|
Combatting old/new antisemitism
Speech at Yad Vashem, April 11, 2002
The international
conference ”The Legacy of Holocaust Survivors” at Yad Vashem,
Jerusalem, April 8-11, 2002
By PER AHLMARK
Some people have a feeling of
emerging anti-Jewish threats before the rest of us realize what is
in the offing. We know who they are, those women and men sensitive
and knowledgable enough to recognize the first signs. Why do so many
Survivors of the Shoah sense before they see?
From their past they know how so called
”innocent” insinuations about Jews quickly grow into accusations.
And accusations – if we do not combat them - could later on become
discrimination and legislation and separation. Then the road to
violence and murder and annihilation is open.
That is the terrible process which
thousands of Survivors always remind us of. A major legacy of the
Survivors: they try to make us avoid the fate that destroys not only
a people but civilization and humanity itself.
A great mentor of mine, and of all of us
here, and of millions more, will be at Yad Vashem today. He
survived Auschwitz and Buchenwald. When I first met Elie Wiesel in
the 70´s he told me: the deniers of the Holocaust try to kill the
Jews a second time. Not only that, he underlined. Rehabilitate the
murderers and they can murder again.
In a speech Elie Wiesel once said: ”Let
us remember the heroes of Warsaw, the martyrs of Treblinka, the
children of Auschwitz. They fought alone, they suffered alone, they
lived alone, but they did not die alone for something in all of us
died with them”.
What died with them? My answer is: what
died was the creed that there are limits of human cruelty. Now we
know: THERE ARE NO LIMITS. The Holocaust proved that evil ideology,
built on hateful fantasies, combined with total power, and met with
appeasement could bring our societies to atrocitities never seen
before.
Survivors have often sounded the alarm
because they know what is at stake. By doing so they have
strengthened democracy in a way no others could. We listen to the
Survivors in order to survive.
They have also taught us two other
truths. First, antisemitism always starts with Jews, it never
stops with Jews. Jew-hatred, if not contained, almost always
develops into assaults on other groups and minorities and finally
undermines democratic institutions and the rule of law.
So the struggle against antisemitism is
a task for Jews and non-Jews together. Antisemitism is a
prejudice among non-Jews – therefore it is a duty for us non-Jews to
resist it. However, Jews are the first victims of this non-Jewish
disease, and they usually know much more about it than non-Jews.
Consequently, it is an obligation for Jews to combat antisemitism in
order to defend themselves and our societies.
Thus, Jews and non-Jews have to be
standing here shoulder to shoulder.
And, secondly, always take the
antisemites seriously! Do believe that they believe in what they are
saying! The most catastrophic mistake of the 20th century was that
tens of millions of people did not think that Hitler actually meant
what he wrote and said.
Our assumption therefore must be that
the Jew-haters of the 21st century are not pretending. The
non-Jewish world must now realize that current anti-Jewish charters
by individuals, organizations and countries are documents you should
study and be prepared to encounter.
It might not be just rhetoric – or
rather: rhetoric could, when circumstances permit it, explode and
become guidelines for actions.
And now let us together tell and teach
people around the world that one astonishing thing with antisemitism
is its flexibility. Minister Melchior did so in a brilliant
and blistering speech in Geneva three weeks ago, when addressing
the UN Human Rights Commission. You know of course that the UN has
elected to this commission - the purpose of which is to strengthen
human rights – several nice, liberal, peace- and freedom-loving
countries like Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Syria, and of course
Cuba and China (and some other tyrannies) ! At the same time they
have kicked out the United States of America, the most important
democracy in the world.
Rabbi Melchior in his speech in Geneva
underlined the adaptability of antisemitism. Of course it
cannot change its goal: to attack the Jews. But it can change its
face, its strategy, its rationalization and part of its vocabulary.
Antisemites of different centuries have
usually aimed at destroying the then centre of Jewish existence.
Once Jewish religion was the target. When Judaism did not surrender
Jews were expelled or killed. In the 19th century, when race became
the word of the day, the Jews were attacked for being an evil race –
that propaganda peaked with the Nazis.
And today, when the Jewish state
has become a centre of identity and a source of pride and protection
for most Jews, Zionism is being slandered as a racist ideology.
Naturally, I do not regard criticism of
Israel as antisemitism. It is as legitimate to oppose certain
Israeli policies and decisions as it is to scrutinize any other
nation.
But anti-Zionism today has become very
similar to antisemitism. Anti-Zionists accept the right of other
peoples to have national feelings and a state, and to defend that
state. But they reject the right of the Jewish people to have
its national consciousness expressed in the State of Israel, and
make that state secure. Thus, they are not judging Israel on the
basis of the same values as when judging other countries. Such
discrimination of Jews is called antisemitism.
Also, they are often exploiting
antisemitic stereotypes when condemning the Jewish state.
Anti-Israeli incitement with anti-Jewish connotations is repeatedly
expressed in for example the press, mosques, radio-TV and textbooks
in the Arab world. Islamists very creatively borrow images from the
Middle East conflict and give them a new twist or spin when
illustrating why Jews can never be trusted. Jews seek world or
regional power. The Jews conspire. Jews deceive other people and are
cruel when it comes to both ends and means. Jews are strong
in the art of bluffing and weak when it comes to character
and truthfulness. And, as usual, the ”Protocols of the Elders of
Zion” has proved what Jewish strategy is about.
Holocaust denial has become routine, so
have parallells between Israel and the Third Reich. We have ”to
confront the new Nazi plague which is nesting in Israel”, wrote a
Syrian paper. Palestinian TV portrays Israeli soldiers as rapists
and cold-blooded murderers. The Mufti of Jerusalem stated that ”it´s
not my fault that Hitler hated the Jews, they hate them just about
everywhere”. Another Friday sermon on Palestinian TV told Muslims
”to have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where you are…. kill them….
and those Americans who are like them”, etc.
We must take such outbursts seriously!
When new generations of Arabs and Muslims are contaminated with
this hatred, it also makes peace and trust and cooperation between
Israel and its neighbours increasingly difficult.
Anti-Zionists, explicitly or implicitly,
question the entire existence of Israel, which means that millions
of Israeli Jews have to be fought and probably killed. And
deliberately suggesting massmurder of Jews - openly or in vague
formulas - has always been seen as the most extreme form of
antisemitism. Those anti-Zionists, who advocate the destruction of
the Jewish state, should be put in a similar category.
Sometimes anti-Zionists claim that they
are not against Jews but ”only” against the Jewish state. Suppose
that someone said: ”I am only against the existence of Great Britain
but I am not anti-British!” Or if somebody told me that ”I love
Swedes, but Sweden should be abolished”. None would take such
statements seriously. It is hard to love or respect a people and
hate their state.
And never forget Durban! Several
of the draft statements preparing the Durban meeting, which should
have been an anti-racist conference, were in fact part of an
ideological pogrom against Israel. They suggested that Jews were not
primarily victims of the Holocaust but perpetrators of another
holocaust, against the Palestinians. Antisemitism did not mean
hostility against Jews but ”Zionist practices against semitism”. It
sounds ridiculous, but that crap was part of the program from the
other side.
In spite of the shameless demagoguery of
these drafts, most democracies did not react with any energy at all,
until very late last summer. I salute the systematic efforts to
inform and warn EU nations and other free countries through a
diplomatic campaign passionately carried out by Minister Melchior
and his collegues. They could not prevent Durban from becoming an
antisemitic festival, but they totally changed the outcome of the
final, official Durban declaration.
How come that the democracies – except
Israel and the United States and maybe Canada – did not immediately
realize what was going on? There is a paradox here. Today there are
more democracies in the world than ever before. An increasing number
of UN members have governments, which got their power through free
elections and free speech.
This is not 1975: no Communist empire –
instead a democratic Europe from west to east. Latin America has
experienced surprising victories for freedom; so have parts of
Africa and East Asia. And the United States is today the only
superpower. These facts suggest that it would be a fairly easy match
for the free countries today to resist Arab and Muslim verbal
anti-Jewish aggression in the international arena.
Yet, the Durban humiliations did
occur. And our adversaries will strike again. In several agencies of
the United Nations, Israel-bashing has become a political ritual.
That has been monitored in detail by for example the UN Watch, an
independent institution in Geneva, and in outstanding lectures by
Law Professor Irwin Cotler, also member of the Canadian Parliament.
They have proved that the demonization of the only democracy in the
Middle East is a central part of the new anti-Jewishness. Israel is
branded by the dictatorships as a systematic violater of all sorts
of human rights. When this country is described ”as the enemy of
all good and the repository of all that is evil”, Cotler says in his
analysis, it becomes a ”teaching of contempt” within the UN.
He regards this a parallell to the
medieval indictment of the Jew as the ”poisoner of the wells”.
Portraying Israel as a leper state makes it the ”poisoner of the
international wells”. And Professor Robert Wistrich´s summary is
that ”the accumulation of anti-Israeli resolutions (at the UN) is
liable to cause the complete delegitimization of the Jewish state”.
The constant singling out of one nation
as the enemy of humanity is in fact a campaign directed against the
Jewish people. We have seen that many anti-Jewish outbursts in a
number of countries have been rooted in condemnations of Israel
exploiting an antisemitic terminology. Attacks on synagogues have
been triggered by a defaming language about the conflict in the
Middle East.
Words lead to actions. And propaganda
lines by Muslim radicals have been supported and repeated by
extremists both on the Right and the Left in the Western world. And
yet the media in the West, especially in Europe, are reluctant to
link violence and terrorist acts to their ideological inspirations,
including antisemitic obsession. Do always bear in mind how the
journalist Daniel Pearl was murdered. His last reported words were:
”I am a Jew, my mother is a Jew”. Then they cut his throat.
Such acts of murderous barbarism should
not make us forget the vulgarization of language in quarters assumed
to be civilized. It very often happened in the 20th century that
people who regarded themselves ”intellectuals” became fellow
travellers of fascism or communism without being members of
political parties based on those ideologies. Now in the 21st
century - in the chattering classes often linked to massmedia,
politics, government administration or universities – we quite often
encounter people who condemn Israel with an excistement, that
reminds us of anti-democratic movements. I am not referring to
majorities in the Western world but to often significant and
influential minorities.
The French Ambassador to Britain, at a
dinner party in London recently, described Israel as ”that shitty
little country”. He has not been removed by his government, and he
has many allies in the European elites. Ambassador Bernard has
helped us to realize how widespread this new anti-Jewishness is.
”That shitty little country”! The columnist Andrew Sullivan was
right when saying that Israel has become ”the object of hate that
dare not speak its name”. We here at Yad Vashem dare speak its name:
antisemitism.
Not only dare we, we have an
obligation to do so. Never, never be silent about the daily
attacks in France now against Jews and synagogues. It is a shame for
all of Europe that many French Jews today cannot send their children
to school without beeing deeply worried about their security. I look
forward to the words on this from Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, whom
many of us admire so much.
Also a fairly large number of Christians
in several countries are still influenced by the legacy of
anti-Jewish theology. Resist and reveal them when they, for
religious reasons, express their hostility against Israel!
And when the Radical Left in Britain
reacts to antisemitic statements in their country´s mosques by
not reacting, by hear-no-evil, see-no-evil, we have to tell the
ugly truth. Them and other anti-Zionists we refute by quoting
Martin Luther King Jr: ”When people criticize Zionism, they mean
Jews – make no mistake about it”.
And finally we should not hesitate to
describe the fanatic and determined danger to democracy that comes
with totalitarian Muslim fundamentalism. Professor Yehuda Bauer has
called it ”the greatest antisemitic threat of the start of the 21st
century”. His conclusion is that it does not resemble ”old” Arab
antisemitism; it is closer to Communism and Nazism as it longs for a
global rule and the destruction of the old value system, the
civilization of ”the Jews and infidels” as they call it. This
fundamentalist Muslim ideology, Bauer says, ”uses the unmistakable
language of genocide, of annihilation”.
So, we have a number of very good
reasons to support Rabbi Melchior´s idea of creating The
International Commission to Combat Antisemitism (ICCA). That body
should learn from the Survivors of the Shoah to make the necessary
wake up calls. I hope this organization will be clear in
defining the increasing threat of the old/new antisemitism. To
wind up: compared to most previous anti-Jewish outbreaks this one is
often less directed against individual Jews. It attacks primarily
the collective Jew, the State of Israel. And then such attacks start
a chain reaction of assaults on individual Jews and Jewish
institutions.
We certainly could say that in the
past the most dangerous antisemites were those who wanted to make
the world Judenrein, free of Jews. Today the most dangerous
antisemites might be those who want to make the world
Judenstaatrein, free of a Jewish state.
XXX
PER AHLMARK - writer and author, former
Leader of the Swedish Liberal Party and Deputy Prime Minister of
Sweden, founder of The Swedish Committee Against Antisemitism,
columnist in Dagens Nyheter (Stockholm), has published a number of
books on politics, ideology, international conflicts, and poetry.
E-mail: per.ahlmark@chello.se |