There have been several anti-Semitic attacks in Greece over the past few weeks. These attacks have involved the desecration of the Jewish cemetery in Athens, defacing a Holocaust monument in Corfu, attacks on synagogues and anti-Semitic articles in the Greek media. The latest outrage occurred a few days ago in Ioannina with another desecration of a Jewish cemetery. All these incidents are made more shocking because of the inaction of the authorities and the almost complete silence on the subject on the part of the media.
From the Greek Helsinki Monitor
Most condemnable moreover is the generalized silence of Greek media, intellectuals, and other civil society organizations about the anti-Semitic attacks. Even the organizations funded to monitor racism and anti-Semitism on behalf of the EU appear once more to fights racism selectively. In such climate, it was reported that an annual lecture in the Thessaloniki Jewish Museum in the framework of a history course at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki was canceled because of student reactions while hostile comments were registered at least in an academic list about a forthcoming seminar on historiography of the Greek Jews, planned a long time ago
Articles on the recent attacks here and here (in Greek)
Technorati Tags: greece, antisemitism, jewish, jews, cemetery, holocaust
LiveReal on March 8th, 2007
Loading...
The all-too common anti-semitism present in Greek society is utterly unacceptable and, frankly, quite simply embarassing in its espousal of notions of Jewish conspiracies and control of world media and other such biggoted clichés.
As someone who is both a passionate anti-racist as well as a staunch supporter of the rights of Palestinians and the upholding of International Law (ie.: a return to 1968 borders, palestinian refugees’ right of return, etc.), I believe that anti-semitism is also, in many ways, the greatest threat to the Palestinian cause.
In addition to the sheer wrongness of anti-semitism and every other form of racism, bigotry and prejudice, in and of themselves, and on every level (I hope that I do not even need to any explanations about why that is as I assume that racist ideology is something thoroughly rejected by all reasonable persons, ie. the readers of this blog), such expressions of hate also play right into the hands of the colonialist Israeli state which uses every chance it can get to deflect all legitimate critiques of its actions and policies by simply denouncing all of Israel’s detractors as anti-semites.
Which is why I thought it was important to point out my critique of one of the links provided in your posting, DD. After having read the American Jewish Committee’s (AJC) press release, I believe it is important to point out that most of the examples they cite are not actually instances of anti-semitism and the few examples of actual anti-semitism seem to be mentioned almost as a means of tainting those examples which clearly aren’t (sort of like a guilt by association or a propagandistic attempt at muddying the waters). Instead, this press release appears to engage in precisely the kind of practices which seeks to promote the notion that all criticism of Israel as inherently anti-semitic.
Let me be clear, the desecration of Jewish cemeteries and the vandalizing of synagogues are clearly and unequivocably anti-semitic acts and must be roundly condemned.
The inaction by authorities is utterly unacceptable and in large part due to anti-semitic sentiment (mixed in with the usual greek bureaucratic incompetence).
The media’s silence on these events is inexcusable and also evidence of anti-semitism.
However, let’s have a closer look at what the press release cites as “prominent displays of anti-Semitism in the Greek media”:
- Making comparisons between Israel and the Nazi regime and accusing Israel of genocide;
- Editorial cartoon depictions of Israeli soldiers with swastikas on their uniforms;
- Accusing Israel of having committed a Holocaust.
Although we might disagree with such statements or drawings as being over-simplifications, ahistorical, exaggerated or even just plain incorrect, they are not in fact examples of anti-semitism.
The AJC’s press release then goes on to mention the attacking of Israeli embassies and the burning of Israeli flags by protestors in response to “the Israeli operation in Gaza” immediately after which is also mentioned the vandalizing of synagogues and Jewish cemeteries, seemingly placing them all on equal footing. Again, I contend that there is nothing anti-semitic about attacking the Israeli embassy or burning that state’s flag as an expression of one’s disagreement with Israel’s military operation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and that such acts of protest most certainly cannot and should not be equated with hateful acts such as the vandalization of Jewish cemeteries and synagogues.
So, yes, let’s loudly denounce all instances of anti-semitism and the media’s silence when such acts occur but let us also condemn attempts at silencing legitimate critique or critical debate of Israel’s actions by branding it all as anti-semitic.
Christina
You are right about the demonstrations and the Israeli flag burnings. IN a democracy they are legitimate forms of protest and it is a disgrace that a Syrian was arrested for burning such a flag (luckily he was acquitted).
But on the comparisons AJC uses an internationally accepted definition and says so. It has been put together by the OSCE and the EU. See:
http://fra.europa.eu/fra/mater.....-draft.pdf
Also see an article by the previous expert on the matter at the OSCE: http://fra.europa.eu/fra/index.....mp;lang=EN
You may be interested to know that he was replaced by a leading AJC executive last week appointed by the current OSCE President … Dora Bakoyannis: http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/n.....ontent_id={25504A10-8498-480D-A1A5-6A513A164014}¬oc=1
Hi Panaote,
It is sadly true that the the EUMC has adopted the document you provide a link for in your comment but it is far from being free of controversy in its defining of what constitutes anti-semitism.
Here is an excellent article on the subject which was published in The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm.....teisnotana
I’ve also taken the liberty of copying and pasting it below.
————————————————
When an anti-semite is not an anti-semite
A new ‘working definition’ promoted by Israel lobbyists seeks to confuse anti-semitism with anti-Zionism.
Arthur Neslen
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 April 2007 16.30 BST
What do Einstein, Mahatma Ghandi, Ehud Olmert and myself all have in common? We could each be censured for racism according to the European Union Monitoring Centre’s “working definition of anti-semitism” which was last week adopted by the National Union of Students as official policy.
This definition has lately been sweeping all before it, taking endorsements everywhere from the all-party parliamentary Report on anti-semitism to the US state department’s special envoy for combating anti-semitism. The British government has pledged to re-examine its own definition of anti-semitism if the EUMC’s successor body, the Fundamental Rights Agency, ratifies the new lingua franca.
So it’s actually a bit shocking to discover that the new definition was largely drafted by a pro-Israel advocate who gives talks on how to elide the distinction between anti-Zionism and hatred of Jews. Kenneth Stern is the American Jewish Committee’s expert on anti-semitism and in Defining Anti-Semitism, a paper published by Tel Aviv University’s Stephen Roth Institute, he explained how he developed the working definition “along with other experts” in the second half of 2004.
Significantly, it involved crunching religious and racial hatred of Jews with what he labelled “political” anti-semitism. This latter, he claimed, has been “otherwise known in recent years as anti-Zionism, which treats Israel as the classic Jew”. Political anti-semites could thus include, for example, those who “seek to disqualify Israel from equal membership in the community of nations”, presumably by means of boycott initiatives. Naturally, comparing Israel to apartheid-era South Africa is also, within Kenneth Stern’s framework, “an expression of anti-semitism”.
His organisation, the AJC, boasts that during the consultation period, the EUMC accepted its invitation to convene a consultation over the working definition. Unlike some of the other Jewish contributors to the consultation process, the AJC’s mission statement lists building support for “Israel’s quest for peace and security” and countering “the treatment of Israel at the United Nations” among its most pressing concerns. But Stern seems to be particularly interested in discrediting anti-Zionism. The flyer for a meeting on “anti-semitism and anti-Zionism”, which he is giving next month, says he will be addressing the question: “What are the essential ingredients of strategies to combat anti-Zionism as anti-semitism both here and abroad?”
At the risk of sounding flip, I’d say that persuading policy makers to blur the difference between the two in their working definition might be a good start. The EUMC ended up doing precisely this. “Anti-semitism,” its report began, “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred.” Such a perception could include stereotypical or dehumanising libels about, for example:
The power of Jews as a collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
But it could also include a litany of lobbyist shibboleths, such as:
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination (eg, by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavour); Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation … Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis; Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Jewish peace activists have always balked at this last point, dissociating themselves from war crimes committed in their names. Sadly, Ehud Olmert was not so circumspect when, on July 7, he told the United Jewish Communities that the invasion of Lebanon was “a war fought by all the Jews”.
By the new definition though, it might be an anti-Semitic “double standard” to single him out for criticism when the hateful words of the former Indian leader, Mahatma Ghandi, are still being taught in British schools. In 1938, Ghandi said he believed that “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French”. Thus might he disbar himself from speaking at a British college today.
Einstein, though, would really bomb. After the Deir Yassin massacre that killed more than 250 Palestinian civilians in 1948, he signed a letter to the New York Times describing the Herut Party (aka Likud) as “closely akin in its organisation, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties”. Its then-leader (and Israel’s future prime minister) Menachem Begin, represented “fascist elements” in Israel, and his party had “openly preached the doctrine of the fascist state”. So Einstein, would flunk the EUMC’s “comparing Israeli policy to the Nazis” test.
But even higher forces than Einstein could fall foul of the Stern exam. After all, in Leviticus 25:23, God instructed Moses to tell the Jewish people that “the land is mine; you are but tenants and travellers”. What was this if not denying the Jewish people the right to their self-determination? Haul Him up before the AJC, Kenneth.
The terrible irony of all this is that, on its current policy platform, the British National party might have few problems with the working definition. During the Lebanon war, for example, Lee Barnes, the BNP’s head of legal affairs wrote on the party’s website:
As a Nationalist I can say that I support Israel 100% in their dispute with Hizbullah. In fact, I hope they wipe Hizbullah off the Lebanese map and bomb them until they leave large greasy craters in the cities where their Islamic extremist cantons of terror once stood.
So Lee Barnes would pass the EUMC test. By comparison, Jewish anti-Zionists (such as myself) who have been physically attacked by leading members of the BNP and subjected to anti-semitic campaigns could face censure or worse. How have we come to this?
Certainly, some Palestinians talk about “Yehuds” in a derogatory fashion, cite libellous texts without forethought and make foolish statements about the Holocaust. But that’s what happens to language when you step on someone’s throat. Black victims of segregation in the Deep South talked about “honkys” and Malcolm X’s Nation of Islam preached that an evil scientist called Yaqub created white people in a test tube experiment that went wrong. This did not make them racists, because racism usually describes a concrete set of power relations, more than it does an abstract collection of prejudices.
Of course, power relations can themselves be murky. When lunatic fringes of the pro-Palestinian movement try to forge alliances with neo-Nazis by blurring the distinction between Jews and Zionists, they should be opposed. But doing this is made much more difficult when Zionist ideologues and Brussels bureaucrats, for different reasons, blur exactly the same distinctions, only more effectively. That’s why no-one should be intimidated from challenging them over their atrocious new guidelines.
To paraphrase the old joke about feminists: How many pro-Israel lobbyists does it take to change the working definition of a lightbulb? One, and it’s not anti-semitic to say so.
Does anyone think it’s bad that the Palestinians use human shields so as to increase the number killed by the Israelis. I realize the Israelis are bad, but do the Palestinians come out clean on this completely? There was a letter to the editor in the Athens news today from a Greek who lived in Palestine and talks about what tecnique Hamas uses to inflate their value at the expense of the Palestinians and the Israelis by using human shields, including children and non-volunteers. Apparently, when the Israelis notify the building where the target will be destroyed, Hamas was purposefully sending innocent people there.
Of course, this won’t be shown on any Greek or USA TV station, and will be dismissed as propaganda.
But, we have to question ourselves on why we are so eager to show injured Palestinians but not focus on Hamas’ cause of these deaths and injuries.
Anti-Semitism should be deplored whenever and wherever it rears it’s ugly head.
DD,
I am quite surprised that you haven’t dealt with the War in Gaza at all. Your blog is quite rightly among the Top 50 Human Rights blogs but unlike the others, you haven’t posted one article about the biggest humanitarian disaster of the year (a war in which more than 400 children died).
At the height of the conflict, I think you mentioned that you will open a discussion about the Gaza conflict, but you didn’t get round to it.
Is there a particular reason why you avoided it?
If Jews have the right to self-determination in the form of the State of Israel then why are European nations and the dominant ethnic groups that live in them not entitled to self-determination and piece of land to call homeland?
It seems contradictory your stances because it seems that you promote the idea that in order to be considered a democracy that believes in human rights a society should just let anybody in who wants to come in, sneek in, or claim asylum (whether they are truly political refugees of not)..of course this applies only to European based nations not Japan, Israel, China, India, Korea, etc..
I think human rights of illegal and legal migrants should be respected but that does not include the right to just come in because they want to and in whatever numbers..in no time Greece went from being majority Greek to being in a few decades away (according to projections) to having ethnic Greeks become a minority population in their homeland.
Lets say hypothetically that 20,000,000 Chinese Catholics were political refugees from China because of the forced abortion there and they all wanted to come to Italy. That would make Italians a veritable minority in no time flat in Italy.
I do feel that there are abuses of migrants but being anti-mass-immigration is not the same thing as being against the immigrants themselves. I do not like to see anybody abused or mistreated however at a certain point enough is enough. Greece according to the national intelligence agency hosts about 2,500,000 illegal and legal aliens.
So what gives Panayote. Why are Israelis or Jews entitled or in need of an almost exclusive land dominated by Jews ( I forget the name of the Israeli politicians right now, but there was one who said he hopes that Israel will remain at least 80% Jewish –using the ethnic definition of Jewishness), but if Europeans repeat the same thing, that is they want to keep their countries native majority ethnic group dominant (which of course would mean tossing out all illegal migrants and even some legal ones) they are neo-nazis?
@ Michael Scowcroft
My apologies. I did say that I would do an “Open Thread” on Gaza but I really haven’t had time. I am working full time at the moment and it’s proving quite tough to do that as well as my other responsibilities and commitments. It’s not so much about posting articles but having time to moderate comments on the more “inflammatory” issues.
I hope people understand.
DD,
Please take the following comments in the positive spirit they are intended. I am by no means trying to tell you how to run your blog but i feel that blog contributors can offer a constructive feedback for the blogs in which they participate, so i would like to offer my opinion:
With all due respect DD, you have given the reason of “no time to moderate” but you did have the time to post 14 separate threads since the Gaza conflict began.
You moderated comments in all 14 of the threads and participated in many of them and you still had enough spare time to tweak the blog’s features and layout – but you didn’t have the time to moderate a thread on the biggest human rights outrage of the year? Your blog is the only Top 50 human rights blog that i visited which didn’t mention the tragic humanitarian disaster in Gaza.
I know it must be a thankless and difficult task to moderate comments and I appreciate that this takes alot of your time but I think that the Gaza conflict (where over 400 children and 100 women died, in just 3 weeks) deserved at least a mention on a human rights blog.
Point taken. In the spirit it was meant.
I don’t comment very much on Human Rights issues outside Greece but I understand that people sometimes would like me to. And I did say I would do an Open Thread on it.
There’s always room for improvement. Thank you.
I ma sorry but this new layout has the weakness that one can write a text forget to add the name and then lose it, as I just did.
So I wont have time to repeat all that I wrote but please read your text that criticized the AJC for a position that is not theirs but the EU’s and the oSCE’s (and not just the EUMC’s). And of course what 50+ states and many more NGOs have agreed upon does not become irrelevant because of one critical article in one newspaper.
Of course not, Panayote. The newspaper article was simply to illustrate that such disagreement exists and the grounds on which it is made. After that, it is up to each of us to decide on whether or not we believe this “working definition of anti-semitism” is problematic or correct.
Panayote Dimitras,
…but i think that the new layout is a vast improvement over the old one.
I’ve lost many posts that way, it’s so frustrating
DD,
Thanks for considering my comments.
I will look for a plugin that will fix this problem as soon as I get a chance. Thank you for pointing it out, Panayote and Michael Scowcroft.
there is no question that this is a vastly improved layout etc
bravo DD!
Of course anti-Semitism is wrong, and vandalism of Synagogues and Jewish cemetries is awful.
I’m Greek, Catholic Christian who lived in Gaza until I was evacuated back to Greece by the Greek embassy in Israel.
I tried the feeling of being a member of a very small minority in Gaza, were the Catholic church which is the only one in the whole city was vandalized many times by terrorists and Christians were murdered when the relations went critical with the USA.
I suppose it’s very wrong to put our small Jewish population into all of this.
Judaism is a religion while Zionism is a political ideology and that is the critical point which most of the times is forgotten.
Israel should surely by critisized for the last Gaza war, as I’m a witness of the violent war, the tank stood just beside my house but because I’m a European I was helped with a UN guarded car and from my house in Gaza escaped into the safe borders of Israel and then to Greece from Tel-Aviv.
It’s hard to really know who’s right and who’s wrong, no one is right and no one is wrong.
Well, after all the war should not have anything to do with the Greek Jews.
Instead of vandalizing of Synagogues we should restore them, Jews have a very long history and rich heritage in Greece and we should preserve this heritage and not try to erase it from our history, because Greek Jews are Greek just like us, and it’s not necessary to be Orthodox Christian to be welcomed in the Greek community, as I’m Catholic, but proud to be Greek.
Greece lacks the freedom of religion and must open its mind to the outside world, and the most important thing, to allow Jews to practice their prayers and religious traditions freely in the public just as Christians do, and help them restore and built their Synagogues, because as you need to pray in a church when in Saudi Arabia, the Greek Jew will need to pray in a Synagogue in Greece.
What I said is very simple, but I mean every word in it.
I hope who reads this would agree with me.