book that suggested that mass murder was the optimum solution to the Jewish 21. For details of Bronnen’s remarkably checkered career, see Friedbert Aspetsberger, Arnolt Bronnen, Vienna 1995; Harald Kaas, “Der faschistische Piccolo” A.B’, in Intellektuelle im Bann des Nationalsozialismus, Karl Corino (ed.), Hamburg: Hoffmann and Campe, 1980, pp. 136-149. 22. Erotik und Rasse, p. 106. 23. For Die entfesselte Menschheit, see Andy Hahnemann, “ ‘Der Tod jagt durch die Strassen . . .’ Zur Psychopathologisierung der Revolution” in Max Glass, Die enfesselter Menschheit (1919), in “Friede, Freiheit, Brot.” Romane zur deutschen November Revolution, ed. Ulrich Kittstein and Regine Zeller, Amsterdam 2009. Glass founded the production companies Terra-Film-Gesellschaft, Max Glass-Film GmbH, and Kristall-Film GmbH. As a Jew who converted to Catholicism, he was forced to leave Germany in 1933. After a short but successful career as a film producer in Paris, he managed to travel to Brazil and then to the United States. He returned to France after the war, where he died in 1965. He was the stepfather of the psychologist Hans Eysenck. See http://www.lips.org/ bio_GlassM.asp. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 235 question.24 The second half of Erotik und Rasse is devoted to a ferocious attack on Hugo Bettauer, who is presented as being the most pernicious of all these German-Jewish writers. When the police tried to stop the sale of Er und Sie to minors, Karl Sietz, the mayor of Vienna whom Hartner-Hnizdo claimed was the illegitimate son of “the Jew Pollak,” stepped in to save his Jewish comrade.25 This outraged the chancellor, Ignaz Seipel, who called for “the rehabilitation of souls” (Seelensanierung) and the outlawing of publications such as Er und Sie and Bettauers Wochenschrift, a view that was shared by the Zionist paper Wiener Morgenzeitung, which described Bettauer as “a professional pimp disguised as a journalist,” whose paper offered “the satisfaction of every imaginable sexual indulgence by people of all ages, even sixteen-year-olds, on provision of the client’s age and due payment.”26 Hartner-Hnizdo agreed with this judgment, but questioned the paper’s motives. Bettauer had become an embarrassment for the Jewish community and was an anti-Zionist. He asked why the Wiener Morgenzeitung did not also attack Freud, suggesting as an answer—with blissful disregard of the fact that Freud was a prominent anti-Zionist—that it was probably because he was a Zionist.27 Bettauer was charged on twenty-three counts of attacks on public decency under paragraph 516 of the criminal code, but a jury court found him not guilty. Bettauer’s propagation of free love was a constant thorn in the side of the respectable right and prompted antisemites like Hartner-Hnizdo into frenzied outbursts of indignation. His claim that prostitutes voluntarily plied their trade, making the preposterous accusation that this assertion was cover for the fact that the sex trade was firmly in Jewish hands, caused particular outrage. Bettauer campaigned for the rights of women, including prostitutes, and mounted a campaign against the law that denied them the right to vote.28 He strongly endorsed Magnus Hirschfeld’s efforts to legalize homosexuality.29 In addition, he supported the idea that before a couple could get 24. Franz Schattenfroh, Wille und Rasse, Berlin 1938. 25. Harald Gröller, Karl Seitz, Vienna 2002; Wolfgang Maderthaner, Karl Seitz, Vienna 2000; Rudolf Spitzer, Karl Seitz: Waisenknabe, Staatspräsident, Bürgermeister, Vienna 1994. Seitz’s father died young, leaving his wife and eight children destitute. For this reason, and not because he was illegitimate, Seitz was raised in an orphanage. Seitz was the architect of “Red Vienna,” a model of social democratic town planning. 26. Erotik und Rasse, 135. The Wiener Morgenzeitung was the only Germanlanguage Jewish daily in Europe. 27. Freud abandoned his opposition to Zionism when the Nazis came to power. 28. Prostitutes were also disenfranchised in Italy and Spain. 29. Lesbianism was criminalized in Austria, but not in Germany. 236 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 married they had to show that they had lived together for at least six months; other provisos was that the relationship could be broken off at any time during this trial period; the man would be made responsible for the upkeep of any child conceived during this time if the mother was unemployed and remained single, and he would also be obliged to compensate the woman for any losses incurred should they not marry; and if the experiment failed, a year had to pass before another attempt was made. Only three such trials should be permitted. Hartner-Hnizdo was appalled by these rather impracticable notions, which he felt would reduce European civilization to a “Negroid level.” He insisted that a German woman’s greatest wish was to “bring forth new, healthy German life that was full of hope,” whereas Bettauer saw marriage purely and simply in terms of mutual sexual compatibility. For HartnerHnizdo, Bettauer showed his true face in his novel The Blue Mark (Das Blaue Mal).30 The story, which is set in the American Deep South, tells the tale of a blonde, blue-eyed botany professor who falls in love with a beautiful mulatto woman. Were such miscegenation to be encouraged, the net result, Hartner-Hnizdo argued, would be the “niggerisation of America.” For this reason, he strongly endorsed the Klu Klux Klan, which lumped Jews together with Negroes. They did so, he asserted, “for perfectly good reasons, because they (Jews) have a lot of dark, non-Aryan and especially Nigger blood in their veins. This can clearly be seen in their bulging lips (Nigger lips) and their curled hair, as well as in their dark complexion, which naturally can also come from other racial mixtures[,] and their prominent schnozzles, which is a pretty common characteristic among Jews.” He agreed wholeheartedly with the Klan in his determination to make a clear distinction between Jews, coloreds, and “us Germans.” This would inevitably lead to the forcing away of Jews from German soil.” Hartner-Hnizdo had to admit that Bettauer’s portrait of the Ostjuden as ‘flat-footed, grafters, wheelers and dealers, their hands covered with platinum and diamonds,” with their “prurient lust for women” was perfectly accurate, but regretted that he did not apply this description to the rest of his race.31 On the contrary; Bettauer believed that the vast majority of Jews were sensitive, intelligent human beings, who were open-minded, thoughtful, and mentally alert. Above all, they had a better understanding of women—particularly those independent, warm, and sensual women whom he admired—than the 30. Das Blaue Mal. Der Roman eines Ausgestossenen, Vienna 1922; Erotik und Rasse, 165-172. 31. The word used for “wheelers and dealers” is Kettenhändler—unnecessary dealers between producers and consumers. The practice is illegal in present-day Germany. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 237 average German petit bourgeois. By contrast, the crooks in his novels are almost all exemplary Aryans. This was all too much for Hartner-Hnizdo. As a passionate antisemite, convinced that Jews posed a deadly threat to Aryan civilization, he was outraged that “the swastika people,” by whom Bettauer means all those who have anti-Jewish sentiments, are without exception portrayed in his novels as “utterly inferior, measly and mean-spirited creatures.” Bettauer’s agenda was obvious to him: “He clearly shows us where the whole movement is intended to end: in the total dissolution of existing conditions, with the Jew as the only consciously active and effective element, while the German having been deprived of all intellectual and moral footholds will sink into the mud.”32 At the root of the problem, in Hartner-Hnizdo’s troubled mind, was the belief that intellectual and instinctual drives differed radically according to race. Unbridled sexuality is, according to this theory, at the basis of the Jewish worldview. All that stays in the way of pure animal lust—marriage, the family, the sense of spiritual and intellectual belonging, even the state— is rejected out of hand. The Jew initially sees in a woman an object of sexual desire. He is incapable of appreciating beauty without being overcome by lust. The Aryan, by contrast, looks first for spiritual and intellectual qualities in the other sex. Marriage is at the very heart of the racial idea, for it is through marriage that the race is strengthened, purified, and preserved. It is for this precise reason that Jews attack the institution, while making sure that marriage within their own community is kept free from extraneous racial material. Quotations from Ezra and Nehemiah did not act as a very successful smokescreen with which to hide the fact that the already high degree of exogamy in the Jewish community was on the rise, much to the alarm of the antisemites.33 Hartner-Hnizdo worked himself up into a frenzy over this issue: “The racial idea alone can save our young men from gaining knowledge of life and intellectual sustenance from a foreign or poisoned source; but women also can only be protected from sinking into an inferior race and becoming the objects of desire of sensually perverse humans or sexual adventurers by a strong spiritual affinity with their racial species. This racial consciousness, which is represented in the Old Testament in an often repulsive form, was made into one of God’s most sacred commandments by the prophets Ezra and Nehemiah, so that the Jews, even in the Diaspora, were saved from dissolution among the neighbouring peoples . . . Who teaches our children to have a German sense of race and identity, that will guide their lives and save them from being destroyed by a foreign culture and way of life? Neither at home nor in the schools do they 32. Erotik und Rasse, 212. 33. The relevant passages are in Ezra 10 and Ezekiel 10:31 and 13: 23-31. 238 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 learn anything of the importance of race, or of the spiritual and intellectual forces that are determined by this factor. The cultural uniqueness and level of a people is irrevocably linked to its racial composition. It is never made clear to them that they are Germans and that as Germans they must feel that they are a vital part of the race and that they must order their lives in a manner appropriate to the intellectual, moral and cultural imperatives of their racial origins.”34 Hartner-Hnizdo made the state responsible for Bettauer’s murder. He had been allowed to publish his pornography, to undermine public order and decency, and to attack those who were determined to preserve all that was best in German culture. In such a situation, violence was justified as the last resort. At this point, one might well ask why the murder of a hack writer of dubious integrity by a psychologically disturbed fanatic and justified in a 252-page rant by a racist crank should be worthy of attention. First of all, Erotik und Rasse was lent to Heinrich Himmler in 1927 by Walter Buch, the man responsible for purges in the Nazi party and a prominent racial ideologue.35 The prudish Himmler, who was still at the age of 27 inexperienced in matters sexual, was enormously impressed by this tirade against the unrestrained sexuality of the times encouraged by highly spiced Jewish literary products. In his judgment, the book was “a collection of appalling products of literature, terrible to read. It is, however, a necessary collection of evidence and therefore valuable.”36 The book certainly served further to confirm Himmler’s already obsessive antisemitism and homophobia. But this alone is hardly enough. Far more important is the light it shines on the appalling degree of antisemitism in interwar Austria. Chancellor Ignaz Seipel’s Christian Social Party was founded by the prominent antisemite Karl Lueger and its program bore a close resemblance to that of the National Socialists, but Seipel was alarmed at the socialist elements within National Socialism and appalled at the movement’s rejection of Christianity. Seipel was what was known at the time as a “theological antisemite,” one who rejected the racial antisemitism of the Nazis. His world view was based on the Catholic social teaching of Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum of 1891 on the rights and duties of capital and labor that was reaffirmed and extended in 1931 by Pius XI’s Quadragesimo Anno on the reconstruction of the social order. It was a reactionary, authoritarian 34. Erotik und Rasse, 237. 35. The “Röhm Putsch” of 1934 was among the Säuberungsaktionen (purges) in which Buch played a prominent role. 36. Geoffrey J. Giles, Why Worry About Homosexuals? Homophobia and Sexual Politics in Nazi Germany, Washington, D.C. 2001, 6. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 239 Catholicism, similar to that of Franco and Salazar and, mutatis mutandis, Vargas in his first period as president of Brazil. Bettauer’s murder, like that of Walter Rathenau, marks a sea change in European antisemitism. Toward the end of the nineteenth century traditional European antipathy towards Jews, largely for religious motives, became a codeword for a wide range of attitudes including authoritarianism, imperialism, ultra-nationalism, racism, militarism, manliness, misogyny, the desire for fellowship in an exclusive community, hatred of all forms of democracy, particularly liberalism and social democracy.37 It was an attitude summed up by the historian Heinrich Treitschke in his remark, “The Jews are our misfortune,” or by Otto Glagau, who wrote “The social question is the Jewish question,” in other words, “The Jew” was symbolic of all that is out of joint in the modern world—a boo word for boo things.38 It did not necessarily imply hatred or even dislike of individual Jews—as Karl Lueger’s “I decide who is a Jew,” or its later equivalent, “Some of my best friends are Jews”—clearly indicates. Nor was antisemitism ever transformed into a systematic ideology, in spite of a series of determined attempts. It was, instead, a convenient means of explanation for often complex issues, a blanket rejection of many facets of modernity, a knee-jerk reaction to an inchoate discontent, anxiety, or unease. It is thus hardly surprising that Julius Streicher adopted Treitschke’s “Die Juden sind unser Unglück” as the motto for his appalling weekly Der Stürmer (The Attacker). By the same token, an alarming number of professed antiantisemites, particularly among the Social Democrats, let slip many an antiJewish slur and had neither a particular affection for Jews nor concern for their fate. Some Jews even managed to convince themselves that there was a grain of truth in the antisemites’ charges against them. With the rise of violence against Jews, of which Bettauer’s murder is a 37. Shulamit Volkov, Germans, Jews, and Antisemites: Trials in Emancipation, Cambridge 2006, 113; Volkov, “Antisemitism as a Cultural Code: Reflections on the History and Historiography of Antisemitism in Imperial Germany,” Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 23, 1978, 25-46. 38. Daniela Weiland, Otto Glagau und “Der Kulturkämpfer”. Zur Entstehung des modernen Antisemitismus im frühen Kaiserreich, Berlin 2004. Otto Glagau is best known for his series of articles in Die Gartenlaube in 1874-5 on Die Borsen and Gründergeschwindel in Berlin, in which he blames the Jews for irregularities in the stock market. Glagau wrote: “The children of Israel multiply in Berlin just as they once did in Egypt and they are all prosperous and rich people; really poor Jews are not to be found among them. The climate in Berlin, although lacking ozone, suits Abraham’s descendents very well. If one wished to assuage their 1800 years of suffering and send them back to the land of milk and honey, they would say ‘thank you very much.’ ” 240 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:225 striking example, coupled with calls for the expulsion of Jews, German antisemitism had escalated to a new and dangerous level. This prompted the anti-antisemitists to take a more principled stand, while those Jews who did not manage to convince themselves that this new and virulent antisemitism was directed solely against the Ostjuden, that it was purely political, or that the work of cranks and psychopaths had begun to fear what the future had in store. But at that time no one could possibly have imagined the full scale of the horrors that lay ahead. Adolf Hitler published Mein Kampf in 1925, but it attracted little attention. He was seen as a somewhat ridiculous figure ranting and raving about Jews, socialists, and democrats, dismissed as a “vegetarian Genghis Khan” or a “Charlie Chaplin without the talent.”39 Viscount D’Abernon, British ambassador to the Weimar Republic, in his three volumes of memoirs mentioned Hitler in a footnote as a man who “rose to notoriety” by “exploiting the Semitic and Bolshevik bogies,” who was sentenced to five years’ prison? but “was finally released after six months and bound over for the rest of his sentence, thereafter fading into oblivion.”40 The threat of right-wing extremism in Austria had diminished considerably when the Geneva Protocols helped to stabilize the economy. But the potential was very real, as many shrewd commentators remarked. There was a steady escalation of violence between Nazis and Social Democrats. One such clash was over the Nazis’ allegation that the social democratic paramilitary organization, the Schutzbund, was used to protect the delegates to the Zionist congress in Vienna in 1925. This prompted the Social Democrats to make a swift rejoinder that they did not support “bourgeois-nationalist elements.” Antisemitism was constantly on the political agenda and, once enflamed by the demagogic genius of Adolf Hitler, resulted in an even greater degree of brutality against Jews than in Germany in the immediate aftermath of the Anschluss. As early as 1926, when Seipel once again became chancellor, it became increasingly clear that Austria was heading toward a civil war, as is reflected in the Social Democrats’ Linz Program of that year. At the same time the vaguely reformist, staunchly nationalist, and internally democratic native National Socialism was replaced by the “Hitler Movement,” which placed the Austrian Nazis under the direct control of the German party, thereby subordinating its needs and aims totally to those of the Germans. For the Nazis, Austria was now simply an administrative dis39. Amos Elon, The Pity of It All: A History of Jews in Germany 1743-1933, New York 2002, 380. 40. Lord D’Abernon, An Ambassador of Peace. Lord D’Abernon’s Diary, Vol. II: The Years of Crisis June 1922-December 1923, London 1929, 51-52. I am grateful to Gaynor Johnson for this reference. 2011] THE MURDER OF HUGO BETTAUER 241 trict (Gau) of a greater Germany. In such a context, Bettauer’s murder was a significant portent. The murder was soon forgotten, however, as Austria was rent apart amid escalating violence. The murderer and his defense council vanished from the stage. Hitler never forgave Riehl for his Austrian nationalism and his refusal to bend to his will. Himmler failed to repay the debt he owed to Herwig Hartner-Hnizdo—who, after the Anschluss, found a niche in the propaganda ministry’s Institute for the Study of the Jewish Question in Frankfurt after publishing a scurrilous book on Jewish swindlers; while at the Institute, worked on a new edition of a standard textbook on the Jewish question.41 Bettauer’s novels were placed on the Nazi index, but they enjoyed a modest revival after the war, when scholars began to turn their interest to trivial literature. In December 2009, the crossroads at the Lange Gasse and the Josefsgasse in Vienna’s Josefstadt was renamed the HugoBettauer-Platz. *Martin Kitchen is professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University, Canada. His most recent books are A History of Modern Germany, 1800-2000, Rommel’s Desert War: Waging World War II in North Africa, 1941-1943, and The Third Reich: Charisma and Community. 41. Herwig Hartner-Hnizdo, Das jüdische Gaunertum, Munich 1939; Theodor Fritsch, Handbuch der Judenfrage, Leipzig 1943. Antisemitism in Wagnerian Opera1 Daniel N. Leeson* Richard Wagner’s Jew hatred is well known. What is less well known is that his antisemitic utterances are sometimes a hidden part of his operas. This experience of viewing antisemitic theater may have direct consequences in terms of perpetuating his vicious and ugly stereotypical beliefs. Wagner’s intentions and his success in achieving this end are discussed. An apocryphal story about Wagner’s stage works is attributed to Gioachino Rossini (1792-1868), who is alleged to have described Wagner’s music as having “great moments, but bad quarter hours.”2 Those of us who have worked Wagner’s operas in orchestra pits, however, do not agree with that bit of nineteenth-century wit, for what one plays is sometimes remarkable. For special moments, such as the death of Siegfried in Gotterdammerung or Walther’s “Prize Song” in Meistersinger (The Mastersingers of Nuremberg), it is hard, even for the most blasé and bored old-timer who has played everything, to control the emotions, so awe-inspiring is the impact of the music. Unfortunately, playing, singing, and even listening to Wagner’s music presents internal conflicts for those who reject the man’s antisemitic utterances, as espoused, for example, in his essay “Jewishness in Music.”3 In this essay, assertions about the absence of antisemitism in his music dramas are said to be unsound at the instant of their utterance. Below the surface in some of Wagner’s most creative utterances—particularly though not exclusively in Meistersinger and The Ring—there are many examples of coded antisemitic stereotypes, hateful images of Jews, and disguised references to what Wagner believed were abhorrent Jewish personal and physical characteristics. 1. This essay is a revision and enlargement of an article on Wagner that appeared in the Zionist publication Midstream, Vol. XXXIV, No. 7, November/ December 1998, 9-12, with relevant letters to the editor printed in the issue of February/March 1999. 2. While this quotation is attributed to Rossini, I have been unable to find a source for the attribution. 3. Das Judenthum in der Musik, by Richard Wagner, published under the pseudonym K. Friegedank in the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, Leipzig, September 1850. The essay attacks Jews in general and the composers Giacomo Meyerbeer and Felix Mendelssohn in particular. The work, which was reissued in a greatly expanded version under Wagner’s name in 1869, is a landmark in the history of German antisemitism. 243 244 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 BEING WAGNER Wagner’s loathing of Jews is a much-examined topic in the vast biographical literature about the composer. A consensus of the opinions of many of those examining the subject focus on a seminal phobia in Wagner’s life: an anxiety responsible for his efforts to distance himself from Jews, namely, his belief that he was of Jewish origin. Wagner was not certain of his father’s identity, and one possibility was that the actor, poet, and painter Ludwig Geyer, a man who Wagner suspected of being of Jewish descent, sired him. No proof is available to resolve the biological question, nor does it matter—the overriding consideration being not whose son he was, but who and what Wagner thought his father might have been. So consumed was he with the question of his own heritage that he may have held suspicions of a possible Jewish ancestry for his mother, too. Thus, it is suggested that Wagner became one of the most vocal antisemites in Europe as a means of focusing attention away from his own ethnicity. Sadly, there are many cases of such extreme examples of selfhatred. The idea of a fatherless hero appears at least five times in Wagner’s music dramas. Siegfried, Siegmund, Tristan, Parsifal, and Walther were all either unaware of who their fathers were or else had the father disappear or die when they were young. It is difficult to see this leitmotif reoccur so many times in Wagner’s operas and not believe that he was obsessed with a father’s absence. The idea for Wagner’s possible Jewish descent was exploited by detractors of his music, often in caricatures that appeared in the press, where he is shown with an excessively large nose designed to resemble the stereotypical “distinctive physiognomy” that Jews were accused of possessing. Such caricatures also burlesqued other unVolkish physicality in Wagner. He was short, large of head, and had an excitable nature. Theodore Adorno (1903-1959), a German-born Protestant intellectual, sociologist, philosopher, musicologist, and composer (of Jewish descent), wrote in In Search of Wagner (1981) that Wagner’s early depiction of the gnome Mime, an important character in The Ring, was so psychologically self-descriptive that Wagner withdrew and replaced it as soon as he realized what he had done—i.e., he had described some of his own physical characteristics: “[Mime] is small and bent, somewhat deformed and hobbling. His head is abnormally large, his face a dark ashen color and wrinkled, his eyes small and piercing, with red rims, his grey beard long and scrubby, his head bald . . .” Wagner’s description of Mime, which later also depicts him as 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 245 having an excitable nature, is a traditional antisemitic stereotype. How shocked Wagner must have been to see himself in Adorno’s description of the prototypical subhuman. MEISTERSINGER The opera, which takes place in medieval Nuremberg, tells of that city’s guild of singer/poets.4 Entry into the guild was based on the applicant’s singing and his ability to craft the poetry on which his song would be based. Rules of text and song were strict, with little toleration for any deviation from orthodoxy. Wagner’s opera was an autobiographical roman à clef in which the genius-hero, Walther—Wagner’s depiction of himself—breaks the rules of song construction but creates masterpieces. The villain, Sixtus Beckmesser, represents Wagner’s archenemy, the forces that insist on adherence to doctrine. Beckmesser, who is not a Jew and who could not have been a member of the guild if he were, is an accumulation of nineteenth-century antisemitic clichés, the personification of every unsavory aspect about Jews espoused by Wagner. Specifically, Wagner believed that Jews shuffle and stagger, their eyes squint, they are belligerent, designing, and unscrupulous—all characteristics that Beckmesser displays in the course of the opera. Furthermore, and most important to the character of Beckmesser, is his absolute deficiency of musical talent, his inability to craft poetry, and his lack of metric or rhythmic sensitivity, any one of which should have made him unfit to be a member of the guild. 4. Between the 14th and 16th centuries, Mastersingers generally belonged to the artisan and trading classes of German towns. The earliest Mastersinger school was in Mainz. Others were established in Strasbourg, Frankfurt, Wurzburg, Zurich, Prague, and Nuremberg, the latter under the leadership of Hans Sachs, who is a central figure in Wagner’s opera. The Nuremberg Mastersinger school became the most famous school in the 16th century, by which time such schools had spread all over Germany to include Magdeburg, Breslau, Görlitz, and Danzig. Each guild had various classes of members, ranging from beginner to Meister, who were poets skilled in writing new melodies as well as new verses to already composed melodies. The singing was done without accompaniment and with rules of the art set down in the lawbook of the guild. Meetings took place either in the town hall or, more frequently, in the town church. Three times a year, at Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas, special festivals and singing competitions were instituted. At such events, judges, called “Markers,” were appointed to criticize the competitors and note their offenses against the rules. In Meistersinger, this is the role of Sixtus Beckmesser. 246 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 Wagner’s view on the Jew’s ability to contribute to the world of culture is described in his essay “Jewishness in Music”:5 He writes, “In this language and this art the Jew can produce only imitative sounds and counterfeit goods—he cannot write truly eloquent poetry or create works of true art.” Elsewhere in this essay, Wagner writes, “If the Jew [is] incapable of articulating his feelings and intuitions through artistic speech, how much more incapable he must be of articulating them through song.” Yet, like the Jew who, in Wagner’s eyes, used devious and unscrupulous practices to gain entry into German society, Beckmesser has somehow become a member of the guild of singers, though how he passed the entrance examination at some previous time is incomprehensible. Unlike every other guild member, Beckmesser has no craft but earns his living as the town notary. Despite his inadequacies, he has become a Marker, measuring the worth of potential members for the guild and judging the merit of aspiring candidates. He criticizes the slightest deviation from doctrine, and is the very thing that Wagner hates, namely a critic. On this matter, it is noted that an early name for the character of Sixtus Beckmesser was “Veit Hanslich,” almost a duplicate of Wagner’s nemesis, Eduard Hanslick, the so-called “Bismarck of critics.” The name change to Sixtus Beckmesser occurred very early in the creative cycle, but the fact that Wagner even considered this humiliation for a man he regarded as an archenemy is notable. Beside the fact that Wagner’s detested Hanslick because of his negative criticisms about Wagner’s music, equally noteworthy is the fact that Hanslick’s mother was Jewish. It is in Beckmesser’s singing style that the most revealing picture makes itself known, for what he sings and how he sings it is a parody of the rhythms and vocal inflections of synagogue chant. Further, it is music that is very high—far too high, in fact, for the bass voice specified by Wagner. It is an example of the effeminate high voice that parodied the imagined result of castration, which, in the mind of the ill informed, was confused with circumcision. Beckmesser’s performance as a poet singer is so outrageously incompetent that the reactions to him from the citizens of Nuremberg range from cynical disrespect to outright ridicule. His ardent but pathetic serenading of the wrong woman leads to a riot. And he is a thief as well, stealing a poem that he uses as the text for his own song. But even in this he fails because, in Wagner’s eyes, Beckmesser cannot be a musical person even when given 5. The English title is often given as “Judaism in Music.” But Wagner’s intent was to describe alleged negative Jewish characteristics, not theological details, which is the implication given by “Judaism in Music.” 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 247 satisfactory raw material and coached in its proper use by a master. Here, the parallel to the unpoetic, inarticulate, and unmusical Jew is unambiguous. Finally, there is the matter of Beckmesser’s participation in a song contest that directly challenges Walther, the opera’s hero. Beckmesser’s purpose in this foolish act, which results in further humiliation for him, is shaped by the contest’s prize being the beautiful daughter of a wealthy fellow guild member; the image of Beckmesser is that of a talentless and incompetent older man having sexual pretensions for a young, pure German maiden as well as a lust for wealth. This description summarizes Wagner’s opinion of Jews. The characteristics exhibited in Beckmesser generally pass unnoticed by contemporary audiences, mostly because our generation has little experience with and hardly any memory of coded nineteenth-century antisemitism. The heritage of the Shoah has gone far to desensitize us to all but the most naked, uncamouflaged, and flagrant antisemitic actions. Our sensitivity to how the German world saw Jews at the time of the premiere of Meistersinger has become clouded, unfamiliar, and distorted by time, making it difficult for the contemporary world to recognize the subtle characteristics of coded antisemitism. For example, we no longer remember the Grimm fairy tale, “The Jew in the Thornbush,”6 which appeared in 1815 though derived from a story dating from 1618. Theodore Adorno claimed that Wagner identified the character of Beckmesser with the “Jew in the ThornBush,” though his assertion is disputed.7 It is interesting to note that those who quarrel with Adorno’s contention have neither experience in the details of pre 20th-century antisemitism or exposure to antisemitic theater. Early performances of Meistersinger suggest that its reception was not uniformly positive. There were hostile demonstrations, but it is not clear if these were because of Wagner’s essay “Jewishness in Music,” the opera as a whole, the composer, or the character of Sixtus Beckmesser. But it was the Jews who were blamed for the disturbances when the audiences were said to be full of “distinctive physiognomies”—once again, the nose— “ready “to take their revenge on [Wagner].” Wagner’s wife, Cosima, wrote that “the [Jews] are spreading a story . . . that ‘Beckmesser’s Song’ is an old 6. See Pat Pinsent, “After Fagin: Jewishness and Children’s Literature,” in Stanley E. Porter and Brook W. R. Pearson, Christian Jewish Relations Through the Centuries (London: T&T Clark International, 2004), 311-328. 7. See Ritchie Robertson, ed., The German Jewish Dialogue: An Anthology of Literary Texts, 1749-1793 (Oxford University Press, first published as Oxford World’s Classics, 1999), 63-67; “The Jew in the Thorn-Bush” (1815). 248 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 Jewish song that R[ichard] was trying to ridicule. In consequence [there was] some hissing in the second act.” Wagner’s antisemitic subtlety in Meistersinger is matched by his cunning in depicting Jewish characteristics in The Ring. In that monumental music drama he would employ all of the artifacts used to characterize Beckmesser and add a few more, including references to the blood libel and the dangers of race mixing. THE RING It is possible to tell the story of The Ring, but the collection of characters, plots, and subplots make it difficult to understand. There are gods, goddesses, giants, gnomes who live beneath the earth, mermaid-like creatures living in the Rhine, mortals, and other roles difficult to categorize. The Ring is a pagan tale of sorcery and incest that presents an incomprehensible mythology as a rational philosophy for the world, but it is strong enough stuff to allow the modern listener to become drunk in its embrace. Rarely has the art-loving world been presented with such a deceit as this attempt at a complete work of art, for it is a tangle of falsehoods and pathetic arrogance run amok, where trivial opinions are made into ponderous utterances, and bankrupt personal pursuits are elevated to matters of universal significance. Like every other written utterance of Wagner, The Ring is largely egocentric. But here it is of such proportions that it forms a stage work in which Wagner’s fantasies were transformed into the future of the German people. Excluding those few characters who are neutral, the personalities of the drama fall into two groups having opposite characteristics. One such group is the “Volk,” roughly translated as “the race” or “the nation,” but not “the common people.” The other is the “outsider,” who differs from the Volk in many specifics. Wagner assigns various characteristics to the good Volk, and then displays the opposite attributes as present in the evil outsiders. One such characteristic is that the Volk walk in a poised and confident manner, while the outsider staggers and stumbles. This stage device is derived from the medieval superstition that Jews had goat feet. In the Middle Ages, the billy goat was presented as a symbol of satanic lechery and the devil’s most usual disguise. The Jews, believed to be Satan’s minions, were also accused of having the same attribute. That the Jew’s feet were shod in public was interpreted as using the cloak of civilization to disguise his corruption. This acceptance of Jewish deviltry gave rise to the concept that the Jewish foot could not function at a normal gait; the Jew stumbled and staggered. In The Ring, the gnomes walk in this fashion while the Volk are surefooted, a 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 249 characteristic also seen in the stumbling of Beckmesser as contrasted with the graceful dancing of the townspeople in Meistersinger. In Sander Gilman’s The Jew’s Body (1991), further significance is given to the Jew’s feet. They became a source of disease, and the pace at which Jews walked was perceived as a sign of their affliction. The seventeenth-century Orientalist John Schudt commented that the crooked feet of the Jews made them physically inferior and, ultimately, the general belief about Jews’ feet influenced liberal efforts to include them in the modern state. This is particularly true with military service, where it was believed that Jews would be worthless as soldiers. In Austria, for example, weak feet were said to be the main reason Jews inducted into the military were subsequently detached. Another example of a characteristic with hidden antisemitic meaning is that of vocal patterns. Wagner’s formulation of a large-scale male and female voice, for example, the “heroic tenor,” is used for the Volk, whereas the outsiders sing in distinguishing non-Volkish ways. The gnomes in The Ring have high and piercing voices, the same coded message for the confusion between castration and circumcision found in Meistersinger, as well as a related claim connecting circumcision with effeminacy in the Jewish male. Thus, the Volk sing with heroic qualities while the outsider screams in a high-pitched, effeminate voice. Going beyond the visual and acoustic, Wagner employs the allegory of smell to evoke images of character. Sulphurous fumes and the noxious stenches that emanate from the outsider often accompany them. The central theme of this coded idea is especially despicable because it is derived from the belief of the “Jewish stench,” or “foetor Judaicus.”8 The assertion that the Jew has a distinctive and unpleasant odor is a particularly grave accusation, first because of the origin alleged to be the stench’s cause, and second because of the several ways Jews were said to act in order to eliminate it. Common belief during the Middle Ages associated good spirits with emitting a pleasant fragrance while evil spirits, particularly Satan and his minions, gave forth an obnoxious stench. For example, when the coffin of St. Stephen, the protomartyr, was opened, his body was said to have filled the air with a sweet fragrance that insinuated the odor of sanctity.9 In the case of the Jews, the stink was said to be a punishment for 8. For a survey of this degrading medieval superstition, see Jay Geller, “(G)nos(e)ology: The Cultural Construction of the Other,” chap. 10 in People of the Body, ed. Howard Eilberg Schwartz (Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1992), 243-282. 9. See Stephen the Deacon, Protomartyr, in http://www.saintpatrickdc.org/ss/ 1226.shtml. 250 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 their alleged crimes, which included accusations of host desecration and deicide. The Jews were believed to have two ways to eliminate the smell, one of which involved murder and cannibalism; it was said that Jews killed Christian children to obtain their blood for ritual purposes, one of which was said to occur during the Passover Seder. It was alleged that Jews consumed cups of this blood as a way to alleviate the Jewish stench. The other choice was acceptance of baptism. A direct quote from the time states that “the water of baptism carried off the Jews’ odor” and that this left them with a fragrance “sweeter than that of ambrosia floating upon the heads touched by the sanctified oil.” This accusation went beyond those expressed in the extreme anti-Jewish rhetoric of Martin Luther, causing him to say, “So long as we use violence and slander, saying that [the Jews] use the blood of Christians to get rid of their stench . . ., what can we expect of them?”10 Another discriminatory feature used by Wagner is that of vision.11 Poor eyesight is a class attribute that was never applied to anyone but Jews. The medieval view was that Jews were blind to Christianity, that the synagogue was veiled. Statues of a blindfolded woman, an allegory representing “the synagogue defeated,” still decorate churches in Europe; one stands today in an alcove on the exterior of Strasbourg’s cathedral, and postcards of it may be purchased at nearby shops. This notion eventually was concretized as weak eyes, which, among other things, caused squinting and blinking, characteristics that are found in the outsider. Wagner carried the idea of good vision of the Volk to a higher dimension in suggesting that they recognize each other by glance alone, and can “see” the outsider as being different. Finally, in The Ring, Wagner gives coded messages about the dangers of race mixing. The character Hagen, who has a gnome father but a Volkish mother, bears no good maternal characteristics. Instead, he retains the depraved character of his father, namely that of a liar, usurper, and villainous murderer. But his racially pure counterpart, Siegfried, the product of an incestuous twin brother-sister relationship, is an idealized hero who is hand10. The statement appears in Martin Luther’s pamphlet, Dass Jesus ein Geborner Jude Sei, and is contained in the online Jewish Encyclopedia article on Martin Luther under the pamphlet’s title. 11. See Marc A. Weiner, Richard Wagner and the Anti-Semitic Imagination (Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press, 1995), chap. 1, “The Eyes of the Volk.” Here, Weiner discusses the importance of vision as it appears in Wagner’s antisemitic writings. 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 251 some, honest, virtuous, and brave, and whose most significant flaw is that he is too trusting of strangers. It is often argued that every representation of a negative physical characteristic should not automatically be interpreted as an antisemitic statement. This is a perceptive and valuable criticism, but not as applied to these five specifics, none of which are in the least extreme. As Paul Lawrence Rose said in Wagner: Race and Revolution, “If Wagner, with the supreme artist’s infallible intuition, never intruded his racialist theories into his works of art, this does not mean that the art is free of racist content. It simply means that Wagner was too subtle an artist to reduce his operas to the level of political tracts.” While it would be possible to level a criticism of overreaction were there to be only one or two instances where Wagner’s utterances could be confused with coded antisemitic statements, the presence of five specifics— feet, smell, voice, sight, and race mixing, as found in three of the four operas of The Ring—defies the laws of probability. I suggest that The Ring, with the exception of Valkyrie, is an anthology of Jew hatred from first note to last. NON-WAGNER OPERAS Other than Wagner, negative stereotypes of Jews in opera are rare. Richard Strauss’s portrayal of five Jews in Salome shows quarreling, complaining, and whining men. Furthermore, four of the Jews are high tenors, which gives an especially shrill quality to their singing. As Sander Gilman has pointed out,12 in the latter part of the nineteenth century, high voices were associated with castration, which, in the mind of the ill informed, was synonymous with circumcision.13 Sergei Prokofiev’s opera, Betrothal in a Monastery (La Duenna), based on an eighteenth-century play, La Duenna, by Richard Brinsley Sheridan (1751-1816), contains the individual, Isaac Mendoza, a Jew portrayed in a negative fashion. But this would be very much out of character for Prokofiev, who was not an antisemite. His Overture on Yiddish Themes was written in New York for his conservatory colleagues in the touring Jewish 12. Sander Gilman is Distinguished Professor of the Liberal Arts and Sciences at Emory University, where he is the director of the Program in Psychoanalysis as well as the University’s Health Sciences Humanities Initiative. In 2007 he was appointed professor, Institute in the Humanities, Birkbeck College (London) and a visiting fellow of the new Institute of Advanced Studies, Warwick University, UK. 13. Sander Gilman, The Jew’s Body (New York: Routledge, Chapman, and Hall, 1991). 252 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 musical ensemble Zimro, and was based on Jewish-style melodic material given to him by Simeon Bellison, clarinetist with the ensemble and later principal clarinet with the New York Philharmonic. Betrothal in a Monastery’s antisemitic details come from Sheridan’s play in which Mendoza, a central character, gives up his Jewish faith in order to marry a rich Christian girl. Jack D. Durant, in his 1975 study of Sheridan, depicts Mendoza as “a repulsive, fortune-seeking Jew,” on the basis of the play’s characterization of Mendoza.14 The Tales of Hoffmann, an opera by the composer Jacques Offenbach (who was Jewish), makes an unfortunate reference to the bankruptcy of “the Jew Elias,” who never appears in the opera. The implication is that Elias’s bankruptcy may have been deliberate to avoid the repayment of a debt. This operatic characterization is due either to the surrealist, E. T. A. Hoffmann, three of whose stories were used as the basis of Offenbach’s opera, or the librettists Jules and Pierre Barbier. Later in the drama, the shadowless “Schlemiel” makes his entrance. This character, whose name, Schlemiel, is a Yiddish word (derived from the Hebrew congnate Shlumi’el) that describes a hopelessly incompetent person, a bungler. The name, a synonym for any unlucky person, is mentioned in an 1813 novella, Peter Schlemiehl’s Remarkable Tale, by the German Romantic writer Adelbert von Chamisso (1781-1838).15 In a letter to his brother, Chamisso explained that the word was “a Hebrew name meaning ‘the one who loved God’ . . . [and is a] term Jews use for clumsy or unhappy people.” Whatever the source of Chamisso’s understanding, there appears to be no malevolence in his or the opera’s use of the Schlemiel character. Rossini’s opera, Moses in Egypt, is said by Stendahl to have a chorus with “nasal intonation.” But this is an opera with which Stendahl has had no experience. No conclusions are possible without personal, first-hand understanding; even listening to a recorded performance is insufficient. One must see the event in its natural setting to experience the context in which such alleged stereotypical images may be presented. Stendahl’s comment is unclear, and by “nasal intonation” he may be referring to a classic antisemitic assertion about Jewish noses. Other operas that have one or more Jewish characters (or subthemes)—often portrayed sympathetically—include Gounod’s The Queen of Sheba, Halevi’s La Juive,16 Mascagni’s L’amico Fritz, Saint-Saens’ Sam14. Jack D. Durant, “Sheridan and Language,” in Sheridan Studies, eds. James Morwood and David Crane (Cambridge University Press, 1995), 96-113. 15. Adelbert von Chamisso, Peter Schlemihl’s wundersame Geschichte, 1814, ed. Friedrich Heinrich Karl La Motte-Fouqué (Nürnberg: J. L. Schrag). 16. The English title of the opera is frequently given as The Jewess, which is an 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 253 son and Delilah, Sullivan’s Ivanhoe, and Verdi’s Nabucco. In effect, it is generally assumed—in fact, it is asserted as possible evidence of Wagner’s non-hostile view of Jews—that, unlike the few cases mentioned above, nowhere are Jews present or even remarked upon in Wagner’s operas. The evidence presented above, however, contradicts this assertion. SOME OF HIS BEST FRIENDS . . . Wagner’s antisemitism is sometimes said to be exaggerated. Manfred Eger, then director of the Richard Wagner museum in Bayreuth and organizer of a 1985 exhibition on Wagner and the Jews, admits that some of Wagner’s utterances “could have been attributed to the National Socialist’s violently antisemitic publication, Der Stuermer,17 but adds that “several of [Wagner’s] colleagues and friends were Jews.” The exhibition brochure stressed Wagner’s supposed appreciation of Jewish composers such as Mendelssohn and Halevy. The reference to Mendelssohn as a Jewish composer is the worst possible example for Eger to have employed in this context since doing so, even with the best of intentions and without malevolence, is an example of racial antisemitism. Mendelssohn, as it is frequently forgotten, became a Lutheran Protestant at the age of four, when his father, Abraham, had the entire family, including the children, converted to Christianity. And in Wagner’s eyes—as well as the eyes of many antisemites, including Hitler’s—there was no such thing as a former Jew. For Eger to refer to Mendelssohn as a Jew is little different from the National Socialist argument that Jewishness was such a sufficient evil that even divesting oneself of it by conversion to Christianity was inadequate for entry into German society; i.e., Jewishness was perceived as a ugly stereotype that needs to be eliminated from English usage. A more suitable translation would be The Jewish Woman. While many languages enforce a gender distinction, English does not. In medieval literature, the term “Jewess” was used synonymously with “witch,” or “sorceress.” Further, such a use marginalizes Jewish women, since no one uses gender-based terms to describe female members of other religions. It would be ludicrous to hear the term “Protestantess,” or “Catholicess,” though the term “Mormoness” does appear from time to time. In the case of animals, the terms “lioness,” “tigress,” and “pantheress” suggest an aura of feline savagery for a Jewess. In Sir Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe, the term, when referring to Rebecca, is generally pejorative. 17. Der Stuermer was a weekly Nazi newspaper and a central element of the Nazi propaganda machine. The founder and publisher was Julius Streicher. At the Nuremberg trials after the war, Streicher was convicted of crimes against humanity and executed. 254 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 genetic disfigurement, a chromosomal defect, that was retained for several generations. After conversion, Mendelssohn was no more Jewish than Madeleine Albright; the late Cardinal Lustiger of France; the 20th century’s most important operatic baritone, the late Leonard Warren; and one of the 20th century’s most important historical musicologists, Otto Erich Deutsch,18 all of whom happen to have been born Jews. Using the word “Jew” in reference to Mendelssohn shows how futile conversion to Christianity is in achieving social equality. The particulars of Wagner’s alleged friendship with Jews were offered by Eger as evidence, along with the fact that Wagner had an affair with a Jewish writer, Judith Gautier, that he was not an antisemite (a questionable piece of reasoning, which asserts that sex between Jew and non-Jew is evidence that the non-Jew is a philosemite). Wagner’s rages are suggested only to be resentment of the successes of the Jewish composer Giacomo Meyerbeer, whose operas were then triumphs that today defy explanation. Eger suggested that antisemitism in Bayreuth was eliminated, and cited as evidence the fact that the 1983 season had three Jewish conductors, one of whom, Daniel Barenboim, has made public statements about his perception of both Wagner’s antisemitism and its presence in the music dramas. Barenboim stated at one point that “Wagner did not write antisemitic music,” and at another, that “. . . knowing [Wagner’s] views on antisemitism and on Judaism you can interpret certain figures as such . . . But the pieces [i.e., the music dramas] themselves are not that.” It is disappointing to hear such a shallow interpretation of Wagner’s music dramas from a man so musically well schooled. That he has conducted performances of The Ring and saw no further than the superficial layer is appalling. In effect, Barenboim appears to be entirely ignorant of the antisemitic details of the Wagner that he conducts, and a hypocritical Jewish apologist for Wagner’s Jew-hating attitude. As for Mr. Eger, I am as heartened by his outstretched hand and genuinely positive effort as I am disappointed by his “some of my best friends 18. See Gitta Deutsch’s biography of Otto Deutsch, The Red Thread (Riverside, CA: Ariadne Press, 1996), for a discussion of her father’s conversion to Christianity. Both Deutsch and his daughter are buried in Vienna’s Central Cemetery, he in an Ehrengrab (grave of honor). This distinction is granted by certain German, Swiss, and Austrian cities to one of their citizens for extraordinary services or achievements in their lifetime. If there are no descendants or institutions to care for the grave site, the communities or cities will take responsibility for the grave and for financing its care. Many honorary graves serve to document cultural history, for example, when a cemetery containing artistically notable graves is closed and the graves are relocated at public expense. 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 255 are Jews” naı̈veté. It is true that Wagner had a number of long-term Jewish supporters, including conductor Hermann Levi, and pianists Karl Tausig and Joseph Rubenstein. But dealings with these men can only be characterized as something similar to keeping pets in one’s home. Levi was publicly and privately abused and humiliated by Wagner at every opportunity, which included an insistence that Levi’s conversion to Christianity was a prerequisite to his conducting of Parsifal. In the face of this, Levi behaved like a lapdog, appreciative of any attention. A letter from Levi to his rabbi father demonstrates what a spineless individual the son must have been, not only to tolerate the abuse, but to express such noble sentiments about Wagner. He calls him “the best and noblest of men,” offers the view that Wagner’s antisemitic opinions “[sprang] from the noblest motives,” and ends his pathetic letter with the statement that “The most wonderful thing I have experienced in my life is the privilege of being close to such a man, and I thank God for it every day.” Wagner had several reasons to deal with pianist Tausig. First, he was a key fund-raiser for Bayreuth; second, he acted as a foil to the outrage voiced by Wagner’s Jewish supporters after “Jewishness in Music” was reprinted. Tausig was naı̈ve enough to be content with Wagner’s 1869 letter to him suggesting that if Jews would simply understand his essay in the proper spirit, all would be well. Rubenstein may have been deranged. When he first arrived to meet Wagner, he was accompanied by his personal physician, who advised Wagner of his instability; Rubenstein requested that Wagner offer him salvation from his Jewishness. He came, however, from a wealthy family, played the piano exceptionally well, promised financial support for the transcription of Wagner’s scores, became his mascot and house Jew, and was exploited, manipulated, and insulted behind his back by both Wagner and Cosima. It is painful to report the bootlicking reactions of some Jews to Wagner. Levi, Tausig, and Rubenstein were not the only Jewish apologists for his antisemitic views, but they are, typically, the ones brought up to show that Wagner’s loathing of Jews as a class was exaggerated. Wagner, however, was prepared to enter into a symbiotic relationship with anyone, providing that person could be of use, and that he [Wagner] would be toadied to. An international conference on Wagner and the Jews was held in the Bavarian city of Bayreuth in August 1998. Sponsored by the universities of Tel Aviv, Heidelberg, and Bayreuth, the event was funded by the Bayreuth Festival, the German government, and Israel’s Howard Gilman Israel Culture Foundation. The matter of the open-mindedness of the symposium 256 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 became a sore spot even before it began, because of the apparently deliberate failure to invite Hartmut Zelinski, author of the 1976 book, Richard Wagner: Ein Deutsches Thema, that did so much to open the discussion of Baryeuth’s Nazi past. It is suggested that the rejection of Zelinski was due to his claims that Wagner’s antisemitism was expressed as part and parcel of his operas. Zelinski’s opinion contradicted and embarrassed those who want to separate Wagner’s music dramas from his expressions of Jew hatred. Other Wagner critics not invited to attend the symposium were the composer’s great-grandson, Gottfried Wagner, and Mark Weiner, author of Richard Wagner and the Anti-Semitic Imagination. The only known antiWagnerian writer to be invited to speak, an act now regretted by the organizers of the event, was Paul Lawrence Rose, author of Wagner: Race and Revolution. His presentation was repeatedly interrupted by one of the conference organizers, who told Rose that he would not be permitted to address questions about certain topics on the grounds that other speakers had thoroughly discussed these points. His paper was denounced in hysterical terms because it argued that Wagner’s antisemitism was actually inscribed musically within the operas. Clearly, such attitudes changed the nature of what was supposed to be a scholarly conference to that of a political convention. Criticisms were also leveled at the symposium’s structure of control. One Israeli participant became so disturbed by the lack of any open discussion of the problems of Wagner/Hitler/Holocaust and the violation of academic freedom that was imposed on the conference by the Bayreuth organizers that he walked out publicly and in protest on the second evening of the event. The conference, it seems, had a prearranged agenda—i.e., to secure the lifting of the Israeli ban on Wagner and then to use this as a certificate of good health in Germany. In this way, Bayreuth would be redeemed, sanitized, and restored to its prime position in German culture. At the symposium’s conclusion, a public invitation materialized inviting Wolfgang Wagner, the composer’s grandson, to a 1999 Tel Aviv conference on Wagner, along with the suggestion that his visit might be celebrated with a public performance of Wagner’s music in Israel. AN OLD DEBATE IS RENEWED Today, the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra (IPO) does not play Wagner’s music, though it is incorrect to suggest that they never did. Arturo Toscanini included the preludes to Acts I and III of Lohengrin, Jascha Horenstein the overture to Tannhauser, and Bronislav Szulc the overture to the 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 257 Flying Dutchman, all before 1938.19 The ban on performance of Wagner’s music by the Palestine Orchestra (later the Palestine Philharmonic and, still later, the IPO) began on Nov. 12, 1938. The closing work of the program was to have been the prelude to Meistersinger. Following the intermission of that concert, the chairman of the orchestral association announced that “because of the antisemitic excesses and disturbances in Germany,” the Wagner work had been removed from the program by public demand, and Weber’s overture to his opera Oberon had been substituted. The most significant factor in this action was due, not to Wagner, but to Kristallnacht, which had taken place only three days earlier, November 9, 1938. It would appear that the use of the name “Nuremberg” and its connection with both Nazi party conventions and anti-Jewish laws was the aggravating factor—i.e., the restrictive ordinances were made by the Nazis in that city in explicit deference to Wagner’s opera. As such, this was not a wholesale condemnation of Wagner by the management or the personnel of the Palestine Orchestra, and for the fourth concert of the season, the orchestra played the “Bacchanal” from Wagner’s Tannhauser, though not in Palestine but on tour in Egypt. From November 12, 1939, until today, however, with one well-publicized exception, the IPO has performed no music of Wagner. That exception occurred in 1981, when the conductor, Zubin Mehta, tried to heal the wounds with an unscheduled Wagner encore. Some orchestral musicians refused to participate; many older members of the audience left before the work—an excerpt from Tristan and Isolde—was played; and there was considerable commotion during the encore from those who remained. Unwilling to repeat the reaction, and aware of a poll in which 50% (later 30%) of those sampled were against the playing of Wagner’s music, performances of his works by the IPO were put aside.20 On June 7, 1998, the English version of the Israeli newpaper Ha’aretz reported emotional outbursts at the Tel Aviv Performing Arts Center, where 19. The information about the Palestine Orchestra was taken from the book The History of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra. Researched and Remembered by Uri Töplitz, 1913-2006 (Tel Aviv: Sifiat Poalim Publishing House, translated from Hebrew. Töplitz, who immigrated to Israel from Germany in 1936, was one of the orchestra’s original founders; until 1970, he held the chair of principal flutist with the orchestra. He was the son of one of the 20th century’s most important mathematicians, Otto Töplitz (1881-1940). 20. In 2001, Daniel Barenboim conducted an unadvertised excerpt from Tristan and Isolde as an encore at the Israel Festival with the Berlin Staatskapelle. For a BBC newscast of the event and the audience reactions, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/ hi/entertainment/1428634.stm. 258 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 a symposium entitled “Wagner: An Artist or a Symbol” was being held. Sponsored by the New Israel Opera (NIO) and attended by the composer’s great-grandson, Dr. Gottfried Wagner, the discussion pitted Zalman Shoval, chairman of the NIO’s board, against Asher Fisch, NIO music director, who wished to perform Wagner’s operas in Israel. When Fisch, on piano, tried to accompany a baritone in a monologue from The Flying Dutchman, dozens of people left the hall in protest, shouting, “This is unthinkable!,” “Rape!,” and “In the name of culture, you are patronizing everyone!” For many music lovers, the emotions associated with the performance of Wagner’s music have a built-in safety valve, invoked with variations of the following statement of justification: “Certainly Wagner was an antisemite. However, Schubert’s alleged pedophilia does not change my perspective of his music’s beauty, nor does Mozart’s scatology, Beethoven’s poor hygiene, Delius’s sexual promiscuity, or Grainger’s whipping fetish. Besides, other composers also held loathsome antisemitic views. So, despite Wagner’s offensive declarations, his opinions are irrelevant to an admiration of his music, and one must not permit his abhorrent personal creed to be an impediment to an appreciation of his musical genius.” Yet, in 2010, the intended action of the Israeli Chamber Orchestra has resurrected a debate over whether it is appropriate for an Israeli orchestra to play the music of Richard Wagner, and in Germany no less. It seems that Katherina Wagner, the German composer’s great-granddaughter, sought to visit Israel to formally invite the Cameri Israeli Chamber Orchestra to inaugurate the 2010 Bayreuth Festival in Germany—an annual event promoting Wagner’s music. But when her intentions were leaked to the media, a maelstrom of anger arose and she canceled her visit. Later, the Cameri announced its intentions to perform at a venue other than the Bayreuth Festpielhaus—as if that changes the picture—and it would neither rehearse nor play Wagner’s music in Israel. For an Israeli orchestra to actually go to Germany to perform Wagner’s works in Bayreuth, where the Nazis glorified him, is both a disgrace and a public humiliation. For those opposed to the playing of Wagner’s music in Israel, the situation became more uncertain when the Israeli government approved the creation of an Israeli Wagner Society, which has been accepted into the International Association of Wagner Societies. The new association will be headed by an Israeli lawyer, Yonatan Livni, who said, “It’s time to allow those who desire to hear Wagner’s music in Israel to be able to do so . . . Karl Orff, and even Richard Strauss, who was president of the Reich’s State Music Bureau, are played in Israel. So why is it prohibited to play Wagner, who died years before the Nazis came to power? This boycott no longer makes sense.” 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 259 One can only wonder about Livni’s calculations, which enabled him to say, “It’s time to allow . . .” For some, that time will never be. BAREINBOIM REDUX Having touched on Daniel Barenboim’s blind eye to the antisemitism that is part and parcel of both Meistersinger and The Ring—but that he denies exists—there are aspects of his Israel bashing that warrant mentioning, not the least of which is his silence on the matter of anti-Israel violence. Barenboim is a first-class musical talent, well schooled, and with technique and temperament to burn. Those skills are combined with a worldclass sense of political irresponsibility and gross naiveté. In a recent concert of Music Without Borders held in Hamastan21 at the Mathaf Cultural House, he led an ensemble of musicians from the Berlin and Vienna Philharmonic, the Berlin Staatskapelle, the Orchestra of La Scala in Milan, and the Orchestre de Paris, saying, “We are playing this concert as a sign of our solidarity and friendship with the civil society of Gaza,” which he followed with his wishes for success of the recently signed agreement executed in Egypt by Hamas and Fatah. While the orchestral players waited late into the evening before just across the Egyptian border in nearby El Arish, Hamas officials almost sent the undertaking off the rails because they thought that the event would somehow be interpreted as a celebration of Osama bin Laden’s assassination, which the Hamas government had just publicly condemned. Global public opinion sees Barenboim as the epitome of tolerance, though his actions show a distinctly different face. For example, he refused to take part in Israel’s 60th-anniversary celebrations. And, in 2005, during a book-signing ceremony (a book coauthored with the late anti-Israel activist Edward Said), he refused to be interviewed by an Israeli army radio reporter because the reporter was wearing an IDF uniform. In 2002, Barenboim performed in Ramallah at the very time that terrorist groups were launching suicide attacks inside Israel. In 2008, he became the recipient of a Palestinian passport, an act approved by the former Hamas-led Palestinian government, and then he pledged allegiance to an antisemitic entity whose objective is the elimination of Israel. 21. Hamastan is a derogative, newly coined term that merges “Hamas” and “-stan.” The term, which emerged during the days of Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005, is suggestive of Hamas’ Islamic ideology as well as its political ties with Iran. Since 2007, the term has been used to refer to its victory over Fatah in Gaza in the ongoing inter-Palestinian conflict. 260 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:243 Barenboim always claims to be promoting the “cause of peace,” though his behavior is the antithesis of that claim. For example, he made no protest when Hamas banned all musical instruments not mentioned in the Koran, and he also failed to object when a Palestinian youth orchestra was disbanded in Jenin because it had performed for Holocaust survivors in Israel. His silence in the face of attacks on Israelis speaks volumes. In August 2003, while conducting a Concert for Peace in Spain with an Arab orchestra, a bus of the Jewish faithful returning from the Western Wall was blown up. Many infants were among the dead and injured. Instead of using the Spanish concert to denounce the massacre of Jews, he chose to remain silent. And, tragically, I can find no comments by him concerning the death of the Fogel family by Arabs from the village of Avrata, and which included a three-month-old infant with her throat cut. Note Performing Wagner’s music in an orchestra gives one no special insight into matters beyond a simple understanding of how the music goes. Orchestral players are specialists in the difficult task of performing specific orchestral parts, and while some go beyond that because of personal curiosity and intellectual interest, it is not part of the job. Even some conductors do not inquire beyond that printed in the orchestral score. A colleague of mine, who held a principal chair with the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra for 30 years, knew very little of the characters or the plots of the operas that he performed so many times, though he carried off his role as a critical orchestral player brilliantly. In my own case, I have performed the Nutcracker ballet more than 600 times but have no idea what happens on stage except that mice are somehow involved, a fact deduced when a heavy mechanical mouse used for one production wandered off the stage, tumbled into the orchestra pit, glanced off my head and shoulder, and disabled me for several weeks. All this is by way of saying that though I have played a great deal of Wagner’s orchestral music over the years, the preparation of this article required considerable study. It was here that I benefited from the specialized research of some remarkably sophisticated historians and social scientists, many of whom have spent a great part of their adult lives plowing deep furrows in this gnarled, unpleasant, and distasteful territory. In addition to the brilliant Wagner: Race and Revolution of Paul Lawrence Rose, quoted from above (and with whom I had an exceptionally useful correspondence, some of which influenced my views about the Bayreuth conference of August 1998), I mention two other seminal research 2011] ANTISEMITISM IN WAGNERIAN OPERA 261 efforts in this domain. They are Marc A. Weiner’s profound but disturbing book, Richard Wagner and the Anti-Semitic Imagination, and Barry Millington’s seminal article, “Is There Anti-Semitism in Die Meistersinger,”22 now summarized in the New Grove Dictionary of Opera. I honor and remember the late Uri Töplitz, retired principal flute of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra and a member of the group at the time of the first concert under Toscanini, for supplying me with details of the IPO’s history regarding the playing of Wagner’s music. My career as an orchestral player has been over for some years. But if I were still performing—being sensitized now to what I did not know then—I am not sure that I would be able to play any more of Wagner’s music, contractual obligations, its extraordinary beauty, fascinating architecture, and strong emotional effect notwithstanding. It has even become too painful to listen to it, and I am musically poorer because of this decision. But having lived through the period of the Shoah and seeing, from my safe haven in the America of my birth, where Wagner’s brand of thinking leads—and, more important, finding so much of that thinking coded into his music dramas—I do not wish to give such bigotry any further space in my life. Despite the music’s extraordinary richness, it is not worth the pain. I speak for no one but myself, and offer no opinions on what others should do. *Daniel Leeson retired from 30 years at IBM, then taught mathematics at De Anza Community College for an additional 15 years. A leading Mozart scholar with six books and some 100 published articles on the subject, Leeson has played professionally with major symphony orchestras. His interest in the history of antisemitism is long standing. 22. Cambridge Opera Journal, 1991. The Mosque at Rachel’s Tomb Shalva Weil* And Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem. And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave: that is the pillar of Rachel’s grave unto this day. —Genesis 35:19-20 The Biblical matriarch’s tomb, purportedly containing the bones of Rachel, has for many years now been a bone of contention. Last month, Palestinian youth hurled Molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers guarding the tomb situated on the outskirts of Jerusalem on the road to Bethlehem. In February 2010, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had drawn up a list of Israeli holy sites to be included in the UN Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) National Heritage list. The tomb, which is one of the holiest sites to Jews over the generations, was naturally included in the list, but instead, in October 2010, it was declared a mosque by UNESCO. Out of 58 member states, only the United States voted against the decision; 12 European and African countries abstained. The Tomb of Rachel marks the very spot where the Biblical matriarch Rachel died in childbirth on the road to Bethlehem. Muhammad al-Idrisi, the 12th-century Muslim geographer, wrote: “On the road between Bethlehem and Jerusalem is the Tomb of Rachel, the mother of Joseph and Benjamin.” The tomb has been the site of pilgrimage and prayer for Jews in the Diaspora for more than three thousand years. Throughout the centuries, Jews from all over the world visited the tomb, and sent funds to help renovate and maintain it. It was such a revered site that even Jews in farflung countries, as far away as India, longed to pray there and felt connected to the place. The tomb is of special significance to women, who used to pray there 263 264 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:263 for a suitable marriage partner or the ability to give birth. Rachel’s birthday, which falls on the 11th day of the lunar month of Heshvan, has become a day of pilgrimage for thousands of Jewish women, who come from all over the country to pray for fertility for their loved ones or themselves. By an irony of history, this Hebrew date has also become a source of conflict. Rachel’s birthday coincides with the day on which Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. In recent years, in an attempt to avoid commemorating the assassination of a left-wing political leader, many religious right-wing Jews have offered Rachel’s birthday as a “religious” alternative. It has thus come to pass that large sectors of Israeli society do not know when Prime Minister Rabin was assassinated but are reminded of Rachel’s death annually. As with many Jewish religious sites in Israel and elsewhere, and particularly with respect to tombs of patriarchs, prophets and great Rabbis, the site also had religious significance for members of other faiths. This was particularly well documented in the 15th century with descriptions of Jews, Muslims, and Christians frequenting the place. In 1615, Muhammad, Pasha of Jerusalem, gave the Jews exclusive rights to the tomb. In 1830, the Ottomans recognized the legal rights of the Jews to the site. When Sir Moses Montefiore purchased the site in 1841, he restored the tomb and added a small prayer hall for the Muslims. Christians wanted to take this over and build a church there. However, until 2000, the site remained predominantly Jewish. One of the lesser known historical facts is the connection between the Jews of Mumbai (formerly Bombay), India, and Rachel’s tomb. Inscribed on the wall was the following plaque: “This well was made possible through a donation from our esteemed brothers, the Bene Israel, who dwell in the city of Bombay, may the Lord bless that place. In honour of the whole congregation of Israel who come to worship at the gravestone for the tomb of our matriarch Rachel, may her memory rest in peace, amen! In the year 5625.” This lunar year is the equivalent of 1864. In 1859 the emissary Rabbi Eben Sapir from Jerusalem had stayed six months in Bombay in order to find out more about the “lost” tribes of Israel “who are called Bene Israel.” Sapir wrote: “And they knew that there are other Jews and the land of Israel, and Jerusalem, and the destruction of the Temple, and that when the Messiah comes they will be redeemed and gathered together in Jerusalem . . . . and they also give charity and donations to the poor of Israel and to messengers who come from Palestine for this purpose.” At the beginning of the twentieth century, while Jewish art in Palestine always portrayed Rachel’s tomb as one of the most important holy sites, the site began to be contested by Muslims, with the Wakf demanding control of 2011] THE MOSQUE AT RACHEL’S TOMB 265 the place on the grounds that the tomb was part of a neighboring Muslim cemetery. After the Israeli War of Independence in 1948, the tomb was allocated to Jordan and Jews could no longer visit. During the Six Day War in 1967, after Israel occupied some Jordanian territory, the tomb once again became part of Israel. During the 1970s, when I used to visit the tomb of Rachel, the keeper of the small tomb was a Bene Israel Indian Jew from Bombay, who felt an historical affinity with the site because of his forefathers. In 1995, after the Oslo agreement, Bethlehem, with the exception of Rachel’s tomb, became part of the Palestinian Authority. The following year, the Israel Defence Forces, fearing a terrorist attack at the site, built a huge fortification round the previously modest tomb. In retaliation, the Palestinian Authority declared the place to be on Palestinian land and built on an Islamic mosque. During the second Intifada in 2000, there were intermittent attacks on the tomb with altercations between the IDF and Palestinian gunmen. Since then, there has been growing support for the idea launched by Al-Hayat al-Jadida, a Palestinian daily, that the site was a thousand year-old mosque by the name of the “Bilal ibn Rabah mosque” until, finally, UNESCO endorsed the idea. In a petition to UNESCO initiated on the internet, petitioners pointed out that Rachel’s Tomb was called Al-mawsu’ah al-filastiniyah in the Palestinian encyclopedia published after 1996, and also in Palestine, The Holy Land, a publication with an introduction by Yasser Arafat. They wrote: “In attempting to sever the Jewish cultural, religious, and natural heritage bond with the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb, UNESCO denies the history it is mandated to preserve, engages in a political maneuver designed to weaken a member UN nations, and undermines its own principles. . . . We demand that UNESCO, whose purpose it is to protect heritage, also protect Jewish heritage, rather than deny it.” It has thus come to pass that Rachel’s Tomb, which today is situated in Israel just in front of the “checkpoint” to Bethlehem, has become a symbol not just of fertility, but of disputed historical memory. *Shalva Weil is a senior researcher at the Research Institute for Innovation in Education at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. She is a specialist in Indian Jewry and is the founding chair of the Israel-India Friendship Association. Reprinted by permission from ISN Insights. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/CurrentAffairs/ISN-Insights/Detail?lng=en&ots627=fce62fe0-528d-4884-9cdf-283c282cf0 b2&id=128699&contextid734=128699&contextid735=128314&tabid=128314 Journal of Contemporary Leftist Antisemitism? Mark Gardner* Routledge, the respected academic publishing house, has published a book review that is a depressing tour de force of contemporary high-brow leftist antisemitism. There has long been a sense of “anything goes” in such circles, and this review goes a long way to proving that—an impression that is only deepened by its carrying a “peer review integrity” logo. Worse still, the review provides further evidence of the convergence between the increasingly antisemitic anti-Zionism of parts of the left intelligentsia and the increasingly anti-Zionist antisemitism of American neoNazi ideologues. The damage is done. The only thing remaining is to see if Routledge and the editorial board responsible for the review belatedly distance themselves from it. The review is of James Petras’ book, War Crimes in Gaza and the Zionist Fifth Column in America. It shames the May 2011 edition of Routledge’s peer-reviewed Journal of Contemporary Asia, and is written by a former United Nations official, Frederic F. Clairmont. Both Petras and Clairmont, in addition to celebrity intellectual Noam Chomsky, are on the Journal’s editorial board. The Petras book, and its Journal review, present a conspiracy theory that has very little to do with traditional Asian themes, but fits resoundingly with the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century socialist linkage of Jews with capitalism, now updated and repackaged for twenty-first-century anti-capitalist discourse. Socialist antisemitism had nothing to do with biological racism, but exhibited striking resemblances to the subsequent national socialist propaganda that twinned “international Jewry” with American capitalism and British imperialism. Soviet antisemitism continued this lineage with its combined attacks on Zionism, finance capital, corporations, millionaires, and so on. Today, the trend continues, with far-left and far-right bastardization of the word “Zionist” providing the cornerstone, and the word “Jew” lurking in its shadow. Clairmont’s offending review in the Journal clearly derives from an earlier review by Clairmont, dated September 5, 2010, that can be read in full on James Petras’ Web site. The earlier review is the unexpurgated version: the Director’s Conspiracy Cut, as it were. The Routledge version avoids some of the trashier antisemitic aspects of the original. We can’t know if this editing was done by the editors of the 267 268 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:267 Journal or the author, but whatever the case, it is a good representation of how the antisemitic aspects of contemporary anti-Zionist hysteria are airbrushed—as if the old antisemitic conspiracy theories would have been entirely accurate had they only coined their own linguistic obfuscation of the word “Jew.” Clairmont’s only point of contention with the Zionist Fifth Column book is that he believes Petras should not have used the terms “Zionist Fifth Column in America” and “Zionist Power Configuration,” but should rather have called it the “Zio-fascist complex,” “so as to throw into sharper relief the horrors of its being.” Clairmont’s contemplation resembles a 2009 posting by ex-Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke on Stormfront, the leading American neo-Nazi Web site, in which Duke asked his readers: Maybe one of you might have an idea to describe the matrix of power in America. Perhaps, the political, financial, media-Zionist matrix Or Just the Zionist media, political and financial matrix Or just the Zionist matrix, Or just the Zionist complex Any suggestions? Let’s work on this; we can create a whole new powerful term that sums up the core of Jewish extremist power in America and the world. It is most unlikely that this review will propel Journal readers to urgently warn their peers and students that the dangers of Zionism and Zionists are even worse than they had previously believed. Nevertheless, it is the insidious nature of such arguments, repeated time and again with varying degrees of extremism, that is the biggest danger. Over time, such incitement is increasingly able to masquerade as academic theory, especially when it is not simply unchallenged, but approved by an academic editorial board. Nevertheless, the similarity in belief and language between Stormfront and the Journal is more likely a reflection of David Duke having been seduced by James Petras et al.—by what they get away with saying—rather than the other way around. At any rate, both ideologies have reached the same point, inexorably borne by what is, at root, an antisemitic conspiracy narrative. The Routledge version seems at least (implicitly) cognizant of the dangers of sounding outwardly antisemitic. For example, it states, “. . . [Israeli] ‘settlements’ are being funded by the ‘donations’ of Zionist finance,” whereas Clairmont’s original says, “. . . [Israeli] ‘settlements’ are being funded by the big money bags of Zionist finance capital . . .” Perhaps an 2011] CONTEMPORARY LEFTIST ANTISEMITISM? 269 editor at the Journal realized that “the big money bags of Zionist finance capital” sounded more National Socialist brute than it did Revolutionary Socialist highbrow. Or perhaps Clairmont knew it himself. Then, in the next paragraph, there is another deletion of a phrase that is redolent of Nazi anti-capitalist antisemitism. The Routledge version says, “Excluding the huge German reparations, since 1950 Israel has received yearly some US $5 billion, and that in a land of about six million.” The original adds in a parenthetical after this statement: “(that is the private sector payouts from international Jewry plus the US government),” and follows by saying, “Any move to halt this . . . would be knifed by the Zionist cabals.” This is not, however, to say that the Routledge version does not have its own blatant shortcomings. Consider this: Israel is a brazen fascist monster. The mobilisation of its power in the USA is by elected and appointed Zionist officialdom. A key to its power is that it is a mass grassroots organisation buttressed by the financial support of scores of millionaires, dozens of billionaires and a mass media that is its handmaiden. The review continues: In many ways it has paralyzed the US Congress and the Executive. It influences Treasury, State, the Pentagon and all leading Congressional committees that relate to Israeli expansionism . . . The career profiles of its professionals that are the quintessence of the “Fifth Column” are to be found in every nook and cranny of Wall street, the globe-girdling corporate law firms, the insurance industry, the big three stock market-rating agencies, the big three accounting firms and the media. As the author makes clear, pro-Israel career patterns and projections of power have established a hegemony of US public life. How does this conspiracy really differ from David Duke’s depiction of “the Zionist media, political and financial matrix”? Yes, Duke uses the word “Jewish” (to be more precise, “Jewish extremist power”), but the Petras book echoes even that, citing “Judeo-Zionist hegemony.” (A fantasy term, warmly quoted in Clairmont’s original article, “he [Petras] emphasizes that ‘in effect pro-Israel career patterns and projections of power have established a kind of Judeo-Zionist hegemony of US public life.’ ”) The above paragraphs may remind those familiar with antisemitism of the notorious forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, with its global conspiracy theory and attendant imagery, such as a Star of David-bearing octopus encircling the globe in its tentacles, or a Star of David-bearing spi- 270 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:267 der holding the world in its web, or a grotesque Jewish capitalist squeezing blood out of the world. As if to reinforce the impression, the next paragraph in the Routledge version states that “the ramifications of the Zionist behemoth is by no means confined to the US political oligarchy. Indeed its tentacles are globalized, notably in all the major EU countries.” (Here, the Routledge version omits Clairmont’s details of how “the grip” of “the operational fifth column . . . is vastly magnified by the stranglehold on the major media outlets notably on the Middle East.”) Perhaps Clairmont’s peer reviewers were seduced by the relative absence of the word “Jew” from their actual version of the article. After all, Jews (by name) appear only in the article’s conclusion: . . . the preparations for the obliteration of Iran has gathered speed . . . The vote in Congress was galvanised amongst others by the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and acclaimed by all the major American Jewish organizations. The upsurge of Zionism, as Petras notes is a virulent form of identity linked to a foreign power. Its overwhelmingly successful hegemonic inroads have been abetted by the abject capitulation of the US ruling class. The US political complex and successive administrations with no exception have become part of the interlaced web of Zionist power that extends into every nook and cranny of all sectors of American capitalism. There is no distancing here of Jews from this “interlaced web of Zionist power” that holds the “US ruling class” in “abject capitulation.” It is “all the major American Jewish organizations” that are either in the conspiracy or cheering from the sidelines. This sudden introduction of “all the major American Jewish organisations” into the closing section of Clairmont’s polemic really lets the antisemitic cat out of the bag. The only surprise is that whoever airbrushed Jews from the original article failed to spot this mention of them. Or, perhaps more likely, the antisemitic cat had been squirming so furiously in the anti-Zionist bag that it finally, inevitably, escaped. *Mark Gardner is director of communications, CST (Community Security Trust), http://www.thecst.org.uk/, and regularly publishes articles on antisemitism. Gardner was awarded a police commendation for his work during the 1999 neo-Nazi nail bombing campaign, and in 2006 he represented the Jewish community and CST during the Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism. He assists with several police advisory committees. Miral and International Efforts to Delegitimize Israel Joanne Intrator and Scott Rose* Does Miral author Rula Jebreal harbor any antisemitic thoughts and feelings? In preparation for this article, we sent an interview request to Jebreal through the contacts given on her Web site. We said we wished to speak with her to gain clarity about her current political thoughts vis-à-vis Israel. We did not receive the courtesy of a reply. We note from the outset that Jebreal long suffered a very painful, arduous personal history. Among her many tragic living nightmares, her mother’s stepfather raped her mother, who committed suicide when Jebreal was five years old. We state also that aspects of her advocacy for the role that education might play toward establishing peace in the Middle East could conceivably be viewed as admirable. However, particularly given that her lover Julian Schnabel’s controversial film Miral was shown at the United Nations in New York, Jebreal now should consider that she is accountable for speaking responsibly in public about Israel. We have searched in vain for statements from her acknowledging that, for example, due to the centuries and centuries of anti-Jewish persecutions in the Muslim-majority countries of Africa and the Middle East, Jews—and Sephardic Jews most of all—have a right to be free of antiJewish persecution in at least some sliver of the geographical area that was the homeland of the ancient Hebrews. To the extent that Jebreal formulates coherent geopolitical proposals, she would appear to favor a single-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Notably, she is recklessly unbalanced in her recommendations for 271 272 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:271 how to reach that goal, were that goal even deemed enduringly safe for the Jews of the Middle East. She has a tendency, outside of her fiction, to fault Jewish Israelis obliquely but sharply for everything, and Palestinian Muslims mildly for almost nothing. Interviewed on The Charlie Rose Show on March 23, 2011, for instance, she appeared glamorously beautiful as well as persuasive in her appeals for women in the Middle East to escape religious extremism through education. Without saying the country-name “Israel,” though, she talked about “walls” that have been built to prevent young Palestinian women from reaching Jerusalem to become educated. Repeatedly, she implicates Israel’s security barriers against suicide bombers, and other forms of attack, as the most formidable barrier to young Palestinian women becoming well educated. Even as she states that young Palestinian women must not be allowed to get trapped in their lives by Islamic extremists in Gaza and the West Bank, she implies that Israel should eliminate its defenses against the Islamic extremists in those places, in order that young Palestinian women should be allowed a better education. Why Jebreal does not instead demand of Palestinian authorities in Gaza and the West Bank that they immediately allow their young women access to contemporary liberal education within those territories is anybody’s guess. Her belief, misguided, appears to be that if Israel removed its security barriers, all young Palestinian women would immediately receive enlightened educations in Jerusalem, and Israel would have nothing to fear from Hamas in Gaza or from various malevolent elements in the West Bank. Jebreal’s “pin the blame on Israeli Jews” viewpoint was confirmed when Charlie Rose asked her about recent Arab revolts against despotic leaders in countries including Tunisia and Egypt. Jebreal asked, “After the uprising, are we telling people to stay behind walls?” It was clear in the context that she was referring to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank as being “behind walls.” Equally clear was her lack of consideration for what would happen to Israelis were the referenced “walls” eliminated. Ironically, as we were at work on this article, in Egypt—with its popular uprising that Jebreal had cited as a model for an enlightened, peaceful new Middle East reality—hardliner Salifi Muslim mobs were setting violently upon Christians. As with life generally, it is a given in the Middle East that varying degrees of ambiguity attend the elements within it. Jebreal is not a conscienceless monster. Yet if her prescriptions for Israeli policies were implemented today, a result in very short order would be the subjugation of today’s Israeli Jews—and, not insignificantly, today’s Israeli Arabs—to the much harsher dictates of theocratic rule we now see imposed on the Palestinian populations in Gaza and the West Bank. The case of Walid Husayin comes to mind. In Qalqilya in the West Bank, Husayin posted online atheis- 2011] MIRAL AND DELEGITIMIZING ISRAEL 273 tic messages lampooning Islamic religious beliefs. When the general population started giving Husayin death threats, and clamoring for him to be punished, the Palestinian authorities imprisoned him. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens said, “if Palestinians cannot abide a single free-thinker in their midst, they cannot be free in any meaningful sense of the word.” Worth noting, additionally, is that Husayin had originally written on his Noor al-Aqel (Enlightenment of Reason) blog that, in his view, Muslims “believe anyone who leaves Islam is an agent or a spy for a Western State, namely the Jewish State. They actually don’t get that people are free to think and believe in whatever suits them.” We find unacceptable that Jebreal, in addressing an international public, mischaracterizes Israel’s security barriers as “walls” against the enlightened education of young Palestinian women. As if, were Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank to guarantee and fully to protect freedom of speech and freedom of religion for their populations, Israel would in the least object. As if Israel’s security barriers were in place mainly for the purpose of stopping young Palestinian women from receiving enlightened educations. When Jebreal mischaracterizes Israel’s security barriers as “walls” against Palestinian women becoming educated, she is demonizing and delegitimizing Israel. Whatever the qualities of the novel Miral and of Schnabel’s movie based on it, Jebreal is not alone in the present-day world to deliver genteelly wrapped public statements delegitimizing Israel. Imam Abdullah Antepli, for example, published an essay on the Huffington Post about his tour of Auschwitz. The ostensible theme of Antepli’s essay is his heightened sensitivity to Jewish-rights-related concerns in the wake of his increased understanding of the history of the Holocaust. Lamentably, though, Imam Antepli paints the Holocaust as an exclusively European event. He actually states that Bosnian Muslims did much to save Bosnian Jewry. (We e-mailed Imam Antepli, asking him whether he acknowledges the documented Middle Eastern Muslim complicity in the Holocaust. We did not receive the courtesy of a reply.) There might indeed have been some individual Bosnian Muslims who made efforts to save Bosnian Jews from the Holocaust. However, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who had a face-to-face meeting with Hitler during which they agreed to extend the “Final Solution” to Jews in all the Muslim-Arab majority countries, organized Muslim SS troops in Bosnia, and those troops collaborated in the destruction of Bosnian Jewry. The Grand Mufti was later hailed by his nephew Yassir Arafat as a Palestinian national hero; Hind Husseini, the Mufti al-Husseini’s sister, was glorified uncritically in Miral. (Where is the record of Hind Husseini condemning her brother’s involvement in the Holocaust?) In her interview with 274 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:271 Charlie Rose, Rula Jebreal said she does not believe one needs to know much of politics or history in order to have properly apportioned empathy for the people now living in the West Bank, Gaza, and Israel. We beg to differ. *Joanne Intrator, MD, is an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in New York, where she also has a private practice. Scott Rose writes frequently on culture and the arts. But Will It Sell in Islamabad? Tarek Fatah, The Jew Is Not My Enemy. (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 2010), 243 pp., $24.95 Khaleel Mohammed* It is not often that someone gets to review a book in which he is positively mentioned. I note this at the very beginning in the interests of full disclosure. I must also point out that, after the publication of this book, the author and I have blocked each other on our Facebook pages. I chose to do so because I feel that Tarek Fatah has morphed from someone with reformist ideas to a person sounding more like a self-hating Muslim, deeming all who disagree with him as Islamists. My evidence is the material on his Facebook page and the large following of Islamophobes that form his fan base, sparing no opportunity to disparage and denigrate Islam. I had also refused, until sent this copy for review, to read the book because I consider its title to be pandering to a Jewish readership. And yet, if I stick to the book and its contents only, I must admit that from its very first page it rivets the attention. The author is not an academic—perhaps mercifully so—because he spares us the stultifying pedantry that is often expected in such a work. Instead, he gives us an eloquent, well-researched document. The reception that his work has met is precisely why I, despite having researched the topic of Jewish-Muslim religions at great length, have chosen not to write a book for the popular press. For the 275 276 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:275 Islamophobes, Tarek is not critical enough of Islam, and for the Islamists, he has crossed the boundaries of propriety (82). Tarek’s book is filled with references to contemporary events, items that the average reader can remember from television or newspaper news, and can easily research for accuracy. Even though I still feel that Jewish readers are more likely to make use of this book than are Tarek’s coreligionists, I find the principled statement that the author makes in his preface to be most commendable: For me, a discussion about Muslim-Jewish relations or the Arab-Israeli dispute becomes a non-starter the moment the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state is challenged. Having said that, I firmly believe Israel, in continuing its occupation of the West Bank, is in serious violation of international law (xvii). Whether one agrees with Tarek or not is beside the point; what is established is that the writer is a principled man and states his position fearlessly. This is Tarek at his sometimes discomfiting best: saying what he feels, honestly and courageously—a characteristic he has displayed even from his days as a foreign worker in Saudi Arabia. If the book is wonderfully written; that some of it is hyperbole, often verging on outright prevarication, is problematic. Tarek claims that Professor Tarek Ramadan is one of those academics who has praised the alleged massacre of the Jews of the Banu Qurayzah “in glowing terms” (xxiii). Later in his book, he does refer to statements made by the professor on the incident—and none of these represent any “adulation,” as claimed (144). Tarek also asserts that for centuries, the norm has been for Muslims to ask God to “crush the Jews” (16). The fact is that while the hadith literature is replete with denigrating references to Jews, there has never been a time when it would have been likely that Muslims would make that prayer except for the time of Muhammad’s wars with the Jewish tribes, the rebellion of Abu Isa al Isfahani, and the rise of modern Israel. For most of the history of the Muslim polity, Jews were not a threat and the prayer would not have been applicable. If in Tarek’s lifetime this has been the norm, then he ought to realize that the modern confrontation between Jews and Arabs started during WWI and that it is conceivable that Muslims started to make their invocations then. Contrary to his norm, Tarek has provided no citations from classical texts showing any sources for invocations dating back centuries, as he claims. One of Tarek’s most astute observations is reflected in his term “pseudo anti-Americanism” (19). It is a statement that is likely to be attested to by any Muslim who has visited one of the Muslim-majority 2011] BUT WILL IT SELL IN ISLAMABAD? 277 states. On my several visits, I have encountered in public the most hateful anti-American rhetoric. And yet, in private, the most vociferous perpetrators become transformed into abject beggars, pleading with me to find some way to get visas for them and/or their family to the supposedly ungodly United States. Even with the very occasional hyperbole, Tarek ensures that his presentation is balanced and provides nuggets of information that one does not even find in the regular history texts. He shows, for example, that King Zog of Albania, during the time when the pogroms of Hitler were being conducted without much interference from abroad, was the first Muslim monarch to rescue the Jews in his country (41). Since the book is not an academic text, the author is certainly at liberty to write from his own political biases. As such, he considers the Arabs’ siding with the British against the Ottomans in World War I as a betrayal (68). He does not seem to realize that the Arabs were never happy having the authority of Islam in the hands of non-Arabs, and to them, therefore, the Ottomans were just another foreign oppressor. The British had offered independence to the Arabs in exchange for their assistance against the Ottomans. The Arabs were acting out of good faith—so much so that until they found out that the British would renege on their promise, they even supported the establishment of a Jewish state. Tarek also considers the Saudi presence in the Hijaz as an “occupation.” Perhaps he overlooks the fact that Muhammad united the Arab tribes under the banner of religion, and that the headquarters of Islam was seen to belong to the Arab people as a whole. The power of the Najdis, therefore, is not considered as an occupation by most Muslims—and Tarek’s contention might come across, unintentionally, as trying to place the Arab-Israeli dispute on a par with what he deems a Saudi occupation (xvii). The Arab-Israeli dispute is presented with remarkable candor—one that is probably not going to win the author support by ardent supporters of either side. His chiding the Arabs for their own problems (76) is straightforward and precise; his dealing with the modern as well as the classical material is truly remarkable. In his chapter on the investigation of the alleged massacre of the Banu Qurayzah, Tarek does something no Muslim writer has done with as much intrepidity and ingenuity: he probes, dissects, and finally debunks the whole massacre story as a myth. Shortly before reviewing this book, I read Sir Martin Gilbert’s In Ishmael’s House. Sir Martin also deals with the Banu Qurayzah story. Strangely, though, the accounts of the two authors are vastly different—Sir Martin comes across as unschooled in history, while Tarek emerges as the consummate academic. What we glean from Tarek’s investigation is something that has been known to biblical scholars for a long while, even if it has been lost on 278 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:275 Muslims: stories of war and depictions of the routed enemy in classical presentations are often done with highly exaggerated numbers. They were presented to show God’s chastisement of a people—and did not cater to questions of a later time, such as the investigation of data, considerations of human rights, and other issues. In dealing with the scriptural basis for the existence of Israel, as well as the pervasive antisemitism in modern Islam, Tarek makes use of much of my material. He painstakingly investigated all my claims, and in the end reached the same conclusion that I did. He is to be commended for his industrious approach to his task, as I remember him cross-examining me on my references. Others have sought to use Tarek to advance their own agenda. Farzana Khan, for example, tries to find a hole in Tarek’s reference to 5:21 of the Qur’an, where he asserts that God had decreed Israel as belonging to the Jews in perpetuity.1 Ms. Khan claims that Q5:26 refutes such permanency, and that that “Fatah Muhammad” argument is fallacious. She obviously has no training in hermeneutics; if she had done her research, she would have found that classical exegetes did not see 5:26 as a refutation. She also claims that 6:165 of the Qur’an denies specific Jewish claims to the land (enlandisement), and that God’s bounties are open to all. In fact, no exegete, classical or modern, makes this claim. Her interpretation of religious continuity to show that Muslims are somehow, by scriptural writ, entitled to the Holy Land is simply supersession in disguise. The Qur’an never denies Jews their land. And when, during the caliphate of Umar, that territory was captured, he declared it a waqf (endowment) precisely because he knew it was not to be treated like other territories since the Qur’an had specifically mentioned its owners. Even if Muslim scholars had laid claim to Israel based on Ms. Khan’s unique interpretation, the fact is that Jewish claims to their land are not contingent upon Muslim approval. Indeed, for Jews, and for Muslims who are directed to look to the Bible for history (Q 21:7, 16:43), Sarah had exacted a promise from God that the inheritance would be through her son—Isaac. Muslim claims to Israel are based on the hadith . . . a genre of literature that Tarek has shown is notorious for its self-serving, supremacist agenda. Without realizing it, Ms. Khan has, while ostensibly fighting Islamism, sought to supply it with a new argument against Israel. As I noted earlier, I had refused to read this book because I felt its title pandered to a Jewish readership. Interestingly, Tarek accuses Irshad Mani of catering to Jews with the publication of her book, The Trouble with Islam. He claims that she accused him of being anti-Jewish because she 1. See http://www.artsandopinion.com/2010_v9_n6/hassan-2.htm. Accessed January 30, 2011. 2011] BUT WILL IT SELL IN ISLAMABAD? 279 could not understand his pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian positions (79). Tarek’s depiction of Ms. Manji may lead some to the misconception that she is anti-Palestinian. This is the farthest thing from the truth. I remember some colleagues from Israel complaining to me that Ms. Manji had refused to pose for photographs with an Israeli tank crew. When I asked her about the incident, she pointed out that she did not wish to give the impression she was siding with any occupation by force. Both Tarek Fatah and Irshad Manji are reformist- minded Muslims who have the same positions on many issues; it behooves Tarek to be more judicious in his representation of allies in his cause. In rating Tarek’s book, I am reminded of my Arabic-language professor at McGill. I dreaded receiving my corrected research papers from him; they would invariably be covered in notes. Yet, I never received less than an “A”—because the professor was a perfectionist; his comments were meant to be constructive. My voluminous critique of Tarek’s book is in that category. But for the fact that Tarek has lauded me in it, I would have given it an A+. Since I do not wish to be accused of favoritism, however, I must award it only an A. Yet, however, in my department, we do not give A+s, so in the end, his book still gets the top grade. This book should be in every mosque, every church, every synagogue, every library—every institution that promotes knowledge as empowerment. *Khaleel Mohammed is an associate professor of religion in the Department of Religious Studies at San Diego State University. He has a bachelor’s in religion and psychology from Universidad Interamerica (Mexico), an MA from Concordia University (Canada), and a PhD in Islamic law from McGill (Canada). He has read law at Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University and held a Kraft Hiatt fellowship from Brandeis. Time Well Spent Albert S. Lindemann and Richard S. Levy, eds., Antisemitism: A History (Oxford University Press, 2010), 288 pp., $31.95 Leon Rosenberg* According to the editors of this collection, Albert S. Lindemann, professor of history emeritus, University of California, Santa Barbara, and Richard S. Levy, professor of history, University of Illinois, Chicago, the “central goal of this volume is to offer a reasonable overview of a daunting topic.” To accomplish this task, they recruited “a wide selection of recognized scholars, asking them to include the most important new developments in their fields, as succinctly as possible.” I volunteered to write a review on this book in an effort to learn the topic; the authors and editors of Antisemitism: A History successfully taught me the facts and imparted their opinions. In the body of the work, 232 pages of this 288-page book, Lindemann and Levy, with a distinguished supporting cast, educated me in true professorial style. They used the classical formula, “Tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them,” and did just that, discussing the last 2,000 years of prejudice against Jews and antisemitism. The introduction, the “Tell them what you’re going to tell them” and including the subtitle “Antisemitism: What Is It? How Can We Best Understand It?” begins the discussion; the epilogue, entitled “The Conclusion: 281 282 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:281 Not the Final Word,” weaves over the factual history, using all of the information in the book to help us to understand the editors’ hypothesis: that we are only in the second century of the new face of antisemitism, not just hatred of the Jews, but an era of death and destruction to the Jews. In his summary, Levy notes that since the end of the 18th century, certain people have moved from “Jew-hatred, Jew-baiting, and Judeo-phobia and their permutations and other prejudices to anti-Jewish actions.” Prior to the last century, “persecution, especially in violent forms, had been episodic rather than continuous, and long periods of European history yielded no evidence of anti-Jewish violence.” The editors note that the “fantasy of enormous Jewish power became the position of enough individuals to float a movement.” Prior to this, Augustine had taught that “Jews should go on living but that their debased condition was fitting testimony to the superiority of Christian faith.” In the last 200 years, however, Jews thriving and triumphant rather than suffering and subservient violated a culturally embedded expectation. Jews are now to be feared, not just hated. The body of the pieces begins with two chapters entitled “The Jewish Question,” by Albert S. Lindemann; and “The Ancient Mediterranean and the Pre-Christian Era,” by Benjamin Isaac, Lessing Professor of Ancient History, Tel Aviv University, and ends with two chapters entitled “Antisemitism in Eastern Europe (excluding Russia and the Soviet Empire) Since 1848,” by Istvan Deak, Seth Low Professor of History emeritus, Columbia University; and “Israel and Antisemitism,” by Meir Litvak, associate professor of Middle Eastern history, Tel Aviv University, and Esther Webman, senior research fellow, Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, and the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Antisemitism and Racism. The 15 middle chapters open with the following quote in Chapter 3, “Jews and Christians from the Time of Christ to Constantine’s Reign,” by Philip A. Cunningham, professor of theology and director of the Institute for Jewish-Catholic Relations, St. Joseph’s University, Philadelphia: “It is a widely held belief that Judaism and Christianity became separate and fundamentally opposed religious communities shortly after the lifetime of Jesus,” teaching the history of the world from an antisemitic perspective. Lindemann and Levy wonder what, perhaps, the Jews had done to deserve their special status as the eternal scapegoat, but had no convincing, valid explanation for it; indeed, given the present level of anti-Jewish, antiZionistic, and antisemitic feelings among the billion Muslim voices, they despair in the conclusion to the book—although they recognize that it is not the final word—that “It is difficult to believe that antisemitism will anytime soon be overcome.” This book could either be used in the classroom, or serve, as it did for 2011] TIME WELL SPENT 283 me, as a self-directed course. I learned a great deal, even from the glossary, which should have been placed immediately after the preface and should have been more extensive, as I had to resort to the Internet to uncover the meaning of such previously esoteric words as neopaganism—an umbrella term used to identify a wide variety of modern religious movements, particularly those influenced by pre-Christian pagan beliefs of Europe; and by eschatology, the branch of theology concerned with End Times. Most of these words, however, were readily explained in the text. Such concepts include the Doctrine of Jewish Witness, noted above, the influential argument advanced by Augustine of Hippo at the end of the 4th century that said Jews and Judaism should be allowed to survive in the Christian world in order to “bear witness, in their depraved state, to the superior truth of Christianity.” Likewise, the ancient phrase, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” explained the Catholic-Jewish and alternatively Protestant-Jewish alliances that proved, intermittently, to alleviate the burden of antisemitism for the Jews. The early chapters of the book for the most part are set in a format that separates each chapter’s conclusion, or editorial comments, from the primary resource material of the chapter. Had the editors insisted on this format in every chapter, this great book might have been even better. It is done well in Chapter 9, “Antisemitism in Modern France: Dreyfus, Vichy and Beyond,” by Richard J. Golsan, Distinguished Professor of French, Texas A&M, who ends his chapter with a section titled “Conclusion: The Duty to Remember,” in which he editorializes upon his area of expertise. Similarly, other chapters separate content from opinion in a clear way that uses the content to reinforce the opinions of these learned writers. On the other hand, Heinz-Dietrich Lowe, in his Chapter 11, entitled “Antisemitism in Russia and the Soviet Union,” while doing an excellent job of teaching us, for instance, that “Pogroms were not an everyday occurrence in Russia[;] rather, they appeared in three great waves, 1881 to 1884, 1905 to 1906, and 1917 to 1921,” that “more than 95% of all pogroms took place in the four years, 1881, 1882, 1905 and 1906,” and that “Contrary to widespread opinion, the pogroms were not government organized or the work of any mysterious hidden hand,” goes on to hypothesize that the pogroms were targeted, suggesting that the “acculturated, integrated, and economically successful Jews may have been more intolerable to the broader masses than the Orthodox poor and less assertive Jews.” He cites as evidence for this that prior to these pogroms (noted above), others occurred in Odessa in 1821, 1859, and 1871, where “Jews were the most modernized and integrated.” Lowe claims additional support for this hypothesis that the pogroms were targeted “[w]hen the few pogroms of 1884 and the infamous pogrom of Kishinev are were taken into consideration,” but does not tell us 284 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:281 about the economic and social situation of Kishinev or about the economic and social situation where the 1884 pogrom took place. It is confusing when Lowe mixes fact with opinion in this way. Later, on page 182, he discusses the “only important special institution for Jews inside the (communist) Soviet system, the Yevsektsiya (the wholly subordinate Jewish section of the communist party of the Soviet Union), was abolished in 1903.” Lowe editorializes within the factual/scientific body of the chapter when he says that the Yevsektsiya was “created to combat the overwhelming influence of non-communist groups within the Jewish population, it was obviously never intended as a means of pursuing Jewish national aims,” without giving any scientific evidence for his non-scientific “obviously.” Despite this minor shortcoming, anyone interested in learning and delving deeper into the history of the Jews and of antisemitism—i.e., not just that there were marranos, but that these marranos eventually became known as New Christians, singled out after conversion, even though they were forced to convert as “Ethnic Jews no longer constrained by anti-Jewish restrictions and whose increasing influencing and prosperity provoked resentment and jealousy” to separate them from Old Christians, who began to fear “actual physical contamination from near proximity to the New Christians’ “polluted blood’ ”—will learn a great deal from this book. So, I agree with the statement on the back cover of this paperback collection, which reads: “The essays contained in this volume provide an ideal introduction to the history and nature of antisemitism, stressing readability, balance, and thematic coherence, while trying to gain some distance from the polemics and apologetics that so often cloud the subject.” Reading this book was time well spent. *Leon I. Rosenberg, MD, is the president and medical director of the Center For Emotional Fitness (CFEF) in Cherry Hill, N.J., where he practices psychiatry, geriatric psychiatry, and forensic psychiatry. Jihad and Judaism . . . The New Incivility David Patterson, A Genealogy of Evil: Anti-Semitism and Nazism to Islamic Jihad (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 312 pp., $27.99 Steven K. Baum* Of his thirty books, this may be David Patterson’s best book to date. For those who are new to Dr. Patterson’s work, he is the Hillel Feinberg Chair in Holocaust Studies at the University of Texas at Dallas and generally writes in the humanities on subjects ranging from philosophy to education. He now turns his attention to the jihad. The first three chapters of A Genealogy of Evil are spent laying the foundation for his case for Islamism as an ideology of hate. The case is compelling and well organized, focusing correctly by Chapter 3 on the key Islamist ideologues—al Banna, Qutb, and Maududi. The Muslim Brotherhood becomes the pivot point for the next chapter, which is incredibly timely as we watch the Arab Spring unfold in Egypt with questions of how and where the Brotherhood will affect the burgeoning democracy. Their influence for the jihad may be a fait accompli. According to a 2011 Pew Research Center poll, only 36% of Egyptians would maintain a treaty with Israel, while 82% of Egyptians view the United States unfavorably. The remaining chapters document the activities of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Sudanese National Islamic Front. It is interesting that Dr. Patterson separates out the religious (Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Islamic Revolu- 285 286 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:285 tion) from secular offshoots of Islamist activities—e.g., Baath Party, PLO—though he acknowledges that the boundaries fuse at times: the secular are religious and the religious are at times political. The conclusion may be somewhat troubling for the less religious person. Because of his Orthodox Jewish background, Dr. Patterson easily cites Old Testament passages, making his case that Israel’s existence is humanity’s existence. Indeed, the last line of the book is ki mi-Zion tetze Torah undevar Ha Shem mi Yerushalyum (Isaiah 2:3). It is not translated into English in the text, but means “for from Zion (Israel), the Torah Law comes forth and Hashem (God) shall speak from Jerusalem.” Citing the Bible to make an academic point is just fine for the religious reader. For the nonreligious reader, however, citing the Bible borders on the squeamish. Biblical citations notwithstanding, this is a good academic work on the jihad and the politics of hate. David Patterson’s newest book is timely and solidly based and well worth the read. An early review by Oxford’s Jonathan Leader Maynard found otherwise. It was unduly scathing and his criticism was not based on the criteria that usually makes for bad reviews— sloppy footnoting, erroneous conclusions, lack of originality, timeliness. Instead, it bordered on antisemitism using denigration as academic pretense to attack in what may be termed the new incivility. While conceding that there are linkages between Nazism and jihadism, Maynard dismisses or may not know of the 1,500-year history of Muslim antisemitism prior to the formation of the State of Israel. He focuses exclusively on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, blaming Israel for the jihad and subsequent antisemitism. He writes, “Patterson seems blind to the obvious fault in his inference”: Jihadists’ belief that “Jews are evil irrespective of what they/Israel does” does not demonstrate that Israeli actions do not play a causal role in explaining Jihadists’ anti-Semitism, or in providing a narrative within which anti-Semitic rhetoric is persuasive for potential audiences.” Taking this position not only dismisses prior scholarly work by Jeffrey Herf, Laurent Murawiec, Matthew Kuntzel, Walid Phares, Richard Breitman, and Richard Rubenstein, as well as Andrew Bostom on the Nazijihadi linkage, it points up the new incivility. No one has said that these authors used false methodology or garnered a “poor interpretative method,” as Maynard did with Patterson. But with the new incivility, you can. Regarding Islam and Nazism, Maynard concedes that “It’s not that there is nothing to this argument,” but he seems to be worried that “Patterson’s deflection of criticism from Israel” is due to “prior political or religious projects [that] are driving the production of preconceptions.” When 2011] THE NEW INCIVILITY 287 Patterson writes: “There is much for the world to atone for, starting with the countless UN resolutions against the Jewish state . . . [for] while Mecca signifies the truth of Islam, Jerusalem signifies the holiness of humanity— that is what makes it God’s dwelling place . . . Jerusalem is not only the capital of Israel, it is the centre of the world . . . hence humanity’s need for Israel.” Maynard counters with “readers hardly need assistance in evaluating these passages and the motivations behind them.” In the new uncivility, you can dismiss Jews as being too subjective. Too Jewish to be objective about Israel was the theme of Margaret Thatcher’s former press secretary Sir Bernard Ingham. Ingham said that, as editor of The Private Eye, he would never read a letter to the editor about Israel written by someone with a “Jewish sounding name,” because he knew it would be biased. It should then follow that all Christian and Muslim letters are unbiased purveyors of the political truth. In the new incivility, it is better to be critical of Israel and minimize antisemitism while justifying jihad. Like it not, the new incivility is here and is working hard to convince you that it is politically unfettered in speaking the truth to Jewish power. Reasonable people may ask what in the world this has to do in saying a book is academically sound—as is David Patterson’s latest work—and they would be right. *Steven K. Baum is the co-editor of the Journal for the Study of Antisemitism. Analysis of the Pogrom Jonathan Dekel-Chen, David Gaunt, Natan M. Meir, and Israel Bartal (eds.), Anti-Jewish Violence: Rethinking the Pogrom in East European History (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010), 240 pp., $34.95 Paul R. Bartrop* The word pogrom comes from Russian roots: grom, thunder, and pogrimit, to smash or destroy. It is a term usually associated with mob attacks against Jewish communities, especially in Tsarist Russia before 1917, though embracing numerous additional anti-Jewish persecutions in other countries up to relatively recent times. The term became common when describing anti-Jewish riots in the Russian Empire that had been organized by (or at least arranged with some form of assistance from) local authorities. During much of the twentieth century, the term implied any attack on Jews regardless of the degree of official input, and irrespective of whether or not the attack was spontaneous or planned. The destruction wrought by pogroms varied from situation to situation, and could involve murder, rape, pillage, physical assault, and wanton or random destruction. The relationship of pogroms to genocide is a close one, in that pogroms could lead to genocidal massacres, or, when not going as far as this, could nonetheless promote the physical and psychological preconditions in the 289 290 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:289 minds of the perpetrators to be disposed to taking the extra step toward genocide if ever the conditions should call for it. While this latter situation did not occur in Russia, the destruction that rained down on Jewish communities at the end of the nineteenth and the start of the twentieth centuries was no less horrifying for the Jewish communities and individuals who suffered. The formula attributed to the conservative Russian statesman Konstantin Pobedonostsev (1827-1907)—that the solution to Russian’s Jewish problem would be for one third to die, one third to assimilate, and one third to emigrate—found expression in the pogroms: certainly there were deaths, certainly there were those who sought sanctuary through merging into the general population (difficult though that was), and certainly there was intimidation, leading many Jews to flee overseas. This book examines the phenomenon of the pogrom and its effects, seen through a new lens and asking by the asking of new questions. The story of the pogroms is essentially connected to the Jews of Russia, though the pogrom as a device for terrorizing Jews and attaining antisemitic policy goals spread throughout eastern Europe in the latter part of the nineteenth century. This book, which comprises a number of articles originally presented as papers at an academic conference on the subject held in Stockholm, Sweden, in May 2005, examines the pogrom not only in the late Russian Empire, the Revolutionary period, and the early Soviet Union, but also localizes the phenomenon through considered studies of Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Siberia, and Belorussia. While the various essays all bring their own distinctive perspectives on pogroms to the table, the Introduction by the editors provides a very useful unifying structure to the volume overall. A brief consideration of the nature of anti-Jewish violence as a general theme in European history gives way to a definitional discussion concerning the notion of the pogrom itself: what it was, how it varied from place to place, and what its intentions were. A conclusion worthy of note is that while the pogroms stimulated a considerable outcry from foreign observers, and a resultant sympathy for the persecuted Jews, this did not lead to any form of concrete action to alleviate their distress. An additional point made in the Introduction—for some readers no doubt an obvious one, for others perhaps not so obvious—is that the pogroms have been largely overshadowed historically by the far greater antisemitic explosion that took place a generation later under the Nazis, the Holocaust. It should not be held, though, that these were necessarily two distinct experiences. The precedents offered in Russia were noted by many in Germany and elsewhere, and the political, social, and psychological uses that could be made of anti-Jewish violence were studied carefully by Euro- 2011] ANALYSIS OF THE POGROM 291 pean racists, rabble-rousers, and anti-democratic politicians throughout the first third of the twentieth century—a period during which antisemitism once more became fashionable and new uses (and justifications) were found for exploiting the Jewish presence. How did the Jews themselves respond to these developments? An important section of the book, “Responses to Pogroms,” contains two essays that consider Jewish reactions, noting that the Jews did not sit by passively awaiting their victimization. Rather, we see some of the ways in which Jews organized their various communities to meet the challenge of anti-Jewish violence—not through counter violence (which could never hope to be successful), but, rather, through self-defense, meaningful dialogue with the authorities leading to political intercession, and a systematic campaign with the broader (non-Jewish) community to raise awareness of the need to oppose antisemitism through the dissemination of books and pamphlets, as well as through public education efforts. In Kiev, we learn, Jews reminded their Christian neighbors of the long-standing interrelationships that had existed between the two communities, working from the perspective of a shared history rather than one in which two disparate groups had nothing to do with each other. Overall, this outstanding collection of eleven essays (plus the Introduction) sheds fresh light on the phenomenon of the pogrom in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century Russia. It offers much that is new and groundbreaking, enabling a contemporary readership to delve into the roots of this expression of anti-Jewish atrocity. From this, even newer questions may be asked, and something of the character of the pogroms may be discerned. Finally, it is to be hoped that the initiative taken by those who called the original conference from which this book derives (and the editors who followed it through to publication) will stimulate additional scholarship in this area. For too long, pogroms have been neglected, overshadowed by the much greater expression of evil that followed twenty to thirty years later. *Paul R. Bartrop is the head of the History Department at Bialik College, Melbourne, Australia, where he teaches Jewish Studies, Comparative Genocide Studies, and the History of Revolutions. His most recent book, co-authored with Steven Leonard Jacobs, is Fifty Key Thinkers on the Holocaust and Genocide (Routledge, 2011). What Walt and Mearsheimer Got Wrong Mitchell Bard, The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance that Undermines America’s Interest in the Middle East (New York: Harper Collins, 2010), 362 pp., $27.99 Samuel M. Edelman* Walt and Mearsheimer got it wrong. Their work on the so-called Israel “lobby” published as an article in 2006 and full book in 2007 accused the lobby of overwhelming influence on American foreign policy. Their accusation was unwarranted and unsubstantiated, their research finding flawed. Yet, their work has become one of the theoretical underpinnings for antiIsrael boycotts, divestment, and sanctions. It has also been used by antisemites. Israel remains a staunch ally of the United States, and economic, educational, military, and cultural relations between the two countries have been and continue to be beneficial to both. The relationship between the United States and the Arab world has not been so beneficial. Billions have been spent by the United States on military solutions to conflicts with the Arab world; 9-11 caused the deaths of thousands of America citizens; today we spend more than ever on gasolineand oil-based products; and our homeland security costs have gone up dramatically. Yet, there remains a lobbying effort paid for by the Arab nations, which spend in the billions of dollars to influence American public opinion and to shape policies in Congress, and have affected a generation of Middle East scholars through Arab-funded Middle East Studies programs. Libya, 293 294 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:293 Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and even non-Arab Iran have a daily impact on American policies through paid lobbyists and volunteer organizations underwritten by foreign funds. Walt and Mearsheimer are the recipients of some of this largess themselves. Mitchell Bard’s book, The Arab Lobby, explores in detail the history and the impact of the Arab lobby—a mix of old-style Christian missionary anti-Jewish groups, oil lobbyists and companies, Arabists retired from the State Department, members of Arab-American groups, Islamic religious groups, and the Arab diplomatic corps and a variety of both extreme leftist and rightist groups whose major interest is less in the Arab world and more in pursuing anti-Jewish and anti-Israel sentiments. Bard’s work is a crucial and important primer into this relatively unknown world. It is certainly a work that uncovers the negative impact of Arab lobbying efforts on the U.S. economy in the arena of energy policy. Even more important for scholars and lay people concerned about antisemitism, Bard’s work reveals the deep-seated anti-Jewish and antiIsrael nature of many of the groups and organizations lobbying the U.S. president and the Congress on behalf of the Arab world. Every American has the constitutional right to petition his or her government no matter whether they are Jewish or Arab; Walt and Mearsheimer seem to forget that seminal concept in their writing. Bard does not. He does not attack Arab Americans for petitioning their government but he does rightly go after Arab governments and big oil for using their massive wealth to affect public policy without any regard to the negative consequences for the United States. Clearly, Mitchell Bard got it right. Walt and Mearsheimer got it wrong. *Samuel M. Edelman is the executive director, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East; professor emeritus, CSU, Chico; and former dean at American Jewish University. Confluent Ideologies—Nazism and Islamism Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, Nazi Palestine (New York: Enigma Books, 2010). Paper. Reviewed by David Sokol* Enigma Books should be complimented for bringing Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers’ book to the English-reading world. Originally published in German in 2006 as Halbmond und Hakenkreuz: Das Dritte Reich, die Araber und Palestinia (The Crescent and the Swastika: The Third Reich, The Arabs and Palestine), its title, unfortunately, has been changed by the publisher to Nazi Palestine. I say unfortunately because the original title is more indicative of the goals and focus of the book. Nazi Palestine sounds to me like a defamation, a name calling, and leads to supporting a politically motivated criticism of the book that is simply not true for two reasons1: The criticism I refer to suggests that the book is part of an Israeli propaganda movement. The truth is that the original title reflects the clear-headed analysis contained in the book of the relationship between the Muslim world (the Crescent) and the National Socialists (the Swastika). It describes how the common value of Jew-hating and anti-Zionism made Palestine a ripe prize and rallying point both strategically and politically for Islamists, Arab nationalists, and Nazis. In a personal communication, the 1. Gilbert Achcar, “Blame the Grand Mufti: Israel’s Propaganda War,” Le Monde Diplomatique (English ed.), May 2010. 295 296 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:295 editor for Enigma Books told me that “The title was picked by Enigma Books, not the translator; it means to indicate what would have happened if Palestine and the rest of North Africa had been conquered by the Germans.”2 The book does paint the disastrous probable outcome of a “Nazi Palestine,” but it is much more than that. It is a book about what did happen, not a fantasy. It makes clear that the outcome of a success of the Arab/Nazi coalition in WW II would have been genocide of the Jews, led by Germans and enforced by Arabs. Nazi Palestine is one of the first of a shower of post-2001 books on the relationship between the Muslim world and the Nazis. Other books at the top of the list, filling that story out—by Matthias Küntzel, Ephraim Karsh, and Jeffrey Herf, and some chapters in Robert Wistrich3—are invaluable to understanding what actually happened in that part of the world during and after WW II. Since history is not a snapshot of an event but more like a film—a continuous and sequential set of ongoing happenings—it is crucial to find out what has led up to contemporary events. Nazi Palestine does that by revealing some of the underpinnings to the intractable problems between Israel and Palestine. When it seems clear that reasonable men and women could come to a solution to a problem of boundaries and assets, Mallmann and Cüppers show us the irrational roots of history. The authors discuss how useful the irrationality of Jew-hating was as a tool for uniting Muslims and Nazis. In addition, Nazi Palestine displays the toxic mix of Nazi and Muslim antisemitism, showing how the Germans exploited its pragmatic and historical tendency in the Middle East. The debate about how intrinsic antisemitism is in Muslim orthodoxy is not dealt with here, however. The relevant discussion between writers like Bassam Tibi, Bernard Lewis versus Andrew Bostom,4 and others might be expanded by this work. Did the Nazis bring genocidal antisemitism to an Arab culture that previously had a very negative view of Jews, or is there a genocidal message in the core of Islam that the radical Islamists are bringing to the fore? Although Nazi Palestine does not approach this philosophical question 2. Robert Miller, personal letter to author, March 15, 2011. 3. Matthias Küntzel, Jihad and Jew Hatred (New York: Telos Press, 2007); Jeffrey Herf, Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009); Ephraim Karsh, Palestine Betrayed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010); Robert Wistrich, A Lethal Obsession (New York: Random House, 2010). 4. Bassam Tibi, From Sayyid Qutb to Hama: The Middle East Conflict and the Islamization of Antisemitism (New Haven: YIISA, 2010); Bernard Lewis, “The New Antisemitism,” The American Scholar, Vol. 75, no. 1 (Winter 2006); Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism (Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 2008). 2011] CONFLUENT IDEOLOGIES—NAZISM AND ISLAMISM 297 directly, it gives us a lot of facts useful in drawing conclusions and in providing an understanding of how, in much of the Palestinian population, this antisemitism was transformed into genocidal hate and political ammunition. The book educates us about what went on between Germans, Arabs, and Jews between 1933 and 1945 in the Middle East. Numerous anti-Jewish assaults began after the end of WW I. Early in Nazi Palestine, Mallmann and Cüppers introduce us to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin el-Husseini. The Mufti and his actions have been well known. During WW II and earlier, the Mufti was a celebrity—a dark star, no doubt, but often seen in newsreels and in The New York Times. His murderous conspiracies lost public attention until recently, but post 9/11 research is bringing him back under scrutiny; he is one of the few Arab sources directly quoted. The Iraqi leader and Nazi supporter Gailani (elsewhere spelt as Kailani) is also mentioned, but most of the narrative is told by the authors through translations of German sources. This does not make the information in any way inaccurate, but the reader should be aware that what the Germans said about the Arabs may be somewhat different from what the Arabs were saying to each other. The Mufti is freely quoted promoting the antisemitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Before WW II, the Mufti was ranting for genocide. In 1936 he said, “When the English remove their hands from this land, we will throw and chase all the Jews in a stampede into the sea.”5 The authors mention that the Mufti incited the Arab revolt against the English and Jews of Palestine in 1936-1939. In the revolt, more Arabs perished under the terror of the Mufti’s gunmen than did Jews or Englishmen; the Mufti had taken this opportunity to start killing off any Arabs in Palestine who showed signs of compromising with the Jews or the English. In 1933, the Mufti reached out to the German consul general with a warm gesture toward the new German regime and his idol Adolph Hitler. The relationship of these men mirrors a nefarious love affair. The authors merely touch on this metaphor of romantic love, and it deserves more development. In 1938, articles appeared in various Arab newspapers in which Hitler was placed on a level with the Prophet Mohammad.”6 Clerics began preaching that God had sent the twelfth imam to the world in the form of Adolph Hitler. The myth of Hitler’s divinity became an orchestrated public relations move planned in Germany and aimed at Islam; a common chant at demonstrations was “In Heaven Allah/On Earth Hitler.” A love affair was growing—one not nurtured on kindness but fed 5. Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, Nazi Palestine (New York: Enigma Books, 2010), 18. 6. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 30. 298 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:295 by hate, specifically Jew hating. Representatives of Nazi Germany began visiting the Middle East. The German head of Hitler Youth visited Iraq. Arab youth organizations popped up, designed after Hitler Youth and promoting the similarities between Nazis and the pan-Arab renaissance. “Anyone who drove through Arab territory with a swastika pennant had nothing to fear and was met with rapturous cheers,” the authors state.7 Comments like these support other reports of the popularity of the Nazis in the Middle East. They also bring up the question that although there is anecdotal evidence of collusion of the population, can the level of support be quantified? Since most of the evidence is from the German report, we once again miss the firsthand contemporary Arab translations that might provide some quantifiable evidence. The reason we cannot completely trust only the German reports is twofold. First, using the previous example of “rapturous cheers” for the swastika, it is possible that after the Mufti terrorized his Arab opposition into silence, there was an obligation to conform. Imagine in Tripoli during the 2011 uprising refusing to cheer Gadafi while in the midst of Gadafi supporters. Next, there is a term in Arabic called taqiyya. The principle of taqiyya allows Muslims to lie with honor if they believe it protects the goals of their faith. Lying to the Germans in some situations may have been strategic. We know today that some of Arab leaders’ comments in English can be contradicted by the same leader’s comments in Arabic. Nowhere in Nazi Palestine does it state that all Palestinians were antisemitic Nazis. There are a few stabs at measuring the amount of sympathy for Nazis. There were 2,500 German settlers living in Palestine—members of the Templar Society (Templars), a Christian group. Where 5% of non-Jewish Germans outside of Germany belonged to the Nazi Party, 17% of the German Palestinian Templars were Nazis. The authors later quote a “British situation analysis concluding that 95% of the population of Iraq was also quite positively disposed toward Germany.”8 In 1942, Germany sent Persian spies to assess the situation in Iran. They reported that 90% were in support of Germany. Robert Satloff9 estimates that possibly up to 90% of Arabs might have been indifferent to the fate of the Jews. That still left 10%, or millions of people, to support the Nazi persecution of the Jews. The love affair between Hitler and the Arab world did not start out smoothly. Many Arabs had stars in their eyes. They projected their hopes of a liberator onto Hitler and were blind to the racist discrimination that would most likely be in store for them. In the beginning, the Germans were not in 7. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 30. 8. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 39. 9. Robert Satloff, Among the Righteous (Perseus Group, PublicAffairs, 2006). 2011] CONFLUENT IDEOLOGIES—NAZISM AND ISLAMISM 299 any way in favor of the Arabs. They did not want to offend the British, whom they wanted to keep neutral. What started out as a rejection by Germany would turn into a mutually exploitive relationship. By 1937, Adolph Eichmann’s visit to the Middle East indicated a serious interest in exploring the relationship; by 1939, there was evidence that the Germans had secretly funded the Mufti’s Arab Revolt. The cool reception the initial Arab courting got from the Nazis was changing into something hotter and more mutual. The British Mandate system estimated that 60% of Palestinians who owned radios listened to Radio Bari. Radio Bari, an Italian station, was broadcast all over the world. The Mufti (Palestine) and Gailani (Iraq) and others broadcast over 5,000 broadcasts of vicious antisemitic and anti-British/American propaganda on Radio Bari. After presenting information of the deepening confluence of Palestinian and Nazi interests and resources, Mallmann and Cüppers, in an unusual criticism, charge an American historian with being “erroneous” and “inconsistent” when he claims that “The Arab cause in Palestine . . . was not among the interests of National Socialist Germany.”10 If the German Mediterranean strategy had been successful, there is no reason to believe that the future of the Jews there would have been any different from their fate in the conquered nations in Europe. In 1941, the Mufti escaped the British, who were chasing him around the Middle East. and took up residence in Berlin. His meeting with Adolph Hitler is the consummation of the Mufti and Arab love affair with Hitler. They agreed to share the German solution to the “Jewish question.” This period brought explicit plans for the destruction of the Jews worldwide. One quote states: “The Jews could be enclosed and isolated in their Zionist state and destroyed there root and branch.”11 This antisemitic genocidal statement is echoed in modern times by Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, when he says, “If they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them world wide.”12 An unbelievable criticism of Nazi Palestine is that the Mufti was actually a marginal power at the time and never had the power attributed to him. These critics ignore the facts. Yasser Arafat became a disciple of the Mufti when he was 17 years old. At the Mufti’s funeral in 1974, Arafat called him “our Hero.” The U.S. government was threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood at the end of WW II. The Brotherhood basically said that if the Mufti were prosecuted for war crimes, the United States would be the target of 10. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 133. 11. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 54. 12. Deborah Passner, “Hassan Nasrallah: In His Own Words,” Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), July 26, 2006. 300 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:295 terrorism. The king of Egypt provided living quarters to the Mufti, and the whole establishment of the Arab world welcomed him back from Europe after the war as a hero. The Arab Higher Committee was renewed and Husseini was appointed leader. In the 1960s, the Mufti lost his glow in the Arab world. Though politics put him on the losing side at times, he has always been a powerful figure in Palestine and beyond. In 2011, when Israel destroyed a wing of the decrepit Shepherd Hotel, protests arose that this was a “Palestinian and Islamic symbol” that should be honored and preserved. The building was originally built by and as a home to Husseini. The lead Palestinian spokesperson protesting the partial destruction of the building was a Palestinian official directly related to the Mufti. Thirty-six years after his death, many still hold the Mufti in high regard. In light of all this, the authors are right to ascribe significant power to Amin al-Husseini. ROMMEL AND THE ROAD TO CAIRO At this point in the book I wanted a military table map to keep track of ground, sea, and air movements. At least a printed situation map included in the book would have been helpful. The propaganda in the region was that the Axis powers in the form of the Afrika Korps were coming to liberate Egypt. Mussolini was ready to ride into Cairo on a white horse. He already had victory medallions minted. The Axis plan was to destroy Russia as an ally to the United States, bring Nazis into the Middle East from the Caucuses and from the west, and, through Tunisia and Libya, conquer Egypt and the rest. Probably the most shocking and freshest research in Nazi Palestine is the information on the Einsatzkommando and Rommel’s Afrika Korps. The Einsatzkommando was authorized by the SS and the German police to “take executive measures against civilian populations on its own authority.”13 This was a euphemism for a license to commit mass murder on civilians, especially Jews. The Einsatzgruppen had a history as a small group of commandos who recruited the help of local sympathizers to slaughter large numbers of non-military men, women, and children. They did this in the Soviet Union, Poland, Lithuania, and Serbia. The authors give us a very personal profile of the members of the Einsatzkommando. They were young, idealistic, and committed Nazis, most in their twenties. Walter Rauff was the leader of this killing unit deployed in Egypt with plans to actively sweep into Palestine, exterminating the Jewish population on the way. One of Rauff’s claims to fame was the invention and use of automotive trans13. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 85. 2011] CONFLUENT IDEOLOGIES—NAZISM AND ISLAMISM 301 ports that had the exhaust hooked up to the cargo section of the van, delivering lethal doses of carbon monoxide to the passengers/cargo. The readiness of this unit, along with the assurances of Arab leaders of assistance in the mass murder of the Jewish populations, gave little doubt of the antisemitic genocide about to take place. The precedent had been set. The Einsatzkommando had a tried-and-true protocol, tested in Europe, that they were about use in the implementation of the Holocaust in the Middle East. While the Mufti and Arabs enjoyed a honeymoon of hate with the Third Reich, there were Arab troops in Greece waiting for deployment. Eichmann was bragging about the success of “the solution to the European Jewish Question.” Eichmann and the Mufti were equally charmed with each other; the Jews were their mutual mortal enemy. In the Arab world, people were greeting each other on the street with “Heil Rommel.” Nasser was an advocate of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Sadat said of the Nazis and his own political circle in Egypt that “We acted in complete harmony.”14 Once Rommel crossed the Suez, Arabs, with German guidance, would have instituted the Nazi solution to the Jewish Problem in Palestine. In 1936, David Ben Gurion predicted “the greatest catastrophe the world has ever experienced,” stating that Hitler and Arab supporters would invade the Middle East and destroy all Jews. In 1942, it looked like this was right on schedule: 15,000 Jews left Egypt for Jerusalem; Rommel was advancing with the Einsatzkommando, and plenty of willing Arab henchmen, behind him. The Haganah and the Irgun debated strategy. Jews from Palestine were ready to join the British military. The Palmach was formed to perform commando missions. A Jewish fighting force was maturing. There were plans for a mass evacuation should Rommel succeed in reaching Palestine. But evacuate to where? The reality was that the Jewish community in Palestine would have been annihilated. Alas for Hitler, his decision to put most of his resources in the Eastern Front foiled his plans for conquering the Middle East. The battles at El Alamein and the Nazi invasion from the Caucuses began to fail. The intelligence advantage switched to the British side. Supplies became scarce for the Axis powers. The Nazi plan was to converge on the Arab region from the east and west. Rommel’s losses at Alamein ended the hopes to crush the Jews and the British in the Arab world. Walter Rauff and his Einsatzgruppen were sent back to Europe. Before Rauff returned to Europe, he inflicted a reign of terror in Tunisia. He enforced a labor program on Jews for months and robbed them of 14. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 96. 302 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:295 their personal possessions. After Rauff was evacuated from Tunisia, the war soon ended. The Middle East was not the only place Muslims were working for Hitler. The Mufti was crucial to raising Muslim Nazi troops in Croatia and elsewhere. These troops, who were SS war criminals, wore uniforms honoring both Nazi and Islamic symbols. Certainly, all European Muslims were not Waffen SS soldiers. But this book is not about those who were not Nazis, it is about those who were. In Among the Righteous, Satloff15told about the righteous Muslims of WW II who saved Jews. Unfortunately, there were tens of thousands more who carried guns, burned homes with civilians inside, and generally perpetrated mayhem under the Crescent and the Swastika. Bolshevism, Jews, Catholic Serbs, and gypsies were the enemy. The troops were inspired by Imams trained in Islam and Nazi propaganda who traveled with them as they inflicted havoc. The cover of Nazi Palestine shows a photograph of two young and innocent-looking Muslim Waffen SS soldiers studying an antisemitic text. In Western Europe, there were training camps provided by the Germans for Arab informers who were trained in sabotage, insurrection, and radio operations. They were guided intellectually and politically to believe that Nazi and Islamic interests were parallel. Nowhere, though, do Mallmann and Cüppers claim that these Muslim troops were crucial to the Holocaust; in fact, they write when discussing the Muslim troops, “The practical value of the SS formations proved to be modest.”16 Those troops did, however, commit numerous war crimes and “had taken wide ranging measures against the Jews.”17 Husseini exaggerated to the Reich what he could deliver to them in terms of real military might. He was a failure not only to his troops and the Nazis, but to his people as well. Or was he? In the short term, he failed, but his view was wider and longer than WW II. One could say that his antiWestern plan is continuing and that WW II was just the beginning. Mallmann and Cüppers end the book with a follow-up on some of the villains. The Mufti lived a long and celebrated life. Walter Rauff retired to South America and spoke freely of his death machine; he was protected by Chile’s lack of deportation laws. Others were killed by the end of the war, and very few were tracked down and punished after the war. Of course, all Arabs were not Nazis. The Mufti and his thugs did allow, intentionally or not, some moderate, communist, and other Palestinians to live. Mallmann and Cüppers did not write a survey of all of Arab hearts and minds. They wrote instead a shocking and dangerously revealing 15. Satloff, Among the Righteous. 16. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 17. 17. Mallmann and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, 146. 2011] CONFLUENT IDEOLOGIES—NAZISM AND ISLAMISM 303 story of a significant threat to the world reflected in the relevance of Nazi ideology and Nazi values to many Arabs. We hear in modern voices rising from Palestine and the Middle East repetitions of those genocidal threats that seem to have been coined in the 1930s and 40s. There should be room to defend against a blanket condemnation of a whole people as “Nazis.” At the same time, there should be the awareness of a legacy of Nazi sympathizers that exists in the Middle East. It would be interesting to see this subject followed up by a study using Arabic sources researched from the same time period. René Wildangel does attempt to counter Mallmann and Cüppers, but his book, Between the Axis and the Mandate Power,18 published in German, is unavailable in English. This reviewer cannot read German, but from commentary, Wildangel believes Mallmann and Cüpper’s position is overstated. Another book, by Esther Webman and Meir Litvak,19 is primarily about post-Holocaust Arab opinion. This work, which helps the Western reader understand Arab thinking on the Nazis, uses many Arabic sources as it takes a look at the complexity of Arab opinion after the war of the treatment of Jews by Nazis. What makes this book extraordinarily relevant today is not that Arabs collaborated with Nazis; French, Polish, and other peoples did as well. What is different is that today we hear the same hateful and genocidal rants tolerated, not from Europe, but from the Middle East. It is imperative to determine the roots of this criminal speech and intent so that it can be overcome. The public has the tendency to keep their eyes shut tight and not see the uncomfortable even if it is obvious. It is the role of the researcher to pry those eyes open through well-researched material, allowing scholars and the public to see the facts. The authors of Nazi Palestine have done just that with good scholarship and potent writing. *David Sokol, MA, is a writer, psychologist, and visual artist living in Vermont. He wrote and produced the video Mufti and writes about antisemitism. 18. René Wildangel, Between the Axis and the Mandate Power (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2007). 19. Esther Webman and Meir Litvak, From Empathy to Denial: Arab Reponses to the Holocaust (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009). The First Argentinian Jewish Women Sandra McGee Deutsch, Crossing Borders, Claiming a Nation: A History of Argentine Jewish Women, 1880-1955 (Duke University Press, 2010), 368 pp., $84.95 Donna Guy* The publication of Sandra McGee Deutsch’s Crossing Borders, Claiming a Nation marks a major contribution to the history of Jews in Argentina as well as to women’s history. Her nuanced and engaging stories of women from the right, the left, and the center of the Argentine Jewish community and their efforts to distinguish themselves beyond the realm of hearth and home represents the first major monograph on Jewish women in the Southern Hemisphere. It covers women who grew up in the Jewish agricultural communities as well as those who lived in urban areas from 1880 to 1955. From women who told of their daily existence in families to those who portrayed Jewish themes in the theater and in music, to socialists and Zionists, women appear in the records of the Jewish community, even though they often had little power outside the home within the religious community. Equally important, Deutsch has paid careful attention to German, eastern European, and Moroccan Jewish women. Often, prosopography can be weighed down by the biographical unsubstantiated by personal recollections, but Deutsch has relied on a combination of statistics, memoirs, and personal interviews to bring life to the many women discussed. Furthermore, their lives become more than anecdo- 305 306 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:305 tal through the skillful use of the concepts denoted in the book title: the efforts of women to transit communal, geographic, political, and familial boundaries. Together they form part of a transnational diasporic community bounded by gender, religious, and ideological expectations that women challenged as well as celebrated in many ways. Each chapter deals with a different group of women, beginning with those in the Jewish agricultural colonies who were often ignored or expected to remain at home by the Jewish Colonization Association officials. Although the common recollections of these communities are often nostalgic, the Ashkenazi and Sephardic women who went to the interior sometimes had to support the family by moving to Buenos Aires to work, and widows became the only women entitled to plots of land without their husbands to help out. Furthermore, Jewish girls received less education than their male counterparts, partly due to poverty, but also to the emphasis on male education. One solution became boarding schools in more urban areas, with the girls living with relatives, and women became active in founding and supporting libraries. Communist-supported libraries also introduced Jewish women to new ideas. They also supported activities extolling the Argentine state on its public holidays as part of the process of both assimilation and patriotism long before women gained voting rights in 1947. In Buenos Aires, as well as in other urban diasporic cities, poor Jewish women helped support the family through menial tasks such as laundering clothing. Educated women became involved in cultural centers and philanthropic activities. Although Jewish women lived in neighborhoods more segregated than others in immigrant communities, that did not mean they had no opportunities to reach out and engage in activities that transcended their own streets and families. They also received more education, often through religious organizations, than in the countryside, and teaching offered an acceptable occupation for educated women both inside and outside the Jewish community. Once again the presence of strong ideological movements such as anarchism, socialism, and, after 1918, communism, meant that women proved their usefulness ideologically by engaging in strikes, maintaining solidarity with those imprisoned on political charges, and both publishing and teaching these ideologies. The narratives and analysis become the strongest as the research approaches the mid twentieth century due to the possibility of interviewing women who participated in these processes. Furthermore, the coverage of both antifascist and Zionist Jewish women shows that women could cross international borders as well as work closely with groups of other Argentine women, particularly with the Junta de la Victoria in the case of the antifascist women. Rather than tell just the stories of the most famous Jewish women 2011] THE FIRST ARGENTINIAN JEWISH WOMEN 307 Deutsch truly tries to integrate the unknown, the infamous (in the case of Jewish prostitutes), and the more well-known political activists. Thus while we learn more about the socialist Chertkoff sisters, we also learn of Elisa, a seamstress from Romania. We now know much more about the entertainers Cipe Lincofsky and Golda Fleme. What remains untold, however, is the interaction of these women with formal Jewish associations controlled by men. Indeed, the emphasis in this book, other than looking at the Zionists, is on women who generally worked outside the framework of “appropriate” roles for Jewish women in Argentina. Equally important, it is very difficult to tell whether the patriarchal nature of the formal Jewish community or husbands actually impeded women “crossing borders.” For example, there are no studies on divorces among the religious and their impact on Jewish women, nor of community ostracism of women who transgressed boundaries other than commercial sex. Since it would be impossible to quantify the number of women who became notable within the Jewish community over time, it is even more difficult to gauge whether they are principally with the left or the Zionists. In more recent times, estimates of Jews in Argentina who do not practice their faith well outnumber those who do, and given the fact that before the 1960s no Jewish seminaries operated in Argentina, one might surmise that non-practicing Jews also outnumbered those who belonged to the formal Jewish community. Thus the issue of patriarchy and religious control is a particularly important question for the Jewish women of Argentina, as the Jewish community itself solidified its fragmentation between the left and the religious during the Peronist era and thus muddied these waters. Despite these thorny questions, there can be no doubt that few have gone as far as McGee Deutsch to reveal the history of Jewish women in Argentina. In fact, it ranks as the first major publication on women in an immigrant community anywhere in Latin America. And that is quite an achievement. *Donna Guy teaches in the Department of History at Ohio State University. This review was originally published on H-Judaic (June 2011) and is reprinted with permission of the author. . . . From the Conference Floor Madeleine Albright and Joschka Fischer speaking with AJC’s David Harris Neal E. Rosenberg AJC 2011 On April 27-29 of this year, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) presented its Global Forum on global Jewish advocacy at the Grand Hyatt in Washington, D.C. The Journal for the Study of Antisemitism editors Steven K. Baum and Neal E. Rosenberg attended, as did several other groups, such as SPME. Speakers and debates included renowned diplomats and political figures such as Madeline Albright (former U.S. secretary of state), Joschka Fisher (foreign minister and vice chancellor of Germany), Elliot Abrams (U.S. deputy security advisor), and William M. Daley (White House chief of staff). Their analysis of the current political climate concerning global antisemitism was insightful and succinct. The debate between Yossi Klein Halevi of The New Republic and Peter Beinart, senior political writer for the Daily Beast, was exciting. Beinart made an impassioned plea against settlement building in West Bank (Sumeria and Judea), focusing on the offended sensibilities of the Palestinians. Halevi then asked Beinart why he did not have the same passion and sensitivity for Jews living under the yoke of Muslim fundamentalist terrorism in Israel. Along those lines. Halevi asked Beinart why he did not criticize the bomb and missile attacks with the same intensity in his remarks about Palestinian sensitivities concerning settlement building. Halevi 309 310 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:309 addressed the double standard of judging the actions of Jews by one standard and the Palestinians by another. The debate was lively. There were several breakout sessions with lectures. Of particular interest was the forum on “Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century: Confronting a Persistent Menace,” by Andrew Baker, the AJC director of international Jewish affairs. Rabbi Baker’s analysis of the Dutch approach to antisemitism illustrated the complicated nature of the phenomenon in Holland. The audience’s engagement and personal experiences added greatly to the texture of the breakout sessions. AJC excels as an advocacy group that fosters the equitable interests of Jews, Israel, and the world at large. With its specific focus on worldwide antisemitism, AJC’s nuanced and sophisticated offensive is a bulwark against the multifaceted expression of antisemitism in the contemporary world, and lays important methodical groundwork to strengthen the ties between Jews and non-Jews throughout the world. This was illustrated to me in a discussion with Antonyia Parvanova, a member of the European Parliament from Bulgaria. Dr. Parvanova is a member of a faction of the European Parliament identified as the “Friends of Israel.” These members attempt to foster a good relationship between the European Union and Israel. The AJC assists the Friends of Israel with information, personal persuasion, trips to Israel, and trips to conferences such as this AJC Global Forum. AJC is an older group and has begun to seek out Jewish youth. As such, it encourages Jewish youth from all corners of the globe to involve themselves with issues concerning Jews, Israel, and antisemitism. At the end of the Global Forum on Friday, the weekend continued with a youth conference called Access 20/20 Weekend. The AJC believes that the future of global Jewish issues is dependent upon the enthusiasm and participation of today’s youth. It is the young Jews who will be inheriting the legacy of antisemitism—whether they are prepared is AJC’s concern. AIPAC Conference May 22-24, Washington, D.C. Neal E. Rosenberg AIPAC 2011 The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference was held May 22-24 this year at the Convention Center in Washington, coinciding with the visit of Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of the State of Israel, with Barack Obama, president of the United States of America. The atmosphere was charged with excitement and anticipation. On the first day of the conference, President Obama came to the podium. His speech clarified comments he had made concerning whether the 1967 borders of Israel would be the basis of the settlement between the Israelis and Arabs for a comprehensive peace. The president’s speech was courageous in that many of the delegates at the AIPAC conference had strong reservations about the level of commitment that he has to the State of Israel. President Obama reiterated his strong support for the territorial integrity of Israel and military support for the Jewish state. But there was an unspoken issue of concern to the audience at the conference: What is the real inner conviction of the president for the survival of the Jewish state? President Obama’s intent was to convince those assembled at the AIPAC conference that his inner conviction strongly supports the Jewish state. During the speech, he produced all the buzzwords concerning support of the State of Israel and the mutual democratic traditions of both countries. But, for many, the buzzwords were not enough. The question remains concerning the strength of his inner commitment to the Jewish state. President Obama’s speech did not overcome the reservations of many in the audience. These members, even after the speech, questioned that commitment and wondered whether he identifies more with the plight of the Palestinians than the survival of the Jewish people in Israel. The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, addressed the con- 311 312 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:311 ference on Monday evening. He stressed the historical and emotional ties between the Israeli people and the American people, describing in his most succinct point what a democracy is in relation to the Arab revolutions now taking place. Natanyahu’s fear is that the revolutions may herald the arrival of fundamentalist and authoritarian regimes that will not accept the peace process with Israel. He pointed out that a democracy is not just the vote of its people; rather, it is a true democratic government that has many necessary values associated with it, such as freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of associations. Without these values, a democratic vote does not reflect true liberal democracy. Natanyahu strongly stated that, without these associated freedoms, Israel will not have true democratic partners to make peace with its Arab neighbors and the Palestinian people. And, without these associated democratic traditions, any peace accord will always be in jeopardy. Not only did the conference consist of a Who’s Who of policy makers concerning Israel, but also the AIPAC assembly and two-thirds of Congress for the dinner honoring Benjamin Netanyahu. Along with the prime minister, at the dinner were both Harry Reed (D-NV), majority leader of the U.S. Senate, and the Honorable John Boehner (R-OH), speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, who voiced their strong support for the State of Israel. The conference achieved its purpose of bringing together the supporters of the State of Israel in the United States, and making clear the division between President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concerning the elements needed for peace between Israel and its neighbors. The audience’s engagement and personal experiences added greatly to the texture of the breakout sessions. Antisemitica 313 314 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:313 In the 1992 embassy bombing in Buenos Aires, 29 people were killed and 242 were injured. In the bombing at the AMIA Jewish community center in 1994, 85 people were killed and 300 injured. A banner made of the colors of the Israeli flag and Nazi swastika reads, in Spanish, “What a shame Israel” at a march to the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, January 6, 2009. (AP Photo) 2011] 315 ANTISEMITICA Cartoons by Carlos Carlos Latuff, Brazilian cartoonist, b. November 30, 1968 Urging Turkish PM to “cut ties with Israel NOW” Israelis are born to kill. Like Nazis, they are just following orders. A Palestinian as a Holocaust victim The Shunned Toadstool In the past, fungi were often regarded with suspicion and fear. Mysterious and magical qualities were associated with their unusual shape, and it was also well known that many of the species could be toxic and even fatal. The fact that they thrive in dark and wet places added to the misgivings people held about them. These weird botanical wonders were given strange names that were supported by folklore and superstition. Even when scientific and rational explanations emerged in time, certain stories prevailed and still appear in their old garb. Myriads of mushrooms spring up all over the world; they sprout, bloom, burst forth, and wither very quickly; some of them have become well known for their poisonous deadly attributes, yet others—the edible ones— are considered delicacies, fit to be the gold of the gods. Most mushrooms have always been treated with great respect for these reasons, but no fungus has been considered as vile and unholy as the edible Auricularia auricular, or, as it is known by its alternate name, Auricula judae—Latin for Jew’s ear. The Auricula judae grows mainly but not exclusively on dead and dying elders, and its nickname goes back to the Middle Ages. People believed that Judas Iscariot had betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, then grew desolate and morbid because of his deed, discarded the money, and hanged himself on an elder tree. The fungus appeared on the tree as a symbolic manifestation of Judas’ evil deed, a representation that his doomed spirit cannot find rest. The toadstool is edible, velvety soft, and jelly-like, and truly looks like a wrinkled disfigured ear. Its vicious reputation does not prevent some people from picking it and consuming it in a stew, despite that it does not seem to add any desirable flavor. Some who like practical jokes might enjoy the surprise and disgust on the faces of their guests when they serve the soup that seems to have ears floating in it. Hatred and hostility toward Jews was widespread, deep, and illogical. People forgot that Jesus himself had been a Jew, and that Judas, whose exact motives are unknown, had betrayed a friend, and not a member of a different religion or race. Judas’ act is but one of the excuses for the spread of discrimination, prejudice, and intolerance. Folklore sometimes, as in this case, reinforces the strong negative feelings of those who chose to follow the dark paths. The unlucky Auricula judae is regarded as a curse, not just because of its shape, but also due to its repulsive odor that was believed to have some connection with witchcraft. It grows very quickly, and some tales connect its unusual rapid birth and demise with the full moon and the thundering skies. Thunder is usually followed by rain, and thus creates the ideal breeding field for mushrooms, while the full moon exerts a certain additional gravitational pull to which fungi seem to respond by maturing even faster. The elder tree shares some of this toadstool’s despicable reputation, since its flowers and leaves are commonly considered to be foul smelling. The curse fell on the tree, reflecting that some say it was its wood that served as Jesus’ cross. The legend has more far-reaching, dismal insinuations. It was believed that God punished the Jews for Judas’ betrayal by inflicting on them the same putrid smell and some abominable disease. Yet another sinister tale sprang forth, as a result of the previous one, claiming that for the Jews the best medicine to combat those illnesses was the blood of Christian children. Thus it became a common conviction that Jews murdered youngsters, particularly around Passover. The proof—the brownish-reddish flakes that appear on the surface of the baked matzo eaten during the holiday—is a sure sign that blood is used in its making. —From Nadine Grosser Nagarajan’s Pomegranate Seeds (University of New Mexico Press, 2005). 317 The UK’s University and College Union (UCU) decided this weekend to immunize itself against anybody who might claim that antisemitism can come in a form that looks like criticism of Israel. It did this by rejecting and denouncing the EUMC working definition of antisemitism. There was only one Jewish person at UCU willing or to speak against this stance, and it was met with stony silence. I, a Jewish member of this union, am telling you that I feel an antisemitic mood in this union and even in this room. I would feel your refusal to engage with the EUMC definition of antisemitism, if you pass this motion, as a racist act. Many Jews have resigned from this union, citing their experience of antisemitism. Only yesterday a delegate here said: “They are an expansionist people.” It is difficult to think that the people in question are anything other than the Jews. You may disagree with me. You may disagree with all the other Jewish members who have said similar things. You may think we are mistaken. But you have a duty to listen seriously. Instead of being listened to, I am routinely told that anyone who raises the issue of antisemitism is doing so in bad faith. Congress, imagine how it feels when you say that you are experiencing racism, and your union responds: “Stop lying, stop trying to play the antisemitism card.” You, a group of mainly white, non-Jewish trade unionists, do not have the right to tell me, a Jew, what feels like antisemitism and what does not. Macpherson tells us that when somebody says they have been a victim of racism, then institutions should begin by believing them. This motion mandates the union to do the opposite. Until this union takes complaints of antisemitism seriously, the UCU will continue to be labeled as an institutionally antisemitic organization. It’s true that anti-Zionist Jews may perceive things differently. But the overwhelming majority of Jews feel that there is something wrong in this union. They understand that it is legitimate to criticize Israel in a way that is, quoting from the definition, “similar to that leveled to any other country,” but they make a distinction between criticism and the kind of demonization that is considered acceptable in this union. —Ronnie Fraser, UCU Congress, Harrogate, UK, May 29, 2011 Religions are based on scripture, which is mostly poetry. So it only makes sense that religious conflict must be resolved through poetry, and not through politics, negotiation, or war. I propose that all religious conflicts be redefined poetically, so that they can be resolved without bloodshed, winners, or losers. So let’s sharpen our pencils, not our swords; send missives, not missiles; and apply our minds not to pomposity, animosity, ferocity, atrocity, or monstrosity but to metaphor, simile, rhyme, meter, and prosody. —Hugh Mann 319

JOURNALfor the STUDYof ANTISEMITISM

Documentos relacionados

Productos

Apoyo

JOURNALfor the STUDYof ANTISEMITISM

Documentos relacionados

Añadir este documento a la recogida (s)

Añadir a este documento guardado

Sugiéranos cómo mejorar StudyLib