One is that it denies the Jewish people the right to self-determination, delegitimizing Israel as a state and attributing the entire world’s misfortune to it. It ascribes a mix of evil qualities to the country; Cotler called this cultural anti-Semitism. It also involves calls for restrictions on countries trading with Israel, or economic anti-Semitism.
As it is sometimes difficult to pinpoint the boundary between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism, Cotler proposed some guidelines. He said that critics of Israel become anti-Semites when:
- They publicly call for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish This is the case with the covenants of Palestinian terrorist groups (the PLO and Hamas) and some militant Islamic legal rulings (fatwas), as well as the Iranian threat to annihilate Israel (“genocidal anti-Semitism”).
- They deny the Jewish people’s right to self-determination, delegitimize Israel as a state, and attribute to Israel all of the world’s evil (“political anti-Semitism”).
- They Nazify Israel (“ideological anti-Semitism”).
- Israel is characterized as the perfidious enemy of Islam (“theological anti-Semi- tism”).
- Israel is attributed a mix of evil qualities by salon intellectuals and Western elites (“cultural anti-Semitism”).
- They call for restrictions on those trading with Israel (“economic anti-Semitism”).
- They deny the Holocaust
- They support racist terrorism against Israel.
- They single out Israel for discriminatory treatment in the international arena through denial of equality before the law.4
Cotler thus drew attention to several of the points later included in the working definition of anti-Semitism of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). This body later changed its name to European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). Examples are Cotler’s mention of: calling for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people, “Nazifying” Israel, and discriminatory treatment of Israel by denying it equality before the law.5 Former Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Per Ahlmark pointed out:
Anti-Zionism today has become very similar to anti-Semitism.
Anti-Zionists accept the right of other peoples to national feelings and a defensible state. But they reject the right of the Jewish people to have its national consciousness expressed in the state of Israel and to make that state secure. Thus, they are not judging Israel with the values used to judge other countries. Such discrimination against Jews is called anti-Semitism.6
Natan Sharansky, until his resignation in May 2005 as Israeli cabinet minister responsible for the Diaspora, initiated a concise working definition of “new anti-Semitism.” He developed the “3D test”— demonization, double standards, and delegitimization—to separate legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.7
The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz—this is anti-Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel. The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross—this is anti-Semitism.
The third “D” is the test of delegitimization. When Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied—alone among all peoples in the world—this too is anti-Semitism.8
FRA Working Definition of Anti-Semitism
As verbal attacks on Israel intensified, there was an increasing need for an updated and well-accepted definition of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism that could expose the racist and anti-Zionist permutations of it. In its 2004 report on anti-Semitism, the above mentioned European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) noted the lack of a common definition and requested one from a small group of Jewish NGOs. The resulting definition was gradually accepted in many circles, and is now known as the FRA working definition of anti-Semitism.
The document that contains the working definition mentions various contemporary examples of anti-Semitism. One of these is: “Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.”9
The FRA text has been increasingly accepted. For example, delegates to the May 2005 Cordoba Conference of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) constantly referred to this definition. In another example, the Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism recommended that “the EUMC Working Definition of anti-Semitism—since then the FRA definition—is adopted and promoted by the Government and law enforcement agencies.”10
The FRA document also states that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.” It lists examples of how anti-Semitism can manifest itself regarding Israel:
Anti-semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.
In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Anti-Semitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of anti-Semitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical al- legations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective—such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrong- doing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Je
- Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own na11
The document also gives many examples of the ways in which anti-Semitism may manifest itself regarding Israel, including:
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize I
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.12
In 2013, the FRA removed this definition from its website rather suddenly.13 This may well have been because when applying this definition, it becomes evident that the European Union from time to time commits anti-Semitic acts. Though it has no official working definition of anti-Semitism, the U.S. State Department has published an anti-Semitism fact sheet, with much of the FRA document copied verbatim. Some items in this fact sheet that partly differ from those found in the FRA definition are:
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or I
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis, blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tension
Also included in this definition are double standards for Israel, including those of “Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations.”14
The Three Main Categories of Anti-Semitism
The history of anti-Semitism starts in Egypt, several centuries before the birth of Christianity. The first pogrom took place in Alexandria in 38 CE.15 For many cen- turies, anti-Semitism as a major force manifested itself as religious anti-Semitism. Pieter van der Horst, a Dutch expert on early Christianity and Judaism, says:
Christian anti-Semitism began much later than Jesus’ life. In the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which are the historically more reliable ones, Jesus views himself as a messenger of God to the Jews and as a member of the Jewish people. He wanted to prepare them for what he saw as the approaching end of time and God’s imminent kingdom. Jesus was not planning to initiate a new religion. The writer of a later book, the Gospel of John, has Jesus make anti- Semitic remarks. That book, however, is much less historical.16
The beginning of violent European anti-Semitism is often traced to the Cru- sades at the end of the eleventh century. Others claim it commenced in 1010 with organized mass murders of Jews in France, followed by massacres in areas that are now part of Germany.17 Anti-Semitism also led to the expulsion of Jews from many European countries during the Middle Ages.
The Core Motif Mutates
As the perception of absolute evil has mutated over the centuries, the attire of this recurring core motif has changed as well. In classic Christian anti- Semitism, the key accusation is that the Jews have killed God’s alleged son and therefore their descendants are eternally responsible for this crime. It follows that those who are abysmally wicked enough to be God-killers must be the embodiment of Satan on earth. Once society internalizes this demonization, the way to virulent attitudes and extreme anti-Jewish violence is wide open.
The demonization of the Jews often had far-reaching consequences. It led some Christians to the conclusion that if certain people, that is, the Jews, were the representatives of Satan, the world would be better off without them and they should be killed. Those who thought so proposed an escape option to the Jews: conversion to Christianity. During the Crusades this stark choice was offered in numerous locales; many Jews who refused to convert were murdered. For almost a thousand years, versions of religious anti-Semitism have been accompanied by other manifestations of Jew-hatred in political, economic, academic, and cultural spheres. During the nineteenth century, a second major type of anti-Semitism emerged, namely, nationalistic-ethnic anti-Semitism. It found its genocidal expression in the Holocaust.
After World War II, anti-Semitism broadened into a third major category, that of anti-Israelism. This form of anti-Semitism is characterized by similar hate motifs to those of religious and nationalistic-ethnic anti-Semitism. Its multiple manifestations also include extensive genocidal incitement against Israel and the Jews, predominantly in the Muslim world.
As aforementioned, this variant of Jew-hatred is now often referred to as “new anti-Semitism.” Its Western perpetrators often call themselves anti-Zionists. They aim to isolate Israel and portray it—in the words of Berlin Technical University’s Center for Research on Anti-Semitism—“as a state that is fundamentally negatively distinct from all others, which therefore has no right to exist.”18
The Three Categories of Anti-Semitism Overlap
There are many common elements between the three main permutations of anti-Semitism: religious anti-Semitism, or anti-Judaism; nationalist-ethnic (racist) anti-Semitism; and anti-Israelism (anti-Zionism). The current delegitimization of Israel overlaps and is intertwined with classic anti-Semitism. Verbal or physical attacks are often against both Jews and Israelis. This merging of targets is one major proof, among many, of the substantial overlaps between anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism.
One phenomenon, then, cannot be analyzed without the other. Both classic anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism have become global in nature. Any inquiry into the delegitimization of Israel and how to confront it requires a broad understanding of the characteristics and developments in contemporary global anti-Semitism, as well as its past.
Although the most extreme current demonization of Israel and the Jews comes out of parts of the Arab and Muslim world, similar motifs and semantics are also expressed in extreme left- and right-wing Western circles. This also pertains, though at lower intensity, to segments of the Western mainstream.
A particularly effective way to demonstrate all this is by analyzing anti- Semitic cartoons. Like all caricatures, these rely on familiar and immediately grasped stereotypes. Cartoonists in mass media must employ these broad type- casts as they are easily recognizable by most viewers. In contemporary society, in which knowledge is extremely superficial, caricatures remain a successful tool for concisely conveying opinions including hate messages. This is particularly true for countries with a high percentage of illiteracy, such as in the Arab world. European cartoons also flaunt many parallels between Jews and Nazis, the Star of David and the swastika, the security fence and the Warsaw Ghetto wall. One finds anti-Semitic cartoons in leading mainstream papers remote from fascism or the extreme left. These include the London Independent, the Italian La Stampa, the Spanish El País, and many others. Even if these instances are incidental, it still indicates that many moral borders have been breached in a continent where, seventy years ago, the overwhelming majority of the Jews were murdered by Germans and Austrians with the assistance of many other Europeans.
Absolute Evil Mutates
Anti-Semitism’s classic core theme that Jews embody absolute evil has been propagated intensely for many centuries. This extreme lie and its principal submotifs have remained largely the same over the ages. Their representation, however, has evolved according to the prevailing worldview at a given time.
The perception of what constitutes absolute evil has changed over the centuries. In Christian anti-Semitism, the most evil act imaginable was deicide— that the Jews had killed Jesus whom many Christians believed to be God’s son.
When Christianity dominated public opinion, the Jew was often portrayed as the killer of God, the anti-Christ, and also as Satan. Joshua Trachtenberg summarized how medieval Christendom saw the Jew as “sorcerer, murderer, cannibal, poisoner, blasphemer.”19 The main Christian demonizers of the Jews, however, such as the Church Father John Chrysostom, already dated from the fourth century.20
The Jew is also denounced as the “quintessential other,” as perceived at that moment. In periods of strong nationalism, Jews are characterized as radically alien elements. When the societal emphasis is on race, Jews are depicted as an extremely inferior one.
Once societies turned more secular, the false accusation of killing God’s alleged son no longer meant much to many Europeans. In the second major category of anti-Semitism, nationalistic-ethnic anti-Semitism, the theme of the Jews as a paradigm of absolute evil reappeared in a new guise. The criminal worldview of the Nazis reinvented the core motif that the Jews are the carriers of all evil. For the Nazis, who were largely neo-pagans, the Christian accusation of the Jews of the murder of God’s alleged son was irrelevant; they perceived absolute evil differently—for instance, as having a subhuman character. The Jews thus had to be branded, among other things, as bacteria or vermin, implying that they had to be exterminated.
In an environment where nationalism increasingly became a primary societal value, the Jews were also accused of being cosmopolitans without any national loyalties, and thus evil people acting against the interests of the nationalities of their compatriots. This also led to the accusation that Jews con- spire to control the world. The main supporting “document” for this conspiracy theory was The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Czarist forgery that has been reprinted in large numbers.21
The Nazis further detailed the accusations that the Jews are the source of all evil. They also saw Bolshevism as evil; hence the Jews had to be branded, among other things, as communists.
In contemporary Western society, absolute evil is often seen as the crimes of the Germans and their allies during World War II, with the Holocaust and committing genocide as its paradigm. After the Holocaust, for a certain period anti-Semitism became politically incorrect in the public domain. Many Europeans also started to become aware that if there was absolute evil in the world, it was represented by substantial parts of Europe rather than the Jews. For many others, however, this was too painful to admit. It created the psychological necessity to again attach evil to the Jews, this time mainly to Israel, the Jewish state.
The presentation of Israelis as Nazis goes back to high-ranking Englishmen in the 1940s during the time of the British Mandate for Palestine. Historian Robert Wistrich says, “An example is Sir John Glubb Pasha, who was com- mander of the Arab Jordanian Legion fighting against Israel in 1948. He was an upper-class conservative Englishman and a lifelong Arabophile, with a special love for desert Arabs. He was also a convinced anti-Semite.”
Glubb was not alone. One can find in British documents similar state- ments from high-ranking officials in the Palestine administration . . . One fi e high up in the Palestine administration was Sir Edward Grigg, later Lord Altrincham. He referred to what he called the National Socialist character of what became the Israeli Labor Party (Mapai) and of the Hagana (the core of the Israeli army). He saw in the Zionist youth movements a copy of the Hitler Youth.22
This comparison of Israel with the Nazis developed strongly in the communist world. Simon Wiesenthal, in an article in 1968, found in particular that East Germany’s news service was far more anti-Israeli than that of other communist countries.
Wiesenthal noticed that the words used in the DDR’s press and propaganda deviated from the commentary of other socialist countries. Some utterances even corresponded literally with remarks in former National Socialist newspapers and journals. Very soon it became evident that the anti-Israeli articles in the East German press had been written by the same persons who, during the Third Reich, had published articles about the “Jewish peril.”
On 14 July 1967, for example, a cartoon appeared in the Berliner Zeitung, depicting a flying Moshe Dayan, with his hands stretched out toward Gaza and Jerusalem. Next to him stood Adolf Hitler in an advanced state of decomposi- tion. He encouraged Dayan with the words: “Carry on, colleague Dayan!”23
The conspiracy motif also recurs in more recent times. This is, for instance, the case in Arab television programs, a mode of communication far more effec- tive and encompassing than books or written media. The fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion is widely reprinted in the Arab world. It has also been published in recent years in several Western countries, Norway being one of the examples.24 The truth about contemporary conspiracy is different: now that Nazism and communism have failed, the jihadi current of Islam, however fragmented, is the only major movement actively conspiring to rule the world. The conspiracy motif also appears in multiple forms and in many other circles. This was mentioned in the Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism, which noted: “We were told that Jewish conspiracy theories have been applied to many contemporary issues.”25
Common Characteristics of Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israelism
The three permutations of anti-Semitism have a number of major common characteristics. There is an ongoing, powerful promotion of a discourse of Jew-hatred. Verbal or physical attacks occur against both Jews and Israelis. Jews and nowadays also Israel are judged by standards that are applied to them but not to others.
Contemporary anti-Semites use a number of major hate motifs, several of which have been repeated in various forms for more than two thousand years. As noted, one of these is that the Jews—which now also includes Israel—em- body absolute evil and are behind all disasters. Nowadays this motif recurs in many forms, some of which are not explicit yet implied—as in the notion that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the greatest danger facing the world.
A variant of this was promoted by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry when he tied the rise of ISIS to the lack of progress in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. He did so at a State Department dinner for Muslim guests in October 2014. Kerry is not anti-Semitic in his personal outlook and has been a friend of Israel. Nevertheless, he was using a motif that many anti-Semitic spokesmen have previously promoted.
One of the common characteristics of the three main permutations of anti- Semitism is an ongoing and vigorous promotion of hatred. This demonization has developed major subthemes over the years, which recur in various guises and gradually permeate society’s narrative. With time, accusations become increasingly complex and more difficult to unravel. The Jews’ enemies continue to build further on this infrastructure when the circumstances are suitable, when they wish to attack a specific person or group, or when they seek out a scapegoat in any given situation.
The core motif of the Jews and Israel as extreme evil manifests itself in many other ways. The Jews (and Israel) are again accused of responsibility for a large number of disasters. Historically, the Jews were blamed for various plagues such as the Black Death in the fourteenth century. Germans invented the “stab in the back” (Dolchstoss) legend, which held the Jews responsible for Germany’s defeat in World War I and was subsequently used by the National Socialists in their murderous anti-Semitic campaigns.
On a local level, when Christian children who had disappeared were found dead, Jews were sometimes accused of having murdered them, often out of religious motives. This was the classic anti-Semitic version of the blood libel. Nowadays the blood-libel accusation reemerges with respect to Israel in different mutations.
After a huge mining disaster in Turkey in May 2014, the progovernment Turkish daily Yeni Akit criticized on its front page the owner of the Soma Coal Mine Company for having a Jewish son-in-law. The paper claimed this was the reason why “foreign” media outlets were attacking Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for the tragedy. The headline was followed by a later- deleted tweet by Burhun Kuzu, a senior parliamentarian from Erdogan’s AKP party. He wrote that the “Foreign Jewish lobby pounced on Erdogan because of the Soma disaster. But the mine owner’s son-in-law is Jewish.”26
Today, strong ideological currents promote universalism; at the same time, the state of Israel is demonized as nationalist, racist, and colonialist. Meanwhile the mainstream view of absolute evil as committing genocide or behaving like the Nazis has become a very widespread perception of Israel in Western Europe.
Once again cartoons can illustrate this point. The Palestinian Authority does not only promote anti-Israelism but also anti-Semitism of the most extreme kind, conveying that Jews are absolute evil. One example is a late-1999 cartoon from Al-Hayat al-Jadida, the Palestinian Authority’s official daily. It depicts an old Arab man in a djellaba, symbolizing the twentieth century, taking leave of a young Arab man symbolizing the twenty-first century. In between them stands a small Jew with a Star of David on his chest, above whom an arrow points to him saying, “the illness of the century.”27
The Jew depicted as the devil is yet another incarnation of absolute evil. In a Syrian paper, the Zionist devil is presented as a hairy creature with a tail. He has a black kippa (skullcap) on his head and a black beard, which are Jewish stereotypes and not Israeli ones. On his forehead is a Star of David, in his hand a pole with a seven-branched candelabrum.28 This is one more example of the blending of anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli themes.
In 2006, the Iranian daily Hamshahri, owned by the Tehran municipality, launched a Holocaust-cartoon competition. Among those exhibited were several cartoons with the message that Israel is perpetrating a Holocaust against the Pal- estinians. Abdolhossein Amirizadeh of Iran shows a Jew as a horned devil with vampire fi gers reading from a book on which “Holocaust” is written. Next to him is a staff in the form of a seven-branched candelabrum topped by a Star of David.29 The Moroccan cartoonist Naji Benaji went further by suggesting that Israel behaved even worse toward the Palestinians than the Germans treated the Jews during World War II. He was awarded a special prize for his drawing of two bottles. One, on which “Holocaust” is written, contains a few skulls; the second carries the Palestinian flag and is filled with skulls.30
Belgian political scientist Joël Kotek writes:
Long before [Ariel] Sharon came to power [as prime minister], the theme of the Israeli as a Nazi appeared in Arab cartoons everywhere. According to them, all Zionists from [Ehud] Barak to Sharon, by way of [Shimon] Peres, drew their inspiration from Nazi methods. The paradox is glaringly obvious when one remembers, first, the Arab sympathies for the Nazi cause during the Second World War and then the support—seldom denounced—given by several Arab intellectuals to denial theory. According to this perspective, “The Zionist crimes appear far worse than ‘exaggerated’ Nazi crimes.”31
The medieval perception of the Jew as devil has also reappeared in Norwegian caricatures.32 The Jewish Satan was represented in a 2003 caricature by Oddmund Mikkelsen in the Norwegian local daily Hamar Arbeidersblad, which is close to the Labour Party. It showed then-Prime Minister Sharon with horns.33 Over the years the leading Spanish daily El País has regularly published anti-Semitic cartoons. Several of these referred to the Holocaust. For instance, it printed a cartoon by Romeu where two people talk to each other. One says, “Sharon’s wall is identical to the wall of the Warsaw Ghetto.” The other answers, “They are not comparable. Sharon’s wall is much more effective.” In another cartoon that appeared in El País the muse of history, Clio, places a Hitler mustache on Sharon’s face.34
Anti-Semitic Submotifs Recur
Over the past millennium, the notion that the Jews, who were maligned as having murdered God, were the paradigm of absolute evil and thus capable of all imaginable misdeeds developed into many anti-Semitic submotifs. These, in turn, like the “absolute evil” core motif, recur over the centuries and are also cloaked according to the predominant narrative of the period. Seemingly, there is a large variety of disparate contemporary submotifs of the core hate motif. Yet analysis shows that the major variants are few in number. The main submotifs of the two anti-Semitisms and anti-Israelism are identical, though they may be dressed up somewhat differently.
Deconstructing cartoons enables easy identification of the recurrent sub- motifs of anti-Semitism. The array of anti-Semitic cartoons from the Arab world is so large that it offers the best starting point. Subsequently, one can also see how contemporary demonization of Israel and the Jews has seeped into caricatures published in mainstream European newspapers.
Several authors have carried out research on anti-Semitic Arab cartoons. Particularly important here is the work of Kotek, an expert analyst of cartoons. His analysis illustrates that Arab cartoons use the same anti-Semitic stereotypes against Israelis and Jews.35
Major Anti-Semitic Submotifs
From the perspective of contemporary anti-Semites, the transforming of ancient hate themes into contemporary versions has clear advantages. It is often the case that a proven motif that has succeeded in the past will work in the present if it is somewhat updated.
This mutation of ancient anti-Semitic themes can be seen, for instance, in the promotion of conspiracy theories. As noted, these accusations found their culmination in the Czarist forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Boston University historian Richard Landes says:
In this new century, we see a revival of conspiracy theories. Muslim societies are most prominent in the production, circulation and belief in them. The best known conspiracy theory is probably that Americans themselves, or the Mossad, carried out the 9/11 terror attacks and not the jihadist Al-Qaeda perpetrators. This belief permeates the elites throughout the Muslim world.
Conspiracy theories coming out of the Muslim world are accompanied by an- other surprising phenomenon. In the past, conspiracists blamed a malevolent other—the Jews, the lepers, the witches, the communists. Now we find Western believers in conspiracy theories which target themselves—for instance on 9/11— in which they confirm the paranoid accusations of their enemies. Postmodern conspiracy theory’s siren song runs: “We’ are to blame, ‘our’ enemy is innocent.”36
The supposedly pivotal role of American neoconservatives—a codeword for Jews—in launching the First Iraq War is another recurrent theme. One of the more astute responses was given by Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice-chair- man of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. He told how once, replying to listeners’ questions on an African American radio station, he was asked about the Jews being behind the Iraq War. He answered in detail, but others kept repeating the question. “I see that the secretary of state is Colin Powell and the national security adviser is Condoleezza Rice,” he remarked. “It seems to me that it is more of a black conspiracy.” Thereafter the questions stopped.37
More Conspiracy Theories
A few examples from a short period at the beginning of 2006 further illustrate the widespread use of conspiracy theories by leaders in the Muslim world. In one case, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the Jews were behind the Danish cartoons satirizing Mohammed, and declared, “They [who insult the founder of Islam] are hostages of the Zionists. And the people of the U.S. and Europe should pay a heavy price for becoming hostages of Zionism.”38
In February 2006, the Syrian state-controlled paper Al-Tawhra asserted that Israel was responsible for the expanding bird flu phenomenon. It said Israel had spread the virus in the Far East to distract the world while aiming to attack the Arabs.39
Later that month, Iran’s religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei claimed that Zionists and foreign forces were behind the bombing of the gold-domed Shiite mosque in Samarra, Iraq, on February 22. His words were echoed by Ahmadine- jad, who said that “these heinous acts are committed by a group of Zionists and occupiers that have failed. They have failed in the face of Islam’s logic and justice.”40
A book by German journalist Thomas Jaecker analyzed some examples of twenty-first-century anti-Semitic conspiracy theories in German left-wing, right-wing, and mainstream media.41 Jaecker focused on three topics: September 11, the battle in the Palestinian refugee camp of Jenin in April 2002, and the First Iraq War.
Jaecker pointed out that, scientifically speaking, the term “conspiracy theory” is misplaced and “conspiracy ideology” or “conspiracy myth” is much more accu- rate. The basic approach, he explained, is to ascribe complex processes to simple origins. These “theories” display common patterns in that a supposedly powerful group of conspirators is unmasked by a small number of people who resist them. The invented story is then believed by many who do not check the alleged facts. In Germany since the Holocaust, anti-Semitism has centered partly on the claim that the Jews have managed to extort large sums from the Germans in the form of reparation payments. This is portrayed as an instance of the lust for revenge, attributed to the Old Testament. The next step is to claim that Jews are an international group of conspirators, and that they seek to cast a dark influence over Germany by keeping the Auschwitz theme alive in the media. This, in turn, prevents Germany from becoming a normal state. Some of these motifs have been used by prominent Germans such as Rudolf Augstein, the late publisher of the weekly Der Spiegel, and the novelist Martin Walser.42
Jaecker also mentioned the bestselling German author Jan van Helsing, who promoted anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. His books sold “hundreds of thousands” of copies in the mid-1990s before they were banned. Van Helsing claimed, for example, that certain German politicians were Jews, without this being known. One of his “examples” was Helmut Kohl, whose true name was, according to him, Henoch Kohn.43
Extreme Lust for Power
The false accusation of the Jews’ extreme lust for power is one of the major anti-Semitic submotifs. Another submotif is a derivative of it: the Jews have a lust for money and through it, corrupt the world. Today this expresses itself, among other things, as: “Jews control the United States” and “Jewish money controls the world.” A third anti-Semitic submotif is that Jews thirst for blood and infanticide. It had precursors in the pre-Christian world but developed mainly in Christian anti-Semitism. The “blood libel” has been used against Jews for many centuries. Today it translates, for instance, into false claims that Israel aims to kill Palestinian children, or that Jews kill Palestinians so as to harvest their organs for reuse.
Another related submotif is that the Jews are poisoners. It has been around since the early fourteenth century when the false charge that Jews were poi- soning wells was propagated in parts of Germany and France. One finds the poisoning theme nowadays in several European cartoons.
Yet another submotif is that Jews are subhuman. This was a central theme in Germany under the Nazis, with Jews depicted as vermin or bacteria. It appeared frequently in cartoons that showed Jews as animals. Nowadays this zoomorphism is a staple of Arab anti-Semitic cartoons.44
A Current Version of the Conversion Theme
Trying to convert others was, and is, a major characteristic of Christianity. Jews who converted were mostly protected from anti-Semitism and discrimination. This motif has its own current secular mutation: some Jews or Israelis can escape condemnation by their friends provided they publicly oppose Israeli policies. This sometimes also happens in selective academic and similar boycott campaigns against Israel where those Israelis who are willing to denounce their government may be excluded from a boycott.45 In other cases, Israelis who are suffering from the boycott publicly state that they dissent from their government’s policy.
Another variant is that Westerners call on Jews to disassociate themselves from Israel’s policies. An example occurred in March 2006 when the editor of a British dance magazine, Dance Europe, said she would only publish an article on Israeli choreographer Sally Ann Freeland if Freeland condemned the occupation. She refused and the article was dropped.46 Economic boycott campaigns against Israel, however, usually leave no room for exceptions.
Behavior of Anti-Israelis
Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism overlap. Behavior and statements by anti- Israelis about Jews provide additional proof of this point. In 2003, Richard Ingrams wrote in the British weekly Observer: “I have developed a habit when confronted by a letter to the editor in support of the Israeli government to look at the signature to see if the writer has a Jewish name; if so, I tend not to read it.” He also asserted that those who side with Israeli policy should say whether they are Jewish so as to make this transparent. The British Press Complaints Commission considered Ingrams’s position legitimate.47
In the same year, Patrick Klugman, then president of the French Union of Jewish Students (UEJF), observed:
On some university campuses like Nanterre, Villetaneuse and Jussieu, the cli- mate has become very difficult for Jews. In the name of the Palestinian cause, they are castigated as if they were Israeli soldiers! We hear “death to the Jews” during demonstrations which are supposed to defend the Palestinian cause. Last April , our office was the target of a Molotov cocktail. As a condition for condemning this attack, the lecturers demanded that the UEJF declare a principled position against Israel!48
In the Netherlands, thousands of fans of the Feijenoord soccer team often sang “Gas the Jews” from the stands when it played against the Ajax team of Amster- dam.49 The same chants occur elsewhere as well in Dutch soccer games. In recent years, the more frequently heard version has a Middle Eastern element: “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas!” Although Ajax is not a Jewish team, it has a group of fervent non-Jewish supporters who, mostly as a reaction to the racist attacks, call themselves “Jews.” The word Jew in this context does not refer to actual Jews but is used as the name of a clique. Somewhat similar anti-Semitic chants are also sung on other European soccer fields—for instance, in the UK by opponents of Tottenham Hotspur, a London team with many Jewish supporters.50
Two Dutch authors relate another example of how anti-Israelism and anti- Semitism intermingle:
On 13 April 2002, a pro-Palestinian demonstration on the Dam [Amsterdam’s main square] became violent. American and Israeli flags were burned. Placards with texts like “Sharon is Hitler” and “the lie of the six million” dominated the streets. In front of Hotel Krasnapolsky, a man with a kippa was beaten up. The police allowed all of this to happen.51
Extreme anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli signs—frequently carried by Muslims— are often seen in marches by antiglobalists and antiwar demonstrators. In many cases these are tolerated by the organizers.
In January 2014, a mass rally in Paris took place. This “Day of Anger” was not related to any specific Jewish topic. Part of the protest was against French President François Hollande’s economic plans. However, various groups of participants started to shout anti-Semitic slogans. They included, “Jews, France doesn’t belong to you” and (the Holocaust denier) “Faurisson is right,” as well as “the Holocaust was a hoax.”
French journalist and public intellectual Michel Gurfinkiel wrote that it was shocking that nobody had acted to remove the anti-Semitic protesters. Not even the police had done anything, even though the shouts were in violation of the French hate-speech laws. Gurfinkiel questioned whether French democracy was capable of holding anti-Semitism in check.52
The Interrelationship between Anti-Semites and Anti-Israelis
French human rights expert Christophe Ruffin, in a 2004 report he prepared for the country’s interior minister, explicitly linked anti-Semitism to the prevalent anti-Israeli mood: “It is not conceivable today to fight actively in France against anti-Semitism in its new forms without going all-out to try and balance anew the public’s view of the situation in the Middle East.”53
The 2004 GMF survey in Germany interviewed 2,656 representatively selected German-speaking people in the country. Thirty-two percent of them agreed, or largely agreed, with the statement: “Because of Israel’s policies I have increasing antipathy toward Jews.” Forty-four percent agreed that: “Given Israel’s policies, I can well understand that people have something against Jews.”54 The same question is asked periodically in polls and the results usually show a correlation.
The study’s authors wrote that criticism of Israel is to a certain extent a cover for anti-Semitic attitudes. In their quest to locate the borderlines between anti- Semitism and criticism of Israel, they concluded:
Criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic when it denies Israel’s right of existence and of self-defense. When it draws historical comparisons between Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians and the persecution of the Jews in the Third Reich, when it judges Israel’s policy with a double standard, when it transfers anti- Semitic stereotypes onto the state of Israel or transfers this criticism to Jews in general and makes Jews generally responsible for events in the Near East.55
The 2006 Lebanon War
The Second Lebanon War in 2006 brought much further proof that anti-Sem- itism and anti-Israelism go hand in hand. During the war, at a demonstration “attended by many Moroccan youngsters in Amsterdam one could see signs like: ‘Jews, the army of the Prophet Mohammed is marching.’”56
After that war, the European Jewish Congress published a document titled
Anti-Semitic Incidents and Discourse in Europe during the Israel-Hezbollah War.57 A few examples from it highlight the overlap between anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism:
- Gerald Grosz was then head of the right-wing Alliance for the Future of Austria Party (BZÖ) in the Austrian state of Styria; the national party was then led by Jörg Grosz demanded that the Jewish communities of Vienna and Graz “publicly issue a condemnation of the ‘cruel and cowardly murder.’”58
- Dan Kantor, executive secretary of the Central Council of Jewish Communities in Finland, noted that: “Marginal extreme-left groups, often in co-operation with Islamic groups in a so-called ‘Peace Movement’ held weekly small marches, where signs were observed equating the Star of David with Nazi Such groups make little distinction between Israel and local Finnish Jews, Kantor stated, adding that this is ‘nothing new.’”59
- In France, the Representative Council of French Jewry (CRIF)—the umbrella body of French Jewish organizations—reported that: “Demonstrations in support of Lebanon took place in different cities throughout France, with anti-Semitic placards visible read- ing ‘Death to the Jews—Death to Israel,’ and stars of David emblazoned with swastikas.”
- A leaflet sent to a synagogue said: “Wake up France, and join us in refusing that ‘Jewry’ massacres the Palestinians in their own homeland . . . In France, your duty as well is to combat the J The enemy is the Jew, and they need to be chased from the media, finance, institutions.”60
- In Germany, over three hundred letters were received by the Jewish umbrella body Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland “directly attacking both the organization and German Jews for both blindly supporting Israel and spending state money to support a ‘fascist state’ in the Middle East.” Stephan Kramer, then the Zentralrat executive director, referred to the quantity of letters received as “mind-boggling.” Furthermore, reports on harassment of Jewish students by Muslim and non-Muslim schoolmates were received by the Berlin Jewish community.61
- In the Netherlands in July 2006, Socialist Party chairman Jan Marijnissen “compared Islamic terrorism in the Middle East to the actions of the Dutch resistance against the Nazi German occupiers in World War Tw” After major criticism, Marijnissen eventually apologized. He still claimed that the Islamist terrorist groups exist “be- cause of Israel’s occupation of Palestine, the American presence in the Middle East and the West’s support to undemocratic regimes.”62
- In Spain, an article
that appeared in [the leading daily] El Mundo entitled Cauchemar Estival, made a link between Nazi Germany and Israel, accusing Israel of using the same arguments made by the Nazi leaders to justify “its aggression.” The article continues, “Now the victims of this period (the 1930s) have become the executioners . . . The victims of today are systematically taken hostage, reduced to live in ghettos, and closed in by a horrible wall.”63
To better understand contemporary Western classic anti-Semitism and its lat- est major mutation anti-Israelism, two new concepts must be introduced. The first one is part-time anti-Semites. These are people who commit anti-Semitic acts intermittently and may even on other occasions make positive gestures toward Jews and Israel.
Norway’s prime minister during World War II, Vidqun Quisling, was a “fulltime anti-Semite,” twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Several contemporary left-of-center Norwegian political leaders commit or condone anti-Semitic acts, including applying double standards to Israel. Yet they may show solidarity with the Jewish community on other occasions, or even speak at Holocaust memorial meetings. It may well be that for some of them, this is an attempt to show that they are not anti-Semites.64 This, however, does not whitewash their anti-Semitic acts, which may contribute not only to the de- monization of Israel but also to the harassment of the country’s Jews.
In recent years, one of the major inciters against Israel in the Norwegian La- bour Party-dominated government—defeated in the 2013 elections—has been former Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. Yet this politician also occasionally visited Oslo’s synagogue. It happened, for instance, in January 2009 after the major anti-Semitic riots in the Norwegian capital.65
An iconic example of a part-time anti-Semite was Austrian Jewish Prime Minister Bruno Kreisky. This Socialist politician said about the Jews, “If they are a people, they are an ugly people.”66 Wistrich described Kreisky as the quintessential left-wing, self-hating Jew. Kreisky claimed that he suffered no anti-Semitism in his youth, which seems highly improbable in view of the widespread anti-Semitic hatred in Austria during the pre-World War II period. Wistrich also writes that Kreisky was “the one Jew who could grant gentile Austrians full exculpation from a latent sense of guilt over their prominent role in the Holocaust.” Kreisky did this in several ways. He ruthlessly attacked Simon Wiesenthal, branding him “a dangerous reactionary.” Kreisky was a pioneer in the slandering of Israel as a “semifascist” and “apartheid” state. He also called Israel “undemocratic,” “clerical,” and “militarist.”67
A second concept required for accurately analyzing the current situation in Europe is humanitarian racism. This type of racism is rarely recognized. It can be defined as attributing reduced responsibility to people of certain ethnic or national groups for their criminal behavior and intentions, even if these are of major dimensions. Humanitarian racists judge delinquency and crime differ- ently according to the color and socioeconomic status of those who engage in them. For example, white people are held to higher standards of responsibility than people of color.68
Israel is frequently blamed for whatever measures it takes to defend its citi- zens. Palestinian responsibility for suicide bombings, rocket attacks, promoting genocide, glorifying murderers of Israeli civilians, and massive incitement, including that similar to Nazi-type hatred, is often downplayed if not ignored altogether. Similarly, many of those who fight Islamophobia in the Western world remain silent about widespread anti-Semitism in Muslim communities.
The Total War of the 1930s and 1940s
The total war against the Jews of the 1930s and first half of the 1940s was es- sentially a genocidal crusade against the Jews by their enemies—Germany, Austria, and their allies. It was modern, centrally directed, and continuous.
The main murderous propaganda against the Jews originated with the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP) and later German chancellor, Adolf Hitler. The major anti-Jewish measures and attacks were initiated by him, or resulted from the policies he proclaimed publicly. They exceeded the discrimination existing elsewhere.
The discriminatory policies were promoted and enacted through the bu- reaucratic systems of the German state and the NSDAP. From Germany, ideas and instructions flowed to sister parties, affiliates, as well as unorganized sym- pathizers and collaborators abroad. Once World War II started, many of these people, as well as others, would assist the Nazi occupiers in encouraging and implementing anti-Jewish measures and sometimes even in murdering Jews. There was other anti-Semitic propaganda as well. Some of its perpetrators col- laborated with the Germans, others worked alone. One prominent Arab ally of the Nazis was Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, whom many considered the main leader of the Palestinian Arabs. “Openly and knowing about Auschwitz, he had advocated the Shoah. ‘Germany,’ he declared in 1943, has ‘decided to fi d a fi al solution to the Jewish menace, which will end this misfortune in the world.’”69 In the fi st half of the twentieth century, the teachings of the Catholic Church, several other churches, and many diverse institutions continued to play a substantial role in propagating international anti-Semitism. On a national basis, governments in the Soviet Union, Poland, some Balkan coun- tries, and others also participated in the hate propagation. There were also important anti-Semitic organizations in many countries that were not linked to the National Socialists; France was a prime example. However severe the anti-Semitism of many others, it usually paled next to that of the murderous system Hitler controlled.
One might compare the anti-Semitism of the 1930s with noxious factories. From their large chimneys, poison and pollution constantly spread over a wide area. Contemporary anti-Semitism, however, comes from many sources, like the pollution from a huge number of car exhausts. That also explains why the propaganda war today has the character of “a million cuts.”
Promoters of the contemporary total propaganda war against Israel have many precursors in Christian anti-Semitism over the centuries. Examples were medieval monks who went from town to town spreading hatred of the Jews, which often led to their murder. The Crusades and their mass murder of Jewish communities had many elements of a propaganda hate campaign. In the fourteenth century, many European Jewish communities were massacred after false accusations of poisoning water sources were spread.
The twentieth-century Germans, with their ideology of political anti- Semitism and National Socialism, turned the mass murder of the Jews into an international industrial operation. Its major elements included registration, systematic discrimination, transportation to—extermination or other—camps, forced labor, and murder.
The Postmodern Propaganda War
The current total propaganda war against Israel in the twenty-first century is of a different overall nature than its predecessors, partly because of its fragmented character. It has both major similarities and differences with the widespread hate campaign against the Jews that led in the previous century to the Holo- caust.
One main similarity is that both hate campaigns encompassed a large number of perpetrators and accomplices. Another is the considerable role that governments play. In the first half of the previous century, this mainly involved Germany and other extreme nationalist countries. Today it includes politicians, officials, and state-owned media of many Arab and Muslim states, including those with which Israel is at peace. The main difference between to- day’s total war and that of the previous century lies in the dispersed character of the hostilities.
The Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism also observed:
Anti-Zionist discourse can be polluted with anti-Semitic themes in different ways and with different levels of intent. It can be used deliberately as a way to mask or articulate prejudice against Jews. It is difficult to counter because one must first identify and explain the anti-Semitism behind the language and imagery. For instance, a far right party may use the terms of “Zionist” and “Zionism” instead of “Jews” and “Jewish.”70
The Three Stages
Another important aspect of the total propaganda and discrimination war is the development of its various stages. The war of the 1930s and thereafter had three partly overlapping phases. The first consisted of systematic and extreme defamation of the Jews. The second aimed at gradually excluding them from society. The third centered on their annihilation.
The total war against Israel in the twenty-first century already contains elements of all three phases. We are now primarily in the first stage, that of extreme defamation. The assault is mainly aimed at Israel; Jews are a lesser but still significant target of contemporary anti-Semites.
Several elements of the second stage have emerged mainly in recent years. These include various attempts to exclude Israel or Israelis from international forums. Another aspect involves boycott initiatives of various kinds. Some initia- tives aim at Israeli universities and academics; others, in part instigated by certain liberal Protestant churches, are directed at certain suppliers of Israel. Yet others act against Israeli companies, mainly but not only from the West Bank. Still others try to persuade artists not to perform in Israel. A further approach is to promote di- vestment of shares of Israeli companies. The most extreme boycott Israel entirely.71 Elements of the third stage are (yet?) largely verbal in nature. However, they also manifest themselves in some murderous attacks on Israeli civilians as well as Jews abroad. There are many, mainly in Arab and Muslim countries and environments, who aim for the physical destruction of Israel.
For example, in June 2002, Iran held the International Conference on Imam Khomeini and Support for Palestine, in which the country’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei participated. “The Iranian organizer of the conference, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-Pur, declared, ‘Israel is a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Muslim world which should be removed,’ and lauded the attacks carried out by Palestinian suicide bombers.”72
Many politicians and religious leaders in the Arab world support homi- cide bombings by radical Muslims against civilians. As for Palestinian suicide bombings, one of their best-known senior religious supporters is Egyptian- born Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who currently heads the Sunni Studies De- partment at Qatar University.
Al-Qaradawi appears frequently on the Arabic satellite TV channel Al Jazeera, reaching a wide audience. Among other things, he criticized the Imam of Mecca: “It is unfortunate to hear that the grand imam has said it was not permissible to kill civilians in any country or state, even in Israel.”73
One finds explicit support for murder among some Westerners as well. Others express their profoundly anti-Semitic mindsets by stating their desire that the Jewish state disappear.
One example is Ted Honderich, a Canadian-born philosophy professor (emeritus) at University College in London. He has publicly stated that the Palestinians have a moral right to blow up the Jews. He even encouraged them to do so by saying, “To claim a moral right on behalf of the Palestinians to their terrorism is to say that they are right to engage in it, that it is permissible if not obligatory.”74 Honderich has repeated this position frequently, including at the University of Leipzig in Germany.75
Gianni Vattimo, a leading Italian philosopher, said in a radio interview during the 2014 Protective Edge campaign that there should be international brigades as in the Spanish Civil War to fight Israel. He called the Israeli gov- ernment “fascist” and claimed it was destroying an entire people. He also said that a genocide was taking place. He called the Hamas rockets “toy rockets” and said he wanted to organize an international financing campaign so that true weapons could be purchased for the Palestinians. He added that Europe should give the Palestinians arms free of charge.76 He also said in the interview, “I would like to shoot those Zionist bastards.”77
Various numerical data offer evidence of how much the hatred of Israel and Jews has increased. At least 150 million citizens of sixteen years and older in the European Union embrace a demonic view of Israel. Proof of this comes from a study published in 2011 by the University of Bielefeld. It was carried out on behalf of the German Social Democratic Friedrich Ebert Foundation.78 The study was undertaken in seven European countries. Researchers polled one thousand people per country over the age of sixteen in fall 2008. One of the questions asked was whether they agreed with the assertion that Israel is carry- ing out a war of extermination against the Palestinians. The lowest percentages of those who agreed were in Italy and the Netherlands, with 38 percent and 39 percent respectively. Other percentages were: Hungary 41 percent, United Kingdom 42 percent, Germany 48 percent, and Portugal 49 percent. In Poland the figure was 63 percent.
In the first years of this century the University of Bielefeld undertook a simi- lar study, this one relating to Germany only. More than 2,500 people there were asked whether they agreed with the statement: “What the state of Israel does today to the Palestinians is in principle no different from what the Nazis did to the Jews in the Third Reich.” Fifty-one percent answered in the affirmative.79
Sixty-one percent concurred with the statement: “I am fed up with hear- ing over and over about the German crimes against Jews.” Sixty-eight percent agreed that: “Israel undertakes a war of destruction against the Palestinians.” The study concluded that criticism of Israel is to a certain extent a cover for anti-Semitic attitudes and opinions. In their earlier-mentioned definition of anti-Semitism, the study group of the University of Bielefeld had stated that it was anti-Semitic to compare “Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians and the persecution of the Jews in the Third Reich.”80
According to this definition, the majority of Germans polled hold extreme anti-Semitic views. Thirty-five percent fully agreed and 33 percent were in- clined to agree that Israel is working to destroy the Palestinians. Twenty-seven percent fully agreed and 24 percent were inclined to agree that Israel’s conduct toward the Palestinians is essentially the same as the Nazis’ toward the Jews. Only 19 percent totally disagreed and 30 percent were inclined to disagree.81 The findings of this survey, published in 2004, reinforced findings of earlier surveys on German anti-Semitism that several authors have analyzed.82
A study published in Switzerland by gfs.bern in 2007 found that 50 percent of the Swiss population see Israel as “the Goliath in the extermination war of the Palestinians.”83
In 2012, in a study carried out by the Center for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities in Norway, a sample group of people were asked, “Is what Israel does to the Palestinians identical to what the Nazis did to the Jews?” Thirty-eight percent of Norwegians interviewed gave an affirmative answer.84 In September 2014, the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and Bielefeld University carried out another study in Germany. One of the questions was again whether people agreed with the statement: “Israel conducts a war of extermination against the Palestinians.” Forty percent of Germans agreed; the comparative figure for 2004 was 68 percent. The question was asked also in another way: “What the state of Israel does today to the Palestinians is in principle no dif- ferent from what the Nazis did to the Jews during the Third Reich.” In 2014, 27 percent answered affirmatively, compared to 51 percent in 2004.85
Some may be surprised that researchers ventured to ask questions about Israel as committing genocide or as a Nazi state. Yet the answer to this question is simple. The researchers had probably realized that this extreme anti-Semitic belief about Israel is widespread in their social environment.
As additional studies are published over the years, asking similar questions, the percentages of respondents may greatly vary. That does not, however, change the main finding: a huge number of Europeans have a diabolical view of Israel.
A Very Negative Picture of Israel
In 2003, a Eurobarometer study asked whether a number of countries were a threat to world peace. It turned out that 59 percent of Europeans believed Is- rael posed such a threat. No other country on the list was considered a similar threat by such a high percentage. Iran and North Korea tied for second place at 53 percent. At the bottom of the list was the European Union, which only 8 percent of Europeans saw as a danger to world peace.
Among the then fifteen EU countries, the highest percentage viewing Israel as a threat to world peace was found among the Dutch at 74 percent. Next in line were the Austrians with 69 percent.86
In 2013, the BBC published a poll asking twenty-six thousand people from twenty-five countries around the world whether they viewed a list of sixteen countries and the European Union as having a “mainly positive” or “mainly negative” influence in the world.
Germany topped the list with 59 percent of respondents viewing it positively, followed by Canada (55%), the U.K. (55%) and Japan (51%). Only North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran had lower positive scores than Israel. Twenty-one percent of respondents viewed Israel’s influence as mainly positive, while 52% saw the Jewish State’s influence as mainly negative. Israel’s “positivity” ranking was identical to the score it received in the 2012 BBC poll.
Just 15% of respondents considered Iran’s influence as mainly positive, while 59% said the Islamic Republic’s influence was mainly negative. France finished fifth as a positive influence (49%), followed by the E.U. (49%), Brazil (46%),
U.S. (45%), China (42%), South Korea (36%), South Africa (35%), India (34%) and Russia (30%).87
All these data together indicate how profound the demonization of Israel has become. Blaming contemporary anti-Semitism in Europe primarily on Muslim immigrants and their descendants is an easy and convenient yet partly false explanation. If Muslims formed the dominant percentage of people who had an- swered the questions about Israel negatively, such high figures for extreme views of Israel would not have been possible. Yet there is no doubt, and the few studies available show it as well, that the major nonselective immigration from Muslim countries into Europe has brought with it a higher percentage of anti-Semites and also more extreme ones compared to the autochthonous population.88
Italian and Other Polls
An Italian poll conducted by Paolo Merulla in fall 2003 found that only 43 percent of Italians are sympathetic toward Israel. Seventeen percent said it would be better if Israel did not exist. Twenty percent thought Jews were not real Italians; 10 percent thought Jews were lying when they said that Nazism murdered millions of Jews.89 This study is yet another indicator of a connection between anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism.
Even more telling was a major survey conducted in 2003 among approxi- mately 2,200 Italian youngsters aged fourteen to eighteen. Broadly speaking, one-third of them considered that Jews hold the reins of financial power. Twenty to twenty-five percent considered, among the negative traits of Jews, that they “feel themselves superior to everyone else,” “are too attached to money,” and “can never be completely trusted.” About 20 percent felt that Jews exaggerate when speaking about the Holocaust and close to 20 percent thought Jews should “return to Israel.” That similarity proves again that hardcore anti- Semitism and anti-Israelism are linked.90
Yet another poll carried out in nine EU countries around that time for the Italian daily Corriere della Sera found substantial anti-Semitic trends. In all countries, anti-Semitic sentiment paralleled anti-Israeli sentiment.91 A poll conducted around the same time in the United Kingdom found that almost 20 percent of the British consider that a Jewish prime minister would be less acceptable than a non-Jewish one.92 This was particularly relevant as Michael Howard, the Conservative Party’s leader at the time, was Jewish.
A 2014 Pew study found that 47 percent of Greeks viewed Jews unfavor- ably. This was followed by 26 percent of Poles, 24 percent of Italians, and 18 percent of Spaniards. In France, the UK, and Germany, 10 percent or fewer of respondents viewed Jews unfavorably.93
Across Europe, anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism have been on the rise. In some countries anti-Semitism has increased, with 50-60 percent of people polled stating they have an unfavorable view of Jews. Many of those polled had never met a Jew before. Results of the poll for Corriere della Sera also showed that 35 percent of Spaniards aged eighteen to forty-four could not place the Holocaust chronologically, and two-thirds of European respondents did not know how many Jews were killed by the Nazis.94
A 2011 study that partially focused on Italian anti-Semitism was com- missioned at the initiative of Fiamma Nirenstein. She was then an Italian parliamentarian and chairperson of the Sub-Committee of Inquiry into Anti- Semitism. The study found several disturbing aspects of how Italians perceive Jews. Forty-four percent of those polled were found to “harbour some prejudice or have a hostile attitude toward Jews.” One in three Italians find Jews to be “not very nice.”
One in four Italians agree that Jews are “not fully Italian.” Additionally, about 10 per cent have a more traditional anti-Jewish prejudice, religious in nature; 11 per cent accept a “modern,” more xenophobic, prejudice; 12 per cent have a “contingent” prejudice often linked to their opinion of Israel. Then there are a further 12 per cent, driven by pure anti-Jewish sentiment: these are the interviewees who declare their agreement with all the anti-Jewish statements in the questionnaire.
This study also found that 26 percent of Italians believe that Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the country of their birth, 26 percent think that “Jews have changed from being a race of victims to a race of aggressors,” 21.6 percent consider that “Jews are doing to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to Jews,” and 15.1 percent agree that “Basically Jews have always lived at the expense of others.”
Furthermore, 25.3 percent believe that “Jews control the mass media in many countries,” 31.7 percent agree that “Jews run the world’s banks for their own benefit,” 27.1 percent agree that “Jews always manage to wield dispropor- tionate political power,” 30.3 percent feel that “Jews talk too much about their own tragedies and ignore other people’s,” and 26.7 percent agree that “when it comes down to it, the Jews always hold the purse strings.” Lastly, 24.5 percent consider that “Jews exploit the Nazi extermination to justify Israel’s policies.” Other Italians polled did view Jews favorably. Some 27.1 percent think that “Jews have made a great contribution to different areas of Italian society,” 26.8 percent agree that “modern science would not be what it is today without the contribution of Jews,” 23.3 percent agree that “Despite the conflict Jews are sensitive to the suffering of the Palestinian people,” and 22.6 percent agree that “Western culture owes a debt of gratitude to Jewish culture for many fundamental ideas.”95
In 2015, a YouGov poll was commissioned by the Campaign Against Anti- Semitism in the United Kingdom. The poll found that: one in four (25%) Britons believed that Jews chase money more than other British people . . .
One in six (17%) felt Jews thought they were better than other people and had too much power in the media, while one in 10 people (11%) claimed Jews were not as honest in business as other people . . . One in five believed their loyalty to Israel made British Jews less loyal to the UK, while one in 10 people (10%) said they would be unhappy if a relative married a Jew.96
Negative views about people are politically far more dangerous than positive views are beneficial. Although several polls indicate that many people in Eu- rope hold positive views about Jews, these have less impact than those of the anti-Semitic hate-mongers.
The 2013 FRA Study
Statistics also show that a substantial number of Jews in Europe have encoun- tered anti-Semitism. A 2013 study by the FRA proved this. Of those who had undergone anti-Semitic incidents with recognizable perpetrators, 27 percent blamed Muslims, 22 percent blamed people with left-wing views, and 19 percent blamed extreme rightists.97
The statistics regarding Muslim incitement were even higher for those who had experienced extreme anti-Semitic violence. Most respondents perceived 40 percent of perpetrators of extreme physical violence as someone with a “Muslim extremist view,” 25 percent as being teenagers, 20 percent as “someone else” or “other,” 14 percent as someone with a “left-wing political view,” 10 per- cent as “someone with a right-wing political view,” and 9 percent respectively “a colleague or supervisor at work” and a “neighbor.”98 Those who made nega- tive statements about Jews were found to be 53 percent left-wing, 51 percent Muslim extremist, 39 percent right-wing, and 19 percent Christian extremist.99 Researchers at Yale University analyzed an Anti-Defamation League (ADL) opinion survey of five hundred citizens in each of ten European countries. They found that anti-Israeli sentiment “consistently predicts the probability that an individual is anti-Semitic, with the likelihood of measured anti-Semitism increasing with the extent of anti-Israel sentiment observed.”100
As aforementioned, already in 2004 in a report for the French interior minister, Christophe Ruffin explicitly linked anti-Semitism to the anti-Israeli mood prevailing in that country.101
In a 2006 report titled “Campus Anti-Semitism,” the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found among other things that “Anti-Israeli or anti-Zionist propa- ganda has been disseminated on many campuses that include traditional anti- Semitic elements, including age-old anti-Jewish stereotypes and defamation.” A second finding was that “anti-Semitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism.” The report also stated: “substantial evidence suggests that many university departments of Middle East studies provide one-sided, highly polemical academic presentations and some may repress legitimate debate concerning Israel.”102
Many Europeans continue to hold classic anti-Semitic stereotypes.103 Several opinion surveys show that tens of millions of Europeans are hard-core, classic anti-Semites. A 2002 poll conducted on behalf of the ADL in Austria, Switzer- land, Spain, Italy, and the Netherlands found that one out of five respondents “harbor strong anti-Semitic views.”104
A 2012 ADL survey in ten European countries asked people whether they agreed with a number of statements.105 In six out of ten countries, the major- ity of those interviewed agreed that it is probably true that “Jews are more loyal to Israel” than to their own country. The highest percentage was in Spain with 72 percent, followed by Poland and Italy with 61 percent, Norway with 58 percent, Hungary with 55 percent, and Germany with 52 percent. The lowest percentage was in France with 45 percent, the Netherlands and Austria were at 47 percent, and the United Kingdom was at 48 percent. This data indicates that large percentages of Europeans continue to question the loyalty of their Jewish compatriots.
A 2005 ADL poll in Europe asked whether the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. Nineteen percent of Belgians, 21 percent of Danes, and 19 percent of the Swiss people polled answered affirmatively.106 The 2012 ADL poll in Europe asked the same question. It was found that among those polled 18 percent of Austrians, 14 percent of Germans, 38 percent of Hungarians, 15 percent of Italians, 16 percent of Dutch, 19 percent of Norwegians, 46 percent of Poles, 21 percent of Spaniards, and 18 percent in the United Kingdom believed this fallacy.107 In a 2011 ADL poll in Argentina, 22 percent also believed the Jews killed Jesus.108 Agreeing with this statement is a stereotypical example of anti-Semitism.
The 2012 ADL survey also asked the respondents whether their opinion of Jews was influenced by Israel’s actions. Thirty-nine percent of those interviewed in Norway said yes. They were followed by 37 percent in Austria, 34 percent in Germany, 29 percent in Spain, 27 percent each in Poland and Hungary, 26 percent in Italy, and 25 percent in the Netherlands. The two countries with the lowest figures were France with 12 percent and the United Kingdom with 23 percent.
Those who responded that their opinion of Jews was influenced by Israel were asked a follow-up question: whether Israel’s actions made their opinion of Jews better or worse. Sixty-five percent said they made it worse. The highest percentages were among respondents in the Netherlands at 85 percent, Hun- gary at 80 percent, and Norway at 78 percent. That figure may indicate that close to 30 percent of all Norwegians hold a more negative opinion of Jews because of their negative view of Israel.109
In a 2011 poll in Argentina carried out by the ADL, the Delegation of Argen- tine Jewish Associations, and the Gino Germani Research Institute, 26 percent of respondents strongly believed that “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this country.” Twenty-six percent partially agreed, for a total of 52 percent of Argentine respondents agreeing that Jews are more loyal to Israel.110 The ADL also performed the same survey in the United States in 2013. Here, 30 percent of respondents believed that “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to their own country.”111
The 2014 ADL Global Survey
In May 2014, the ADL released a global survey of anti-Semitism, the largest such report ever. It covered more than a hundred countries, and its results indicate that there are seventy anti-Semites for every Jew.112 Thus, if the world’s billion-plus adult anti-Semites were living in a single country, it would be the third largest after China and India. This is even an understatement, since, as children would be included, that country would probably be the largest on earth.
One of this survey’s important contributions was new, key information about massive anti-Semitism in the Palestinian territories and the greater Muslim world. This added much to what was known earlier from several Pew Research surveys about hate-mongering there.
The ten territories with the highest index scores were, in order: the West Bank and Gaza, Iraq, Yemen, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, and Morocco. In all of these 80 percent or more of respondents demonstrated anti-Semitic views. The next six countries also came from the Arab world.113
The study as presented, however, also raised question marks about anti- Semitism in various countries, regions, and religions. One of the key issues concerns its definition of anti-Semites. ADL pollsters asked eleven questions about anti-Semitic stereotypes; they then defined those who agreed with six of them as anti-Semites.
These questions included the four included in the 2012 study. The other seven were: “Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind,” “Jews have too much control over global affairs,” “Jews have too much control over the United States government,” “Jews think they are better than other people,” “Jews have too much control over the global media,” “Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars,” and “people hate Jews because of the way Jews behave.”
However, questions asked did not include: “Do you believe that Jews are apes and pigs?” This question is very relevant in Muslim environments. The NazisclaimedthatJewsweresubhuman.AnyonewhobelievesthatJewsare animals has a similar extreme anti-Semitic mindset regardless of how he or she answers those eleven questions.
The same goes for another unasked question, which is mainly relevant in Christian environments: “Are Jews responsible for Jesus’ death?” That belief laid the infrastructure of the “satanic Jew”—or the Jew as absolute evil—which in turn led to discrimination, pogroms, and expulsions in a number of Christian lands. According to the ADL study, 9 percent of Americans are anti-Semitic.
However, an ADL study in 2013 found that 26 percent of Americans believe that Jews killed Jesus.114
No questions were asked about anti-Semitic attitudes regarding Israel. Only one question derives an indirect indication of the extent of hatred of Israel from the “positive” answers to the survey question: “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the countries they live in.” With 41 percent answering “probably true,” this is the most believed of all stereotypes in the 2014 ADL study.
The exclusion of questions about anti-Israelism led to a mistakenly posi- tive view of European countries. The ADL Global Index ranked Sweden as the third least anti-Semitic country among the 102 analyzed—with 4 percent of the population anti-Semitic—after Laos and the Philippines. The 2013 FRA study, however, found that among the eight EU countries surveyed, 60 percent of Swedish Jews see anti-Semitism as a big or fairly big problem. Thirty-seven percent of Swedish Jews said anti-Semitism had increased greatly over the past five years, while 43 percent responded that it had increased a little. Twenty- two percent had personal experiences of verbal insults or harassment and/or physical anti-Semitic attacks over the past twelve months.
Sixty percent of Swedish Jews never or rarely wear anything in public that makes them identifiable as Jews. This was the highest percentage for any country in the FRA study. Malmö, the third largest city in Sweden, is often con- sidered “Europe’s capital of anti-Semitism.” This gives a very different picture than Sweden’s “benign” ranking on the ADL index.
The fourth least anti-Semitic country according to the ADL index is the Netherlands. The 2011 survey by the University of Bielefeld asked people in seven EU countries whether they agreed with the—extremely anti-Semitic —statement that Israel “is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians.”115 Forty-three percent of all those surveyed answered in the affi mative; in the Netherlands the fi e was close to 39 percent. The ADL study implies that there are fewer than seven hundred thousand adult anti- Semites in the Netherlands. The Bielefeld study indicates that there are about five million!
Perception and Reality
It is revealing to compare the number of people killed over the past years 2007- 2012 in all of the conflicts Israel was involved in with those of other recent wars and violent conflicts. In Israel’s largest military campaigns from 2007 to 2012, Operations Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense in Gaza, altogether 2,500 casualties were recorded. Outside of these larger conflicts, most violence has involved Palestinian attacks and targeted actions by the Israel Defense Forces.116, 117
These death totals were far below those of the civil wars in Syria and Iraq and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the latter two, several European countries were involved. The global impact of these violent conflicts goes far beyond political issues. They have, for instance, entailed a huge expenditure for the United States, which has greatly added to worldwide concern about the stability of the dollar. If confidence in the dollar declines further due to this instability, it is likely to cause even more problems worldwide.
In 2007, Gunnar Heinsohn and Daniel Pipes ranked world conflicts since 1950 with more than ten thousand casualties. There were sixty-seven of them, and the Arab-Israeli conflict came in forty-ninth place.118 Some of these other conflicts totaled tens of times more deaths than the Arab-Israeli one. Yet the fallacy that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the greatest threat to world peace is repeated on a regular basis.
The notion that Israel is a major threat to world peace was promoted by one of the leading Jewish anti-Israeli inciters, Noam Chomsky. In 2012, he called the United States and Israel the greatest threats to world peace. He wrote that Israel is a greater threat than Iran because “Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspections, as Iran has done. Israel continues to defy the overwhelming international call for a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region.” Chomsky added a major lie about the number of people killed by Israel:
Like its patron, Israel resorts to violence at will. It persists in illegal settlement in occupied territory, some annexed, all in brazen defiance of international law and the U.N. Security Council. It has repeatedly carried out brutal attacks against Lebanon and the imprisoned people of Gaza, killing tens of thousands without credible pretext . . . Iran too has carried out aggression—but during the past several hundred years, only under the U.S.-backed regime of the shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.119
In fall 2013, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif told the BBC that sectarian tension between Shiite and Sunni Muslims is probably the most serious threat to world security.120 One hardly if ever hears this from Western experts who should have stated it long ago.
The aforementioned studies illustrate that demonic worldviews about Israel are widespread in mainstream Europe. That these studies are virtually ignored by political and civil leaders is yet another indicator of Europe’s decaying norms and values.
The accusation that Israel is exterminating the Palestinians constitutes extreme slander. During the two years from the end of 1941 to the end of 1943 in the extermination camps of Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor alone, two million people—mainly Jews—were murdered by the Germans. Technology, including that of murder, has greatly “advanced” since then. If the genocidal accusations against Israel were true, the last of the Palestinian adults and children would have been killed long ago.
In reality, the number of Palestinians has continued to increase greatly over the past decades. Palestinian children are born in Israeli hospitals and sick ones are treated by Israeli doctors.
Not only Palestinians but also a number of Syrian war victims are treated in Israeli hospitals. By April 2014, that number exceeded a thousand. With Syr- ian hospitals lacking proper equipment to take care of the war’s most severely injured, both rebel forces and Bashar al-Assad supporters have been treated by Israeli doctors at hospitals in northern Israel. This occurs even though Israel and Syria are in a state of war and have no diplomatic relations.121
The aforementioned data not only illustrate the widespread overlap between contemporary anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism. They also offer compelling proof of the demonization of Israel in a sizable part of the European mainstream. This, in turn, is an indicator of a reemerging and widespread criminal European mindset, for which the infrastructure has been laid by many opinion makers over the decades.
2 Manfred Gerstenfeld, “The Deep Roots of Anti-Semitism in European Society,”
Jewish Political Studies Review 17, 1-2 (Spring 2005): 3-46.
3 Robert Fife, “UN Promotes Systemic Hatred of Jews, MP Says,” National Post,
April 2, 2002.
6 Per Ahlmark, Det ar demokratin, dumbom! (Stockholm: Timbro, 2004), 307.
7 Natan Sharansky with Ron Dermer, The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom
to Overcome Tyranny and Terror (New York: Public Affairs, 2004), 221-226.
8 Natan Sharansky, “Foreword,” Jewish Political Studies Review 16, 3-4 (Fall 2004):
9 Working definition of anti-Semitism, Coordination Forum for Countering Anti-
Semitism (CFCA), http://antisemitism.org.il/eng/Working%20definition%20
10 Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry, para. 26.
11 Working definition of anti-Semitism, Coordination Forum for Countering Anti-
Semitism (CFCA), http://antisemitism.org.il/eng/Working%20definition%20
13 Sam Sokol, “Israel Urges EU Human Rights Body to Return ‘Anti-Semitism’
Definition to Website,” The Jerusalem Post, December 6, 2013.
14 Special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism, “Defining Anti-Semitism:
Fact Sheet,” U.S. Department of State, June 8, 2010.
15 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Pieter van der Horst, “The Egyptian Beginning
of Anti-Semitism’s Long History,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 62,
November 1, 2007.
16 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Pieter van der Horst, “The Origins of
Christian Anti-Semitism,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 81, June 1, 2009.
17 Richard Landes, “What Happens when Jesus Doesn’t Come: Jewish and Christian
Relations in Apocalyptic Time,” Terrorism and Political Violence, Vol. 14
(Spring 2002) (London: Frank Cass, 2002).
18 Working definition of anti-Semitism, Coordination Forum for Countering Anti-
Semitism (CFCA), http://antisemitism.org.il/eng/Working%20definition%20
19 Joshua Trachtenberg, The Devil and the Jews (Cleveland: Meridian, 1961), 159.
20 Gerstenfeld, interview with Van der Horst, “Origins of Christian Anti-Semitism.”
21 Hadassa Ben-Itto, The Lie That Wouldn’t Die: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
(Edgware, UK: Vallentine Mitchell, 2005).
22 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Robert Wistrich, “Anti-Semitism Embedded
in British Culture,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 70, July 1, 2008.
23 J. H. Brinks, “Political Anti-Fascism in the German Democratic Republic,” Journal of Contemporary History 32, 2 (1997): 207-217.
24 Erez Uriely, “Jew-Hatred in Contemporary Norwegian Caricatures,” Post-Holocaust
and Anti-Semitism, 50, November 1, 2006.
25 Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry, para. 96.
26 “ADL Expresses Concern Over Conspiracy Theories About Jews Made by Turkish
Politicians and Media in Reference to Mining Accident,” Anti-Defamation
League, May 22, 2014.
27 Al-Hayat al-Jadida, December 28, 1999, reproduced in Joël et Dan Kotek, Au
nom de l’antisionisme: L’image des Juifs et d’Israël dans la caricature depuis la
seconde Intifada (Brussels: Éditions Complexe, 2003), 53. (French)
28 Al-Thawra (Syria), March 4, 1993; Arie Stav, Peace, the Arabian Caricature: A
Study in Antisemitic Imagery (Tel Aviv: Gefen, 1999), 202.
29 Manfred Gerstenfeld, “Ahmadinejad, Iran, and Holocaust Manipulation: Methods,
Aims, and Reactions,” Jerusalem Viewpoints, 551, February 1, 2007.
31 Joël Kotek, Cartoons and Extremism: Israel and the Jews in Arab and Western
Media (Edgware, UK: Vallentine Mitchell, 2009), 87.
32 Reproduced in Uriely, “Jew-Hatred.”
33 “The Devil and the Jew” (caricature by Oddmund Mikkelsen, Hamar Arbeidersblad,
July 12, 2003), reproduced in ibid.
34 “Las viñetas antisemitas de El País,” Libertad Digital, May 20, 2009. (Spanish)
35 Joël et Dan Kotek, Au Nom de l’Antisionisme. See also Kotek, Cartoons and Extremism.
36 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Richard Landes, “Muslim Conspiracy
Theories Affect Jews,” in Demonizing Israel and the Jews (New York: RVP Press,
37 Malcolm Hoenlein, personal communication.
38 AP, “Iran Blames U.S., Europe in Cartoon Crisis,” The New York Times, February
39 Roee Nahmias, “Syrian Paper Accuses Israel of Having Spread Bird Flu to Kill
Arabs,” Ynetnews, February 9, 2006.
40 “Ahmadinejad Warns West over Shrine Blast,” Reuters, February 23, 2006.
41 Tobias Jaecker, Antisemitische Verschwörungstheorien nach dem 11. September
(Berlin: LIT, 2005).(German)
42 Ibid., 54-55.
43 Ibid., 57.
44 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Joel Kotek, “Major Anti-Semitic Motifs in
Arab Cartoons,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 21, June 1, 2004.
45 Manfred Gerstenfeld, “How to Fight Anti-Israeli Campaigns on Campus,” Post-
Holocaust and Anti-Semitism, 51, December 1, 2006.
46 Jonny Paul, “The Emergence of a Silent Academic Boycott of Israel,” EJPress,
May 28, 2006.
47 Sharon Sadeh, “UK Watchdog Backs Writer Who Won’t Read Mail from Jews,”
Haaretz, August 5, 2003.
48 Ori Golan, “Same Word, Same Meaning,” The Jerusalem Post Magazine, January
49 Simon Kuper, “Ajax, de joden, Nederland,” Hard Gras (Amsterdam), March 22,
2000, 141. (Dutch)
50 Oliver Bradley, “Anti-Semitism or Endearment?,” EJPress, June 26, 2006.
51 Margalith Kleywegt and Max van Weezel, Het Land van Haat en Nijd (Amsterdam:
Balans, 2006), 226. (Dutch)
52 Jerome Gordon, “Gurfinkiel: France may have joined ‘Europe’s league of fringe
anti-Semitic countries,’” The Iconoclast, January 29, 2014.
53 Jean-Christophe Ruffin, “Chantier sur la Lutte contre le Racisme et
l’antisémitisme,” Ministère de l’interieur, de la sécurité interieure, et des libertés
locales, October 30, 2004, 30. (French)
54 Aribert Heyder, Julia Iser, and Peter Schmidt, “Israelkritik oder Antisemitismus?
Meinungsbildung zwischen Öffentlichkeit, Medien und Tabus,” in Wilhelm
Heitmeyer, ed., Deutsche Zustände (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2005), 144ff.
(German). GMF stands for Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit (Group-
55 Wilhelm Heitmeyer, “Texte zu Ergebnissen der Umfrage 2004 des Projektes,”
Universität Bielefeld, Institut fur interdisziplinare Konflikt- und Gewaltforschung,
56 Kleywegt and Van Weezel, Het Land van Haat en Nijd, 214.
57 Ilan Moss, Antisemitic Incidents and Discourse in Europe during the Israel-Hezbollah
War (Paris: European Jewish Congress, 2006).
58 Ibid., 9-10.59 Ibid., 19.
60 Ibid., 20-21.
61 Ibid., 23.
62 Ibid., 33.
63 Ibid., 43.
64 Miranda McGonagall, “Lysbakkens and Willochs Holocaust Memorial speeches
not at all well received,” Norway, Israel and the Jews, November 27, 2012.
65 NTB, “Antisemittiske holdninger skal bekjempes,” Verdens Gang, January 13,
66 Robert S. Wistrich, From Ambivalence to Betrayal: The Left, the Jews, and Israel
(Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2012), 496.
67 Ibid., 480.
68 Manfred Gerstenfeld, Behind the Humanitarian Mask (Jerusalem: Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs and Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust
Studies, 2008), 22-23.
69 Speech on the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, November 2, 1943, quoted
in Matthias Küntzel, “National Socialism and Anti-Semitism in the Arab World,”
Jewish Political Studies Review 17, 1-2 (Spring 2005): 109.
70 Report of the British All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry, para. 89.
71 “Norwegian YMCA embraces boycott Israel policy,” JTA, March 2, 2014.
72 Yehudit Barsky, “Terrorism Briefing: Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine,”
American Jewish Committee, 2002.
73 Haim Malka, “Must Innocents Die? The Islamic Debate over Suicide Attacks,”
Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2003.
74 Jonathan Kay, “Hating Israel Is Part of Campus Culture,” National Post, September
75 Ted Honderich, “Is There a Right to Terrorism?,” lecture at the University of
Leipzig, October 19, 2003.
76 “Vattimo, frasi choc contro Israele ‘Comperiamo armi per palestinesi’ Comperiamo
armi per palestinesi’ Comperiamo armi per palestinesi…,’” Corriere Della
Serra, July 16, 2014. (Italian)
77 “Well-known Italian philosopher: ‘I’d like to shoot those bastard Zionists,’”
Haaretz, July 23, 2014.
79 Heyder, Iser, and Schmidt, “Israelkritik oder Antisemitismus?”
80 Heitmeyer, “Texte zu Ergebnissen.“
81 Heyder, Iser, and Schmidt, “Israelkritik oder Antisemitismus?”
82 See, e.g., Martin Ulmer, “Current Trends in Germany,” lecture presented at a
conference on “Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism in Western Europe since 2000,”
SICSA, Jerusalem, haGalil.com, December 18, 2002; Susanne Urban, “Anti-Semitism
in Germany Today: Its Roots and Tendencies,” Jewish Political Studies Review
16, 3-4 (Fall 2005): 119-130.
83 “Kritik an Israel nicht deckungsgleich mit antisemitischen Haltungen,” gfs.bern,
March 28, 2007. (German)
84 “Antisemittisme i Norge? Den norske befolkningens holdninger til jøder og andre
minoriteter,” HL-senteret, May 20, 2012, http://www.hlsenteret.no/publikasjoner/
85 “Zusammenfassung zentraler Ergebnisse,” Frederich Ebert Stiftung and Bielefeld
University, November 20, 2014, 5. (German)
86 European Commission, “Iraq and Peace in the World,” Eurobarometer Survey,
151, November 2003, 78.
87 “BBC poll: Germany most popular country in the world,” BBC News Europe,
May 23, 2013.
88 Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Mark Elchardus, “Belgian Anti-Semitism,”
Israel National News, May 21, 2013; Manfred Gerstenfeld, interview with Günther
Jikeli, “Myths and Truth about Muslim Anti-Semitism in Europe,” in Demonizing
Israel and the Jews (New York: RVP Press, 2013).
89 Renato Mannheimer, “E antisemita quasi un italiano su cinque,” Corriere de la
Sera, November 10, 2003. (Italian)
90 Enzo Campelli, Figli di un dio locale, Giovani e differenze culturali in Italia (Milan:
FrancoAngeli, 2004), 147. (Italian)
91 “European Poll: 46% Say Jews Are ‘Different,’” Haaretz, January 26, 2004.
92 Stephen Bates, “One in Seven Britons Say Holocaust Is Exaggerated,” The Guardian,
January 23, 2004.
93 “A Fragile Rebound for EU Image on Eve of European Parliament Elections,” Ch.
4, Pew Research Center, May 12, 2014.
94 Joint Committees I (on Constitutional, Presidency of the Council of Ministers
and Interior Affairs) and III (on Foreign and European Union Affairs) of the Italian Parliament, Final Report of the Fact-Finding Inquiry on Anti-Semitism,
October 14, 2011.
95 Ibid., 36-38.
96 Ben Quinn, “Almost half of Britons hold antisemitic view, poll suggests,” The
Guardian, January 14, 2015.
97 “Discrimination and hate crime against Jews in EU Member States: experiences
and perceptions of anti-Semitism,” European Union Agency for Fundamental
Rights, 2013, 13.
98 The numbers add up to more than 100%, probably because people have had more
than one anti-Semitic experience.
99 Ibid., 25-26.
100 Edward H. Kaplan and Charles A. Small, “Anti-Israel Sentiment Predicts Antisemitism
in Europe,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 50, 4 (2006): 548-561.
101 Ruffin, “Chantier sur la Lutte contre le Racisme,” 30.
102 “Campus Anti-Semitism,” Briefing Report by the United States Commission on
Civil Rights, Washington, DC, July 2006, 3.
103 Manfred Gerstenfeld, Europe’s Crumbling Myths: The Post-Holocaust Origins
of Today’s Anti-Semitism (Jerusalem: Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Yad
Vashem, World Jewish Congress, 2003).
104 “ADL Survey of Five European Countries Finds One in Five Hold Strong Antisemitic
Sentiments; Majority Believes Canard of Jewish Disloyalty,” press release,
Anti-Defamation League, October 31, 2002, 5.
105 “Attitudes Toward Jews In Ten European Countries,” Anti-Defamation League,
106 “ADL Survey: Attitudes Toward Jews in 12 European Countries: Country by
Country Results,” Anti-Defamation League, June 7, 2005.
107 “Attitudes Toward Jews In Ten European Countries,” Anti-Defamation League,
108 “Attitudes Towards Jews in Argentina,” Anti-Defamation League, Delegation of
Argentine Jewish Associations, and Gino Germani Research Institute, September
109 “Attitudes Toward Jews In Ten European Countries,” Anti-Defamation League,
March 2012, 13-14.
110 “Attitudes Towards Jews in Argentina,” Anti-Defamation League, Delegationof Argentine Jewish Associations, and Gino Germani Research Institute, September
111 “ADL Poll: Anti-Semitic Attitudes in America Decline 3 Percent,” press release,
Anti-Defamation League, October 28, 2013.
113 “Chapter 3: Views of Religious Groups,” Pew Research Global Attitudes Project,
Pew Research Center, February 4, 2010; “Chapter 2: How Muslims and Westerners
View Each Other,” Pew Research Global Attitudes Project, July 21, 2011;
“Muslim Public Shares Concerns about Extremist Groups,” Pew Research Global
Attitudes Project, September 10, 2013.
114 JTA, “Poll: 26% of Americans believe Jews killed Jesus,” The Jerusalem Post, November
116 Yaakov Lappin, “IDF releases Cast Lead casualty numbers,” The Jerusalem Post,
March 26, 2009.
117 “Operation Pillar of Defense,” Israel Security Agency.
118 Gunnar Heinsohn and Daniel Pipes, “Arab-Israeli Fatalities Rank 49th,” Front-
Page Magazine, October 8, 2007.
119 Noam Chomsky, “Why America and Israel Are the Greatest Threats to Peace,”
Alternet, September 3, 2012.
121 John Reed, “Israel Quietly Treats Syria War Victims,” Financial Times, November