2003/24EB/EN/anti-Semitism-report-rev3
2003/15MB/EN/anti-Semitism-report-rev3
Im Rampenlicht:
Die Studie zum Antisemitismus in der EU
(EU-ANTISEMITISMUSSTUDIE)
This study has been carried out on behalf
of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). The
opinions expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the position of
the EUMC.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in the European Union
First Semester 2002
Synthesis Report
on behalf of the
EUMC
European Monitoring Centre
on Racism and Xenophobia
by
Werner Bergmann
and
Juliane Wetzel
Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung
Center for Research on Antisemitism
Technische Universität Berlin
Vienna, March 2003
Preface
Although we know – and opinion polls show - that
anti-Semitism is permanently present in Europe in a more or less hidden way,
many of us have hoped that manifest forms of anti-Semitism will not see any
revival in Europe again. At present, Jews are rather well integrated
economically, socially and culturally in the Member States of the European
Union (EU). But the attacks in New York and Washington on September 11 and
the conflict in the Middle East have contributed to an atmosphere in Europe,
which gives latent anti-Semitism and hate and incitement a new strength and
power of seduction. Even rumours that Israel was responsible for 11
September 2001, for the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon,
and that Jews bring about a situation in their interest in order to put the
blame on somebody else, found a receptive audience in some places.
Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories are spreading over the Internet, which
provides a cheap vehicle for the distribution of hate.
Immediately after 11 September our primary concern was
increased Islamophobia in the European Union. Right away the European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia implemented a monitoring process
in the Member States. The country-by-country results and a synthesis report
have already been published. But early in 2002 there was additional concern
about open anti-Semitic incidents in several Member States. The European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia found it necessary to carry out a
more detailed investigation of the prevalence and kinds of anti-Semitism and
to study, how it affects Jewish people living in Europe. It is the first
study of this kind. It provides a flashlight on anti-Semitism in each of the
15 Member States.
The EUMC, through its RAXEN Information Network of
National Focal Points in the EU Member States, received reports on
anti-Semitism in the 15 Member States. The Center for Research on
Anti-Semitism (CRA), Berlin, supplemented the country reports and brought
them into a European perspective.
The report shows clearly an increase of anti-Semitic
activities since the escalation of the Middle East conflict in 2000 with a
peak in early spring 2002. But it reveals also positive developments. By
2003 the legal basis to fight against any discrimination on ethnic or
religious grounds will be implemented in each of the EU Member States; all
the governments and leading statesmen condemned anti-Semitic events and
attitudes; many leaders of religious communities, political parties and NGOs
are currently cooperating in the fight against anti-Semitism.
On the other hand, the EUMC is aware that more than only
short-term measures have to be done. There is a need to implement activities
on a continuous, long-term basis. For that end the report offers examples
and recommendations to various groups of society on how to proceed and
succeed in the struggle against the shadows of the European past.
Bob Purkiss Beate Winkler
Chair of the EUMC Director of the EUMC
Executive Summary
Alerted early in 2002 by worrying news on anti-Semitic
incidents in some Member States the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and
Xenophobia (EUMC) decided to commission a report on "Manifestations of
Anti-Semitism in the EU" covering the first half of 2002. The report is
based partly on short-term information provided to the authors by National
Focal Points (NFPs) of the EUMC, giving special emphasis to the period
between May 15 and June 15. The NFPs are the contact points to national
networks in the Member States reporting regularly to the EUMC within its
European Information Network RAXEN.
In their reports the National Focal Points were asked to
cover the following issues:
- Physical acts of violence towards Jews, their communities,
organisations or their
property;
- Verbal aggression/hate speech and other, subtler forms of
discrimination towards Jews;
- Research studies reporting anti-Semitic violence or opinion polls on
changed attitudes towards Jews;
- Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and aggression by
NGOs;
- Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders including
initiatives to reduce polarization and counteract negative national
trends.
The situation in the EU Member States
The reports and our own investigations show that in
spring 2002 many EU Member States experienced a wave of anti-Semitic
incidents. They were tied to public discussion on the dividing line between
legitimate criticism of Israeli government policy and anti-Semitic
argumentation. This wave of anti-Semitism started with the
"Al-Aqsa-Intifada" in October 2000 and was fuelled by the conflict in the
Middle East and the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on
11September 2001, which triggered off a fierce debate on the causes of
radical Islamic terrorism.
During the first half of 2002 the rise of anti-Semitism
reached a climax in the period between the end of March and mid-May, running
parallel to the escalation of the Middle East conflict, whereas factors
which usually determine the frequency of anti-Semitic incidents in the
respective countries, such as the strength and the degree of mobilisation
extremist far-right parties and groups can generate, have not played the
decisive role.
In the months following the monitoring period the
sometimes heated discussions about the Middle East conflict in the public
sphere and the media died down and the number of incidents decreased. In
countries like Denmark, Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, The
Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and Finland there are only a few or no
incidents known for the period after July 2002. In some Member States like
Belgium, France and Sweden anti-Semitic incidents, including violent attacks
and threatening phone calls, increased again in September and October, but
not that much as in the period monitored. Anti-Semitic leaflets, hate mail
and phone calls were also reported for Germany and the United Kingdom.
This leads to the conclusion that the increase in
anti-Semitic attacks was in this case set off by the events in the Middle
East, a foreign event that however exerted a varying impact on the
individual Member States. An exact quantitative comparison is not possible
because of:
- the difficult and varied classification of anti-Semitic incidents;
- the difficulty of differentiating between criticism of Israeli
governmental policy and anti-Semitism; and
- the differences in systematically collating information about
anti-Semitic incidents in the EU Member States.
While there is no common pattern of incidents for all
countries, some similarities occur. But it must be underlined that some
countries (such as Germany, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom)
have a very effective data and monitoring system, and this is not the case
elsewhere.
There are a number of EU Member States, namely Ireland,
Luxembourg, Portugal and Finland, where the Jewish communities are rather
small and anti-Semitic incidents in general seldom occur. This was true
during the monitoring period. At most, threatening letters were sent to the
Israeli consulate or to local Jews. Portugal and Finland each also suffered
one attack on a synagogue.
On the other hand, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and
the UK witnessed rather serious anti-Semitic incidents (see the respective
country reports) such as numerous physical attacks and insults directed
against Jews and the vandalism of Jewish institutions (synagogues, shops,
cemeteries). Fewer anti-Semitic attacks were reported from Denmark and
Sweden.
Other countries also experienced incidents of
anti-Semitism. Greece suffered desecrations of cemeteries and memorials by
the far-right. Anti-Semitic statements and sentiments often linked to
Israeli government policy were found in the mass media and were also
expressed by some politicians and opinion leaders. Spain, where the
traditionally strong presence of neo-Nazi groups was evident suffered a
series of attacks by people with a radical Islamist background. Italy showed
a certain similarity with Germany; although no physical attacks were
evident, there were threatening telephone calls, insulting letters, slogans
and graffiti. From Austria no physical attacks were reported; and few verbal
threats and insults. Anti-Semitic stereotypes in relation to Israel were to
be found essentially in right-wing newspapers and amongst far-right groups.
In the public domain in Spain, France, Italy and Sweden,
sections of the political left and Arab-Muslim groups unified to stage
pro-Palestinian demonstrations. While the right to demonstrate is of course
a civil right, and these demonstrations are not intrinsically anti-Semitic,
at some of these anti-Semitic slogans could be heard and placards seen; and
some demonstrations resulted in attacks upon Jews or Jewish institutions. In
the Netherlands pro-Palestine demonstrators of Moroccan origin used
anti-Semitic symbols and slogans. In Finland however, pro-Palestinian
demonstrations passed without any anti-Semitic incidents. In Germany, and
less so in Austria, public political discourse was dominated by a debate on
the link between Israeli policy in the Middle East conflict and
anti-Semitism, a debate in which the cultural and political elite were
involved. In Germany and the United Kingdom the critical reporting of the
media was also a topic for controversy. In other countries such as Denmark,
Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Finland there was no such heated public
discussion on the theme of criticism of Israel/anti-Semitism (see country
reports).
Perpetrators and kinds of anti-Semitic activities
For many anti-Semitic incidents, especially for violent
and other punishable offences, it is typical that the perpetrators attempt
to remain anonymous. Thus, in many cases the perpetrators could not be
identified, so an assignment to a political or ideological camp must remain
open. Nevertheless, from the perpetrators identified or at least
identifiable with some certainty, it can be concluded that the anti-Semitic
incidents in the monitoring period were committed above all either by
right-wing extremists or radical Islamists or young Muslims mostly of Arab
descent, who are often themselves potential victims of exclusion and racism;
but also that anti-Semitic statements came from pro-Palestinian groups (see
country report Italy: public discourse) as well as from politicians (see
country reports Germany, Greece, Finland, Austria) and citizens from the
political mainstream (see anti-Semitic letters, e-mails and phone calls in
Germany as well as in other countries). The following forms of anti-Semitic
activities have been experienced:
- Desecration of synagogues, cemeteries, swastika graffiti, threatening
and insulting mail as well as the denial of the Holocaust as a theme,
particularly on the Internet. These are the forms of action to be
primarily assigned to the far-right.
- Physical attacks on Jews and the desecration and destruction of
synagogues were acts often committed by young Muslim perpetrators in the
monitoring period. Many of these attacks occurred either during or after
pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which were also used by radical Islamists
for hurling verbal abuse. In addition, radical Islamist circles were
responsible for placing anti-Semitic propaganda on the Internet and in
Arab-language media.
- Anti-Semitism on the streets also appears to be expressed by young
people without any specific anti-Semitic prejudices, so that "many
incidents are committed just for fun". Other cases where young people were
the perpetrators could be classified as "thrill hate crimes", a well-known
type of xenophobic attack.
- In the extreme left-wing scene anti-Semitic remarks were to be found
mainly in the context of pro-Palestinian and anti-globalisation rallies
and in newspaper articles using anti-Semitic stereotypes in their
criticism of Israel. Often this generated a combination of anti-Zionist
and anti-American views that formed an important element in the emergence
of an anti-Semitic mood in Europe. Israel, seen as a capitalistic,
imperialistic power, the "Zionist lobby", and the United States are
depicted as the evildoers in the Middle East conflict as well as exerting
negative influence on global affairs. The convergence of these motives
served both critics of colonialism and globalisation from the extreme left
and the traditional anti-Semitic right-wing extremism as well as parts of
the radical Islamists in some European countries.
- More difficult to record and to evaluate in its scale than the
"street-level violence" against Jews is "salon anti-Semitism" as it is
manifested "in the media, university common rooms, and at dinner parties
of the chattering classes".
- In the heated public debate on Israeli politics and the boundary
between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism, individuals who are not
politically active and do not belong to one of the ideological camps
mentioned above become motivated to voice their latent anti-Semitic
attitudes (mostly in the form of telephone calls and insulting letters).
Opinion polls prove that in some European countries a large percentage of
the population harbours anti-Semitic attitudes and views, but that these
usually remain latent.
Media
Some commentators discuss the possible influence of the
mass media on an escalation of anti-Semitic incidents. The question at issue
is whether this escalation was merely an agenda setting effect of the daily
media coverage of the violence in the Middle East or whether the reporting
itself had an anti-Semitic bias.
- The Jewish communities regarded the one-sidedness, the aggressive tone
of the reporting on Israeli policy in the Middle East conflict and
references to old Christian anti-Jewish sentiments as problematic.
- The country reports (Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden) list
some cases of anti-Semitic arguments or stereotypes (cartoons) in the
quality press, but only very few systematic media analyses are available.
Anti-Semitic reporting can mainly be found in the far-right spectrum of
the European press.
- One study of the German quality press (see country report on Germany)
concludes that the reporting concentrated greatly on the violent events
and the conflicts and was not free of anti-Semitic clichés; at the same
time this negative view also applies to the description of the Palestinian
actors. The report on Austria identified anti-Semitic allusions in the far
right press.
- Observers point to an "increasingly blatant anti-Semitic Arab and
Muslim media", including audiotapes and sermons, in which the call is not
only made to join the struggle against Israel but also against Jews across
the world. Although leading Muslim organisations express their opposition
to this propaganda, observers assume that calling for the use of violence
may influence readers and listeners.
Internet
The Internet reflects a development observable since
2000, namely the networking of the extreme right via links with sections of
radical Islamists, some sites from anti-globalisation campaigners and from
the anti-American far left. Since the end of the 1990s there has been a
dramatic increase in the number of homepages present on the web from
far-right groups and parties, which quite often also have ties to radical
Islamic fundamentalists. In addition, the Internet provides easy access to
music from the far right, which glorifies violence and is often
anti-Semitic. Sales and distribution centres for such music are mainly
located in Scandinavia. Up till now, state organs have paid too little
attention to the Arab language publications which spread anti-Semitic
propaganda in European countries, whether through newspapers, audiotapes or
the Internet.
Prevalent anti-Semitic prejudices
As almost all reports emphasise, Jews in the EU Member
States are well integrated socially, economically and culturally, and as
such the typical motives of xenophobia (fear of competition for jobs,
housing and social welfare, linguistic and cultural otherness of migrants,
external appearance) are hardly of consequence. Instead, the Jews are
basically imagined to be a nationally and internationally influential group,
allegedly controlling politics and the economy. Hence, anti-Semitism has
other motives and a different structure from racism.
- The dominating assumption of contemporary anti-Semitism is still that
of a Jewish world conspiracy, i.e. the assumption that Jews are in control
of what happens in the world, whether it be through financial or media
power, whether it be the concealed political influence mainly exerted on
the USA, but also on European countries. This basic assumption is applied
to explain very different phenomena. The Holocaust denial assumes a
central role in European right-wing extremism. It is purported that the
Holocaust has never taken place and that the Jewish side, exploiting their
victim status, use the "Auschwitz lie" to apply moral pressure on mainly
European governments (restitution, support for Israeli policies), but also
to influence US policy towards Israel. Furthermore, the thesis of the
"Auschwitz lie" naturally also negates the assertion that the foundation
of the state of Israel was historically necessary in order to create a
secure homeland for the survivors of the Holocaust and Jews in general.
Precisely at this point, extreme right-wing propaganda becomes employable
ideologically for radical Islamist groups in their struggle against
Israel, for the victim status and Israel’s right to exist are challenged
by the "Auschwitz lie". Here a learning process has taken place in which
"revisionist" thought has been adopted by some people in the Arab world.
The influence of these ideas is supported by a number of Western Holocaust
deniers like Jürgen Graf, Gerd Honsik, Wolfgang Fröhlich who fled
prosecution in their homelands and found asylum in Arab countries, and
last but not least by Roger Garaudy who was hailed as a hero throughout
the Middle East when he faced prosecution by the French government for
inciting racial hatred. Via Arab-language media (newspapers, satellite TV
and internet) in Europe these notions reach a small section of the Arab
speaking population in European countries.
- Following September 11, 2001, some hold that Islamist terrorism is a
natural consequence of the unsolved Middle East conflict, for which Israel
alone is held responsible. They ascribe to Jews a major influence over the
USA’s allegedly biased pro-Israel policies. This is where anti-American
and anti-Semitic attitudes could converge and conspiracy theories over
"Jewish world domination" might flare up again.
- The assumption of close ties between the US and Israel gives rise to a
further motive for an anti-Semitic attitude. Amongst the political left,
anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism are very closely tied together. Due to
its occupation policy, sections of the peace movement, opponents of
globalisation as well as some Third World countries view Israel as
aggressive, imperialistic and colonialist. Taken on its own terms this is
naturally not to be viewed as anti-Semitic; and yet there are exaggerated
formulations which witness a turn from criticism into anti-Semitism, for
example when Israel and the Jews are reproached for replicating the most
horrific crimes of the National Socialists like the Holocaust. In the form
of anti-Semitism it could be said that the tradition of demonising Jews in
the past is now being transferred to the state of Israel. In this way
traditional anti-Semitism is translated into a new form, less deprived of
legitimacy, whose employment today in Europe could become part of the
political mainstream.
- Israeli policies toward the Palestinians provide a reason to denounce
Jews generally as perpetrators, thereby questioning their moral status as
victims that they had assumed as a consequence of the Holocaust. The
connection between anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment lies in this
opportunity for a perpetrator-victim role reversal. In particular there is
an attempt by the right-wing to compare Israeli policies with the crimes
perpetrated against Jews throughout history in order to minimize or even
deny the guilt and responsibility of their own nations.
- The fact that the Middle East conflict is taking place in the Holy
Land of the Christians has led in a number of countries to a
revitalisation of anti-Judaist motives by church leaders, and confessional
and some liberal newspapers.
Recommendations
The upsurge of anti-Semitic criminal offences and verbal
assaults against Jewish citizens and institutions, but also against Muslims,
indicates that joint action has to be initiated. This action should not be
restricted to one area of society, but has to deal with a multitude of
combined activities. Actions on the political level should be backed by
sound data and information about the phenomena in question. The civil
society has to be mobilized to establish dialogues, the press, TV and the
Internet has to be addressed to report about ethnic and cultural groups in a
responsible way. Also for large-scale sporting events, preventive measures
fighting racist attacks have to be implemented.
We recommend that the EUMC requests state authorities to
acknowledge at the highest level the extraordinary dangers posed by
anti-Semitic violence in the European context.
Legal
- The EUMC should propose to the Member States to adopt the proposed
framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia (COM 2001/664) as
soon as possible and call on the Council of Ministers to ensure that it is
amended to be as effective as possible to deal with reported incidents of
anti-Semitism.
- The EUMC should propose to the European Commission and to the Member
States that they consider a decision for police cooperation according to
Article 34 of the Treaty of European Union, which shall bind all Member
States to collect and disseminate data on anti-Semitic offences. This
decision should also involve EUROPOL and EUROJUST.
- To achieve effective regulation of the Internet concerning racist
propaganda, it is essential to extend the jurisdiction of European courts
to include detailed provisions on the responsibility of Internet service
providers.
Registering anti-Semitic incidents
- State institutions must assume responsibility for monitoring
anti-Semitism in the individual EU Member States. These institutions
should work in accordance with well-defined categories enabling them to
recognise an anti-Semitic element within any politically motivated
criminal offences they register, and to then incorporate them into their
statistics.
- In some Member States racist attacks are not identified separately in
crime statistics while others have at their disposal state-sponsored
instruments which monitor and pursue anti-Semitic incidents. We recommend
joint strategies for action to be developed, whereby those countries
possessing years of experience in this regard should pass this on to the
other Member States.
- In those countries in which racist and anti-Semitic incidents are
already registered by the security authorities, a swifter processing and
publication of the results must be ensured and not first presented – as in
current practice – in the middle of the following year.
- There is a need to distinguish clearly in reporting between acts of
violence, threatening behaviour, and offensive speech, and to make
transparent government norms and procedures for registering and acting
upon crimes and offences motivated by anti-Semitism. Only in this way can
a genuinely comparative basis for incidents be attained for European
countries.
Education and sport
- We recommend that the governments of the EU Member States still absent
should undertake initiatives to become members of the Task Force for
International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and
Research, whose purpose is to mobilise the support of political and social
leaders to foster Holocaust education, remembrance and research.
- We recommend that NGOs engage in initiatives of intercultural and
inter-religious exchange and inter-religious dialogue, and cooperate in
educational information campaigns against racism and anti-Semitism.
- National ministries of education should organise round tables and
seminars on mutual respect and tolerance; all teachers in the EU should be
required to learn about different religions and faiths, cultures and
traditions; history books used in schools around Europe should be examined
for prejudice, or one-sidedness.
- In the area of European football a whole series of initiatives have
been started in the last few years, which combat racism and anti-Semitism
in the stadiums. We recommend that these activities be encouraged and
extended.
Research
- We recommend that research studies should be carried out on
anti-Semitic incidents in specific fields – e.g. sport, entertainment,
public services - and placed in an overall European context in order to
establish a comparative perspective on their occurrence.
- Across all Member States there should be implemented a coordinated
programme of victim studies to overcome the problem of underreporting with
regard to incidents of anti-Semitism.
- To date there has been no well-founded media analysis on how the
European press exploits and perpetuates anti-Semitic stereotypes. We
recommend the implementation of research studies to fill this gap.
Internet
- State authorities, academics and research institutions engaged with
racism and anti-Semitism should establish joint committees at national and
international levels to monitor anti-Semitism on the Internet. Through
mutual exchange these committees should establish a basis for an improved
recording and combating of racist and anti-Semitic developments on the
Internet.
- Recent developments have shown that partly impeded or completely
obstructed access to some homepages at least hinders the possibility of
placing racist propaganda on the Internet. Thus private and state
organisations should exert continuing pressure on large Internet providers
to remove racist and anti-Semitic content from the net.
- The enormous potential of the Internet for educational purposes has
not yet been recognised and utilised. We recommend that projects are
developed to utilise the Internet far more in order to combat anti-Semitic
and racist content with serious counter-information.
Contents
Executive
Summary *
1.
Introduction *
2. Analysis
*
Forms of anti-Semitic
prejudice *
Perpetrators and kinds of
anti-Semitic activities *
The situation in the EU Member
States *
The mass media *
Internet as an international
action base *
3.
Recommendations *
Registering anti-Semitic
incidents *
Education *
Media *
Internet *
Sport *
Other initiatives by NGOs *
Further Research *
Concluding remarks *
4. Country
Reports *
Belgium *
Germany *
Ireland *
Greece *
Spain *
France *
Italy *
Luxembourg *
The Netherlands *
Austria *
Portugal *
Finland *
Sweden *
United Kingdom *
Annex:
Reporting institutions and data sources *
1. Introduction
Alerted during early 2002 by news on anti-Semitic
incidents in some Member States and also by information given to the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) by the European
Jewish Congress, the EUMC asked its RAXEN network of 15 National Focal
Points (NFPs) to report on anti-Semitism and to monitor the anti-Semitic
aggression, violence and attitudes in the Member States with a special focus
on a one-month period (from 15th May – 15th June 2002). The EUMC also asked
for examples of good practices implemented to prevent and reduce
anti-Semitism.
The National Focal Points were asked to cover the
following issues:
1. Physical acts of violence towards Jews, their
communities, organisations or their property (cemeteries, synagogues,
religious symbols etc) and also any measures seen as retaliation to other
vulnerable groups, or ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities, or new
types of victims:
Have any physical attacks (harassment, verbal abuse,
violent acts, etc.) against Jews (or other people related to them) been
reported (in the media, by Jewish organisations, by human
rights/anti-discrimination NGOs, by the police etc.)? Please use the
following categories as headlines: Arson; throwing objects and/or tear gas;
physical aggression; theft and burglary; vandalism and disparagement;
threatening intrusion; physical threat.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech and other, subtler forms
of discrimination towards Jews:
Have there been any verbal attacks against Jews in the
media, in the public discourse, in politics? Are there any cases of
incitement to hatred? Are there court cases to be reported? What about hate
speech on the Internet? Please use the following categories as headlines:
direct verbal threat; threats by telephone; insults; graffiti and
anti-Semitic inscriptions; publicly distributed leaflets.
3. Research Studies reporting anti-Semitic violence or
Opinion Polls on changed attitudes towards Jews:
Are there any new or recent reports done on anti-Semitic
aggression or attitudes?
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression:
Can you report of any good practice that has been
successful in avoiding the increase of prejudice and violence towards Jewish
people and other groups?
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
including initiatives to reduce polarization and counteract negative
national trends:
How has the government reacted to increased anti-Semitic
violence? What have been the reactions of the politicians and other opinion
leaders? Are there any institutionalized proposals and implementations to be
observed?
Political Background
The reports of the National Focal Points and our own
investigations show that in early 2002 several EU Member States experienced
an increased number of anti-Semitic incidents. The wave of anti-Semitism
reached a climax in the period between end of March and mid-May. But further
examination shows that the increase of anti-Semitism had already started
with the "Al-Aqsa-Intifada" in October 2000 and was fuelled by the conflict
in the Middle East and the attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon on 11 September 2001, which triggered off a fierce debate on the
causes for radical Islamic terrorism.
Into the summer of 2000 negotiations for obtaining a
peaceful settlement of the Middle East conflict seemed to be taking a
promising course. The failure of Camp David II and the "second Intifada"
(al-Aqsa Intifada) beginning in late September 2000 marked however a
turning-point. Reports on anti-Semitism from the year 2000 show a clear
increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the final months of the year.
Besides the continuing media interest in the violent
conflict in the Middle East, in 2001 the World Conference on Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Tolerance, which was held in Durban,
South Africa between 31 August and 7 September encouraged anti-Semitism in
an unexpected way. The Member States of the United Nations adopted a
Declaration and Action Programme, which included demands for the recognition
of a Palestinian state and the right of security for Israel, as well as the
demand for the end of violence in the Middle East that would allow Israel
and the Palestinians to continue the peace process. But at the same
conference vehement anti-Semitic outbreaks took place, in particular at some
meetings held between NGOs, which were directed against representatives of
Jewish groups. "These attacks were fuelled by the heated debates at the
meeting concerning the Israeli government’s practices in West Bank and Gaza
Strip."
A few days later the attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon triggered off a fierce debate on the causes of radical
Islamic terrorism, seen by many to lie primarily in the occupation policy
pursued by the Israeli government and the pro-Sharon stance taken by the US.
For the Stephen Roth Institute on Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv, the
events of September 11 also enhanced the wave of anti-Semitic manifestations
and violence.
In our opinion one cannot deny that there exists a close
link between the increase of anti-Semitism and the escalation of the Middle
East conflict, whereas factors which usually determine the frequency of
anti-Semitic incidents in the respective countries, such as the strength and
the degree of mobilisation extremist far-right parties and groups can
generate, have not played the decisive role in the reporting period.
Defining anti-Semitism
Many of the National Focal Points mention that in their
countries the dividing line between anti-Semitism and criticism of Israeli
government was a controversial issue. The various political groups often
have different opinions on the threshold where justified criticism ends and
anti-Semitic argumentation begins.. In such a delicate situation it is
advisable to study the results of social research and to look for
appropriate definitions of anti-Semitism accepted by the research community.
This also assures a sound level of impartiality. After a detailed review of
existing literature we recommend the definition of anti-Semitism given by
the well-known Holocaust researcher Helen Fein:
Anti-Semitism is "a persisting latent structure of
hostile beliefs towards Jews as a collective manifested in individuals as
attitudes, and in culture as myth, ideology, folklore and imagery, and in
actions – social or legal discrimination, political mobilisation against the
Jews, and collective or state violence – which results in and/or is designed
to distance, displace, or destroy Jews as Jews."
To specify the basic content of these hostile beliefs we
refer to a summary given by Dietz Bering:
Jews are not only partially but totally bad by nature,
that is, their bad traits are incorrigible. Because of this bad nature
- Jews have to be seen not as individuals but as a collective.
- Jews remain essentially alien in the surrounding societies.
- Jews bring disaster on their "host societies" or on the whole world,
they are doing it secretly, therefore the anti-Semites feel obliged to
unmask the conspiratorial, bad Jewish character.
With the help of the above definition the distinction
between anti-Semitism and criticism of Israeli government policy can be made
in an easier way. From there allusions to or comparisons with Israel’s
actions with the behaviour of the Nazi regime have to be viewed as
anti-Semitic. Those who identify Israel and Nazi-Germany or see Israeli
behaviour as the cause of anti-Semitism use these arguments for their own
ideological interests. Also to be evaluated as a form of anti-Semitism are
anti-Semitic stereotypes when applied to Israeli policy: for example: the
accusation that there is a secret, world-encompassing Zionist conspiracy,
the isolation of Israel as a state that is fundamentally negatively distinct
from all others, which therefore has no right to exist, and negative
historical recourses to ancient Jewish history, which is to point to an
immutable negative Jewish character. All cases in which the Jews are made
collectively responsible for the policy of the Israeli government represent
a form of anti-Semitism. That means, the moment when criticism on Israel
turns into criticism of Jews in general or Jews living in other countries
has at least an anti-Semitic connotation.
This report analyses the current manifestations of
anti-Semitism as far as it is possible so close to the time period under
observation. It does not try to chart its history or analyse its historical
roots in the countries concerned.
2. Analysis
According to some observers, a new wave of anti-Semitism
is sweeping across Europe; many are even speaking of the worst anti-Semitic
wave since 1945. The latter claim is historically inaccurate. Above all
directly after the war, in 1946, and in the course of the Stalinist "purges"
in the early 1950s there were far more violent anti-Semitic excesses,
persecution and discrimination. Antony Lerman, former Executive Director of
the Institute for Jewish Policy Research in London, has correctly stressed,
"that it is wrong to think that increases in incidents must mean an overall
worsening of the anti-Semitic climate". Indeed, since 1945 there have been
repeated waves of anti-Semitic incidents in Europe (such as the graffiti
wave of 1959/60, waves between 1990 and 1992 as well as waves tied to the
periodic flare-ups in the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1967, 1973 and, above
all, 1982), whereby concrete causes could not be given for these outbreaks
in every case, nor had they resulted in a long-term increase in
anti-Semitism. If, apart from incidents, further indicators are selected,
such as anti-Jewish attitudes, the electoral success of far-right extremist
parties espousing anti-Semitism, the membership numbers of right-wing
extremist organisations, social and legal discrimination of Jews etc., the
picture becomes far more differentiated – one that does not indicate a
general increase in anti-Semitism and, furthermore, turns out to be
different across the EU Member States. If we speak of a wave of
anti-Semitism, we primarily mean incidents for which, on the basis of
contagion effects, such a wave-like and cyclical course is typical.
The fact that a rise in anti-Semitic activities is
clearly observable in most of the EU Member States since the beginning of
the so-called al-Aqsa Intifada, which increased in frequency and the
intensity of their violence parallel to the escalation in the Middle East
conflict in April/May 2002, points to a connection between events in the
Middle East with criticism of Israel’s politics on the one hand and
mobilisation of anti-Semitism on the other. According to an Anti-Defamation
League survey, almost two-thirds of Europeans (62%) believe "that the recent
outbreak of violence against Jews in Europe is a result of anti-Israel
sentiment and not traditional anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish feelings." The
international dimension of the problem was clearly evident as Shimon Peres,
Israel’s Foreign Minister, told EU colleagues in Valencia in April 2002 that
he saw a link between the growing anti-Semitism in Europe and the Union’s
tilt towards the Palestinians. He added: "The issue is very sensitive in
Israel (...). We ask for memory." The Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Piqué
rejected this criticism: "Please don’t confuse anti-Semitism with legitimate
criticism of policies of the current Israeli government." Peres’ critical
remark and the reply given by the European Foreign Ministers indicates that
the core issue in this public conflict was the political question as to when
does anti-Israeli criticism assume anti-Semitic characteristics and whether
reproaches of anti-Semitism are being used as part of an attempt to silence
criticism of Israeli policies. All NFP Reports point to this problem, one
that was also discussed publicly in all countries and was an essential point
of dispute in discussions; namely how to draw a clear distinction between
anti-Semitism and criticism of Israeli government’s policies towards
the Palestinians – even if it is extremely sharp.
While it is certainly correct to view anti-Semitism as
part of racism, at the same time it possesses very specific traits. As
almost all of the reports emphasise, Jews in the European Union are well
integrated socially, economically and culturally. Thus, the typical motives
of xenophobia are hardly of consequence for the Jews (fear of competition
for jobs, linguistic and cultural differences of migrants, external
appearance). Instead, Jews are imagined to be a national and international
influential group who allegedly exert a bad influence on or even steer
politics, the economy and the media, which is a way of expressing the old
anti-Semitic prejudice of hidden Jewish power. Furthermore, from within the
culture of the Christian West, traditional historical anti-Judaist and
anti-Semitic prejudices are again and again liable to be reactivated. On the
level of accusations levelled against Jews, traditional motives prevail (see
below). Perception of the Jews as victims of National Socialism is very
strong, making them a preferred target for all
"revisionist/deniers/negationists" and right-wing extremists. Anti-Semitic
offenders make use of National Socialist symbols; but also the German
language itself is used in non-German speaking countries (expressions such
as "Juden raus!") so as to refer affirmatively to the National Socialist
persecution of the Jews.
A further aspect that needs to be noted is that the local
Jewish population is closely associated with the state of Israel and its
politics. It can be said that the native Jews have been made "hostages" of
Israeli politics. Here anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist motives
are mixed together. What is certainly quite new is the particular connection
between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism made in the Arab and Muslim world, so
that anti-Semitism, due to its connection with a concrete political
conflict, varies greatly with its escalation and de-escalation. That
anti-Semitic offenders in some cases are drawn from Muslim minorities in
Europe – whether they be radical Islamist groups or young males of North
African descent – is certainly a new development for most Member States, one
that offers reason for concern for European governments and also the great
majority of its citizens. As members of the Arab-Muslim minorities in Europe
are themselves target of racist and Islamophobic attitudes, there arises the
precarious situation of a conflict that is primarily motivated by foreign
affairs but played out on the domestic front, a conflict in which the
members of one minority discriminate against another minority group.
Forms of anti-Semitic prejudice
Let us first of all look at the anti-Semitic prejudices
and the groups expressing them. The range of motives stretches from racist
to conspiratorial-oriented and religious prejudices; but anti-Zionist
notions, often coupled with anti-American patterns, were also activated.
Anti-Zionism here is to be seen as a form of anti-Semitism, because Zionism
is described by the extreme right, the extreme left and also by parts of
Arab-Muslim circles as the evil of the world and therefore can be used
easily as a wanted scapegoat. This implies the fight against the existence
of Israel.
1) The dominating motive of contemporary anti-Semitism is
still that of a Jewish world conspiracy, i.e. the assumption that Jews are
in control of what happens in the world, whether it be through financial or
media power, whether it be the concealed political influence mainly exerted
on the USA, but also on European countries. This basic assumption is applied
to explain very different phenomena. Here the Holocaust denial assumes a
central role in European right-wing extremism. It is purported that the
Holocaust has never taken place and that the Jewish side, exploiting their
victim status, use the "Auschwitz lie" to apply moral pressure on mainly
European governments (restitution, support for Israeli policies), but also
to influence US policy towards Israel. Furthermore, the thesis of the
"Auschwitz lie" naturally also negates the assertion that the foundation of
the state of Israel was historically necessary in order to create a secure
homeland for the survivors of the Holocaust and Jews in general.
Precisely at this point, extreme right-wing propaganda
becomes employable ideologically for radical Islamist groups in their
struggle against Israel, for the victim status and Israel’s right to exist
are challenged by the "Auschwitz lie". Here a learning process has taken
place in which "revisionist" thought, that was propagated very early and
very prominently by French intellectuals (lastly by Roger Garaudy), was
adopted by some people in the Arab world. The influence of these ideas is
supported by a number of Western Holocaust deniers like Jürgen Graf, Gerd
Honsik, Wolfgang Fröhlich, who fled persecution in their homelands and found
asylum in Arab countries, and last but not least by Roger Garaudy who was
hailed as a hero throughout the Middle East when he faced persecution by the
French government for inciting racial hatred. Via Arab-language media
(newspapers and satellite TV) in Europe these notions reach in turn a small
section of the Muslim population in European countries.
2) Reception of another European source has also
influenced their conception of the world, namely the infamous anti-Semitic
fake the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", which describes how a
group of Jews apparently hold the thread of world politics in their hands.
With help of this conspiracy theory explanations are found for why the
politics of the United States and most of the European countries display a
pro-Israeli bias in the Middle East conflict. A current example of this
conspiratorial thought is offered by the attacks of 11 September 2001, which
in some Arab newspapers (e.g. in Jordan, Egypt and Syria, but also in the
London and Saudi-Arabian editions of Al-Hayat) is presented as an
action initiated by the Israeli secret service or even the Israeli
Government itself, who were seeking to prevent the establishment of closer
ties between the US and the Arab world so as to gain a free hand for their
aggressive plans against the Palestinians. This rumour has also spread
through Europe, where it found great resonance above all in Greece.
3) Following 11 September 2001, some hold that Islamist
terrorism is a natural consequence of the unresolved Middle East conflict,
for which Israel alone is held responsible. They ascribe to Jews a major
influence over America’s allegedly biased pro-Israel policies. This is where
anti-American and anti-Semitic attitudes converge and conspiracy theories
over "Jewish world domination" flare up again.
4) The supposed close ties between the US and Israel give
rise to a further motive for an anti-Semitic attitude, one that is also to
be found amongst the far left. Due to its occupation policy, sections of the
peace movement, opponents of globalisation as well as some Third World
countries – as the World Conference on Racism in Durban 2001 had shown –
view Israel as aggressive, imperialistic and colonialist. Taken on its own
terms this is naturally not to be viewed as anti-Semitic; and yet there are
exaggerated formulations which witness a turn from criticism into
anti-Semitism, for example when Israel and the Jews are reproached for
replicating the most horrific crimes of the National Socialists – apartheid,
ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, genocide. In the form of
anti-Zionism it could be said that the historical demonising of the Jews is
transferred to the state of Israel (striving for world power, the
vindictiveness and cruelty of "an eye for an eye", the greed of capitalism
and colonialism). In this way traditional anti-Semitism is translated into a
new form, less deprived of legitimacy, whose employment today in Europe
could extend more and more into the political mainstream. Thus, the issue at
stake in judging statements critical of Israel is whether a double standard
is being set, i.e. Israel is evaluated differently from other states,
whether false historical parallels are drawn (comparison with the National
Socialists), and whether anti-Semitic myths and stereotypes are used to
characterise Israeli politics.
5) The United States of America is also faced with sharp
attacks from sections of the peace movement, opponents of globalisation and
some Third World countries as well as from sections of the extreme right as
a world power categorised as imperialistic and as the protector of Israel.
For example, especially in German speaking countries various political
extremists use the word "East coast" ("Ostküste") as synonymous to a
supposed total Jewish influence on the United States and their policy.
Sympathisers to these extremists immediately understand the meaning of this
word without having to get any background information. Therefore they may
use it without being afraid of any state persecution according to
anti-discrimination laws. This makes clear how anti-Americanism and
anti-Semitism are sometimes very closely tied together.
6) While the historical victim status of Jews continues
to be acknowledged, for many Europeans it no longer transfers to support of
Israel. Israeli policies toward the Palestinians provide a reason to
denounce Jews as perpetrators, thereby qualifying their moral status as
victims that they had assumed as a consequence of the Holocaust. The
connection between anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment lies in this
opportunity for a perpetrator-victim role reversal.
7) The fact that the Middle East conflict is taking place
in the Holy Land of the Christians has lead in various countries to a
revitalisation of anti-Judaist motives by church leaders and confessional as
well as some liberal newspapers. This takes the form of current events (the
conflict over the Church of Nativity, children and youths as the victims of
military action) being brought into connection with events in the New
Testament, which historically have clear anti-Jewish connotations (Massacre
of the Innocents, crucifixion of Christ). Such phenomena are particularly
virulent in Italy, but are also present in Protestant countries such as
Denmark or the United Kingdom.
Perpetrators and kinds of
anti-Semitic activities
For many anti-Semitic incidents, above all naturally for
the violent and other punishable offences, it is typical that the
perpetrators attempt to remain anonymous. Thus, in many cases the
perpetrators could not be identified, so an assignment to a political or
ideological camp must remain open. Nevertheless, looking at the perpetrators
identified or at least identifiable with some certainty, it can be said that
the anti-Semitic incidents in the monitoring period were committed above all
by right-wing extremists and radical Islamists or young Muslims; but also
that anti-Semitic statements came from the pro-Palestinian left as well as
politicians and citizens from the political mainstream.
Specific forms of action can be assigned to each of these
sections.
- Desecration of synagogues, cemeteries, swastika graffiti, threatening
and insulting mail as well as the denial of the Holocaust as a theme
networking various groupings, particularly in the Internet – these are the
forms of action to be primarily assigned to the far-right spectrum.
- Physical attacks on Jews and the desecration and destruction of
synagogues were acts mainly committed by young Muslim perpetrators mostly
of an Arab descent in the monitoring period. Many of these attacks
occurred during or after pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which were also
used by radical Islamists for hurling verbal abuse. In addition, Islamic
circles were responsible for placing anti-Semitic propaganda in the
Internet and in Arab-language media.
- Anti-Semitism on the streets also appears to be expressed by young
culprits without any specific anti-Semitic prejudices, so that "many
incidents are committed just for the fun of it". In the view of the
sociologist Paul Iganski, in many cases – at least in the UK – represent a
type of "thrill hate crimes", "likely to be committed by a group of young
offenders, outside their neighbourhood", a type of action we are familiar
with in racist attacks in other European countries and which Iganski views
as "part of the repertoire of routine incivilities and antisocial
behaviour prevalent in the street, shopping malls, cinemas, (...) and
other public space".
- In the left-wing scene anti-Semitic remarks were to be found mainly in
the context of pro-Palestinian and anti-globalisation rallies and
commentaries critical of Israel in the respective media during the
monitoring period.
- More difficult to record and to evaluate than the "street-level
violence" against Jews is the elite or salon anti-Semitism as it is
manifested "in the media, university common rooms, and at dinner parties
of the chattering classes". The development in some EU countries suggests
that today it appears legitimate, sometimes even en vogue to take an
anti-Israeli stance. While such a standpoint is legitimate politically, in
many cases a boundary is transgressed in the direction of anti-Semitic
prejudices, for example when a politician in Germany used the concept "war
of extermination" to characterise the actions of the Israeli army, thus
equating it with the war of extermination undertaken by the German army
against the Soviet Union and European Jewry. In this way anti-Semitic
modes of thought can increasingly creep into public and private discourses
and are seldom picked out and criticised by society, politicians and the
press.
- During a wave of anti-Semitism like the one we could observe in April
and May 2002, in which a heated public debate took place on Israeli
politics and the boundary between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism,
persons become motivated to voice their latent anti-Semitic attitudes
(mostly in the form of telephone calls and insulting letters) who are not
politically active and do not belong to one of the ideological camps
sketched above. Opinion polls prove that in some European countries a
large percentage of the population harbours anti-Semitic attitudes and
views, but that these usually remain latent.
The situation in the EU Member
States
The difficulty in classifying anti-Semitic incidents
makes it impossible to provide a quantitative comparison of the anti-Semitic
manifestations in the EU Member States. The difficulty is further compounded
by the fact that in some countries incidents are systematically recorded by
state organs, while others reveal a high level of monitoring by NGOs, or
indeed in a third group the collation of information proved to be extremely
difficult. We thus have to assume that some EU Member States, due to their
history and the significance anti-Semitism had and still has in their
country, pay far greater attention to monitoring anti-Semitic incidents as
others.
The extent and kind of anti-Semitic incidents vary from
country to country. While a constant pattern valid for all countries is not
recognisable, some constellations are evident. Due to the plurality of the
actors and motives, the distribution of anti-Semitic manifestations only
partially corresponds to the distribution employed in the annual
"Anti-Semitism Reports" from the 1990s. They thus show hardly any connection
with the spread of anti-Semitic attitudes and views in the population as a
whole.
A rise in the number of anti-Semitic incidents has been
noticeable for almost all of the fifteen Member States since the start of
the "Al-Aqsa-Intifada". In the monitoring period this rise reached a climax
in the period between the end of March and mid-May, running parallel to the
escalation in the Middle East conflict. This leads to the conclusion that
the occasion for anti-Semitic attacks was in this case triggered by a
foreign event, one that however exerted a varying impact in the individual
Member States.
There are a number of EU Member States, namely Ireland
and Luxembourg, where anti-Semitic incidents in general seldom occur and
were hardly evident in the monitoring period. At most threatening letters
were sent to the Israeli consulate or to local Jews. The same applies to
Portugal and Finland, where such threatening letters and telephone calls
were evident and where there was one attack each on a synagogue,
respectively.
On the other hand, a group of countries was identified
with rather severe anti-Semitic incidents. Here, France, Belgium, the
Netherlands and the UK have to be mentioned. They witnessed numerous
physical attacks and insults directed against Jews and vandalism of Jewish
institutions (synagogues, shops, cemeteries). In these countries the violent
attacks on Jews and/or synagogues were reported to be committed often by
members of the Muslim-Arab minority, frequently youths (see reports on these
countries). The observers agree that these are disaffected young men who
themselves are frequently targets of racist attacks, i.e. here the social
problems of these migrant minorities are obviously an essential factor for
their propensity to violence and susceptibility to anti-Semitism. Far
fewer anti-Semitic attacks committed by members of this group were evident
in countries like Sweden and Denmark, where attacks – similarly to the
Netherlands – were only seldom evident in the 1990s given general
populations in which, according to polls, anti-Semitic attitudes are not
widespread.
Other countries show a very specific expression of
anti-Semitism. In Greece we find a series of cemetery and memorial
desecrations, which point to a far-right background.
Anti-Semitic/anti-Zionist statements and sentiments were found in the mass
media and were also expressed by some politicians and opinion leaders. Here
the Greek foreign policy position perhaps plays a role; since the Second
World War Greece has opposed Israel because of its alliance with Turkey.
Spain offered a mixed picture where the traditional strong presence of
neo-Nazi groups was evident alongside a series of attacks, with an Islamist
background.
In Germany, where a large number of anti-Semitic offences
have been registered annually since the 1990s, persons of Arab descent
committed some of the few attacks on Jews in the monitoring period.
Anti-Semitism manifested itself less in a higher number of attacks (between
May-June there were no physical attacks) but more in the form of a flood of
anti-Semitic letters to the Jewish Communities and prominent Jews sent by
German citizens who by no means all belong politically to the far right.
This was in part a reaction to a hefty political controversy (see the
country report on Germany). The explosiveness in this controversy lay in how
a well-known German politician and the Central Council of Jews stood opposed
face to face, so that in the end all the political partners took a clear
position against the FDP politician Jürgen Möllemann.
Italy showed a certain similarity with Germany; although
no physical attacks were evident, there were threatening telephone calls,
insulting letters, slogans and graffiti, whereby the perpetrators did not
come from the Muslim population. However, particularly pronounced in Italy
is a pro-Palestinian mobilisation within left-wing parties, organisations
and newspapers, which in connection with public rallies partially took an
anti-Semitic turn. From Austria no physical attacks were reported; verbal
threats and insults were seldom. Anti-Semitic stereotypes in relation to
Israel were found essentially in right-wing newspapers and amongst far-right
groupings.
The countries can also be grouped together in another
constellation when focus is switched to those actors who are present in the
public discourse. In Italy, France, Spain and Sweden sections of the far
left and Muslim groups unified to stage pro-Palestinian demonstrations. At
some of these demonstrations anti-Semitic slogans and placards were to be
seen and heard and some even resulted in attacks upon Jews or Jewish
institutions. A similar trend was observed in the Netherlands, though
without any great participation from the political left. In Finland,
pro-Palestinian demonstrations passed without any anti-Semitic incidents. In
Germany, and also less so in Austria, public political discourse was
dominated by a debate on the link between Israeli policy in the Middle East
conflict and anti-Semitism, a debate in which the cultural and political
elite were involved, whereas the mobilisation of the extreme left remained
low-key. In Germany the critical reporting of the media was also a topic for
controversy, as it was also in the United Kingdom, where left-liberal papers
(The Guardian and The Independent) were heavily criticised by Jewish
representatives. In other countries such as Luxembourg, Ireland, Portugal,
Denmark and Finland there was obvious no prominent public discussion on this
subject.
The mass media
Some commentators discuss the possible influence of the
mass media on an escalation of the number of anti-Semitic incidents. There
is a connection seen between the sharp increase in anti-Semitic attacks in
April 2002 and the events in Jenin at the end of March and in Bethlehem in
April. Here the question at issue is whether this escalation was merely the
result of the daily news reports on the violence in the Middle East, in the
sense of an agenda-setting effect, or whether the reporting itself reveals
an anti-Semitic bias. Judgement upon this is dependent on partisanship in
the Middle East conflict. The Jewish communities regarded the one-sidedness,
the aggressive tone of the reporting on Israeli policy in the Middle East
conflict and references to old Christian anti-Jewish sentiments as
problematic. The country reports (Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and
Sweden) list some cases of anti-Semitic argument or stereotypes (cartoons)
in the quality press, but as of yet no systematic media analyses are
available. One study of the German quality press (see Germany) comes to the
conclusion that the reporting concentrated greatly on the violent events and
the conflicts and was not free of anti-Semitic clichés; at the same time
though this negative view also applies to the description of the Palestinian
actors. The report on Austria identified anti-Semitic allusions in the
right-wing press. Here there is a need for further empirical studies. One
study on the impact of the very critical reporting on the wave of right-wing
extremist violence in Germany in the early 1990s concluded that the daily
news coverage through television and the press had a "contagion effect" and
contributed to a further escalation in violence; this though could not be
said to be the case of the commentary-oriented background reports in the
daily press. This means that the impact is not generated by the content of
the reporting, which naturally evaluates the violence negatively, but rather
from the massiveness and consonance of the overall media coverage. The
intensive and consonant focus on events thus has a clear effect on the
climate of opinion. In fact, those Europeans who followed media coverage of
the events in the Middle East the closest were more likely to be sympathetic
to the Palestinian case.
Openly anti-Semitic reporting is rather seldom in the
European press, with the exception of the far-right spectrum. However,
observers point to an "increasingly blatantly anti-Semitic Arab and Muslim
media", including audio tapes and sermons, in which the call is not only
made to join the struggle against Israel but also against Jews across the
world. Although leading Muslim organisations express their opposition to
this propaganda, observers assume that its calling for the use of violence
may exert a certain influence on readers and listeners.
Internet as an international
action base
The Internet is named in almost all of the country
reports as an important medium for anti-Semitic propaganda, precisely
because it is suited to the international dissemination of anti-Semitism due
to the difficulty in identifying the perpetrators. As the Internet
represents an international medium, only those homepages have been included
in the individual country reports, which have a direct relationship to the
nationalist – mostly then far-right – spectrum. The international character
of the medium itself allows only a trans-national assessment and so,
correspondingly, a joint strategy in formulating and implementing counter
measures. In addition, the dissemination of anti-Semitic thought via the
Internet cannot be circumscribed to fit a specific period, for this
worldwide transference of data is fast-moving, meaning that much of the
information is accessible only for a short time or the relevant homepages
are switched on and then off. Inherent to the medium, this is only seldom
for political reasons. At the same time though, there are a whole series of
homepages available, which are never or only seldom updated, but
nevertheless are permanently present as a propaganda medium. The evaluation
and monitoring of this organ for disseminating anti-Semitic stereotypes,
particularly those with revisionist/denial and conspiracy theory content,
must therefore be limited to a more general survey.
The Internet reflects a development observable since
2000, namely the networking of the extreme right scene via links with
sections of the radical Islamist spectrum, some sites from
anti-globalisation campaigners and from the anti-American far left. Since
the end of the 1990s there has been a dramatic increase in the number of
homepages present on the web from far-right groups and parties, which quite
often also have ties to radical Islamic fundamentalists. Observers start
from the assumption that there are some 3000 homepages with extreme rightist
content on the web; in addition, there are discussion forums and chat rooms
in which the corresponding body of thought is spread, mostly anonymously.
Such groups create ideological ties, in particular by utilising the denial
of the Holocaust as a component of anti-Semitic agitation, and build up a
network. Revisionism is spread by European organisations such as the Belgian
"Vrij historisch Onderzoek" (vho), the Swedish "Radio Islam", the French
"L’Association des Anciens Amateurs de Récits de Guerres et d’Holocaustes"
(AAARGH), the Danish site "Patriot" or numerous homepages in German that are
hosted in various countries. These are in turn linked to the entire
international scene, i.e. the respective leading revisionist homepages in
America, Australia and Canada are then accessible. Right-wing extremists
have discovered how to conduct their war via the Internet, i.e. how to use
"electronic warfare". Such tactics have lead to state authorities warning of
terrorist tendencies in the far-right spectrum. Furthermore, the potential
for violence is fostered by the worst kinds of computer games. These are
upgraded to a political weapon when neo-Nazis convert well-known apolitical
games into malicious anti-Semitic hate campaigns.
In summary it can be said that the threatening nature of
the situation, in particular for the Jewish communities, arose because in
most of the countries monitored the increasing number of anti-Semitic
attacks, committed frequently by young Arabs/Muslims and by far-right
extremists, was accompanied by a sharp criticism of Israeli politics across
the entire political spectrum, a criticism that in some cases employed
anti-Semitic stereotypes. This parallel character arose out of the joint
reference to the escalating situation in the Middle East; both phenomena,
the attacks and the public discussion, have significantly receded since June
2002. In countries such as Denmark, Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and Finland there are only a
few or no incidents known for the period after July 2002. In some Member
States such as Belgium, France and Sweden the number of anti-Semitic
incidents, including violent attacks and threatening phone calls, increased
again in September and October, but it does not compare to the period
monitored. Anti-Semitic leaflets, hate mail and phone calls were also
reported in Germany and the United Kingdom. Factors which usually
determine the frequency of anti-Semitic incidents in the respective
countries, such as the strength and the degree of mobilisation extremist
far-right parties and groupings can generate, have obviously not played the
decisive role in the monitoring period.
3. Recommendations
The upsurge of anti-Semitic criminal offences and verbal
assaults against Jewish citizens and institutions, but also against Muslims,
prompted the Interior Ministers of five EU Member States (Belgium, Germany,
Spain, France and the United Kingdom) to issue a "Declaration against
Racism, Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism" in April 2002. The Ministers said that
they had already introduced preventive measures (in particular the
surveillance and protection of places of worship) on a national level
against the violent attacks occurring in connection with the Middle East
conflict. It appears to them in the future to be of particular importance
that "joint measures are undertaken on a European level" and "that a series
of actions are to be resolved which encompass the rapid acceptance and
implementation of concentrated measures, such as an intensifying of the
exchange of information and experience between the law enforcement agencies
in the Member States and Europol and providing more support for the EUMC,
using the data collated by the EUMC. We consider it to be particularly
useful that suitable penalties can be applied for racist offences in a
comparable way in every Member State."
To be able to do that, state institutions must assume
responsibility for monitoring anti-Semitism in the individual EU Member
States. These institutions should work in accordance with well-defined
categories (see below), enabling them to recognise an anti-Semitic element
within any politically motivated criminal offences they register and to then
incorporate them into their statistics. The NFPs’ reports make it clear that
information on anti-Semitic attacks in many countries is mainly presented by
Jewish institutions or NGOs registering incidents – and they often only do
so when they have received reports from the persons affected. All too often
we are faced with chance findings, which, for example, have only become
public through the regional press release of a committed journalist. Thus,
NGOs have recorded 259 racially motivated murders between 1995 and 2000 in
Italy; whereas the Italian police have not registered a single case. In
Germany NGOs registered five times as many racist murders as the police.
Although the violent attacks upon minorities with a racist background has
raised the sensitivity of state agencies to such criminal offences in the
last few years, the attention required to accept and perceive incidents
motivated by anti-Semitism is still lacking in many countries.
In those countries in which incidents are already
registered by the security authorities, a swifter processing and publication
of the results must be ensured, and not first presented – as in current
practice –in the middle of the following year by the police, the authority
responsible for the protection of the constitution etc.
We recommend that:
The EUMC requests state authorities to acknowledge at the
highest level the extraordinary dangers posed by anti-Semitic violence in
the European context.
There is a definite need to distinguish clearly in
reporting between acts of violence, threatening behaviour, and offensive
speech, and to make transparent government norms and procedures for
registering and acting upon racially motivated crimes and offences motivated
by anti-Semitism. Only in this way can a genuinely comparative basis for
incidents be attained for European countries, a comparison that till now has
been limited to a mere juxtaposition of incomparable individual results.
The EUMC should propose to the European Commission and to
the Member States to consider a decision for police cooperation according to
Article 34 of the Treaty of European Union, which shall bind all Member
States to collect and disseminate data on relevant offences, following the
model of States such as Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. This decision
should also involve EUROPOL and EUROJUST. Such a decision needs to be
complemented in all Member States by a coordinated programme of victim
studies to overcome the problem of underreporting, which is generally
recognised by experts in this area.
The EUMC should propose to the Member States to adopt the
proposed framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia (COM
2001/664) as soon as possible and call on the Council of Ministers to ensure
that it is amended to be as effective as possible to deal with the reported
incidents. To achieve effective regulation of the Internet concerning racist
propaganda, it is essential to extend the jurisdiction of European courts to
include detailed provisions on the responsibility of Internet service
providers. As the Internet must be seen as the central networking medium of
the different ideological directions as regards anti-Semitism, it is
precisely here where a particularly intensive monitoring is required, one
which in the first instance must be undertaken by state authorities, but
also by academic and research institutions engaged with racism and
anti-Semitism. For this purpose it is thus necessary to establish joint
committees at national and international levels. Through mutual exchange
these committees shall make available research results, cases of police
prosecution and information from state security authorities, establishing a
basis for an improved recording and combating of racist and anti-Semitic
developments.
The EUMC should encourage and assist civil society to
complement the improved legal basis. Most of the EU Member States in recent
years already have enacted laws against hate crime or the "Holocaust lie" as
well as anti-discrimination laws, which include religious or racial
discrimination. Due to these improvements in legislation and law
enforcement, and as a result of intensified police activities and increased
public awareness, anti-Semitic incidents and violent attacks as well as
Holocaust denial have less chance to evade punishment. But as the increase
of anti-Semitic attacks shows, laws – although necessary - are not
sufficient to stave off incidents, and in most cases do not cover verbal
threats.
Registering anti-Semitic incidents
The measures put forward by the five Ministers already
imply improvements in monitoring and combating anti-Semitic and racist
attacks. In some Member States (Belgium, Ireland, Greece and Portugal)
"racist attacks were simply not identified separately in crime statistics",
while others (Germany, France, Sweden and the United Kingdom) have at their
disposal state-sponsored instruments which monitor and pursue anti-Semitic
incidents. In Germany for instance this is incumbent upon the Federal Office
for the Protection of the Constitution, which in turn receives its
information from the various State Offices for Criminal Investigation.
However, these offices record and investigate only punishable offences. In
Sweden the Swedish Security Police (Säpo) records systematically
anti-Semitic incidents. Since 2001 in the United Kingdom the Community
Security Trust (CST), the monitoring body, has been accorded third-party
reporting status by the police, allowing it to report anti-Semitic incidents
to the police and act as a go-between between them and those victims who are
unable or unwilling to report to the police directly. The function performed
by the CST thus goes beyond the possibilities accorded to the German
agencies and also involves the victims themselves. Other countries, which
till now have hardly known any anti-Semitic incidents, do not possess such
instruments and were till now not forced to develop monitoring guidelines.
The European-wide wave of anti-Semitic incidents has shown that there is now
an urgent need for action in these countries as well.
We recommend joint strategies for action to be developed,
whereby those countries possessing years of experience in this regard should
pass this on to the other Member States. A prerequisite for such joint
action must be to establish common guidelines for categorising anti-Semitic
incidents. Some countries have for some years now already based their
activities on prescribed guidelines for registering anti-Semitic incidents;
these though have not been coordinated with one another and hence the
results have only a limited comparative value. The most recent definition of
anti-Semitic incidents used by the Community Security Trust in the United
Kingdom appears to us to be the most suitable for dealing with the demands
of a European-wide phenomenon. This definition goes beyond the usual
criteria for registering racist incidents, focusing specifically on criteria
geared towards anti-Semitism:
- Extreme violence
: any attack potentially causing loss of life;
- Assault
: any physical attack against people, which is not a threat
to life;
- Damage and Desecration of Property
: any physical attack directed
against Jewish property, which is not life threatening;
- Threats
: includes only clear threats, whether verbal or written;
- Abusive Behaviour
: face-to-face, telephone and targeted
abusive/anti-Semitic letters (inter alia those aimed at and sent to
a specific individual) as opposed to a mail shot of anti-Semitic
literature, which will be included under Category 4. Anti-Semitic graffiti
on non-Jewish property is also included in the category;
- Literature
: includes distribution of anti-Semitic literature,
based on the following criteria:
- the content must be anti-Semitic (except see (d) below);
- the recipient may be either Jewish or non-Jewish;
- the literature must be part of a mass distribution, as opposed to
that directed at a specific individual;
- racist literature that is not anti-Semitic is included when it is
clear that Jews are being deliberately targeted for receipt because they
are Jews (implying an anti-Semitic motive behind the distribution);
- It should be noted that the statistics for this category does not
give any indication of the extent of distribution. Mass mailings of
propaganda are only counted as one incident, although anti-Semitic
leaflets have been circulated to hundreds and possibly thousands of
Jewish and non-Jewish individuals and organisations.
Education
As already established, laws offer only limited means to
counteract anti-Semitism because it is after all a problem of society as a
whole. Changes in anti-Jewish attitudes can only be achieved by education.
Parents, teachers and day care providers can provide opportunities for
children to express their feelings and channel them into positive direction.
The most important issue is to promote knowledge on Jewish history, on all
dimensions of Jewish-Christian relations and on the Holocaust but without
moralising admonitions. To learn about the Holocaust and apply the lessons
of the past to contemporary issues of prejudice, racism and moral
decision-making is an important aim for the future.
The Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust
Education, Remembrance, and Research, founded in 1998 on the initiative of
the Swedish Government, is composed of representatives of government, as
well as governmental and non-governmental organisations. Its purpose is to
mobilise the support of political and social leaders to foster Holocaust
education, remembrance, and research both nationally and internationally.
The ITF creates programmes and develops guidelines for teaching about the
Holocaust. Currently fourteen countries are members of the ITF: Argentina,
Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy,
Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the
United States.
We recommend that the governments of the EU Member States
still absent should undertake initiatives to become members of this
international board. The guidelines of the ITF are an important basis for
counteracting prejudices and anti-Semitism especially not only because
Holocaust denial is part of radical groups (right-wing and radical Islamist
groups) who practise anti-Semitism but also because Holocaust education must
be part of European historical knowledge. According to the ITF in general,
teaching about the Holocaust should advance knowledge of this unprecedented
destruction, preserve the memory of the victims, encourage educators and
students to reflect upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by the
events of the Holocaust as they could be applied to world of today. In order
to see the differences between the Holocaust and other genocides,
comparisons should be carefully distinguished and similarities also should
be articulated. The study of the Holocaust must be studied within the
context of European history as a whole. Educators should provide context for
the events of the Holocaust by including information about anti-Semitism and
Jewish life in Europe before the Holocaust. The main task is to provide
teacher seminars on these subjects but also on racism and intolerance and on
neo-Nazi music and propaganda.
Media
The fact that in connection with the radicalisation of
the Middle East conflict an anti-Semitic body of thought has gained currency
and become relevant in many Arab countries, or that an already virulent
anti-Semitism, circulating since the Six Day War and which in the last few
years has become more and more focused on the denial of the Holocaust, has
once again broken out, raises the issue of how the media exploits and hands
down anti-Semitic stereotypes.
State authorities have obviously till now paid too little
attention to Arab-language publications which spread anti-Semitic propaganda
in European countries, whether they be newspapers, audio tapes or the
Internet, which in the view of British authors "enjoy, as far as one can
tell, nearly total impunity" in the United Kingdom. In order to acquire
knowledge of the degree of media influence upon sections of the European
population with Arab or North African descent, a research study should be
undertaken on the Arab-language television, press and homepages operating in
the 15 Member States. Until now it is known that the Arab newspaper
"al-Hayat" published in London and "explicit – the political magazine for an
Islamic Consciousness" both spread radical anti-Semitism. This is also the
case with the Internet, where Hizb-ut-tahrir (the party of Islamic
Liberation) operates a site containing anti-Semitic propaganda in German,
English, Danish and French, incidentally via a Russian server.
Press reporting of the Middle East conflict was
frequently lacking in balance as well as in a perspective on the contexts
and the formative background history of the current conflict. Partisanship
for the Palestinians as a people allegedly oppressed by a so-called
imperialist Israeli state was mainly to be found in the left-oriented media.
Quite often there were also caricatures, which used anti-Semitic stereotypes
(see Italy, La Stampa). To date there has been no well-founded media
analysis of the European press on this subject.
We recommend studies such as the one about how the German
print media reported four important incidents in the Middle East during the
second Intifada between September 2000 and August 2001, initiated by the
American Jewish Committee (AJC), should be organised also for the other
Member States.
Internet
One of the effective counter-strategies against
anti-Semitic agitation on the Internet stems from the providers themselves.
They remove upon notification – often only after outside pressure – such
websites from the net, or increasingly undertake voluntary self-monitoring.
The developments in the last months in partly impeded or completely
obstructed access to some homepages have shown that such an approach at
least hinders the possibility of placing propaganda on the Internet, even if
some suppliers of the homepages removed from the net find alternatives for
spreading their material through smaller American or Russian providers.
There exists a genuine danger that the far-right extremists can achieve an
even more intensive networking through the Internet, although the respective
links offered, which suggest close co-operation, are often completely
obsolete. Some may lead to the next related homepage, but this does not
necessarily mean that there is automatically a close connection with the
link partner. In addition, the relevant sites realised with the latest
technology are often the work of a single individual or, at the most, of a
few persons whose circle of sympathisers is small.
A whole series of private initiatives have already
originated in the last few years, which combat anti-Semitic and racist
content on the Internet, and with serious information and lexical entries
counteract, for instance, the denial of the Holocaust on the Internet. In
the Netherlands (state-funded) and the United Kingdom (funded by local
Internet Service Providers), Bureaux for Discrimination on the Internet were
founded. In addition, private and state organisations exert pressure on
large Internet providers such as Yahoo and AOL to remove racist and
anti-Semitic content from the net. Legislation recently passed in some
countries (Germany, Sweden) prohibiting Internet-based hate speech exerts in
the first instance a moral pressure, for it is hardly possible to deal with
an international medium which is difficult to control with legislative means
on a national level.
We recommend that apart from state approaches for
combating Internet-based racism and anti-Semitism, which are in a state of
flux, the enormous potential for educational purposes must be utilised far
more than is presently the case.
The extent to which anti-Semitic and racist content is
also conveyed via websites from football fans and how effective they are in
mobilising support is being investigated by a joint study undertaken by the
EUMC, the Italian organisation Unione Italiana Sport Per Tutti (UISP) and
the Internet company ERIN based in Luxembourg.
Sport
Above all in the area of European football a whole series
of initiatives have been started in the last few years, which combat racism
and anti-Semitism in the stadia, following the initiative "Football against
Racism".
The "Let’s Kick Racism out of Football" (LKROOF) campaign
is the product of the United Kingdom’s Commission for Racial Equality,
working in conjunction with the football associations of England, Wales and
Scotland. A Jewish Policy Research (JPR) seminar in London for academics and
sportswriters examined the issues concerning anti-Semitism, xenophobia,
racism and violence that frequently surround football. The research study on
"Racism, Football and the Internet" on behalf of the EUMC analysed football
supporter sites carrying violence and racism often combined with
anti-Semitism.
We recommend similar studies should also be carried out
on other issues in the area of anti-Semitic incidents and placed in an
overall European context in order to establish a comparative basis. For this
purpose close co-operation is also needed between European research
institutions, which would submit their regional studies to, for example, the
EUMC to form an information pool. This is the prerequisite for the
comparison that in turn – based on specific regional symptoms – opens up the
possibility of locating and analysing common patterns, the formation of
stereotypes and the different determining political and social conditions.
Only on this basis, which needs to be interdisciplinary so as to illuminate
the various facets of anti-Semitism from different disciplines and so
ultimately provide a comprehensive picture, can measures and strategies be
developed which lead to a genuinely effective combating of anti-Semitic
tendencies.
Other initiatives by NGOs
During the "European-wide Action Week against Racism
2002" in March 2002, activists in 33 countries all over Europe showed their
commitment against racism. In France, many organisations co-operated and
focussed on anti-racist education. Their activities included meetings,
discussions, concerts and theatre performances. In Germany, immigration was
the most central issue in debates, demonstrations and games. In the
Netherlands anti-racist organisations discussed recent changes in politics
related to migration and integration issues.
AMARC Europe, the European branch of the World Association of Community
Radio Broadcasters, prepared a 24-hour radio-campaign relayed through the
Internet. Initiatives such as the International Day against Fascism and
Anti-Semitism (9/11/2002) are especially devoted to issues of anti-Semitism,
in which most of the European countries – non-profit organisations of the
UNITED-network – are involved with corresponding programmes.
The strategies for dismantling prejudices against Jews
have till now included exhibition projects (see the reports on Austria: The
Jews of Mistelbach; Jewish Museum Hohenems; on Luxembourg and on Germany)
and educational projects and pedagogical tools to improve and foster
interculturalism and diversity in society (see the reports on Belgium and
Italy). It is precisely the efforts undertaken in the school and education
sector that are suitable for incorporating the new challenges posed by
anti-Semitic prejudices amongst the Arab/north-African Muslim immigrants. In
the United Kingdom the teaching method called "Abrahams barn" ("Abraham’s
children"), pointing out similarities between Christianity, Islam and
Judaism, has – according to teachers – been reported to be fairly successful
in schools with a high percentage of immigrants. Along with this, teachers
in some schools have reported that a generally increased vigilance against
racist and anti-Semitic expressions has been successful in curbing such
sentiments. The Swedish Committee against anti-Semitism has been writing
articles and arranging a series of seminars in different cities and towns.
The seminars were called "Stereotyping immigrants, Jews and Muslims in media
and debate" and got a very good response in the evaluations. The
Samordningskommittén for Europaåret mot rasism i Sverige (Swedish Commission
against Racism and Xenophobia), established in 1996 by Mona Sahlin, former
vice-premier of Sweden, continues to organise seminars and support
anti-racist projects.
In order to do justice to the current development of
anti-Semitism within the Muslim population in Europe, other ways of
dismantling prejudices must also be developed. One important component is
intercultural and inter-religious exchange (see Belgium: Jewish-Muslim
meeting; Germany: inter-religious dialogue; the Netherlands: organised
meeting between CIDI youth group and the youth organisation of the Moroccan
association Tans). Also of importance are clear statements from leading
personalities in the Muslim community (see country report on Denmark: "Hate
of the Jews is not Islamic"; United Kingdom: Condemning the desecration of a
synagogue; Germany: protest by the Turkish Association Berlin-Brandenburg
against "playing with anti-Semitism"), which are explicitly directed against
anti-Semitism and radical Islamic forms of animosity towards Jews. The
educational information campaigns within Muslim groups, such as on the theme
"to burn a synagogue is like burning a mosque", have encouraged people to
talk again and have improved solidarity between the different communities in
this field. Thus, the gesture of a local Muslim group in Aubervilliers (a
northern suburb of Paris) is particularly symbolic: it lent its school bus
to a Jewish school of the same area after its buses were destroyed during an
attack.
Beyond inter-religious dialogue, the spontaneous or
organised mobilisation of civil society against the far right has reaffirmed
the Republic of France’s common values. Such reactions have at least
reminded us that the fight against racism, xenophobia and discrimination
remains a common struggle (see country report on France).
Further research
Many of the issues raised above have specific
implications for further research. In particular we recommend that research
studies should be carried out on anti-Semitic incidents in various fields -
for example, sport, entertainment, public service provision – and placed in
an overall European context in order to establish a comparative perspective
on their occurrence. As stated earlier, a major difficulty with attempting
to gain an overview of anti-Semitic incidents is the general problem of
under-reporting. To help to overcome this problem it would be helpful to
have a programme of victim studies across the different Member States.
Another observation has been that the way that the European press draws on
and perpetuates anti-Semitic stereotypes has not yet been subject to
systematic research analysis. This is another area where research studies
should be implemented in order to fill a gap.
Concluding remarks
The public expects from the police, state security
agencies and also monitoring offices rapid results and from scientific
research bodies a short and precise assessment of the prevailing situation.
But unfortunately, there are no patent remedies and quick solutions
available. Just as there is no simple and clear solution for explaining
anti-Semitic prejudices and stereotype patterns, it is not possible to
formulate a once and for all strategy, which is effective everywhere. The
strategies are always dependent upon specific situations and must react to
the specific national conditions. The individual Member States have to
create necessary framework conditions, which has already occurred in many
cases, and coordinate these with their European partners, not the least in
the face of increasing globalisation – and this has also already taken place
in part. At the same time though, state sanctions, legislative regulations
and institutionalised monitoring can only then bite when they also lead to
changes and the dismantling of prejudices within society. This can only be
successful when a re-thinking takes place in society itself that is not
directed only by the state. Initiatives from NGOs, religious institutions,
trade unions, educational institutions and, not the least, private
initiatives therefore assume an extremely important role in reaching as
broad a spectrum of the public as possible through dialogue and various
actions. Besides initiating intercultural and inter-religious dialogues,
generating a greater sensitivity for terminology and themes belongs to their
most important tasks in working together with the media, as well as
reminding journalists of their public responsibility. The results of the
study by Hans Bernd Brosius and Frank Esser on the connection between media
reporting and xenophobic violence against foreigners can also be applied to
anti-Semitism. Brosius and Esser established that a connection between
close-up reporting and violence towards foreigners exists, following the
mechanism that the more up to date and current the medial presence is, then
the more likely it is that reporting is structured more in a xenophobic
form, setting off a rapid spiral of violence. But this also means that
journalists must be conscious of their influence on society and act
accordingly in a responsible way.
4. Country Reports
Bringing together data on current or recent events poses
special problems, mainly because in most cases the results of investigations
undertaken by state organs take a long time to become available. In
addition, the data collection takes place under severe time pressure, and
scientific studies covering the monitoring period are often yet to be
presented.
Furthermore, the NFPs in the individual Member States are
faced with very different starting conditions as to the collation of data on
anti-Semitic incidents. In Greece, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal and
Finland there is neither a specific recording of anti-Semitic incidents by
the police or responsible state security agencies, nor NGOs, which
specialise in the collection of such data. In these countries the
information comes almost exclusively from Jewish organisations and the
media. In other countries, such as Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands,
Sweden and the United Kingdom, no data from state agencies was available at
the time this report was compiled (data collated by state agencies is mostly
published annually, in the second half of the following year); however, at
the same time there exist networks of NGOs in these countries which deal
with racism and anti-Semitism and, besides the aforementioned data sources,
collect and provide information. Finally, there are countries, like Germany
and Austria, in which state agencies record and classify anti-Semitic crimes
according to specific categories; here, too, there are also numerous NGOs
and research institutions dealing with racism and anti-Semitism.
In addition, with the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai
B’rith and the American Jewish Committee there are organizations, which
monitor anti-Semitic incidents worldwide, commission polls on current public
opinion and media analyses, and immediately publish (reports, Internet)
their findings. The Stephen Roth Institute (Tel Aviv) and the Institute of
Jewish Policy Research (London) also compile national reports on
anti-Semitism covering almost all EU Member States, whereby these reports
are naturally first published one or two years later.
The data was collected essentially through the following
methods:
- Inquiries at the police, state security agencies and ministries of the
interior
- Interviews with or questions posed by telephone/in writing to Jewish
organisations
- Inquiries at NGOs which have specialised in monitoring racism and
anti-Semitism
- Analysis and evaluation of the media (newspapers, TV)
- Research on the Internet
- Evaluation of research studies, media analyses, opinion polls.
A detailed description of sources used can be found in
the Annex "Reporting institutions and data sources".
For this Synthesis Report, the Center for Research on
Anti-Semitism (CRA), Berlin, unified and supplemented the submitted NFP
reports. Furthermore, the attempt was made to balance out the different
evaluations provided by the NFPs on anti-Israeli prejudices. Some NFPs have
not classified anti-Israeli prejudices as anti-Semitic, whereas others have
very precisely distinguished between a criticism of Israel that is not to be
evaluated per se as anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli stereotypes which clearly
utilise anti-Semitic prejudices. In compiling the Synthesis Report the CRA
was able to draw on surveys, data and some media and Internet sources
published after the deadline for submitting the NFP reports. These sources
provided additional information on the individual countries. Furthermore, to
be able to identify trends and developments over time, the CRA studied
materials on anti-Semitic incidents prior to 2002 for the individual
countries. Based on anti-Semitism reports up to 2001 and other sources, the
aim of this presentation was to provide a context for the evaluation of the
monitoring period.
Also the CRA had to compile reports for two countries on
its own: neither the National Focal Points from the Netherlands nor from the
United Kingdom provided reports. The differing length of the individual
country reports mirrors not only the degree and frequency of anti-Semitic
attacks and prejudices in the individual countries (Belgium, Germany,
France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom), but also the intensity of
monitoring by institutional and state agencies and the sensitivity towards
anti-Semitic incidents.
Belgium
Within the Belgian population (10.3 million; 55% Flemish,
33% Walloon) Jews represent a minority of some 35,000, most of whom live in
Antwerp and Brussels.
In recent years racism has been on the increase, both in
terms of discrimination against immigrants in general and against Arabs in
particular. The Eurobarometer 2000 compiled by the EUMC came to the
conclusion that the attitudes towards ethnic and religious minorities in
Belgium show a more negative set of views than the EU average. Although
racially motivated attacks from extreme right-wing groups, resurgent since
the 1990s, are in the first instance directed against foreigners, running
parallel to this is a strong increase in anti-Semitic tendencies. In
particular since the beginning of the "al-Aqsa Intifada" in the autumn of
2000, the number of violent actions against Jews and Jewish institutions has
increased, with the suspected perpetrators mainly from Muslim and Arab
communities, especially from those of Maghreb origin which itself is most
vulnerable to xenophobia. But right-wing extremist groups also used the
situation for an "anti-Zionist" campaign. In addition, a certain influence
was exerted by legal proceedings started in June 2001, based on a law passed
in Belgium in 1993 that also enables criminal prosecution of crimes
committed in foreign countries. Survivors of the massacre in the refugee
camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982 used this law to undertake legal
proceedings against the then Defence Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon for
crimes against humanity. An Israeli inquiry had found that Sharon was
indirectly responsible, prompting his resignation. The attempted prosecution
itself, but also the delaying of a decision over many months, caused an
international stir, not the least because Belgium assumed the EU Presidency
on 1 July 2001 and had the request seriously examined. On 26 June 2002 the
court dismissed the charges.
On 30 May, Reuters reported that a confidential Senate
Report, based on evidence from the State Security Service, stated that
Belgium is a recruiting ground for Islamic militants. Apparently, the
Saudi-backed Salafi Movement has created some sort of religious "state
within Belgium."
1. Physical acts of violence
According to the current report of the American Lawyers
Committee for Human Rights, since 11 September 2001 around 2000 anti-Semitic
incidents have taken place, whereby no distinction has been made between
violent attacks and other forms. Already on 5December 2001, the Chief Rabbi
of Brussels, Albert Gigi, was physically assaulted by a group of youths in
Anderlecht (Brussels). After shouting at him and his companion "dirty Jew"
in Arab, they followed them into the subway and one of them kicked the Rabbi
in the face, breaking his glasses. After the first graffiti appeared on
Jewish shops in February 2002, demanding "Death to the Jews", the synagogue
in the Anderlecht district of Brussels was severely damaged by two Molotov
cocktails in the night of 31 March / 1 April. In the following weeks the
attacks increased: on 17 April unknown persons set fire to a Jewish bookshop
in Brussels and on the following day the front window of a kosher restaurant
were shattered by an air rifle; during the night of 20 – 21 April 18 shots
were fired at the façade of the synagogue in Charleroi. During a
pro-Palestinian demonstration in Antwerp on 1 April, which took place near a
Jewish area and in which ca. 2000 persons took part, front windows were
shattered and an Israeli flag burnt.
Between 15 May and 15 June 2002 the following attacks or
violent acts against Jews have been recorded. Compared with the attacks the
month before, the number of incidents was relatively low.
19 May: a group of Jewish youngsters aged 13 were
threatened by a group of Arab youths at the City Park. One of them menaced
the Jewish youngsters with a mock rifle. The police intervened and arrested
the youth.
25 May: a group of adolescent immigrants (around the age
of 13) vandalized the restaurant of the Maccabi Soccer Club belonging to the
Jewish community of Antwerp. They spread anti-Jewish slogans across the club
walls, destroyed doors, windows and furniture. The youngsters were caught by
the police. After interrogation and an interview with their parents, they
were released.
28 May: a shop on the Frankrijklei, a major avenue in
Antwerp, was smeared with the following slogans: "Kill the juif. Laat ze
lijden (let them suffer), fuck Belgium".
The Antwerp police have also gathered evidence of damage
to bus stops, shops or public buildings. In most cases these were graffiti
of the SS insignia, the swastika and the Star of David.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Newspapers reported the following incidents:
- On 19 April unknown persons smeared a Jewish shop in Brussels with
slogans such as "Dirty Jew" and "We will burn you".
- In the second half of May an anonymous letter of anti-Semitic and
revisionist character was sent to a survivor of the concentration camps
after this person had published an article in a widely circulated public
newsletter.
- In the second half of May 2002 an article of highly anti-Semitic
nature was published in a free journal published in the Charleroi region.
- On 3 June an anti-Semitic letter, originating in France, was sent to
an individual in Belgium.
- Racist and anti-Semitic slogans continue to belong to the repertoire
of many football fans.
Internet
Websites of Belgian origin with racist and anti-Semitic
texts have increasingly gone online in recent times. The Centre for Equal
Opportunity and Combating Racism was able to identify 82 Belgian sites,
which spread such material. On 6 June a complaint about racism was
introduced at the CEOOR against Dyab Abou Jahjah, President of the Arabian
European League (AEL). His Internet site encourages hatred, discrimination
and violence towards the Jewish community. The complaint concerns a press
statement in which the AEL urged people to join a demonstration in Antwerp
to be held on 8 June 2002. According to the League, this demonstration has
to take place in Antwerp since "the power (there) is in the hands of a
Zionist lobby and extreme right racists" and, furthermore, because "Antwerp
represents the bastion of Zionism in Europe" and is a city "where pro-Sharon
gangs of Zionists are dictating the rules". Instead, Antwerp needs to become
the "Mecca of pro-Palestinian action".
On 17 January the far left anti-globalisation website
Indymedia Belgium relayed photographs of three corpses of children who
should have fallen victim of the supposed Israeli practice to use bodies of
Palestinians for organ theft.
MediaJoel Kotek, professor at the Free University of
Brussels refers to the one sided reports on Israel in the Belgium media:
"Israel is portrayed by the Belgian media, notably "Le Soir", the most
widely circulated French-language newspaper in Belgium, as well as by "Vif
l’Express", its weekly supplement, as solely responsible for the violence
which has shaken the Middle East for almost two years. Frequently, in their
forum pages and in letters to the editor, Israelis are equated with Nazis
and in more extreme publications anti-Semitic motifs appear in anti-Israel
propaganda."
3. Research studies
The survey commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League
(ADL) in ten European countries has collected information on "European
Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israel Conflict" between
16 May and 4 June respectively between 9 and 29 September.
European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israel Conflict
Statement |
Belgium |
Denmark |
France |
Germany |
United Kingdom |
Spain |
Italy |
Austria |
Netherlands
|
Jews don´t care what happens to anyone but their own
kind |
25% |
16% |
20% |
24% |
10% |
34% |
30% |
29% |
15% |
Jews are more willing to use shady practices to get
what they want |
18% |
13% |
16% |
21% |
11% |
33% |
27% |
28% |
9% |
Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this country |
50%
|
45%
|
42% |
55% |
34% |
72% |
58% |
54% |
48% |
Jews have too much power in the business world |
44%
|
13%
|
42% |
32% |
21% |
63% |
42% |
40% |
20% |
Percent responding "probably true" to each statement /
500 respondents in each country
Taylor Nelson Sofres, margin of error +/-4.4% at 95%
level of confidence
For Belgium a clear agreement emerged with anti-Semitic
stereotypes. From the four stereotypical statements presented, 39% of
respondents agreed to at least two, 21% with at least three and 6% with all
four. Fifty per cent of respondents agreed with the statement that "Jews are
more loyal to Israel than to this country", a rate somewhat below the
EU-average of 51%, and 38% agreed with the statement "Jews still talk too
much about the Holocaust" (EU-average: 42%).
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
Following the multi-religious meetings organised since 11
September 2001, the CEOOR proposed an action plan, the implementation of
which is still in the preparatory phase. However, it has already been
decided to create a website containing a list of associations which
subscribe to diversity and mutual respect and a set of pedagogical tools to
improve and foster interculturalism. There will also be a section on how to
make a complaint about racism to the CEOOR. Finally, there will be an index
of key words and concepts, which will be elaborated and explained in a
language understandable by the general public.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion makers
Within the Belgian legal framework there are two laws
dealing with the fight against anti-Semitism, notably the general
anti-racism law of 1981 and the law of the denial of the Holocaust of March
1995.
- Immediately after the assault on the Brussels Chief Rabbi was made
public in January 2002 and the debate in the Parliament, moderate forces
within the Jewish community in Brussels organised a meeting with Muslim
leaders.
- On 5 April 2002 a Round Table Conference was held on the initiative of
the Belgian Government with representatives from the social partners, the
Jewish and the Muslim communities, the Ligue des droits de l'Homme (League
of Human Rights) and the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to
Racism. After the attacks on a few synagogues in Antwerp and Brussels
different communities requested the Round Table Conference. A common
declaration was signed and commitments were made by the different actors
to undertake concrete measures in the near future.
- On 19 April 2002 the Belgian Interior Minister, Antoine Duquesne, made
a joint declaration with his colleagues from France, Spain, Germany and
Great Britain on "Racism, Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism". Given the
background of international tension, in particular in the Middle East,
they characterised the racist and xenophobic violence as an offence
against freedom, democracy and human rights and pronounced European-wide
preventive measures and a coordination of the responsible agencies and
offices. At the Interministerial Conference for the Equal Opportunities
Policy, which took place on 17 May 2002, a concrete action plan was
introduced and approved by the Government.
Denmark
The Jewish population (ca. 7000) in Denmark (total
population: 5.3 million) is well integrated socially and anti-Semitism is
hardly visible, though the activities of right-wing extremist groups and the
election campaign, which focused on immigration policy in 2001, have
reinforced xenophobic attitudes. With the al-Aqsa Intifada violent
anti-Israeli demonstrations and heated debates broke out from October 2000,
"which included anti-Semitic manifestations". These initiatives come from
extreme leftist groups and militant Islamist activists. As in most of the
other EU Member States, the climax of the public debate lay prior to the
monitored period in March-April 2002, while the monitored period itself was
calmer for the Jewish community in Denmark. It appears that there have been
very few (if any) physical attacks and few reported incidents of direct
verbal abuse.
- Physical acts of violence
PET has no reports of anti-Semitic attacks in the
monitoring period, neither of a physical or verbal nature, nor of
incidents of graffiti, vandalism, etc. in the monitoring period. However
in August the Copenhagen synagogue was vandalized and anti-Semitic
graffiti sprayed on its walls.The Jewish Community in Denmark, which
systematically registers all anti-Semitic incidents in Denmark, reported
the following incidents: two Arabs harassed the President of the Jewish
Community. During the period in question the Jewish Community received at
least 8 reports from members who had been spat upon or otherwise harassed
on the street by Moslems. A mother, who wished to remain anonymous,
reported that Palestinians who knew her son from school had beaten him on
the street. The boy required medical attention at the local hospital. On
21 April 2002, a Danish Jewish shop owner in the "Nørrebro" district of
Copenhagen was attacked by a gang of Palestinian youths near his shop. The
gang beat him and stabbed him with a knife. On 13 June 2002, a member of
the Jewish Community’s Board reported the eighth incident of malicious
damage to his automobile.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats/abuse
Rabbi Yitzchok Lowenthal, director of Chabad Denmark,
reports that between 15 May and 15 June 2002 he was shouted at 5-6 times
by young men with Arab background. Similarly, a few friends of the Rabbi
were verbally assaulted on the street. A student at the Jewish school
(Carolineskolen) was afraid to go home after being repeatedly threatened
by young men of Arab background at the bus stop. A Jewish man on a bus
reported that a gang of young people of presumable Arab descent yelled at
him and told him what they would do to "the Jews".
On 21 May 2002, the mother of a student at Byens Skole
in the Valby district of Copenhagen went to the police because Muslim
students from the neighbouring Vigerslev Allé Skole had threatened her
son. A teacher at the boy’s school had to smuggle him out the back door on
17 May when a gang of Arabs showed up to beat him.
Indirect threats
In April the Islamic political organisation,
Hizb-ut-tahrir, distributed flyers on the street containing material from
their homepage, "And kill them, wherever you find them, and expel them
from where they expel you". The incident has been continuously debated in
public (see section 5).
On 21 May 2002, graffiti was seen and photographed on
traffic signs around Fælledparken: "No Juden".
On 11 June 2002, graffiti was seen and photographed at
Blågårdsplads: "No Jews". A Lutheran bishop delivered a sermon in
Copenhagen Cathedral comparing Sharon’s policies toward the Palestinians
to those of the biblical King Herod, who ordered the slaughter of all male
children in Bethlehem under the age of two – prior to the incident at the
Church of Nativity (2 April) – in the same Bethlehem under siege by the
Israelis today.
Insults
A person with connections to the Progressive Jewish
Forum describes how various insinuating comments have been passed at work.
For example, when entering her office, a colleague said, "you’ve occupied
there (her chair) very well, haven’t you – ha, ha", and "you have nothing
against there being pig’s blood in the wine, have you?" When she enquired
whether the wine was Italian, the colleague answered: "It is in any case
not from Israel. If it was I would definitely not drink it!"
Media
No examples of anti-Semitic newspaper articles in the
daily press are known. However in August the widely circulated newspaper
Jytland Posten carried a radical Islamist’s offer of a reward of $35,000
for the murder of prominent Jews. The head of the Danish Jewish community
subsequently reported receiving threatening telephone calls. There has
also been a debate about the situation in Israel in the daily press, where
some critics of Israel’s policies feel as if they are being accused of
being anti-Semitic, whereas certain members of the Jewish community feel
that the newspaper reports are one-sided.
Internet
Hizb-ut-tahrir’s homepage contains anti-Semitic
material, such as "Jews are a slanderous people" and openly calls on
Muslims "kill all Jews (. . .) wherever you find them."
3. Research studies
Between 16 May and 4 June and between 9 and 29
September, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) based in New York commissioned
two surveys "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" that were conducted in ten European
countries, including Denmark. Compared with most of the other EU member
states, the agreement expressed in Denmark to four anti-Semitic
stereotypes was clearly below the EU-average (see Table: Report on
Belgium). Also with the statement "Jews are more loyal to Israel than to
this country" the Danes (45%) remained below the European average (51%)
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
See below.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
On the same day as Hizb-ut-tahrir began distributing
its flyers the Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, invited several
leading figures from the Jewish Community in Denmark to discuss the
incident. Immediately afterwards the Prime Minister publicly condemned the
flyers and everything they stood for. The author of the flyer has been
reported to the police in connection with §266 b, the so-called racism
paragraph, and the Public Prosecutor is presently investigating whether
Hizb-ut-tahrir should be prohibited in accordance with §78 of the Danish
constitution, an act which prohibits violent organisations or
organisations which incite violence. A majority in the Danish Parliament
supports both of these actions.
Several commentators have, however, stated that the
quote has been taken out of context and is in fact not an actual call for
Muslims to kill Jews in Denmark. Several leading figures with Muslim
background have publicly condemned Hizb-ut-tahrir, their methods and their
viewpoints. The Member of Parliament, Naser Khader, together with the
Chairman of the Integration Council in Copenhagen, Hanna Ziadeh and
historian Mahmoud Issa, who are all Danish-Palestinians, wrote a long open
letter in the daily broadsheet newspaper Politiken (24.5.02) appealing to
all Danish-Palestinians living in Denmark not to let their "justified
criticism of the Israeli government turn into hatred for all Jews". They
emphasized, "our battle is political and not about religion and
ethnicity". The article was printed in both Danish and Arab.
The daily newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad published (10
May 2002) an interview with Tariq Ramadan, whom the paper describes as
Europe’s best-known Islamic thinker, in which he explains that "hate for
the Jews is not Islamic". In the article he says, "nothing in Islam
legitimizes the anti-Semitism that certain Muslim organisations are
expounding".
Germany
Since 1989 the Jewish community has more than doubled
and now numbers about 100,000 in a total population of 82 million. Since
the early 1990s waves of racist violence were frequently directed against
migrant minorities among which the Turks form the majority group (2
million; total Muslim population: 3,2 million). The number of anti-Semitic
incidents since the early 1990s also clearly exceeds those of earlier
decades. This is mainly due to an active far-right scene. After a fall in
the number of incidents between 1996 and 1999, there has been an increase
since 2000, when it tripled in the last three months of the year. This
dramatic increase is "due in large part to the al-Aqsa Intifada which
inspired radical Islamists to anti-Jewish acts and served as a catalyst
for extreme right-wing anti-Semites". In 2001 anti-Semitic incidents,
numbering 1,629 cases, reached an historical high, although the great
majority were propaganda offences.
Like other EU countries, Germany suffered anti-Semitic
incidents in early 2002. During the first three months 127 cases were
registered: 77 of which were incitement of hatred; 26 were propaganda and
five were violent offences; in addition, there were four cases of damage
to property, three cases of desecration of graves, and twelve other
offences. But the main problem in Germany is not an increase in physical
attacks on Jews or their organisations, but a more subtle form of
anti-Semitism, which is mainly expressed in anti-Jewish attitudes and
statements. From the beginning, the debate about anti-Semitism was closely
linked to the question of how far criticism of Israeli policy in the
Middle East conflict can go. Leading representatives of the Jewish
community continuously expressed their view that criticising Israel has
never been a taboo subject, but allusions to or comparisons with the
behaviour of the Nazi regime would be unacceptable and unjustified.
Nevertheless, the basic question, regarding what kind of criticism is
justifiable without running the risk of being called anti-Semitic, remains
unanswered.
Since the escalation of the Middle East conflict and
the increase of anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian demonstrations in
Germany, the Jewish communities have been expressing growing concern.
Anti-Semitism became one of the main topics in the German media from mid
May till the end of June – mainly because of two interconnected incidents:
the Karsli and the Möllemann cases (see below)
1. Physical acts of violence
No incident of physical violence was reported between
15 May and 15June in Germany. In the previous month (April) four cases
were registered:
14 April: in Berlin two Jewish women wearing a Star of
David necklace were attacked. 15 April: graffiti was found on the
synagogue in Herford reading: "Six million is not enough."
20 April: in Dachau the monument near the site of the
concentration camp was desecrated and gravestones in the nearby Jewish
cemetery were damaged.
28 April: in Berlin a bottle with flammable liquids was
thrown at the synagogue on the Kreuzberger Fraenkelufer without causing
any damage.
Physical threat
There was one case of a bomb scare that was possibly
committed for anti-Semitic reasons. On 28 May, an unidentified man called
the Hessischen Rundfunk (Hessian Broadcasting Corporation) in Frankfurt
and asked whether the live programme "Achtung Friedman!" (showmaster
Michel Friedman, vice-chairman of the Central Council of the Jews in
Germany, was currently in the news because of a heated argument with
Jürgen Möllemann, see below) was to be broadcast that evening. After a
corporation employee confirmed this, the man said that a bomb would blow
up the main tower, the building where the talk show takes place. Police
evacuated the building, the search was called off without any results, and
the talk show took place with a 45-minute delay.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Indirect threats
Since early April the Jewish communities and the
Central Council of the Jews in Germany have received a huge amount of
anti-Semitic letters, e-mails and phone calls with an increasingly
aggressive tone. Representatives of the organisations, e.g. the chairman
of the Jewish Community in Berlin, Alexander Brenner, noted that the
writers of these agitation letters no longer even shy away from signing
the letters with their complete name and address. In Brenner’s opinion
many writers disguise their anti-Jewish aggression as criticism of Israel.
The weekly Jewish newspaper Allgemeine Jüdische Wochenzeitung released a
sample of these letters. On 3 June 2002, the offices of the Munich Jewish
Community received, for the third time, a letter with threats of murder
involving the heads of the umbrella organisation of the Jewish communities
in Germany and against the President of the Jewish Community in Munich.
The letter contained a specific threat to plant an explosive charge near a
kosher butcher shop in Munich.
On 21 May the German branch of the anti-globalisation
organisation "attac" invited to an anti-Bush demonstration in Berlin. The
leaflet for the demonstration used the well-known picture of "Uncle Sam"
but with a Stürmer-style portrait with a "typical Jewish nose". This
implied the supposed Jewish world conspiracy because on the forefinger of
"Uncle Sam" hangs the world on a thread. Portraying "Uncle Sam" as Jewish
refers to the supposed Jewish influence on the United States policy and
connects anti-Jewish and anti-American feelings.
Politics
The former member of the Green Party (Bündnis90/Die
Grünen) Jamal Karsli, a German with an immigrant background (Syria) who
applied for admission in the liberal-democratic party FDP on 30 April,
launched a public debate about criticizing Israel’s policy and
anti-Semitism with an interview given to the weekly right-wing newspaper
Junge Freiheit on 3 May. Karsli said that the "very big Zionistic lobby"
was controlling the major part of worldwide media and, therefore, would be
capable of "getting down on every person no matter how important". Michel
Friedman, vice-chairman of the Central Council of the Jews in Germany,
indirectly accused Karsli of being an "anti-Semite, and Paul Spiegel,
chairman of the Central Council, demanded that the FDP should refuse
Karsli’s admission to the party. The deputy-chairman of the FDP and party
leader in North Rhine-Westphalia, Jürgen Möllemann, rejected this demand,
although other leading FDP politicians, including chairman Westerwelle,
supported it. Nearly all public opinion leaders distanced themselves from
Karsli’s statements, except Möllemann. On 22 May, Karsli withdrew his
application for admission to the FDP due to "public hounding". Möllemann
launched another debate closely linked to the "Karsli case" in early
April, when he commented on the Palestinian suicidal attacks on Israelis
with the words: "I would also defend myself, (...) and I would also do it
in the land of the aggressor". Expressing understanding or even sympathy
with the Palestinian people was interpreted by German media and
politicians as legitimising suicidal attacks and brought him the reproach
of anti-Semitism from, amongst others, Michel Friedman. In the course of
the debate about Karsli’s statements, Möllemann accused Friedman of
himself being partly responsible for anti-Semitism in Germany. He said
that he feared that hardly anyone else would make anti-Semitism more
popular than Prime Minister Sharon in Israel and Michel Friedman "with his
intolerant and spiteful way" in Germany. A few days later Möllemann called
Friedman "obviously megalomaniac" and renewed his accusation that Friedman
would provoke "anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic resentments" with his
"unbearable, aggressive, arrogant way of treating" people who criticise
Sharon. Möllemann said that he had received more than 11,000 approving
letters.
The discussion about Möllemann’s statements in
particular and the attitude of the FDP in general dominated the media for
weeks. Politicians of all democratic parties in Germany blamed Möllemann
for using this debate to get more votes for the Liberal Party in the
federal election in September, and Westerwelle, leader of the FDP, even
admitted that he is seeking to win votes from people who had voted for
right-wing parties in the previous federal election. After Karsli had left
the parliamentary group of the FDP in North Rhine-Westfalia, Möllemann
declared publicly: "If I have hurt the feelings of Jewish people, I want
to apologise to them". However, he renewed his attacks on Friedman and
excluded him deliberately from his apology. A few days before the Federal
election (22 September) Möllemann spread a flyer repeating the accusation
against Sharon and Friedman. The chairman of the FDP forced him to resign
as a vice chairman a few days later, arguing that his playing with
anti-Semitism has caused a considerable loss of votes for the FDP. Finally
on 20 October Möllemann resigned also as party leader in North
Rhine-Westfalia.
Reaction and public debate about Möllemann and Karsli
The "Karsli case" and the argument between Möllemann
and Friedman have evoked anti-Semitic and hate reactions in Germany. On
the Internet website of the FDP parliamentary group ( the discussion forum
"Speaker’s corner" has been used to for all kinds of anti-Semitic
statements, such as: Germany has to free itself from "the chains of
bondage of Israel"; "The Jews themselves propagate the so-called
‘anti-Semitism’ in order to punish everyone who contradicts them".
Statements which praised Möllemann for his comments about Israel and
Friedman can be found on several discussion for a of the Liberal Party.
Countless racial and anti-Semitic statements were also sent to Möllemann’s
own website before it had to be shut down because of a hacker attack. The
online discussion forum of the weekly magazine Der Spiegel ( was also used
for anti-Semitic hate speech.
Public discourse
The broad discussion about a novel by Martin Walser,
which had not yet been published, led to a further escalation in the
anti-Semitism debate. The author Walser, who was accused of serving
anti-Semitic tendencies by the former chairman of the Central Council of
the Jews, Ignatz Bubis, four years ago, because he described Auschwitz as
a "moral cudgel" in Germany, was attacked by parts of the media. The
editor of the FAZ (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung), Frank Schirrmacher,
said that his latest novel Tod eines Kritikers ("Death of a Critic") would
serve anti-Semitic resentments. He thus refused the planned pre-release
serial publication in his newspaper. Walser himself rejected any
accusations of being anti-Semitic. He claimed that the novel is about
"power in the world of culture", not about Jewry. This statement was
doubted in parts of the media, but even assuming that Walser had not
intended to play with anti-Semitic resentments, he should have been able
to anticipate how his novel might be (mis)read and interpreted by others.
The argument between Walser and Schirrmacher was linked to the heated
debate about anti-Semitism in Möllemann’s statements and was dealt with in
numerous articles in German newspapers.
Internet
On 31 March the radical Muslim organisation
"Hizb-ut-tahrir" (Liberation Party) published a leaflet on its German
homepage containing the following statements: "The Jews are a people of
slander. They are a treacherous people who violate oaths and covenants
(…). Allah has forbidden us from allying ourselves with them. (…) Indeed,
that you should destroy the monstrous Jewish entity. (…) Kill all Jews (…)
wherever you find them." The organisation has been observed for a longer
time by the German Office for the Protection of the Constitution
(Verfassungsschutz) but did not receive public attention before they
organised a public lecture on "The Iraq – e new war and its consequences"
at the Berlin Technical University in October 2002 where also
representatives of the German extreme right-wing party NPD (National
Democratic Party) participated.
3. Research studies
On 31 May, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) released
a study in Berlin about how the German print media reported four major
incidents in the Middle East during the second Intifada between September
2000 and August 2001. The study, conducted by the Linguistic and Social
Research Institute in Duisburg (Institut für Sprach- und Sozialforschung),
came to the conclusion that the reporting of the Middle East conflict in
the newspapers and magazines examined was biased and showed anti-Semitic
elements which would often be liable to (re)produce existing anti-Semitic
and racial prejudice. The reporting also used terms to describe the
behaviour of the Israeli troops, which make the reader associate their
actions with genocide and suggest similarities to fascism (e.g.
"massacre"). Generally speaking, the media was criticised for its
anti-Semitic allusions and stereotypes. According to the study, there are
deeply latent anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist prejudices in the German
public, usually hidden behind "concealed" and "vague allusions". The study
was criticised by the weekly newspaper Die Zeit because it refused to
provide proof as to whether and how the way of reporting affects reception
in Germany. Another study on reporting of the Middle East conflict showed
that, in comparison to some other countries (USA, South Africa, the UK),
TV reporting in Germany encompassed a broader spectrum of neutral
presentations of events.
In the monitoring period three surveys were conducted
which posed questions concerning anti-Semitism. According to the study
"Political Attitudes in Germany", conducted by the Sigmund-Freud-Institut
in Frankfurt in April 2002, anti-Semitic tendencies have increased since
1999. The statement "I can understand well that some people feel
unpleasant about Jews" was confirmed by 36% (1999: 20%). The second
statement offered by the study, that the Jews are responsible for the
problems in the world, showed in contrast a reduction in anti-Semitic
attitudes. A further study from April 2002, "Extreme Right Attitudes in
Germany", included three statements on anti-Semitism: "Even today Jews
have too much influence"; "The Jews simply have something particular and
peculiar about them and are not so suited to us"; "More than others, the
Jews use dirty tricks to achieve what they want". The study showed that in
comparison to 1994 and 2000 there was a strong increase in the number of
negative answers; surprisingly, however, these came from those questioned
from West Germany. This indicates an effect determined by current events:
many West Germans reacted to Israeli policy and the heated debate about
the bounds of legitimate criticism of this policy, whereas these issues
found obviously less resonance amongst East Germans. A poll conducted by
NfO Infratest in June had different results: generally speaking, the given
answers lead to the conclusion that anti-Semitic resentments have been
slightly decreasing in Germany over the past 11 years. In June 2002, 68%
of those polled rejected the statement "The Jews are partly responsible
for being hated and persecuted", while 29% confirmed the statement (in
1991 confirmation was 32%). The question "How many Germans have an
anti-Jewish attitude?" was answered as follows: 2% believed "most of the
Germans", 13% "a high number of Germans", 57% "a small number of Germans",
and 26% said "hardly anyone". Nevertheless, 29% confirmed the statement
that "Jews have too much influence on the world". This number is lower
than in the 1991 poll, when it was agreed by 36%. Between 16 May and 4
June respectively between 9 and 29 September surveys commissioned by the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in New York, "European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict", were conducted in ten
European countries, including Germany (see Table: Report on Belgium) Here
the agreement with anti-Semitic stereotypes was on similar levels as in
France and Belgium%). From the four stereotypical statements presented,
19% of respondents agreed to at least three. With 55% the Germans agreed
on an average with the statement "Jews are more loyal to Israel than to
this country" (average 51%).
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence, and
aggression
In the period from 15 May to 15 June, 2002 there were
many appeals for solidarity with the Jewish communities and calls for
promoting an inter-religious dialogue. Appeals were made by the chairman
of the Central Council of the Jews, Paul Spiegel, but also from
representatives of the Christian churches, for example by the chairman of
the German Conference of Bishops (Deutsche Bischofskonferenz), Karl
Lehmann, the Bavarian bishop Dr. Johannes Friedrich or the chairman of the
Council of the Protestant Church, Manfred Kock. Beside calls for
solidarity with the Jews, there have also been efforts to improve the
inter-religious dialogue. The German Coordinating Council of Societies for
Christian-Jewish Cooperation (Deutscher Koordinierungsrat der
Gesellschaften für Christlich-Jüdische Zusammenarbeit; member of the
International Council of Christians and Jews) organised a meeting in June
in which the importance of an inter-religious dialogue was discussed.
An inter-religious discussion group was recently also
established in the city of Bremen. A few weeks prior, the Muslims had
invited the Jewish community in order to foster a dialogue and to promote
a peaceful way of living together. This started a process of setting up a
discussion group which is presently not only made up of Muslims and Jews,
but also of non-Muslim Palestinians, Protestants, Catholics, peace
campaigners, politicians and trade unionists. They are attempting to
maintain positive inter-cultural relations in Bremen as an example for
other towns. In Germany there are some non-governmental programmes and
initiatives, which aim to combat anti-Semitism, although no further
initiatives were started in the relevant period. The Turkish Association
Berlin-Brandenburg, the Turkish Community Association of Germany as well
as the Central Council of Muslims all sharply criticised the FDP’s
vice-chairman Möllemann at the beginning of June. "To employ an
anti-Semitic climate for political purposes must be taboo", declared the
chairmen. The Turkish Association Berlin-Brandenburg called upon its
members to protest together with the Jewish community in front of the FDP
headquarters in Berlin against "playing with anti-Semitism".
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
Almost all public leaders distanced themselves from
Jürgen Möllemann’s statements in relation to the current debate about
anti-Semitism and pronounced (Chancellor Gerhard Schröder) their fear of
negative consequences for Germany’s reputation abroad which might arise
from the ongoing debate. Möllemann’s statements received positive
reactions from some right-wing parties such as "Die Republikaner", the NPD
(National Democratic Party Germany) and the DVU. But the vice-chairman
also had to face criticism from within his own party as well. With regard
to the parties, the Liberal Democrats as well as the Social Democrats/the
Greens have submitted separate but identical applications to the German
Bundestag (lower house of the German parliament) demanding that
anti-Semitic tendencies be eradicated and that anti-Semitism may not be
exploited for election campaigns. The Bundespräsident (Head of State of
the Federal Republic of Germany), Johannes Rau, had already entered into
the discussion in May by meeting representatives of the Central Council of
Jews in order to express his solidarity with the Jewish communities. In an
interview with the Jewish newspaper Allgemeine Jüdische Wochenzeitung he
remarked on his fear of a decreasing level of inhibition for making
anti-Semitic statements, although he pointed out that criticism of Israel
is not tantamount to anti-Semitism. Even a trade union reacted directly in
relation to the anti-Semitism debate. The "IG Bauern-Agrar-Umwelt" split
from their member Jürgen Möllemann by "mutual agreement" as a result of
the politician’s statements.
On 19 April the German Interior Minister Otto Schily,
together with his colleagues from France, Belgium, Spain and Great
Britain, presented a joint declaration on "Racism, Xenophobia and
Anti-Semitism" which appealed for preventive measures and a European-wide
coordination of all responsible agencies and offices.
From 29 September 2002 the Jewish Museum in Berlin
opened a short three-week exhibition that showed letters written during
the Möllemann campaign to the Jewish journalist Henryk M. Broder and to
the "Allgemeine Jüdische Wochenzeitung" under the title "Ich bin kein
Antisemit" (I am not an anti-Semite).
In early July a panel Forum on Anti-Semitism as
concerted action to stem escalating violence in conjunction with the 11th
annual Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was held in Berlin. This session was followed
up on the initiative of German Bundestag Member Gert Weisskirchen and
United States Helsinki Commission Co-Chairman Christopher H. Smith by a
meeting of members of the Commission and a German Bundestag delegation in
Washington DC in December. The Forum heard experts on Anti-Semitism in
Europe and the United States and a "letter of intent" was signed by Gert
Weisskirchen and Christopher H. Smith.
Ireland
The Jewish community in the Republic of Ireland (total
population: 3.8 million mostly Roman Catholics - 91.6 per cent and
Protestants, the only significant religious minority - 3 per cent) is a
small, but long established community, which comprises approximately
1000-1600 people who mostly live in Dublin (0.04%). There has been no
reporting of anti-Semitic incidents in recent years. The Garda reported
the existence of several far-right individuals or small groups, none of
whom however have come to the fore publicly. Most of the incidents
referred to in this report come from information supplied by Jewish
organisations in Ireland. Many incidents reported are considered to be
one-off and unusual occurrences, with no evidence of a systematic
targeting of the Jewish community in Ireland. The police provide discreet
presence at the synagogue in Dublin on certain occasions. According to the
Intercultural Office, there appear to be good relations between the local
police and representatives of the Jewish community and meetings have been
held between Garda Racial & Intercultural Office and Jewish communal
leaders in the period in question. However, one representative of the
Jewish Representative Council of Ireland contends that there is increased
apprehension in the Irish Jewish community. This anxiety relates primarily
to recent events in Europe, such as the increased electoral support of the
far right, as opposed to any marked change in attitudes amongst the Irish
population.
1. Physical acts of violence
There have been no reports of physical violence against
Jews or their properties during the period of 15 May-15 June.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats
The Israeli embassy has received a number of hate
telephone calls in the last month but has not logged the exact number. The
embassy received a piece of hate mail on 10 June, written on a brown paper
bag. The Garda Racial and Intercultural Office reports that there have
been a few threatening and abusive phone calls to Jewish residents in the
Terenure district of Dublin, where the synagogue is located. These were
dealt with by local Garda.
Graffiti
On 19 April 2002, Dublin graffiti equating Jews with
Nazis and the Star of David with a swastika was found near the main
synagogue in Dublin.
Leaflets
Amnesty International ran an advertising campaign on
Israel and the Occupied Territories. A copy of the advertisement was
returned to the office with the words "Hitler Was Right" written over it.
Media and public discourse
A survey of national newspapers for the month 15 May –
15 June shows no verbal attacks on Jews in public discourse or by Irish
politicians. A representative of the Jewish Representative Council
maintained that there had been some concern about the tone of some
correspondence in the Irish Times and in debate on Israel’s policies on
the Joe Duffy programme of RTE radio, but that ultimately it was not
deemed to be anti-Semitic but essentially hostile to Israeli policy.
Internet
The website National Socialist Are Us contains a
section called "The New Folk" where White supremacist and "Aryan" ideology
is expressed. The website also contains links to other white supremacist
sites including Stormfront. In its report on racial incidents May-October
2001, the NCCRI referred to this website and concerns about it and two
others run by the Irish Fascist Party and Irish National Front.
3. Research studies
There were no reports or studies focusing solely on
anti-Semitism in the period monitored.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
There are no examples of good practices to report.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
Nothing to report
Greece
In Greece, population 10 million, the 5000 Jews
represent a small minority (3000, mainly in Athens, and 1000 in
Thessaloniki). Despite denials on the part of most Greek opinion leaders
and leaders of the Greek Jewish community, anti-Semitism does seem to
exist in Greece, perhaps not so much in social behaviour, but rather as a
latent structure. The Orthodox Church continues to include in the liturgy
ritual of Good Friday anti-Jewish references and also the religious
prejudices against "the Christ killers" remain virulent. Anti-Semitic
rhetoric in Greece usually takes the form of opposition to a
conspiratorial conception of "Zionism", interpreted as a "Jewish plot for
world domination". Latent prejudices and bigotry became evident during the
last two years over the issue of having religion included on Greek
identity cards. When the Greek government according to EU standards
removed this reference it was vilified for "bowing to Jewish pressure".
Although all mainstream political parties denounce anti-Semitism, they
sometimes also exhibit a curiously strong anti-Semitism seemingly confused
with an anti-Israeli and anti-American stance. This form of anti-Semitism
was reinforced by Israel’s alliance with Turkey, an alliance that led
Greece to reinforce its links with the Arab world. Despite their close
affiliation to the United States, successive post-war governments and even
the Junta followed a foreign policy unfavourable to Israel, which as an
ally of Turkey was seen as a potential enemy. The state of Israel was only
recognised de-jure by the conservative New Democracy government of Prime
Minister K. Mitsotakis in 1990, partly as a result of the Greek
involvement in the Gulf War and partly as a result of the ongoing peace
process in the Middle East. Populist elements within all political parties
still continue to engage in the anti-Semitic rhetoric that stresses the
conspiratorial element. Nearly all these prejudices and popular demonising
fortified the barriers in the social relationships between Jewish and
non-Jewish Greeks.
1. Physical acts of violence
Several Jewish sites were vandalised and defaced with
Nazi slogans and graffiti in the last few years, for example the Jewish
cemetery in Athens (on 25-26 May 2000) and the Holocaust Memorial and the
synagogue in Thessaloniki. In part the only active neo-Nazi group Chrissi
Agvi is responsible for these attacks. The al-Aqsa Intifada set off a
series of small pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which, however, all went
ahead without any outbreaks of violence. During the period covered by the
report no physical attacks on Jews or Jewish organisations or incidents
concerning them have been reported.
However, we would like to note that only a month before
the following incidents were recorded by ANTIGONE, the Central Board of
Jewish Communities in Greece and by other NGOs. On 15 and 16 April 2002
the Holocaust Memorial in Thessaloniki was vandalised by person(s) unknown
who sprayed red paint on the wreaths, which had been laid two days
previously in memory of the victims of the Holocaust, and on the
surrounding area. The word "Palestinians" was written in paint nearby. The
incident occurred a day after a large pro-Palestinian demonstration had
been held in Thessaloniki. The Central Jewish Board of Greece wrote to the
Minister of Public Order asking for measures to be taken to guard these
sites more effectively in the future and to publicly condemn the
incidents. The Government (on 17 April), political parties and the
Orthodox Church strongly condemned the incident. On 15 April 2002, the
Jewish cemetery of Ioannina in Northern Greece was vandalised by person(s)
unknown with Nazi and anti-Semitic graffiti slogans. The cemetery had
already been desecrated on 16 January 2002. The Greek Government,
political parties and the Orthodox Church condemned the incident in strong
terms. On 18 April the Holocaust Memorial of Drama in northern Greece and
the Jewish cemetery of Zavlani in Patras (southern Greece) were vandalised
with Nazi and anti-Semitic graffiti slogans. The Greek Government,
political parties and the Orthodox Church condemned the incident.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Politics
The rumour, first published by some newspapers of the
Arab press, that 4000 Jews had been warned by the Israeli Secret Service
Mossad and did not go to their offices on 11 September, the day of the
terrorist attack in New York, was tabled as a question in Parliament by MP
and leader of the ultra nationalist party "LAOS" G. Karatzaferis soon
after the attack. Print and broadcast media – even the Bulletin of the
Technical Chamber of Greece (8 October, 2001) – reported this rumour as
well. According to a poll conducted five weeks after the event, 42% of
Greeks subscribed to this rumour, as opposed to 30% who rejected it. The
Central Jewish Board and the Israeli Embassy protested to politicians and
the press. In a statement the Union of Athens Press Journalists mentioned
the small television station "Tele Asty" (which is owned by Karatzaferis
and spread the anti-Semitic rumours) as a special case of racist behaviour
towards the Jews. It should also be noted that most newspapers reported
this rumour ironically and not in an anti-Semitic way.
Insults
The Chairman of the Central Board of Jewish Communities
in his written reply to the National Focal Point’s request for information
has included a number of cartoons published in national dailies that may
be considered as insulting to Jews.
Graffiti
This has been reported in the previous section under
"Vandalism and Disparagement". There have been no other reported graffiti
or other anti-Semitic inscriptions by human rights NGOs.
Media
On 2 April the two largest dailies Ta Nea and
Elefterotypia (center-left) as well as the right-wing daily Apogevmatini
printed as unquestionable reality a heinous libel that Israelis were
trafficking the organs of dead Palestinian fighters and performing medical
experiments on Arab prisoners.
The Chairman of the Central Board of Jewish Communities
in his written reply to the National Focal Point’s request for information
has stressed that "there is a conscious attempt to create an anti-Semitic
climate by various articles that are critical of the policies pursued by
Israel and personally its Prime Minister"; he specifically pointed out two
articles that put forward the view that Jews have excessively used the
pain resulting from the cruelty of the Holocaust published during the
period in question:
- "Auschwitz and Palestine", published in the daily
national newspaper Kathimerini on 2 June 2002.
- "The excessive use of the Holocaust", published in
the daily national newspaper Kathimerini on 4 June 2002. He also pointed
out that cartoons with anti-Semitic content have appeared in newspapers
during the period in question and in previous months.
A small number of commentators, who frequently appear
on small TV stations like the ultra right wing Tele-Asty and Extra Channel
expressing anti-Semitic views, are not considered "opinion leaders" and
their influence is very small. The popular composer Mikis Theodorakis
wrote an editorial for the Greek daily TO VIMA in which he claimed that
the Jews are "imitating the Nazi savagery" and that they are "enchanted by
the Nazi methods".
Internet
1997 the Hellenic Nationalist Page published an
anti-Semitic diatribe on its Internet site, entitled "New Zionist Attack
against Hellenism" which is still on their homepage. Taking issue with
phrases in the ad referring to the Maccabean victory over the Greeks, the
article accused the Jews of racism and claimed, falsely, that Rupert
Murdoch, owner of the New York Post, was a Jew. The article
also reiterated other charges the group had made in the past, such as
Jewish collaboration with "the Ottomans in the subjugation of Byzantium,"
and the Jews’ promotion of the notion that "they are the only (or at least
the most victimised) victim in history." Further, it questioned the
"imaginary 6 million figure" of people who perished in the Holocaust, in
contrast to the documented figure of 800,000 Greeks lost in World War II.
Similar articles have appeared on this website in recent years. The latest
addition (news 2001) presents an article on "The exclusive victims of
genocide" which contains similar anti-Semitic stereotypes and refers to
another article from 1996 (with a link to be opened) on "Zionists and
Mongols – Butchers of Hellenism."
3. Research Studies
Opinion polls carried out after 11 September terrorist
attacks showed that a significant proportion of the Greek public readily
accepted conspiratorial rumours implicating the Israeli secret services in
the attack. There is no reliable scientific data available, but it may be
that media reports may have in their critical approach towards Israel’s
military operations inadvertently led to a rise in anti-Semitic sentiments
among the Greek population.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
Only small examples had been visible: On 6 June the
topic in Modern Greek presented in the formal examinations for entry into
Greek Universities (Panhellenic Examinations) was an excerpt from the
"Diary of Anne Frank". Students were asked to comment and compare WWII and
modern incidents of racism and anti-Semitism. On 28 January 2002 the
President of the Republic was visited by the teachers and pupils of the
primary school of the Jewish Community of Athens. On 29 January Leon
Benmayor, honorary Chairman of the Jewish Community of Thessaloniki and
Holocaust survivor, was honoured with the Golden Cross of the Greek Legion
of Honour by the President of the Republic for his contribution to
science. There was also an excellent treatment of Zionism as the quest for
national identity and a state by the IosPress group of journalists who
write for the national daily Eleftherotypia (published on 28 April 2002).
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
The Government, political parties and the Orthodox
Church have always condemned any anti-Semitic incidents through their
official spokespersons and the Government has taken special security
measures for safeguarding Jewish establishments. The government on 17
April condemned acts of vandalism at the Holocaust memorial in
Thessaloniki and the Jewish cemetery of Ioannina.
There have been no particular reactions by politicians
or other opinion leaders during the period in question. This brought the
Greek Helsinki Monitor/Minority Rights Group to the conviction "that the
government has yet to take a strong and consistent stand against
anti-Semitism. Even extreme anti-Semitic views openly expressed by
Orthodox clergy members, politicians, factions, cultural icons, and
journalists pass without comment. Attacks on Jewish monuments and property
receive little if any attention in the media and faint condemnation by the
political and spiritual leadership." The large majority of politicians and
opinion leaders from both the right and the left have been strongly
critical of the military offensive against the Palestinian Authority and
the following events, but have equally condemned terrorist acts stressing
the need for a peaceful settlement and the futility of military solutions.
On 31 March the speaker of the Greek Parliament and leading PASOK member
Apostolos Kaklamanis condemned Israel for committing genocide against the
Palestinian people. The Central Jewish Council expressed its deep regrets
"for the unacceptable and unfair comparison" of the Holocaust with Israeli
action in the West Bank. During an OSCE parliamentary discussion on
current European anti-Semitism on 8 July 2002, the Simon Wiesenthal Center
urged the Greek Prime Minister and other Greek leaders to publicly condemn
the use of anti-Semitic stereotypes and Nazi imagery that has
characterised much of the public and media criticism of Israel.
Spain
In Spain (total population 40 million) Jews were
recognised as full citizens in 1978. Today the Jewish population numbers
about 40,000, 20,000 of whom are registered in the Jewish communities. The
majority live in the larger cities of Spain on the Iberian Peninsula,
North Africa or the islands. Many of the prejudices cultivated during the
Franco years persist; during that time Israel was never recognised. Israel
and Spain did not establish diplomatic ties until 1986, when Spain
recognised the State of Israel. Many young Spaniards consider support of
the PLO a crucial qualification for being identified as "progressive" or
leftist.
Since the beginning of the second Intifada more and
more anti-Semitic attacks are taking place, mainly after pro-Palestinian
demonstrations. In October 2000 the Holocaust Memorial in Barcelona was
desecrated and the glass door of Spanish-Moroccan synagogue in the North
African enclave of Ceuta destroyed and anti-Semitic pamphlets distributed
across the market place. On 8 October, the most important Jewish holiday
Yom Kippur, graffiti was smeared across a house belonging to the local
Jewish association in Oviedo that read "Jew murderers". An incident had
taken place the day before during the football match between Spain and
Israel outside the stadium in Madrid. Neo-Nazis shouted anti-Semitic
slogans and distributed anti-Semitic literature. Also, windows of the main
synagogue in Madrid were shattered on 13 October. The Imam of Valencia
asserted on 21 September 2001 in a mosque filled with worshipers: "All the
evidence shows that the Jews are guilty", referring to the claim by
radical Islamists, right-wing extremists and Holocaust deniers that Jews
were behind the attacks in New York and Washington on 11 September. In
September 2001 the synagogue of Melilla was attacked and a Jewish cemetery
desecrated; in Ceuta several Jewish buildings were daubed with paint.
1. Physical acts of violence
On 5 January 2002, anti-Semitic graffiti was found on
the door of a synagogue in Madrid; around midnight of 8 March 2002, the
door of the Ceuta synagogue was set on fire. The synagogue of Madrid is
now under permanent police surveillance and Jewish schools are also
provided with police surveillance at the beginning and end of activities.
2. Verbal Aggression/hate speech
Direct Threats
In July outside the synagogue in Madrid, a group of twenty
skinheads demonstrated, shouting anti-Israel and anti-Semitic slogans.
Public Discourse
The Movimiento Social Republicano (MSR), which on other
occasions joins xenophobic protests against Muslims (for example against
the opening of a Moroccan consulate in Almeria), participated in
pro-Palestinian demonstrations organised by radical Islamists and NGOs,
where the participants also displayed anti-American attitudes. The mass
media often confuses Israel and the Jewish community.
On 7 April 2002, a pro-Palestinian demonstration
attracted official representatives from all Catalan political parties,
except the conservative PP, and a total of 7000 people in Barcelona. One
demonstrator, who appeared clearly in a photograph taken, was carrying a
caricature of Ariel Sharon’s head on a pig’s body (traditional
anti-Semitic stereotype), which is surrounded by swastikas.
Internet
A series of international right-wing extremist and
revisionist/denial homepages offer links in Spanish. Particular attention
is to be given to the website of the "Nuevo Order" group that is networked
per links with the entire far-right scene and whose label shows a
similarity with the American militant far-right group "Stormfront". "Nuevo
Order" combines anti-Semitism with anti-Americanism and mixes old with
modern anti-Semitic stereotypes. The "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" can
be downloaded here as well as at the linked site belonging to the "Fuerza
Aria". The "Fuerza Aria", a group that spreads extreme rightist and
National Socialist thought, conducts campaigns via the Internet "Against
the Jewish Power" and propagates a pro-Palestinian and pro-Iraqi stance.
3. Research Studies
The survey commissioned by the ADL conducted between 9
and 29 September 2002 concerning "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel
and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" (see Table: Report on Belgium)
established that Spanish respondents harbour the most anti-Semitic view.
72% agreed to the statement "Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this
country" (EU average: 51%) and 63 % to the statement "Jews have too much
power in the business world".
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
On 9 June 2002 the Evangelical Church and the Institute
for Judeo-Christian Studies in Madrid together with the Jewish communities
of Madrid and Barcelona organised a demonstration of support for Israel
also as a sign against anti-Semitic attitudes.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
Newspapers have become more deliberate in their use of
graphics, avoiding any assimilation between Nazi and Jew symbols. The
Spanish Interior Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey, together with his colleagues
from Germany, France, Belgium and the United Kingdom, presented a joint
declaration against "Racism, Xenophobia and anti-Semitism" in April 2002.
France
Jews in France (total population: 60 million) – the
biggest such community in Western Europe (600,000-700,000, half of them
living in the Paris area) – are generally well respected, socially
assimilated and well represented in politics.
Anti-Semitic prejudices in France were already virulent
during the Six Day War and the anti-Zionist campaign of the 1970s and
1980s. With the successes achieved by the extreme right-wing Front
National and an increasing denial of the Holocaust in the 1990s such
stereotypes once again received strong acceptance. At the same time, in
the mid-1990s began the critical engagement with National Socialism,
collaboration and the responsibility of the Vichy Regime.
As the second Intifada began, the number of
anti-Semitic criminal offences rose drastically; out of 216 racist acts
recorded in 2000 146 were motivated by anti-Semitism. The peak was reached
during the Jewish High Holidays in October 2000; one third of the
anti-Semitic attacks committed worldwide took place in France (between 1
September 2000 and 31 January 2002 405 anti-Semitic incidents were
documented). The perpetrators were only seldom from the extreme right
milieu, coming instead mainly from non-organised Maghrebian and North
African youths. After interrogating 42 suspects, the police concluded that
these are "predominantly delinquents without ideology, motivated by a
diffuse hostility to Israel, exacerbated by the media representation of
the Middle East conflict (…) a conflict which, they see, reproduces the
picture of exclusion and failure of which they feel victims in France".
Beginning in January 2002, but mainly from the end of March till the
middle of April 2002, there was a wave of anti-Semitic attacks. In the
first half of April attacks against Jews and Jewish institutions in Paris
and surrounding areas were daily occurrences. This was a repeat of the
situation of October 2000. In reaction to the anti-Semitic mood the number
of the French Jews who immigrated to Israel in 2002 doubled to 2,566, the
highest number since 1972.
In addition, there was an almost polemical debate on
the nature as well as the denunciation of anti-Semitism linked to the
situation in the Middle East and to Islam, a debate, which led to
divisions between prominent participants and anti-racist groups.
Anti-Semitism and security questions specific to the Jewish community were
almost absent from public debate during this period. In fact, the main
ideological themes in the public debate at a time of both Presidential (12
April and 5 May 2002) and national (9 and 16 June 2002) elections were law
and order and the unexpectedly strong support for the Front National and
its leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, who played on anti-Semitic resentments.
Viewed from a later perspective, there is an obvious connection with
anti-Semitism. During that same period there was a renewed outbreak of
anti-Muslim acts and speech attributed to the far right.
1. Physical acts of violence
Indications are that there was a significant decrease
in May and June 2002 in observed acts in relation to the period from 29
March to 17 April 2002, a period in which police sources recorded 395
events, ranging from graffiti to assaults. Sixty-three percent of these
events involved anti-Semitic graffiti, while 16 cases of assault and 14 of
arson or attempted arson against synagogues were reported to the police.
These acts principally took place in large urban areas (Ile-de-France,
Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur and Alsace). Many of the violent incidents
occurred around the pro-Palestinian demonstrations at the end of March in
Lyon, Strasbourg, Marseille and Toulouse. While the hypothesis of a
détente needs to be confirmed by time, it is true that hostility displayed
towards Jews was still observed, in particular by new Jewish victim
support groups. The people in charge of the help lines « SOS Vérité et
Sécurité » or « SOS antisémitisme » estimated an average of 8 to 12
reports of this kind every day.
On 10 May eight Arabs who studied with him in the same
school attacked a 16-year-old Jewish youth in Bordeaux. The attack was
accompanied by curses and threats.
On 12 May 2002 in Saint-Maur des Fossés (a Paris
suburb), three young Jews who were playing football stated that they were
insulted and attacked by about fifteen young people "of North African
origin". They lodged a complaint against them for assault and racist
remarks.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Indirect threats
On 18 May 2002 at a demonstration organised in the XIXth
district of Paris by the Parti des Musulmans de France against the
"Naqba", hostile slogans towards Jews were shouted without any attempt
from the organisers to intervene.
On 26 May 2002 during a demonstration organised in
Paris against George W. Bush’s trip to France by groups such as the French
Communist Party, the Green party "Les Verts", the Revolutionary Communist
League ("Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire", LCR) and others such as the
MRAP ("Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peuples" -
Movement against racism and for friendship between peoples) and the Human
Rights League, about thirty teenagers chanted anti-Jewish and pro-Bin
Laden slogans. The organisers expelled them. Ethnic minority activists
were then forced to intervene to prevent some youths from attacking a
young couple on a scooter in the belief that they were Jewish.
The anti-Semitic atmosphere also found expression in
verbal attacks at schools and universities.
Graffiti
On 21 May 2002 the police questioned an 18-year-old
female student who was suspected of drawing anti-Semitic slogans and
symbols on a kosher butcher’s shop front in Pré Saint-Gervais
(Seine-Saint-Denis, Paris suburb).
In June 2002 advertising posters in various metro
stations as well as election posters were defaced by graffiti showing the
Star of David and the swastika connected by an "=" sign. It should be
noted that many Front National and RPF (Rassemblement pour la France)
election posters were also defaced by graffiti with such terms as "racist"
or "Fascist".
Media
In the edition of the daily Le Figaro from 7 June 2002,
Oriana Fallaci, who is the Italian author of a polemical book entitled "La
rage et l'orgueil" (Rage and Pride), wrote a similarly polemical article
entitled "Sur l'antisémitisme" ("On anti-Semitism").
On 10 June 2002 the MRAP (Mouvement contre le racisme et
pour l'amitié entre les peuples) lodged a complaint against Oriana
Fallaci’s book, calling it "a despicable work where slander, vulgarity and
confusion intermingle with contempt. This book is an ‘asserted call’ to
racist hatred and violence against all Muslims." The request for it to be
banned proved unsuccessful.
Internet
On 7 June 2002, the publication on the website
Indymedia-France of a text in which the "Israeli concentration camps" were
compared to the Nazi camps in Germany during the Second World War provoked
the resignation of two editorial team members. One of the founding members
of this anti-globalisation site, which was created after the Seattle
summit, demanded the expulsion of the author of the article, "to prevent
Indymedia-France from falling under revisionist influence". The
incriminated article also pondered whether Israel might be equated with
Nazi Germany. On the other hand, another website contributor stated that,
"in parallel, there is a debate on the website to determine whether the
[Israeli] government is a Nazi government or not."
3. Research studies
Between 28 January and 1 February 2002, the Sofres
Institute surveyed 400 people aged between 15 and 24 living in France. A
massive majority rejected anti-Semitic acts: 87% of the respondents
considered that "anti-Semitic acts against synagogues in France" are
"scandalous; the state must punish the culprits very severely"; 11% of
them considered that "if the Jews did not support Israel as much, these
attacks would not take place"; 88% of the respondents considered that "the
Jews should be allowed to follow their usual customs without risking to
get into a fight"; in contrast, 11% considered that "if the Jews did not
seek to make themselves conspicuous in wearing the kipah, this kind of
fight would not take place"; 99% of respondents judged that defacing
synagogues is "very serious" or "rather serious" (against 1% of them who
consider this is "not very serious or not serious at all"); 97% of
respondents judged that writing anti-Semitic graffiti is "very serious" or
"rather serious" (against 3%); 91% of respondents judged that joking about
gas chambers is "very serious" or "rather serious" (against 9%); but 11%
allocate "a share of responsibility for these acts to the Jewish
community, because of its support to Israel". To the question "do the Jews
have too much influence…?" in France, 77% answered that they "rather
disagree" or "do not agree at all"; specifically in the media, 79%
responded that they "rather disagree" or "do not agree at all"; and in
politics, 80% answered that they "rather disagree" or "do not agree at
all". These figures are much weaker than those collected by Sofres during
a previous survey, which covered the whole population, conducted in May
2000 for the Nouveau Mensuel magazine. Then 45% of the respondents had
agreed with the statement that Jews have "too much influence".
To the question "regarding people who say that the
Holocaust and the gas chambers did not exist, what is your position?", 51%
estimated that "these people should not be condemned because everyone is
free to think whatever they want"; against which 48% said "these people
must be condemned because they deny a serious historical fact". The
figures suggest that the Holocaust is to some extent trivialised, in so
far as "freedom of thought" (and expression) is often placed above the
other issues at stake.
Several observers believe that far-right anti-Semitic
violence has shifted towards anti-Semitism of the suburbs. In this
respect, the survey provided new information on the state of mind of the
youth of North African origin "towards the Jews and anti-Semitism". As a
matter of fact, they were asked the same questions as above. Thus, 86% of
them judged that "defacing synagogues" is "very serious" or "rather
serious"; 95% of them thought that the Jews have the "right to follow
their usual habits without risking to get into a fight"; and only 5% of
them thought that "if the Jews did not seek to make themselves conspicuous
in wearing the kipah, this kind of fight would not take place". In the
end, 54% of them underlined the seriousness of "insulting the Jews, even
if it is a joke". Compared with the overall group of people between 15 and
24, such answers tend to show that the youth of North African origin is
more tolerant than the average, an attitude that can undoubtedly be
explained by the fact that anti-Semitic acts or attitudes remind them more
or less directly of how they themselves have suffered from racial or
cultural discrimination as Muslims or children of North African parents.
On the other hand, according to this survey the
tendency is reversed concerning traditional anti-Semitic prejudices. The
question relating to the Jews’ alleged influence shows that "respectively
35%, 38% and 24% of the youth of North African origin (against only 22%,
21% and 18% of the whole group of young people) completely or rather think
that the Jews have too much influence in the economic and political fields
and in the media". Strangely enough, the poll did not say anything about
their answers to the questions concerning the Holocaust.
According to an exclusive survey carried out on 3 and 4
April 2002 by the CSA poll institute and the weekly Marianne of a 1000
people aged over 18, 10% of the French dislike the Jews (while 23% of them
dislike North Africans and 24% of them dislike young French people of
North African origin), which is the case with 52% of far-right voters
(whether for Le Pen or Mégret).
The surveys commissioned by the ADL conducted between
16 May and 4 June 2002 and between 9 and 29 September concerning "European
Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" (see
Table: Report on Belgium) established that 17% of respondents agreed to at
least three of the four anti-Semitic statements presented. Forty-two
percent agreed to the statements that "Jews are more loyal to Israel than
to this country" and "Jews have too much power in the business world",
whereby amongst youths the agreement was far higher with 61% and 64%,
respectively. With regard to the current conflict in the Middle East, 29%
expressed that they sympathised with the Palestinians and only 10%
sympathised with Israel. 37% had no preference for one side or the other.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
The publishing of documents such as the Sofres public
opinion poll entitled "Youth and the Jewish Image", as well as the public
meetings organised to accompany them, maintain a feeling of hope with
regard to both the growing tolerance towards the Jews and to their
"normalisation" in French society. The situation also seems to be
encouraging concerning the attitude of children of North African parents
towards the Jews, in a time when the global geopolitical situation remains
very shaky.
The educational information campaigns within Muslim
groups, such as on the theme "to burn a synagogue is like burning a
mosque", have encouraged people to talk again and have improved solidarity
between the different communities in this field. Thus, the gesture of a
local Muslim group in Aubervilliers (northern suburb of Paris) is
particularly symbolic: it lent its school bus to a Jewish school of the
same area as its buses were destroyed during an attack.
Beyond inter-religious dialogue, the spontaneous or
organised mobilisation of civil society against the far right has
reaffirmed the Republic’s common values. Such reactions have at least
reminded us that the fight against racism, xenophobia and discrimination
remains a common struggle.
The fact that anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish acts in
France are presently being committed mainly by youngsters from North
African immigration, apparently acting in an isolated manner, brought many
observers to the conclusion that a far right anti-Semitism has been
superseded by a form of anti-Semitism rooted in urban decay and social
deprivation. The French term for this combination of urban decay and
social deprivation is "banlieue", literally "suburb", which functions in
roughly the same way as "inner city" in English. Beyond the local
character of this observation, some, like the philosopher Pierre-André
Taguieff – during his highly publicised book launch in spring 2002 –,
spoke of a "new planetary judeophobia" ("nouvelle judéophobie planétaire")
that explains "all world problems by the existence of Israel". This "new
judeophobia", which he sees as initially brought about by radical Islamic
activists, by the heirs of "third-worldism" and by far-left
anti-globalisation activists, accuse the Jews of being themselves racist.
Thus, according to Taguieff, there seems to be an "anti-Jewish
anti-racism". In this way, it can appear that "the fight against racism
and the fight against anti-Semitism have been dissociated from one
another", as Shmuel Trigano wrote in the weekly newspaper Actualité Juive
(25 April 2002), adding that "suburb anti-Semitism has indeed broken the
"united front" strategy, revealing that the victims of racism (Arab
Muslims) could be anti-Semites". This point of view, which is shared by
some Jewish personalities and groups, can extend to an exclusively Jewish
conception of the fight against anti-Semitism and a tendency to link it to
support for Israel and its current government.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
The current political climate, which has been dominated
by the growth of the far right and the renewed Republican mobilisation
since 21 April 2002, eclipsed anti-Semitism and tensions between Jews and
Muslims in France and removed them from the political agenda. It resulted
in the abandonment of the large demonstration against racism and
anti-Semitism, for peace in the Middle East and for the union of all
communities, planned for Sunday, 12 May 2002, to run parallel to the
"Peace Now" demonstration in Israel. Many trade unions, politicians of
both left and right organisations and numerous personalities had organised
this demonstration.
Representatives from Jewish organisations criticised
the French Government for being inactive. President Chirac, who was
re-elected on 5 May 2002, reacted officially to the accusations that he
had denied the gravity of the threats against Jews coming mainly from
abroad, in particular from Israel and the United States, on several
occasions. He stated that he "has protested against the ‘anti-French
campaign’, which took place in Israel and which aimed at presenting France
as an anti-Semitic country". "France is not an anti-Semitic country", he
repeated the day before the 55th Cannes Film Festival, in
response to the American Jewish Congress, which had sought to dissuade
Jewish celebrities from participating in the film festival. During his
discussions with President George W. Bush, who was in France on 26 and 27
May 2002, President Chirac "protested strongly" against the idea conveyed
in the United States that France is seized by a kind of anti-Semitic
fever.
On 19 April the French Interior Minister Daniel
Viallant, together with his colleagues from Belgium, Spain, Germany and
the United Kingdom, issued a joint declaration on "Racism, Xenophobia and
Anti-Semitism" that appealed for an undertaking of preventive measures and
a European-wide coordination of the responsible agencies and offices.
On 29 May 2002, Nicolas Sarkozy, the new Interior
Minister, went to the synagogue of Clichy-sous-Bois, which was attacked
with a petrol bomb on 10 August 2000, and launched the slogan "zero
tolerance for anti-Semitism". On 2 June 2002, he welcomed representatives
from the Jewish community at the Ministry of the Interior. The Minister
promised to improve the coordination of the suitable preventive or
educational safety measures and to follow up regularly the files indexing
complaints, particularly those submitted by "SOS Vérité et Sécurité". The
participants agreed that similar meetings would take place periodically in
Ile de France and in the provinces. Moreover, the Minister is said to have
committed himself to work in partnership with the Ministries of Justice
and of Education.
On 21 July 2002 French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre
Raffarin declared at a meeting held on the occasion of the 60th
anniversary of the roundup of French Jews for deportation: "to harm the
Jewish community is to harm France, harm the values of our republic." A
new government’s hard line on crime and North African juvenile gangs in
the second half of 2002 led to a remarkable decrease of anti-Semitic
incidents. Besides the conspicuous presence of police protecting Jewish
institutions the initiatives of the new Minister of Interior Nicolas
Sarkozy promoting an active dialogue with different sections of the Muslim
community changed the situation in a positive way.
Italy
The 35,000 Jews, of whom 25,000 are members of the
various Jewish communities, are completely integrated into the Italian
population (total population: 56.3 million). Since the Second World War,
anti-Semitic prejudice in Italy has seldom taken on aggressive forms;
violent attacks have been rare. However, with the increase in the number
of far-right groups since the beginning of the 1990s, the picture has
altered. Although anti-Semitic traditions are hardly virulent in Italian
society, the networking of the international far-right scene, which uses
anti-Semitism to create such networks, has also led to a strong
anti-Semitic orientation in the Italian far-right spectrum. In 1995
anti-Semitic incidents rose from 30 to 50 a year; since the middle of 2000
(30-40% rise) to March-April 2002 a sharp increase of 100% has been
recorded. In the first instance this is due to the conflict in the Middle
East. However, besides this factor, a high level of xenophobic attitudes
and views is noticeable in the population, which are supported in turn by
racist remarks in public discourse (politics and print media). Above all
the socially marginalized working migrants, numbering ca. 700,000 (510,000
migrants mainly from Morocco, Tunisia and Albania), are affected. During
the 1990s, not only Jewish culture itself but also the history of Israel,
its literature and cinema enjoyed a period of success in Italy, a
surprising development for those who had experienced the troubled years of
the 1970s and 1980s in which anti-Israeli resentment was virulent,
particularly on the left. The crisis that started at the turn into 2001
has accelerated an unforeseen and unpredictable process that in other
countries, especially in France, is already evident; in Italy, this
process has left a number of options open for the future and these are not
immediately clear. In Italy, the second Intifada has set in motion
unexpected mechanisms, whereby traditional anti-Jewish prejudices are
mixed with politically based stereotypes. It is important to bear in mind
that the so-called "spiritual (or psychological) anti-Semitism" has had a
greater impact on the overall phenomenon in Italian cultural history
during the course of the 20th century (see Julius Evola).
In contrast to France and Belgium, anti-Semitic attacks
in Italy have up to now been limited to verbal abuse, graffiti and the
like. But since the start of the second Intifada incidents now include
death threats against Jews and carry both anti-Semitic as well as
anti-Israeli stereotypes, often in a synonymous context. The perpetrators
are local Italians and till now, in contrast to Belgium, France and the
Netherlands, hardly any person from the milieu of Muslim migrants. In
contrast to other countries, in Italy there is rather a revival of
anti-Judaist topoi coupled with traditional anti-Semitic and
anti-Zionist stereotypes rooted in the left. It became particularly
visible during the events, which took place at the Church of Nativity in
Bethlehem. The worsening of the Israeli-Arab conflict and, in particular,
the question of Bethlehem and the Church of the Nativity once again led to
ambiguous positions being taken in some contexts and witnessed the use of
potentially dangerous language.
1. Physical acts of violence
There were a few attacks at the beginning of the year,
for example in January, a Jewish lawyer was attacked came in his office by
two thugs who hit him with a club on his head and shoulders. It appears
that right-wing extremists were responsible for this attack. A number of
the incidents occurred in April, but in the following months there was a
reduction. The incidents recorded coincided with the heightening in
international tension, thus creating entirely predictable peaks. Italian
commentators assess that the rise in the scope of anti-Semitism is the
result of Israel’s governmental policy towards the Arabs since the
outbreak of the Intifada.
There are however some exceptions. These can be linked
to the specific Italian situation and there is often the feeling that the
lack of public attention or dwindling of public interest in such incidents
is the result of the national political situation, its internal crisis and
the strong political divisions between government and opposition parties,
a factor exerting a severe impact on different spheres of public life.
Demonstrations, marches and other political actions were recorded at the
end of March, but without doubt the climax was reached in the period
beginning with the Israeli occupation of Bethlehem, the stalemate at the
Church of Nativity (2 April) and the attack against Jenin refugee camp (10
April). By the end of April tension as well as media attention had again
decreased, leaving behind a few consequences and some rather feeble
polemics.
4 April: destruction of the research work and the
archives on the Holocaust and the resistance created by the students of
Liceo Galileo Ferraris High School in Varese, where billboards were
destroyed and the school walls were painted in red with graffiti such as
"burn the Jews". Varese belongs to one of the strongholds of far-right
groups in Italy, especially right-wing skinheads.
2 June: some newspapers reported that two right-wing
extremists were arrested for planning an attack in the Venice ghetto. In
addition, powerful weapons and a map with the borders of the Venice ghetto
clearly marked were seized.
- Verbal aggression/hate speech
Politics
On 2 April some Jews from Rome staged a protest in front
of the headquarters of the political party Rifondazione Comunista. Although
peaceful, the protest still caused some trouble with passers-by: some
passing cars reacted to the traffic jam in Corso Italia by shouting
anti-Semitic slogans at the protesters. During an event organised by the
Social Forum of Bologna in support of the Palestinians, the recurrent words
against Israel were "genocide"; "deportation"; "fanatic and racist Zionists"
and these were accompanied by the proposal for a vast boycott of Israeli
products, which "could be associated to genocide".
The period in question has been marked by a long and
bitter dispute between the trade unions and the government over a proposed
revision of a decree stipulating the cancellation of Article 18 of the
Workers’ Statute. This crisis resulted in a general strike (16 April),
overlapping exactly with the week in which the Middle East crisis reached
its climax. During the strike and the accompanying street demonstrations and
on the Liberation Day celebrations (25 April), the empathy generated by
pro-Palestinian sentiments overtook the trade union issues or historical
affiliations which had rallied thousands to protest in the squares,
transforming, in some cases but not all, the above events into forms of
explicit anti-Israeli propaganda.
4 April: Rifondazione Comunista opened its national
congress. Some observers were struck by the opening of the conference: a
video showing images of a Palestinian child being protected in vain by his
father from shooting (stills from the video have also been placed on a whole
series of international far-right websites inferring that the child has been
shot by Israeli soldiers) was screened together with a scene from the film
Roma città aperta (Rome, an Open City). The scene from the film shows a Nazi
soldier shooting the actress Anna Magnani with a machine gun. The
secretary-general of the party, preoccupied by the reactions to the party’s
marked pro-Palestinian policy, closed the congress three days later, saying
that the party supported all minorities and proclaimed: "We are Jews".
During the congress, a number of objects explicitly referred to Palestine:
the Palestinian flag, a book by the representative of the Palestinian
National Authority (PNA) in Italy, Diario segreto (Secret Diary; with a
foreword by a former President of Italy), as well as other texts by
Palestinian leaders and the kefiah, the traditional Arab head gear. During
the general strike on 16 April, in Turin many demonstrators were wearing the
kefiah. The kefiah is also present in the Italian and European far-right
political movements. Some participants in pro-Palestinian demonstrations
openly displayed their radical attitude: they dressed as suicide bombers
with all the trappings.
6 April: an imposing crowd of anti-globalisation
protesters marched through Rome and young people dressed as kamikaze shouted
slogans against Israel. The leadership of the political parties Democratici
di Sinistra (Democrats of the Left) and Margherita dissociated themselves
from the protest, which had been promoted by all the trade unions and
opposition political parties; for the first time political parties on the
left split over issues relating to the Middle East. A number of banners
directed against Israel and the Israeli Prime Minister Sharon included the
following slogans: "State of Israel, State of murderers"; "Sharon
executioner" (with the Nazi "S"), "Bush, Sharon, Peres" (with the "S" styled
as a swastika); "Zionists and fascists are the terrorists"; "Against the
racist terrorism of USA, Europe and Israel, on the side of the Palestinian
masses"; "Holocaust, no thank you. Free Palestine"; "Palestinian Holocaust,
Europe, where are you?"
Public discourse
25 April: the Centro di Documentazione Ebraica
Contemporanea (CDEC) was informed that during a demonstration in Milan
marking the anniversary of the liberation of Italy from the Nazis, many
pro-Palestinian banners were displayed, reading for example "Murderers,
Nazist Sharon, Intifada until victory"; others assimilated the Star of David
to the swastika or surrounded the star with barbed wire and broken by a
closed fist.
Graffiti
31 March: anti-Semitic graffiti and a swastika were found
on a synagogue in Modena.
7 April: anti-Semitic graffiti was found in several
places in the old Venice ghetto.
6 May: large graffiti in bold characters saying "Jews
murderers" was seen in an underground pass in the city of Prato (central
Italy). On the same day, the CDEC of Milan received an anonymous phone call
from someone who said, "We will burn you all".
22 May: anti-Semitic slogans were written on the walls of
the town of Marrucini in Abruzzo.
In addition, in Milan messages such as "Jews out of the
neighbourhood" re-appeared on public walls (Via Venini).
Media
There seems to be a return of abusive language towards
Jews; an example of which is the use of the attribute "perfidious" when
referring to the Israeli government - a term that used to be in the Catholic
Good Friday prayers and was condemned by Pope John XXIII. There is an
outpouring of anti-Israel statements on state radio and television and also
in some Catholic circles, lamenting the deaths of Palestinians while
glossing over Israel deaths. It is absolutely essential to make a clear
distinction between the language used by the Pope and that, which appears in
the media and in the declarations of some Catholics. Even in some of the
politically moderate press there are scattered references to the murder of
Christ, showing that, after decades of absence, such stereotypes are also
being revived in secular circles.
3 April: the front page of the national daily newspaper
La Stampa carried a cartoon by Giorgio Forattini as a comment on the
occupation of Bethlehem. At the sight of an Israeli tank a baby Jesus in a
crèche asks: "Are they going to kill me for a second time?" A heated debate
followed in the papers. Many resentful letters were sent to the editor and
numerous Catholic readers filed protests. The president of the Union of
Jewish Communities, Amos Luzzatto, strongly criticised the return of the
accusation of deicide, cancelled by the Second Vatican Council. The director
of La Stampa distanced himself from the author of the cartoon. The same day
someone wrote "Israelis Murderers" on the walls of a synagogue in Siena.
5 April: one of the main authorities of the state - the
President of the Senate - denounced what he described as "the imbalance of
Italian public opinion in favour of only the cause of the Palestinians, thus
risking feeding an anti-Semitic campaign, of which we have had dangerous and
serious examples". The same day someone wrote "Free Palestine" on the façade
of the synagogue in Cuneo.
2 May: the daily La Nazione of Florence reported that
some anti-Semitic messages were written on a Catholic Church in the town of
Gavinana outside Florence, praising the Holocaust and the twenty years of
fascist domination in Italy.
The head of the Rome Jewish Community, Leone Paserman,
stated, "The Italian mass media have started a disinformation campaign that
nourishes anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred".
On 12 April the famous Italian journalist and writer,
Oriana Fallaci published her condemnation of the media, the church, and the
left and their anti-Semitism in the weekly Panorama: "I find it shameful
(...) that the government-controlled television stations contribute to the
revival of anti-Semitism by crying over Palestinian deaths only, minimising
the importance of Israeli deaths, speaking in a brisk and dismissive tone
about them". Fallacis condemnation and fiery indictment was followed by a
mostly controversial debate specially because she is known as a
controversial left-leaning journalist.
Direct threats
Renowned Jewish journalists have received threatening
letters full of insults as well. Some of them received up to fifty such
e-mails during the period monitored. Attacks against Jewish students by
fellow pupils in schools, at playgrounds and during sports competitions,
such as calling them names, including the use of the words "Jew", "dirty
Jew" or "Rabbi" as insults, still persist, as does the hanging of
anti-Semitic slogans and banners in stadiums.
Indirect threats
Although they did not increase in the last few months,
these remain on a very high level, especially in connection with the
football club Lazio Rome.
Public discourse
Particularly interesting is the emergence, in the month
of April, of slogans and comments that referred to the current persecution
of the Palestine people by describing the Israeli-Arab conflict in terms of
the inversion of the victim/persecutor roles, with clear reference here to
the extermination of the Jews. Resorting to terms taken from Nazi
vocabulary, such as deportation, extermination, genocide etc., is a constant
practice and at times such terms are emphasised in newspapers with very
large titles or else they are used scornfully in commentaries.
The Internet
The website that can boast a larger number of
participants in their discussion list is that of the extreme right-wing
militant group Forza Nuova (New Force). Some of these sites – right-wing or
pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian ("Lo Straniero Senza Nome", "Holy War", "Radio
Islam", "Associazione Italia-Iraq", "Oltre la Verità Ufficiale") – make use
of the entire spectrum of anti-Semitic stereotypes and have placed the
complete text of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", an anti-Semitic
forgery from Tsarist Russia, on the net. The website of Fronte sociale
nazionale (National Social Front) carries a pro-Palestinian Intifada appeal
which adopts a traditional anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-American
language with hostile references to "Talmudic Judaism", the "global
plutocratic cupola" and the bleeding Star of David. Many other sites deal
with the subject of the so-called ritual murder and the accusation of blood
shedding; in others the denial of the Holocaust is the central point. The
website Che fare (What should be done), part of the far left-wing groups,
includes elements of anti-Zionism, pro-Arab fundamentalism, anti-Americanism
and recurrent stereotypes against Jews used both in the past and at the
present: the Jewish lobby, the relationship with the Masonry, the
international plot, world economic power held by Jews, Jews circumcised with
a dollar etc. are all examples of the most repeated slogans. It is difficult
to know how many people visit these websites as the figures cited seem to be
enlarged, for they increase remarkably over short periods to be credible.
Between 20 and 29 July, Alfred Olsen, member of a fundamentalist Catholic
brotherhood, Holocaust denier and responsible for the anti-Semitic website
"Holy War/Tradizione Cattolica", submitted contributions to the online forum
of the daily La Stampa on nine occasions which combined anti-Judaist,
traditional anti-Semitic world conspiracy theories and anti-Zionist
stereotypes.
3. Research Studies
Among the various surveys carried out during the past few
months, it seems interesting to refer to the ones carried out by
Ispo/ACNielsen CRA, between 13 April and 13 May, part of which was published
in "Il Corriere della Sera". The survey was inspired by the observation that
the rigid positions regarding "who is right" and "who is wrong" in the
Israeli-Arab conflict does not include any references to the circumstances
giving rise to the conflict. For instance, less than half of the Italian
population knows about the foundation of the State of Israel. Only 4% have
knowledge about the historical events that preceded and to some extent
explain the evolution of the conflict. The level of knowledge does not
change meaningfully when the political position changes, although a greater
number of both political far-right and far-left supporters are less informed
than those who are centre-right and centre-left supporters.
Exactly one month after the above survey, "Il Corriere
della sera" published the results of a poll carried out at the beginning of
April. This second survey showed that the number of people who stated that
they had no idea about the situation had decreased, while the opinion of the
majority of the population blaming "both parties" for the conflict remained
stable and consolidated, although some people on the political centre-left
(11% against 6% overall) tended to mostly blame the Israelis for the
conflict. In addition, during the same period "sympathy" for the Jewish
state seemed to have grown and once again this was linked to the political
orientation of the surveyed.
Between 12 and 14 April, a further survey was carried out
by Ispo/ACNielsen CRA based on a sample of 5000 telephone interviews. The
data has yet to be fully processed. This survey asked respondents whether
Italian Jews have common characteristics distinguishing them from the rest
of the population: 54% of the interviewed still believe that Italian Jews
have distinct characteristics and 68% cited as proof a peculiar relationship
with money and a mentality and lifestyle different from those of other
Italians. In addition, there is growing number of people who think that
Italian Jews are not real Italians and that they should stop playing the
role of being a victim of a persecution that dates back fifty years. In
particular they mentioned: the need to speak less about the Holocaust; the
passage from being the victims of the past to becoming the persecutors of
today in the Israeli-Arab conflict; and that the Day of Memory (27 January)
should not only be devoted to remembering the victims of the Shoah, but also
all the other victims of persecution in the 20th century.
The survey commissioned by the ADL between 9 and 29
September 2002 concerning "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" (see Table: Report on Belgium) established
that Italian respondents assumed second place behind the Spanish in their
agreement to anti-Semitic statements. Next to Spain (72%) Italy also shows
the second highest agreement with the statement that "Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this country" (58%) whereby 42 % agreed to the statement
"Jews have too much power in the business world" which places Italy with
France in third place after Spain and Belgium.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
In the months prior to May 2002, good practices to combat
anti-Semitism included those numerous initiatives aimed at stimulating an
often fragile and poor historical memory organised all over the country on
27 January to mark Memory Day, established by a legislative decree two years
ago. Trade unions organised public debates and initiatives in many regions
and provinces, showing an interest for a debate that had not received much
attention in the previous years within the trade union movement. Beginning
in the autumn of 2002, a training programme started in the region of
Lombardy that will continue through into 2003 and involve the high schools
of the city of Lecco and union delegates from companies operating in the
area. Issues to be dealt with are anti-Semitism and the Shoah and the
dignity of man. The provisional title is Considerate se questo è un uomo
(Consider if this is a man), taken from the famous phrase by Primo Levi.
Rather innovative in Italy, trips will be organised to some of the symbolic
places in Europe, from Prague to Auschwitz and to Mostar, including the
former Nazi concentration camp Risiera di San Sabba in Trieste. The video
Promesse (Promises), on tales of Israeli and Palestinian children in war and
their fears and hopes beyond the usual stereotypes, had a remarkable impact
on public opinion; the video is useful for a balanced understanding of the
dramatic situation in the Middle East. Significantly, the video was
distributed together with a major weekly magazine, L’Espresso, allowing more
copies to be circulated than would have otherwise been the case.
Another initiative aimed at reconciliation after the
division that occurred within the left-wing parties following the rally of 6
April (see chronology) was a concert on 19 April at the Colosseum organised
by the Mayor of Rome, during which Israeli and Palestinian singers performed
in turn on stage. The proposal by the Radical Party to include the State of
Israel into the European Union does not seem to have met with the interest
of the other political parties. This proposal was also submitted to all
Regional Councils, but there, too, not much consensus was reached, nor did
it gain much exposure in the media.
There are quite a number of websites dealing with the
issue of anti-Semitism in both Europe and in Italy from a historical
perspective, with particular focus on the racial laws in Italy and its
consequences. There are also websites created for the specific purpose of
countering the wave of misunderstanding and of responding to media attacks
against Israel, at times with a certain partisan spirit but on the whole
impartial in judgment. An example of such a website is
http://www.informazionecorretta.com/ which provides a wide range of
sources. Another interesting site that can be highlighted is the site of the
confederated trade union UIL which, starting from 23 May 2002, presents a
position paper by the educational department of the national secretariat of
the union under the title: "Schools and the prevention of anti-Semitism".
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
An appeal by the Israeli writer Abraham Yehoshua to
establish a clear boundary between Israel and Palestine, thereby encouraging
a unilateral withdrawal of Israel, was signed by prominent Italian writers
from across the political spectrum. Political leaders have condemned the
anti-Semitic tone of the demonstrations billed as promoting peace or
Palestinian rights. The imam of the Italian Islamic Community Abdul Hadi
Palazzi maintains contact to the Italian Jewish Community and preaches
messages of moderation and even friendship toward Israel.
15 April: some politicians from both the governing and
opposition parties called for an "Israeli Day" in Rome; the director of a
pro-government daily newspaper - Il Foglio (The Sheet) - acted as promoter
of the event. About 3000 people marched through the centre of the city
carrying Israeli flags. The participants included militants from a wide
range of political parties, acting individually and irrespective of their
political affiliations.
25 April: during the manifestation of the day of
liberation in Milan, participated by about 200,000 people, the leader
(general secretary) of the main Italian trade union, Sergio Cofferati
insisted "to fight any revisionism of history".
In September 2002 Gianfranco Fini, Deputy Prime Minister
and leader of Alleanza Nazionale (National Alliance), the former neo-fascist
party, excused himself during his visit to Israel in an interview with the
Israelian newspaper "Haaretz" for the anti-Jewish laws in Italy. He said
that he would accept historical responsibility for Fascist crimes and would
ask the forgiveness of The Jewish People.
Luxembourg
According to a 1979 law, the government may not collect
or maintain statistics on religious affiliation. But this is not the only
reason why it is difficult for the leaders of the Jewish communities to
carry out an accurate census: a great many of the Jews only pass through
Luxembourg. Within the Jewish population (1200, 650 of whom are members of
the Jewish community) there are nearly no orthodox families and a great many
non-practising Jews. Luxembourg is the smallest Jewish community in Europe,
in accordance with the overall population (440,000) of the country. The
Jewish population is extremely well integrated into the social, community
and cultural life of the country. In terms of attitudes towards minority
groups Luxembourg meets the European average on the EUMC Eurobarometer,
whereby a high rate of agreement for improving the rights of minorities
exists side by side with a strong rejection of working migrants. Since 1997
the negative attitudes have increased. But the excellent economic situation,
in which the Grand Duchy finds itself, with an unemployment rate below 3%,
certainly fosters benevolence among the population.
1. Physical acts of violence
In Luxembourg physical aggression in general and
especially against Jews is rather rare. It might be explained by an absence
of deeper social conflicts and extreme right parties. According to ASTI, the
representative of the Jewish community and the secretary general of the
Israelite Consistory, no act of violence or aggression against Jews or their
institutions are know of for the period from 15 May to 15 June 2002; indeed
for the whole year up to now no aggressive act has been committed.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speeches
Neither the police nor the Jewish community reported any
real verbal anti-Semitic aggression during the reference period. In mid-May,
an anonymous letter was sent to a representative of the Jewish community
with the following content: "Down with Sharon …!" The Jewish community has
not deemed this letter to be anti-Semitic, but an expression of rejection of
the Sharon policy. At the same time, on a bridge support on the motorway
towards France, the inscription "Sharon, assassin" (murderer) appeared. In
this case, the Jewish community also stressed that it was a political
statement. In their opinion the two acts are to be considered as isolated
political incidents, albeit in direct relation to the escalation of violence
in the Middle East, but not anti-Semitic.
3. Research studies
No studies have been undertaken regarding anti-Semitism
in Luxembourg. The last opinion poll carried out by "Ilres" (National
Polling Institute) on behalf of the European Community took place in 1997.
It focussed on racism in the broadest sense of the term, thus including
xenophobia and anti-Semitism, and revealed that only 2% of Luxembourg people
considered themselves to be racist/could be considered as having racist
leanings. The Eurobarometer 2000 shows that Luxembourg is one of the
countries where many people support policies for improving social
coexistence between different ethnic groups. 33% have passively tolerant and
28% actively tolerant attitudes toward minority groups. But negative
attitudes have increased over the past years.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
On 16 June 2002 within the context of the European Day of
Jewish Culture, the Jewish community invited the population of Luxembourg to
discover the Jewish heritage and find out about the traditions of Judaism.
The Jewish community registered a higher number of visitors than in previous
years. On 10 May the "Service National de la Jeunesse" (National Youth
Service) organised a "Journée du Souvenir" (Remembrance Day) on the theme
"It is necessary to know history in order to prepare for the future". In the
presence of the Luxembourg Minister of Culture, Luxembourg internees of
concentration camps during the Second World War told young people of their
experiences. The Minister stressed the fact that the Luxembourg government
will be increasing the number of initiatives of this sort. Also in 2002,
classes from various educational establishments in Luxembourg will visit
concentration camps in the company of their former Luxembourg prisoners.
This initiative has made a considerable contribution to increasing the
awareness of young people to the problems of anti-Semitism. In fact, each
time long reports were published in the press and presented on Luxembourg
television. On 15 May a panel dealing more directly with the situation in
the Middle East was organised at the capital’s high school on the subject
"Without justice and responsibility there will be no peace". Representatives
of religious communities, secular bodies and freemasons explained their
points of view. This initiative was a part of the Luxembourg project
"Towards a culture of peace" initiated in that school. The only event on the
theme "Towards an equitable peace in the Middle East", organised by the
"Friddensbeweegung" (Peace Movement), brought together 250 persons belonging
to humanitarian groups and various left-wing parties in Luxembourg at the
beginning of April.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
As neither acts of violence nor overt or latent
anti-Semitic tendencies have been observed in Luxembourg, the reactions of
politicians and opinion leaders is limited to condemning such acts occurring
in other European countries. Ministers in the Luxembourg government and
members of parliament from all parties, but also many diplomats
traditionally attend the religious services held in synagogues for the
Luxembourg National Day celebrations. At the same time, the Chief Rabbi and
representatives of the Jewish community attend the "Te Deum" for National
Day in the Nôtre Dame Cathedral, and other ecumenical services and official
events.
The Netherlands
There are three main religious directions within Dutch
Jewry (total: 30,000, the majority living in Amsterdam): the traditional
Jewish community (Nederlands Israelitisch Kerkgenootschap), the liberal
religious Jews (Liberaal Religieuze Joden) and the Sephardic community
(Portugees Israelitisch Kerkgenootschap). The majority are well integrated
in the social and cultural life of Dutch society (total population: 16
million). In recent years the establishment of Islamic institutions serving
the 700,000-800,000 Muslims resident in the Netherlands (Moroccans, Turks
and people from former Dutch colonies) has increased and the founding of
over 30 Islamic schools demonstrates the increased influence of Islam. At
the same time, racist attacks against the Muslim population have risen, in
particular after 11 September 2001. Public statements by Imams against
homosexuality, women, the Western world etc. have meet with displeasure in
large sections of the population. Many of the radical Muslim religious
leaders publicly express their disdain of the USA or even praise the
Palestinian suicide bombers. A recent intelligence service report suggesting
that young Muslims were being recruited at mosques for anti-Western missions
in Afghanistan and elsewhere also stirred up public feeling.
The Dutch Jewish community remains one of the targets of
both extreme right-wing and Islamic fundamentalist movements. Although no
comprehensive system for recording anti-Semitic incidents is in place,
anti-Semitic activity appears to have been increasing slowly but steadily in
recent years. Incidents such as acts of vandalism, abusive graffiti,
desecration of Jewish cemeteries and memorial sites, but also insults and
threats continue to happen. Football vandalism and Internet propaganda are
among the main focal points of anti-Semitic activities in the Netherlands.
There was also a clear link between the incidents and the restitution of
Jewish assets as well as with the events in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
In the aftermath of the 11 September attacks on the United States 90
incidents directed against Muslims were also registered.
In the run up to parliamentary elections in May 2002 it
was mainly the party of Pim Fortuyn (LPF) which attempted to recruit votes
with xenophobic slogans, whereby in particular new immigration was
addressed. Shortly before the election Pim Fortuyn was murdered; nonetheless
his party list became the second strongest group in parliament and joined
the government coalition led by Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende.
The Dutch government has banned kosher slaughter,
becoming the sixth European country to do so. The local Agriculture Ministry
informed Jewish community leaders that they would no longer be permitted to
slaughter cows in a kosher manner [shechitah] because of "cruelty" to
animals. At the same time though, the Netherlands has implemented the most
restrained regulations of all the European countries, which have passed the
prohibition. The ban is only applicable for older, heavier bulls – not cows
or other animals. In July 2002 an arrangement was reached in meetings with
members of the Dutch Jewish Committee that took into consideration the
"needs of the Jewish community in Holland".
The University of Leiden together with the Ministry of
Internal Affairs and the Anne Frank Foundation annually investigates the
extent of extreme-right and racist violence against minorities. The report
for the year 2000 shows an increase of registered incidents from 313 (1998)
to 406 (2000), directed increasingly against asylum seekers and Jewish
persons. Many incidents were not reported however. For the first four months
of 2002 a renewed increase in the number of attacks is evident. Another
study shows that the perpetrators of anti-Semitic attacks to a large extent
– but not exclusively – come from sections of the younger second generation
Moroccan population, whose level of social integration is poor and who are
influenced by Arab radio and television stations which broadcast programmes
in the Netherlands and agitate against Jews, homosexuals and Western
influences.
Although in contrast to other countries no synagogue has
been set on fire in the Netherlands, since autumn 2000 and above all in the
course of 2001 the number of anti-Semitic incidents increased; cemeteries,
monuments, synagogues and buildings housing Jewish organisations were the
target of vandals on 50 occasions. In 2001 there were 31 incidents; in the
first four months of 2002 the number of attacks, ranging from physical
assault to attacks per e-mail, rose to over 100. The unregistered number of
cases is possibly far greater though, for the numbers published only include
those incidents cited by the victims themselves and passed on by NGOs.
1. Physical acts of violence
In March numerous reports of death threats towards Jews
sent by letter, fax and mobile phone were reported. For the months January
to April 2002 six cases of physical violence and nine cases of threats of
violence were registered. In particular more and more Jews who wear the
kipah were disparaged on the streets. An American Jew was followed by a
group of persons and badly beaten up.
4 April 2002: one of the back windows of the synagogue in
the Lekstraat in Amsterdam was badly damaged during the night.
24 April 2002: a Jewish market vendor in the centre of
Amsterdam was threatened with a pistol and the words "I’ll shoot you dead".
2. Verbal aggressions/hate speech
In 2000 the number of incidents of verbal intimidation of
Jews sharply increased; CIDI registered 32 incidents of verbal abuse. In
comparison with this figure in the first four months of 2002, 40 cases of
anti-Semitic abuse were registered by CIDI. Most of the anti-Semitic
discrimination and incidents involved the use of swastikas, the distribution
of neo-Nazi propaganda and delivering the Hitler salute.
Direct threats
The number of anti-Semitic incidents in schools and at
the workplace is growing. The slogan "Hamas, Hamas, Joden aan het gas"
(Hamas, Hamas, all Jews to the gas) and the accusation "Kankerjoden"
(cancerous growth Jews) are frequently used against the Jewish population by
native Dutch, often by children and by members of the Muslim population.
Indirect threats
During the pro-Palestinian demonstration in Amsterdam on
13 April 2002, 75 swastikas were carried amongst the 15,000-20,000
participants, almost 90% of whom were not native Dutch; Israeli and American
flags were also burned. 200 mostly non-native Dutch Moroccan young people
were responsible for the excesses during the demonstration. At other
pro-Palestinian demonstrations mainly Moroccan participants called out
anti-Semitic slogans, including the aforementioned "Hamas, Hamas, all Jews
to the gas", a slogan that is heard repeatedly in football stadiums, in
particular by supporters of Feyenoord Rotterdam; anti-Semitic symbols were
also visible. It was also noticed that such chants have long become the norm
in football stadiums.
On 31 July 2002 Feyenoord Rotterdam Football Club held an
open day during which football fans bawled anti-Semitic slogans; as there
was no police presence no action was taken.
Graffiti
In March and April the Memorials for the Murdered Jews in
Wageningen and Meppel were smeared with paint and graffiti reading "Israel
fascist state".
Media
On 26 April 2002 an article by Hayo Meyer appeared in the
daily Volkskrant under the title "Israel misbruikt antisemitisme taboe"
(Israel abuses the anti-Semitism taboo). In the article the author used the
classical anti-Semitic stereotype that the Jews themselves are to blame for
anti-Semitism. Ronny Naftaniel, director of the CIDI, was given the
opportunity on 2 May to reply to the accusation and criticise Meyer.
Gretta Duisenberg, wife of European Central Bank
President Wim Duisenberg, has hung a Palestinian flag from her balcony and
was accused by some people to have made anti-Semitic statements. This
initiated a broad public debate.
Internet
According to the CIDI, the Internet plays an important
role in spreading anti-Semitism. Of the 550 complaints about the Internet
registered by the Discrimination Internet Registration Centre in 2001, 203
concerned anti-Semitic incidents. In 2001 197 anti-Semitic homepages were
located on the Internet; in the first four months of 2002 the number had
already reached 87.
3. Research studies
The Eurobarometer survey commissioned by the EUMC for the
year 2000 showed that the proportion of Dutch who are to be characterised as
"tolerant" towards minorities lies far above the European average.
The survey commissioned by the ADL conducted between 9
and 29 September 2002 concerning "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel
and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" (see Table: Report on Belgium)
established that compared to the other nine countries included in the
surveys one finds the lowest percentage of anti-Semitic attitudes among the
Dutch. 48% agreed with the statement that "Jews are more loyal to Israel
than to this country" whereby 20 % agreed to the statement "Jews have too
much power in the business world".
4. Good practices for reducing prejudices, violence and
aggression
A network comprising of many organisations is active
against racism, organises demonstrations and annual activities within the
programme of the national Anti-Racism Day held in March. Two successful
educational programmes were conducted in Dutch schools: "School without
racism" and "A world of differences". The CIDI youth group and the youth
organisation of the Moroccan association Tans (Towards A New State)
organised a joint meeting at the beginning of July 2002 to get to know one
another better and to plan more joint projects and events in the future.
CIDI demanded of the responsible offices and in particular from the
government the establishment of an initiative (Overlegorgaan Religie en
Levenbeschouwing) which shall be devoted to religious and general life
issues in daily co-existence between the various religions, above all with a
focus on transgressing boundaries in relation to persons of different faith.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
On 31 May 2002 the member of parliament Boris Dittrich
from the D 66 party submitted an inquiry to the Justice and Interior
Ministers as to what measures the state intends to undertake concerning the
anti-Semitic attacks in 2001 and 2002, presented on 30 May 2002, which
showed a drastic increase in anti-Semitic incidents.
Austria
Within the population of Austria (8 million) Jews form a
small minority of about 8,000 persons, mainly living in Vienna. The Austrian
problem of anti-Semitism seems to focus more on diffused and traditional
stereotypes than on acts of physical aggression. Extreme rightist and
neo-Nazi groups have intensified their activities since 2000, encouraged by
the FPÖ electoral success in March 1999. Anti-Semitism is a main ideological
component of most extreme right-wing groups and their publications in
Austria. In the course of the last few years, themes directly concerned with
the National Socialist past have been debated again and again in the public
sphere: demonstrations were held against the Wehrmacht exhibition, there was
controversy regarding a Holocaust memorial that was officially opened in
2000 and the question of restitution.
Anti-Semitism was an important issue in public debate
during the period of observation. The crucial point in many discussions was
indeed whether it was anti-Semitic to criticise or offend individual Jews or
Israeli politics. The quality papers provided a rather clear answer:
criticising or defaming Jews for being Jewish or playing with long-standing
anti-Semitic stereotypes was indeed an act of anti-Semitism, whereas
criticism of the work or behaviour of people of Jewish descent was not. We
agree with this definition supposing that this criticism refers to Israeli
governmental politics or any other behaviour which will not be connected
with the Jewish descent of the criticised. Some debates showed how fuzzy the
concepts of anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli criticism are. Especially in this
grey-zone, ideas like a worldwide Jewish conspiracy "dictating political
correctness" were rather openly expressed. The Austrian problem of
anti-Semitism seems to focus more on these diffused and traditional
stereotypes than on acts of physical aggression.
1. Physical acts of violence
The media analysis of the daily papers did not reveal any
physical acts of violence towards Jews, their communities, organisations or
their property.
According to the Federal Ministry of the Interior, a
memorial plaque near the synagogue in St. Pölten, Lower Austria was damaged.
The investigations of the complaint are yet to be completed, but the
incident is an alleged infringement of Article 126 StGB (Criminal Code)
(serious damage to property). The Federal Ministry of the Interior
emphasised that its report possibly does not cover all incidents occurring
during the monitoring period.
The NGO ZARA, based in Vienna and providing counselling
and aid to victims and witnesses of racism, told the NFP that only one
smearing of a swastika in Vienna was reported to them within the period of
observation.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Insults
The Israelitische Kultusgemeinde Innsbruck received one
threatening letter. It was addressed to the president and individual members
of the community. The letter said that Jews were not welcome in the Tyrol
and that they should go to the USA or Israel, where they actually belonged.
The letter also stated that the President of the Kultusgemeinde should
apologise on TV for what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians, and
indicated there would be consequences if she refused to do so. The Forum
gegen Antisemitismus (Forum against Anti-Semitism) reported that the
Israelitische Kultusgemeinde Wien received 18 threatening letters and there
were about six cases that their clients had qualified as anti-Semitic during
the period of observation. The Ministry of the Interior reported two
incidents of verbal aggression. A professor at the University of Salzburg
received an anti-Semitic flyer from the USA. A billboard with anti-Jewish
slogans was put up in Ried, Upper Austria. Investigations into this incident
have yet to be completed.
Media
The media analysis of the dailies disclosed three letters
to the editor containing anti-Semitic language. One letter accused the
Israelis of being themselves responsible for the emerging anti-Semitism; the
other two letters were related to the discussion about the memorial
Siegfriedskopf. The memorial was put up in commemoration of the people
affiliated to the University of Vienna killed during WWI, but German
fraternities, who mobilised against Jews and organisations accepting Jews as
members, dominated the inauguration ceremony.
The analysis of the right-wing papers shows how
anti-Israeli statements from right-wing politicians and journalists are
linked to anti-Semitism and draw on the repertoire of anti-Semitic
stereotypes. In an interview Jörg Haider spoke about the necessary fight
against terrorism following 9/11, including the fight against "the state
terrorist acts of Israel against the Palestinians". "It is the old problem
of the ambivalent standards the US applies, as everything done by Israel is
accepted, including the extinction of civilians, of innocent people, whose
houses are demolished by caterpillars, although there are still people in
them. Whereas the USA is totally allergic to any kind of terrorist activity
executed by the Arab side." Haider accuses the media of contributing to an
unparalleled "Volksverdummung" (making the people stupid) as they conceal
"the real backgrounds of the power-political conflict in the world and
especially in the Middle East".
The following newspaper article, entitled "Israel is
different", gives an insight into the repertoire of anti-Semitic stereotypes
invoked by right-wing extremism: "Israel has always been presented as a
moral and political model state during the last decades. This picture was
severely damaged by the latest incidents: more than 700,000 Palestinians
have been expelled after the state of Israel has been founded ....
Reparations paid for the victims of the Holocaust by Germany, Austria and
Switzerland are hardly ever used for their dedicated purposes .... In 2002,
Israeli soldiers have allegedly committed war crimes in Jenin and other
cities."
Public discourse/politics
The German discussion on anti-Semitism also filtered
through into the regular party conference (Parteitag) of the Freedom Party
(FPÖ). Governor Jörg Haider stated, alluding in the direction of Möllemann
(deputy-chairman of the German FDP and party leader in North
Rhine-Westphalia), that "if you are of an opinion, you must not get down on
your knees about it a few days later", and that the weakness in response to
left-wing or Jewish critics is the reason why the FDP will never be as
successful as the FPÖ. In an interview with the daily Kurier, Haider stated
that it was unbearable that "the politically correct class" was dictating
what to think and what not to think.
The conflict between the author Karl-Markus Gauß and Luc
Bondy, director of the Wiener Festwochen (Viennese cultural festival), is
based on a statement by Gauß in his book Mit mir, ohne mich hinting at
Bondy’s vanity. Following the German debate about Martin Walser’s novel "Tod
eines Kritikers", Bondy said in an interview: "I am quite sure that Gauß is
not an anti-Semite – apparently unconsciously he reverted to the rhetoric
arsenal of anti-Semitism." Gauß responded by saying that the images he used
for Bondy’s vanity were definitely not taken from a pool of anti-Semitic
stereotypes. Furthermore, he pointed out that it was rather dangerous to use
the term "anti-Semitism" in a private conflict, for this leads to a term
having a devastating tradition and exerting an ominous force in Austria
losing its meaning.
3. Research Studies
We did not encounter any research studies reporting
anti-Semitic violence or opinion polls on changed attitudes towards Jews. A
research study also dealing with the place of anti-Semitism amongst racism
and xenophobia under the title "Fremdenfeindlichkeit in Österreich"
(Xenophobia in Austria) was conducted in the second half of the 1990s and
presented at a press conference last year. Forty-six percent of the
respondents showed a low or a very low tendency towards anti-Semitism, 35%
were neutral and 19% were strongly or very strongly inclined to
anti-Semitism. The most recent survey "Attitudes towards Jews and the
Holocaust in Austria" from 2001 shows that agreement with anti-Semitic
statements had increased compared to 1995 and that in a European comparison
Austria belongs to those countries in which anti-Semitism is still
widespread amongst the population. For example, 40% of Austrians in 2001, as
against 29% in 1995, "strongly agree/or somewhat strongly agree" with the
statement "Now, as in the past, Jews exert too much influence on world
events."
The survey commissioned by the ADL conducted between 9
and 29 September 2002 concerning "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel
and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" (see Table: Report on Belgium)
established that anti-Semitic attitudes are still quite widespread among the
Austrian respondents . 54% agreed with the statement "Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this country" whereby 40 % agreed to the statement "Jews have
too much power in the business world".
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
In the book "5 Fragen an 3 Generationen: Antisemitismus
und wir heute" (5 Questions put to 3 Generations: Anti-Semitism and we
today) the three authors belonging to three different generations
ask themselves five questions about anti-Semitism: What are Jews to you? Has
your attitude towards Jews changed during your lifetime? How do you explain
Hitler and the extinction of the Jews to young people today? Are you for or
against Jews emigrating from the East to Germany and Austria today just as
in 1900? What do you think about Israel? The three authors answer these
questions in a very personal way and try to explain the phenomenon of
anti-Semitism and show the different perspectives of the three generations
concerning the persecution of the Jews in the Nazi period and Israel. The
book was presented and discussed in the Austrian newspaper where it was
characterised as signifying "cultural change".
The Mistelbacher Stadtmuseum (Municipal Museum in
Mistelbach, Lower Austria) opened its exhibition Verdrängt und vergessen –
Die Juden von Mistelbach (Repressed and Forgotten - The Jews of Mistelbach)
on 9 June 2002. The exhibition shows the development of Jewish settlement
since 1867, the life of the former Jewish community and their extinction.
The Jüdisches Museum Hohenems (Jewish Museum Hohenems)
opened its exhibition Rosenthals. Collage einer Familiengeschichte (The
Rosenthals. Collage of a Family History), which tells stories about a Jewish
family who formerly lived in the Hohenems region and are now scattered all
over the world. The stories and pieces were collected and displayed by the
members of the Rosenthal family themselves.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
The members of the Austrian Government neither commented
on any of the good practices mentioned above, nor on the negative trends
mentioned in this report.
The following reactions and discussions by and among
politicians and other opinion leaders show how fuzzy the borders between
anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli attitudes are. Imprudent statements directed
against the state of Israel and its leading politicians are apt to stimulate
anti-Semitism, especially among those who are susceptible to anti-Semitic
stereotypes.
Last year, the municipality of Salzburg put up a memorial
plaque for Theodor Herzl which read: "In Salzburg I spent some of the
happiest hours of my life. Dr. Theodor HERZL 1860-1904." ("In Salzburg
brachte ich einige der schönsten Stunden meines Lebens zu") Federal
President Klestil informed Heinz Schaden, the mayor of Salzburg, that he
would prefer to see the complete quotation from Herzl’s diary: "So I would
have loved to stay in this beautiful city, but, being a Jew, I would have
never been awarded with the position of a judge." In his letter, President
Klestil wrote that "especially in Austria we must treat the memory of
Theodor Herzl with special sensitivity." This was the starting point of a
discussion at the beginning of June, involving the Israelitische
Kultusgemeinden Salzburg and Wien and ending with an agreement on 10 June
2002 to complete the text.
On 24 May, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Federal Minister for
Foreign Affairs, visited the former concentration camp in Auschwitz during
her visit to Poland. In her speech she stressed that it was "not easy for
Austria to confess that many of our compatriots have been perpetrators,
accomplices or people who knew about things happening (Mitwisser)." She
stated that "we must learn from Auschwitz that we cannot watch inactively
where anti-Semitism, hatred and intolerance occur."
On 12 June, Ariel Muzicant and Josef Pühringer, chairman
of the Landeshauptleutekonferenz (Governors Conference of the Federal
Provinces), signed a restitution treaty. The treaty says that the Federal
Provinces will pay 8.1 million Euro to the Kultusgemeinde for property that
once belonged to Jewish communities and was expropriated or destroyed during
the Nazi regime. The treaty cannot come into force, though, before the two
class-action lawsuits in the USA are dropped. The negotiations prior to the
signing of the treaty were closely watched, as governor Jörg Haider and
Ariel Muzicant were previously involved in court proceedings, and Haider
finally apologized for his libellous statement about Muzicant in February
2001. The discussion on whether Haider’s statement about Muzicant was
anti-Semitic or not, dominated public discourse for a couple of weeks. An
expert from the Kultusgemeinde Salzburg told us that the Internet fora of
the ORF (Austrian Broadcasting Corporation) and dailies were full of
anti-Semitic statements in connection with reports on the signing of this
reparation treaty.
Portugal
In Portugal (total population: 10 million) there is no
tradition of anti-Semitism in recent times. Apart from a period of some
tension between Salazar’s regime and the Portuguese Jewish community – that
never resulted in persecution –, in the recent past the small Jewish
community (700 people) has been assimilated and accepted by Portuguese
society. After the dawn of democracy, Jews were totally accepted as another
religious minority and its religion is protected under the act acknowledging
religious plurality.
1. Physical acts of violence
In July the Lisbon synagogue was vandalised and sacred
objects scattered on the floor.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats
There are no reports of complaints neither by the Jewish
community, the press, NGOs nor other media.
Insults
The Israel Embassy has received slanderous calls and
Internet messages with offensive content.
Telephone
There are no reports of physical or material threats
against the Jewish community and its property.
Graffiti
The Israeli Embassy reported that their flag in the
"Nations Park", located where the World Expo took place in 1998 and now a
major social meeting place in Lisbon, was vandalised. Several Nazi swastikas
and other insults appeared on the flag platform.
Leaflets
No material of this kind was reported to have appeared in
circulation. The Jewish community, as expressed through its representative,
considered an e-mail sent by a professor of the Trás-os-Montes University
the main anti-Semitic event in the monitored period. In this e-mail,
addressing the conflict in the Middle East, a phrase stated "If there are
any good Jews (which I doubt) (…)". Another professor of the same university
alerted the Portuguese Jewish community about this e-mail, who in turn then
revealed it to the press, where it was published in the newspaper Público.
Public discourse
On a visit to Israel, the Nobel Prize winner José
Saramago declared to Portuguese radio station Antenna 1, that "It must be
said that in Palestine, there is a crime which we can stop. We may compare
it with what happened at Auschwitz". While visiting Ramallah and Arafat with
members of the International Parliament of Writers, Saramago stated that the
Israeli blockade of Ramallah is "in the spirit of Auschwitz," and "this
place is being turned into a concentration camp."
Internet
Several Portuguese Nazi sites appeared in 2002 on the
Internet. Some of them have anti-Semitic declarations and articles. However,
these are translations of anti-Semitic articles written in other countries,
mainly from the US. No explicit threats to the Portuguese Jewish community
were found in any of these sites (at least in the period monitored). One
particular site has more explicit anti-Semitic allusions: Movimento da
Reconstrução Nacional Socialista Atlântico (Atlantic Movement for the
National Socialist Reconstruction). At this site one can find several links
to further national and foreign National Socialist sites. The majority of
the anti-Semitic sites are Brazilian; and though we can also find Portuguese
fascist and nationalist sites, they do not display anti-Semitic references.
3. Research studies
There is no recent report on anti-Semitic aggression or
attitudes.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
There are no reported examples of good practices.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
The President recently participated in the 100-year
celebrations for the Lisbon Synagogue. On that occasion the President stated
that Portugal should pay more attention to Jewish culture and to its several
famous names, claiming that they are an integral part of Portuguese history.
The main newspapers broadcasted the celebrations and printed the President’s
address.
Finland
The Finnish Jewish community is rather small (1500
members) of the overall Finnish population of 5.2 million. In Finland, the
Jews are well integrated into society and are represented in nearly all
sectors of it. Most of them live in the metropolitan area of Helsinki, with
small numbers of members living also in the cities of Turku and Tampere. Due
to Finland’s continuing pro-Arab attitude since the 1967 Six Day War, there
were minor threats against the Jewish community during the Middle East
crisis. In the monitoring period there have also been many pro-Palestine
demonstrations and movements directed against the government of Israel and
its actions in the Palestinian areas. These activities cannot be evaluated
as anti-Semitic; nevertheless there is always a possibility that they can
create extreme expressions of opinion, so that people may no longer
distinguish the Israeli government from the Jewish people, thus increasing
the danger of anti-Semitic thoughts and acts.
1. Physical acts of violence
On 6 May a window of the Jewish synagogue in the centre
of Helsinki located on the building’s 2nd floor was smashed and raw eggs
thrown against the walls at the Jewish Community Building. The attack was
carried out by a group of about 10 skinheads. This is the first time that an
incident of this kind has occurred in Helsinki.
Earlier in the spring there were two bomb threats. One
bomb threat was not reported at all in the media and the other one was
reported on different scales depending on the paper.
- Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats
The Jewish community in Helsinki has received threatening
letters throughout the spring, especially in the earlier part, but also in
May.
Telephone
Earlier this spring, at the same time as the Israeli army
invaded the city of Jenin, the Finnish Jewish community began to receive
threatening phone calls on a daily basis. Also in the monitoring period
covered by this report there have been threatening phone calls to the Jewish
Community Centre because of the recent incidents in the Middle East.
On 4 April an anonymous telephone bomb threat to a Jewish
school in Helsinki caused the evacuation of the Helsinki synagogue and the
Jewish old people’s home. No device was found.
Graffiti and anti-Semitic inscriptions
There has not been much anti-Semitic graffiti in
Helsinki. While most of the graffiti expresses pro-Palestine sentiments,
some of it is also very anti-Israeli.
Publicly distributed leaflets
Pro-Palestine movements have distributed their leaflets
on many occasions. Some of these leaflets contain (extreme) anti-Israeli
material, and others have asked people to boycott Israeli products to help
attain peace in Israel.
Media
According to a representative of the Jewish community in
Helsinki, Jews are blamed for what happens in Israel and the news and
articles in the Finnish media have tended to be biased about issues dealing
with the situation in Israel. He believes that the anti-Israeli and
anti-Jewish tone of these writings could have been intentional or
unintentional. He also sees that the recent development of anti-Semitism in
Europe may lead to an increase in anti-Semitic acts in Finland.
Some of the writers of letters to newspapers have
expressed their concern over the way the Finnish media handles the situation
in Middle East. Some writers see that the media can really damage the
general picture of Jews and weaken their position in society by presenting
news from a narrow point of view, without taking all relevant matters into
consideration.
Public discourse
The Archbishop, when referring to the situation in Middle
East, said that the borders of a state cannot be drawn with the help of the
Old Testament’s guidelines. He has agreed that the Jewish people are God’s
chosen people, but still this fact should not affect how Christians react to
the policy the Israeli government practices. Some people reacted very
strongly to the Archbishop’s opinions. They could not understand how the
Archbishop of the Finnish Lutheran Church could criticise the actions of the
Israeli government. Others believed that he showed a great deal of courage
by expressing his opinions on the situation in Middle East.
Internet
In some of the Internet’s news groups and chat rooms
there has been discussion about the situation in Israel. The opinions have
been both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel. On some occasions the discussion has
been impolite from both sides. Hence, there are some anti-Semitic opinions
in Internet chat rooms. It is common in these Internet discussions that
people cite the Bible in making their arguments. Some argue that the Bible
says that Jews are the chosen people of God and now they are persecuted as
the Bible has predicted; others argue that the Jews killed Jesus and they
will always be blamed for this.
3. Research studies
During the period no research studies were done in the
field.
4. Good practice for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
FLHR interviewed the representative of the Friends of
Israel Association, who said that they have done a lot of work to reduce
prejudice and violence towards Jews. The main method for doing this has been
the dissemination of information. They have organised events informing the
public about Israel and the Jewish culture. Some speakers have come from
Israel to give lectures about the situation in Israel. There was also one
pro-Israel demonstration on 11 May 2002.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
There has not been much discussion about the increase of
anti-Semitism; more generally politicians have expressed their concern about
a rise in support for extreme right-wing parties in Europe. Politicians and
parties have declared that this kind of development is unacceptable in
Finland and that a lot of work must be done to prevent this development from
also taking place here.
Sweden
Within its general population of 8.9 million Sweden has
an estimated Jewish population of around 18,500, most of whom live in the
three large city areas of Stockholm (5500 members belonging to the Jewish
community), Gothenburg (Götheburg, 1800 members) and Malmö (1200). Around
50% of the Jewish population in these cities are members of Jewish
communities.
There has been a slow but steady upsurge in anti-Jewish
activities since the beginning of the Intifada in September 2000. Perhaps
the most dramatic example from the beginning of this period was in October
2000 when a big anti-Israeli demonstration was held in Malmö and
demonstrators forced their way into a shop owned by Jews and threatened
them. There have been some examples of references to old Christian
anti-Jewish sentiments in the media, where references have been made to
concepts like "an eye for an eye", child slaughter and Christ-killers;
furthermore, Israeli politics has been compared with Nazi politics on a few
occasions. In the early spring of 2002 the daily Aftonbladet published an
article criticising Israeli politics with the headline "The crucified
Arafat", a reference to one of the most well known anti-Semitic myths.
References have also been made to "Jewish media power". A television
programme in November 2001, Mediemagasinet, pointed out that three out of
the six Swedish reporters reporting from the Middle East were Jewish. The
programme put in question the objectivity of these Jewish reporters.
Internet homepages of both the extreme right and the radical left have used
anti-Semitism when discussing the Middle East conflict. One left-wing
homepage, Indymedia, featured an anti-Semitic cartoon; the Grim Reaper
sporting a hat with a swastika and the Star of David. The Indymedia chat has
featured statements referring to well-known conspiracy themes such as a "New
World Order" and a "Zionist Occupation Government – ZOG". The anniversary of
the November-pogrom 1938 on 9 November 2001 was exploited by some groups for
anti-Israeli propaganda. Nazi groups like the National Socialist Front have
applauded Islamic anti-Semitism and terror, including the acts of al Qaida.
1. Physical acts of violence
On 18 April 2002, a small public meeting with
approximately 100 participants protesting against both anti-Semitism and
phobic attitudes to Islam took place in central Stockholm. The organisers
expressed that the rally was non-partisan and did not take sides in the
Middle East conflict. The rally was organised by a branch of the Liberal
Party youth organisation and several of the participants were Jews. As the
rally was about to end, a much larger anti-Israeli march organised by the
Palestinian support organisation was passing nearby. Suddenly, 100-150 young
demonstrators broke out and charged into the little crowd that was left
around the small demonstration - most of them Jews. The attacking group was
threatening and some violence was seen. Individual attackers could be heard
shouting, "Kill the Jews!" and "We’ll blow you up!" Some attackers also went
around aggressively asking people if they were Jewish. It should be pointed
out that there were also many young Swedish extreme left-wing people amongst
the most aggressive participants.
There were no incidents reported for Stockholm and
Göteburg over the period of May and June. Malmö has witnessed a consistently
high level of anti-Semitic agitation since the beginning of the current
Intifada in the autumn of 2000. The city has a higher percentage of Muslims
than the other two large Swedish cities. Among the population of around
250,000 inhabitants there are 45,000 individuals of Muslim background in
Malmö. Including the surrounding areas, the number reaches around 100,000.
Though the anti-Semitic sentiments are not shared by a majority of the
Muslim population, indications show that such sentiments are more common
there than among the rest of the population. Several incidents were directed
towards the Jewish cemeteries in Malmö.
19 May: vandalism inflicted at the Jewish cemetery in
Rosengard in the suburb of Malmö.
3 June: burglary and vandalism in the funeral chapel at
the Jewish cemetery at Föreningsgatan close to the city centre of Malmö.
4 and 6 June: burglary and vandalism at the Jewish
cemetery in Rosengard. Smashed windows and anti-Semitic graffiti.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
On 21 May a group of young Arabs were reported yanking at
the entrance doors of the Jewish Community Centre shouting "Fucking Jew!"
(literally "Judejävel": "Jew Devil!"), and making obscene gestures at a
woman inside.
Graffiti and inscriptions
On 3 June graffiti on the wall of the Jewish cemetery at
Föreningsgatan read: "Fuck the pigs!", "Smash Israel" and "Never forget
Jenin!"
Publicly distributed leaflets
On 29 May in the northeastern town of Gävle a man was
sentenced to two years prison for running a record company called Sniper
Records and releasing racist and anti-Semitic CDs, some of them in German.
The man admitted passing the profit on to the National Socialist Front. The
local daily Sydöstran reported (6 June 2002) that the library of the town
Karlskrona had found a great amount of anti-Semitic propaganda slipped into
shelves, books and papers over the last year. The library has now decided to
forbid people with openly racist views to visit the premises.
On 14 June several Swedish papers reported that four
leading Nazis, two of them living in Karlskrona, have been sentenced to six
months prison for re-publishing a 1930s anti-Semitic book titled "The Jewish
Question".
Media
Samtidsmagazinet Salt, an up-market magazine labelling
itself "radical conservative", released its latest issue at the beginning of
June. Previous issues of Salt had clear anti-Semitic content. In the June
issue one article paid tribute to Holocaust denial, while a well-known
anti-Semitic conspiracy theoretician penned another article.
In March the presidents of the Jewish communities in
Stockholm, Göteborg and Malmö, acting together with presidents of the
Swedish-Israel Society, the Swedish branch of the Israel Information Office
and the Swedish Committee Against Anti-Semitism, published an article in the
main daily, Dagens Nyheter, in which they protested against "the one-sided
reporting in the Swedish media about the conflict in the Middle East." In an
alarming passage, the article continues: "As a consequence of the massive
anti-Israeli campaign, we have observed a dramatic increase in anti-Jewish
activity and expressions of anti-Semitism in Swedish society".
During Easter 2002 the newspaper Aftonbladet attacked
Israeli policy with a headline "Crucified Arafat" referring to the old
anti-Jewish accusation that it were the Jews who crucified Jesus.
Internet
In May and June, the website "Focus Israel" (Brännpunkt
Israel) – run by one of the officials in the Malmö Jewish community –
repeatedly received hate mail with anti-Semitic content. Karlskrona, a small
town in the southeast of Sweden, is the stronghold of the largest and most
active Nazi group in Sweden, the NSF, Nationalsocialistisk Front (National
Socialist Front). The group is known for its high anti-Semitic profile, also
reflected on its homepages, which are directly linked to the sites of the
right extremist and revisionist Gary Lauck from Lincoln/Nebraska. Another
Swedish internet site carries anti-Israel, anti-Semitic and anti-American
material, mainly caricatures similar to those from a Swedish caricaturist
who in the past has drawn anti-Semitic caricatures for the revisionist Ahmed
Rami and his "Radio Islam" which was a radio station and today is one of the
most radical right wing anti-Semitic homepages on the net with close links
to radical Islam groups.
3. Research Studies
There is no recent report or opinion poll on anti-Semitic
aggression or attitudes.
4. Good Practice for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
Individual teachers in some schools have made a point of
introducing the issue of anti-Semitism in class discussions. Reports to the
Expo Foundation from several teachers indicate a growth of anti-Semitic
sentiments, including various conspiracy theories among (predominantly)
immigrant youth with a Muslim background. Such sentiments seem to be closely
related to the media reporting and the development of the situation in the
Middle East. There has been no formal study made about such claims. An
example of good practice is how survivors of the Holocaust have related
their experiences in the schools. A teaching method called "Abrahams barn"
("Abraham’s children"), pointing out similarities between Christianity,
Islam and Judaism, has – according to teachers – been reported to be fairly
successful in schools with a high percentage of immigrants. Along with this,
teachers in some schools have reported that a generally increased vigilance
against racist and anti-Semitic expressions has been a successful method in
curbing such sentiments. The Swedish Committee against anti-Semitism has
been writing articles and arranging a series of seminars in different cities
and towns. The seminars were called "Stereotyping immigrants, Jews and
Muslims in media and debate" and got a very good response in the
evaluations.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
EXPO found no example of politicians speaking up against
anti-Semitism. The leftist party Vänsterpartiet announced a campaign against
racism, mentioning xenophobia, homophobia and other forms of racism, but not
anti-Semitism.
United Kingdom
The Jewish population in the United Kingdom numbers
280,000, two-thirds of whom live in London; other large communities are
located in Manchester, Leeds and Glasgow. The Muslim population is 500,000,
most of whom have an Asian background. Between 1990 and 2001 an average of
282 anti-Semitic incidents per year were counted. During the period 1998 to
2001, the average yearly total rose to 305 incidents. In comparison to the
preceding year, in 2000 the UK (total population 58.4 million) witnessed 405
anti-Semitic incidents, a rise of 50. One third of these occurred in the
months of October and November, "reflecting the upsurge in tensions between
Palestinians and Israelis". The rise in 2000 was also accompanied by an even
greater increase in racist incidents. The number of incidents decreased in
2001 to 305, but the Community Security Trust states that "October 2000
proved to be a watershed with regard to incidents. There appears to have
been a genuine change, both qualitative and quantitative after this point":
there were 22 synagogue desecrations in the 22 months before October 2000,
but 78 in the same time period since, and assaults on Jews since October
2000 "have often been sustained beating leading to hospitalisation, compared
with the `roughing up` by neo-Nazis that more typically occurred before."
The data of the CST show that an increasing number of incidents are "caused
by Muslims or Palestinian sympathisers, whether or not they are Muslims".
This indicates a change of direction from which anti-Semitism comes, which
is closely connected to the tensions in the Middle East conflict.
1. Physical acts of violence
The climax of the violence was reached in the weeks
between the beginning of April and the start of May 2002. There were 51
incidents nationwide in April, "most of them assaults on individuals",
compared with 12 in March and seven in February. Some of the assaults
resulted in the hospitalisation of the victims with serious injuries.
Reportedly, the victims were mainly orthodox and Hassidic Jews. In London,
Manchester and Glasgow the windows of synagogues or the Hebrew Congregation
were smashed; in London a further synagogue was desecrated.
On 6 May, following a rally in support of Israel, a boy
wearing a shirt with the Star of David was attacked by three youths.
On 11 July the synagogue in Swansea (Wales) was
desecrated by vandals with graffiti (swastika, and the phrase "T4 Jewish
c*** from Hitler") and Torah rolls were damaged and burned. The attempt to
burn down the building failed.
The CST counted 20 incidents of extreme violence (attacks
potentially causing loss of life) and assaults during the first five months
of 2002. Then perpetrators were described as follows: five white, five Arab,
three Asian, seven unknown.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
In Edinburgh an Episcopalian clergyman was forced to
defend a mural showing a crucified Jesus flanked by Roman soldiers - and
modern-day Israeli troops. It was not anti-Semitic, he insisted, but
designed to make his congregation think about current conflicts. The
Anti-Defamation League criticised that Christian clerics are using
anti-Jewish rhetoric in proclaiming the old, destructive ‘replacement
theology’ – the notion that Judaism has been replaced as religion".
Media
Many British Jews are of the opinion that the press
reporting on Israeli policy is spiced with a tone of animosity, "as to smell
of anti-Semitism" as The Economist put it. In their opinion this is above
all the case with the two quality papers, the Guardian and the Independent.
After the attack on the Finsbury Park synagogue Jeremy Newmark, official
spokesman for Chief Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks, said that "anti-Semitic
incidents have been rising over the past year, but have shown a marked
upturn in the past six weeks as the conflict in the Middle East has reached
a furious pitch." He says that "the anti-Israeli bias of much media coverage
here has made British Jews more vulnerable" without though naming any
examples.
3. Research studies
Between 16 May and 4 June and between 9 and 29 September
surveys commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) New York were
conducted on "European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" in ten European countries. Compared to most of
the other EU countries agreement with anti-Semitic statements in the United
Kingdom was clearly lower: from the four stereotypical statements presented,
only 9% of the respondents agreed to at least three (see Table: Report on
Belgium). Only with the statement "Jews are more loyal to Israel than to
this country" did one third of the respondents agree; at the same time
though this number is well below the European average of 51%. A third of the
British respondents feel that anti-Jewish sentiments will increase in the
coming years. To the question "Thinking specifically of the current conflict
(...) – are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the
Palestinians?", 30% of the British respondents sympathised with the
Palestinian side, the second highest rate after the Danes, while only 16%
sympathised with Israel. Here the social contact with Muslims appears to
have played an important role: 32% of the British in contact with Muslims
"fairly often" sympathised with the Palestinians. In all states surveyed the
individual use of media exerted a certain influence: of those British
respondents who followed the news coverage "a great deal" or "a good
amount", 41% sympathised with the Palestinian side, while the proportion for
Israel was 11%. A survey already conducted in April, "The plague on both
houses. British attitudes to Israel and Palestine", had reached similar
conclusions: 14% said that they were more sympathetic to Israel than to the
Palestinians, while 28% sympathised more with the latter. Both Prime
Minister Sharon and Palestinian leader Arafat were mainly disapproved of
(50% and 54% respectively); and 38% and 33% respectively were for sanctions
against both sides (cutting off aid and blocking military exports). The
Economist spoke of a "steady shift of sympathy away from Israel, especially
on the left".
4. Good Practice for reducing prejudice, violence and
aggression
After the desecration of the synagogue at Finsbury Park,
on 2 May the Muslim Jewish Forum of North London, a group committed to
improving relations between the two faiths, condemned the attack as "a
terrible violation of a sacred place of worship". Some days after the attack
on the Finsbury Park synagogue, a petition to "Stop Anti-Semitism in the UK"
was placed on the Internet and to be personally presented to the Prime
Minister Tony Blair.
5. Reactions by politicians and other opinion leaders
In a demonstration of mainstream political solidarity
against racism, two senior Labour and Conservative politicians united on 2
May 2002, to condemn the desecration of the synagogue of Finsbury Park. The
Local Government Secretary, Stephen Byers, and the opposition home affairs
spokesman, Oliver Letwin, supported the Chief Rabbi, Dr Jonathan Sacks, as
volunteers began scraping away spattered paint, repairing broken seats and
replacing vandalised equipment. After surveying the damage, Mr Byers said he
wanted to demonstrate the government’s support for the Jewish community.
"The people of this country will defend their right to practice their
religion." "In the year 2002 this kind of destruction is not what I had
expected to see. Any right-thinking member of the community will condemn
this as barbaric. We have to ensure that those people who are intolerant,
who are prejudiced, don’t have the opportunity of committing this again." Mr
Letwin regarded it as particularly important "that every mainstream
political party in Britain shows the solidarity we feel about this attack.
It was deliberately intended to inflame relationships in the local
community." The Chief Rabbi warned of the upsurge in anti-Semitic attacks,
emphasising though at the same time that the "support from political parties
and local communities has been tremendous. Britain must reject racist
politics and I’m confident it will. There will certainly be greater
vigilance in the community."
On 4 March 2002, the MP Jim Murphy had submitted a
parliamentary question to the Home Secretary, calling for him to make a
statement on anti-Semitism in the UK and asking what action he has taken to
combat it. In reply the government emphasised that it is "fully committed to
tackling racism and anti-Semitism wherever it occurs. We have continued to
strengthen our anti-discrimination laws and our criminal law to ensure that
it continues to offer some of the most comprehensive protection against
racism and anti-Semitism in Europe. In that regard we have introduced the
Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000; we are looking at ways to implement the
European Union directives on race and discrimination in employment;
strengthen the law on incitement to racial hatred by raising the maximum
penalty to seven years’ imprisonment and extending the scope to hatred
directed against racial groups outside the United Kingdom and introduced
religiously aggravated offences to add to the racially aggravated offences
we introduced in 1998. We have asked the police and the Crown Prosecution
Service to work together to pool knowledge and experience in the
investigation and prosecution of race hate material. We have also made
significant changes to our laws countering the threat of terrorism,
including the Terrorism Act 2000 and, in response to the events of September
11, the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. The Government and the
police continue to have a good working relationship with the Jewish
community in Britain."
On 19 April, David Blunkett, the Home Secretary
presented, together with his colleagues from France, Belgium, Spain and
Germany, a joint declaration on "Racism, Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism" which
aims at establishing preventive measures and a European-wide coordination of
the responsible offices and agencies.
In response to a question posed by the MP Dismore as to
the number of anti-Semitic offences in the last weeks and months, on 14 May
2002 the government declared that the number of anti-Semitic crimes is not
collected separately by the Home Office. "The Government condemns all acts
of anti-Semitism in this country. The Government and the police are aware of
the concerns of the Jewish community and we have received reports from both
the police and community organisations such as the Community Security Trust.
We will continue to monitor the situation carefully in co-operation with
community organisations."
Annex: Reporting institutions and
data sources
The list of the National Focal Points (NFPs)
presented below does not primarily deal with monitoring and recording
anti-Semitic incidents. Therefore some NFPs experienced difficulties in
collecting data, but they have tried to overcome these difficulties in
various ways, as one can see from the list of sources.
- Belgium: Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition
to Racism (CEOOR)
- Denmark: The Danish Board for Ethnic Equality
- Germany: European Forum for Migration Studies
- Greece: ANTIGONE - Information & Documentation Centre
- Spain: Movement for Peace, Disarmament and Liberty
- France: Agency for the Development of Intercultural
Relations
- Ireland: Equality Authority (EA) /National Consultative
Committee on Racism and Interculturalism (NCCRI)
- Italy: Co-operation for the Development of Emerging
Countries (COSPE)
- Luxemburg: Association for the Support of Immigrant
Workers
- Austria: Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Human Rights;
Department of Linguistics of the University of Vienna; Institute of
Conflict Research;
- Portugal: Research Center on Human and Social Sciences
- Finland: Finnish League for Human Rights
- Sweden: EXPO Foundation
The following list gives an overview of the
collation methods, databases and data-collecting institutions in the EU
Member States used by the NFPs:
Belgium
The Belgian report contained the following
sources:
- Forum of the Jewish Organisations of Antwerp
- Newspapers
- Internet
Denmark
Various sources have been consulted in the
data collection. The aim was to speak to both official and unofficial
sources in order to achieve a full representation. The unofficial sources
were identified by firstly speaking to an information worker at "The Jewish
Community" (Det Mosaiske Trossamfund), by pursuing the "links" on The Jewish
Community’s homepage, and then by checking other "links" on the "Jewish"
sites visited. The Jewish Community in Denmark systematically registers all
anti-Semitic incidents in Denmark.
The following institutions and
organisations have been consulted:
– The Danish Civil Security Service (PET) –
as they collect data on "racially motivated"
crimes in Denmark.
For incidents of graffiti, vandalism, etc.:
- The Jewish Community (Det Mosaiske Trossamfund), which
is the official representative of the Jewish community in Denmark;
- "Maichsike-hadas" – an Orthodox Jewish Community in
Copenhagen;
- Chabad – a broad organisation promoting Jewish
awareness;
- JIF Hakaoh – a Jewish sports club (via Carolineskolen);
- Carolineskolen – the main Jewish school located in
Copenhagen;
- Progressive Jewish Forum – a small organisation working
for a "reform Jewish congregation";
- The Danish Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies;
- The Israeli Embassy in Copenhagen.
Other sources:
- daily newspapers;
- Internet was used to identify homepages with
anti-Semitic content.
Germany
The German NFP based its report on the
following sources:
- Data from the Federal Office of Criminal Investigation;
- An intensive analysis of the media;
- Internet, the Websites of organisations;
- Analysis of scientific studies: media analyses, opinion
polls.
Ireland
Information was mostly supplied by Jewish
organisations in Ireland.
Organisations contacted:
- Jewish Representative Council of Ireland;
- the Chief Rabbi’s Office;
- the Israeli Embassy;
- the Ireland-Israel Friendship League;
- the Garda (Irish police);
- Garda Racial and Intercultural Office.
Survey of national newspapers
Internet (right-wing websites)
Greece
Data was collected from three main
sources:
- Representative organisations of the Jewish Community in
Greece (Regional Boards and Central Board of Jewish Communities in
Greece). A written request was sent by fax and e-mail to these
organisations. Members of the NFP’s staff had interviews with members of
the Board of the other main Jewish Communities in Corfu, Larissa and
Thessalonica;
- The media were both monitored and studied. The
monitoring of the media, which is a routine activity of the INFOCENTER,
provides us with information to be further investigated. At the same time,
the content of the media reports is also studied since it constitutes an
important attitude-forming instrument. Detailed content analyses have not
been carried out in the context of the present report, as it was not
within its scope, but the essential primary material has been collected,
categorised and can be analysed further, if required;
- The Internet was used basically as a source of data
-mostly reports from national and international organisations- and also as
a source of material pertinent to our inquiry, i.e. anti-Semitic web
pages, discussion groups, etc.
Spain
The following information sources were used
for the report:
- Mass media;
- Internet (oriented on neo-Nazi and racist groups);
- Violence reports;
- Personal interviews;
- Consultation with several organisations, especially
Jewish ones.
France
The sources used to monitor incidents were:
- All daily print press as well as press agencies;
- Jewish Communities’ media (Actualité juive,
antisémitisme.info, etc.);
- Jewish groups (CRIF, UEJF), in particular the new
structures or initiatives recently set up to counter anti-Semitic acts or
for the purpose of victim support (Observatoire du monde juif, help lines
such as SOS Vérité - Sécurité or SOS antisémitisme);
- anti-racist non-profit organisations (LICRA, SOS
Racisme, MRAP, FASTI)
Italy
The basic sources were made available by
the Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation (Centro di Documentazione
Ebraica Contemporanea, CDEC) in Milan, which systematically collects data on
anti-Semitism in Italy.
- Surveys
- Newspapers
- Internet
- Report on anti-Semitism in Italy, edited by A.
Goldstaub, June 2002. The report had been presented at the national
Congress of UCEI (Unione delle Comunità Ebraiche Italiane, 20-23 June
2002)
Luxembourg
Inquiries were made at:
- Representatives of the Jewish community;
- Secretary General of the Israelite Consistory;
- Grand Ducal Police;
- NGO working against racism and anti-Semitism;
- Amnesty International Luxembourg;
Analysis of newspapers
The Netherlands
The report is based on the compilation by
the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism, Technical University Berlin.
Sources used are from:
- European Commission against Racism and Intolerance
(ECRI), online: Second report on the Netherlands, adopted on 15 December
2000 and made public on 13.11.2001.
- Anti-Semitism Worldwide 2000/1, online, Netherlands;
- Centrum Informatie en Documentatie Israel (CIDI), The
Hague, online overzicht antisemitische incidenten Nederland 2001 en
voorloping overzicht 2002 by Hadassa Hirschfeld;
- Other NGOs: Anti Discrininatiebureaus in Nederland
(ADB’s), Landelijke Vereniging van ADB’s (LV), Meldpunt Discrimnatie
Internet (MDI), Landelijke Expertise Centrum Discriminatiezaken (LECD),
Antifascistische Onderzoeksgroep Kafka, Centraal Meldpunt
Voetbalvandalisme, Monitorrapport over Racisme en Extreem Rechts from the
Anne Frank Stichting and the University of Leiden; the Dutch Auschwitz
Committee, the National Bureau for the Fight Against Racism and the 4th
and 5th May Committee;
- Newspapers;
- Internet.
Austria
The analysis is based on a balanced mix of
sources:
- NGOs related to the Jewish communities (Forum gegen
Antisemitismus [sub-organisation of the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde
Wien], ESRA, Israelitische Kultusgemeinden Salzburg, Innsbruck, and Graz);
- Other NGOs (ZARA, Dokumentationsarchiv des
österreichischen Widerstands [DÖW], Ökologische Linke [OEKOLI],
Österreichische HochschülerInnenschaft);
- relevant journalists;
- Federal Ministry of the Interior.
The media analysis included monitoring of
the following dailies:
Der Standard,
Die Presse, Wiener Zeitung, Salzburger Nachrichten,
Kurier, Kleine Zeitung, Oberösterreichische Nachrichten
and Kronen Zeitung. The NFP looked for the keywords "anti-Semitism",
"anti-Semitic", "Jew(s)" and "Jewish" in the online archives of these
papers.
In addition, the following right-wing
papers were scrutinized: Zur Zeit published weekly by FPÖ-members,
Aula edited monthly by the National-freiheitliche Akademikerverbände
Österreichs, an umbrella organisation of the national-"liberal"
fraternities, and Der Eckart published monthly by the
Österreichische Landsmannschaften.
Internet
The keywords "anti-Semitism – Austria"
"Jews – Austria" were used for the general search on the Internet.
Portugal
The NFP gave reference to official
institutions, Jewish organisations and anti-discrimination NGOs and the
media in a general way.
Finland
Data was collected from three main
sources:
– Interviews with a representative of the
Finnish Jewish community, a representative of
the Friends of Israel Association and the
Ombudsman’s office;
Intrinsic problem: Although there are some
institutions that monitor the situation, they do it usually from a very
narrow point of view, specialising their efforts on some particular issue.
Sweden
Sources and methods:
The only Swedish institution compiling a
formal index of anti-Semitic incidents is the Swedish Security Police
(Säpo); however, such statistics are only published annually the year
following the incident.
To compile this report the NFP has made
use of its contacts with all three Jewish communities and is continuously
receiving reports on registered anti-Semitic incidents. The NFP is also in
continuous contact with a number of individuals researching the topic,
either in a private or in an academic capacity.
The gathering of information has been done
basically through telephone calls that were prepared by sending out the
questions well in advance of the calls.
Other information, especially about
activities on the Internet and articles in papers, stems from the normal
daily collection of information by the NFP.
United Kingdom
This report is based on the compilation by
the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism, Berlin.
Sources used:
- Data from the Community Security Trust (CST), the
monitoring body, which has been accorded third-party reporting status by
the police. This allows it to report anti-Semitic incidents to the police
and act as a go-between between the police and those victims who are
unable or unwilling to report to the police directly. Michael Whine,
Anti-Semitism on the streets, in: Is there a new anti-Semitism in
Britain?, online www.jpr.org.uk/Reports;
- Lawyers Committee for Humans Rights, Fire and Broken
Glass. The Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe, Strasbourg, May 2002;
- Amnesty International Press Release, AI Index: EUR
3.1.2002 (Public) News Service No: 84, 10.5.2002;
- Anti-Defamation League, Global Anti-Semitism: Selected
Incidents Around the World in 2002;
- Anti-Semitism Worldwide 2000/1, online, United Kingdom;
- Survey: Anti-Defamation League, European Attitudes
Towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, 27. 6. 2002;
- Newspapers;
- Internet.
hagalil.com
09-12-2002
|