ByDaniel Greenfield June 04, 2023 @ Sultan Knish Blog
In
2019, President Trump signed an executive order on combating
antisemitism. The order used the International Holocaust Remembrance
Alliance definition of antisemitism which includes “denying the Jewish
people their right to self-determination”, “using the symbols and images
associated with classic antisemitism to characterize Israel” and
applying double standards to the Jewish State.
Biden’s
hyped U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, released on the
eve of the Shavuot holiday, backtracks from this gold standard by
claiming that, “there are several definitions of antisemitism, which
serve as valuable tools to raise awareness and increase understanding of
antisemitism”, including the IHRA, but noting that the Biden
administration “welcomes and appreciates the Nexus Document and notes
other such efforts.”
The Nexus definition was authored by anti-Israel activists like Tema Smith,
who had claimed that, “Hamas — and the Palestinians as a whole — have
desperately real and legitimate grievances against Israel.”
“Jews *have* to be ok with Palestinians *explaining* why some turn to terrorism,” she argued.
The Nexus advisory committee included the likes of Hussein Ibish, who had described Hezbollah as a “disciplined and responsible liberation force” whose terrorists had “conducted themselves in an exemplary manner”, along with J Street leader Jeremy Ben Ami, Lila Corwin-Berman, who had defended BDS, and Chaim Seidler-Feller, whose hatred was so intense he had kicked and scratched a Jewish woman over her support for the Jewish State.
The
Nexus definition of antisemitism was created to protect anti-Israel
activists from charges of antisemitism. That definition, which the Biden
administration chose to promote, claims that BDS, or “boycotting goods
made in the West Bank and/or Israel is not antisemitic”, and argues
that, “opposition to Zionism and/or Israel does not necessarily reflect
specific anti-Jewish animus nor purposefully lead to antisemitic
behaviors and conditions” and defends double standards by contending
that “paying disproportionate attention to Israel and treating Israel
differently than other countries is not prima facie proof of
antisemitism.”
While the U.S. National Strategy to Counter
Antisemitism claims that the IHRA definition is the most prominent, that
is not the same as an endorsement and the strategy carefully avoids any
mention of BDS and beyond its opening has relatively few mentions of
Israel. Despite being hyped by Jewish Democrats, it is undeniably a step
back from the Trump executive order.
Even with the seemingly
strong language cited by administration supporters, such as “when Israel
is singled out because of anti-Jewish hatred, that is antisemitism”,
the ‘conditional’ in that sentence is clearly a lawyerly use of the
Nexus, not the IHRA definition, defining hatred of Israel only as
antisemitism when it can be proven to have originated because of
antisemitism.
Incorporating the Nexus defense of BDS and hatred of Israel is a symptom of a larger problem.
The
U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism insists that the only
kind of antisemitism is white supremacism or “right-wing” hatred. Its
only references to leftist, black, or Muslim antisemitism are cautiously
indirect because those forms of antisemitism cannot be condemned.
After
multiple Muslim and black nationalist terrorist attacks on synagogues,
Muslims and black nationalists are only mentioned as allies and fellow
victims of white supremacist bigotry.
The strategy states that,
“antisemitic conspiracy theories are often foundational to white
supremacy as well as numerous other violent extremist ideologies. For
example, in January 2022, an armed hostage-taker motivated by other
violent notions terrorized the members of a synagogue in Colleyville,
Texas.” The “other violent notions” were Islamic ones.
Malik
Faisal Akram, a Muslim Pakistani supporter of ‘Lady Al Qaeda’, broke
into the synagogue and held the people inside hostage until he was shot
and killed by the FBI. Al Qaeda later called Akram a “martyr” and
declared that “there Is no greater enemy of Islam and inhabitants of
Islam than the Jews”.
When a national antisemitism strategy can’t
even name and describe an Al Qaeda attack on a synagogue because it
would undermine its premise that Muslims can only be victims and that
the only threat worth discussing is white supremacy then it’s the
problem, not the solution.
If the Biden administration won’t even
allow a mention of the most violent kind of Islamic antisemitism by a
supporter of a terror group we are at war with, it’s collaborating with
it.
Literally.
The U.S. National Strategy to Counter
Antisemitism.rollout press release boasts that “the Council on
American-Islamic Relations will launch a tour to educate religious
communities about steps they can take to protect their houses of worship
from hate incidents.”
That’s the same CAIR which has defended
Islamic terrorism against Jews, defended Muslim terrorists who plotted
attacks on synagogues, whose official, Zahra Billoo, had urged,
“we need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues”, and which was
named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial
involving the funding of Hamas.
When Ahmed Ferhani was arrested for a plot to attack a synagogue, CAIR held a rally to support him. It still has materials on its site defending the antisemitic terrorist.
After
promoting an antisemite’s definition of antisemitism, the Biden
administration is promoting synagogue bombers to tour and educate houses
of worship about security measures.
There are good things about
the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. It does address
campus antisemitism, acknowledging that, “on college campuses, Jewish
students, educators, and administrators have been derided, ostracized,
and sometimes discriminated against because of their actual or perceived
views on Israel.” But it fails to note that the antisemitism is coming
from Islamists and leftists, and its focus on “swastikas” and
“Kristallnacht” implies the familiar white supremacist narrative even
when, in one case, the Nazi reference was actually being employed by a
Muslim woman.
The strategy does mention that beyond learning
about the Holocaust, students should also learn the “histories of
antisemitism experienced by Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews—who trace their
ancestry to Spain, the Middle East, and North Africa—and their stories
of exclusion, persecution, and expulsion.” And that is a good thing,
American Jewish historiography has been dominated for too long by
Ashkenazi or European Jewish history, but how will it be possible to
teach about Muslim antisemitism without even mentioning Islam?
Even
though Orthodox Jews have been the victims of the majority of violent
physical assaults, there is only one brief mention of this phenomenon,
“some traditionally observant Jews, especially traditional Orthodox
Jews, are victimized while walking down the street.”
Inconveniently, the attackers tend to be black or other minorities, and so cannot be mentioned.
The
black nationalist massacre at a Kosher grocery store in Jersey City and
a machete attack at a synagogue in 2019 go completely unmentioned, even
though they were among the deadliest recent attacks on Jews along with
the white supremacist terrorist attack in Poway, California.
A
better name for the new approach would be the U.S. National Strategy to
Counter Those Kinds of Antisemitism We Are Willing to Discuss while
leaving out the majority of violent antisemitic threats and avoiding the
question of Israel as much as it possibly can.
The U.S. National
Strategy to Counter Antisemitism is crippled by the woke dependency on
intersectionality, on the need to view antisemitism as interrelated with
other prejudices and bigotries, and to position Jews as common victims
and allies against white supremacy, and in the process it ignores what
antisemitism actually is and what is unique about it. And that approach
has actually ended up enabling leftist antisemitism over the 20th
century.
Anitsemitism is not simply a racial or religious hatred.
The attempts to narrowly define it run aground on its persistence
across thousands of years, through different cultures, religions, and
nations. Antisemitism morphs, adopting different shapes and forms,
emerging in radically different political movements across both the Left
and the Right, to form a common denominator. The Biden strategy seeks
to compartmentalize antisemitism within a postmodern rainbow coalition
of minority victims faced with the bigotry of a majority, even as the
document is forced to awkwardly grapple with the fact that much of the
hatred is coming from minorities.
At best that’s denial and at worst that’s complicity.
The
U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism isn’t a strategy to
fight antisemitism, but to cover up the reality of it as a politically
inconvenient reality with a politically convenient myth. And no one
should have expected anything else from a radical administration with no
shortage of antisemitic nominees, which continues to undermine Israel
while supporting hate groups like CAIR. Whether it’s Nexus or the U.S.
National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, putting the enablers of
antisemitism in charge of defining and fighting antisemitism can never
end well.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment