Manifestations of anti-Semitism
in the European Union
First Semester 2002
Synthesis Report
Draft 20 February 2003
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
2
Disclaimer
This Report has been carried out
by the „Center for Research on Anti-Semitism“ at the Technische Universität
Berlin, Germany, on behalf of the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). The
opinions expressed by the authors
do not necessarily reflect the position of the EUMC.
Reproduction is authorized,
except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged and the
attached text accompanies any
reproduction: "This study has been carried out on behalf of the European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and
Xenophobia (EUMC). The opinions expressed by the authors do not
necessarily reflect the position
of the EUMC."
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
3
Manifestations of
anti-Semitism
in the European
Union
First Semester 2002
Synthesis Report
on behalf of the
EUMC
European Monitoring Centre
on Racism and Xenophobia
by
Werner Bergmann
and
Juliane Wetzel
Zentrum
für Antisemitismusforschung / Center for Research on Antisemitism
Technische
Universität Berlin
Vienna,
March 2003
Preface
Although we know - and opinion polls show
- that anti-Semitism is permanently present in
Europe in a more or less hidden way, many
of us have hoped that manifest forms of anti-
Semitism will not see any revival in
Europe again. At present, Jews are rather well integrated
economically, socially and culturally in
the Member States of the European Union (EU). But
the attacks in New York and Washington on
September 11 and the conflict in the Middle East
have contributed to an atmosphere in
Europe, which gives latent anti-Semitism and hate and
incitement a new strength and power of
seduction. Even rumours that Israel was responsible
for 11 September 2001, for the attacks on
the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, and that
Jews bring about a situation in their
interest in order to put the blame on somebody else,
found a receptive audience in some places.
Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories are spreading
over the Internet, which provides a cheap
vehicle for the distribution of hate.
Immediately after 11 September our primary
concern was increased Islamophobia in the
European Union. Right away the European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
implemented a monitoring process in the
Member States. The country-by-country results and
a synthesis report have already been
published. But early in 2002 there was additional
concern about open anti-Semitic incidents
in several Member States. The European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
found it necessary to carry out a more detailed
investigation of the prevalence and kinds
of anti-Semitism and to study, how it affects Jewish
people living in Europe. It is the first
study of this kind. It provides a flashlight on anti-
Semitism in each of the 15 Member States.
The EUMC, through its RAXEN Information
Network of National Focal Points in the EU
Member States, received reports on
anti-Semitism in the 15 Member States. The Center for
Research on Anti-Semitism (CRA), Berlin,
supplemented the country reports and brought
them into a European perspective.
The report shows clearly an increase of
anti-Semitic activities since the escalation of the
Middle East conflict in 2000 with a peak
in early spring 2002. But it reveals also positive
developments. By 2003 the legal basis to
fight against any discrimination on ethnic or
religious grounds will be implemented in
each of the EU Member States; all the governments
and leading statesmen condemned
anti-Semitic events and attitudes; many leaders of religious
communities, political parties and NGOs
are currently cooperating in the fight against anti-
Semitism.
On the other hand, the EUMC is aware that
more than only short-term measures have to be
done. There is a need to implement
activities on a continuous, long-term basis. For that end
the report offers examples and
recommendations to various groups of society on how to
proceed and succeed in the struggle
against the shadows of the European past.
Bob Purkiss
Beate Winkler
Chair of the EUMC
Director of the EUMC
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
5
Executive Summary
Alerted early in 2002 by worrying news on
anti-Semitic incidents in some Member States the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and
Xenophobia (EUMC) decided to commission a
report on “Manifestations of Anti-Semitism
in the EU” covering the first half of 2002. The
report is based partly on short-term
information provided to the authors by National Focal
Points (NFPs) of the EUMC, giving special
emphasis to the period between May 15 and June
15. The NFPs are the contact points to
national networks in the Member States reporting
regularly to the EUMC within its European
Information Network RAXEN.
In their reports the National Focal Points
were asked to cover the following issues:
- Physical acts of violence
towards Jews, their communities, organisations or their
property;
- Verbal aggression/hate
speech and other, subtler forms of discrimination towards Jews;
- Research studies reporting
anti-Semitic violence or opinion polls on changed attitudes
towards Jews;
- Good practices for reducing
prejudice, violence and aggression by NGOs;
- Reactions by politicians
and other opinion leaders including initiatives to reduce
polarization and counteract negative
national trends.
The situation in the EU Member States
The reports and our own investigations
show that in spring 2002 many EU Member States
experienced a wave of anti-Semitic
incidents. They were tied to public discussion on the
dividing line between legitimate criticism
of Israeli government policy and anti-Semitic
argumentation.1 This wave of anti-Semitism
started with the “Al-Aqsa-Intifada” in October
20002 and was fuelled by the conflict in
the Middle East and the attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon on 11September
20013, which triggered off a fierce debate on the
causes of radical Islamic terrorism.
During the first half of 2002 the rise of
anti-Semitism reached a climax in the period between
the end of March and mid-May, running
parallel to the escalation of the Middle East conflict,
whereas factors which usually determine
the frequency of anti-Semitic incidents in the
respective countries, such as the strength
and the degree of mobilisation extremist far-right
parties and groups can generate, have not
played the decisive role.
In the months following the monitoring
period the sometimes heated discussions about the
Middle East conflict in the public sphere
and the media died down and the number of
incidents decreased. In countries like
Denmark, Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg,
The Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and
Finland there are only a few or no incidents known for
the period after July 2002.4 In some
Member States like Belgium, France and Sweden anti-
1 All the National Focal Point
(NFP) reports point out this problem of drawing a clear distinction.
2 See: Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/2001, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-
Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv
University; Anti-Semitism World Report 2000/2001, Jewish Policy Research
London. (see
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html) .
3 This event led to an increase
in anti-Muslim discrimination in Europe; see EUMC, Reports on Anti-Islamic
reactions within the European
Union after the acts of terror against the USA. A collection of country reports
from RAXEN National Focal Points
(NFPs), Vienna 2002.
4 See the reports for the
countries by The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, online
(http://www.antisemitism.org.il).
For a different assessment for The Netherlands see Footnote 381.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
6
Semitic incidents, including violent
attacks and threatening phone calls, increased again in
September and October, but not that much
as in the period monitored.5 Anti-Semitic leaflets,
hate mail and phone calls were also
reported for Germany and the United Kingdom.
This leads to the conclusion that the
increase in anti-Semitic attacks was in this case set off by
the events in the Middle East, a foreign
event that however exerted a varying impact on the
individual Member States. An exact
quantitative comparison is not possible because of:
1) the difficult and varied classification
of anti-Semitic incidents;
2) the difficulty of differentiating
between criticism of Israeli governmental policy and
anti-Semitism; and
3) the differences in systematically
collating information about anti-Semitic incidents in
the EU Member States.
While there is no common pattern of
incidents for all countries, some similarities occur. But it
must be underlined that some countries
(such as Germany, France, the Netherlands and the
United Kingdom) have a very effective data
and monitoring system, and this is not the case
elsewhere6.
There are a number of EU Member States,
namely Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal and
Finland, where the Jewish communities are
rather small and anti-Semitic incidents in general
seldom occur. This was true during the
monitoring period. At most, threatening letters were
sent to the Israeli consulate or to local
Jews. Portugal and Finland each also suffered one
attack on a synagogue.
On the other hand, France, Belgium, the
Netherlands and the UK witnessed rather serious
anti-Semitic incidents (see the respective
country reports) such as numerous physical attacks
and insults directed against Jews and the
vandalism of Jewish institutions (synagogues, shops,
cemeteries). Fewer anti-Semitic attacks
were reported from Denmark and Sweden.
Other countries also experienced incidents
of anti-Semitism. Greece suffered desecrations of
cemeteries and memorials by the
far-right7. Anti-Semitic statements and sentiments often
linked to Israeli government policy were
found in the mass media and were also expressed by
some politicians and opinion leaders.
Spain, where the traditionally strong presence of neo-
Nazi groups was evident suffered a series
of attacks by people with a radical Islamist
background8. Italy showed a certain
similarity with Germany; although no physical attacks
were evident, there were threatening
telephone calls, insulting letters, slogans and graffiti.
From Austria no physical attacks were
reported; and few verbal threats and insults. Anti-
Semitic stereotypes in relation to Israel
were to be found essentially in right-wing newspapers
and amongst far-right groups.
In the public domain in Spain, France,
Italy and Sweden, sections of the political left and
Arab-Muslim groups unified to stage
pro-Palestinian demonstrations. While the right to
demonstrate is of course a civil right,
and these demonstrations are not intrinsically anti-
Semitic, at some of these anti-Semitic
slogans could be heard and placards seen; and some
5 In France for example the hard
line of the government on crime and North-African juvenile gangs exercised a
positive influence on diminishing
the number of anti-Semitic attacks compared to the first half of 2002.
6 The EUMC is continually working in order
to improve the situation.
7 Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, Greece (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
8 Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, Spain (see http://tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
General Analysis Overview, p.7
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
7
demonstrations resulted in attacks upon
Jews or Jewish institutions. In the Netherlands pro-
Palestine demonstrators of Moroccan origin
used anti-Semitic symbols and slogans. In
Finland however, pro-Palestinian
demonstrations passed without any anti-Semitic incidents.
In Germany, and less so in Austria, public
political discourse was dominated by a debate on
the link between Israeli policy in the
Middle East conflict and anti-Semitism, a debate in
which the cultural and political elite
were involved. In Germany and the United Kingdom the
critical reporting of the media was also a
topic for controversy. In other countries such as
Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal,
and Finland there was no such heated public
discussion on the theme of criticism of
Israel/anti-Semitism (see country reports).
Perpetrators and kinds of anti-Semitic
activities
For many anti-Semitic incidents,
especially for violent and other punishable offences, it is
typical that the perpetrators attempt to
remain anonymous. Thus, in many cases the
perpetrators could not be identified, so
an assignment to a political or ideological camp must
remain open. Nevertheless, from the
perpetrators identified or at least identifiable with some
certainty, it can be concluded that the
anti-Semitic incidents in the monitoring period were
committed above all either by right-wing
extremists or radical Islamists or young Muslims
mostly of Arab descent, who are often
themselves potential victims of exclusion and racism9;
but also that anti-Semitic statements came
from pro-Palestinian groups (see country report
Italy: public discourse) as well as from
politicians (see country reports Germany, Greece,
Finland, Austria) and citizens from the
political mainstream (see anti-Semitic letters, e-mails
and phone calls in Germany as well as in
other countries). The following forms of anti-
Semitic activities have been experienced:
- Desecration of synagogues,
cemeteries, swastika graffiti, threatening and insulting mail as
well as the denial of the Holocaust as a
theme, particularly on the Internet. These are the
forms of action to be primarily assigned
to the far-right.
- Physical attacks on Jews
and the desecration and destruction of synagogues were acts
often committed by young Muslim
perpetrators10 in the monitoring period. Many of these
attacks occurred either during or after
pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which were also
used by radical Islamists for hurling
verbal abuse. In addition, radical Islamist circles were
responsible for placing anti-Semitic
propaganda on the Internet and in Arab-language
media.11
- Anti-Semitism on the
streets also appears to be expressed by young people without any
specific anti-Semitic prejudices, so that
“many incidents are committed just for fun”.
Other cases where young people were the
perpetrators could be classified as “thrill hate
crimes”, a well-known type of xenophobic
attack.12
- In the extreme left-wing
scene anti-Semitic remarks were to be found mainly in the
context of pro-Palestinian and
anti-globalisation rallies13 and in newspaper articles using
9 Due to the time period under
observation (escalation of the Middle East conflict) there might be an over-
estimation of perpetrators with
an Arab or Muslim background in the country reports compared to other periods.
10 After interrogating 42
suspects (young immigrants from North-Africa and the Maghreb), the French
police
concluded that these are
“predominantly delinquents without ideology, motivated by a diffuse hostility
to Israel,
exacerbated by the media
representation of the Middle East conflict (…) a conflict which, they see,
reproduces
the picture of exclusion and
failure of which they feel victims in France”, Cited by Centre Simon
Wiesenthal,
Antisemitism 2002 in France.
“Intifada” Import or Domestic Malaise., by Shimon Samuels/Mark Knobel, Paris
2002, p. 3.
11 Western Anti-Semitism was
brought to the Arab countries and now comes back by Arab media stations (via
satellite), newspapers and the
World Wide Web influencing some immigrants in the European Member States.
12 Paul Iganski, From ‘extremism’
to ‘yob culture’: Interpreting anti-Semitism on the streets, in: Is there a new
anti-Semitism in Britain. Online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/.
13 One of the numerous examples
is the leaflet of the German branch of the anti-globalisation organisation
“attac” designed for an
anti-Bush demonstration in Berlin on May 21 2002: The well-known picture of
“Uncle
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
8
anti-Semitic stereotypes in their
criticism of Israel. Often this generated a combination of
anti-Zionist and anti-American views that
formed an important element in the emergence
of an anti-Semitic mood in Europe. Israel,
seen as a capitalistic, imperialistic power, the
“Zionist lobby”, and the
United States are depicted as the evildoers in the Middle East
conflict as well as exerting negative
influence on global affairs. The convergence of these
motives served both critics of colonialism
and globalisation from the extreme left and the
traditional anti-Semitic right-wing
extremism as well as parts of the radical Islamists in
some European countries.
- More difficult to record
and to evaluate in its scale than the “street-level violence” against
Jews is “salon anti-Semitism” as it is
manifested “in the media, university common
rooms, and at dinner parties of the
chattering classes”.14
- In the heated public
debate on Israeli politics and the boundary between criticism of Israel
and anti-Semitism, individuals who are not
politically active and do not belong to one of
the ideological camps mentioned above
become motivated to voice their latent anti-
Semitic attitudes (mostly in the form of
telephone calls and insulting letters). Opinion
polls prove that in some European
countries a large percentage of the population harbours
anti-Semitic attitudes and views,15 but
that these usually remain latent.
Media
Some commentators discuss the possible
influence of the mass media on an escalation of anti-
Semitic incidents.16 The question at issue
is whether this escalation was merely an agenda
setting effect of the daily media coverage
of the violence in the Middle East or whether the
reporting itself had an anti-Semitic bias.
- The Jewish communities
regarded the one-sidedness, the aggressive tone of the reporting
on Israeli policy in the Middle East
conflict and references to old Christian anti-Jewish
sentiments as problematic.
- The country reports
(Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden) list some cases of anti-
Semitic arguments or stereotypes
(cartoons) in the quality press, but only very few
systematic media analyses are available.
Anti-Semitic reporting can mainly be found in
the far-right spectrum of the European
press.
- One study of the German
quality press (see country report on Germany) concludes that the
reporting concentrated greatly on the
violent events and the conflicts and was not free of
anti-Semitic clichés; at the same time
this negative view also applies to the description of
the Palestinian actors. The report on
Austria identified anti-Semitic allusions in the far
right press.
Sam” is showing a “typical Jewish
nose”. Also the poster implies the supposed Jewish world conspiracy because
on the forefinger of “Uncle Sam”
hangs the world on a thread. Portraying “Uncle Sam” as Jewish refers to the
supposed Jewish influence on the
United States policy and connects anti-Jewish and anti-American feelings. See
leaflet for the demonstration
(see: http://attac-netzwerk-bush.de). The criticism of this leaflet and of
other
occasions where Neonazis
participated in attac demonstrations with anti-Semitic slogans (Munich, 20
November
2002) without any reaction by the
organizers led the network to publish an explanation (see www.attac.de/
archiv/antisemit.php; discussion
paper of the attac coordination committee on anti-Semitism, racism and
nationalism)
14 See Paul Iganski, From
‘extremism’ to ‘yob culture’: Interpreting anti-Semitism on the streets, in: Is
there a
new anti-Semitism in Britain. Online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/, p.1.
15 See as one example the results
of the ADL Survey in June and October 2002 for ten countries (here all
together given in the report on
Belgium) and the surveys mentioned in the respective country reports.
16 In fact, those Europeans who
followed media coverage of the events in the Middle East the closest were more
likely to be sympathetic to the
Palestinian case. See ADL, European Attitudes toward Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, June
2002. http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/European_Attitudes.pdf
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
9
- Observers point to an
“increasingly blatant anti-Semitic Arab and Muslim media”,
including audiotapes and sermons, in which
the call is not only made to join the struggle
against Israel but also against Jews
across the world. Although leading Muslim
organisations express their opposition to
this propaganda, observers assume that calling
for the use of violence may influence
readers and listeners.17
Internet
The Internet reflects a development
observable since 2000, namely the networking of the
extreme right via links with sections of
radical Islamists, some sites from anti-globalisation
campaigners and from the anti-American far
left. Since the end of the 1990s there has been a
dramatic increase in the number of
homepages present on the web from far-right groups and
parties, which quite often also have ties
to radical Islamic fundamentalists. In addition, the
Internet provides easy access to music from
the far right, which glorifies violence and is often
anti-Semitic. Sales and distribution
centres for such music are mainly located in Scandinavia.
Up till now, state organs have paid too
little attention to the Arab language publications which
spread anti-Semitic propaganda in European
countries, whether through newspapers,
audiotapes or the Internet18.
Prevalent anti-Semitic prejudices
As almost all reports emphasise, Jews in
the EU Member States are well integrated socially,
economically and culturally, and as such
the typical motives of xenophobia (fear of
competition for jobs, housing and social
welfare, linguistic and cultural otherness of migrants,
external appearance) are hardly of
consequence. Instead, the Jews are basically imagined to be
a nationally and internationally
influential group, allegedly controlling politics and the
economy. Hence, anti-Semitism has other
motives and a different structure from racism.
- The dominating assumption
of contemporary anti-Semitism is still that of a Jewish world
conspiracy, i.e. the assumption that Jews
are in control of what happens in the world,
whether it be through financial or media
power, whether it be the concealed political
influence mainly exerted on the USA, but
also on European countries.19 This basic
assumption is applied to explain very
different phenomena. The Holocaust denial assumes
a central role in European right-wing
extremism. It is purported that the Holocaust has
never taken place and that the Jewish
side, exploiting their victim status, use the
“Auschwitz lie” to apply
moral pressure on mainly European governments (restitution,
17 Examples for the UK are given
by Michael Whine (Anti-Semitism on the streets) and Peter Pulzer (Anti-
Semitism old and new: Just
anti-Sharon and a little bit more) both online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/.
18 See the Chapter on the
“Internet as an international action base” in this report and the respective
points in the
country reports; see also Juliane
Wetzel, Networking on the Internet. Anti-Semitism as networking tool for right-
wing extremism on the World Wide
Web, paper presented on the EUMC Third Annual European Round Table
Conference, Vienna, October
10-11, 2002; Juliane Wetzel, Antisemitismus im Internet, in: Das Netz des
Hasses.
Rassistische, Rechtsextreme und
Neonazistische Propaganda im Internet, hrsg. vom Dokumentationsarchiv des
Österreichischen Widerstands,
Wien 1997, pp. 78-105; Rechtsextreme Propaganda im Internet.
Ideologietransport und
Vernetzung, in: Wolfgang Benz (Hrsg.), Auf dem Weg zum Bürgerkrieg.
Rechtsextremismus und Gewalt
gegen Fremde in Deutschland, Frankfurt a. M. 2001, pp. 134-150.
19 This conspiracy theory is
often based on the infamous anti-Semitic fake the “Protocols of the Learned
Elders
of Zion”, which describes how a
group of Jews apparently hold the thread of world politics in their hands. For
this, the abbreviation “ZOG” (Zionist
Occupation Government) has established itself in both the far-right as well
as the radical Islamist scene,
not the least to camouflage against criminal prosecution on the grounds of
incitement. A recent Egyptian
TV series “Horseman Without A Horse”
uses the notorious anti-Semitic forgery,
“Protocols of the Learned
Elders of Zion” as a major subject. The 41 parts of the series were transmitted
during
Ramadan by numerous Arab TV
stations. Recently in Egypt criticism on using this Russian falsification in a
TV
series as propaganda against
Israel has been increasing, Der Tagesspiegel, 26 November 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
support for Israeli policies), but also to
influence US policy towards Israel. Furthermore,
the thesis of the “Auschwitz lie”
naturally also negates the assertion that the foundation of
the state of Israel was historically
necessary in order to create a secure homeland for the
survivors of the Holocaust and Jews in
general. Precisely at this point, extreme right-wing
propaganda becomes employable
ideologically for radical Islamist groups in their struggle
against Israel, for the victim status and
Israel’s right to exist are challenged by the
“Auschwitz lie”. Here a
learning process has taken place in which “revisionist” thought
has been adopted by some people in the
Arab world. The influence of these ideas is
supported by a number of Western Holocaust
deniers like Jürgen Graf, Gerd Honsik,
Wolfgang Fröhlich who fled prosecution in
their homelands and found asylum in Arab
countries, and last but not least by Roger
Garaudy who was hailed as a hero throughout
the Middle East when he faced prosecution
by the French government for inciting racial
hatred.20 Via Arab-language media
(newspapers, satellite TV and internet)21 in Europe
these notions reach a small section of the
Arab speaking population in European
countries.22
- Following September 11,
2001, some23 hold that Islamist terrorism is a natural
consequence of the unsolved Middle East
conflict, for which Israel alone is held
responsible. They ascribe to Jews a major
influence over the USA’s allegedly biased pro-
Israel policies. This is where
anti-American and anti-Semitic attitudes could converge and
conspiracy theories over “Jewish world
domination” might flare up again.
- The assumption of close
ties between the US and Israel gives rise to a further motive for
an anti-Semitic attitude. Amongst the
political left, anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism
are very closely tied together. Due to its
occupation policy, sections of the peace
movement, opponents of globalisation as
well as some Third World countries view Israel
as aggressive, imperialistic and
colonialist. Taken on its own terms this is naturally not to
be viewed as anti-Semitic; and yet there
are exaggerated formulations which witness a
turn from criticism into anti-Semitism,
for example when Israel and the Jews are
reproached for replicating the most
horrific crimes of the National Socialists like the
Holocaust.24 In the form of anti-Semitism
it could be said that the tradition of demonising
Jews in the past is now being transferred
to the state of Israel.25 In this way traditional
anti-Semitism is translated into a new
form, less deprived of legitimacy, whose
employment today in Europe could become
part of the political mainstream.
20 Götz Nordbruch, The
Socio-historical Background of Holocaust Denial in Arab Countries: Arab
reactions to
Roger Garaudy's The Founding
Myths of Israeli Politics (see http://sicsa.huji.ac.il/17nordbruch.html),
published
also as part of the series
Analysis of Current Trends in Antisemitism No.17, Jerusalem 2001; see also
Middle
East Research Institute (MEMRI)
http://www.memri.org.
21 See this report, Recommendations on
Media in Chapter 3
22 Robert S. Wistrich, Muslim Anti-Semitism:
A Clear and Present Danger, in: The American Jewish Committee
online, Publications
(www.ajc.org), now also in a printed version, see above; see also Nordbruch,
footnote 16.
23 The Impact of September 11 on Anti-Semitism, General
Analysis - Overview, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute
for the Study of Contemporary
Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv University (http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/asw2001-2/genanal.htm.
Bassam Tibi, political scientist at the University of Göttingen and specialist
in Islam at the University of St.
Gallen, has recently criticised the fact that the “anti-Semitic dimension” of
11
September has been disregarded by
the European public (Die Zeit, 6 February 2003).
24 These stereotypes are also
spread by Arab medias like “Arab News.com”, a Saudi English language daily
online version, April 17, 2002,
by Seham M.S. Fatani, article entitled “There is an impending Palestinian
Holocaust”, cited in:
Anti-Semitism/Anti-Israel Incitement in the Arab and Muslim Media March - May
2002
(see:
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/media_2q02.asp.
25 The French philosopher
Pierre-André Taguieff calls this a “new planetary judeophobia” ("nouvelle
judéophobie planétaire”) that
explains “all world problems by the existence of Israel”. This “new
judeophobia”,
which he sees as initially
brought about by radical Islamic activists, by the heirs of “third-worldism”
and by far-
left anti-globalisation
activists, accuse the Jews of being themselves racist. Thus, according to
Taguieff, there
seems to be an “anti-Jewish
anti-racism”. Pierre-André, La nouvelle judéophobie, Paris 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
11
- Israeli policies toward
the Palestinians provide a reason to denounce Jews generally as
perpetrators, thereby questioning their
moral status as victims that they had assumed as a
consequence of the Holocaust. The
connection between anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli
sentiment lies in this opportunity for a
perpetrator-victim role reversal.26 In particular
there is an attempt by the right-wing to
compare Israeli policies with the crimes
perpetrated against Jews throughout
history in order to minimize or even deny the guilt
and responsibility of their own nations.
- The
fact that the Middle East conflict is taking place in the Holy Land of the
Christians
has led in a number of countries to a
revitalisation of anti-Judaist motives by church
leaders, and confessional and some liberal
newspapers.27
Recommendations
The upsurge of anti-Semitic criminal
offences and verbal assaults against Jewish citizens and
institutions, but also against Muslims,
indicates that joint action has to be initiated. This
action should not be restricted to one
area of society, but has to deal with a multitude of
combined activities. Actions on the
political level should be backed by sound data and
information about the phenomena in
question. The civil society has to be mobilized to
establish dialogues, the press, TV and the
Internet has to be addressed to report about ethnic
and cultural groups in a responsible way.
Also for large-scale sporting events, preventive
measures fighting racist attacks have to
be implemented.
We recommend that the EUMC requests state
authorities to acknowledge at the highest level
the extraordinary dangers posed by
anti-Semitic violence in the European context.
Legal
· The EUMC should propose to
the Member States to adopt the proposed framework
decision on combating racism and
xenophobia (COM 2001/664) as soon as possible
and call on the Council of Ministers to
ensure that it is amended to be as effective as
possible to deal with reported incidents
of anti-Semitism.
· The EUMC should propose to
the European Commission and to the Member States
that they consider a decision for police
cooperation according to Article 34 of the
Treaty of European Union, which shall bind
all Member States to collect and
disseminate data on anti-Semitic offences.
This decision should also involve
EUROPOL and EUROJUST.
· To achieve effective
regulation of the Internet concerning racist propaganda, it is
essential to extend the jurisdiction of
European courts to include detailed provisions
on the responsibility of Internet service
providers.
26 On the one hand we have an
unprecedented interest in the history of the Holocaust developing in many
European countries. At the same
time a poll of the Anti-Defamation League conducted in five countries found
that 39 percent of those surveyed
agreed with the statement: “The Jews still talk too much about the Holocaust.”
(European Attitudes toward Jews,
Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, June 2002)
27 For example, the liberal
Italian daily La Stampa depicted a baby Jesus looking up from the manger at an
Israeli
tank, saying, “Don't tell me they
want to kill me again.”
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
12
Registering anti-Semitic incidents
· State institutions must
assume responsibility for monitoring anti-Semitism in the
individual EU Member States. These
institutions should work in accordance with
well-defined categories enabling them to
recognise an anti-Semitic element within any
politically motivated criminal offences
they register, and to then incorporate them into
their statistics.
· In some Member States
racist attacks are not identified separately in crime statistics
while others have at their disposal
state-sponsored instruments which monitor and
pursue anti-Semitic incidents. We
recommend joint strategies for action to be
developed, whereby those countries
possessing years of experience in this regard
should pass this on to the other Member
States.
· In those countries in
which racist and anti-Semitic incidents are already registered by
the security authorities, a swifter
processing and publication of the results must be
ensured and not first presented - as in
current practice - in the middle of the following
year.
· There is a need to
distinguish clearly in reporting between acts of violence, threatening
behaviour, and offensive speech, and to
make transparent government norms and
procedures for registering and acting upon
crimes and offences motivated by anti-
Semitism. Only in this way can a genuinely
comparative basis for incidents be attained
for European countries.
Education and sport
· We recommend that the
governments of the EU Member States still absent should
undertake initiatives to become members of
the Task Force for International
Cooperation on Holocaust Education,
Remembrance, and Research, whose purpose is
to mobilise the support of political and
social leaders to foster Holocaust education,
remembrance and research.
· We recommend that NGOs
engage in initiatives of intercultural and inter-religious
exchange and inter-religious dialogue, and
cooperate in educational information
campaigns against racism and
anti-Semitism.
· National ministries of
education should organise round tables and seminars on mutual
respect and tolerance; all teachers in the
EU should be required to learn about different
religions and faiths, cultures and
traditions; history books used in schools around Europe
should be examined for prejudice, or
one-sidedness.
· In the area of European
football a whole series of initiatives have been started in the
last few years, which combat racism and
anti-Semitism in the stadiums. We
recommend that these activities be
encouraged and extended.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
13
Research
· We recommend that research
studies should be carried out on anti-Semitic incidents in
specific fields - e.g. sport,
entertainment, public services - and placed in an overall
European context in order to establish a
comparative perspective on their occurrence.
· Across all Member States
there should be implemented a coordinated programme of
victim studies to overcome the problem of
underreporting with regard to incidents of
anti-Semitism.
· To date there has been no
well-founded media analysis on how the European press
exploits and perpetuates anti-Semitic
stereotypes. We recommend the
implementation
of research studies to fill this gap.
Internet
· State authorities,
academics and research institutions engaged with racism and anti-
Semitism should establish joint committees
at national and international levels to
monitor anti-Semitism on the Internet.
Through mutual exchange these committees
should establish a basis for an improved
recording and combating of racist and anti-
Semitic developments on the Internet.
· Recent developments have
shown that partly impeded or completely obstructed access
to some homepages at least hinders the
possibility of placing racist propaganda on the
Internet.
Thus private and state organisations should exert continuing pressure on
large Internet providers to remove racist
and anti-Semitic content from the net.
· The enormous potential of
the Internet for educational purposes has not yet been
recognised and utilised. We recommend that projects are developed to
utilise the
Internet far more in order to combat
anti-Semitic and racist content with serious
counter-information.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
14
Contents
Executive
Summary......................................................................................................5
1. Introduction................................................................................................................16
2.
Analysis.........................................................................................................................20
Forms of anti-Semitic
prejudice...........................................................................................22
Perpetrators and kinds of anti-Semitic
activities..................................................................25
The situation in the EU Member
States...............................................................................26
The mass
media....................................................................................................................28
Internet as an international action
base................................................................................29
3.
Recommendations...................................................................................................31
Registering anti-Semitic incidents.......................................................................................32
Education..............................................................................................................................34
Media....................................................................................................................................34
Internet.................................................................................................................................35
Sport.....................................................................................................................................36
Other initiatives by
NGOs....................................................................................................37
Further
Research..................................................................................................................38
Concluding
remarks.............................................................................................................38
4. Country
Reports......................................................................................................40
Belgium.........................................................................................................................41
Germany........................................................................................................................48
Ireland.............................................................................................................................55
Greece.............................................................................................................................57
Spain................................................................................................................................61
France..............................................................................................................................63
Italy...................................................................................................................................70
Luxembourg...............................................................................................................78
The
Netherlands......................................................................................................80
Austria............................................................................................................................84
Portugal..........................................................................................................................89
Finland............................................................................................................................91
Sweden...........................................................................................................................93
United
Kingdom.....................................................................................................97
Annex: Reporting
institutions and data sources....................................101
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
15
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
16
1. Introduction
Alerted during early 2002 by news on
anti-Semitic incidents in some Member States and also
by information given to the European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
(EUMC) by the European Jewish Congress,
the EUMC asked its RAXEN network of 15
National Focal Points (NFPs) to report on
anti-Semitism and to monitor the anti-Semitic
aggression, violence and attitudes in the
Member States with a special focus on a one-month
period (from 15th May - 15th June 2002).
The EUMC also asked for examples of good
practices implemented to prevent and
reduce anti-Semitism.
The National Focal Points were asked to
cover the following issues:
1. Physical acts of violence towards Jews,
their communities, organisations or their property
(cemeteries, synagogues, religious symbols
etc) and also any measures seen as retaliation to
other vulnerable groups, or ethnic,
cultural, and religious minorities, or new types of victims:
Have any physical attacks (harassment,
verbal abuse, violent acts, etc.) against Jews (or other
people related to them) been reported (in
the media, by Jewish organisations, by human
rights/anti-discrimination NGOs, by the
police etc.). Please use the following categories as
headlines: Arson; throwing objects and/or
tear gas; physical aggression; theft and burglary;
vandalism and disparagement; threatening
intrusion; physical threat.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech and
other, subtler forms of discrimination towards Jews:
Have there been any verbal attacks against
Jews in the media, in the public discourse, in
politics. Are there any cases of
incitement to hatred. Are there court cases to be reported.
What about hate speech on the Internet.
Please use the following categories as headlines:
direct verbal threat; threats by
telephone; insults; graffiti and anti-Semitic inscriptions;
publicly distributed leaflets.
3. Research Studies reporting anti-Semitic
violence or Opinion Polls on changed attitudes
towards Jews:
Are there any new or recent reports done
on anti-Semitic aggression or attitudes.
4.
Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence and aggression:
Can you report of any good practice that
has been successful in avoiding the increase of
prejudice and violence towards Jewish
people and other groups.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders including initiatives to reduce
polarization and counteract negative
national trends:
How has the government reacted to
increased anti-Semitic violence. What have been the
reactions of the politicians and other
opinion leaders. Are there any institutionalized
proposals and implementations to be
observed.
Political Background
The reports of the National Focal Points
and our own investigations show that in early 2002
several EU Member States experienced an
increased number of anti-Semitic incidents. The
wave of anti-Semitism reached a climax in
the period between end of March and mid-May.
But further examination shows that the
increase of anti-Semitism had already started with the
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
17
“Al-Aqsa-Intifada” in
October 200028 and was fuelled by the conflict in the Middle East and
the attacks on the World Trade Center and
the Pentagon on 11 September 200129, which
triggered off a fierce debate on the
causes for radical Islamic terrorism.
Into the summer of 2000 negotiations for
obtaining a peaceful settlement of the Middle East
conflict seemed to be taking a promising
course. The failure of Camp David II and the
“second Intifada” (al-Aqsa
Intifada) beginning in late September 2000 marked however a
turning-point. Reports on anti-Semitism
from the year 200030 show a clear increase in anti-
Semitic incidents in the final months of
the year.
Besides the continuing media interest in
the violent conflict in the Middle East, in 2001 the
World Conference on Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Tolerance,
which was held in Durban, South Africa
between 31 August and 7 September encouraged
anti-Semitism in an unexpected way. The
Member States of the United Nations adopted a
Declaration and Action Programme, which
included demands for the recognition of a
Palestinian state and the right of
security for Israel,31 as well as the demand for the end of
violence in the Middle East that would
allow Israel and the Palestinians to continue the peace
process.32 But at the same conference
vehement anti-Semitic outbreaks took place, in
particular at some meetings held between
NGOs, which were directed against representatives
of Jewish groups.33 “These attacks were
fuelled by the heated debates at the meeting
concerning the Israeli government’s
practices in West Bank and Gaza Strip.”34
A few days later the attacks on the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon triggered off a fierce
debate on the causes of radical Islamic
terrorism, seen by many to lie primarily in the
occupation policy pursued by the Israeli
government and the pro-Sharon stance taken by the
US. For the Stephen Roth Institute on
Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv, the events of
September 11 also enhanced the wave of
anti-Semitic manifestations and violence.35
In our opinion one cannot deny that there
exists a close link between the increase of anti-
Semitism and the escalation of the Middle
East conflict, whereas factors which usually
28 See: Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/2001, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-
Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv
University; Anti-Semitism World Report 2000/2001, Jewish Policy Research
London. (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html)
.
29 This event led to an increase
in anti-Muslim discrimination in Europe; see EUMC, Reports on Anti-Islamic
reactions within the European
Union after the acts of terror against the USA. A collection of country reports
from RAXEN National Focal Points
(NFPs), Vienna 2002.
30 Anti-Semitism Worldwide
2000/2001, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-
Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv
University (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html); Anti-
Semitism World Report 2000/2001,
Jewish Policy Research London.
31 World Conference against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Declaration
and Programme of Action, New York
2002, Declaration, Article 63.
32 World Conference against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Declaration
and Programme of Action, New York
2002, Programme of Action, Article 151.
33 The Impact of September 11 on
Anti-Semitism, general Analysis - Overview, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute
for the Study of Contemporary
Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv University (http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/asw2001-2/genanal.htm).
During street parades, demonstrators carried banners equating Zionism with
all evil, the anti-Semitic
pamphlet “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” was distributed freely.
Extensive media coverage
transmitted the hostile atmosphere worldwide.
34 Fire and Broken Glass. The
Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe, ed. by Lawyers Committee for Human Rights,
Washington D.C. 2002, Foreword
(online edition http://www.lchr.org).
35 The Impact of September 11 on
Anti-Semitism, General Analysis - Overview, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute
for the Study of Contemporary
Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv University ( http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/asw2001-2/genanal.htm).
See also Bassam Tibi, Footnote 23.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
18
determine the frequency of anti-Semitic
incidents in the respective countries, such as the
strength and the degree of mobilisation
extremist far-right parties and groups can generate,
have not played the decisive role in the
reporting period.
Defining anti-Semitism
Many of the National Focal Points mention
that in their countries the dividing line between
anti-Semitism and criticism of Israeli
government was a controversial issue. The various
political groups often have different
opinions on the threshold where justified criticism ends
and anti-Semitic argumentation begins..36
In such a delicate situation it is advisable to study
the results of social research and to look
for appropriate definitions of anti-Semitism accepted
by the research community. This also
assures a sound level of impartiality. After a detailed
review of existing literature we recommend
the definition of anti-Semitism given by the well-
known Holocaust researcher Helen Fein:
Anti-Semitism is “a persisting latent
structure of hostile beliefs towards Jews as a collective
manifested in individuals as attitudes,
and in culture as myth, ideology, folklore and imagery,
and in actions - social or legal
discrimination, political mobilisation against the Jews, and
collective or state violence - which
results in and/or is designed to distance, displace, or
destroy Jews as Jews.” 37
To specify the basic content of these
hostile beliefs we refer to a summary given by Dietz
Bering:
Jews are not only partially but totally
bad by nature, that is, their bad traits are incorrigible.
Because of this bad nature
- Jews have to be seen not as individuals
but as a collective.
- Jews remain essentially alien in the
surrounding societies.
- Jews bring disaster on their “host
societies” or on the whole world, they are doing
it secretly, therefore the anti-Semites
feel obliged to unmask the conspiratorial,
bad Jewish character.38
With the help of the above definition the
distinction between anti-Semitism and criticism of
Israeli government policy can be made in
an easier way. From there allusions to or
comparisons with Israel’s actions with the
behaviour of the Nazi regime have to be viewed as
anti-Semitic. Those who identify Israel
and Nazi-Germany or see Israeli behaviour as the
cause of anti-Semitism use these arguments
for their own ideological interests.39 Also to be
evaluated as a form of anti-Semitism are
anti-Semitic stereotypes when applied to Israeli
policy: for example: the accusation that
there is a secret, world-encompassing Zionist
conspiracy, the isolation of Israel as a
state that is fundamentally negatively distinct from all
others, which therefore has no right to
exist, and negative historical recourses to ancient
Jewish history, which is to point to an
immutable negative Jewish character. All cases in
which the Jews are made collectively
responsible for the policy of the Israeli government
represent a form of anti-Semitism. That
means, the moment when criticism on Israel turns
36 All the National Focal Points
(NFPs) reports point out this problem of drawing a clear distinction.
37 Helen Fein, Dimensions of
Antisemitism: Attitudes, Collective Accusations and Actions, in: H. Fein (ed.),
The
Persisting Question. Sociological
Perspectives and Social Contexts of Modern Antisemitism, Current Research
on Antisemitism, vol. 1, ed. by
Herbert A. Strauss, Werner Bergmann, Berlin, New York 1987, p. 67.
38 Dietz Bering, Gutachten über
den antisemitischen Charakter einer namenpolemischen Passage aus der Rede
Jörg Haiders, 28 February 2001,
in: Anton Pelinka, Ruth Wodak (ed.), „Dreck am Stecken“ - Politik der
Ausgrenzung, Vienna 2002.
39 see for this argument John
Bunzl, Round Table Anti-Semitism, 5 December 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
19
into criticism of Jews in general or Jews
living in other countries has at least an anti-Semitic
connotation.40
This report analyses the current
manifestations of anti-Semitism as far as it is possible so
close to the time period under
observation. It does not try to chart its history or analyse its
historical roots in the countries
concerned.
40 As the former Deputy Prime
Minister of Sweden Per Ahlmark puts it: “Compared to most previous anti-
Jewish outbreaks this one is
often less directed against individual Jews. It attacks primarily the
collective Jew,
the State of Israel. And then
such attacks start a chain reaction of assaults on individual Jews and Jewish
institutions.” Speech, given at the
International Conference, Yad Vashem, The Legacy of Holocaust Survivors.
The Moral and Ethical
Implications for Humanity, 8 - 11 April 2002 (see http://www.yad-
vashem.org.il/about_yad/
what_new/data_whats_new/whats_new_international_conference_ahlmark.html) see
also Ahlmark cited in Snunit
Center for the advancement of Web based learning, “Exportation” of the Middle-
East Conflict to the Rest of the
World and the Response of Moslem Immigrants (see
http://www.snunit.k12.il/seder/anti/english/ques1pluseng.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
20
2. Analysis
According to some observers, a new wave of
anti-Semitism is sweeping across Europe; many
are even speaking of the worst
anti-Semitic wave since 1945.41 The latter claim is historically
inaccurate. Above all directly after the
war, in 1946, and in the course of the Stalinist
“purges” in the early 1950s
there were far more violent anti-Semitic excesses, persecution and
discrimination. Antony Lerman, former
Executive Director of the Institute for Jewish Policy
Research in London, has correctly
stressed, “that it is wrong to think that increases in
incidents must mean an overall worsening
of the anti-Semitic climate”.42 Indeed, since 1945
there have been repeated waves of
anti-Semitic incidents in Europe (such as the graffiti wave
of 1959/60, waves between 1990 and 1992 as
well as waves tied to the periodic flare-ups in
the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1967, 1973
and, above all, 1982), whereby concrete causes could
not be given for these outbreaks in every
case, nor had they resulted in a long-term increase in
anti-Semitism.43 If, apart from incidents,
further indicators are selected, such as anti-Jewish
attitudes, the electoral success of
far-right extremist parties espousing anti-Semitism, the
membership numbers of right-wing extremist
organisations, social and legal discrimination of
Jews etc., the picture becomes far more
differentiated - one that does not indicate a general
increase in anti-Semitism and,
furthermore, turns out to be different across the EU Member
States. If we speak of a wave of
anti-Semitism, we primarily mean incidents for which, on the
basis of contagion effects, such a
wave-like and cyclical course is typical.
The fact that a rise in anti-Semitic
activities is clearly observable in most of the EU Member
States since the beginning of the
so-called al-Aqsa Intifada, which increased in frequency and
the intensity of their violence parallel
to the escalation in the Middle East conflict in
April/May 2002, points to a connection
between events in the Middle East with criticism of
Israel’s politics on the one hand and mobilisation
of anti-Semitism on the other. According to
an Anti-Defamation League survey, almost
two-thirds of Europeans (62%) believe “that the
recent outbreak of violence against Jews
in Europe is a result of anti-Israel sentiment and not
traditional anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish
feelings.”44 The international dimension of the problem
was clearly evident as Shimon Peres,
Israel’s Foreign Minister, told EU colleagues in
Valencia in April 2002 that he saw a link
between the growing anti-Semitism in Europe and
41 Avi Becker, secretary general
of the World Jewish Congress, said in April 2002: “These are the worst anti-
Semitic days in Europe since the
end of the Second World War”. Taken from Antony Lerman, who stated: “A
cursory glance at some of the
main developments in anti-Semitism in Europe since 1945 shows the absurdity of
(such) statements.” See Lerman, A
new anti-Semitism. in: Is there a new anti-Semitism in Britain. Ed. by Paul
Iganski and Barry Kosmin, online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports. An analysis in The Economist also questions this
thesis: Is it really rising.
Growing hostility to Israel, and Islamic attacks on Jewish targets in Europe,
do not
mean that old-style anti-Semitism
is back. (Economist.com, 4 September 2002).
42 Lerman, ibid.
43 Simcha Epstein has outlined
this cyclical pattern: Cyclical Pattern in anti-Semitism: The Dynamics of Anti-
Jewish Violence in Western
Countries since the 1950s, in: acta 2 (Jerusalem 1993).
44 Ian Black wrote on this in The
Guardian (26 April 2002): “European governments are right to be worried: for
the furies spawned by the
Arab-Israeli conflict are reaching their own streets, vicious little sideshows
in the "war
of civilisation" many fear
will be the deadly legacy of the 11 September attacks on the US.” 69% of
European
respondents in the ADL survey
said in June “they are very or fairly concerned about violence directed against
European Jews” (European
Attitudes toward Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, June 2002).
In the
follow-up survey by the ADL in
September 2002 conducted in Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Austria and the
Netherlands 53% of the
respondents believed the recent outbreak of violence against Jews in Europe is
a result
of anti-Israel sentiment and not
traditional anti-Jewish feelings, and 61% said “they are very or fairly
concerned
about violence directed against
European Jews” (European Attitudes toward Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-
Israeli Conflict, October 2002).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
21
the Union’s tilt towards the
Palestinians.45 He added: “The issue is very sensitive in Israel
(...). We ask for memory.” The Spanish
Foreign Minister Josep Piqué rejected this criticism:
“Please don’t confuse
anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of policies of the current Israeli
government.”46 Peres’ critical remark and
the reply given by the European Foreign Ministers
indicates that the core issue in this
public conflict was the political question as to when does
anti-Israeli criticism assume anti-Semitic
characteristics and whether reproaches of anti-
Semitism are being used as part of an
attempt to silence criticism of Israeli policies. All NFP
Reports point to this problem, one that
was also discussed publicly in all countries and was an
essential point of dispute in discussions;
namely how to draw a clear distinction between anti-
Semitism and criticism of Israeli
government’s policies towards the Palestinians - even if it is
extremely sharp.47
While it is certainly correct to view
anti-Semitism as part of racism, at the same time it
possesses very specific traits. As almost
all of the reports emphasise, Jews in the European
Union are well integrated socially,
economically and culturally. Thus, the typical motives of
xenophobia are hardly of consequence for
the Jews (fear of competition for jobs, linguistic
and cultural differences of migrants,
external appearance). Instead, Jews are imagined to be a
national and international influential
group who allegedly exert a bad influence on or even
steer politics, the economy and the media,
which is a way of expressing the old anti-Semitic
prejudice of hidden Jewish power.
Furthermore, from within the culture of the Christian West,
traditional historical anti-Judaist and
anti-Semitic prejudices are again and again liable to be
reactivated. On the level of accusations levelled
against Jews, traditional motives prevail (see
below). Perception of the Jews as victims
of National Socialism is very strong, making them a
preferred target for all
“revisionist/deniers/negationists” and right-wing extremists. Anti-
Semitic offenders make use of National
Socialist symbols; but also the German language
itself is used in non-German speaking
countries (expressions such as “Juden raus!”) so as to
refer affirmatively to the National
Socialist persecution of the Jews.
A further aspect that needs to be noted is
that the local Jewish population is closely associated
with the state of Israel and its politics.
It can be said that the native Jews have been made
“hostages” of Israeli
politics.48 Here anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist motives are
45 For the same argument see: An
Open Letter to the Nations of Europe” by the Anti-Defamation League (New
York), published in:
International Herald Tribune, 11 April 2002
(http://www.adl.org/israel/israel_ad_041102.asp)
46 The EU’s External Affairs
Commissioner Chris Patten told Guardian Unlimited: “It is ludicrous to imply
that
any criticism of the way the
Israeli government conducts policy reflects hostility to Israel (...). That sort
of
argument is beneath contempt.”
(The Guardian, 26 April 2002).
47 Here we cite the view of the
Greek NFP as a paradigmatic example: “Used in this sense the definition [of
anti-
Semitism] does not include
actions against either the government or the state of Israel. This we feel must
be
made clear from the outset, as it
has been the source of both confusion and conflict, at least in Greece, where
opposition to and protest against
the policies of Israeli governments have on occasion been equated with anti-
Semitism. It is true, though,
that this careful distinction is frequently blurred both by Jews who identify
with the
state of Israel and non-Jews who
identify all Jews with Israelis and furthermore by considering that all
Israelis
identify with their government.
In this sense it would be wrong in our view to record all anti-Israeli protests
as
anti-Semitic incidents and we
have deliberately chosen not to do so. It is nevertheless true that in some
cases,
especially concerning comparisons
to the Holocaust that appeared in the press, the dividing line was not drawn
so clearly. We have recorded such
incidents, because we consider them anti-Semitic, probably meant to provoke
Jews to take a position vis-à-vis
the policies of the Sharon government.”
48 There is some evidence that
many Europeans doubt the national loyalty of members of Jewish communities
due to their support for Israel:
An ADL survey (June 2002/October 2002) in nine EU states (Belgium, Denmark,
France, Germany, UK, Spain, Italy,
Austria, The Netherlands) ascertained that 51% of respondents (the numbers
lay between 34% in the UK and 72%
in Spain) believed “that Jews are more loyal to Israel than to their own
country”.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
22
mixed together. What is certainly quite
new is the particular connection between anti-
Semitism and anti-Zionism made in the Arab
and Muslim world, so that anti-Semitism, due to
its connection with a concrete political
conflict, varies greatly with its escalation and de-
escalation. That anti-Semitic offenders in
some cases are drawn from Muslim minorities in
Europe - whether they be radical Islamist
groups or young males of North African descent -
is certainly a new development for most
Member States, one that offers reason for concern for
European governments and also the great
majority of its citizens.49 As members of the Arab-
Muslim minorities in Europe are themselves
target of racist and Islamophobic attitudes,50
there arises the precarious situation of a
conflict that is primarily motivated by foreign affairs
but played out on the domestic front, a
conflict in which the members of one minority
discriminate against another minority
group.51
Forms of anti-Semitic prejudice
Let us first of all look at the
anti-Semitic prejudices and the groups expressing them. The
range of motives stretches from racist to
conspiratorial-oriented and religious prejudices; but
anti-Zionist notions, often coupled with
anti-American patterns, were also activated. Anti-
Zionism here is to be seen as a form of
anti-Semitism, because Zionism is described by the
extreme right, the extreme left and also
by parts of Arab-Muslim circles as the evil of the
world and therefore can be used easily as
a wanted scapegoat. This implies the fight against
the existence of Israel.52
1) The dominating motive of contemporary
anti-Semitism is still that of a Jewish world
conspiracy, i.e. the assumption that Jews
are in control of what happens in the world, whether
it be through financial or media power,
whether it be the concealed political influence mainly
exerted on the USA, but also on European
countries. This basic assumption is applied to
explain very different phenomena. Here the
Holocaust denial assumes a central role in
European right-wing extremism. It is
purported that the Holocaust has never taken place and
that the Jewish side, exploiting their
victim status, use the “Auschwitz lie” to apply moral
pressure on mainly European governments
(restitution, support for Israeli policies), but also to
influence US policy towards Israel.
Furthermore, the thesis of the “Auschwitz lie” naturally
also negates the assertion that the
foundation of the state of Israel was historically necessary
in order to create a secure homeland for
the survivors of the Holocaust and Jews in general.
Precisely at this point, extreme
right-wing propaganda becomes employable ideologically for
radical Islamist groups in their struggle
against Israel, for the victim status and Israel’s right to
exist are challenged by the “Auschwitz
lie”. Here a learning process has taken place in which
49 See Ian Black in The Guardian,
26 April 2002; European Attitudes toward Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-
Israeli Conflict, June 2002.
50 EUMC, Reports on Anti-Islamic
reactions within the European Union after the acts of terror against the USA.
A collection of country reports
from RAXEN National Focal Points (NFPs), Vienna 2002. See
http://eumc.eu.int/publications/terror-report/index.htm
51 Michael Whine has sketched the
problematic consequences for the attitude of the Jewish communities: “...if as
the evidence suggests the
perpetrators are increasingly young Muslims and Palestinian sympathizers, we
have to
recognize that they too are also
victims of racism. Therefore the Jewish Community has to be involved with
them in the struggle against
racism as fellow victims. However, their community leaders cannot continue to
call
for ever-stronger action against
racism and racist violence without recognizing their own racism and the effects
that Middle East tension and the
rise of Islamist ideology is having on their members.” (Anti-Semitism on the
streets, in: A new anti-Semitism.
in: Is there a new anti-Semitism in Britain. Ed. by Paul Iganski and Barry
Kosmin, online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports.
52 Just 1967 Martin Luther King
Jr. emphasised: “Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and
remains a plot on the soul of
mankind. (…) So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and
ever
will be so.” Martin Luther King
Jr., Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend, Saturday Review, August 1967, p. 76.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
23
“revisionist” thought, that
was propagated very early and very prominently by French
intellectuals (lastly by Roger Garaudy),
was adopted by some people in the Arab world. The
influence of these ideas is supported by a
number of Western Holocaust deniers like Jürgen
Graf, Gerd Honsik, Wolfgang Fröhlich, who
fled persecution in their homelands and found
asylum in Arab countries, and last but not
least by Roger Garaudy who was hailed as a hero
throughout the Middle East when he faced
persecution by the French government for inciting
racial hatred.53 Via Arab-language media
(newspapers and satellite TV)54 in Europe these
notions reach in turn a small section of
the Muslim population in European countries.
2) Reception of another European source
has also influenced their conception of the world,
namely the infamous anti-Semitic fake the
“Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”, which
describes how a group of Jews apparently
hold the thread of world politics in their hands.
With help of this conspiracy theory
explanations are found for why the politics of the United
States and most of the European countries
display a pro-Israeli bias in the Middle East
conflict.55 A current example of this
conspiratorial thought is offered by the attacks of 11
September 2001, which in some Arab
newspapers (e.g. in Jordan, Egypt and Syria, but also in
the London and Saudi-Arabian editions of
Al-Hayat56) is presented as an action initiated by
the Israeli secret service or even the
Israeli Government itself, who were seeking to prevent
the establishment of closer ties between
the US and the Arab world so as to gain a free hand
for their aggressive plans against the
Palestinians.57 This rumour has also spread through
Europe, where it found great resonance
above all in Greece.58
53 Götz Nordbruch, The
Socio-historical Background of Holocaust Denial in Arab Countries: Arab
reactions to
Roger Garaudy's The Founding
Myths of Israeli Politics (see http://sicsa.huji.ac.il/17nordbruch.html); see
also
Middle East Research Institute
(MEMRI) http://www.memri.org.
54 Examples: Al-Akhbar, Egyptian
government daily, 29 April 2002, by Fatma Abdallah Mahmoud, article
entitled "Accursed Forever
and Ever”: “The entire matter, as many French and British scientists and
researchers
have proven, is nothing more than
a huge Israeli plot aimed at extorting the German government in particular
and the European countries in
general”, cited in: ADL, Anti-Semitism/Anti-Israel Incitement in the Arab and
Muslim Media March - May 2002
(see: http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/media_2q02.asp#2); Al-Riyadh,
Saudi government daily, 10 April
2002, article entitled “ (…) An Israeli 'Holocaust' in Brave Jenin Refugee
Camp”: “ (…) in memory of the 6
millions Jews, about whom ‘Israel’ lies saying that they were killed in the
Nazi crematoriums during the
World War II”, ibid; the Internet Homepage by Ahmed Rami “Radio Islam”
which spreads the Holocaust lie
in at least 12 languages via the World Wide Web. In spring 2000 the TV station
Al-Jazeera transmitted an
interview with the notorious British Holocaust denier David Irving, see
Al-Ahram
weekly online, 11-17 May 2000
(http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/481/eg12.htm). The editor of Al-Ahram in
mid-2002 was subpoenaed for a
criminal investigation in France on charges of anti-Semitism after he had
published an article about a
blood libel in his paper, MEMRI, Special Dispatch, 30 August 2002 and see also
MEMRI, 8 January 2003. Al-Ahram
sees the criminal investigation on the editor as a campaign by a “Zionist
lobby” and also refers on the
Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy to underline their anti-Israel intention, MEMRI,
Special Dispatch, 30 August 2002.
In May 2001 Al-Jazeera hosted in a discussion on “Zionism and Nazism” Dr.
Hayat Al-Hwayek 'Atiya,
“researcher of Zionism” and follower of Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy and
translator of his book into
Arabic, Middle East Research Institute (MEMRI), 6 June 2001 (see:
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi.Page=subjects&Area=antisemitism&ID=SP22501).
Al-Jazeera which
claims to have tens of million
viewers across the world due to Fouad Ajami “What’s the Arab World is
Watching (New York Times
Magazine, 18 November 2001) obviously offers an anti-American and anti-Zionist
diet (see Robert Wistrich, Muslim
Anti-Semitism. A Clear and Present Danger, New York 2002, p. 37, fn. 127).
55 For this, the abbreviation
“ZOG” (Zionist Occupation Government) has established itself in both the
far-right
as well as the radical Islamist
scene, not the least to camouflage against criminal prosecution on the grounds
of
incitement.
56 Kai Hafez, Die WTC-Attentate
in der arabischen Öffentlichkeit, in: Orient-Journal, spring 2002, p. 8.
57 Robert S. Wistrich, Muslim
Anti-Semitism: A Clear and Present Danger, in: The American Jewish Committee
online, Publications
(www.ajc.org).
58 Taken as “proof” for these
plans was the rumour that Mossad had given prior warning to the Jewish
employees
in the World Trade Center and
they therefore did not turn up for work on 11 September.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
24
3) Following 11 September 2001, some hold
that Islamist terrorism is a natural consequence
of the unresolved Middle East conflict,
for which Israel alone is held responsible.59 They
ascribe to Jews a major influence over
America’s allegedly biased pro-Israel policies. This is
where anti-American and anti-Semitic
attitudes converge and conspiracy theories over
“Jewish world domination”
flare up again.
4) The supposed close ties between the US
and Israel give rise to a further motive for an anti-
Semitic attitude, one that is also to be
found amongst the far left. Due to its occupation policy,
sections of the peace movement, opponents
of globalisation as well as some Third World
countries - as the World Conference on
Racism in Durban 2001 had shown - view Israel as
aggressive, imperialistic and colonialist.
Taken on its own terms this is naturally not to be
viewed as anti-Semitic; and yet there are
exaggerated formulations which witness a turn from
criticism into anti-Semitism, for example
when Israel and the Jews are reproached for
replicating the most horrific crimes of
the National Socialists - apartheid, ethnic cleansing,
crimes against humanity, genocide.60 In
the form of anti-Zionism it could be said that the
historical demonising of the Jews is
transferred to the state of Israel (striving for world power,
the vindictiveness and cruelty of “an eye
for an eye”, the greed of capitalism and
colonialism).61 In this way traditional
anti-Semitism is translated into a new form, less
deprived of legitimacy, whose employment
today in Europe could extend more and more into
the political mainstream. Thus, the issue at
stake in judging statements critical of Israel is
whether a double standard is being set,
i.e. Israel is evaluated differently from other states,
whether false historical parallels are
drawn (comparison with the National Socialists), and
whether anti-Semitic myths and stereotypes
are used to characterise Israeli politics.62
5) The United States of America is also
faced with sharp attacks from sections of the peace
movement, opponents of globalisation and
some Third World countries as well as from
sections of the extreme right as a world
power categorised as imperialistic and as the protector
of Israel. For example, especially in
German speaking countries various political extremists
use the word “East coast” (“Ostküste”) as
synonymous to a supposed total Jewish influence
on the United States and their policy.
Sympathisers to these extremists immediately
understand the meaning of this word
without having to get any background information.
Therefore they may use it without being
afraid of any state persecution according to anti-
discrimination laws. This makes clear how
anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism are
sometimes very closely tied together.
6) While the historical victim status of
Jews continues to be acknowledged, for many
Europeans it no longer transfers to
support of Israel. Israeli policies toward the Palestinians
provide a reason to denounce Jews as
perpetrators, thereby qualifying their moral status as
59 The Impact of September 11 on
Anti-Semitism, General Analysis - Overview, ed. by Stephen Roth Institute
for the Study of Contemporary
Anti-Semitism and Racism, Tel Aviv University (http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/asw2001-2/genanal.htm
60 Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
described this as a “blasphemous inversion” as this would mean that opposition
to
Nazism and racism is
simultaneously opposition to Israel and Jews. (A new anti-Semitism. Online:
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports).
61 The French philosopher
Pierre-André Taguieff calls this a “new planetary judeophobia” ("nouvelle
judéophobie planétaire”) that
explains “all world problems by the existence of Israel”. This “new
judeophobia”,
which he sees as initially
brought up by radical Islamic activists, by the heirs of “third-worldism” and
by far-left
anti-globalisation activists,
accuses the Jews of being themselves racist. Thus, according to Taguieff, there
seems
to be an “anti-Jewish anti-racism”.
Pierre-André, La nouvelle judéophobie, Paris 2002.
62 Karmela Liebkind, Comments
prepared for the “Round Table on Manifestations of Anti-Semitism in Europe”,
EUMC, Vienna 2002, p. 4.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
25
victims that they had assumed as a
consequence of the Holocaust. The connection between
anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment
lies in this opportunity for a perpetrator-victim role
reversal.63
7) The fact that the Middle East conflict
is taking place in the Holy Land of the Christians has
lead in various countries to a
revitalisation of anti-Judaist motives by church leaders and
confessional as well as some liberal
newspapers.64 This takes the form of current events (the
conflict over the Church of Nativity,
children and youths as the victims of military action)
being brought into connection with events
in the New Testament, which historically have
clear anti-Jewish connotations (Massacre
of the Innocents, crucifixion of Christ). Such
phenomena are particularly virulent in
Italy, but are also present in Protestant countries such
as Denmark or the United Kingdom.
Perpetrators and kinds of anti-Semitic
activities
For many anti-Semitic incidents, above all
naturally for the violent and other punishable
offences, it is typical that the
perpetrators attempt to remain anonymous. Thus, in many cases
the perpetrators could not be identified,
so an assignment to a political or ideological camp
must remain open. Nevertheless, looking at
the perpetrators identified or at least identifiable
with some certainty, it can be said that
the anti-Semitic incidents in the monitoring period
were committed above all by right-wing
extremists and radical Islamists or young Muslims;
but also that anti-Semitic statements came
from the pro-Palestinian left as well as politicians
and citizens from the political
mainstream.
Specific forms of action can be assigned
to each of these sections.
- Desecration of synagogues,
cemeteries, swastika graffiti, threatening and insulting mail as
well as the denial of the Holocaust as a
theme networking various groupings, particularly
in the Internet - these are the forms of
action to be primarily assigned to the far-right
spectrum.
- Physical attacks on Jews
and the desecration and destruction of synagogues were acts
mainly committed by young Muslim
perpetrators mostly of an Arab descent in the
monitoring period. Many of these attacks
occurred during or after pro-Palestinian
demonstrations, which were also used by
radical Islamists for hurling verbal abuse. In
addition, Islamic circles were responsible
for placing anti-Semitic propaganda in the
Internet and in Arab-language media.
- Anti-Semitism on the
streets also appears to be expressed by young culprits without any
specific anti-Semitic prejudices, so that
“many incidents are committed just for the fun of
it”. In the view of the sociologist Paul
Iganski, in many cases - at least in the UK -
represent a type of “thrill hate crimes”,
“likely to be committed by a group of young
offenders, outside their neighbourhood”, a
type of action we are familiar with in racist
attacks in other European countries and
which Iganski views as “part of the repertoire of
63 On the one hand we have an
unprecedented interest in the history of the Holocaust developing in many
European countries: Holocaust
memorial days are commemorated, personal involvement in the atrocities is
openly discussed and a Task Force
to promote Holocaust education has been established. At the same time polls
of the Anti-Defamation League
conducted in nine EU-countries found that 42 percent of the surveyed agreed
with the statement: “The Jews
still talk too much about the Holocaust.” (European Attitudes toward Jews,
Israel
and the Palestinian-Israeli
Conflict, June and October 2002)
64 The liberal Italian daily La
Stampa, for example, depicted a baby Jesus looking up from the manger at an
Israeli tank, saying, “Don't tell
me they want to kill me again.” And in Edinburgh, an Episcopalian clergyman
was forced to defend a mural
showing a crucified Jesus flanked by Roman soldiers - and modern-day Israeli
troops. It was not anti-Semitic,
he insisted, but designed to make his congregation think about current
conflicts
(The Guardian, 25 April 2002).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
26
routine incivilities and antisocial
behaviour prevalent in the street, shopping malls,
cinemas, (...) and other public space”.65
- In the left-wing scene
anti-Semitic remarks were to be found mainly in the context of pro-
Palestinian and anti-globalisation rallies
and commentaries critical of Israel in the
respective media during the monitoring
period.
- More difficult to record
and to evaluate than the “street-level violence” against Jews is the
elite or salon anti-Semitism as it is
manifested “in the media, university common rooms,
and at dinner parties of the chattering
classes”.66 The development in some EU countries
suggests that today it appears legitimate,
sometimes even en vogue to take an anti-Israeli
stance. While such a standpoint is
legitimate politically, in many cases a boundary is
transgressed in the direction of
anti-Semitic prejudices, for example when a politician in
Germany used the concept “war of
extermination” to characterise the actions of the Israeli
army, thus equating it with the war of
extermination undertaken by the German army
against the Soviet Union and European
Jewry. In this way anti-Semitic modes of thought
can increasingly creep into public and
private discourses and are seldom picked out and
criticised by society, politicians and the
press.
- During a wave of
anti-Semitism like the one we could observe in April and May 2002, in
which a heated public debate took place on
Israeli politics and the boundary between
criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism,
persons become motivated to voice their latent anti-
Semitic attitudes (mostly in the form of
telephone calls and insulting letters) who are not
politically active and do not belong to
one of the ideological camps sketched above.
Opinion polls prove that in some European
countries a large percentage of the population
harbours anti-Semitic attitudes and views,
but that these usually remain latent.
The situation in the EU Member States
The difficulty in classifying anti-Semitic
incidents makes it impossible to provide a
quantitative comparison of the
anti-Semitic manifestations in the EU Member States. The
difficulty is further compounded by the
fact that in some countries incidents are
systematically recorded by state organs,
while others reveal a high level of monitoring by
NGOs, or indeed in a third group the
collation of information proved to be extremely difficult.
We thus have to assume that some EU Member
States, due to their history and the
significance anti-Semitism had and still
has in their country, pay far greater attention to
monitoring anti-Semitic incidents as
others.
The extent and kind of anti-Semitic
incidents vary from country to country. While a constant
pattern valid for all countries is not
recognisable, some constellations are evident. Due to the
plurality of the actors and motives, the
distribution of anti-Semitic manifestations only
partially corresponds to the distribution
employed in the annual “Anti-Semitism Reports”
from the 1990s. They thus show hardly any
connection with the spread of anti-Semitic
attitudes and views in the population as a
whole.67
A rise in the number of anti-Semitic
incidents has been noticeable for almost all of the fifteen
Member States since the start of the
“Al-Aqsa-Intifada”. In the monitoring period this rise
65 Paul Iganski, From ‘extremism’
to ‘yob culture’: Interpreting anti-Semitism in the street, in: Is there a new
anti-Semitism in Britain.,
online: www.jpr.org.uk/Reports.
66 See: Introduction, in: Is
there a new anti-Semitism in Britain., www.jpr.org.uk/Reports, p.1.
67 Institute of Jewish Policy
Research, Anti-Semitism World Report, 1992-1997 (after that online version);
The
Project for the Study of
Anti-Semitism, Tel-Aviv University, Anti-Semitism Worldwide, since 1994,
succeeded
by Stephen Roth Institute,
Anti-Semitism Worldwide, online. (see
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html )
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
27
reached a climax in the period between the
end of March and mid-May, running parallel to the
escalation in the Middle East conflict.
This leads to the conclusion that the occasion for anti-
Semitic attacks was in this case triggered
by a foreign event, one that however exerted a
varying impact in the individual Member
States.
There are a number of EU Member States,
namely Ireland and Luxembourg, where anti-
Semitic incidents in general seldom occur
and were hardly evident in the monitoring period.
At most threatening letters were sent to
the Israeli consulate or to local Jews. The same
applies to Portugal and Finland, where
such threatening letters and telephone calls were
evident and where there was one attack
each on a synagogue, respectively.
On the other hand, a group of countries
was identified with rather severe anti-Semitic
incidents. Here, France, Belgium, the
Netherlands and the UK have to be mentioned. They
witnessed numerous physical attacks and
insults directed against Jews and vandalism of
Jewish institutions (synagogues, shops,
cemeteries). In these countries the violent attacks on
Jews and/or synagogues were reported to be
committed often by members of the Muslim-
Arab minority, frequently youths (see
reports on these countries). The observers agree that
these are disaffected young men who
themselves are frequently targets of racist attacks, i.e.
here the social problems of these migrant
minorities are obviously an essential factor for their
propensity to violence and susceptibility
to anti-Semitism.68 Far fewer anti-Semitic attacks
committed by members of this group were
evident in countries like Sweden and Denmark,
where attacks - similarly to the
Netherlands - were only seldom evident in the 1990s given
general populations in which, according to
polls, anti-Semitic attitudes are not widespread.
Other countries show a very specific expression
of anti-Semitism. In Greece we find a series
of cemetery and memorial desecrations,
which point to a far-right background. Anti-
Semitic/anti-Zionist statements and
sentiments were found in the mass media and were also
expressed by some politicians and opinion
leaders. Here the Greek foreign policy position
perhaps plays a role; since the Second
World War Greece has opposed Israel because of its
alliance with Turkey. Spain offered a
mixed picture where the traditional strong presence of
neo-Nazi groups was evident alongside a
series of attacks, with an Islamist background.
In Germany, where a large number of
anti-Semitic offences have been registered annually
since the 1990s,69 persons of Arab descent
committed some of the few attacks on Jews in the
monitoring period. Anti-Semitism
manifested itself less in a higher number of attacks
(between May-June there were no physical
attacks)70 but more in the form of a flood of anti-
Semitic letters to the Jewish Communities
and prominent Jews sent by German citizens who
by no means all belong politically to the
far right. This was in part a reaction to a hefty
political controversy (see the country
report on Germany). The explosiveness in this
controversy lay in how a well-known German
politician and the Central Council of Jews
stood opposed face to face, so that in the
end all the political partners took a clear position
against the FDP politician Jürgen
Möllemann.
68 See Round Table on
Anti-Semitism, 5 December 2002: Odile Quintin, Director General, DG Employment,
points at the “crisis of
integration of immigrant communities” as one origin of anti-Semitism.
69 This is certainly also due to
the intensive police and public attention, forbidding quantitative comparisons
to
other countries.
70 The number ascertained for the
first three months, 127 incidents, is significantly lower than one would have
expected compared to those for
the whole of 2001 (1629), (see Germany).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
28
Italy showed a certain similarity with
Germany; although no physical attacks were evident,
there were threatening telephone calls, insulting
letters, slogans and graffiti, whereby the
perpetrators did not come from the Muslim
population. However, particularly pronounced in
Italy is a pro-Palestinian mobilisation
within left-wing parties, organisations and newspapers,
which in connection with public rallies
partially took an anti-Semitic turn. From Austria no
physical attacks were reported; verbal
threats and insults were seldom. Anti-Semitic
stereotypes in relation to Israel were
found essentially in right-wing newspapers and amongst
far-right groupings.
The countries can also be grouped together
in another constellation when focus is switched to
those actors who are present in the public
discourse. In Italy, France, Spain and Sweden
sections of the far left and Muslim groups
unified to stage pro-Palestinian demonstrations. At
some of these demonstrations anti-Semitic
slogans and placards were to be seen and heard
and some even resulted in attacks upon
Jews or Jewish institutions. A similar trend was
observed in the Netherlands, though without
any great participation from the political left. In
Finland, pro-Palestinian demonstrations
passed without any anti-Semitic incidents. In
Germany, and also less so in Austria,
public political discourse was dominated by a debate on
the link between Israeli policy in the
Middle East conflict and anti-Semitism, a debate in
which the cultural and political elite
were involved, whereas the mobilisation of the extreme
left remained low-key. In Germany the
critical reporting of the media was also a topic for
controversy, as it was also in the United
Kingdom, where left-liberal papers (The Guardian
and The Independent) were heavily
criticised by Jewish representatives. In other countries
such as Luxembourg, Ireland, Portugal,
Denmark and Finland there was obvious no
prominent public discussion on this
subject.
The mass media
Some commentators discuss the possible
influence of the mass media on an escalation of the
number of anti-Semitic incidents. There is
a connection seen between the sharp increase in
anti-Semitic attacks in April 2002 and the
events in Jenin at the end of March and in
Bethlehem in April. Here the question at
issue is whether this escalation was merely the result
of the daily news reports on the violence
in the Middle East, in the sense of an agenda-setting
effect, or whether the reporting itself
reveals an anti-Semitic bias. Judgement upon this is
dependent on partisanship in the Middle
East conflict.71 The Jewish communities regarded the
one-sidedness, the aggressive tone of the
reporting on Israeli policy in the Middle East
conflict and references to old Christian
anti-Jewish sentiments as problematic. The country
reports (Greece, Italy, the Netherlands,
and Sweden) list some cases of anti-Semitic argument
or stereotypes (cartoons) in the quality
press, but as of yet no systematic media analyses are
available. One study of the German quality
press (see Germany) comes to the conclusion that
the reporting concentrated greatly on the
violent events and the conflicts and was not free of
anti-Semitic clichés; at the same time
though this negative view also applies to the description
of the Palestinian actors. The report on
Austria identified anti-Semitic allusions in the right-
wing press. Here there is a need for
further empirical studies. One study on the impact of the
very critical reporting on the wave of
right-wing extremist violence in Germany in the early
71 Some authors criticised a
“left-liberal obsession with Israel” (Michael Whine) and sees “a left-wing
anti-
American cognitive élite with
strong representation in the European media” at work (so the Chief Rabbi
Jonathan Sacks in his article: A
new anti-Semitism. online: www.jpr.org.uk/Reports), a reproach sharply
rejected by Seamus Milne in the
article: This slur of anti-Semitism is used to defend repression. Ending
Israel's
occupation will benefit Jews and
Muslims in Europe. (The Guardian, 9 May 2002). The Palestinians see a pro-
Israeli bias in the European
press. Many Europeans also share this view. In the aforementioned ADL survey,
the
majority of Belgians, British,
Germans and French respondents agreed that the media coverage has been biased
“in favour of the Israelis”;
only the Danes saw a bias slant in favour of the Palestinians.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
29
1990s concluded that the daily news
coverage through television and the press had a
“contagion effect” and
contributed to a further escalation in violence; this though could not be
said to be the case of the
commentary-oriented background reports in the daily press.72 This
means that the impact is not generated by
the content of the reporting, which naturally
evaluates the violence negatively, but
rather from the massiveness and consonance of the
overall media coverage. The intensive and
consonant focus on events thus has a clear effect
on the climate of opinion. In fact, those
Europeans who followed media coverage of the
events in the Middle East the closest were
more likely to be sympathetic to the Palestinian
case.73
Openly anti-Semitic reporting is rather
seldom in the European press, with the exception of
the far-right spectrum. However, observers
point to an “increasingly blatantly anti-Semitic
Arab and Muslim media”, including audio
tapes and sermons, in which the call is not only
made to join the struggle against Israel
but also against Jews across the world.74 Although
leading Muslim organisations express their
opposition to this propaganda,75 observers assume
that its calling for the use of violence
may exert a certain influence on readers and listeners.
Internet as an international action base
The Internet is named in almost all of the
country reports as an important medium for anti-
Semitic propaganda, precisely because it
is suited to the international dissemination of anti-
Semitism due to the difficulty in
identifying the perpetrators. As the Internet represents an
international medium, only those homepages
have been included in the individual country
reports, which have a direct relationship
to the nationalist - mostly then far-right - spectrum.
The international character of the medium
itself allows only a trans-national assessment and
so, correspondingly, a joint strategy in
formulating and implementing counter measures. In
addition, the dissemination of
anti-Semitic thought via the Internet cannot be circumscribed to
fit a specific period, for this worldwide
transference of data is fast-moving, meaning that
much of the information is accessible only
for a short time or the relevant homepages are
switched on and then off. Inherent to the
medium, this is only seldom for political reasons. At
the same time though, there are a whole
series of homepages available, which are never or
only seldom updated, but nevertheless are
permanently present as a propaganda medium. The
evaluation and monitoring of this organ
for disseminating anti-Semitic stereotypes,
particularly those with revisionist/denial
and conspiracy theory content,76 must therefore be
limited to a more general survey.
The Internet reflects a development
observable since 2000, namely the networking of the
extreme right scene via links with
sections of the radical Islamist spectrum, some sites from
72 Hans-Bernd Brosius and Frank
Esser, Eskalation durch Berichterstattung. Massenmedien und
fremdenfeindliche Gewalt, Opladen
1995, S. 206 f. see for the conclusions to be drawn for the journalists p. 205
ff.
73 See ADL Survey, 2002.
74 Examples for the UK are given
by Michael Whine (Anti-Semitism on the streets) and Peter Pulzer (Anti-
Semitism old and new: Just
anti-Sharon and a little bit more) both online: www.jpr.org.uk/Reports.
75 Leaders of France's five
million Muslims have warned against stigmatising an entire community, condemned
attacks on Jews and called for
peaceful protests in solidarity with the Palestinians. (Ian Black, Europe's
oldest
hatred revives. Violence in the
Middle East is provoking a rise in anti-Semitism across Europe, The Guardian,
26
April 2002. Cf. similar
statements by Turkish organisations in Germany (see Germany).
76 Almost all relevant homepages
from the extreme right and the Arab pro-Palestinian spectrum offer the
“Protocols of the Elders of
Zion” for downloading, or make it accessible via links to other homepages. This
is
also the case for Hitler’s “Mein
Kampf”, which in the meantime circulates translated in many Arab countries.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
30
anti-globalisation campaigners77 and from
the anti-American far left. Since the end of the
1990s there has been a dramatic increase
in the number of homepages present on the web
from far-right groups and parties, which
quite often also have ties to radical Islamic
fundamentalists. Observers start from the
assumption that there are some 3000 homepages
with extreme rightist content on the web;
in addition, there are discussion forums and chat
rooms in which the corresponding body of
thought is spread, mostly anonymously. Such
groups create ideological ties, in
particular by utilising the denial of the Holocaust as a
component of anti-Semitic agitation, and
build up a network. Revisionism is spread by
European organisations such as the Belgian
“Vrij historisch Onderzoek”, the Swedish
“Radio Islam”, the French
“L’Association des Anciens Amateurs de Récits de Guerres et
d’Holocaustes” (AAARGH), the Danish site
“Patriot” or numerous homepages in German
that are hosted in various countries.
These are in turn linked to the entire international scene,
i.e. the respective leading revisionist
homepages in America, Australia and Canada are then
accessible. Right-wing extremists have
discovered how to conduct their war via the Internet,
i.e. how to use “electronic warfare”. Such
tactics have lead to state authorities warning of
terrorist tendencies in the far-right
spectrum. Furthermore, the potential for violence is
fostered by the worst kinds of computer
games. These are upgraded to a political weapon
when neo-Nazis convert well-known
apolitical games into malicious anti-Semitic hate
campaigns.78
In summary it can be said that the
threatening nature of the situation, in particular for the
Jewish communities, arose because in most
of the countries monitored the increasing number
of anti-Semitic attacks, committed
frequently by young Arabs/Muslims and by far-right
extremists, was accompanied by a sharp
criticism of Israeli politics across the entire political
spectrum, a criticism that in some cases
employed anti-Semitic stereotypes. This parallel
character arose out of the joint reference
to the escalating situation in the Middle East; both
phenomena, the attacks and the public
discussion, have significantly receded since June 2002.
In countries such as Denmark, Greece,
Spain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,
Austria, Portugal and Finland there are
only a few or no incidents known for the period after
July 2002.79 In some Member States such as
Belgium, France and Sweden the number of anti-
Semitic incidents, including violent
attacks and threatening phone calls, increased again in
September and October, but it does not
compare to the period monitored. Anti-Semitic
leaflets, hate mail and phone calls were
also reported in Germany and the United Kingdom.
Factors which usually determine the
frequency of anti-Semitic incidents in the respective
countries, such as the strength and the
degree of mobilisation extremist far-right parties and
groupings can generate, have obviously not
played the decisive role in the monitoring period.
77 Above all homepages from
Indymedia (such as Indymedia-France) are time and again criticised because
there
“outbreak of Fascist
postings” is to be observed, such as in the French version on 7 June 2002:
“Israeli
concentration camps” were
compared to the Nazi camps in Germany during the Second World War. But this
provoked the resignation of two
editorial team members. One of the founding members of this anti-globalization
site, which was created after the
Seattle summit, demanded the expulsion of the author of the article “to prevent
Indymedia-France from falling
under revisionist influence”. Information provided by the NFP Adri, which
compiled the report on France for
this synthesis report.
78 Cf. the homepage of the
well-known neo-Nazi and revisionist Gary Lauck in Lincoln/Nebraska and his
“NSDAP-AO”
(NSDAP-Auslandsorganisation), who offers his site in English, German, Dutch,
Danish, Finnish,
Sweden, Italy, French, Portuguese
and Spanish and besides computer games also provides free access to Nazi
literature like “Mein Kampf”.
79 See the reports for the
countries by The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, online
(http://www.antisemitism.org.il).
As Hadassa Hirschfeld from CIDI points out, anti-Semitic incidents did not
diminish in the Netherlands, but
the type of incidents has changed from sending anti-Semitic e-mails to more
direct threats (Round Table on
Antisemitism, 5 December 2002), Brussels.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
31
3. Recommendations
The upsurge of anti-Semitic criminal
offences and verbal assaults against Jewish citizens and
institutions, but also against Muslims,
prompted the Interior Ministers of five EU Member
States (Belgium, Germany, Spain, France
and the United Kingdom) to issue a “Declaration
against Racism, Xenophobia and
Anti-Semitism” in April 2002. The Ministers said that they
had already introduced preventive measures
(in particular the surveillance and protection of
places of worship) on a national level
against the violent attacks occurring in connection with
the Middle East conflict. It appears to
them in the future to be of particular importance that
“joint measures are
undertaken on a European level” and “that a series of actions are to be
resolved which encompass the rapid
acceptance and implementation of concentrated
measures, such as an intensifying of the
exchange of information and experience between the
law enforcement agencies in the Member
States and Europol and providing more support for
the EUMC, using the data collated by the
EUMC. We consider it to be particularly useful that
suitable penalties can be applied for
racist offences in a comparable way in every Member
State.”80
To be able to do that, state institutions
must assume responsibility for monitoring anti-
Semitism in the individual EU Member
States. These institutions should work in accordance
with well-defined categories (see below),
enabling them to recognise an anti-Semitic element
within any politically motivated criminal
offences they register and to then incorporate them
into their statistics. The NFPs’ reports
make it clear that information on anti-Semitic attacks
in many countries is mainly presented by
Jewish institutions or NGOs registering incidents -
and they often only do so when they have
received reports from the persons affected. All too
often we are faced with chance findings,
which, for example, have only become public
through the regional press release of a
committed journalist. Thus, NGOs have recorded 259
racially motivated murders between 1995
and 2000 in Italy; whereas the Italian police have
not registered a single case. In Germany
NGOs registered five times as many racist murders
as the police.81 Although the violent
attacks upon minorities with a racist background has
raised the sensitivity of state agencies
to such criminal offences in the last few years, the
attention required to accept and perceive
incidents motivated by anti-Semitism is still lacking
in many countries.
In those countries in which incidents are already
registered by the security authorities, a
swifter processing and publication of the
results must be ensured, and not first presented - as
in current practice -in the middle of the
following year by the police, the authority responsible
for the protection of the constitution
etc.
We recommend that:
The EUMC requests state authorities to
acknowledge at the highest level the extraordinary
dangers posed by anti-Semitic violence in
the European context.
There is a definite need to distinguish
clearly in reporting between acts of violence,
threatening behaviour, and offensive
speech, and to make transparent government norms and
procedures for registering and acting upon
racially motivated crimes and offences motivated
80 Bundesministerium des Innern,
Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Pressemitteilungen online, 19 April 2002,
Abdruck der Erklärung (translated
from German).
81 EUMC, Annual Report 2000
“Diversity and Equality for Europe“, Vienna 2001 (see
http://www.eumc.eu.int/publications/ar00/index.htm
).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
32
by anti-Semitism.82 Only in this way can a
genuinely comparative basis for incidents be
attained for European countries, a
comparison that till now has been limited to a mere
juxtaposition of incomparable individual
results.
The EUMC should propose to the European
Commission and to the Member States to
consider a decision for police cooperation
according to Article 34 of the Treaty of European
Union, which shall bind all Member States
to collect and disseminate data on relevant
offences, following the model of States
such as Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. This
decision should also involve EUROPOL and
EUROJUST. Such a decision needs to be
complemented in all Member States by a
coordinated programme of victim studies to
overcome the problem of underreporting,
which is generally recognised by experts in this
area.
The EUMC should propose to the Member
States to adopt the proposed framework decision
on combating racism and xenophobia (COM
2001/664) as soon as possible and call on the
Council of Ministers to ensure that it is
amended to be as effective as possible to deal with the
reported incidents. To achieve effective
regulation of the Internet concerning racist
propaganda, it is essential to extend the
jurisdiction of European courts to include detailed
provisions on the responsibility of
Internet service providers. As the Internet must be seen as
the central networking medium of the
different ideological directions as regards anti-
Semitism, it is precisely here where a
particularly intensive monitoring is required, one which
in the first instance must be undertaken
by state authorities, but also by academic and research
institutions engaged with racism and
anti-Semitism. For this purpose it is thus necessary to
establish joint committees at national and
international levels. Through mutual exchange these
committees shall make available research
results, cases of police prosecution and information
from state security authorities,
establishing a basis for an improved recording and combating
of racist and anti-Semitic developments.
The EUMC should encourage and assist civil
society to complement the improved legal basis.
Most of the EU Member States in recent
years already have enacted laws against hate crime
or the “Holocaust lie” as well as
anti-discrimination laws, which include religious or racial
discrimination. Due to these improvements
in legislation and law enforcement, and as a result
of intensified police activities and
increased public awareness, anti-Semitic incidents and
violent attacks as well as Holocaust
denial have less chance to evade punishment. But as the
increase of anti-Semitic attacks shows,
laws - although necessary - are not sufficient to stave
off incidents, and in most cases do not
cover verbal threats.
Registering anti-Semitic incidents
The measures put forward by the five
Ministers already imply improvements in monitoring
and combating anti-Semitic and racist
attacks.83 In some Member States (Belgium, Ireland,
Greece and Portugal) “racist attacks were
simply not identified separately in crime
statistics”,84 while others (Germany,
France, Sweden and the United Kingdom) have at their
82 Ibid. pp. 11-12.
83 Collection, compilation,
analysis, dissemination and publication of reliable statistical data on racism,
racial
discrimination, xenophobia and
related intolerance were also called for by the Action Programme of the World
Conference against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Durban 2001. See:
Report of the World Conference
against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,
Program of Action, chapter III,
Measure of Prevention, Education and Protection Aimed at the Eradication of
Racism, Racial Discrimination,
National, Regional and International Levels.
84 Lawyers Committee on Human
Rights, Fire and Broken Glass. The Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe,
Strasbourg 2002, p.5
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
33
disposal state-sponsored instruments which
monitor and pursue anti-Semitic incidents. In
Germany for instance this is incumbent
upon the Federal Office for the Protection of the
Constitution, which in turn receives its
information from the various State Offices for
Criminal Investigation. However, these
offices record and investigate only punishable
offences. In Sweden the Swedish Security
Police (Säpo) records systematically anti-Semitic
incidents. Since 2001 in the United
Kingdom the Community Security Trust (CST), the
monitoring body, has been accorded
third-party reporting status by the police, allowing it to
report anti-Semitic incidents to the
police and act as a go-between between them and those
victims who are unable or unwilling to
report to the police directly.85 The function performed
by the CST thus goes beyond the
possibilities accorded to the German agencies and also
involves the victims themselves. Other
countries, which till now have hardly known any anti-
Semitic incidents, do not possess such
instruments and were till now not forced to develop
monitoring guidelines. The European-wide
wave of anti-Semitic incidents has shown that
there is now an urgent need for action in
these countries as well.
We recommend joint strategies for action
to be developed, whereby those countries
possessing years of experience in this
regard should pass this on to the other Member States.
A prerequisite for such joint action must
be to establish common guidelines for categorising
anti-Semitic incidents. Some countries
have for some years now already based their activities
on prescribed guidelines for registering
anti-Semitic incidents; these though have not been
coordinated with one another and hence the
results have only a limited comparative value.
The most recent definition of anti-Semitic
incidents used by the Community Security Trust in
the United Kingdom appears to us to be the
most suitable for dealing with the demands of a
European-wide phenomenon. This definition
goes beyond the usual criteria for registering
racist incidents, focusing specifically on
criteria geared towards anti-Semitism:
1. Extreme violence: any attack
potentially causing loss of life;
2. Assault: any physical attack against
people, which is not a threat to life;
3. Damage and Desecration of Property: any
physical attack directed against Jewish
property, which is not life threatening;
4. Threats: includes only clear threats,
whether verbal or written;
5. Abusive Behaviour: face-to-face,
telephone and targeted abusive/anti-Semitic letters
(inter alia those aimed at and sent to a
specific individual) as opposed to a mail shot of
anti-Semitic literature, which will be
included under Category 4. Anti-Semitic graffiti
on non-Jewish property is also included in
the category;
6. Literature: includes distribution of
anti-Semitic literature, based on the following
criteria:
a. the content must be anti-Semitic
(except see (d) below);
b. the recipient may be either Jewish or
non-Jewish;
c. the literature must be part of a mass
distribution, as opposed to that directed at
a specific individual;
d. racist literature that is not
anti-Semitic is included when it is clear that Jews are
being deliberately targeted for receipt
because they are Jews (implying an anti-
Semitic motive behind the distribution);
e. It should be noted that the statistics
for this category does not give any
indication of the extent of distribution.
Mass mailings of propaganda are only
counted as one incident, although anti-Semitic
leaflets have been circulated to
85 Michael Whine, Anti-Semitism on the
streets, in: A new anti-Semitism. A collection of essays by Chief
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Peter
Pulzer, Michael Whine, Paul Iganski and Antony Lerman, including useful online
resources, Edited by Paul Iganski
and Barry Kosmin, Institute for Jewish Policy Research, 2002
(see
http://www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/index.htm).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
34
hundreds and possibly thousands of Jewish
and non-Jewish individuals and
organisations.86
Education
As already established, laws offer only
limited means to counteract anti-Semitism because it
is after all a problem of society as a
whole. Changes in anti-Jewish attitudes can only be
achieved by education. Parents, teachers
and day care providers can provide opportunities for
children to express their feelings and
channel them into positive direction. The most important
issue is to promote knowledge on Jewish
history, on all dimensions of Jewish-Christian
relations and on the Holocaust but without
moralising admonitions. To learn about the
Holocaust and apply the lessons of the
past to contemporary issues of prejudice, racism and
moral decision-making is an important aim
for the future.
The Task Force for International
Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and
Research, founded in 1998 on the
initiative of the Swedish Government, is composed of
representatives of government, as well as
governmental and non-governmental organisations.
Its purpose is to mobilise the support of
political and social leaders to foster Holocaust
education, remembrance, and research both
nationally and internationally. The ITF creates
programmes and develops guidelines for
teaching about the Holocaust. Currently fourteen
countries are members of the ITF:
Argentina, Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany,
Hungary, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, the
Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and
the United States.87
We recommend that the governments of the
EU Member States still absent should undertake
initiatives to become members of this
international board. The guidelines of the ITF are an
important basis for counteracting
prejudices and anti-Semitism especially not only because
Holocaust denial is part of radical groups
(right-wing and radical Islamist groups) who
practise anti-Semitism but also because
Holocaust education must be part of European
historical knowledge. According to the ITF
in general, teaching about the Holocaust should
advance knowledge of this unprecedented
destruction, preserve the memory of the victims,
encourage educators and students to
reflect upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by
the events of the Holocaust as they could
be applied to world of today. In order to see the
differences between the Holocaust and
other genocides, comparisons should be carefully
distinguished and similarities also should
be articulated. The study of the Holocaust must be
studied within the context of European
history as a whole. Educators should provide context
for the events of the Holocaust by
including information about anti-Semitism and Jewish life
in Europe before the Holocaust. The main
task is to provide teacher seminars on these
subjects but also on racism and
intolerance and on neo-Nazi music and propaganda.
Media
The fact that in connection with the
radicalisation of the Middle East conflict an anti-Semitic
body of thought has gained currency and
become relevant in many Arab countries, or that an
already virulent anti-Semitism,
circulating since the Six Day War and which in the last few
years has become more and more focused on
the denial of the Holocaust, has once again
86 Published by Michael Whine,
Communications Director of the Community Security Trust: Anti-Semitism on
the streets, in: Is there a new
anti-Semitism in Britain. Online: http://www.jpr.org.uk .
87 The website of the Task Force
(http://taskforce.ushmm.gov) maintains an international directory of
organisations in Holocaust
education, remembrance, and research; an international calendar of events; a
directory of archives; listings
of remembrance and education activities; as well as additional information
about
the Task Force.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
35
broken out, raises the issue of how the
media exploits and hands down anti-Semitic
stereotypes.
State authorities have obviously till now
paid too little attention to Arab-language
publications which spread anti-Semitic
propaganda in European countries, whether they be
newspapers, audio tapes or the Internet,
which in the view of British authors “enjoy, as far as
one can tell, nearly total impunity” in
the United Kingdom.88 In order to acquire knowledge of
the degree of media influence upon
sections of the European population with Arab or North
African descent, a research study should
be undertaken on the Arab-language television, press
and homepages operating in the 15 Member
States. Until now it is known that the Arab
newspaper “al-Hayat” published in London
and “explicit - the political magazine for an
Islamic Consciousness” both spread radical
anti-Semitism. This is also the case with the
Internet, where Hizb-ut-tahrir (the party
of Islamic Liberation) operates a site containing anti-
Semitic propaganda in German, English,
Danish and French, incidentally via a Russian
server.
Press reporting of the Middle East
conflict was frequently lacking in balance as well as in a
perspective on the contexts and the
formative background history of the current conflict.
Partisanship for the Palestinians as a
people allegedly oppressed by a so-called imperialist
Israeli state was mainly to be found in
the left-oriented media. Quite often there were also
caricatures, which used anti-Semitic
stereotypes (see Italy, La Stampa). To date there has
been no well-founded media analysis of the
European press on this subject.
We recommend studies such as the one about
how the German print media reported four
important incidents in the Middle East
during the second Intifada between September 2000
and August 2001, initiated by the American
Jewish Committee (AJC),89 should be organised
also for the other Member States.
Internet
One of the effective counter-strategies
against anti-Semitic agitation on the Internet stems
from the providers themselves. They remove
upon notification - often only after outside
pressure - such websites from the net, or
increasingly undertake voluntary self-monitoring.
The developments in the last months in
partly impeded or completely obstructed access to
some homepages have shown that such an
approach at least hinders the possibility of placing
propaganda on the Internet, even if some
suppliers of the homepages removed from the net
find alternatives for spreading their
material through smaller American or Russian providers.
There exists a genuine danger that the
far-right extremists can achieve an even more intensive
networking through the Internet, although
the respective links offered, which suggest close
co-operation, are often completely obsolete.
Some may lead to the next related homepage, but
this does not necessarily mean that there
is automatically a close connection with the link
partner. In addition, the relevant sites
realised with the latest technology are often the work of
a single individual or, at the most, of a
few persons whose circle of sympathisers is small.
88 Peter Pulzer, Anti-Semitism
old and new: Just anti-Sharon or a little bit more. Anti-Semitism in the
streets, in:
Is there a new anti-Semitism in
Britain. On-line at www.jpr.org.uk, where Michael Whine argues in the same
direction.
89 Duisburger Institut für
Sprach- und Sozialforschung (DISS), (on behalf of the American Jewish
Committee),
Medien Tenor, Terror und sonst
fast nichts. Die Berichterstattung über Israel in internationalen TV-Medien
(9/2000-8/2001),
Forschungsbericht Nr. 115, 15 December 2001.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
36
A whole series of private initiatives have
already originated in the last few years, which
combat anti-Semitic and racist content on
the Internet,90 and with serious information and
lexical entries counteract, for instance,
the denial of the Holocaust on the Internet.91 In the
Netherlands (state-funded) and the United
Kingdom (funded by local Internet Service
Providers), Bureaux for Discrimination on
the Internet were founded.92 In addition, private
and state organisations exert pressure on
large Internet providers such as Yahoo and AOL to
remove racist and anti-Semitic content
from the net.93 Legislation recently passed in some
countries (Germany, Sweden)94 prohibiting
Internet-based hate speech exerts in the first
instance a moral pressure, for it is
hardly possible to deal with an international medium which
is difficult to control with legislative
means on a national level.
We recommend that apart from state
approaches for combating Internet-based racism and
anti-Semitism, which are in a state of
flux, the enormous potential for educational purposes
must be utilised far more than is
presently the case.
The extent to which anti-Semitic and
racist content is also conveyed via websites from
football fans and how effective they are
in mobilising support is being investigated by a joint
study undertaken by the EUMC, the Italian
organisation Unione Italiana Sport Per Tutti
(UISP) and the Internet company ERIN based
in Luxembourg.95
Sport
Above all in the area of European football
a whole series of initiatives have been started in the
last few years, which combat racism and
anti-Semitism in the stadia, following the initiative
“Football against Racism”.96
The “Let’s Kick Racism out of Football”
(LKROOF) campaign is the product of the United
Kingdom’s Commission for Racial Equality,
working in conjunction with the football
associations of England, Wales and
Scotland.97 A Jewish Policy Research (JPR) seminar in
London for academics and sportswriters
examined the issues concerning anti-Semitism,
xenophobia, racism and violence that
frequently surround football.98 The research study on
90 For example “Kinder des
Holocaust” (AkdH) from Switzerland (see http://www.akdh.org).
91 The “Nizkor Project” from
Canada (see http://www.nizkor.org).
92 High Commissioner for Human
Rights, Report on the use of the Internet for purposes of incitement to racial
hatred, racist propaganda and
xenophobia, and on ways of promoting international cooperation in this area,
United Nations General Assembly
A/CONF.189/PC.2/12, 27 April 2002.
93 For France see for example
http://www.cyber-rights.org/documents/yahoo_ya.pdf.
94 See High Commissioner for
Human Rights, Report on the use of the Internet for purposes of incitement to
racial hatred, racist propaganda
and xenophobia, and on ways of promoting international cooperation in this
area,
United Nations General Assembly
A/CONF.189/PC.2/12, 27 April 2002.
95 Carlo Balestri, Racism,
Football and the Internet, on behalf of the EUMC by Unione Italiana Sport per
Tutti,
Vienna 2002 (see
http://www.eumc.eu.int/publications/football/index.htm); see also EUMC Annual
Report 2000
“Diversity and Equality for
Europe“, Vienna 2001 (see http://www.eumc.eu.int/publications/ar00/index.htm),
p.
113.
96 See FARE
(http://www.farenet.org); at the FIFA conference on racism in football in July
2001 in Buenos
Aires the federation for the
first time discussed the problem and referred also on anti-Semitic incidents;
Members of the FARE Network are
to deliver soon a seminar on “Football, Culture and Anti-racism” at the
European Social Forum, in
Florence (see http://www.farenet.org); UEFA is putting its full support behind
a ten-
point plan of action to fight
racism in football. Originally compiled by FARE, the plan sets down a variety
of
measures that clubs can take (
see http://www.farenet.org).
97
http://www.people.ku.edu/~boroboy/futbolero/abstract/horne2.html.
98 Football, Racism and Public
Policy, Jewish Policy Research, newsletter; winter 2002 (see
http://www.axt.org.uk/Footballnews.htm).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
37
“Racism, Football and the
Internet” on behalf of the EUMC analysed football supporter sites
carrying violence and racism often
combined with anti-Semitism.99
We recommend similar studies should also
be carried out on other issues in the area of anti-
Semitic incidents and placed in an overall
European context in order to establish a
comparative basis. For this purpose close
co-operation is also needed between European
research institutions, which would submit
their regional studies to, for example, the EUMC to
form an information pool. This is the
prerequisite for the comparison that in turn - based on
specific regional symptoms - opens up the
possibility of locating and analysing common
patterns, the formation of stereotypes and
the different determining political and social
conditions. Only on this basis, which
needs to be interdisciplinary so as to illuminate the
various facets of anti-Semitism from
different disciplines and so ultimately provide a
comprehensive picture, can measures and
strategies be developed which lead to a genuinely
effective combating of anti-Semitic
tendencies.
Other initiatives by NGOs
During the “European-wide Action Week
against Racism 2002” in March 2002, activists in
33 countries all over Europe showed their
commitment against racism. In France, many
organisations co-operated and focussed on
anti-racist education. Their activities included
meetings, discussions, concerts and
theatre performances. In Germany, immigration was the
most central issue in debates,
demonstrations and games. In the Netherlands anti-racist
organisations discussed recent changes in
politics related to migration and integration issues.
AMARC Europe, the European branch of the
World Association of Community Radio
Broadcasters, prepared a 24-hour
radio-campaign relayed through the Internet.100 Initiatives
such as the International Day against
Fascism and Anti-Semitism (9/11/2002) are especially
devoted to issues of anti-Semitism, in
which most of the European countries - non-profit
organisations of the UNITED-network - are
involved with corresponding programmes.101
The strategies for dismantling prejudices
against Jews have till now included exhibition
projects (see the reports on Austria: The
Jews of Mistelbach; Jewish Museum Hohenems; on
Luxembourg and on Germany) and educational
projects and pedagogical tools to improve and
foster interculturalism and diversity in
society (see the reports on Belgium and Italy). It is
precisely the efforts undertaken in the
school and education sector that are suitable for
incorporating the new challenges posed by
anti-Semitic prejudices amongst the Arab/north-
African Muslim immigrants. In the United
Kingdom the teaching method called “Abrahams
barn” (“Abraham’s children”), pointing out
similarities between Christianity, Islam and
Judaism, has - according to teachers -
been reported to be fairly successful in schools with a
high percentage of immigrants. Along with
this, teachers in some schools have reported that a
generally increased vigilance against
racist and anti-Semitic expressions has been successful
in curbing such sentiments. The Swedish
Committee against anti-Semitism has been writing
articles and arranging a series of
seminars in different cities and towns. The seminars were
called “Stereotyping immigrants, Jews and
Muslims in media and debate” and got a very
good response in the evaluations. The
Samordningskommittén for Europaåret mot rasism i
Sverige (Swedish Commission against Racism
and Xenophobia), established in 1996 by
Mona Sahlin, former vice-premier of
Sweden, continues to organise seminars and support
anti-racist projects.
99 Carlo Balestri, Racism,
Football and the Internet, on behalf of the EUMC by Unione Italiana Sport per
Tutti,
Vienna 2002 (see
http://www.eumc.eu.int/publications/football/index.htm).
100 See
http://www.united.non-profit.nl/pages/rep02mrt.htm.
101 See
http://www.united.non-profit.nl/pages/act02n9.htm;
http://www.united.non-profit.nl/pages/info02n9.htm.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
38
In order to do justice to the current
development of anti-Semitism within the Muslim
population in Europe, other ways of
dismantling prejudices must also be developed. One
important component is intercultural and
inter-religious exchange (see Belgium: Jewish-
Muslim meeting; Germany: inter-religious
dialogue; the Netherlands: organised meeting
between CIDI youth group and the youth
organisation of the Moroccan association Tans).
Also of importance are clear statements
from leading personalities in the Muslim community
(see country report on Denmark: “Hate of
the Jews is not Islamic”; United Kingdom:
Condemning the desecration of a synagogue;
Germany: protest by the Turkish Association
Berlin-Brandenburg against “playing with
anti-Semitism”), which are explicitly directed
against anti-Semitism and radical Islamic
forms of animosity towards Jews. The educational
information campaigns within Muslim
groups, such as on the theme “to burn a synagogue is
like burning a mosque”, have encouraged
people to talk again and have improved solidarity
between the different communities in this
field. Thus, the gesture of a local Muslim group in
Aubervilliers (a northern suburb of Paris)
is particularly symbolic: it lent its school bus to a
Jewish school of the same area after its
buses were destroyed during an attack.102
Beyond inter-religious dialogue, the
spontaneous or organised mobilisation of civil society
against the far right has reaffirmed the
Republic of France’s common values. Such reactions
have at least reminded us that the fight
against racism, xenophobia and discrimination remains
a common struggle (see country report on
France).
Further research
Many of the issues raised above have
specific implications for further research.
In particular
we recommend that research studies should
be carried out on anti-Semitic incidents in various
fields - for example, sport,
entertainment, public service provision - and placed in an overall
European context in order to establish a
comparative perspective on their occurrence.
As
stated earlier, a major difficulty with
attempting to gain an overview of anti-Semitic incidents
is the general problem of
under-reporting. To help to overcome
this problem it would be
helpful to have a programme of victim
studies across the different Member States. Another
observation has been that the way that the
European press draws on and perpetuates anti-
Semitic stereotypes has not yet been
subject to systematic research analysis. This is another
area where research studies should be
implemented in order to fill a gap.
Concluding remarks
The public expects from the police, state
security agencies and also monitoring offices rapid
results and from scientific research
bodies a short and precise assessment of the prevailing
situation. But unfortunately, there are no
patent remedies and quick solutions available. Just
as there is no simple and clear solution
for explaining anti-Semitic prejudices and stereotype
patterns, it is not possible to formulate
a once and for all strategy, which is effective
everywhere. The strategies are always
dependent upon specific situations and must react to
the specific national conditions. The
individual Member States have to create necessary
framework conditions, which has already
occurred in many cases, and coordinate these with
their European partners, not the least in
the face of increasing globalisation - and this has also
already taken place in part. At the same
time though, state sanctions, legislative regulations
and institutionalised monitoring can only
then bite when they also lead to changes and the
dismantling of prejudices within society.
This can only be successful when a re-thinking takes
102 See
http://www.fogliolapis.it/news3.htm, Aubervilliers, 15 April 2002. The bus that
takes Jewish children to
school in Aubervilliers has been
attacked three times since 2001, The Boston Globe, 28 April 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
39
place in society itself that is not
directed only by the state. Initiatives from NGOs, religious
institutions, trade unions, educational
institutions and, not the least, private initiatives
therefore assume an extremely important
role in reaching as broad a spectrum of the public as
possible through dialogue and various
actions. Besides initiating intercultural and inter-
religious dialogues, generating a greater
sensitivity for terminology and themes belongs to
their most important tasks in working
together with the media, as well as reminding
journalists of their public
responsibility. The results of the study by Hans Bernd Brosius and
Frank Esser on the connection between
media reporting and xenophobic violence against
foreigners can also be applied to anti-Semitism.103
Brosius and Esser established that a
connection between close-up reporting and
violence towards foreigners exists, following the
mechanism that the more up to date and
current the medial presence is, then the more likely it
is that reporting is structured more in a
xenophobic form, setting off a rapid spiral of violence.
But this also means that journalists must
be conscious of their influence on society and act
accordingly in a responsible way.
103 Hans Bernd Brosius and Frank
Esser (1995), Eskalation durch Berichterstattung. Massenmedien und
fremdenfeindliche Gewalt, Opladen
1995
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
40
4. Country Reports
Bringing together data on current or
recent events poses special problems, mainly because in
most cases the results of investigations
undertaken by state organs take a long time to become
available. In addition, the data
collection takes place under severe time pressure, and scientific
studies covering the monitoring period are
often yet to be presented.
Furthermore, the NFPs in the individual
Member States are faced with very different starting
conditions as to the collation of data on
anti-Semitic incidents. In Greece, Spain, Ireland,
Luxembourg, Portugal and Finland there is
neither a specific recording of anti-Semitic
incidents by the police or responsible
state security agencies, nor NGOs, which specialise in
the collection of such data. In these
countries the information comes almost exclusively from
Jewish organisations and the media. In
other countries, such as Denmark, France, Italy, the
Netherlands, Sweden and the United
Kingdom, no data from state agencies was available at
the time this report was compiled (data
collated by state agencies is mostly published
annually, in the second half of the
following year); however, at the same time there exist
networks of NGOs in these countries which
deal with racism and anti-Semitism and, besides
the aforementioned data sources, collect
and provide information. Finally, there are countries,
like Germany and Austria, in which state
agencies record and classify anti-Semitic crimes
according to specific categories; here,
too, there are also numerous NGOs and research
institutions dealing with racism and
anti-Semitism.
In addition, with the Anti-Defamation
League of B’nai B’rith and the American Jewish
Committee there are organizations, which
monitor anti-Semitic incidents worldwide,
commission polls on current public opinion
and media analyses, and immediately publish
(reports, Internet) their findings. The
Stephen Roth Institute (Tel Aviv) and the Institute of
Jewish Policy Research (London) also
compile national reports on anti-Semitism covering
almost all EU Member States, whereby these
reports are naturally first published one or two
years later.
The data was collected essentially through
the following methods:
- Inquiries at the police,
state security agencies and ministries of the interior
- Interviews with or
questions posed by telephone/in writing to Jewish organisations
- Inquiries at NGOs which
have specialised in monitoring racism and anti-Semitism
- Analysis and evaluation of
the media (newspapers, TV)
- Research on the Internet
- Evaluation of research
studies, media analyses, opinion polls.
A detailed description of sources used can
be found in the Annex “Reporting institutions and
data sources”.
For this Synthesis Report, the Center for
Research on Anti-Semitism (CRA), Berlin, unified
and supplemented the submitted NFP
reports. Furthermore, the attempt was made to balance
out the different evaluations provided by
the NFPs on anti-Israeli prejudices. Some NFPs
have not classified anti-Israeli
prejudices as anti-Semitic, whereas others have very precisely
distinguished between a criticism of
Israel that is not to be evaluated per se as anti-Semitic
and anti-Israeli stereotypes which clearly
utilise anti-Semitic prejudices. In compiling the
Synthesis Report the CRA was able to draw
on surveys, data and some media and Internet
sources published after the deadline for
submitting the NFP reports. These sources provided
additional information on the individual
countries. Furthermore, to be able to identify trends
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
41
and developments over time, the CRA
studied materials on anti-Semitic incidents prior to
2002 for the individual countries. Based
on anti-Semitism reports up to 2001 and other
sources, the aim of this presentation was
to provide a context for the evaluation of the
monitoring period.
Also the CRA had to compile reports for
two countries on its own: neither the National Focal
Points from the Netherlands nor from the
United Kingdom provided reports. The differing
length of the individual country reports
mirrors not only the degree and frequency of anti-
Semitic attacks and prejudices in the
individual countries (Belgium, Germany, France, the
Netherlands, the United Kingdom), but also
the intensity of monitoring by institutional and
state agencies and the sensitivity towards
anti-Semitic incidents.
Belgium104
Within the Belgian population (10.3
million; 55% Flemish, 33% Walloon) Jews represent a
minority of some 35,000, most of whom live
in Antwerp and Brussels.
In recent years racism has been on the
increase, both in terms of discrimination against
immigrants in general and against Arabs in
particular. The Eurobarometer 2000 compiled by
the EUMC105 came to the conclusion that
the attitudes towards ethnic and religious minorities
in Belgium show a more negative set of
views than the EU average. Although racially
motivated attacks from extreme right-wing
groups, resurgent since the 1990s, are in the first
instance directed against foreigners,
running parallel to this is a strong increase in anti-Semitic
tendencies. In particular since the
beginning of the “al-Aqsa Intifada” in the autumn of 2000,
the number of violent actions against Jews
and Jewish institutions has increased, with the
suspected perpetrators mainly from Muslim
and Arab communities, especially from those of
Maghreb origin which itself is most
vulnerable to xenophobia106. But right-wing extremist
groups also used the situation for an
“anti-Zionist” campaign.107 In addition, a certain
influence was exerted by legal proceedings
started in June 2001, based on a law passed in
Belgium in 1993 that also enables criminal
prosecution of crimes committed in foreign
countries. Survivors of the massacre in
the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982 used
this law to undertake legal proceedings
against the then Defence Minister of Israel Ariel
Sharon for crimes against humanity. An
Israeli inquiry had found that Sharon was indirectly
responsible, prompting his resignation.
The attempted prosecution itself, but also the delaying
of a decision over many months,108 caused
an international stir, not the least because Belgium
assumed the EU Presidency on 1 July 2001
and had the request seriously examined.109 On 26
June 2002 the court dismissed the
charges.110
104 This report is based on a
compilation by the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le
Racisme/Centrum voor gelijkheid
van kansen en voor racismebestijding/Centre for Equal Opportunities and
Opposition to Racism (CEOOR).
105 See
http://eumc.eu.int/publications/eurobarometer/EB2001.pdf
106 Out of the 350,000 Muslims
living in Belgium, 125,000 come from Morocco.
107Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
Belgium, online report. See http://tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html.
108 AP Television News 6 February
2002.
109 The Guardian online, 19 June
2001.
110 taz, 27 June 2002; Murray
Gordon, The New Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, AJC, online, 12 August
2002, p. 2 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/PublicationsPrint.asp.did=618 ).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
42
On 30 May, Reuters reported that a
confidential Senate Report, based on evidence from the
State Security Service, stated that
Belgium is a recruiting ground for Islamic militants.
Apparently, the Saudi-backed Salafi
Movement has created some sort of religious “state
within Belgium.”111
1. Physical acts of violence
According to the current report of the
American Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, since
11 September 2001 around 2000 anti-Semitic
incidents have taken place, whereby no
distinction has been made between violent
attacks and other forms.112 Already on 5December
2001, the Chief Rabbi of Brussels, Albert
Gigi, was physically assaulted by a group of youths
in Anderlecht (Brussels). After shouting
at him and his companion “dirty Jew” in Arab, they
followed them into the subway and one of
them kicked the Rabbi in the face, breaking his
glasses.113 After the first graffiti
appeared on Jewish shops in February 2002, demanding
“Death to the Jews”, the
synagogue in the Anderlecht district of Brussels was severely
damaged by two Molotov cocktails in the
night of 31 March / 1 April. In the following weeks
the attacks increased: on 17 April unknown
persons set fire to a Jewish bookshop in Brussels
and on the following day the front window
of a kosher restaurant were shattered by an air
rifle; during the night of 20 - 21 April
18 shots were fired at the façade of the synagogue in
Charleroi. During a pro-Palestinian
demonstration in Antwerp on 1 April, which took place
near a Jewish area and in which ca. 2000
persons took part, front windows were shattered and
an Israeli flag burnt.
Between 15 May and 15 June 2002 the
following attacks or violent acts against Jews have
been recorded. Compared with the attacks
the month before, the number of incidents was
relatively low.
19 May: a group of Jewish youngsters aged
13 were threatened by a group of Arab youths at
the City Park. One of them menaced the
Jewish youngsters with a mock rifle. The police
intervened and arrested the youth.114
25 May: a group of adolescent immigrants
(around the age of 13) vandalized the restaurant of
the Maccabi Soccer Club belonging to the
Jewish community of Antwerp. They spread anti-
Jewish slogans across the club walls,
destroyed doors, windows and furniture. The youngsters
were caught by the police. After
interrogation and an interview with their parents, they were
released.
28 May: a shop on the Frankrijklei, a
major avenue in Antwerp, was smeared with the
following slogans: “Kill the juif. Laat ze
lijden (let them suffer), fuck Belgium”.115
The Antwerp police have also gathered
evidence of damage to bus stops, shops or public
buildings. In most cases these were
graffiti of the SS insignia, the swastika and the Star of
David.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Newspapers reported the following
incidents:
111 The European Terrorism
Review, July 2002; see also Likud of Holland, Brussels, Telegraph Group online,
4
June 2002.
112 Lawyers Committee for Humans
Rights, Fire and Broken Glass. The Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe,
Strasbourg, May 2002, p. 6 (see
http://www.lchr.org/iJP/antisemitism_report.pdf), citing Ambrose Evans-
Pritchard, Jews Suffer Surge of
Hate on Streets of Belgium, Daily Telegraph, 30 May 2002.
113 Anti-Semitic Assault on Rabbi
in Belgium, in: Stephen Roth Institute, Anti-Semitism and Racism, update 6
December 2001.
114 Source: Forum of Jewish
Organisations of Antwerp.
115 Same source.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
43
· On 19 April unknown
persons smeared a Jewish shop in Brussels with slogans such as
“Dirty Jew” and “We will
burn you”.
· In the second half of May
an anonymous letter of anti-Semitic and revisionist character
was sent to a survivor of the
concentration camps after this person had published an article
in a widely circulated public newsletter.
· In the second half of May
2002 an article of highly anti-Semitic nature was published in a
free journal published in the Charleroi
region.
· On 3 June an anti-Semitic
letter, originating in France, was sent to an individual in
Belgium.
· Racist and anti-Semitic
slogans continue to belong to the repertoire of many football fans.
Internet
Websites of Belgian origin with racist and
anti-Semitic texts have increasingly gone online in
recent times. The Centre for Equal
Opportunity and Combating Racism was able to identify
82 Belgian sites, which spread such
material. On 6 June a complaint about racism was
introduced at the CEOOR against Dyab Abou
Jahjah, President of the Arabian European
League (AEL). His Internet site encourages
hatred, discrimination and violence towards the
Jewish community. The complaint concerns a
press statement in which the AEL urged people
to join a demonstration in Antwerp to be
held on 8 June 2002. According to the League, this
demonstration has to take place in Antwerp
since “the power (there) is in the hands of a
Zionist lobby and extreme right racists”
and, furthermore, because “Antwerp represents the
bastion of Zionism in Europe” and is a
city “where pro-Sharon gangs of Zionists are dictating
the rules”. Instead, Antwerp needs to
become the “Mecca of pro-Palestinian action”.116
On 17 January the far left anti-globalisation
website Indymedia Belgium relayed photographs
of three corpses of children who should
have fallen victim of the supposed Israeli practice to
use bodies of Palestinians for organ
theft.117
MediaJoel Kotek, professor at the Free
University of Brussels refers to the one sided reports
on Israel in the Belgium media: ”Israel is
portrayed by the Belgian media, notably “Le Soir”,
the most widely circulated French-language
newspaper in Belgium, as well as by “Vif
l’Express”, its weekly supplement, as
solely responsible for the violence which has shaken the
Middle East for almost two years.
Frequently, in their forum pages and in letters to the editor,
Israelis are equated with Nazis and in
more extreme publications anti-Semitic motifs appear
in anti-Israel propaganda.”118
3. Research studies
The survey commissioned by the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in ten119 European
countries has collected information on
“European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israel Conflict” between 16
May and 4 June respectively between 9 and 29
September.120
116 These are a few of the
statements of the press release on 6 June 2002, which can be found on the site
of the
AEL League.
117 Joel Kotek, Antisemitic
Motifs in Belgian anti-Israel Propaganda, in: Antisemitism Worldwide 2001/2
(see:
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/kotek.htm).
This accusation seems to vary the age-old prejudice
of Jewish ritual murder in which
the Jews were accused to slaughter Christian children in order to get their
blood
for religious purposes.
118 Ibid.
119 In addition to the cited
countries the survey include also Switzerland.
120 See http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4118_13.asp
and full text version at http://www.adl.org/
Anti_semitism/European_Attitudes.pdf;
http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/EuropeanAttitudesPoll-10-02.pdf
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
44
European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel
and the Palestinian-Israel Conflict
StatementBelgiumDenmarkFranceGermanyUnited
Kingdom
SpainItalyAustriaThe
Netherlands
Jews don´t care what
happens to anyone but
their own kind
25%16%20%24%10%34%30%29%15%
Jews are more willing
to use shady practices
to get what they want
18%13%16%21%11%33%27%28%9%
Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this
country
50%45%42%55%34%72%58%54%48%
Jews have too much
power in the business
world
44%13%42%32%21%63%42%40%20%
Percent responding “probably
true” to each statement / 500 respondents in each country
Taylor Nelson Sofres, margin of
error +/-4.4% at 95% level of confidence
For Belgium a clear agreement emerged with
anti-Semitic stereotypes. From the four
stereotypical statements presented, 39% of
respondents agreed to at least two, 21% with at
least three and 6% with all four. Fifty per cent of respondents agreed with the
statement that
“Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this country”, a rate somewhat below the EU-average of
51%, and 38% agreed with the statement
“Jews still talk too much about the Holocaust” (EU-
average: 42%).
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
Following the multi-religious meetings
organised since 11 September 2001, the CEOOR
proposed an action plan, the
implementation of which is still in the preparatory phase.
However, it has already been decided to
create a website containing a list of associations
which subscribe to diversity and mutual
respect and a set of pedagogical tools to improve and
foster interculturalism. There will also
be a section on how to make a complaint about racism
to the CEOOR. Finally, there will be an
index of key words and concepts, which will be
elaborated and explained in a language
understandable by the general public.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion makers
Within the Belgian legal framework there
are two laws dealing with the fight against anti-
Semitism, notably the general anti-racism
law of 1981 and the law of the denial of the
Holocaust of March 1995.
· Immediately after the
assault on the Brussels Chief Rabbi was made public in January
2002 and the debate in the Parliament,
moderate forces within the Jewish community in
Brussels organised a meeting with Muslim
leaders.121
· On 5 April 2002 a Round
Table Conference was held on the initiative of the Belgian
Government with representatives from the
social partners, the Jewish and the Muslim
communities, the Ligue des droits de
l'Homme (League of Human Rights) and the Centre
for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to
Racism. After the attacks on a few synagogues
in Antwerp and Brussels different
communities requested the Round Table Conference. A
common declaration was signed and
commitments were made by the different actors to
undertake concrete measures in the near
future.
· On 19 April 2002 the
Belgian Interior Minister, Antoine Duquesne, made a joint
declaration with his colleagues from France,
Spain, Germany and Great Britain on
121 Haaretz online, 1 February
2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
45
“Racism, Xenophobia and
Anti-Semitism”. Given the background of international tension,
in particular in the Middle East, they
characterised the racist and xenophobic violence as
an offence against freedom, democracy and
human rights and pronounced European-wide
preventive measures and a coordination of
the responsible agencies and offices.122 At the
Interministerial Conference for the Equal
Opportunities Policy, which took place on 17
May 2002, a concrete action plan was
introduced and approved by the Government.
Denmark123
The Jewish population (ca. 7000) in
Denmark (total population: 5.3 million) is well integrated
socially and anti-Semitism is hardly
visible, though the activities of right-wing extremist
groups and the election campaign, which
focused on immigration policy in 2001, have
reinforced xenophobic attitudes.124 With
the al-Aqsa Intifada violent anti-Israeli
demonstrations and heated debates broke
out from October 2000, “which included anti-
Semitic manifestations”.125 These
initiatives come from extreme leftist groups and militant
Islamist activists. As in most of the
other EU Member States, the climax of the public debate
lay prior to the monitored period in
March-April 2002, while the monitored period itself was
calmer for the Jewish community in
Denmark. It appears that there have been very few (if
any) physical attacks and few reported
incidents of direct verbal abuse.
1. Physical acts of violence
PET has no reports of anti-Semitic attacks
in the monitoring period, neither of a physical or
verbal nature, nor of incidents of
graffiti, vandalism, etc. in the monitoring period. However
in August the Copenhagen synagogue was
vandalized and anti-Semitic graffiti sprayed on its
walls.126The Jewish Community in Denmark,
which systematically registers all anti-Semitic
incidents in Denmark, reported the
following incidents: two Arabs harassed the President of
the Jewish Community. During the period in
question the Jewish Community received at least
8 reports from members who had been spat
upon or otherwise harassed on the street by
Moslems. A mother, who wished to remain
anonymous, reported that Palestinians who knew
her son from school had beaten him on the
street. The boy required medical attention at the
local hospital. On 21 April 2002, a Danish
Jewish shop owner in the “Nørrebro” district of
Copenhagen was attacked by a gang of
Palestinian youths near his shop. The gang beat him
122 For the declaration see the
press release presented by the German Federal Interior Ministry,
Pressemitteilung
des Bundesministeriums des
Inneren (Germany), 19 April 2002.
123 This report is based on the
compilation by Naevet for Etnisk Ligenstilling/The Danish Board for Ethnic
Equality.
124 That anti-Semitism is not a
central issue in Denmark is shown that besides the Danish Civil Security
Service
(PET) - as they collect data on
“racially motivated” crime in Denmark - information only otherwise comes from
Jewish organisations. The
following institutions and organisations have been consulted: the Jewish
Community
(Det Mosaiske Trossamfund)
(http://www.mosaiske.dk), which is the official representative of the Jewish
community in Denmark;
“Maichsike-hadas” (www.machsike-hadas.subnet.dk ) - an Orthodox Jewish
Community in Copenhagen; Chabad
(http://hjem.get2net.dk/chabad/) - a broad organization promoting Jewish
awareness; JIF Hakaoh
(http://www.hakoah.dk ) - a Jewish sports club (via Carolineskolen); Carolineskolen
(www.carolineskolen.dk) - the
main Jewish school located in Copenhagen; Progressive Jewish Forum
(http://pjf.5u.com/); the Danish
Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies; the Israeli Embassy.
Other sources: daily newspapers
and the Internet were used to identify homepages with anti-Semitic content.
125 Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/1, online, Denmark. (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html).
126 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish Committee, online,
publications, p.12 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/ Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
46
and stabbed him with a knife.127 On 13
June 2002, a member of the Jewish Community’s
Board reported the eighth incident of
malicious damage to his automobile.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats/abuse
Rabbi Yitzchok Lowenthal, director of
Chabad Denmark, reports that between 15 May and 15
June 2002 he was shouted at 5-6 times by
young men with Arab background. Similarly, a few
friends of the Rabbi were verbally
assaulted on the street. A student at the Jewish school
(Carolineskolen) was afraid to go home
after being repeatedly threatened by young men of
Arab background at the bus stop. A Jewish
man on a bus reported that a gang of young people
of presumable Arab descent yelled at him
and told him what they would do to “the Jews”.
On 21 May 2002, the mother of a student at
Byens Skole in the Valby district of Copenhagen
went to the police because Muslim students
from the neighbouring Vigerslev Allé Skole had
threatened her son. A teacher at the boy’s
school had to smuggle him out the back door on 17
May when a gang of Arabs showed up to beat
him.128
Indirect threats
In April the Islamic political
organisation, Hizb-ut-tahrir, distributed flyers on the street
containing material from their homepage,
“And kill them, wherever you find them, and expel
them from where they expel you”.129 The
incident has been continuously debated in public
(see section 5).130
On 21 May 2002, graffiti was seen and
photographed on traffic signs around Fælledparken:
“No Juden”.
On 11 June 2002, graffiti was seen and
photographed at Blågårdsplads: “No Jews”.131 A
Lutheran bishop delivered a sermon in
Copenhagen Cathedral comparing Sharon’s policies
toward the Palestinians to those of the
biblical King Herod, who ordered the slaughter of all
male children in Bethlehem under the age
of two - prior to the incident at the Church of
Nativity (2 April) - in the same Bethlehem
under siege by the Israelis today.132
Insults
A person with connections to the
Progressive Jewish Forum describes how various
insinuating comments have been passed at
work. For example, when entering her office, a
colleague said, “you’ve occupied there
(her chair) very well, haven’t you - ha, ha”, and “you
have nothing against there being pig’s
blood in the wine, have you.” When she enquired
whether the wine was Italian, the
colleague answered: “It is in any case not from Israel. If it
was I would definitely not drink it!”
127 See http://www.hasbara.us,
Report on anti-Jewish incidents.
128 Information by the Jewish
Community.
129 On 30 October 2002 after a
weeklong trial the spokesman of the Danish branch of Hizb-ut-tahrir Fadi Abd
al-
Latif was sentenced to 60 days
probation. He has been brought to trial because of racism having distributed
all
over Copenhagen in April 2002
pamphlets calling for the murder of Jews wherever they are convicted. Fadi Abd
al-Latif accused the Jews being
responsible for anti-Muslim feelings in Denmark. The Coordination Forum for
Combating Antisemitism (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/issue.asp.t=The+current&m=12&y=2002&d=3).
130 In September the Danish Prime
Minister wrote in a letter to the Simon Wiesenthal Center “a sufficient basis
can be established to bring
before the courts of justice the question of disbanding the organization
[Hizb-ut-
tahrir] in accordance with the
Danish Constitution”, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Press Information, 25 September
2002 (see
Http://wiesenthal.com/social/press/pr_item.cfm.ItemID=6474).
131 Information by the Jewish
Community.
132 The Guardian, 26 April 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
47
Media
No examples of anti-Semitic newspaper
articles in the daily press are known. However in
August the widely circulated newspaper
Jytland Posten carried a radical Islamist’s offer of a
reward of $35,000 for the murder of
prominent Jews.133 The head of the Danish Jewish
community subsequently reported receiving
threatening telephone calls. There has also been a
debate about the situation in Israel in
the daily press, where some critics of Israel’s policies
feel as if they are being accused of being
anti-Semitic, whereas certain members of the Jewish
community feel that the newspaper reports
are one-sided.
Internet
Hizb-ut-tahrir’s homepage contains
anti-Semitic material, such as “Jews are a slanderous
people” and openly calls on Muslims “kill
all Jews (. . .) wherever you find them."134
3. Research studies
Between 16 May and 4 June and between 9
and 29 September, the Anti-Defamation League
(ADL) based in New York commissioned two
surveys “European Attitudes towards Jews,
Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli
Conflict” that were conducted in ten European countries,
including Denmark.135 Compared with most
of the other EU member states, the agreement
expressed in Denmark to four anti-Semitic
stereotypes was clearly below the EU-average (see
Table: Report on Belgium). Also with the
statement “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this
country” the Danes (45%) remained below
the European average (51%)
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
See below.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
On the same day as Hizb-ut-tahrir began
distributing its flyers the Prime Minister, Anders
Fogh Rasmussen, invited several leading
figures from the Jewish Community in Denmark to
discuss the incident. Immediately
afterwards the Prime Minister publicly condemned the
flyers and everything they stood for. The
author of the flyer has been reported to the police in
connection with §266 b, the so-called
racism paragraph, and the Public Prosecutor is presently
investigating whether Hizb-ut-tahrir
should be prohibited in accordance with §78 of the
Danish constitution, an act which
prohibits violent organisations or organisations which incite
violence. A majority in the Danish
Parliament supports both of these actions.
Several commentators have, however, stated
that the quote has been taken out of context and
is in fact not an actual call for Muslims
to kill Jews in Denmark. Several leading figures with
Muslim background have publicly condemned
Hizb-ut-tahrir, their methods and their
viewpoints. The Member of Parliament,
Naser Khader, together with the Chairman of the
Integration Council in Copenhagen, Hanna
Ziadeh and historian Mahmoud Issa, who are all
Danish-Palestinians, wrote a long open
letter in the daily broadsheet newspaper Politiken
(24.5.02) appealing to all
Danish-Palestinians living in Denmark not to let their “justified
criticism of the Israeli government turn
into hatred for all Jews”. They emphasized, “our
133 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish Committee, online,
publications, p.12 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/ Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412); New York
Post,
27 August 2002 (see
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/55747.htm; see
http://www.onwar.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/001029.html).
134 New York Post, 27 August 2002
(see http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/55747.htm).
135 Anti-Defamation League,
European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict,
27
June 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
48
battle is political and not about religion
and ethnicity”. The article was printed in both Danish
and Arab.
The daily newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad
published (10 May 2002) an interview with Tariq
Ramadan, whom the paper describes as
Europe’s best-known Islamic thinker, in which he
explains that “hate for the Jews is not
Islamic”. In the article he says, “nothing in Islam
legitimizes the anti-Semitism that certain
Muslim organisations are expounding”.
Germany136
Since 1989 the Jewish community has more
than doubled and now numbers about 100,000 in
a total population of 82 million. Since
the early 1990s waves of racist violence were
frequently directed against migrant
minorities among which the Turks form the majority
group (2 million; total Muslim population:
3,2 million). The number of anti-Semitic incidents
since the early 1990s also clearly exceeds
those of earlier decades. This is mainly due to an
active far-right scene. After a fall in
the number of incidents between 1996 and 1999, there
has been an increase since 2000, when it
tripled in the last three months of the year. This
dramatic increase is “due in large part to
the al-Aqsa Intifada which inspired radical Islamists
to anti-Jewish acts and served as a
catalyst for extreme right-wing anti-Semites”.137 In 2001
anti-Semitic incidents, numbering 1,629
cases, reached an historical high, although the great
majority were propaganda offences.
Like other EU countries, Germany suffered
anti-Semitic incidents in early 2002. During the
first three months 127 cases were
registered: 77 of which were incitement of hatred; 26 were
propaganda and five were violent offences;
in addition, there were four cases of damage to
property, three cases of desecration of
graves, and twelve other offences.138 But the main
problem in Germany is not an increase in
physical attacks on Jews or their organisations, but
a more subtle form of anti-Semitism, which
is mainly expressed in anti-Jewish attitudes and
statements. From the beginning, the debate
about anti-Semitism was closely linked to the
question of how far criticism of Israeli
policy in the Middle East conflict can go. Leading
representatives of the Jewish community
continuously expressed their view that criticising
Israel has never been a taboo subject, but
allusions to or comparisons with the behaviour of
the Nazi regime would be unacceptable and unjustified.
Nevertheless, the basic question,
regarding what kind of criticism is
justifiable without running the risk of being called anti-
Semitic, remains unanswered.
Since the escalation of the Middle East
conflict and the increase of anti-Israeli and pro-
Palestinian demonstrations in Germany, the
Jewish communities have been expressing
growing concern. Anti-Semitism became one
of the main topics in the German media from
mid May till the end of June - mainly
because of two interconnected incidents: the Karsli and
the Möllemann cases (see below)
136 This report is based on the
compilation by Europäisches Forum für Migrationsstudien (efms)/European
Forum for Migration Studies.
137 Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/1, online, Germany (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html).
138 German Bundestag, Drucksache
14/8722; Berliner Zeitung, 10 May 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
49
1.Physical acts of violence
No incident of physical violence was
reported between 15 May and 15June in Germany. In
the previous month (April) four cases were
registered:
14 April: in Berlin two Jewish women
wearing a Star of David necklace were attacked. 15
April: graffiti was found on the synagogue
in Herford reading: “Six million is not enough.”
20 April: in Dachau the monument near the
site of the concentration camp was desecrated and
gravestones in the nearby Jewish cemetery
were damaged.139
28 April: in Berlin a bottle with
flammable liquids was thrown at the synagogue on the
Kreuzberger Fraenkelufer without causing
any damage.
Physical threat
There was one case of a bomb scare that
was possibly committed for anti-Semitic reasons. On
28 May, an unidentified man called the
Hessischen Rundfunk (Hessian Broadcasting
Corporation) in Frankfurt and asked
whether the live programme “Achtung Friedman!”
(showmaster Michel Friedman, vice-chairman
of the Central Council of the Jews in Germany,
was currently in the news because of a
heated argument with Jürgen Möllemann, see below)
was to be broadcast that evening. After a
corporation employee confirmed this, the man said
that a bomb would blow up the main tower,
the building where the talk show takes place.
Police evacuated the building, the search
was called off without any results, and the talk show
took place with a 45-minute delay.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Indirect threats
Since early April the Jewish communities
and the Central Council of the Jews in Germany
have received a huge amount of
anti-Semitic letters, e-mails and phone calls with an
increasingly aggressive tone.
Representatives of the organisations, e.g. the chairman of the
Jewish Community in Berlin, Alexander
Brenner, noted that the writers of these agitation
letters no longer even shy away from
signing the letters with their complete name and
address. In Brenner’s opinion many writers
disguise their anti-Jewish aggression as criticism
of Israel.140 The weekly Jewish newspaper
Allgemeine Jüdische Wochenzeitung released a
sample of these letters.141 On 3 June
2002, the offices of the Munich Jewish Community
received, for the third time, a letter
with threats of murder involving the heads of the umbrella
organisation of the Jewish communities in
Germany and against the President of the Jewish
Community in Munich. The letter contained
a specific threat to plant an explosive charge near
a kosher butcher shop in Munich.142
On 21 May the German branch of the
anti-globalisation organisation “attac” invited to an
anti-Bush demonstration in Berlin. The
leaflet for the demonstration used the well-known
picture of “Uncle Sam” but with a
Stürmer-style portrait with a “typical Jewish nose”. This
implied the supposed Jewish world
conspiracy because on the forefinger of “Uncle Sam”
hangs the world on a thread. Portraying
“Uncle Sam” as Jewish refers to the supposed Jewish
influence on the United States policy and
connects anti-Jewish and anti-American feelings.143
139 ADL online, Global
Anti-Semitism: Selected incidents around the World.
140 Spiegel online, 16 May 2002.
141 Allgemeine Jüdische
Wochenzeitung, 24 April 2002.
142 The Coordination Forum for
Countering Antisemitism, 3 June 2002 (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp.ID=1952).
143 Leaflet for the demonstration
(see: http://attac-netzwerk-bush.de). The criticism of this leaflet and of
other
occasions where Neonazis
participated in demonstrations of attac with anti-Semitic slogans (Munich, 20
November 2002) led the network to
a public statement (see www.attac.de/ archiv/antisemit.php; discussion paper
of the attac coordination
committee on anti-Semitism, racism and nationalism)
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
50
Politics
The former member of the Green Party
(Bündnis90/Die Grünen) Jamal Karsli, a German with
an immigrant background (Syria) who
applied for admission in the liberal-democratic party
FDP on 30 April, launched a public debate
about criticizing Israel’s policy and anti-Semitism
with an interview given to the weekly
right-wing newspaper Junge Freiheit on 3 May. Karsli
said that the “very big Zionistic lobby”
was controlling the major part of worldwide media
and, therefore, would be capable of
“getting down on every person no matter how important”.
Michel Friedman, vice-chairman of the
Central Council of the Jews in Germany, indirectly
accused Karsli of being an
“anti-Semite,144 and Paul Spiegel, chairman of the Central Council,
demanded that the FDP should refuse
Karsli’s admission to the party. The deputy-chairman of
the FDP and party leader in North
Rhine-Westphalia, Jürgen Möllemann, rejected this
demand, although other leading FDP
politicians, including chairman Westerwelle, supported
it.145 Nearly all public opinion leaders
distanced themselves from Karsli’s statements, except
Möllemann.146 On 22 May, Karsli withdrew
his application for admission to the FDP due to
“public hounding”. Möllemann
launched another debate closely linked to the “Karsli case” in
early April, when he commented on the
Palestinian suicidal attacks on Israelis with the words:
“I would also defend myself,
(...) and I would also do it in the land of the aggressor”.
Expressing understanding or even sympathy
with the Palestinian people was interpreted by
German media and politicians as
legitimising suicidal attacks147 and brought him the reproach
of anti-Semitism from, amongst others,
Michel Friedman. In the course of the debate about
Karsli’s statements, Möllemann accused
Friedman of himself being partly responsible for
anti-Semitism in Germany. He said that he
feared that hardly anyone else would make anti-
Semitism more popular than Prime Minister
Sharon in Israel and Michel Friedman “with his
intolerant and spiteful way” in
Germany.148 A few days later Möllemann called Friedman
“obviously megalomaniac”149
and renewed his accusation that Friedman would provoke “anti-
Israeli and anti-Semitic resentments” with
his “unbearable, aggressive, arrogant way of
treating” people who criticise Sharon.150
Möllemann said that he had received more than
11,000 approving letters.151
The discussion about Möllemann’s
statements in particular and the attitude of the FDP in
general dominated the media for weeks.
Politicians of all democratic parties in Germany
blamed Möllemann for using this debate to
get more votes for the Liberal Party in the federal
election in September,152 and Westerwelle,
leader of the FDP, even admitted that he is
seeking to win votes from people who had
voted for right-wing parties in the previous federal
election.153 After Karsli had left the
parliamentary group of the FDP in North Rhine-
Westfalia,154 Möllemann declared publicly:
“If I have hurt the feelings of Jewish people, I
144 Spiegel online, 16 May 2002.
145 Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung, 21 May 2002; Spiegel online, 17 May 2002.
146 www.stern.de, 19 May 2002;
Spiegel online, 17 May 2002, 20 May 2002 and 21 May 2002; faz.net, 25 May
2002.
147 Spiegel online, 4 April 2002.
148 Der Spiegel, 27 May 2002.
149
http://www.juden.de/newsarchiv/mai_2002/21_05_02_01.shtml.
150 taz, 23 May 2002.
151 Die Tageszeitung (taz), 23
May 2002; see also www.n-tv.de, 22 May 2002.
152 www.sueddeutsche.de, 25 May
2002; BZ, 24 May 2002; Reuters, 23 May 2002.
153 Financial Times Deutschland,
26 May 2002; ZDF heute-journal, online, 25 May 2002
154 At the end of September 2002
Karsli took legal proceedings against Paul Spiegel and Michel Friedman
because to his opinion they had
impute to him “Anti-Semitism of the worst type”, Handelsblatt.com, 27
September 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
51
want to apologise to them”. However, he
renewed his attacks on Friedman and excluded him
deliberately from his apology.155 A few
days before the Federal election (22 September)
Möllemann spread a flyer repeating the
accusation against Sharon and Friedman. The
chairman of the FDP forced him to resign
as a vice chairman a few days later, arguing that his
playing with anti-Semitism has caused a
considerable loss of votes for the FDP. Finally on 20
October Möllemann resigned also as party
leader in North Rhine-Westfalia.156
Reaction and public debate about Möllemann
and Karsli
The “Karsli case” and the argument between
Möllemann and Friedman have evoked anti-
Semitic and hate reactions in Germany. On
the Internet website of the FDP parliamentary
group (http://www.fdp-fraktion.de) the
discussion forum “Speaker’s corner” has been used to
for all kinds of anti-Semitic statements,
such as: Germany has to free itself from “the chains
of bondage of Israel”;157 “The Jews
themselves propagate the so-called ‘anti-Semitism’ in
order to punish everyone who contradicts
them”.158 Statements which praised Möllemann for
his comments about Israel and Friedman can
be found on several discussion for a of the
Liberal Party.159 Countless racial and
anti-Semitic statements were also sent to Möllemann’s
own website before it had to be shut down
because of a hacker attack.160 The online
discussion forum of the weekly magazine
Der Spiegel (www.forum.spiegel.de) was also used
for anti-Semitic hate speech.161
Public discourse
The broad discussion about a novel by
Martin Walser, which had not yet been published, led
to a further escalation in the
anti-Semitism debate. The author Walser, who was accused of
serving anti-Semitic tendencies by the
former chairman of the Central Council of the Jews,
Ignatz Bubis, four years ago, because he
described Auschwitz as a “moral cudgel” in
Germany, was attacked by parts of the
media. The editor of the FAZ (Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung), Frank Schirrmacher, said that
his latest novel Tod eines Kritikers (“Death of a
Critic”) would serve anti-Semitic
resentments. He thus refused the planned pre-release serial
publication in his newspaper. Walser
himself rejected any accusations of being anti-Semitic.
He claimed that the novel is about “power
in the world of culture”, not about Jewry. This
statement was doubted in parts of the
media, but even assuming that Walser had not intended
to play with anti-Semitic resentments, he
should have been able to anticipate how his novel
might be (mis)read and interpreted by
others.162 The argument between Walser and
Schirrmacher was linked to the heated
debate about anti-Semitism in Möllemann’s statements
and was dealt with in numerous articles in
German newspapers.
Internet
On 31 March the radical Muslim
organisation “Hizb-ut-tahrir” (Liberation Party) published a
leaflet on its German homepage containing
the following statements: “The Jews are a people
of slander. They are a treacherous people
who violate oaths and covenants (…). Allah has
forbidden us from allying ourselves with
them. (…) Indeed, that you should destroy the
155 Frankfurter Rundschau, 6 July
2002.
156 Süddeutsche Zeitung, 21
October 2002.
157 Frankfurter Rundschau, 24 May
2002; quoted from the FDP discussion forum.
158 www.fdp-fraktion.de; 23 May
2002.
159 Frankfurter Rundschau, 24 May
2002.
160 Die Welt, 24 May 2002.
161 Der Spiegel 31 May 2002.
162 Frankfurter Rundschau 31 May
2002; Die Welt 30 May 2002; AP 9 May 2002; Allgemeine Jüdische
Wochenzeitung 7 June 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
52
monstrous Jewish entity. (…) Kill all Jews
(…) wherever you find them.”163 The organisation
has been observed for a longer time by the
German Office for the Protection of the
Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) but did
not receive public attention before they organised a
public lecture on “The Iraq - e new war
and its consequences” at the Berlin Technical
University in October 2002 where also
representatives of the German extreme right-wing
party NPD (National Democratic Party)
participated.164
3. Research studies
On 31 May, the American Jewish Committee
(AJC) released a study in Berlin about how the
German print media reported four major
incidents in the Middle East during the second
Intifada between September 2000 and August
2001.165 The study, conducted by the Linguistic
and Social Research Institute in Duisburg
(Institut für Sprach- und Sozialforschung), came to
the conclusion that the reporting of the
Middle East conflict in the newspapers and magazines
examined was biased and showed
anti-Semitic elements which would often be liable to
(re)produce existing anti-Semitic and
racial prejudice. The reporting also used terms to
describe the behaviour of the Israeli
troops, which make the reader associate their actions with
genocide and suggest similarities to
fascism (e.g. “massacre”).166 Generally speaking, the
media was criticised for its anti-Semitic
allusions and stereotypes. According to the study,
there are deeply latent anti-Semitic and
anti-Zionist prejudices in the German public, usually
hidden behind “concealed” and “vague
allusions”.167 The study was criticised by the weekly
newspaper Die Zeit because it refused to
provide proof as to whether and how the way of
reporting affects reception in Germany.168
Another study on reporting of the Middle East
conflict showed that, in comparison to
some other countries (USA, South Africa, the UK), TV
reporting in Germany encompassed a broader
spectrum of neutral presentations of events.169
In the monitoring period three surveys
were conducted which posed questions concerning
anti-Semitism. According to the study
“Political Attitudes in Germany”, conducted by the
Sigmund-Freud-Institut in Frankfurt in
April 2002, anti-Semitic tendencies have increased
since 1999. The statement “I can
understand well that some people feel unpleasant about
163 Homepage Hisb-ut-tahrir, 31
March 2002. The Minister of Interior Otto Schily has forbidden the organisation
on 15 January 2003 because of its
“anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli inflammatory propaganda:” Der Tagesspiegel
online, 15 January 2003
(http://www.tagesspiegel.de), Süddeutsche Zeitung online, 16 January
2003(http://www.sueddeutsche.de/dpa/AP).
The German webside “Muslim-Markt” (muslim market) just openly
kept distance to Hizb-ut-Tahrir
on 17 November 2002 (see http://www.muslim-markt.de/neues/neues.htm;
http://f25.parsimony-net/forum63498/messages/10858.htm)
; see also Germany Bans Islamic Group,
Washington Post online, 16
January 2003 (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63793-
2003Jan16.html).
164 Anti-Semitic hate in plain
public. Besides Hiz-but-Tahrir many other Islamists agitate against Jews
(Antisemitische Hetze in aller
Öffentlichkeit. Neben Hiz-but-Tahrir agitieren viele andere Islamisten gegen
Juden), Der Tagesspiegel, 31
October 2002, see also ibid., 29 October 2002 (see: http://www.tagesspiegel.de).
165 Duisburger Institut für
Sprach- und Sozialforschung (DISS), (on behalf of the American Jewish
Committee),
Der Nahost-Konflikt in deutschen
Printmedien. Analyse diskursiver Ereignisse seit dem Beginn der Intifada im
September 2000, Duisburg May
2002.
166 Die Zeit, 29 May 2002.
167 Spiegel online, 30 May 2002;
see also Frankfurter Rundschau 1 June 2002.
168 Die Zeit, 29 May 2002; also:
Spiegel online, 30 May 2002.
169 Medien Tenor, Terror und
sonst fast nichts. Die Berichterstattung über Israel in internationalen
TV-Medien
(9/2000-8/2001),
Forschungsbericht Nr. 115, 15 December 2001. A recent report on news in German
television
(between 1999 and March 2002)
comes to the conclusion that one can find only very few cases of openly biassed
reporting (Institut für
empirische Medienforschung, Nahostberichterstattung in den Hauptnachrichten des
deutschen Fernsehens, Köln,
November 2002, p.15)
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on Racism
and Xenophobia
53
Jews” was confirmed by 36% (1999: 20%).170
The second statement offered by the study, that
the Jews are responsible for the problems
in the world, showed in contrast a reduction in anti-
Semitic attitudes. A further study from
April 2002, “Extreme Right Attitudes in Germany”,
included three statements on
anti-Semitism: “Even today Jews have too much influence”;
“The Jews simply have
something particular and peculiar about them and are not so suited to
us”; “More than others, the Jews use dirty
tricks to achieve what they want”. The study
showed that in comparison to 1994 and 2000
there was a strong increase in the number of
negative answers; surprisingly, however,
these came from those questioned from West
Germany.171 This indicates an effect
determined by current events: many West Germans
reacted to Israeli policy and the heated
debate about the bounds of legitimate criticism of this
policy, whereas these issues found
obviously less resonance amongst East Germans. A poll
conducted by NfO Infratest in June had
different results: generally speaking, the given
answers lead to the conclusion that
anti-Semitic resentments have been slightly decreasing in
Germany over the past 11 years. In June
2002, 68% of those polled rejected the statement
“The Jews are partly
responsible for being hated and persecuted”, while 29% confirmed the
statement (in 1991 confirmation was 32%).
The question “How many Germans have an anti-
Jewish attitude.” was answered as follows:
2% believed “most of the Germans”, 13% “a high
number of Germans”, 57% “a small number of
Germans”, and 26% said “hardly anyone”.
Nevertheless, 29% confirmed the statement
that “Jews have too much influence on the
world”. This number is lower than in the
1991 poll, when it was agreed by 36%.172 Between
16 May and 4 June respectively between 9
and 29 September surveys commissioned by the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in New York,
“European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and
the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict”, were
conducted in ten European countries, including
Germany173 (see Table: Report on Belgium)
Here the agreement with anti-Semitic stereotypes
was on similar levels as in France and
Belgium%). From the four stereotypical statements
presented, 19% of respondents agreed to at
least three. With 55% the Germans agreed on an
average with the statement “Jews are more
loyal to Israel than to this country” (average 51%).
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice, violence,
and aggression
In the period from 15 May to 15 June, 2002
there were many appeals for solidarity with the
Jewish communities and calls for promoting
an inter-religious dialogue. Appeals were made
by the chairman of the Central Council of
the Jews, Paul Spiegel, but also from
representatives of the Christian churches,
for example by the chairman of the German
Conference of Bishops (Deutsche
Bischofskonferenz), Karl Lehmann, the Bavarian bishop
Dr. Johannes Friedrich or the chairman of
the Council of the Protestant Church, Manfred
Kock. Beside calls for solidarity with the
Jews, there have also been efforts to improve the
inter-religious dialogue. The German
Coordinating Council of Societies for Christian-Jewish
Cooperation (Deutscher Koordinierungsrat
der Gesellschaften für Christlich-Jüdische
Zusammenarbeit; member of the
International Council of Christians and Jews) organised a
meeting in June in which the importance of
an inter-religious dialogue was discussed.174
170 It must be noted however that
this is a “projective” question in which the opinions of others is asked about,
so
that this cannot be evaluated as
the attitude of the respondent.
171 Elmär Brähler/Oskar
Niedermayer, Rechtsextreme Einstellungen in Deutschland, Arbeitshefte aus dem
Otto-
Stammer-Zentrum Nr. 6, Berlin
Leipzig 2002.
172 Der Spiegel, 11 June 2002.
173 Anti-Defamation League,
European Attitudes Towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict,
27
June 2002.
174
www.deutscher-koordinierungsrat.de, 12 April 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
54
An inter-religious discussion group was
recently also established in the city of Bremen. A few
weeks prior, the Muslims had invited the
Jewish community in order to foster a dialogue and
to promote a peaceful way of living
together. This started a process of setting up a discussion
group which is presently not only made up
of Muslims and Jews, but also of non-Muslim
Palestinians, Protestants, Catholics,
peace campaigners, politicians and trade unionists. They
are attempting to maintain positive
inter-cultural relations in Bremen as an example for other
towns.175 In Germany there are some
non-governmental programmes and initiatives, which
aim to combat anti-Semitism, although no
further initiatives were started in the relevant
period. The Turkish Association
Berlin-Brandenburg, the Turkish Community Association of
Germany as well as the Central Council of
Muslims all sharply criticised the FDP’s vice-
chairman Möllemann at the beginning of
June. “To employ an anti-Semitic climate for
political purposes must be taboo”,
declared the chairmen.176 The Turkish Association Berlin-
Brandenburg called upon its members to
protest together with the Jewish community in front
of the FDP headquarters in Berlin against
“playing with anti-Semitism”.177
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
Almost all public leaders distanced
themselves from Jürgen Möllemann’s statements in
relation to the current debate about
anti-Semitism and pronounced (Chancellor Gerhard
Schröder) their fear of negative
consequences for Germany’s reputation abroad which might
arise from the ongoing debate. Möllemann’s
statements received positive reactions from some
right-wing parties such as “Die
Republikaner”, the NPD (National Democratic Party
Germany) and the DVU.178 But the
vice-chairman also had to face criticism from within his
own party as well.179 With regard to the
parties, the Liberal Democrats as well as the Social
Democrats/the Greens have submitted
separate but identical applications to the German
Bundestag (lower house of the German
parliament) demanding that anti-Semitic tendencies
be eradicated and that anti-Semitism may
not be exploited for election campaigns.180 The
Bundespräsident (Head of State of the
Federal Republic of Germany), Johannes Rau, had
already entered into the discussion in May
by meeting representatives of the Central Council
of Jews in order to express his solidarity
with the Jewish communities. In an interview with
the Jewish newspaper Allgemeine Jüdische
Wochenzeitung he remarked on his fear of a
decreasing level of inhibition for making anti-Semitic
statements, although he pointed out that
criticism of Israel is not tantamount to
anti-Semitism.181 Even a trade union reacted directly in
relation to the anti-Semitism debate. The
“IG Bauern-Agrar-Umwelt” split from their member
Jürgen Möllemann by “mutual agreement” as
a result of the politician’s statements.182
On 19 April the German Interior Minister
Otto Schily, together with his colleagues from
France, Belgium, Spain and Great Britain,
presented a joint declaration on “Racism,
Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism” which
appealed for preventive measures and a European-
wide coordination of all responsible
agencies and offices.183
175 Frankfurter Rundschau, 14 May
2002.
176 Die Tageszeitung, 5 June 2002.
177 Schlag ins Wasser. Deutsche
Muslime distanzieren sich von Jürgen Möllemann, Der Spiegel, 10 June 2002.
178 Süddeutsche Zeitung, 10 June
2002; the Austrian far-right politician Jörg Haider also praised Möllemann’s
call for an “emancipation of
democrats” in an interview with Berlin Tagesspiegel. But Möllemann rejected his
support, see
http://germanalert.com, 27 May 2002.
179 Spiegel online, 6 June 2002.
180 Pressedienst des Deutschen
Bundestages, 6 June 2002.
181 Allgemeine Jüdische
Wochenzeitung, 22 May 02; AP, 16 May 2002.
182 Bild, 13 June 2002; Reuters,
13 June 2002.
183 For the declaration see press
release issued by the Bundesministerium des Inneren (Deutschland), 19 April
2002. The Council of Europe
adopted these conclusions on his meeting 25/26 April. Meeting of the Council of
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
55
From 29 September 2002 the Jewish Museum
in Berlin opened a short three-week exhibition
that showed letters written during the
Möllemann campaign to the Jewish journalist Henryk
M. Broder and to the “Allgemeine Jüdische
Wochenzeitung” under the title “Ich bin kein
Antisemit” (I am not an anti-Semite).
In early July a panel Forum on
Anti-Semitism as concerted action to stem escalating violence
in conjunction with the 11th annual
Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was held
in Berlin.184 This session was followed up on
the initiative of German Bundestag Member
Gert Weisskirchen and United States Helsinki
Commission Co-Chairman Christopher H.
Smith by a meeting of members of the
Commission and a German Bundestag
delegation in Washington DC in December. The
Forum heard experts on Anti-Semitism in
Europe and the United States and a “letter of
intent” was signed by Gert Weisskirchen
and Christopher H. Smith.185
Ireland186
The Jewish community in the Republic of
Ireland (total population: 3.8 million mostly Roman
Catholics - 91.6 per cent and Protestants,
the only significant religious minority - 3 per cent)
is a small, but long established
community, which comprises approximately 1000-1600
people who mostly live in Dublin (0.04%).
There has been no reporting of anti-Semitic
incidents in recent years.187 The Garda
reported the existence of several far-right individuals
or small groups, none of whom however have
come to the fore publicly. Most of the incidents
referred to in this report come from
information supplied by Jewish organisations in Ireland.
Many incidents reported are considered to
be one-off and unusual occurrences, with no
evidence of a systematic targeting of the
Jewish community in Ireland. The police provide
discreet presence at the synagogue in
Dublin on certain occasions. According to the
Intercultural Office, there appear to be
good relations between the local police and
representatives of the Jewish community
and meetings have been held between Garda Racial
& Intercultural Office and Jewish
communal leaders in the period in question. However, one
representative of the Jewish
Representative Council of Ireland contends that there is increased
apprehension in the Irish Jewish
community. This anxiety relates primarily to recent events in
Europe, such as the increased electoral
support of the far right, as opposed to any marked
change in attitudes amongst the Irish
population.
1.Physical acts of violence
There have been no reports of physical
violence against Jews or their properties during the
period of 15 May-15 June.188
Europe - Justice, Home Affairs
and Civil Protection, Luxembourg, 25 /26 April 2002, “Combating Racism,
Antisemitism and Xenophobia” -
Council conclusions, 7991/02 (presse 104) (http://ue.eu.int/newsroom).
184 CSCE Digest, vol. 35, No.15
(see http://www.csce.gov/digest_text.cfm.digest_id=37)
185 Homepage CSCE, 4 December
2002 (see http://csce.gov/press_csce.cfm.press_id=277). From Germany the
invited experts were Dr. Hanno
Loewy from the Fritz-Bauer-Institute, Frankfurt and Dr. Juliane Wetzel, Center
for Research on Anti-Semitism,
Berlin.
186 This report is based on the
compilation by Equality Authority (EA) /National Consultative Committee on
Racism and Interculturalism
(NCCRI).
187 Jewish Policy Research, Anti-Semitism
World Report, Ireland, 2001.
188 Organisations contacted in
this regard: the Jewish Representative Council of Ireland, the Chief Rabbi’s
Office, the Israeli Embassy, the
Ireland-Israel Friendship League, the Garda (Irish police) Racial &
Intercultural
Office.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
56
2.Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats
The Israeli embassy has received a number
of hate telephone calls in the last month but has
not logged the exact number. The embassy
received a piece of hate mail on 10 June, written
on a brown paper bag. The Garda Racial and
Intercultural Office reports that there have been
a few threatening and abusive phone calls
to Jewish residents in the Terenure district of
Dublin, where the synagogue is located.
These were dealt with by local Garda.
Graffiti
On 19 April 2002, Dublin graffiti equating
Jews with Nazis and the Star of David with a
swastika was found near the main synagogue
in Dublin.189
Leaflets
Amnesty International ran an advertising
campaign on Israel and the Occupied Territories. A
copy of the advertisement was returned to
the office with the words “Hitler Was Right”
written over it.
Media and public discourse
A survey of national newspapers for the
month 15 May - 15 June shows no verbal attacks on
Jews in public discourse or by Irish
politicians. A representative of the Jewish Representative
Council maintained that there had been
some concern about the tone of some correspondence
in the Irish Times and in debate on
Israel’s policies on the Joe Duffy programme of RTE
radio, but that ultimately it was not
deemed to be anti-Semitic but essentially hostile to Israeli
policy.
Internet
The website National Socialist Are Us
contains a section called “The New Folk” where White
supremacist and “Aryan” ideology is
expressed. The website also contains links to other white
supremacist sites including Stormfront. In
its report on racial incidents May-October 2001,
the NCCRI referred to this website and
concerns about it and two others run by the Irish
Fascist Party and Irish National Front.
3. Research studies
There were no reports or studies focusing
solely on anti-Semitism in the period monitored.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
There are no examples of good practices to
report.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
Nothing to report
189 Anti-Defamation League,
Global Anti-Semitism: Selected Incidents around the World in 2002,
www.adl.org/Anti_semitism.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
57
Greece190
In Greece, population 10 million, the 5000
Jews represent a small minority (3000, mainly in
Athens, and 1000 in Thessaloniki). Despite
denials on the part of most Greek opinion leaders
and leaders of the Greek Jewish community,
anti-Semitism does seem to exist in Greece,
perhaps not so much in social behaviour,
but rather as a latent structure. The Orthodox
Church continues to include in the liturgy
ritual of Good Friday anti-Jewish references and
also the religious prejudices against “the
Christ killers” remain virulent. Anti-Semitic rhetoric
in Greece usually takes the form of
opposition to a conspiratorial conception of “Zionism”,
interpreted as a “Jewish plot for world
domination”. Latent prejudices and bigotry became
evident during the last two years over the
issue of having religion included on Greek identity
cards. When the Greek government according
to EU standards removed this reference it was
vilified for “bowing to Jewish pressure”.
Although all mainstream political parties denounce
anti-Semitism, they sometimes also exhibit
a curiously strong anti-Semitism seemingly
confused with an anti-Israeli and
anti-American stance.191 This form of anti-Semitism was
reinforced by Israel’s alliance with
Turkey, an alliance that led Greece to reinforce its links
with the Arab world. Despite their close
affiliation to the United States, successive post-war
governments and even the Junta followed a
foreign policy unfavourable to Israel, which as an
ally of Turkey was seen as a potential
enemy. The state of Israel was only recognised de-jure
by the conservative New Democracy
government of Prime Minister K. Mitsotakis in 1990,
partly as a result of the Greek
involvement in the Gulf War and partly as a result of the
ongoing peace process in the Middle East.
Populist elements within all political parties still
continue to engage in the anti-Semitic
rhetoric that stresses the conspiratorial element. Nearly
all these prejudices and popular
demonising fortified the barriers in the social relationships
between Jewish and non-Jewish Greeks.
1. Physical acts of violence
Several Jewish sites were vandalised and
defaced with Nazi slogans and graffiti in the last
few years, for example the Jewish cemetery
in Athens (on 25-26 May 2000) and the
190 This report is based on the
compilation by ANTIGONE, the Information Centre for Racism, Ecology, Peace
and Non-Violence. Data collection
was done via
1. Regional Boards and Central
Board of Jewish Communities in Greece. A written request was sent by fax and
e-mail to the organisations
following the format of the Rapid Response request; however, we received only
one
written answer from the Central
Board representing the regional bodies. Our director also held a personal
interview with Mr. Kostandinis,
the Chairman of the Central Board, and members of our staff had interviews
with members of the Board of the
other main Jewish Communities in Corfu (Mr. Sousis), Larissa (Mr.
Almelamsi) and Thessaloniki (Mr.
Sefiha).
2. Media. The media were both
monitored and studied. The monitoring of the media, which is a routine activity
of the INFOCENTER, provides us
with information to be further investigated. At the same time the content of
the media reports is also studied
since it constitutes an important attitude-forming instrument.
3. Internet. The Internet was
used basically as a source of data - mostly reports from national and
international
organisations - and also as a
source of material pertinent to our inquiry, i.e. anti-Semitic web pages,
discussion
groups, etc.
The report on Greece by the Greek
Helsinki Monitor (GHM) Minority Rights Group on “Antisemitism in
Greece. A Current Picture:
2001-2002”, published in November 2002 (see
http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/bhr/english/organizations/ghm_mrgg_antisemitism_2002.rtf)
gives a detailed
overview on the situation of
anti-Semitism in Greece today, documenting the period from January 2001 through
June 2002 and emphasising that
its existence is systematically denied or ignored.
191 See Prof. Hagen Fleischer,
University of Athens, paper to the Round Table Meeting “Manifestations of Anti-
Semitism in Europe” Brussels 5
December 2002; see detailed in Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM) Minority
Rights Group on “Antisemitism in
Greece. A Current Picture: 2001-2002”, published in November 2002, p.5-9
(see
http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/bhr/english/organizations/ghm_mrgg_antisemitism_2002.rtf)
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
58
Holocaust Memorial and the synagogue in
Thessaloniki.192 In part the only active neo-Nazi
group Chrissi Agvi is responsible for
these attacks. The al-Aqsa Intifada set off a series of
small pro-Palestinian demonstrations,
which, however, all went ahead without any outbreaks
of violence. During the period covered by
the report no physical attacks on Jews or Jewish
organisations or incidents concerning them
have been reported.
However, we would like to note that only a
month before the following incidents were
recorded by ANTIGONE, the Central Board of
Jewish Communities in Greece and by other
NGOs. On 15 and 16 April 2002 the
Holocaust Memorial in Thessaloniki was vandalised by
person(s) unknown who sprayed red paint on
the wreaths, which had been laid two days
previously in memory of the victims of the
Holocaust, and on the surrounding area. The word
“Palestinians” was written
in paint nearby. The incident occurred a day after a large pro-
Palestinian demonstration had been held in
Thessaloniki. The Central Jewish Board of Greece
wrote to the Minister of Public Order
asking for measures to be taken to guard these sites
more effectively in the future and to
publicly condemn the incidents. The Government (on 17
April), political parties and the Orthodox
Church strongly condemned the incident. On 15
April 2002, the Jewish cemetery of
Ioannina in Northern Greece was vandalised by person(s)
unknown with Nazi and anti-Semitic
graffiti slogans.193 The cemetery had already been
desecrated on 16 January 2002. The Greek
Government, political parties and the Orthodox
Church condemned the incident in strong
terms. On 18 April the Holocaust Memorial of
Drama in northern Greece and the Jewish
cemetery of Zavlani in Patras (southern Greece)
were vandalised with Nazi and anti-Semitic
graffiti slogans. The Greek Government, political
parties and the Orthodox Church condemned
the incident.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Politics
The rumour, first published by some
newspapers of the Arab press, that 4000 Jews had been
warned by the Israeli Secret Service
Mossad and did not go to their offices on 11 September,
the day of the terrorist attack in New
York, was tabled as a question in Parliament by MP and
leader of the ultra nationalist party
“LAOS” G. Karatzaferis194 soon after the attack. Print and
broadcast media195 - even the Bulletin of
the Technical Chamber of Greece (8 October, 2001)
- reported this rumour as
well. According to a poll conducted five weeks after the event, 42%
of Greeks subscribed to this rumour, as
opposed to 30% who rejected it.196 The Central
Jewish Board and the Israeli Embassy
protested to politicians and the press. In a statement the
Union of Athens Press Journalists
mentioned the small television station “Tele Asty” (which
is owned by Karatzaferis and spread the
anti-Semitic rumours)197 as a special case of racist
behaviour towards the Jews. It should also
be noted that most newspapers reported this
rumour ironically and not in an
anti-Semitic way.
Insults
192Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, Greece (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
193
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/balkanhr/message/3900 (Ioannina).
194
http://www.iospress.gr/mikro2001/mikro20010929.htm (monstrous lie)
195 National daily newspaper
“Eleftherotypia” on 29 September 2001 and 14 October 2001 (www.iospress.gr and
www.enet.gr).
196 Television poll conducted
17-18 October 2001 by KAPA Research among 622 households in the Greater
Athens Area for the TV programme
“Protagonistes,” aired on 18 October 2001 on NET (2nd channel of State
Television).
197 Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM)
Minority Rights Group on “Antisemitism in Greece. A Current Picture:
2001-2002”, published in November
2002, p. 3, 9-14 (see http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/bhr/english
/organizations/ghm_mrgg_antisemitism_2002.rtf)
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
59
The Chairman of the Central Board of
Jewish Communities in his written reply to the
National Focal Point’s request for
information has included a number of cartoons published in
national dailies that may be considered as
insulting to Jews.
Graffiti
This has been reported in the previous
section under “Vandalism and Disparagement”. There
have been no other reported graffiti or
other anti-Semitic inscriptions by human rights NGOs.
Media
On 2 April the two largest dailies Ta Nea
and Elefterotypia (center-left) as well as the right-
wing daily Apogevmatini printed as
unquestionable reality a heinous libel that Israelis were
trafficking the organs of dead Palestinian
fighters and performing medical experiments on
Arab prisoners.198
The Chairman of the Central Board of
Jewish Communities in his written reply to the
National Focal Point’s request for
information has stressed that “there is a conscious attempt
to create an anti-Semitic climate by
various articles that are critical of the policies pursued by
Israel and personally its Prime Minister”;
he specifically pointed out two articles that put
forward the view that Jews have
excessively used the pain resulting from the cruelty of the
Holocaust published during the period in
question:
- “Auschwitz and Palestine”, published in
the daily national newspaper Kathimerini on 2 June
2002.
- “The excessive use of the Holocaust”,
published in the daily national newspaper Kathimerini
on 4 June 2002. He also pointed out that
cartoons with anti-Semitic content have appeared in
newspapers during the period in question
and in previous months.199
A small number of commentators, who
frequently appear on small TV stations like the ultra
right wing Tele-Asty and Extra Channel
expressing anti-Semitic views, are not considered
“opinion leaders” and their
influence is very small. The popular composer Mikis Theodorakis
wrote an editorial for the Greek daily TO
VIMA in which he claimed that the Jews are
“imitating the Nazi
savagery” and that they are “enchanted by the Nazi methods”.200
Internet
1997 the Hellenic Nationalist Page
published an anti-Semitic diatribe on its Internet site,
entitled “New Zionist Attack against
Hellenism” which is still on their homepage. Taking
issue with phrases in the ad referring to
the Maccabean victory over the Greeks, the article
accused the Jews of racism and claimed,
falsely, that Rupert Murdoch, owner of the New York
Post, was a Jew. The article also
reiterated other charges the group had made in the past, such
as Jewish collaboration with “the Ottomans
in the subjugation of Byzantium,” and the Jews’
promotion of the notion that “they are the
only (or at least the most victimised) victim in
history.” Further, it questioned the
“imaginary 6 million figure” of people who perished in the
Holocaust, in contrast to the documented
figure of 800,000 Greeks lost in World War II.201
Similar articles have appeared on this
website in recent years. The latest addition (news 2001)
presents an article on “The exclusive
victims of genocide” which contains similar anti-Semitic
198 Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM)
Minority Rights Group on “Antisemitism in Greece. A Current Picture:
2001-2002”, published in November
2002, p. 3 (see http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/bhr/english/organizations
/ghm_mrgg_antisemitism_2002.rtf)
199 Examples of this: ADL Calls
on Greek Government to Condemn Anti-Semitism in the Press (see
http://www.adl.org).
200 Takis Michas, Many Greeks
React Irrationally to the Middle East Tragedy, National Herald, 20 -21 April
2002.
201 See Anti-Semitism Worldwide
1999/2000 (http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw99-2000/greece.htm.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
60
stereotypes and refers to another article
from 1996 (with a link to be opened) on “Zionists and
Mongols - Butchers of Hellenism.”202
3. Research Studies
Opinion polls carried out after 11
September terrorist attacks showed that a significant
proportion of the Greek public readily
accepted conspiratorial rumours implicating the Israeli
secret services in the attack.203 There is
no reliable scientific data available, but it may be that
media reports may have in their critical
approach towards Israel’s military operations
inadvertently led to a rise in
anti-Semitic sentiments among the Greek population.204
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
Only small examples had been visible: On 6
June the topic in Modern Greek presented in the
formal examinations for entry into Greek
Universities (Panhellenic Examinations)205 was an
excerpt from the “Diary of Anne Frank”.
Students were asked to comment and compare
WWII and modern incidents of racism and
anti-Semitism. On 28 January 2002 the President
of the Republic was visited by the
teachers and pupils of the primary school of the Jewish
Community of Athens. On 29 January Leon
Benmayor, honorary Chairman of the Jewish
Community of Thessaloniki and Holocaust
survivor, was honoured with the Golden Cross of
the Greek Legion of Honour by the
President of the Republic for his contribution to
science.206 There was also an excellent
treatment of Zionism as the quest for national identity
and a state by the IosPress group of
journalists who write for the national daily Eleftherotypia
(published on 28 April 2002).207
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
The Government, political parties and the
Orthodox Church have always condemned any anti-
Semitic incidents through their official
spokespersons and the Government has taken special
security measures for safeguarding Jewish
establishments. The government on 17 April
condemned acts of vandalism at the
Holocaust memorial in Thessaloniki and the Jewish
cemetery of Ioannina.208
There have been no particular reactions by
politicians or other opinion leaders during the
period in question. This brought the Greek
Helsinki Monitor/Minority Rights Group to the
conviction “that the government has yet to
take a strong and consistent stand against anti-
Semitism. Even extreme anti-Semitic views
openly expressed by Orthodox clergy members,
politicians, factions, cultural icons, and
journalists pass without comment. Attacks on Jewish
monuments and property receive little if
any attention in the media and faint condemnation by
the political and spiritual
leadership.”209 The large majority of politicians and opinion leaders
from both the right and the left have been
strongly critical of the military offensive against the
202 See the corresponding
homepage.
203 A lie transforms into
anti-Semitic hysteria and reaches Greek Parliament, Eleftherotypia, 29 October
2001
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/balkanhr/message/2978).
204 See Many Greeks React
Irrationally to the Middle East Tragedy (T. Mihas), The National Herald, 20/21
April
2002 (http://www.
groups.yahoo.com/group/balkanhr/message/3881).
205 Panhellenic Examinations.
206 Macedonian Press Agency, 30
January 2002 (see http://www.hri.org/news/greek/mpa/2002/02-01-
31.mpa.html).
207 Zionism 1 - Zionism 2
(http://www.iospress.gr/ios2002/ios20020428a.htm).
208 Government condemns vandalism
at Holocaust memorial, Jewish cemetery, AP news 17 April 2002
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/balkanhr/message/3869):
209 Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM)
Minority Rights Group on “Antisemitism in Greece. A Current Picture:
2001-2002”, published in November
2002, p. 2 (see
http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/bhr/english/organizations/ghm_mrgg_antisemitism_2002.rtf)
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
61
Palestinian Authority and the following
events, but have equally condemned terrorist acts
stressing the need for a peaceful
settlement and the futility of military solutions. On 31 March
the speaker of the Greek Parliament and
leading PASOK member Apostolos Kaklamanis
condemned Israel for committing genocide
against the Palestinian people.210 The Central
Jewish Council expressed its deep regrets
“for the unacceptable and unfair comparison” of the
Holocaust with Israeli action in the West
Bank.211 During an OSCE parliamentary discussion
on current European anti-Semitism on 8
July 2002, the Simon Wiesenthal Center urged the
Greek Prime Minister and other Greek
leaders to publicly condemn the use of anti-Semitic
stereotypes and Nazi imagery that has
characterised much of the public and media criticism of
Israel.212
Spain213
In Spain (total population 40 million)
Jews were recognised as full citizens in 1978. Today the
Jewish population numbers about 40,000,
20,000 of whom are registered in the Jewish
communities. The majority live in the
larger cities of Spain on the Iberian Peninsula, North
Africa or the islands. Many of the
prejudices cultivated during the Franco years persist;
during that time Israel was never
recognised. Israel and Spain did not establish diplomatic ties
until 1986, when Spain recognised the
State of Israel. Many young Spaniards consider
support of the PLO a crucial qualification
for being identified as “progressive” or leftist.
Since the beginning of the second Intifada
more and more anti-Semitic attacks are taking
place, mainly after pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
In October 2000 the Holocaust Memorial
in Barcelona was desecrated and the glass
door of Spanish-Moroccan synagogue in the North
African enclave of Ceuta destroyed and
anti-Semitic pamphlets distributed across the market
place. On 8 October, the most important
Jewish holiday Yom Kippur, graffiti was smeared
across a house belonging to the local
Jewish association in Oviedo that read “Jew murderers”.
An incident had taken place the day before
during the football match between Spain and Israel
outside the stadium in Madrid. Neo-Nazis
shouted anti-Semitic slogans and distributed anti-
Semitic literature.214 Also, windows of
the main synagogue in Madrid were shattered on 13
October. The Imam of Valencia asserted on
21 September 2001 in a mosque filled with
worshipers: “All the evidence shows that
the Jews are guilty”, referring to the claim by radical
Islamists, right-wing extremists and
Holocaust deniers that Jews were behind the attacks in
New York and Washington on 11
September.215 In September 2001 the synagogue of Melilla
210 Greek Helsinki Monitor, Greek
parliament speaker accuses Israel of `genocide`, 31 March 2002.
211 Michas, ibid.
212 Panayote Dimitras, 11 July
2002: Wiesenthal Center: Unanswered anti-Semitism in Greece’s mainstream
could open the door to violence
and poison the environment leading up to Olympic Games.
213 This report is based on the
compilation of the Movimiento por la paz, el desarme y la libertad
(MPDL)/Movement for Peace,
Disarmament and Liberty. The following information sources were used for this
report: mass media; Internet
(search oriented on neo-Nazi and racist groups); violence reports; personal
interviews; and consultation with
several organizations. The compilation of the anti-Semitic attacks of the years
2000/1 is based on the report by
Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/01 online, Spain and the Simon Wiesenthal
Center, Snider Social Action
Institute, Worldwide Anti-Semitic Hate Crimes & Major Hate Incidents, from
Jewish New Year 5761 (29
September 2000) - Present (3 November 2000), An Interim Report.
214Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, Spain (see http://tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
215 Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/01 online, General Analysis Overview, p.7 (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/annual-report.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
62
was attacked and a Jewish cemetery
desecrated; in Ceuta several Jewish buildings were
daubed with paint.216
1.Physical acts of violence
On 5 January 2002, anti-Semitic graffiti
was found on the door of a synagogue in Madrid;
around midnight of 8 March 2002, the door
of the Ceuta synagogue was set on fire.217 The
synagogue of Madrid is now under permanent
police surveillance and Jewish schools are also
provided with police surveillance at the
beginning and end of activities.
2.Verbal Aggression/hate speech
Direct Threats
In July outside the synagogue in Madrid, a
group of twenty skinheads demonstrated, shouting
anti-Israel and anti-Semitic slogans.218
Public Discourse
The Movimiento Social Republicano (MSR),
which on other occasions joins xenophobic
protests against Muslims (for example
against the opening of a Moroccan consulate in
Almeria), participated in pro-Palestinian
demonstrations organised by radical Islamists and
NGOs, where the participants also
displayed anti-American attitudes. The mass media often
confuses Israel and the Jewish community.
On 7 April 2002, a pro-Palestinian
demonstration attracted official representatives from all
Catalan political parties, except the
conservative PP, and a total of 7000 people in Barcelona.
One demonstrator, who appeared clearly in
a photograph taken, was carrying a caricature of
Ariel Sharon’s head on a pig’s body
(traditional anti-Semitic stereotype), which is surrounded
by swastikas.219
Internet
A series of international right-wing
extremist and revisionist/denial homepages offer links in
Spanish. Particular attention is to be
given to the website of the “Nuevo Order” group that is
networked per links with the entire
far-right scene and whose label shows a similarity with the
American militant far-right group
“Stormfront”. “Nuevo Order” combines anti-Semitism with
anti-Americanism and mixes old with modern
anti-Semitic stereotypes. The “Protocols of the
Elders of Zion” can be downloaded here as
well as at the linked site belonging to the “Fuerza
Aria”. The “Fuerza Aria”, a group that
spreads extreme rightist and National Socialist
thought, conducts campaigns via the
Internet “Against the Jewish Power” and propagates a
pro-Palestinian and pro-Iraqi stance.220
3. Research Studies
The survey commissioned by the ADL
conducted between 9 and 29 September 2002
concerning “European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict” (see
Table: Report on Belgium) established that
Spanish respondents harbour the most anti-
Semitic view. 72% agreed to the statement
“Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this country”
216 EUMC Anti-Islamic reactions
in the EU after the terrorist acts against the USA, Spain (see
http://www.eumc.at/publications/terror-report/collection/Spain.pdf).
217 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish Committee, online,
publications, p.12 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/ Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
218 Ibid.
219 Inside Europe: Iberian Notes
online, 8 April 2002.
220 See the corresponding
websites.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
63
(EU average: 51%) and 63 % to the
statement “Jews have too much power in the business
world”.221
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
On 9 June 2002 the Evangelical Church and
the Institute for Judeo-Christian Studies in
Madrid together with the Jewish
communities of Madrid and Barcelona organised a
demonstration of support for Israel also
as a sign against anti-Semitic attitudes.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders222
Newspapers have become more deliberate in
their use of graphics, avoiding any assimilation
between Nazi and Jew symbols. The Spanish
Interior Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey, together
with his colleagues from Germany, France,
Belgium and the United Kingdom, presented a
joint declaration against “Racism,
Xenophobia and anti-Semitism” in April 2002.223
France224
Jews in France (total population: 60
million) - the biggest such community in Western
Europe (600,000-700,000, half of them
living in the Paris area) - are generally well respected,
socially assimilated and well represented
in politics.225
Anti-Semitic prejudices in France were
already virulent during the Six Day War and the anti-
Zionist campaign of the 1970s and 1980s.
With the successes achieved by the extreme right-
wing Front National and an increasing
denial of the Holocaust in the 1990s such stereotypes
once again received strong acceptance. At
the same time, in the mid-1990s began the critical
engagement with National Socialism,
collaboration and the responsibility of the Vichy
Regime.
As the second Intifada began, the number
of anti-Semitic criminal offences rose drastically;
out of 216 racist acts recorded in 2000
146 were motivated by anti-Semitism.226 The peak was
reached during the Jewish High Holidays in
October 2000; one third of the anti-Semitic
attacks committed worldwide took place in
France (between 1 September 2000 and 31
221 ADL Survey “European
Attitudes Toward Jews, October 2002,
http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/EuropeanAttitudesPoll-10-02.pdf
222 The MPDL declares that this
point is not clear at all: there were no speeches by politicians and other
opinion
leaders on this subject. From the
interviews performed we have extracted: the mass media gives partial
information about the
Israel-Palestinian conflict; this partial information is riddled with error in
its use of
concepts like Jew and Israel; and
there is a problem with the concept foreigner and Jew, both are treated as if
they mean the same meaning.
223 See the report on Belgium,
point 5.
224 This report is based on the
compilation of L’Agence pour le Développement des relations interculturelles
(Adri). The sources used to count
the acts are the following: all daily print press as well as press agencies;
Jewish
Communities’ media (Actualité
juive, antisémitisme.info, etc.); Jewish groups (CRIF, UEJF), in particular the
new structures or initiatives
recently set up to counter anti-Semitic acts or for the purpose of victim
support
(Observatoire du monde juif, help
lines such as SOS Vérité - Sécurité or SOS antisémitisme); anti-racist non-
profit organisations (LICRA, SOS
Racisme, MRAP, FASTI)
225 World Jewish Congress online,
Policy Dispatches, No. 83 (see
http://www.wjc.org.il/publication/policy_dispatches/pub_dis83.html).
226 Annual Report of the
Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme (CNCDH) for 2000,
released March 2001 (cited
Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1, online, France, (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-
Semitism/annual-report.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
64
January 2002 405 anti-Semitic incidents
were documented).227 The perpetrators were only
seldom from the extreme right milieu,
coming instead mainly from non-organised
Maghrebian and North African youths.228
After interrogating 42 suspects, the police
concluded that these are “predominantly
delinquents without ideology, motivated by a diffuse
hostility to Israel, exacerbated by the
media representation of the Middle East conflict (…) a
conflict which, they see, reproduces the
picture of exclusion and failure of which they feel
victims in France”.229 Beginning in
January 2002, but mainly from the end of March till the
middle of April 2002230, there was a wave
of anti-Semitic attacks. In the first half of April
attacks against Jews and Jewish
institutions in Paris and surrounding areas were daily
occurrences. This was a repeat of the
situation of October 2000.231 In reaction to the anti-
Semitic mood the number of the French Jews
who immigrated to Israel in 2002 doubled to
2,566, the highest number since 1972.232
In addition, there was an almost polemical
debate on the nature as well as the denunciation of
anti-Semitism linked to the situation in
the Middle East and to Islam, a debate, which led to
divisions between prominent participants
and anti-racist groups. Anti-Semitism and security
questions specific to the Jewish community
were almost absent from public debate during this
period. In fact, the main ideological
themes in the public debate at a time of both Presidential
(12 April and 5 May 2002) and national (9
and 16 June 2002) elections were law and order
and the unexpectedly strong support for
the Front National and its leader Jean-Marie Le Pen,
who played on anti-Semitic resentments.233
Viewed from a later perspective, there is an
obvious connection with anti-Semitism.
During that same period there was a renewed
outbreak of anti-Muslim acts and speech
attributed to the far right.
227 A 242-page report by « Les
Antifeujs » which was published in March 2002 documents these incidents, JTA
News
(http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp.intarticleid=011090&intacSee also
Les Antifeujs, Actes Hostiles
Commis a Paris et Region
Parisienne, Septembre 2000-Juin 2002, online
(http://www.consistoire.org/incidentsfr.html),
“Antifeujs” means “Antijuifs” (Anti-Jews) and refers to the slang
used by the youth in
underprivileged suburbs which are characterised by strong North African
immigration; see
also Ligne verte SOS
antisémitisme, Antisem.com (http://www.antisem.com), Actes hostiles commis a
paris et
region parisienne, Septembre
2000-Janvier 2002; see also Centre Simon Wiesenthal -Europe, Principal anti-
Semitic attacks in France, 1
January-12 May 2002 by Dr. Shimon Samuels, Director for International Liaison;
see also Centre Simon Wiesenthal
- Europe, Antisemitism 2002 in France. “Intifada” Import or Domestic
Malaise., by Dr. Shimon
Samuels/Mark Knobel, Paris 2002.
228Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, France (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
229 Cited by Centre Simon Wiesenthal,
Antisemitism 2002 in France. “Intifada” Import or Domestic Malaise., by
Shimon Samuels/Mark Knobel, Paris
2002, p.3.
230 In April 2002 French police
services registered 119 physical acts and 448 threats with an anti-Semitic
character, from then on the
incidents diminished stately. Veronique Chemla (for Guysen Israel News), Baisse
importante du nombre d’actes
antijuifs en France selon le ministère de l’Intérieur, 22 August 2002 (see
http://www.
antisem.com/chemla_v020820.html.
231 Lawyers Committee for Humans
Rights, Fire and Broken Glass. The Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe,
Strasbourg, May 2002 (see
http://www.lchr.org/iJP/antisemitism_report.pdf); see the list of attacks from
January
to April 2002 in: ADLonline,
Global Anti-Semitism: selected Incidents Around the World; detailed list of the
incidents from Sept. 2000 to May
2002 in: Antisem.com online “Actes hostiles commis a Paris et Region
parisienne”.
232 Jewish News Worldwide online,
list-server: “Anti-Jewish Incidents in France Resumed”, 10 January 2003.
233 A pamphlet under the title
“Le Pen was, is, and will be right” warned about the influence of the Jewish
“lobby” in France and Le Pen
claimed “We would be wrong to forget the role of the Jewish Masonic
International of B’nai B’rith
(...) This powerful and hidden minority has chosen to erect invisible barriers
inside
the French people.” JTA News
online, 22 April 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
65
1. Physical acts of violence 234
Indications are that there was a
significant decrease in May and June 2002 in observed acts in
relation to the period from 29 March to 17
April 2002, a period in which police sources
recorded 395 events, ranging from graffiti
to assaults. Sixty-three percent of these events
involved anti-Semitic graffiti, while 16
cases of assault and 14 of arson or attempted arson
against synagogues were reported to the
police. These acts principally took place in large
urban areas (Ile-de-France,
Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur and Alsace). Many of the violent
incidents occurred around the
pro-Palestinian demonstrations at the end of March in Lyon,
Strasbourg, Marseille and Toulouse. While
the hypothesis of a détente needs to be confirmed
by time, it is true that hostility
displayed towards Jews was still observed, in particular by new
Jewish victim support groups. The people
in charge of the help lines « SOS Vérité et
Sécurité » or « SOS antisémitisme »
estimated an average of 8 to 12 reports of this kind every
day.
On 10 May eight Arabs who studied with him
in the same school attacked a 16-year-old
Jewish youth in Bordeaux. The attack was
accompanied by curses and threats.235
On 12 May 2002 in Saint-Maur des Fossés (a
Paris suburb), three young Jews who were
playing football stated that they were
insulted and attacked by about fifteen young people “of
North African origin”. They lodged a
complaint against them for assault and racist remarks.236
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Indirect threats
On 18 May 2002 at a demonstration
organised in the XIXth district of Paris by the Parti des
Musulmans de France against the
“Naqba”,237 hostile slogans towards Jews were shouted
without any attempt from the organisers to
intervene.
On 26 May 2002 during a demonstration
organised in Paris against George W. Bush’s trip to
France by groups such as the French
Communist Party, the Green party “Les Verts”, the
Revolutionary Communist League (“Ligue
Communiste Révolutionnaire”, LCR) and others
such as the MRAP (“Mouvement contre le
racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peuples” -
Movement against racism and for friendship
between peoples) and the Human Rights League,
about thirty teenagers chanted anti-Jewish
and pro-Bin Laden slogans. The organisers
expelled them. Ethnic minority activists
were then forced to intervene to prevent some youths
from attacking a young couple on a scooter
in the belief that they were Jewish.238
The anti-Semitic atmosphere also found
expression in verbal attacks at schools and
universities.239
Graffiti
On 21 May 2002 the police questioned an
18-year-old female student who was suspected of
drawing anti-Semitic slogans and symbols
on a kosher butcher’s shop front in Pré Saint-
Gervais (Seine-Saint-Denis, Paris suburb).
In June 2002 advertising posters in
various metro stations as well as election posters were
defaced by graffiti showing the Star of
David and the swastika connected by an “=” sign. It
234 The reports were compiled
using two sources: the media and anti-racist and community groups. It is
important to note that there is
no official source for this very recent period.
235 Report on Anti-Jewish
Incidents and the Struggle Against them,
http://www.hasbara.us/country/Anti_Jewish_Incidents.html.
236 Le Figaro, 15 May 2002.
237 "Naqba" is the word
used by Palestinians to refer to the forced emigration of 1948.
238 AFP Source.
239 See Gordon Murray, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, French Anti-Semitism (see
https://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1413)
and the list of anti-Semitic attacks listed
by http://www.antisem.com and
http://www.antsemitisme.info.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
66
should be noted that many Front National
and RPF (Rassemblement pour la France)240
election posters were also defaced by
graffiti with such terms as “racist” or “Fascist”.
Media
In the edition of the daily Le Figaro from
7 June 2002, Oriana Fallaci241, who is the Italian
author of a polemical book entitled “La
rage et l'orgueil” (Rage and Pride), wrote a similarly
polemical article entitled “Sur
l'antisémitisme” (“On anti-Semitism”).
On 10 June 2002 the MRAP (Mouvement contre
le racisme et pour l'amitié entre les peuples)
lodged a complaint against Oriana
Fallaci’s book, calling it “a despicable work where slander,
vulgarity and confusion intermingle with
contempt. This book is an ‘asserted call’ to racist
hatred and violence against all Muslims.”
The request for it to be banned proved
unsuccessful.242
Internet
On 7 June 2002, the publication on the
website Indymedia-France of a text in which the
“Israeli concentration
camps” were compared to the Nazi camps in Germany during the
Second World War provoked the resignation
of two editorial team members. One of the
founding members of this
anti-globalisation site, which was created after the Seattle summit,
demanded the expulsion of the author of
the article, “to prevent Indymedia-France from
falling under revisionist influence”.243
The incriminated article also pondered whether Israel
might be equated with Nazi Germany. On the
other hand, another website contributor stated
that, “in parallel, there is a debate on
the website to determine whether the [Israeli]
government is a Nazi government or not.”
3. Research studies
Between 28 January and 1 February 2002,
the Sofres Institute244 surveyed 400 people aged
between 15 and 24 living in France. A
massive majority rejected anti-Semitic acts: 87% of the
respondents considered that “anti-Semitic
acts against synagogues in France” are “scandalous;
the state must punish the culprits very
severely”; 11% of them considered that “if the Jews did
not support Israel as much, these attacks
would not take place”; 88% of the respondents
considered that “the Jews should be
allowed to follow their usual customs without risking to
get into a fight”; in contrast, 11%
considered that “if the Jews did not seek to make
themselves conspicuous in wearing the
kipah, this kind of fight would not take place”; 99% of
respondents judged that defacing
synagogues is “very serious” or “rather serious” (against 1%
of them who consider this is “not very
serious or not serious at all”); 97% of respondents
judged that writing anti-Semitic graffiti
is “very serious” or “rather serious” (against 3%);
91% of respondents judged that joking
about gas chambers is “very serious” or “rather
serious” (against 9%); but 11% allocate “a
share of responsibility for these acts to the Jewish
community, because of its support to Israel”.
To the question “do the Jews have too much
influence….” in France, 77% answered that
they “rather disagree” or “do not agree at all”;
240 The Rassemblement Pour la
France was created as a strongly conservative right-wing party by former
Rassemblement Pour la République
(RPR) leader Charles Pasqua and former Union pour la Démocratie
Française (UDF) Philippe de
Villiers. It is particularly associated with anti-EU nationalism. The party had
a
limited success and de Villiers
has since left it.
241 Fallacis publicated her
condemnation of the media, the church, and the left in the Italian weekly
Panorama
just on 12 April 2002, see Murray
Gordon, The New Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish
Committee, online, publications,
p. 3 (see http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/
Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
242 MRAP Communiqué, 11 June
2002.
243 “Révisionniste” is often used
in France as a synonym of “négationniste”, i.e. Holocaust denial.
244 Les Antifeujs, Paris,
UEJF-S.O.S Racism, Calmann-Lévy, 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
67
specifically in the media, 79% responded
that they “rather disagree” or “do not agree at all”;
and in politics, 80% answered that they
“rather disagree” or “do not agree at all”. These
figures are much weaker than those
collected by Sofres during a previous survey, which
covered the whole population, conducted in
May 2000 for the Nouveau Mensuel magazine.
Then 45% of the respondents had agreed
with the statement that Jews have “too much
influence”.
To the question “regarding people who say
that the Holocaust and the gas chambers did not
exist, what is your position.”, 51% estimated
that “these people should not be condemned
because everyone is free to think whatever
they want”; against which 48% said “these people
must be condemned because they deny a
serious historical fact”. The figures suggest that the
Holocaust is to some extent trivialised,
in so far as “freedom of thought” (and expression) is
often placed above the other issues at
stake.
Several observers believe that far-right
anti-Semitic violence has shifted towards anti-
Semitism of the suburbs. In this respect,
the survey provided new information on the state of
mind of the youth of North African origin
“towards the Jews and anti-Semitism”. As a matter
of fact, they were asked the same
questions as above. Thus, 86% of them judged that
“defacing synagogues” is
“very serious” or “rather serious”; 95% of them thought that the
Jews have the “right to follow their usual
habits without risking to get into a fight”; and only
5% of them thought that “if the Jews did
not seek to make themselves conspicuous in wearing
the kipah, this kind of fight would not
take place”. In the end, 54% of them underlined the
seriousness of “insulting the Jews, even
if it is a joke”. Compared with the overall group of
people between 15 and 24, such answers
tend to show that the youth of North African origin
is more tolerant than the average, an
attitude that can undoubtedly be explained by the fact
that anti-Semitic acts or attitudes remind
them more or less directly of how they themselves
have suffered from racial or cultural
discrimination as Muslims or children of North African
parents.
On the other hand, according to this
survey the tendency is reversed concerning traditional
anti-Semitic prejudices. The question
relating to the Jews’ alleged influence shows that
“respectively 35%, 38% and
24% of the youth of North African origin (against only 22%,
21% and 18% of the whole group of young
people) completely or rather think that the Jews
have too much influence in the economic
and political fields and in the media”. Strangely
enough, the poll did not say anything
about their answers to the questions concerning the
Holocaust.
According to an exclusive survey carried
out on 3 and 4 April 2002 by the CSA poll institute
and the weekly Marianne245 of a 1000
people aged over 18, 10% of the French dislike the
Jews (while 23% of them dislike North
Africans and 24% of them dislike young French
people of North African origin), which is
the case with 52% of far-right voters (whether for
Le Pen or Mégret).
The surveys commissioned by the ADL
conducted between 16 May and 4 June 2002 and
between 9 and 29 September concerning
“European Attitudes towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict” (see Table:
Report on Belgium) established that 17% of
respondents agreed to at least three of
the four anti-Semitic statements presented. Forty-two
percent agreed to the statements that
“Jews are more loyal to Israel than to this country” and
245 Marianne, 8-14 April 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
68
“Jews have too much power in
the business world”, whereby amongst youths the agreement
was far higher with 61% and 64%,
respectively. With regard to the current conflict in the
Middle East, 29% expressed that they
sympathised with the Palestinians and only 10%
sympathised with Israel. 37% had no
preference for one side or the other.246
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
The publishing of documents such as the
Sofres public opinion poll entitled “Youth and the
Jewish Image”, as well as the public
meetings organised to accompany them, maintain a
feeling of hope with regard to both the
growing tolerance towards the Jews and to their
“normalisation” in French
society. The situation also seems to be encouraging concerning the
attitude of children of North African
parents towards the Jews, in a time when the global
geopolitical situation remains very shaky.
The educational information campaigns
within Muslim groups, such as on the theme “to burn
a synagogue is like burning a mosque”,
have encouraged people to talk again and have
improved solidarity between the different
communities in this field. Thus, the gesture of a
local Muslim group in Aubervilliers
(northern suburb of Paris) is particularly symbolic: it lent
its school bus to a Jewish school of the
same area as its buses were destroyed during an
attack.
Beyond inter-religious dialogue, the
spontaneous or organised mobilisation of civil society
against the far right has reaffirmed the
Republic’s common values. Such reactions have at
least reminded us that the fight against
racism, xenophobia and discrimination remains a
common struggle.
The fact that anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish
acts in France are presently being committed mainly
by youngsters from North African
immigration, apparently acting in an isolated manner,
brought many observers to the conclusion
that a far right anti-Semitism has been superseded
by a form of anti-Semitism rooted in urban
decay and social deprivation. The French term for
this combination of urban decay and social
deprivation is “banlieue”, literally “suburb”,
which functions in roughly the same way as
“inner city” in English. Beyond the local
character of this observation, some, like
the philosopher Pierre-André Taguieff - during his
highly publicised book launch in spring
2002 -, spoke of a “new planetary judeophobia”
("nouvelle judéophobie planétaire”)
that explains “all world problems by the existence of
Israel”.247 This “new judeophobia”, which
he sees as initially brought about by radical Islamic
activists, by the heirs of
“third-worldism” and by far-left anti-globalisation activists, accuse
the Jews of being themselves racist. Thus,
according to Taguieff, there seems to be an “anti-
Jewish anti-racism”. In this way, it can
appear that “the fight against racism and the fight
against anti-Semitism have been
dissociated from one another”, as Shmuel Trigano wrote in
the weekly newspaper Actualité Juive (25
April 2002), adding that “suburb anti-Semitism has
indeed broken the “united front” strategy,
revealing that the victims of racism (Arab Muslims)
could be anti-Semites”. This point of
view, which is shared by some Jewish personalities and
groups, can extend to an exclusively
Jewish conception of the fight against anti-Semitism and
a tendency to link it to support for
Israel and its current government.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
246 ADL, European Attitudes
towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, 27 June 2002, online
version.
247 See Pierre-André Taguieff, La
nouvelle judéophobie, Paris 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
69
The current political climate, which has
been dominated by the growth of the far right and the
renewed Republican mobilisation since 21
April 2002, eclipsed anti-Semitism and tensions
between Jews and Muslims in France and
removed them from the political agenda. It resulted
in the abandonment of the large
demonstration against racism and anti-Semitism, for peace in
the Middle East and for the union of all
communities, planned for Sunday, 12 May 2002, to
run parallel to the “Peace Now”
demonstration in Israel. Many trade unions, politicians of
both left and right organisations and
numerous personalities had organised this demonstration.
Representatives from Jewish organisations
criticised the French Government for being
inactive.248 President Chirac, who was
re-elected on 5 May 2002, reacted officially to the
accusations that he had denied the gravity
of the threats against Jews coming mainly from
abroad, in particular from Israel and the
United States, on several occasions. He stated that he
“has protested against the
‘anti-French campaign’, which took place in Israel and which
aimed at presenting France as an
anti-Semitic country”. “France is not an anti-Semitic
country”, he repeated the day before the
55th Cannes Film Festival, in response to the
American Jewish Congress, which had sought
to dissuade Jewish celebrities from
participating in the film festival. During
his discussions with President George W. Bush, who
was in France on 26 and 27 May 2002,
President Chirac “protested strongly” against the idea
conveyed in the United States that France
is seized by a kind of anti-Semitic fever.
On 19 April the French Interior Minister
Daniel Viallant, together with his colleagues from
Belgium, Spain, Germany and the United
Kingdom, issued a joint declaration on “Racism,
Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism” that
appealed for an undertaking of preventive measures and
a European-wide coordination of the
responsible agencies and offices.249
On 29 May 2002, Nicolas Sarkozy, the new
Interior Minister, went to the synagogue of
Clichy-sous-Bois, which was attacked with
a petrol bomb on 10 August 2000, and launched
the slogan “zero tolerance for
anti-Semitism”. On 2 June 2002, he welcomed representatives
from the Jewish community at the Ministry
of the Interior. The Minister promised to improve
the coordination of the suitable
preventive or educational safety measures and to follow up
regularly the files indexing complaints,
particularly those submitted by “SOS Vérité et
Sécurité”. The participants agreed that
similar meetings would take place periodically in Ile
de France and in the provinces. Moreover,
the Minister is said to have committed himself to
work in partnership with the Ministries of
Justice and of Education.250
On 21 July 2002 French Prime Minister
Jean-Pierre Raffarin declared at a meeting held on the
occasion of the 60th anniversary of the
roundup of French Jews for deportation: “to harm the
Jewish community is to harm France, harm
the values of our republic.”251 A new
248 The coordination Forum for
Countering Antisemitism, 21 May 2002 (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/english/press/may2002.htm);
Simon Wiesenthal Center, online, Sign the Protest
to the French President and Prime
Minister (see http://www.wiesenthal.com/mailings_swc/swc_jan25.html).
249 For the declaration see also
the press release issued by the German Federal Interior Ministry;
Pressemitteilung,
Bundesministerium des Innern (Deutschland), 19 April 2002. The Council of
Europe adopted
these conclusions on his meeting
25/26 April. Meeting of the Council of Europe - Justice, Home Affairs and
Civil Protection, Luxembourg,
25/26 April 2002, “Combating Racism, Anti-Semitism and Xenophobia” -
Council conclusions, 7991/02
(presse 104) (http://ue.eu.int/newsroom).
250 Source: Actualité juive. The
information was not taken up by the national dailies. On 10 December , French
lawmakers adopted a bill that
toughens penalties for crimes in which “a victim’ s real or presumed ethnicity,
race
or religion” was factor.
Officials will also face more pressure to prosecute racist and anti-Semitic
actions. Jewish
World Bigotry Monitor, vol.2, No.
49, mailing-list.
251 ADL Press Release, online
report from 22 July 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
70
government’s hard line on crime and North
African juvenile gangs in the second half of 2002
led to a remarkable decrease of
anti-Semitic incidents. Besides the conspicuous presence of
police protecting Jewish institutions the
initiatives of the new Minister of Interior Nicolas
Sarkozy promoting an active dialogue with
different sections of the Muslim community
changed the situation in a positive
way.252
Italy253
The 35,000 Jews, of whom 25,000 are
members of the various Jewish communities, are
completely integrated into the Italian
population (total population: 56.3 million). Since the
Second World War, anti-Semitic prejudice
in Italy has seldom taken on aggressive forms;
violent attacks have been rare. However,
with the increase in the number of far-right groups
since the beginning of the 1990s, the
picture has altered. Although anti-Semitic traditions are
hardly virulent in Italian society, the
networking of the international far-right scene, which
uses anti-Semitism to create such
networks, has also led to a strong anti-Semitic orientation in
the Italian far-right spectrum. In 1995
anti-Semitic incidents rose from 30 to 50 a year; since
the middle of 2000 (30-40% rise) to
March-April 2002 a sharp increase of 100% has been
recorded.254 In the first instance this is
due to the conflict in the Middle East. However,
besides this factor, a high level of
xenophobic attitudes and views is noticeable in the
population, which are supported in turn by
racist remarks in public discourse (politics and
print media).255 Above all the socially
marginalized working migrants, numbering ca. 700,000
(510,000 migrants mainly from Morocco,
Tunisia and Albania), are affected. During the
1990s, not only Jewish culture itself but
also the history of Israel, its literature and cinema
enjoyed a period of success in Italy, a
surprising development for those who had experienced
the troubled years of the 1970s and 1980s
in which anti-Israeli resentment was virulent,
particularly on the left. The crisis that
started at the turn into 2001 has accelerated an
unforeseen and unpredictable process that
in other countries, especially in France, is already
evident; in Italy, this process has left a
number of options open for the future and these are not
immediately clear. In Italy, the second
Intifada has set in motion unexpected mechanisms,
whereby traditional anti-Jewish prejudices
are mixed with politically based stereotypes. It is
important to bear in mind that the
so-called “spiritual (or psychological) anti-Semitism” has
252 Jewish News Worldwide, list
server, “Anti-Jewish Incidents in France Resume”, 10 January 2003.
253 This report is based on the
compilation by the NFP “Cooperazione pe lo sviluppo dei paesi emergenti” [Co-
operation for the Development of
Emerging Countries] (COSPE), written by Alberto Cavaglion and Marcella
Filippa. The opinions expressed
in the report are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not represent
COSPE’s position on the issues
treated. Bibliographic references: Alberto Cavaglion, Ebrei senza saperlo,
Napoli 2002; Giorgio Israel, La
questione ebraica oggi. I nostri conti con il razzismo, Bologna 2002; Elena
Loewenthal, L’Ebraismo spiegato
ai miei figli, Torino 2002; Gerald Messadié, Storia dell’antisemitismo. 2500
anni di odio e persecuzione,
Casale Monferrato 2002; Monography “Limes. Italian Review of geopolitics”.
Guerra santa in terra santa, n.2,
2002; Report on anti-Semitism in Italy, edited by Adrian Goldstaub, June 2002.
The report will be presented at
the next national Congress of UCEI (Unione delle Comunità Ebraiche Italiane,
20-23 June 2002); Pierre-André
Taguieff, La nouvelle judéophobie, Paris 2002 ; B.Z. Goldberg, J. Shapiro, C.
Bolado, Promesse, (Promises) USA,
2000, 102’ (Oscar 2002 for the best documentary film, presented in Italy for
the first time, in “L’Espresso”,
6 June 2002).
254 Adriana Goldstaub (Centro di
Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea), paper delivered at the Congress of
the UCEI, Rome 23 June 2002. The
authors are grateful for the information given by Adriana Goldstaub.
255 See European Commission
against Racism and Intolerance, Second Report on Italy, adopted on 22 June
2001,
Strasbourg 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
71
had a greater impact on the overall
phenomenon in Italian cultural history during the course of
the 20th century (see Julius Evola).256
In contrast to France and Belgium,
anti-Semitic attacks in Italy have up to now been limited
to verbal abuse, graffiti and the like.
But since the start of the second Intifada incidents now
include death threats against Jews and
carry both anti-Semitic as well as anti-Israeli
stereotypes, often in a synonymous
context. The perpetrators are local Italians and till now, in
contrast to Belgium, France and the
Netherlands, hardly any person from the milieu of
Muslim migrants. In contrast to other
countries, in Italy there is rather a revival of anti-Judaist
topoi coupled with traditional
anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist stereotypes rooted in the left. It
became particularly visible during the
events, which took place at the Church of Nativity in
Bethlehem.257 The worsening of the
Israeli-Arab conflict and, in particular, the question of
Bethlehem and the Church of the Nativity
once again led to ambiguous positions being taken
in some contexts and witnessed the use of
potentially dangerous language.
1. Physical acts of violence
There were a few attacks at the beginning
of the year, for example in January, a Jewish lawyer
was attacked came in his office by two
thugs who hit him with a club on his head and
shoulders. It appears that right-wing
extremists were responsible for this attack.258 A number
of the incidents occurred in April, but in
the following months there was a reduction. The
incidents recorded coincided with the
heightening in international tension, thus creating
entirely predictable peaks. Italian
commentators assess that the rise in the scope of anti-
Semitism is the result of Israel’s
governmental policy towards the Arabs since the outbreak of
the Intifada.259
There are however some exceptions. These
can be linked to the specific Italian situation and
there is often the feeling that the lack
of public attention or dwindling of public interest in
such incidents is the result of the
national political situation, its internal crisis and the strong
political divisions between government and
opposition parties, a factor exerting a severe
impact on different spheres of public
life. Demonstrations, marches and other political actions
were recorded at the end of March, but
without doubt the climax was reached in the period
beginning with the Israeli occupation of
Bethlehem, the stalemate at the Church of Nativity (2
April) and the attack against Jenin
refugee camp (10 April). By the end of April tension as
well as media attention had again
decreased, leaving behind a few consequences and some
rather feeble polemics.
4 April: destruction of the research work
and the archives on the Holocaust and the resistance
created by the students of Liceo Galileo
Ferraris High School in Varese, where billboards
were destroyed and the school walls were
painted in red with graffiti such as “burn the
256 See Juliane Wetzel,
Rechtsextremismus in Italien zwischen außerparlamentarischer Opposition und
politischem Establishment, in:
Joachim Born, Marion Steinbach (ed..), Geistige Brandstifter und
Kollaborateure.
Schriftkultur und Faschismus in
der Romania, Dresden 1998 pp. 285-301; see also Franco Ferraresi (ed.), La
destra radicale, Milano 1984.
257 Even in the national and
politically moderate press, the old accusation of murdering Jesus has surfaced,
JTA
Global News Service of the Jewish
People, 30 April 2002 (see http://jata.org); see also New York Post, 2 May
2002.
258 The Coordination Forum for
Countering Antisemitism, online, 14 January 2002 (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp./ID=736).
259 The Coordination Forum for
Countering Antisemitism. online, 24 January 2002 (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp.ID=799).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
72
Jews”.260 Varese belongs to one of the
strongholds of far-right groups in Italy, especially
right-wing skinheads.261
2 June: some newspapers reported that two
right-wing extremists were arrested for planning
an attack in the Venice ghetto.262 In
addition, powerful weapons and a map with the borders
of the Venice ghetto clearly marked were
seized.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Politics263
On 2 April some Jews from Rome staged a
protest in front of the headquarters of the political
party Rifondazione Comunista. Although
peaceful, the protest still caused some trouble with
passers-by: some passing cars reacted to
the traffic jam in Corso Italia by shouting anti-
Semitic slogans at the protesters. During
an event organised by the Social Forum of Bologna
in support of the Palestinians, the
recurrent words against Israel were “genocide”;
“deportation”; “fanatic and
racist Zionists” and these were accompanied by the proposal for a
vast boycott of Israeli products, which
“could be associated to genocide”.
The period in question has been marked by
a long and bitter dispute between the trade unions
and the government over a proposed
revision of a decree stipulating the cancellation of
Article 18 of the Workers’ Statute. This
crisis resulted in a general strike (16 April),
overlapping exactly with the week in which
the Middle East crisis reached its climax. During
the strike and the accompanying street
demonstrations and on the Liberation Day celebrations
(25 April), the empathy generated by
pro-Palestinian sentiments overtook the trade union
issues or historical affiliations which
had rallied thousands to protest in the squares,
transforming, in some cases but not all,
the above events into forms of explicit anti-Israeli
propaganda.
4 April: Rifondazione Comunista opened its
national congress. Some observers were struck
by the opening of the conference: a video
showing images of a Palestinian child being
protected in vain by his father from
shooting (stills from the video have also been placed on a
whole series of international far-right
websites inferring that the child has been shot by Israeli
soldiers) was screened together with a
scene from the film Roma città aperta (Rome, an Open
City). The scene from the film shows a
Nazi soldier shooting the actress Anna Magnani with
a machine gun. The secretary-general of
the party, preoccupied by the reactions to the party’s
marked pro-Palestinian policy, closed the
congress three days later, saying that the party
supported all minorities and proclaimed:
“We are Jews”. During the congress, a number of
objects explicitly referred to Palestine:
the Palestinian flag, a book by the representative of the
Palestinian National Authority (PNA) in
Italy, Diario segreto (Secret Diary; with a foreword
by a former President of Italy), as well
as other texts by Palestinian leaders and the kefiah, the
traditional Arab head gear. During the
general strike on 16 April, in Turin many
demonstrators were wearing the kefiah. The
kefiah is also present in the Italian and European
far-right political movements. Some
participants in pro-Palestinian demonstrations openly
displayed their radical attitude: they
dressed as suicide bombers with all the trappings.
6 April: an imposing crowd of
anti-globalisation protesters marched through Rome and young
people dressed as kamikaze shouted slogans
against Israel. The leadership of the political
260 Information CDEC.
261 See Antisemitism World
Report, 1999ff.
262 La Stampa, 2 June 2002.
263 See Adriana Goldstaub (Centro
di Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea), paper delivered at the Congress
of the UCEI, Rome 23 June 2002;
press research, clippings from “La Stampa”, “Corriere delle sera”, “La
Repubblica”, “L’Espresso”.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
73
parties Democratici di Sinistra (Democrats
of the Left) and Margherita dissociated themselves
from the protest, which had been promoted
by all the trade unions and opposition political
parties; for the first time political
parties on the left split over issues relating to the Middle
East. A number of banners directed against
Israel and the Israeli Prime Minister Sharon
included the following slogans: “State of
Israel, State of murderers”; “Sharon executioner”
(with the Nazi “S”), “Bush, Sharon, Peres”
(with the “S” styled as a swastika); “Zionists and
fascists are the terrorists”; “Against the
racist terrorism of USA, Europe and Israel, on the side
of the Palestinian masses”; “Holocaust, no
thank you. Free Palestine”; “Palestinian Holocaust,
Europe, where are you.”264
Public discourse
25 April: the Centro di Documentazione
Ebraica Contemporanea (CDEC) was informed that
during a demonstration in Milan marking
the anniversary of the liberation of Italy from the
Nazis, many pro-Palestinian banners were
displayed, reading for example “Murderers, Nazist
Sharon, Intifada until victory”; others
assimilated the Star of David to the swastika or
surrounded the star with barbed wire and
broken by a closed fist.265
Graffiti
31 March: anti-Semitic graffiti and a
swastika were found on a synagogue in Modena.266
7 April: anti-Semitic graffiti was found
in several places in the old Venice ghetto.267
6 May: large graffiti in bold characters
saying “Jews murderers” was seen in an underground
pass in the city of Prato (central Italy).
On the same day, the CDEC of Milan received an
anonymous phone call from someone who
said, “We will burn you all”.268
22 May: anti-Semitic slogans were written
on the walls of the town of Marrucini in Abruzzo.
In addition, in Milan messages such as
“Jews out of the neighbourhood” re-appeared on
public walls (Via Venini).
Media
There seems to be a return of abusive
language towards Jews269; an example of which is the
use of the attribute “perfidious” when
referring to the Israeli government - a term that used to
be in the Catholic Good Friday prayers and
was condemned by Pope John XXIII.270 There is
an outpouring of anti-Israel statements on
state radio and television and also in some Catholic
circles, lamenting the deaths of
Palestinians while glossing over Israel deaths.271 It is
absolutely essential to make a clear
distinction between the language used by the Pope and
that, which appears in the media and in
the declarations of some Catholics. Even in some of
the politically moderate press there are
scattered references to the murder of Christ, showing
that, after decades of absence, such
stereotypes are also being revived in secular circles.
264 La Repubblica, online, 6
April 2002.
265 Information from CDEC.
266 ADL-online, Antisemitic
incidents (see: http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/anti-
semitism_global_incidents.asp#Italy);
The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, online, 31 March
2002 (see http://antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp.ID=1189).
267 ANSA, 8 April 2002 (see
http://www.ansa.it/notiziari/mae/20020408205832186479.html).
268 Information by CDEC.
269 L’Espresso, 25 April 2002
(article on Catholics and Anti-Semitics by Sandro Magister).
270 The Vatican daily
L’Osservatore Romano in its edition of 2 April spoke of an aggression that is
turning into
an extermination of the
Palestinian people; it also referred to a language of conspiracy and sacrilege
committed
by those who tread on a land they
believe to be theirs but which, in reality belongs to Christ. See also
Osservatore Romano, 5 April 2002.
271 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish Committee, online,
publications, p.3 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/ Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
74
3 April: the front page of the national
daily newspaper La Stampa carried a cartoon by
Giorgio Forattini as a comment on the
occupation of Bethlehem. At the sight of an Israeli tank
a baby Jesus in a crèche asks: “Are they
going to kill me for a second time.”272 A heated
debate followed in the papers. Many
resentful letters were sent to the editor and numerous
Catholic readers filed protests. The
president of the Union of Jewish Communities, Amos
Luzzatto, strongly criticised the return
of the accusation of deicide, cancelled by the Second
Vatican Council. The director of La Stampa
distanced himself from the author of the cartoon.
The same day someone wrote “Israelis
Murderers” on the walls of a synagogue in Siena.
5 April: one of the main authorities of
the state - the President of the Senate - denounced what
he described as “the imbalance of Italian
public opinion in favour of only the cause of the
Palestinians, thus risking feeding an
anti-Semitic campaign, of which we have had dangerous
and serious examples”. The same day
someone wrote “Free Palestine” on the façade of the
synagogue in Cuneo.
2 May: the daily La Nazione of Florence
reported that some anti-Semitic messages were
written on a Catholic Church in the town
of Gavinana outside Florence, praising the
Holocaust and the twenty years of fascist
domination in Italy.273
The head of the Rome Jewish Community,
Leone Paserman, stated, “The Italian mass media
have started a disinformation campaign
that nourishes anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred”.274
On 12 April the famous Italian journalist
and writer, Oriana Fallaci published her
condemnation of the media, the church, and
the left and their anti-Semitism in the weekly
Panorama: “I find it shameful (...) that
the government-controlled television stations
contribute to the revival of anti-Semitism
by crying over Palestinian deaths only, minimising
the importance of Israeli deaths, speaking
in a brisk and dismissive tone about them”.275
Fallacis condemnation and fiery indictment
was followed by a mostly controversial debate
specially because she is known as a
controversial left-leaning journalist.
Direct threats
Renowned Jewish journalists have received
threatening letters full of insults as well. Some of
them received up to fifty such e-mails
during the period monitored. Attacks against Jewish
students by fellow pupils in schools, at
playgrounds and during sports competitions, such as
calling them names, including the use of
the words “Jew”, “dirty Jew” or “Rabbi” as insults,
still persist, as does the hanging of
anti-Semitic slogans and banners in stadiums.276
Indirect threats
Although they did not increase in the last
few months, these remain on a very high level,
especially in connection with the football
club Lazio Rome.277
272 La Stampa, 3 April 2002; see The
Boston Globe, 28 April 2002; Israel and the Anti-Semites by Gabriel
Schoenfeld, June 2002 (see
http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/antiholo/israel_and.html).
273 La Nazione, 2 May 2002.
274 Ruth E. Gruber, European Jews
on high alert, Rome 18 October 2002, JTA (see http://www.cdn-friends-
icej.ca/antiholo/highalert.html).
275 Panorama, 12 April 2002; see
Murray Gordon, The New Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish
Committee, online, publications,
p. 3 (see http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/
Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
276 See Adriana Goldstaub (Centro
di Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea), paper delivered at the Congress
of the UCEI, Rome 23 June 2002.
277 In November 2001 Haaretz
accused Italian football fans as the most anti-Semitic in Europe, La
Repubblica,
online, 4 Novermebr 2001; see
also express-online, 5 September 2001. In general see EUMC, Racism, Football
and the Internet, Vienna 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
75
Public discourse
Particularly interesting is the emergence,
in the month of April, of slogans and comments that
referred to the current persecution of the
Palestine people by describing the Israeli-Arab
conflict in terms of the inversion of the
victim/persecutor roles, with clear reference here to
the extermination of the Jews. Resorting
to terms taken from Nazi vocabulary, such as
deportation, extermination, genocide etc.,
is a constant practice and at times such terms are
emphasised in newspapers with very large
titles or else they are used scornfully in
commentaries.278
The Internet
The website that can boast a larger number
of participants in their discussion list is that of the
extreme right-wing militant group Forza
Nuova (New Force). Some of these sites - right-
wing or pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian (“Lo
Straniero Senza Nome”, “Holy War”, “Radio
Islam”, “Associazione Italia-Iraq”, “Oltre
la Verità Ufficiale”)279 - make use of the entire
spectrum of anti-Semitic stereotypes and
have placed the complete text of “The Protocols of
the Elders of Zion”, an anti-Semitic
forgery from Tsarist Russia, on the net. The website of
Fronte sociale nazionale (National Social
Front) carries a pro-Palestinian Intifada appeal
which adopts a traditional anti-Semitic,
anti-Zionist and anti-American language with hostile
references to “Talmudic Judaism”, the
“global plutocratic cupola”280 and the bleeding Star of
David.281 Many other sites deal with the
subject of the so-called ritual murder and the
accusation of blood shedding; in others
the denial of the Holocaust is the central point. The
website Che fare (What should be done),
part of the far left-wing groups, includes elements of
anti-Zionism, pro-Arab fundamentalism,
anti-Americanism and recurrent stereotypes against
Jews used both in the past and at the
present: the Jewish lobby, the relationship with the
Masonry, the international plot, world
economic power held by Jews, Jews circumcised with a
dollar etc. are all examples of the most
repeated slogans. It is difficult to know how many
people visit these websites as the figures
cited seem to be enlarged, for they increase
remarkably over short periods to be credible.
Between 20 and 29 July, Alfred Olsen, member
of a fundamentalist Catholic brotherhood,
Holocaust denier and responsible for the anti-
Semitic website “Holy War/Tradizione
Cattolica”, submitted contributions to the online
forum of the daily La Stampa on nine
occasions which combined anti-Judaist, traditional anti-
Semitic world conspiracy theories and
anti-Zionist stereotypes.282
3. Research Studies
Among the various surveys carried out
during the past few months,283 it seems interesting to
refer to the ones carried out by
Ispo/ACNielsen CRA, between 13 April and 13 May, part of
278 See Il Manifesto, 2 April
2002.
279 Ibid; Research on the
corresponding websites.
280 This word traditionally
identifies the highest decision-making organ of the Mafia.
281 Reserach on the corresponding
website.
282 La Stampa online, Forum 20-29
July 2002; see also L’Espresso online, 29 July 2002: the author of the article
asked himself why La Stampa has
published such apologetic articles full of hate against Jews.
283 For 2001 a poll conducted by
Il Corriere della sera in January 2002 showed a sharp increase of hatred
against
Jews in comparison with the
figures for the year 2000. In the poll 23% of the participants said that “Jews
are
unpleasant and do not evoke
trust” (2000: 14%). 75% of the Italians are of the opinion that the mentality
and the
life style of the Jewish Italians
are different from those of the rest of the population (2000: 50%), The
Coordination Forum for Countering
Anti-Semitism, online (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp.ID=799).;
see also Murray Gordon, The New Anti-Semitism in
Western Europe, American Jewish
Committee, online, publications, p.8 (see http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/
Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
76
which was published in “Il Corriere della
Sera”.284 The survey was inspired by the
observation that the rigid positions
regarding “who is right” and “who is wrong” in the Israeli-
Arab conflict does not include any
references to the circumstances giving rise to the conflict.
For instance, less than half of the
Italian population knows about the foundation of the State
of Israel. Only 4% have knowledge about
the historical events that preceded and to some
extent explain the evolution of the
conflict. The level of knowledge does not change
meaningfully when the political position
changes, although a greater number of both political
far-right and far-left supporters are less
informed than those who are centre-right and centre-
left supporters.
Exactly one month after the above survey,
“Il Corriere della sera” published the results of a
poll carried out at the beginning of
April. This second survey showed that the number of
people who stated that they had no idea
about the situation had decreased, while the opinion
of the majority of the population blaming
“both parties” for the conflict remained stable and
consolidated, although some people on the
political centre-left (11% against 6% overall)
tended to mostly blame the Israelis for
the conflict. In addition, during the same period
“sympathy” for the Jewish
state seemed to have grown and once again this was linked to the
political orientation of the surveyed.
Between 12 and 14 April, a further survey
was carried out by Ispo/ACNielsen CRA based on
a sample of 5000 telephone interviews. The
data has yet to be fully processed. This survey
asked respondents whether Italian Jews
have common characteristics distinguishing them
from the rest of the population: 54% of
the interviewed still believe that Italian Jews have
distinct characteristics and 68% cited as
proof a peculiar relationship with money and a
mentality and lifestyle different from
those of other Italians. In addition, there is growing
number of people who think that Italian
Jews are not real Italians and that they should stop
playing the role of being a victim of a
persecution that dates back fifty years. In particular
they mentioned: the need to speak less
about the Holocaust; the passage from being the
victims of the past to becoming the
persecutors of today in the Israeli-Arab conflict; and that
the Day of Memory (27 January) should not
only be devoted to remembering the victims of
the Shoah, but also all the other victims
of persecution in the 20th century.285
The survey commissioned by the ADL between
9 and 29 September 2002 concerning
“European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict” (see Table:
Report on Belgium) established that
Italian respondents assumed second place behind the
Spanish in their agreement to anti-Semitic
statements. Next to Spain (72%) Italy also shows
the second highest agreement with the
statement that “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to
this country” (58%) whereby 42 % agreed to
the statement “Jews have too much power in the
business world” which places Italy with
France in third place after Spain and Belgium.286
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
In the months prior to May 2002, good
practices to combat anti-Semitism included those
numerous initiatives aimed at stimulating
an often fragile and poor historical memory
organised all over the country on 27
January to mark Memory Day, established by a
284 The author of the survey and
director of the above organization has kindly permitted the NFP Italy to use
it;
see “Gli ebrei. Non sono dei veri
Italiani”, http://moise.sefarad.org/belsef.php/id/369/.
285 See the comments Chicago
Tribune-online, 7 April 2002
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/showcase/chi-020407maelstrom1.story).
286 ADL Survey “European
Attitudes Toward Jews, October 2002,
http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/EuropeanAttitudesPoll-10-02.pdf
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
77
legislative decree two years ago. Trade
unions organised public debates and initiatives in
many regions and provinces, showing an
interest for a debate that had not received much
attention in the previous years within the
trade union movement. Beginning in the autumn of
2002, a training programme started in the
region of Lombardy that will continue through into
2003 and involve the high schools of the
city of Lecco and union delegates from companies
operating in the area. Issues to be dealt
with are anti-Semitism and the Shoah and the dignity
of man. The provisional title is
Considerate se questo è un uomo (Consider if this is a man),
taken from the famous phrase by Primo
Levi. Rather innovative in Italy, trips will be
organised to some of the symbolic places
in Europe, from Prague to Auschwitz and to Mostar,
including the former Nazi concentration
camp Risiera di San Sabba in Trieste. The video
Promesse (Promises), on tales of Israeli
and Palestinian children in war and their fears and
hopes beyond the usual stereotypes, had a
remarkable impact on public opinion; the video is
useful for a balanced understanding of the
dramatic situation in the Middle East.
Significantly, the video was distributed
together with a major weekly magazine, L’Espresso,
allowing more copies to be circulated than
would have otherwise been the case.
Another initiative aimed at reconciliation
after the division that occurred within the left-wing
parties following the rally of 6 April
(see chronology) was a concert on 19 April at the
Colosseum organised by the Mayor of Rome,
during which Israeli and Palestinian singers
performed in turn on stage. The proposal
by the Radical Party to include the State of Israel
into the European Union does not seem to
have met with the interest of the other political
parties. This proposal was also submitted
to all Regional Councils, but there, too, not much
consensus was reached, nor did it gain
much exposure in the media.
There are quite a number of websites
dealing with the issue of anti-Semitism in both Europe
and in Italy from a historical
perspective, with particular focus on the racial laws in Italy and
its consequences. There are also websites
created for the specific purpose of countering the
wave of misunderstanding and of responding
to media attacks against Israel, at times with a
certain partisan spirit but on the whole
impartial in judgment. An example of such a website is
http://www.informazionecorretta.com/ which
provides a wide range of sources. Another
interesting site that can be highlighted
is the site of the confederated trade union UIL287
which, starting from 23 May 2002, presents
a position paper by the educational department of
the national secretariat of the union
under the title: “Schools and the prevention of anti-
Semitism”.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
An appeal by the Israeli writer Abraham
Yehoshua to establish a clear boundary between
Israel and Palestine, thereby encouraging
a unilateral withdrawal of Israel, was signed by
prominent Italian writers from across the
political spectrum.288 Political leaders have
condemned the anti-Semitic tone of the
demonstrations billed as promoting peace or
Palestinian rights.289 The imam of the
Italian Islamic Community Abdul Hadi Palazzi
maintains contact to the Italian Jewish
Community and preaches messages of moderation and
even friendship toward Israel.290
287 www.uil.it/uilscuola.
288 Ebrei-palestinensi creare un
confine [Jews and Palestinians, creating a boundary], in: La Stampa, 31 May
2002.
289 European Jews wary as
anti-Semitic attacks increase, AP 4 May 2002 (see
http://group.yahoo.com/group/balkanhr/message/3961)
290 World Jewish Congress, Policy
Dispatches, No.83, September 2002 (see:
http://www.wjc.org.il/publications/policy_dispatches/pub_dis83.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
78
15 April: some politicians from both the
governing and opposition parties called for an
“Israeli Day” in Rome; the
director of a pro-government daily newspaper - Il Foglio (The
Sheet) - acted as promoter of the event.
About 3000 people marched through the centre of the
city carrying Israeli flags. The
participants included militants from a wide range of political
parties, acting individually and
irrespective of their political affiliations.
25 April: during the manifestation of the
day of liberation in Milan, participated by about
200,000 people, the leader (general
secretary) of the main Italian trade union, Sergio Cofferati
insisted “to fight any revisionism of
history”.291
In September 2002 Gianfranco Fini, Deputy
Prime Minister and leader of Alleanza Nazionale
(National Alliance), the former
neo-fascist party, excused himself during his visit to Israel in
an interview with the Israelian newspaper
“Haaretz” for the anti-Jewish laws in Italy. He said
that he would accept historical
responsibility for Fascist crimes and would ask the forgiveness
of The Jewish People.292
Luxembourg293
According to a 1979 law, the government
may not collect or maintain statistics on religious
affiliation. But this is not the only
reason why it is difficult for the leaders of the Jewish
communities to carry out an accurate
census: a great many of the Jews only pass through
Luxembourg. Within the Jewish population
(1200, 650 of whom are members of the Jewish
community) there are nearly no orthodox
families and a great many non-practising Jews.
Luxembourg is the smallest Jewish
community in Europe, in accordance with the overall
population (440,000) of the country. The
Jewish population is extremely well integrated into
the social, community and cultural life of
the country. In terms of attitudes towards minority
groups Luxembourg meets the European
average on the EUMC Eurobarometer,294 whereby a
high rate of agreement for improving the
rights of minorities exists side by side with a strong
rejection of working migrants. Since 1997
the negative attitudes have increased. But the
excellent economic situation, in which the
Grand Duchy finds itself, with an unemployment
rate below 3%, certainly fosters
benevolence among the population.
1. Physical acts of violence
In Luxembourg physical aggression in
general and especially against Jews is rather rare. It
might be explained by an absence of deeper
social conflicts and extreme right parties.
According to ASTI, the representative of
the Jewish community and the secretary general of
the Israelite Consistory, no act of
violence or aggression against Jews or their institutions are
know of for the period from 15 May to 15
June 2002; indeed for the whole year up to now no
aggressive act has been committed.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speeches
291 La Repubblica-online, 25
April 2002.
292 La Repubblica-online, 13
September 2002; see also
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/showArticle.asp.ID=2874.
293 This report is based on the
compilation by Association de soutien aux travailleurs immigres (ASTI)/
Association for the support of
immigrant workers. The report employs information provided by representatives
of the Jewish community and the
Grand Duchy police; many questions remain open.
293 See
http://eumc.eu.int/publications/eurobarometer/EB2001.pdf
294 See http://eumc.eu.int/publications/eurobarometer/EB2001.pdf.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
79
Neither the police nor the Jewish
community reported any real verbal anti-Semitic aggression
during the reference period. In mid-May,
an anonymous letter was sent to a representative of
the Jewish community with the following
content: “Down with Sharon …!” The Jewish
community has not deemed this letter to be
anti-Semitic, but an expression of rejection of the
Sharon policy. At the same time, on a
bridge support on the motorway towards France, the
inscription “Sharon, assassin” (murderer)
appeared. In this case, the Jewish community also
stressed that it was a political
statement. In their opinion the two acts are to be considered as
isolated political incidents, albeit in
direct relation to the escalation of violence in the Middle
East, but not anti-Semitic.
3. Research studies
No studies have been undertaken regarding
anti-Semitism in Luxembourg. The last opinion
poll carried out by “Ilres” (National
Polling Institute) on behalf of the European Community
took place in 1997. It focussed on racism
in the broadest sense of the term, thus including
xenophobia and anti-Semitism, and revealed
that only 2% of Luxembourg people considered
themselves to be racist/could be
considered as having racist leanings. The Eurobarometer
2000 shows that Luxembourg is one of the
countries where many people support policies for
improving social coexistence between
different ethnic groups. 33% have passively tolerant
and 28% actively tolerant attitudes toward
minority groups. But negative attitudes have
increased over the past years.295
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
On 16 June 2002 within the context of the
European Day of Jewish Culture, the Jewish
community invited the population of
Luxembourg to discover the Jewish heritage and find out
about the traditions of Judaism. The
Jewish community registered a higher number of visitors
than in previous years.296 On 10 May the
“Service National de la Jeunesse” (National Youth
Service) organised a “Journée du Souvenir”
(Remembrance Day) on the theme “It is
necessary to know history in order to
prepare for the future”. In the presence of the
Luxembourg Minister of Culture, Luxembourg
internees of concentration camps during the
Second World War told young people of
their experiences. The Minister stressed the fact that
the Luxembourg government will be
increasing the number of initiatives of this sort.297 Also
in 2002, classes from various educational
establishments in Luxembourg will visit
concentration camps in the company of
their former Luxembourg prisoners. This initiative
has made a considerable contribution to
increasing the awareness of young people to the
problems of anti-Semitism. In fact, each
time long reports were published in the press and
presented on Luxembourg television. On 15
May a panel dealing more directly with the
situation in the Middle East was organised
at the capital’s high school on the subject “Without
justice and responsibility there will be
no peace”. Representatives of religious communities,
secular bodies and freemasons explained
their points of view. This initiative was a part of the
Luxembourg project “Towards a culture of
peace” initiated in that school.298 The only event
on the theme “Towards an equitable peace
in the Middle East”, organised by the
“Friddensbeweegung” (Peace
Movement), brought together 250 persons belonging to
humanitarian groups and various left-wing
parties in Luxembourg at the beginning of April.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
295 Attitudes towards minority groups in
the European Union. A special analysis of the Eurobarometer 2000
survey on behalf of the EUMC,
Vienna 2001, p. 11, p. 23.
296 Journal, 12 June 2002 : Mieux
connaître la culture juive
297 Le Quotidien, 17 March 2002:
Nicolas Bastuck ,Une petite communauté dans un petit pays.
298 Le Quotidien, 16 June 2002:
Histoire(s) de … la présence juive à Luxembourg et environs.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
80
As neither acts of violence nor overt or
latent anti-Semitic tendencies have been observed in
Luxembourg, the reactions of politicians
and opinion leaders is limited to condemning such
acts occurring in other European
countries. Ministers in the Luxembourg government and
members of parliament from all parties,
but also many diplomats traditionally attend the
religious services held in synagogues for
the Luxembourg National Day celebrations.299 At
the same time, the Chief Rabbi and
representatives of the Jewish community attend the “Te
Deum” for National Day in the Nôtre Dame
Cathedral, and other ecumenical services and
official events.
The Netherlands300
There are three main religious directions
within Dutch Jewry (total: 30,000, the majority
living in Amsterdam): the traditional
Jewish community (Nederlands Israelitisch
Kerkgenootschap), the liberal religious
Jews (Liberaal Religieuze Joden) and the Sephardic
community (Portugees Israelitisch Kerkgenootschap).
The majority are well integrated in the
social and cultural life of Dutch society
(total population: 16 million). In recent years the
establishment of Islamic institutions
serving the 700,000-800,000 Muslims resident in the
Netherlands (Moroccans, Turks and people
from former Dutch colonies) has increased and
the founding of over 30 Islamic schools
demonstrates the increased influence of Islam. At the
same time, racist attacks against the
Muslim population have risen, in particular after 11
September 2001. Public statements by Imams
against homosexuality, women, the Western
world etc. have meet with displeasure in
large sections of the population. Many of the radical
Muslim religious leaders publicly express
their disdain of the USA or even praise the
Palestinian suicide bombers. A recent
intelligence service report suggesting that young
Muslims were being recruited at mosques
for anti-Western missions in Afghanistan and
elsewhere also stirred up public
feeling.301
The Dutch Jewish community remains one of
the targets of both extreme right-wing and
Islamic fundamentalist movements. Although
no comprehensive system for recording anti-
Semitic incidents is in place,
anti-Semitic activity appears to have been increasing slowly but
steadily in recent years. Incidents such
as acts of vandalism, abusive graffiti, desecration of
Jewish cemeteries and memorial sites, but
also insults and threats continue to happen.
Football vandalism and Internet propaganda
are among the main focal points of anti-Semitic
activities in the Netherlands.302 There
was also a clear link between the incidents and the
restitution of Jewish assets303 as well as
with the events in the Israel-Palestine conflict. In the
299 See Luxemburger Wort, 11 May
2002: Man muss die Geschichte kennen, um die Zukunft vorzubereiten.
300 This report is based on the
compilation by the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism, Technical University
Berlin/Zentrum für
Antisemitismusforschung. Sources used are from the ECRI; Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/1, online, Netherlands (see
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html); Centrum Informatie en
Documentatie Israel (CIDI), The
Hague, online overzicht antisemitische incidenten Nederland 2001 en
voorloping overzicht 2002 by
Hadassa Hirschfeld.
301 The Guardian, 9 July 2002.
302 European Commission against
Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), online: Second report on the Netherlands,
adopted on 15 December 2000 and
made public on 13 November 2001 (see also
http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord2001/euro2001/vol2/netherlandsecri.htm).
303 In summer 2000, Dutch Banks
and the Amsterdam stock exchange signed an agreement with the Jewish
community and Dutch Jews in
Israel for restitution of 314 million guilders (about 130 million Euro) to
Dutch
survivors of the Holocaust or
their heirs. Antisemitism Worldwide 1999/2000, online (see
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
81
aftermath of the 11 September attacks on
the United States 90 incidents directed against
Muslims were also registered.304
In the run up to parliamentary elections
in May 2002 it was mainly the party of Pim Fortuyn
(LPF) which attempted to recruit votes
with xenophobic slogans, whereby in particular new
immigration was addressed. Shortly before
the election Pim Fortuyn was murdered;
nonetheless his party list became the
second strongest group in parliament and joined the
government coalition led by Prime Minister
Jan Peter Balkenende.
The Dutch government has banned kosher
slaughter, becoming the sixth European country to
do so. The local Agriculture Ministry
informed Jewish community leaders that they would no
longer be permitted to slaughter cows in a
kosher manner [shechitah] because of “cruelty” to
animals.305 At the same time though, the
Netherlands has implemented the most restrained
regulations of all the European countries,
which have passed the prohibition. The ban is only
applicable for older, heavier bulls - not
cows or other animals. In July 2002 an arrangement
was reached in meetings with members of
the Dutch Jewish Committee that took into
consideration the “needs of the Jewish
community in Holland”.306
The University of Leiden together with the
Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Anne Frank
Foundation annually investigates the
extent of extreme-right and racist violence against
minorities. The report for the year 2000
shows an increase of registered incidents from 313
(1998) to 406 (2000), directed
increasingly against asylum seekers and Jewish persons. Many
incidents were not reported however.307
For the first four months of 2002 a renewed increase
in the number of attacks is evident.
Another study shows that the perpetrators of anti-Semitic
attacks to a large extent - but not
exclusively - come from sections of the younger second
generation Moroccan population, whose
level of social integration is poor and who are
influenced by Arab radio and television
stations which broadcast programmes in the
Netherlands and agitate against Jews,
homosexuals and Western influences.308
Although in contrast to other countries no
synagogue has been set on fire in the Netherlands,
since autumn 2000 and above all in the
course of 2001 the number of anti-Semitic incidents
increased; cemeteries, monuments,
synagogues and buildings housing Jewish organisations
were the target of vandals on 50
occasions.309 In 2001 there were 31 incidents; in the first four
months of 2002 the number of attacks,
ranging from physical assault to attacks per e-mail,
rose to over 100.310 The unregistered
number of cases is possibly far greater though, for the
numbers published only include those
incidents cited by the victims themselves and passed on
by NGOs.311
304 US Department of State,
Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, Releases Human Rights 2001,
online, Country Report The
Netherlands 2001, March 2002.
305 Kesher talk, online, 2 August
2002; see also The Jewish Week, online, 26 July 2002.
306 The Jewish Week, online, 26
July 2002.
307 US Department of State,
Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, Releases Human Rights 2001,
online, Country Report The
Netherlands 2001, March 2002.
308 NRC Handelsblad, 31 March
2002; see also Jood.nl online, Antisemitisme niet langer tolereren, 4 June
2002.
309 CIDI; see also US Department
of State, Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, Releases Human
Rights 2001, online, Country
Report The Netherlands 2001, March 2002 (see
http://www.cidi.nl/html/antisem/asr-nl-06.frameset.html).
310 Het Parool, 31 May 2002.
311 Among others: Anti
Discrininatiebureaus in Nederland (ADB’s), Landelijke Vereniging van ADB’s
(LV),
Meldpunt Discrimnatie Internet
(MDI), Landelijke Expertise Centrum Discriminatiezaken (LECD),
Antifascistische Onderzoeksgroep
Kafka, Centraal Meldpunt Voetbalvandalisme, Monitorrapport over Racisme
en Extreem Rechts from the Anne
Frank Stichting and the University of Leiden.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
82
1. Physical acts of violence
In March numerous reports of death threats
towards Jews sent by letter, fax and mobile phone
were reported.312 For the months January
to April 2002 six cases of physical violence and
nine cases of threats of violence were
registered. In particular more and more Jews who wear
the kipah were disparaged on the streets.
An American Jew was followed by a group of
persons and badly beaten up.313
4 April 2002: one of the back windows of
the synagogue in the Lekstraat in Amsterdam was
badly damaged during the night.
24 April 2002: a Jewish market vendor in
the centre of Amsterdam was threatened with a
pistol and the words “I’ll shoot you
dead”.
2. Verbal aggressions/hate speech
In 2000 the number of incidents of verbal
intimidation of Jews sharply increased; CIDI
registered 32 incidents of verbal
abuse.314 In comparison with this figure in the first four
months of 2002, 40 cases of anti-Semitic abuse
were registered by CIDI. Most of the anti-
Semitic discrimination and incidents
involved the use of swastikas, the distribution of neo-
Nazi propaganda and delivering the Hitler
salute.
Direct threats
The number of anti-Semitic incidents in
schools and at the workplace is growing. The slogan
“Hamas, Hamas, Joden aan het
gas” (Hamas, Hamas, all Jews to the gas) and the accusation
“Kankerjoden” (cancerous
growth Jews) are frequently used against the Jewish population by
native Dutch, often by children and by
members of the Muslim population.315
Indirect threats
During the pro-Palestinian demonstration
in Amsterdam on 13 April 2002, 75 swastikas were
carried amongst the 15,000-20,000
participants, almost 90% of whom were not native Dutch;
Israeli and American flags were also
burned.316 200 mostly non-native Dutch Moroccan
young people were responsible for the
excesses during the demonstration.317 At other pro-
Palestinian demonstrations mainly Moroccan
participants called out anti-Semitic slogans,
including the aforementioned “Hamas,
Hamas, all Jews to the gas”, a slogan that is heard
repeatedly in football stadiums, in
particular by supporters of Feyenoord Rotterdam;318 anti-
Semitic symbols were also visible. It was
also noticed that such chants have long become the
norm in football stadiums.319
On 31 July 2002 Feyenoord Rotterdam
Football Club held an open day during which football
fans bawled anti-Semitic slogans; as there
was no police presence no action was taken.320
Graffiti
312 CIDI: Antisemitisme -
Jaaroverzicht antisemitisme in Nederland 2001 online.
313 Netz gegen Rechts (Network
against the Right) online, 3 May 2002.
314 CIDI; see also US Department
of State, Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, Releases Human
Rights 2001, online, Country
Report The Netherlands 2001, March 2002.
315 CIDI: Antisemitisme -
Jaaroverzicht antisemitisme in Nederland 2001 online, contouren antisemitisme
2002.
316 Nieuw Kampens Dagblad, 24
April 2002.
317 Netzwerk gegen Rechts, 3 May
2002.
318 Racism and anti-Semitism in
football stadiums is also connected with the fact that Ajax Amsterdam Football
Club is regarded as Jewish. The
Stephen Roth Institute on Anti-Semitism and Racism, Antisemitism Worldwide
1999/2000, online (see
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-report.html).
319 Het Parool, 31 May 2002.
320 CIDI Nieuwsbrief, 14 August
2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
83
In March and April the Memorials for the
Murdered Jews in Wageningen and Meppel were
smeared with paint and graffiti reading
“Israel fascist state”.321
Media
On 26 April 2002 an article by Hayo Meyer
appeared in the daily Volkskrant under the title
“Israel misbruikt
antisemitisme taboe” (Israel abuses the anti-Semitism taboo). In the article
the author used the classical anti-Semitic
stereotype that the Jews themselves are to blame for
anti-Semitism. Ronny Naftaniel, director
of the CIDI, was given the opportunity on 2 May to
reply to the accusation and criticise
Meyer.322
Gretta Duisenberg, wife of European
Central Bank President Wim Duisenberg, has hung a
Palestinian flag from her balcony and was
accused by some people to have made anti-Semitic
statements. This initiated a broad public
debate.323
Internet
According to the CIDI, the Internet plays
an important role in spreading anti-Semitism. Of the
550 complaints about the Internet
registered by the Discrimination Internet Registration
Centre in 2001, 203 concerned anti-Semitic
incidents.324 In 2001 197 anti-Semitic homepages
were located on the Internet; in the first
four months of 2002 the number had already reached
87.325
3. Research studies
The Eurobarometer survey commissioned by
the EUMC for the year 2000326 showed that the
proportion of Dutch who are to be
characterised as “tolerant” towards minorities lies far
above the European average.
The survey commissioned by the ADL
conducted between 9 and 29 September 2002
concerning “European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict” (see
Table: Report on Belgium) established that
compared to the other nine countries included in
the surveys one finds the lowest
percentage of anti-Semitic attitudes among the Dutch.327 48%
agreed with the statement that “Jews are
more loyal to Israel than to this country” whereby 20
% agreed to the statement “Jews have too
much power in the business world”.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudices,
violence and aggression
321 CIDI: Antisemitisme -
Jaaroverzicht antisemitisme in Nederland 2001 online, contouren antisemitisme
2002.
322 De Volkskrant, 2 May 2002.
323 JTA, Amsterdam 24 June 2002,
via mailing list Combat Anti-Semitism; see also Het Parool, 28 May 2002;
Der Tagesspiegel, 21 October
2002: Emerson Vermaat, TV journalist in the Netherlands), Gretta Duisenberg -
gefährlicher als die Inflation.).
The debate about Gretta Duisenberg actions continued in the following month -
as she emphasized she needs “six
million” signatures against the occupation of Palestine - and reached a new
peak when she as president of the
initiative „Stop the Palestinian occupation“ (Stop de Oorlog tegen de
Palestijnen) visited Arafat
traveling as a diplomat and gave interviews (Algemeen Dagblad, 10 January 2003)
comparing Israeli policies to the
World War II Nazi occupation of the Netherlands, see Sueddeutsche Zeitung,
14 January 2003; New York Times 9
January 2003; New York Times, 11 January 2003.
324 US Department of State,
Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, Releases Human Rights 2001,
online, Country Report The
Netherlands 2001, March 2002.
325 CIDI: Antisemitisme -
Jaaroverzicht antisemitisme in Nederland 2001 online, contouren antisemitisme
2002.
326 See
http://eumc.eu.int/publications/eurobarometer/EB2001.pdf.
327 ADL Survey “European
Attitudes Toward Jews, October 2002,
http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/EuropeanAttitudesPoll-10-02.pdf
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
84
A network comprising of many
organisations328 is active against racism, organises
demonstrations and annual activities
within the programme of the national Anti-Racism Day
held in March. Two successful educational
programmes were conducted in Dutch schools:
“School without racism” and
“A world of differences”. The CIDI youth group and the youth
organisation of the Moroccan association
Tans (Towards A New State) organised a joint
meeting at the beginning of July 2002 to
get to know one another better and to plan more joint
projects and events in the future.329 CIDI
demanded of the responsible offices and in
particular from the government the
establishment of an initiative (Overlegorgaan Religie en
Levenbeschouwing) which shall be devoted
to religious and general life issues in daily co-
existence between the various religions,
above all with a focus on transgressing boundaries in
relation to persons of different faith.330
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
On 31 May 2002 the member of parliament
Boris Dittrich from the D 66 party submitted an
inquiry to the Justice and Interior
Ministers as to what measures the state intends to undertake
concerning the anti-Semitic attacks in
2001 and 2002, presented on 30 May 2002, which
showed a drastic increase in anti-Semitic
incidents.331
Austria332
Within the population of Austria (8
million) Jews form a small minority of about 8,000
persons, mainly living in Vienna. The
Austrian problem of anti-Semitism seems to focus
more on diffused and traditional
stereotypes than on acts of physical aggression. Extreme
rightist and neo-Nazi groups have
intensified their activities since 2000, encouraged by the
328 Including Anne Frank House,
CIDI, MDI, the Dutch Auschwitz Committee, the National Bureau for the Fight
Against Racism and the 4th and
5th May Committee.
329 Online Dienst Joods.nl,
Marokkaanse en joodse jongeren eten samen, 8 July 2002.
330 CIDI: Antisemitisme -
Jaaroverzicht antisemitisme in Nederland 2001 online.
331 Homepage of the party D66
Democraten, nieuws, online (see
http://www.d66.nl/nieuws/archief/000575.html).
332 This report is based on the
compilation by the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Human Rights/Ludwig
Boltzmann Institut für
Menschenrechte (BIM); Department of Linguistics of the University of
Vienna/Institut für
Sprachwissenschaft der
Universität Wien; Institute of Conflict Research/Institut für Konfliktforschung
(IKF)
In order to base the analysis on
a balanced mix of sources, the compilers contacted various NGOs and GOs, did a
media analysis and a general
search of the internet: NGOs related to the Jewish communities (Forum gegen
Antisemitismus [sub-organisation
of the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde Wien], ESRA, Israelitische
Kultusgemeinden Salzburg,
Innsbruck, and Graz), other NGOs (ZARA, Dokumentationsarchiv des
österreichischen Widerstands
[DÖW], Ökologische Linke [OEKOLI], Österreichische HochschülerInnenschaft),
relevant journalists and the
Federal Ministry of the Interior. All these organisations received e-mails
containing
the EUMC questionnaire, the
period of observation and a friendly request to name other organisations to the
NFP that might be able to answer
these questions.
The media analysis included the
survey of the following dailies: “Der Standard“, “Die Presse“, “Wiener
Zeitung“, “Salzburger
Nachrichten“, “Kurier“, “Kleine Zeitung“, “Oberösterreichische Nachrichten“ and
“Kronen Zeitung“. The NFP
looked for the keywords “anti-Semitism”, “anti-Semitic”, “Jew(s)” and “Jewish”
in
the online archives of these
papers. Besides this, right-wing papers were scanned: “Zur Zeit” published
weekly
by FPÖ-members, “Aula” edited
monthly by the National-freiheitliche Akademikerverbände Österreichs, an
umbrella organisation of the
national-“liberal” fraternities, and “Der Eckart” published monthly by the
Österreichische
Landsmannschaften.
The keywords “anti-Semitism -
Austria” and “Jews - Austria” were used for the general search of the Internet,
but this process did not reveal
much new information after the first two steps of research had been finished.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
85
FPÖ electoral success in March 1999.333
Anti-Semitism is a main ideological component of
most extreme right-wing groups and their
publications in Austria. In the course of the last few
years, themes directly concerned with the
National Socialist past have been debated again and
again in the public sphere: demonstrations
were held against the Wehrmacht exhibition, there
was controversy regarding a Holocaust
memorial that was officially opened in 2000 and the
question of restitution.
Anti-Semitism was an important issue in
public debate during the period of observation. The
crucial point in many discussions was
indeed whether it was anti-Semitic to criticise or offend
individual Jews or Israeli politics. The
quality papers provided a rather clear answer:
criticising or defaming Jews for being
Jewish or playing with long-standing anti-Semitic
stereotypes was indeed an act of anti-Semitism,
whereas criticism of the work or behaviour of
people of Jewish descent was not. We agree
with this definition supposing that this criticism
refers to Israeli governmental politics or
any other behaviour which will not be connected
with the Jewish descent of the criticised.
Some debates showed how fuzzy the concepts of
anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli criticism
are. Especially in this grey-zone, ideas like a
worldwide Jewish conspiracy “dictating
political correctness” were rather openly expressed.
The Austrian problem of anti-Semitism
seems to focus more on these diffused and traditional
stereotypes than on acts of physical
aggression.
1. Physical acts of violence
The media analysis of the daily papers did
not reveal any physical acts of violence towards
Jews, their communities, organisations or
their property.
According to the Federal Ministry of the
Interior, a memorial plaque near the synagogue in St.
Pölten, Lower Austria was damaged. The
investigations of the complaint are yet to be
completed, but the incident is an alleged
infringement of Article 126 StGB (Criminal Code)
(serious damage to property). The Federal
Ministry of the Interior emphasised that its report
possibly does not cover all incidents
occurring during the monitoring period.
The NGO ZARA, based in Vienna and
providing counselling and aid to victims and witnesses
of racism, told the NFP that only one
smearing of a swastika in Vienna was reported to them
within the period of observation.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Insults
The Israelitische Kultusgemeinde Innsbruck
received one threatening letter. It was addressed
to the president and individual members of
the community. The letter said that Jews were not
welcome in the Tyrol and that they should
go to the USA or Israel, where they actually
belonged. The letter also stated that the
President of the Kultusgemeinde should apologise on
TV for what the Israelis are doing to the
Palestinians, and indicated there would be
consequences if she refused to do so. The
Forum gegen Antisemitismus (Forum against Anti-
Semitism) reported that the Israelitische
Kultusgemeinde Wien received 18 threatening letters
and there were about six cases that their
clients had qualified as anti-Semitic during the period
of observation. The Ministry of the
Interior reported two incidents of verbal aggression. A
professor at the University of Salzburg
received an anti-Semitic flyer from the USA. A
333 Antisemitism Worldwide
2000/01 online, Austria (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
86
billboard with anti-Jewish slogans was put
up in Ried, Upper Austria.334 Investigations into
this incident have yet to be completed.
Media
The media analysis of the dailies
disclosed three letters to the editor containing anti-Semitic
language.335 One letter accused the
Israelis of being themselves responsible for the emerging
anti-Semitism; the other two letters were
related to the discussion about the memorial
Siegfriedskopf. The memorial was put up in
commemoration of the people affiliated to the
University of Vienna killed during WWI,
but German fraternities, who mobilised against
Jews and organisations accepting Jews as
members, dominated the inauguration ceremony.
The analysis of the right-wing papers
shows how anti-Israeli statements from right-wing
politicians and journalists are linked to
anti-Semitism and draw on the repertoire of anti-
Semitic stereotypes. In an interview Jörg
Haider spoke about the necessary fight against
terrorism following 9/11, including the
fight against “the state terrorist acts of Israel against
the Palestinians”. “It is the old problem
of the ambivalent standards the US applies, as
everything done by Israel is accepted,
including the extinction of civilians, of innocent people,
whose houses are demolished by
caterpillars, although there are still people in them. Whereas
the USA is totally allergic to any kind of
terrorist activity executed by the Arab side.”336
Haider accuses the media of contributing
to an unparalleled “Volksverdummung” (making the
people stupid) as they conceal “the real
backgrounds of the power-political conflict in the
world and especially in the Middle
East”.337
The following newspaper article, entitled
“Israel is different”, gives an insight into the
repertoire of anti-Semitic stereotypes
invoked by right-wing extremism: “Israel has always
been presented as a moral and political
model state during the last decades. This picture was
severely damaged by the latest incidents:
more than 700,000 Palestinians have been expelled
after the state of Israel has been founded
.... Reparations paid for the victims of the Holocaust
by Germany, Austria and Switzerland are
hardly ever used for their dedicated purposes .... In
2002, Israeli soldiers have allegedly
committed war crimes in Jenin and other cities.”338
Public discourse/politics
The German discussion on anti-Semitism
also filtered through into the regular party
conference (Parteitag) of the Freedom
Party (FPÖ). Governor Jörg Haider stated, alluding in
the direction of Möllemann (deputy-chairman
of the German FDP and party leader in North
Rhine-Westphalia), that “if you are of an
opinion, you must not get down on your knees about
it a few days later”, and that the
weakness in response to left-wing or Jewish critics is the
reason why the FDP will never be as
successful as the FPÖ.339 In an interview with the daily
Kurier340, Haider stated that it was
unbearable that “the politically correct class” was dictating
what to think and what not to think.
334 Bratic, L. (2002) Ein
österreichischer Bauer im Kampf gegen die Juden (An Austrian farmer fighting
the
Jews), available at:
http://www.ballhausplatz.at/johcgi/ball/TCgi.cgi.target=home&ID_News=1287,
(14 June
2002).
335 Kronen Zeitung, 23 May 2002
and Kleine Zeitung, 7 June 2002.
336 The quotation was translated
by the authors of the report.
337 Zur Zeit, 31 May - 6 June
2002.
338 Der Eckart, May 2002, p. 5.
The quotation was translated by the authors of this report.
339 Kleine Zeitung, 10 June 2002.
340 Kurier, 29 May 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
87
The conflict between the author
Karl-Markus Gauß and Luc Bondy, director of the Wiener
Festwochen (Viennese cultural festival),
is based on a statement by Gauß in his book Mit mir,
ohne mich341 hinting at Bondy’s vanity.
Following the German debate about Martin Walser’s
novel “Tod eines Kritikers”, Bondy said in
an interview: “I am quite sure that Gauß is not an
anti-Semite - apparently unconsciously he
reverted to the rhetoric arsenal of anti-Semitism.”
Gauß responded by saying that the images
he used for Bondy’s vanity were definitely not
taken from a pool of anti-Semitic
stereotypes. Furthermore, he pointed out that it was rather
dangerous to use the term “anti-Semitism”
in a private conflict, for this leads to a term having
a devastating tradition and exerting an
ominous force in Austria losing its meaning.342
3. Research Studies
We did not encounter any research studies
reporting anti-Semitic violence or opinion polls on
changed attitudes towards Jews. A research
study also dealing with the place of anti-Semitism
amongst racism and xenophobia under the
title “Fremdenfeindlichkeit in Österreich”
(Xenophobia in Austria) was conducted in
the second half of the 1990s and presented at a
press conference last year. Forty-six
percent of the respondents showed a low or a very low
tendency towards anti-Semitism, 35% were
neutral and 19% were strongly or very strongly
inclined to anti-Semitism.343 The most
recent survey “Attitudes towards Jews and the
Holocaust in Austria" from 2001344
shows that agreement with anti-Semitic statements had
increased compared to 1995 and that in a
European comparison Austria belongs to those
countries in which anti-Semitism is still
widespread amongst the population. For example,
40% of Austrians in 2001, as against 29%
in 1995, “strongly agree/or somewhat strongly
agree” with the statement “Now, as in the
past, Jews exert too much influence on world
events.”
The survey commissioned by the ADL
conducted between 9 and 29 September 2002
concerning “European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict” (see
Table: Report on Belgium) established that
anti-Semitic attitudes are still quite widespread
among the Austrian respondents . 54%
agreed with the statement “Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this country” whereby 40 %
agreed to the statement “Jews have too much power
in the business world”.345
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
In the book “5 Fragen an 3 Generationen:
Antisemitismus und wir heute” (5 Questions put to
3 Generations: Anti-Semitism and we
today)346 the three authors belonging to three different
generations ask themselves five questions
about anti-Semitism:347 What are Jews to you. Has
your attitude towards Jews changed during
your lifetime. How do you explain Hitler and the
extinction of the Jews to young people
today. Are you for or against Jews emigrating from
the East to Germany and Austria today just
as in 1900. What do you think about Israel. The
341 Gauß, K-M. (2002) Mit mir,
ohne mich. Ein Journal. (With me, without me. A Journal), Wien, Zsolnay
Verlag.
342 profil, 24/2002, Der
Standard, 11 June 2002, 13 June 2002 and Die Presse, 10 June 2002, 13 June
2002.
343 Compare Günther Rathner,
Fremdenfeindlichkeit in Österreich, available at:
http://science.orf.at/science/news/34264,
(15 June 2002).
344 American Jewish Committee,
Attitudes towards Jews and the Holocaust in Austria, New York 2001.
345 ADL Survey „European
Attitudes Toward Jews”, October 2002,
http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/EuropeanAttitudesPoll-10-02.pdf
346 Halhuber, M-J./A. Pelinka/D.
Ingruber, Fünf Fragen an drei Generationen: Antisemitismus gestern, heute,
morgen (Five questions put to
three generations: Anti-Semitism yesterday, today, tomorrow), Wien 2002.
347 This information was taken
from the publishing company’s homepage: http://www.czernin-verlag.com/, (15
June 2002).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
88
three authors answer these questions in a
very personal way and try to explain the
phenomenon of anti-Semitism and show the
different perspectives of the three generations
concerning the persecution of the Jews in
the Nazi period and Israel. The book was presented
and discussed in the Austrian newspaper
where it was characterised as signifying “cultural
change”.348
The Mistelbacher Stadtmuseum (Municipal
Museum in Mistelbach, Lower Austria) opened
its exhibition Verdrängt und vergessen -
Die Juden von Mistelbach (Repressed and Forgotten
- The Jews of Mistelbach) on 9 June 2002.
The exhibition shows the development of Jewish
settlement since 1867, the life of the
former Jewish community and their extinction.
The Jüdisches Museum Hohenems (Jewish
Museum Hohenems) opened its exhibition
Rosenthals. Collage einer
Familiengeschichte (The Rosenthals. Collage of a Family History),
which tells stories about a Jewish family
who formerly lived in the Hohenems region and are
now scattered all over the world. The
stories and pieces were collected and displayed by the
members of the Rosenthal family
themselves.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
The members of the Austrian Government
neither commented on any of the good practices
mentioned above, nor on the negative
trends mentioned in this report.
The following reactions and discussions by
and among politicians and other opinion leaders
show how fuzzy the borders between
anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli attitudes are. Imprudent
statements directed against the state of
Israel and its leading politicians are apt to stimulate
anti-Semitism, especially among those who
are susceptible to anti-Semitic stereotypes.
Last year, the municipality of Salzburg
put up a memorial plaque for Theodor Herzl which
read: “In Salzburg I spent some of the
happiest hours of my life. Dr. Theodor HERZL 1860-
1904.” (“In Salzburg brachte ich einige
der schönsten Stunden meines Lebens zu”) Federal
President Klestil informed Heinz Schaden,
the mayor of Salzburg, that he would prefer to see
the complete quotation from Herzl’s diary:
“So I would have loved to stay in this beautiful
city, but, being a Jew, I would have never
been awarded with the position of a judge.” In his
letter, President Klestil wrote that
“especially in Austria we must treat the memory of
Theodor Herzl with special
sensitivity.”349 This was the starting point of a discussion at the
beginning of June, involving the
Israelitische Kultusgemeinden Salzburg and Wien and
ending with an agreement on 10 June 2002
to complete the text.350
On 24 May, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Federal
Minister for Foreign Affairs, visited the former
concentration camp in Auschwitz during her
visit to Poland.351 In her speech she stressed that
it was “not easy for Austria to confess
that many of our compatriots have been perpetrators,
accomplices or people who knew about
things happening (Mitwisser).” She stated that “we
must learn from Auschwitz that we cannot
watch inactively where anti-Semitism, hatred and
intolerance occur.”
On 12 June, Ariel Muzicant and Josef
Pühringer, chairman of the Landeshauptleutekonferenz
(Governors Conference of the Federal
Provinces), signed a restitution treaty. The treaty says
348 Der Standard, 27 May 2002.
349 Der Standard, 5 June 2002.
350 Der Standard, 11 June 2002.
351 Kurier, 25 May 2002 and Der
Standard, 25/26 May 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
89
that the Federal Provinces will pay 8.1
million Euro to the Kultusgemeinde for property that
once belonged to Jewish communities and
was expropriated or destroyed during the Nazi
regime. The treaty cannot come into force,
though, before the two class-action lawsuits in the
USA are dropped.352 The negotiations prior
to the signing of the treaty were closely watched,
as governor Jörg Haider and Ariel Muzicant
were previously involved in court proceedings,
and Haider finally apologized for his
libellous statement about Muzicant in February 2001.
The discussion on whether Haider’s
statement about Muzicant was anti-Semitic or not,
dominated public discourse for a couple of
weeks. An expert from the Kultusgemeinde
Salzburg told us that the Internet fora of
the ORF (Austrian Broadcasting Corporation) and
dailies were full of anti-Semitic
statements in connection with reports on the signing of this
reparation treaty.
Portugal353
In Portugal (total population: 10 million)
there is no tradition of anti-Semitism in recent times.
Apart from a period of some tension
between Salazar’s regime and the Portuguese Jewish
community - that never resulted in
persecution -, in the recent past the small Jewish
community (700 people) has been
assimilated and accepted by Portuguese society. After the
dawn of democracy, Jews were totally
accepted as another religious minority and its religion
is protected under the act acknowledging
religious plurality.
1. Physical acts of violence
In July the Lisbon synagogue was
vandalised and sacred objects scattered on the floor.354
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
Direct threats
There are no reports of complaints neither
by the Jewish community, the press, NGOs nor
other media.
Insults
The Israel Embassy has received slanderous
calls and Internet messages with offensive
content.
Telephone
There are no reports of physical or material
threats against the Jewish community and its
property.
Graffiti
The Israeli Embassy reported that their
flag in the “Nations Park”, located where the World
Expo took place in 1998 and now a major
social meeting place in Lisbon, was vandalised.
Several Nazi swastikas and other insults
appeared on the flag platform.
Leaflets
352 Compare Der Standard, 13 June
2002.
353 This report is based on the
compilation by NUMENA - Centro de Investigação em Ciencias Sociais e
Humanas/Research Centre on Human
and Social Sciences.
354 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe, American Jewish Committee, online,
publications, p.12 (see
http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/ Publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
90
No material of this kind was reported to
have appeared in circulation. The Jewish community,
as expressed through its representative,
considered an e-mail sent by a professor of the Trás-
os-Montes University the main anti-Semitic
event in the monitored period. In this e-mail,
addressing the conflict in the Middle
East, a phrase stated “If there are any good Jews (which
I doubt) (…)”. Another professor of the
same university alerted the Portuguese Jewish
community about this e-mail, who in turn
then revealed it to the press, where it was published
in the newspaper Público.
Public discourse
On a visit to Israel, the Nobel Prize
winner José Saramago declared to Portuguese radio
station Antenna 1, that “It must be said
that in Palestine, there is a crime which we can stop.
We may compare it with what happened at
Auschwitz”. While visiting Ramallah and Arafat
with members of the International
Parliament of Writers, Saramago stated that the Israeli
blockade of Ramallah is "in the
spirit of Auschwitz," and "this place is being turned into a
concentration camp."355
Internet
Several Portuguese Nazi sites appeared in
2002 on the Internet. Some of them have anti-
Semitic declarations and articles.
However, these are translations of anti-Semitic articles
written in other countries, mainly from
the US. No explicit threats to the Portuguese Jewish
community were found in any of these sites
(at least in the period monitored). One particular
site has more explicit anti-Semitic
allusions: Movimento da Reconstrução Nacional Socialista
Atlântico (Atlantic Movement for the
National Socialist Reconstruction). At this site one can
find several links to further national and
foreign National Socialist sites. The majority of the
anti-Semitic sites are Brazilian; and
though we can also find Portuguese fascist and nationalist
sites, they do not display anti-Semitic
references.
3. Research studies
There is no recent report on anti-Semitic
aggression or attitudes.
4. Good practices for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
There are no reported examples of good
practices.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
The President recently participated in the
100-year celebrations for the Lisbon Synagogue. On
that occasion the President stated that
Portugal should pay more attention to Jewish culture
and to its several famous names, claiming
that they are an integral part of Portuguese history.
The main newspapers broadcasted the
celebrations and printed the President’s address.
355 ADL-online, 26 March 2002.
http://www.adl.org/presrele/IslME_62/4063_62.asp (see also Chicago Tribune-
online, 7 April 2002;
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/showcase/chi-020407maelstrom1.story);
Spanish site
of BBC: Interview with Saramago:
"Palestina es como Auschwitz";
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/misc/newsid_1902000/1902254.stm);
Jerusalem Post-omline, 27 March 2002
(see
http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2002/03/27/News/News.45959.html). In the London
Arabic daily “al-Hayat”
the commentator praised
Saramago’s courage to compare Auschwitz with the “massacres against the
Palestinian
people”. MEMRI, special dispatch,
5 April 2002 (see
http://www.memri.de/uebersetzungen_analysen/themen/europa_und_der_nahe_osten/
eu_saramago_05_04_02.pdf).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
91
Finland356
The Finnish Jewish community is rather
small (1500 members) of the overall Finnish
population of 5.2 million. In Finland, the
Jews are well integrated into society and are
represented in nearly all sectors of it.
Most of them live in the metropolitan area of Helsinki,
with small numbers of members living also
in the cities of Turku and Tampere. Due to
Finland’s continuing pro-Arab attitude
since the 1967 Six Day War,357 there were minor
threats against the Jewish community
during the Middle East crisis.358 In the monitoring
period there have also been many
pro-Palestine demonstrations and movements directed
against the government of Israel and its
actions in the Palestinian areas. These activities
cannot be evaluated as anti-Semitic;
nevertheless there is always a possibility that they can
create extreme expressions of opinion, so
that people may no longer distinguish the Israeli
government from the Jewish people, thus
increasing the danger of anti-Semitic thoughts and
acts.
1. Physical acts of violence
On 6 May a window of the Jewish synagogue
in the centre of Helsinki located on the
building’s 2nd floor was smashed and raw
eggs thrown against the walls at the Jewish
Community Building. The attack was carried
out by a group of about 10 skinheads.359 This is
the first time that an incident of this
kind has occurred in Helsinki.360
Earlier in the spring there were two bomb
threats. One bomb threat was not reported at all in
the media and the other one was reported
on different scales depending on the paper.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
356 This report is based on the
compilation by Ihmisoikeusliitto Ry Finnish League for Human Rights. Sources:
Interview with the representative
of Finnish Jewish community on 4 June; Interview with the representative of
Friends of Israel association on
11 June; Interview with the office of Ombudsman for ethnic minorities on 11
June; Chat rooms and discussion
groups: http://www.kpnet.com/ajanfakta/; http://netlari.
econnection.fi/forum/forum.php.viesti=1510;http://www.usko.net;
http://groups.google.com/ groups.hl=fi&lr=
&group=sfnet.keskustelu.uskonto.kristinusko;
the web page of Finnish Jewish Community: http://www.
jchelsinki.fi; and articles and
newspapers. The Finnish NFP is faced with similar problems gathering sources as
in other EU Member States (Ireland,
Denmark) in which anti-Semitism is not widespread and the corresponding
state or NGO institutions
systematically collating information do not exist. The biggest problem the
Finnish
League for Human Rights (FLHR)
faced was the lack of sources. It proved to be almost impossible to find any
accurate information about the
situation of anti-Semitism in Finland. The problem is that there is no other
monitoring centre for racism and
xenophobia in Finland in addition to us.
357 In August 2001 Foreign
Minister Erkki Tuomioja drew a parallel between Israel and the Nazis in an
interview
with the newspaper Suomen
Kuvalehti (24 August 2001). Tuomioja considered the actions of Israel equal to
the
Nazi persecution of the Jews.
(see: http://www.icej.fi/051001.htm). See also Helsingin Sanomat, 29 August
2001, English edition (see:
http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp.id=20010829IE4); Henrik Bachner from Lund
University, Sweden, in a letter
to the editor of Helsingin Sanomat, 8 November 2002, referred on the statements
of Tuomioja saying that he
“brought shame on Finland by using this demonizing comparison”, Further he
emphasised that the image of a
“Nazi Israel” developed originally in the 1960s as part of anti-Zionist Soviet
propaganda and then became
attractive to wider opinion circles, Helsingin Sanomat, 8 November 2002.
358 Institute for Jewish Policy
Research and American Jewish Committee, Anti-Semitism World Report 1996,
p.113.
359 Murray Gordon, The New
Anti-Semitism in Western Europe (see
Http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/publications.asp.did=618&pid=1412);
ADL Global Anti_semitism. Selected
Incidents Around the World in
2002 (see http://www.adl.org/Anti-Semitism/anti-
Semitism_global_incidents.asp#Finland)
360 See http://www.hasbara.us,
Report on anti-Jewish incidents.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
92
Direct threats
The Jewish community in Helsinki has
received threatening letters throughout the spring,
especially in the earlier part, but also
in May.
Telephone
Earlier this spring, at the same time as
the Israeli army invaded the city of Jenin, the Finnish
Jewish community began to receive
threatening phone calls on a daily basis. Also in the
monitoring period covered by this report
there have been threatening phone calls to the Jewish
Community Centre because of the recent
incidents in the Middle East.
On 4 April an anonymous telephone bomb
threat to a Jewish school in Helsinki caused the
evacuation of the Helsinki synagogue and
the Jewish old people’s home. No device was
found.361
Graffiti and anti-Semitic inscriptions
There has not been much anti-Semitic
graffiti in Helsinki. While most of the graffiti expresses
pro-Palestine sentiments, some of it is
also very anti-Israeli.
Publicly distributed leaflets
Pro-Palestine movements have distributed
their leaflets on many occasions. Some of these
leaflets contain (extreme) anti-Israeli
material, and others have asked people to boycott Israeli
products to help attain peace in Israel.
Media
According to a representative of the
Jewish community in Helsinki362, Jews are blamed for
what happens in Israel and the news and
articles in the Finnish media have tended to be
biased about issues dealing with the
situation in Israel. He believes that the anti-Israeli and
anti-Jewish tone of these writings could
have been intentional or unintentional. He also sees
that the recent development of
anti-Semitism in Europe may lead to an increase in anti-
Semitic acts in Finland.
Some of the writers of letters to
newspapers have expressed their concern over the way the
Finnish media handles the situation in
Middle East. Some writers see that the media can really
damage the general picture of Jews and
weaken their position in society by presenting news
from a narrow point of view, without
taking all relevant matters into consideration.
Public discourse
The Archbishop, when referring to the
situation in Middle East,363 said that the borders of a
state cannot be drawn with the help of the
Old Testament’s guidelines. He has agreed that the
Jewish people are God’s chosen people, but
still this fact should not affect how Christians
react to the policy the Israeli government
practices. Some people reacted very strongly to the
Archbishop’s opinions. They could not
understand how the Archbishop of the Finnish
Lutheran Church could criticise the
actions of the Israeli government. Others believed that he
showed a great deal of courage by
expressing his opinions on the situation in Middle East.
Internet
In some of the Internet’s news groups and
chat rooms there has been discussion about the
situation in Israel. The opinions have
been both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel. On some
361 B&NNS Radio
International. Danish and International Weekly News (see
http://www.euroaudio.dk/Triple_site/banns/manus_details.asp.uniqueID=479).
362 Interview of the NFP with a
representative of the Finnish Jewish Community, 4 June 2002.
363 See Interview in Helsingin
Sanomat, 8 April 2002, http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp.id=20020408IE7.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
93
occasions the discussion has been impolite
from both sides. Hence, there are some anti-
Semitic opinions in Internet chat
rooms.364 It is common in these Internet discussions that
people cite the Bible in making their
arguments. Some argue that the Bible says that Jews are
the chosen people of God and now they are
persecuted as the Bible has predicted; others
argue that the Jews killed Jesus and they
will always be blamed for this.
3. Research studies
During the period no research studies were
done in the field.
4. Good practice for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
FLHR interviewed the representative of the
Friends of Israel Association, who said that they
have done a lot of work to reduce
prejudice and violence towards Jews. The main method for
doing this has been the dissemination of
information. They have organised events informing
the public about Israel and the Jewish
culture. Some speakers have come from Israel to give
lectures about the situation in Israel.
There was also one pro-Israel demonstration on 11 May
2002.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
There has not been much discussion about
the increase of anti-Semitism; more generally
politicians have expressed their concern
about a rise in support for extreme right-wing parties
in Europe. Politicians and parties have
declared that this kind of development is unacceptable
in Finland and that a lot of work must be
done to prevent this development from also taking
place here.
Sweden365
Within its general population of 8.9 million
Sweden has an estimated Jewish population of
around 18,500, most of whom live in the
three large city areas of Stockholm (5500 members
belonging to the Jewish community),
Gothenburg (Götheburg, 1800 members) and Malmö
(1200). Around 50% of the Jewish population
in these cities are members of Jewish
communities.
There has been a slow but steady upsurge
in anti-Jewish activities since the beginning of the
Intifada in September 2000. Perhaps the
most dramatic example from the beginning of this
period was in October 2000 when a big
anti-Israeli demonstration was held in Malmö and
demonstrators forced their way into a shop
owned by Jews and threatened them. There have
364 Research in chat rooms by the
NFP.
365 This report is based on a
compilation by the EXPO foundation. Sources and methods: the only Swedish
institution compiling a formal
index of anti-Semitic incidents is the Swedish Security Police (Säpo); however,
such statistics are only published
annually the year following the incident. To compile this report we have made
use of our contacts with all
three Jewish communities and are continuously receiving reports on registered
anti-
Semitic incidents. We are also in
continuous contact with a number of individuals researching the topic. It
should
be noted though that many of our
sources, especially officials within the Jewish communities, feel that there
may
be substantial hidden statistics.
The gathering of information has been done basically through telephone calls
that
were prepared by sending out the
questions well in advance of our calls. Other information, especially about
activities on the Internet and
newspaper articles, stems from our normal daily collection of information. We
feel
that there are several cases
where anti-Israeli propaganda or sentiments have transgressed a boundary and
become anti-Jewish propaganda and
where anti-Israeli propaganda has been directed at Jews only because they
are Jews.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
94
been some examples of references to old
Christian anti-Jewish sentiments in the media, where
references have been made to concepts like
“an eye for an eye”, child slaughter and Christ-
killers; furthermore, Israeli politics has
been compared with Nazi politics on a few occasions.
In the early spring of 2002 the daily
Aftonbladet published an article criticising Israeli politics
with the headline “The crucified Arafat”,
a reference to one of the most well known anti-
Semitic myths.366 References have also
been made to “Jewish media power”. A television
programme in November 2001,
Mediemagasinet, pointed out that three out of the six Swedish
reporters reporting from the Middle East
were Jewish. The programme put in question the
objectivity of these Jewish reporters.
Internet homepages of both the extreme right and the
radical left have used anti-Semitism when
discussing the Middle East conflict. One left-wing
homepage, Indymedia, featured an
anti-Semitic cartoon; the Grim Reaper sporting a hat with
a swastika and the Star of David. The
Indymedia chat has featured statements referring to
well-known conspiracy themes such as a
“New World Order” and a “Zionist Occupation
Government - ZOG”. The anniversary of the
November-pogrom 1938 on 9 November 2001
was exploited by some groups for
anti-Israeli propaganda. Nazi groups like the National
Socialist Front have applauded Islamic
anti-Semitism and terror, including the acts of al
Qaida.
1. Physical acts of violence
On 18 April 2002, a small public meeting
with approximately 100 participants protesting
against both anti-Semitism and phobic
attitudes to Islam took place in central Stockholm.367
The organisers expressed that the rally
was non-partisan and did not take sides in the Middle
East conflict. The rally was organised by
a branch of the Liberal Party youth organisation and
several of the participants were Jews.368
As the rally was about to end, a much larger anti-
Israeli march organised by the Palestinian
support organisation was passing nearby. Suddenly,
100-150 young demonstrators broke out and
charged into the little crowd that was left around
the small demonstration - most of them
Jews. The attacking group was threatening and some
violence was seen. Individual attackers
could be heard shouting, “Kill the Jews!” and “We’ll
blow you up!” Some attackers also went
around aggressively asking people if they were
Jewish. It should be pointed out that
there were also many young Swedish extreme left-wing
people amongst the most aggressive
participants.369
There were no incidents reported for
Stockholm and Göteburg over the period of May and
June. Malmö has witnessed a consistently
high level of anti-Semitic agitation since the
beginning of the current Intifada in the
autumn of 2000. The city has a higher percentage of
Muslims than the other two large Swedish
cities.370 Among the population of around 250,000
inhabitants there are 45,000 individuals
of Muslim background in Malmö. Including the
surrounding areas, the number reaches
around 100,000. Though the anti-Semitic sentiments
are not shared by a majority of the Muslim
population, indications show that such sentiments
366 See Aufbau, online, 18 April
2002 (see http://aufbauonline.com/2002/issue8/pages8/15.html).
367 For a closer study of the
incidents during the peak period in March and April 2002 we refer to the
documents
published by the European Jewish
Congress.
368 ADL, online, Global
Anti-Semitism: Selected Incidents Around the World in 2002, Sweden (see
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/anti-semitism_global_incidents.asp#Sweden).
369 By Lin Noueihed, Beirut,
reported on 1 April 2002 in The Age online, that in March “around 200 marched
past the Israeli and US embassies
in Stockholm, where a handful of extreme left-wing activists raided shops and
destroyed Israeli-imported
produce” (see http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/03/31/1017206169206.html).
370 The Muslim population in the
whole of Sweden is estimated to be between 300,000 to 350,000.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
95
are more common there than among the rest
of the population. Several incidents were directed
towards the Jewish cemeteries in Malmö.371
19 May: vandalism inflicted at the Jewish
cemetery in Rosengard in the suburb of Malmö.
3 June: burglary and vandalism in the
funeral chapel at the Jewish cemetery at Föreningsgatan
close to the city centre of Malmö.
4 and 6 June: burglary and vandalism at
the Jewish cemetery in Rosengard. Smashed
windows and anti-Semitic graffiti.
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
On 21 May a group of young Arabs were
reported yanking at the entrance doors of the Jewish
Community Centre shouting “Fucking Jew!”
(literally “Judejävel”: “Jew Devil!”), and
making obscene gestures at a woman
inside.372
Graffiti and inscriptions
On 3 June graffiti on the wall of the
Jewish cemetery at Föreningsgatan read: “Fuck the
pigs!”, “Smash Israel” and “Never forget
Jenin!”
Publicly distributed leaflets
On 29 May in the northeastern town of
Gävle a man was sentenced to two years prison for
running a record company called Sniper
Records and releasing racist and anti-Semitic CDs,
some of them in German. The man admitted
passing the profit on to the National Socialist
Front. The local daily Sydöstran reported
(6 June 2002) that the library of the town
Karlskrona had found a great amount of
anti-Semitic propaganda slipped into shelves, books
and papers over the last year. The library
has now decided to forbid people with openly racist
views to visit the premises.
On 14 June several Swedish papers reported
that four leading Nazis, two of them living in
Karlskrona, have been sentenced to six
months prison for re-publishing a 1930s anti-Semitic
book titled “The Jewish Question”.
Media
Samtidsmagazinet Salt, an up-market
magazine labelling itself “radical conservative”,
released its latest issue at the beginning
of June. Previous issues of Salt had clear anti-Semitic
content. In the June issue one article
paid tribute to Holocaust denial, while a well-known
anti-Semitic conspiracy theoretician
penned another article.373
In March the presidents of the Jewish
communities in Stockholm, Göteborg and Malmö,
acting together with presidents of the
Swedish-Israel Society, the Swedish branch of the Israel
Information Office and the Swedish
Committee Against Anti-Semitism, published an article
in the main daily, Dagens Nyheter, in
which they protested against “the one-sided reporting in
the Swedish media about the conflict in the
Middle East.” In an alarming passage, the article
continues: “As a consequence of the
massive anti-Israeli campaign, we have observed a
dramatic increase in anti-Jewish activity
and expressions of anti-Semitism in Swedish
society”.374
371 On 16 September the Jewish
cemetery was desecrated once again. On 12 October 2002 a window in a
synagogue in Malmö was smashed,
The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, 23 October 2002 (see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/issue.asp.t=The+Current&m=10&y=2002&d=29).
372 On 8 October, a Jewish woman
in Gothenburg received 11 threatening telephone calls, see
http://www.antisemitism.org.il/issue.asp.t=The+Current&m=10&y=2002&d=29).
373 See the corresponding issues
of the magazine.
374 Aufbau, online, 18 April 2002
(see http://aufbauonline.com/2002/issue8/pages8/15.html).
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
96
During Easter 2002 the newspaper
Aftonbladet attacked Israeli policy with a headline
“Crucified Arafat” referring
to the old anti-Jewish accusation that it were the Jews who
crucified Jesus.375
Internet
In May and June, the website “Focus
Israel” (Brännpunkt Israel) - run by one of the officials
in the Malmö Jewish community - repeatedly
received hate mail with anti-Semitic content.
Karlskrona, a small town in the southeast
of Sweden, is the stronghold of the largest and most
active Nazi group in Sweden, the NSF,
Nationalsocialistisk Front (National Socialist Front).
The group is known for its high
anti-Semitic profile, also reflected on its homepages, which
are directly linked to the sites of the
right extremist and revisionist Gary Lauck from
Lincoln/Nebraska.376 Another Swedish
internet site carries anti-Israel, anti-Semitic and anti-
American material, mainly caricatures
similar to those from a Swedish caricaturist who in the
past has drawn anti-Semitic caricatures
for the revisionist Ahmed Rami and his “Radio Islam”
which was a radio station and today is one
of the most radical right wing anti-Semitic
homepages on the net with close links to
radical Islam groups.377
3. Research Studies
There is no recent report or opinion poll
on anti-Semitic aggression or attitudes.
4. Good Practice for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
Individual teachers in some schools have
made a point of introducing the issue of anti-
Semitism in class discussions. Reports to
the Expo Foundation from several teachers indicate
a growth of anti-Semitic sentiments,
including various conspiracy theories among
(predominantly) immigrant youth with a
Muslim background. Such sentiments seem to be
closely related to the media reporting and
the development of the situation in the Middle East.
There has been no formal study made about
such claims. An example of good practice is how
survivors of the Holocaust have related
their experiences in the schools. A teaching method
called “Abrahams barn” (“Abraham’s
children”), pointing out similarities between
Christianity, Islam and Judaism, has -
according to teachers - been reported to be fairly
successful in schools with a high
percentage of immigrants. Along with this, teachers in some
schools have reported that a generally
increased vigilance against racist and anti-Semitic
expressions has been a successful method
in curbing such sentiments. The Swedish
Committee against anti-Semitism has been
writing articles and arranging a series of seminars
in different cities and towns. The
seminars were called “Stereotyping immigrants, Jews and
Muslims in media and debate” and got a
very good response in the evaluations.
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
EXPO found no example of politicians
speaking up against anti-Semitism. The leftist party
Vänsterpartiet announced a campaign
against racism, mentioning xenophobia, homophobia
and other forms of racism, but not
anti-Semitism.
375 Henrik Bachner (Lund
University), Anti-Semitism must be taken seriously, in Helsingin Sanomat, 8
November 2002.
376 Research in the World Wide
Web.
377 See Juliane Wetzel,
/Networking on the Internet. Anti-Semitism as networking tool for right-wing
extremism
on the World Wide Web, paper
presented on the EUMC Third Annual European Round Table Conference,
Vienna, 10-11October 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
97
United Kingdom378
The Jewish population in the United
Kingdom numbers 280,000, two-thirds of whom live in
London; other large communities are
located in Manchester, Leeds and Glasgow. The Muslim
population is 500,000, most of whom have
an Asian background. Between 1990 and 2001 an
average of 282 anti-Semitic incidents per
year were counted. During the period 1998 to 2001,
the average yearly total rose to 305
incidents.379 In comparison to the preceding year, in 2000
the UK (total population 58.4 million)
witnessed 405 anti-Semitic incidents, a rise of 50. One
third of these occurred in the months of
October and November, “reflecting the upsurge in
tensions between Palestinians and
Israelis”.380 The rise in 2000 was also accompanied by an
even greater increase in racist incidents.
The number of incidents decreased in 2001 to 305,
but the Community Security Trust states
that “October 2000 proved to be a watershed with
regard to incidents. There appears to have
been a genuine change, both qualitative and
quantitative after this point”: there were
22 synagogue desecrations in the 22 months before
October 2000, but 78 in the same time
period since, and assaults on Jews since October 2000
“have often been sustained
beating leading to hospitalisation, compared with the `roughing
up` by neo-Nazis that more typically
occurred before.”381 The data of the CST show that an
increasing number of incidents are “caused
by Muslims or Palestinian sympathisers, whether
or not they are Muslims”.382 This
indicates a change of direction from which anti-Semitism
comes, which is closely connected to the
tensions in the Middle East conflict.
1. Physical acts of violence
The climax of the violence was reached in
the weeks between the beginning of April and the
start of May 2002. There were 51 incidents
nationwide in April,383 “most of them assaults on
individuals”,384 compared with 12 in March
and seven in February. Some of the assaults
resulted in the hospitalisation of the
victims with serious injuries. Reportedly, the victims
were mainly orthodox and Hassidic Jews.385
In London, Manchester and Glasgow the
windows of synagogues or the Hebrew
Congregation were smashed; in London a further
synagogue was desecrated.
On 6 May, following a rally in support of
Israel, a boy wearing a shirt with the Star of David
was attacked by three youths.386
378 This report is based on the
compilation by the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism, Berlin.
379 Michael Whine, Anti-Semitism
on the streets, in: Is there a new anti-Semitism in Britain., online
www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/main.htm.
380Antisemitism Worldwide 2000/1,
online, United Kingdom (see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/annual-
report.html).
381 Whine, ibid.
382 Whine, ibid.
383 Information given by the
Community Security Trust, quoted in: The Guardian 2 May 2002. In Britain,
incident reports are gathered from
the victims themselves, press reports and the police. During 2001 the
Community Security Trust (CST),
the monitoring body, was accorded third-party reporting status by the police.
This allows it to report
anti-Semitic incidents to the police and act as a go-between between the police
and those
victims who are unable or
unwilling to report to the police directly.
384 Lawyers Committee for Humans
Rights, Fire and Broken Glass. The Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe,
Strasbourg, May 2002, p.1 (see
http://www.lchr.org/iJP/antisemitism_report.pdf).
385 Amnesty International Press
Release, AI Index: EUR 3 January 2002 (Public)News Service No: 84, 10 May
2002 speaks of “at least 48
assaults; Michael Whine, spokesman for the Community Security Trust, said that
15
British Jews have been victims of
anti-Semitic attacks in the first three weeks of April, most of them in
London.”
See: Beth Gardiner, Associated
Press, European Jews wary as anti-Semitic attacks increase, 11 May 2002
386 Anti-Defamation League,
Global Anti-Semitism: Selected Incidents Around the World in 2002,
www.adl.org/Anti_semitism.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
98
On 11 July the synagogue in Swansea
(Wales) was desecrated by vandals with graffiti
(swastika, and the phrase “T4 Jewish c***
from Hitler”) and Torah rolls were damaged and
burned. The attempt to burn down the
building failed.387
The CST counted 20 incidents of extreme
violence (attacks potentially causing loss of life)
and assaults during the first five months
of 2002. Then perpetrators were described as
follows: five white, five Arab, three
Asian, seven unknown.388
2. Verbal aggression/hate speech
In Edinburgh an Episcopalian clergyman was
forced to defend a mural showing a crucified
Jesus flanked by Roman soldiers - and
modern-day Israeli troops. It was not anti-Semitic, he
insisted, but designed to make his
congregation think about current conflicts.389 The Anti-
Defamation League criticised that
Christian clerics are using anti-Jewish rhetoric in
proclaiming the old, destructive
‘replacement theology’ - the notion that Judaism has been
replaced as religion”.390
Media
Many British Jews are of the opinion that
the press reporting on Israeli policy is spiced with a
tone of animosity, “as to smell of
anti-Semitism” as The Economist put it.391 In their opinion
this is above all the case with the two
quality papers, the Guardian and the Independent. After
the attack on the Finsbury Park synagogue
Jeremy Newmark, official spokesman for Chief
Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks, said that
“anti-Semitic incidents have been rising over the past year,
but have shown a marked upturn in the past
six weeks as the conflict in the Middle East has
reached a furious pitch.” He says that
“the anti-Israeli bias of much media coverage here has
made British Jews more vulnerable” without
though naming any examples.392
3. Research studies
Between 16 May and 4 June and between 9
and 29 September surveys commissioned by the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) New York were
conducted on “European Attitudes towards
Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli
Conflict” in ten European countries.393 Compared to
most of the other EU countries agreement
with anti-Semitic statements in the United
Kingdom was clearly lower: from the four
stereotypical statements presented, only 9% of the
respondents agreed to at least three (see
Table: Report on Belgium). Only with the statement
“Jews are more loyal to
Israel than to this country” did one third of the respondents agree; at
the same time though this number is well
below the European average of 51%. A third of the
British respondents feel that anti-Jewish
sentiments will increase in the coming years. To the
question “Thinking specifically of the
current conflict (...) - are your sympathies more with
the Israelis or more with the
Palestinians.”, 30% of the British respondents sympathised with
the Palestinian side, the second highest
rate after the Danes, while only 16% sympathised with
Israel. Here the social contact with
Muslims appears to have played an important role: 32% of
the British in contact with Muslims
“fairly often” sympathised with the Palestinians. In all
387 Ibid.
388 Whine reported that: in two
of the incidents involving unknown perpetrators the police or independent
witnesses described the
perpetrators as Arabs or Arab-looking youths (Anti-Semitism on the streets, in:
Is there a
new anti-Semitism in Britain.,
online www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS%20Reports/new_antisemitism/main.htm)
389 The Guardian, 26 April 2002.
390 ADL, Anti-Semitism. It´s not
a History Lesson. It´s a Current Event, ADL-Website 15 June 2002
391 Economist.com, Anti-Semitism
in Europe. Is it really rising. 4 September 2002.
392 The Guardian, 2 May 2002.
393 Anti-Defamation League,
European Attitudes Towards Jews, Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict,
27
June 2002.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
99
states surveyed the individual use of
media exerted a certain influence: of those British
respondents who followed the news coverage
“a great deal” or “a good amount”, 41%
sympathised with the Palestinian side,
while the proportion for Israel was 11%. A survey
already conducted in April, “The plague on
both houses. British attitudes to Israel and
Palestine”, had reached similar
conclusions: 14% said that they were more sympathetic to
Israel than to the Palestinians, while 28%
sympathised more with the latter. Both Prime
Minister Sharon and Palestinian leader
Arafat were mainly disapproved of (50% and 54%
respectively); and 38% and 33%
respectively were for sanctions against both sides (cutting
off aid and blocking military exports).394
The Economist spoke of a “steady shift of sympathy
away from Israel, especially on the left”.
4. Good Practice for reducing prejudice,
violence and aggression
After the desecration of the synagogue at
Finsbury Park, on 2 May the Muslim Jewish Forum
of North London, a group committed to
improving relations between the two faiths,
condemned the attack as “a terrible violation
of a sacred place of worship”.395 Some days after
the attack on the Finsbury Park synagogue,
a petition to “Stop Anti-Semitism in the UK” was
placed on the Internet and to be
personally presented to the Prime Minister Tony Blair.396
5. Reactions by politicians and other
opinion leaders
In a demonstration of mainstream political
solidarity against racism, two senior Labour and
Conservative politicians united on 2 May
2002, to condemn the desecration of the synagogue
of Finsbury Park. The Local Government
Secretary, Stephen Byers, and the opposition home
affairs spokesman, Oliver Letwin,
supported the Chief Rabbi, Dr Jonathan Sacks, as
volunteers began scraping away spattered
paint, repairing broken seats and replacing
vandalised equipment.397 After surveying
the damage, Mr Byers said he wanted to
demonstrate the government’s support for
the Jewish community. “The people of this country
will defend their right to practice their
religion.” “In the year 2002 this kind of destruction is
not what I had expected to see. Any
right-thinking member of the community will condemn
this as barbaric. We have to ensure that
those people who are intolerant, who are prejudiced,
don’t have the opportunity of committing
this again.” Mr Letwin regarded it as particularly
important “that every mainstream political
party in Britain shows the solidarity we feel about
this attack. It was deliberately intended
to inflame relationships in the local community.” The
Chief Rabbi warned of the upsurge in
anti-Semitic attacks, emphasising though at the same
time that the “support from political
parties and local communities has been tremendous.
Britain must reject racist politics and
I’m confident it will. There will certainly be greater
vigilance in the community.”398
On 4 March 2002, the MP Jim Murphy had
submitted a parliamentary question to the Home
Secretary, calling for him to make a
statement on anti-Semitism in the UK and asking what
action he has taken to combat it.399 In
reply the government emphasised that it is “fully
committed to tackling racism and
anti-Semitism wherever it occurs. We have continued to
strengthen our anti-discrimination laws
and our criminal law to ensure that it continues to
offer some of the most comprehensive
protection against racism and anti-Semitism in Europe.
394 Economist.com, Anti-Semitism
in Europe. Is it really rising., 4 September 2002, Source: ICM, April 2002.
395 Owen Bowcott and Sarah Hall,
Vigilance and vigil to fight swastika vandals. Politicians show solidarity at
desecrated synagogue, The
Guardian, 3 May 2002.
396 www.thepetitionsite.com.
397 Ibid.
398 Ibid.
399
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020304/text/20304w13.htm
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
0
In that regard we have introduced the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act 2000; we are looking
at ways to implement the European Union
directives on race and discrimination in
employment; strengthen the law on
incitement to racial hatred by raising the maximum
penalty to seven years’ imprisonment and
extending the scope to hatred directed against racial
groups outside the United Kingdom and
introduced religiously aggravated offences to add to
the racially aggravated offences we
introduced in 1998. We have asked the police and the
Crown Prosecution Service to work together
to pool knowledge and experience in the
investigation and prosecution of race hate
material. We have also made significant changes to
our laws countering the threat of
terrorism, including the Terrorism Act 2000 and, in response
to the events of September 11, the
Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. The
Government and the police continue to have
a good working relationship with the Jewish
community in Britain.”
On 19 April, David Blunkett, the Home
Secretary presented, together with his colleagues
from France, Belgium, Spain and Germany, a
joint declaration on “Racism, Xenophobia and
Anti-Semitism” which aims at establishing
preventive measures and a European-wide
coordination of the responsible offices
and agencies.400
In response to a question posed by the MP
Dismore as to the number of anti-Semitic offences
in the last weeks and months, on 14 May
2002 the government declared that the number of
anti-Semitic crimes is not collected
separately by the Home Office. “The Government
condemns all acts of anti-Semitism in this
country. The Government and the police are aware
of the concerns of the Jewish community
and we have received reports from both the police
and community organisations such as the
Community Security Trust. We will continue to
monitor the situation carefully in
co-operation with community organisations.”401
400 For the declaration see press
release, Federal Ministry for the Interior (Germany), 19 April 2002.
401
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020514/text/20514w29.htm.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
1
Annex: Reporting
institutions and data sources
The list of the National Focal Points
(NFPs) presented below does not primarily deal with
monitoring and recording anti-Semitic
incidents. Therefore some NFPs experienced
difficulties in collecting data, but they
have tried to overcome these difficulties in various
ways, as one can see from the list of
sources.
· Belgium: Centre for Equal
Opportunities and Opposition to Racism (CEOOR)
· Denmark: The Danish Board
for Ethnic Equality
· Germany: European Forum
for Migration Studies
· Greece: ANTIGONE -
Information & Documentation Centre
· Spain: Movement for Peace,
Disarmament and Liberty
· France: Agency for the
Development of Intercultural Relations
· Ireland: Equality
Authority (EA) /National Consultative Committee on Racism and
Interculturalism (NCCRI)
· Italy: Co-operation for
the Development of Emerging Countries (COSPE)
· Luxemburg: Association for
the Support of Immigrant Workers
· Austria: Ludwig Boltzmann
Institute of Human Rights; Department of Linguistics of
the University of Vienna; Institute of
Conflict Research;
· Portugal: Research Center
on Human and Social Sciences
· Finland: Finnish League
for Human Rights
· Sweden: EXPO Foundation
The following list gives an overview of
the collation methods, databases and data-collecting
institutions in the EU Member States used
by the NFPs:
Belgium
The Belgian report contained the following
sources:
- Forum of the Jewish
Organisations of Antwerp
- Newspapers
- Internet
Denmark
Various sources have been consulted in the
data collection. The aim was to speak to both
official and unofficial sources in order
to achieve a full representation. The unofficial sources
were identified by firstly speaking to an
information worker at “The Jewish Community” (Det
Mosaiske Trossamfund), by pursuing the
“links” on The Jewish Community’s homepage, and
then by checking other “links” on the
“Jewish” sites visited. The Jewish Community in
Denmark systematically registers all
anti-Semitic incidents in Denmark.
The following institutions and
organisations have been consulted:
- The Danish Civil Security Service (PET) - as
they collect data on “racially motivated”
crimes in Denmark.
For incidents of graffiti, vandalism,
etc.:
- The Jewish Community (Det
Mosaiske Trossamfund), which is the official representative
of the Jewish community in Denmark;
- “Maichsike-hadas” - an
Orthodox Jewish Community in Copenhagen;
- Chabad - a broad organisation
promoting Jewish awareness;
- JIF Hakaoh - a Jewish
sports club (via Carolineskolen);
- Carolineskolen - the main
Jewish school located in Copenhagen;
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
2
- Progressive Jewish Forum -
a small organisation working for a “reform Jewish
congregation”;
- The Danish Center for
Holocaust and Genocide Studies;
- The Israeli Embassy in
Copenhagen.
Other sources:
- daily newspapers;
- Internet was used to
identify homepages with anti-Semitic content.
Germany
The German NFP based its report on the
following sources:
- Data from the Federal
Office of Criminal Investigation;
- An intensive analysis of
the media;
- Internet, the Websites of
organisations;
- Analysis of scientific
studies: media analyses, opinion polls.
Ireland
Information was mostly supplied by Jewish
organisations in Ireland.
Organisations contacted:
- Jewish Representative
Council of Ireland;
- the Chief Rabbi’s Office;
- the Israeli Embassy;
- the Ireland-Israel
Friendship League;
- the Garda (Irish police);
- Garda Racial and
Intercultural Office.
Survey of national newspapers
Internet (right-wing websites)
Greece
Data was collected from three main
sources:
- Representative
organisations of the Jewish Community in Greece (Regional Boards and
Central Board of Jewish Communities in
Greece). A written request was sent by fax and
e-mail to these organisations. Members of
the NFP’s staff had interviews with members of
the Board of the other main Jewish
Communities in Corfu, Larissa and Thessalonica;
- The media were both
monitored and studied. The monitoring of the media, which is a
routine activity of the INFOCENTER, provides
us with information to be further
investigated. At the same time, the
content of the media reports is also studied since it
constitutes an important attitude-forming
instrument. Detailed content analyses have not
been carried out in the context of the
present report, as it was not within its scope, but the
essential primary material has been
collected, categorised and can be analysed further, if
required;
- The Internet was used
basically as a source of data -mostly reports from national and
international organisations- and also as a
source of material pertinent to our inquiry, i.e.
anti-Semitic web pages, discussion groups,
etc.
Spain
The following information sources were
used for the report:
- Mass media;
- Internet (oriented on
neo-Nazi and racist groups);
- Violence reports;
- Personal interviews;
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
3
- Consultation with several
organisations, especially Jewish ones.
France
The sources used to monitor incidents
were:
- All daily print press as
well as press agencies;
- Jewish Communities’ media
(Actualité juive, antisémitisme.info, etc.);
- Jewish groups (CRIF,
UEJF), in particular the new structures or initiatives recently set up
to counter anti-Semitic acts or for the
purpose of victim support (Observatoire du monde
juif, help lines such as SOS Vérité -
Sécurité or SOS antisémitisme);
- anti-racist non-profit
organisations (LICRA, SOS Racisme, MRAP, FASTI)
Italy
The basic sources were made available by
the Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation
(Centro di Documentazione Ebraica
Contemporanea, CDEC) in Milan, which systematically
collects data on anti-Semitism in Italy.
- Surveys
- Newspapers
- Internet
- Report on anti-Semitism in
Italy, edited by A. Goldstaub, June 2002. The report had been
presented at the national Congress of UCEI
(Unione delle Comunità Ebraiche Italiane, 20-
23 June 2002)
Luxembourg
Inquiries were made at:
- Representatives of the
Jewish community;
- Secretary General of the
Israelite Consistory;
- Grand Ducal Police;
- NGO working against racism
and anti-Semitism;
- Amnesty International
Luxembourg;
Analysis of newspapers
The Netherlands
The report is based on the compilation by
the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism,
Technical University Berlin. Sources used
are from:
- European Commission
against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), online: Second report on
the Netherlands, adopted on 15 December
2000 and made public on 13.11.2001.
- Anti-Semitism Worldwide
2000/1, online, Netherlands;
- Centrum Informatie en
Documentatie Israel (CIDI), The Hague, online overzicht
antisemitische incidenten Nederland 2001
en voorloping overzicht 2002 by Hadassa
Hirschfeld;
- Other NGOs: Anti
Discrininatiebureaus in Nederland (ADB’s), Landelijke Vereniging
van ADB’s (LV), Meldpunt Discrimnatie
Internet (MDI), Landelijke Expertise Centrum
Discriminatiezaken (LECD),
Antifascistische Onderzoeksgroep Kafka, Centraal Meldpunt
Voetbalvandalisme, Monitorrapport over
Racisme en Extreem Rechts from the Anne
Frank Stichting and the University of
Leiden; the Dutch Auschwitz Committee, the
National Bureau for the Fight Against
Racism and the 4th and 5th May Committee;
- Newspapers;
- Internet.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
4
Austria
The analysis is based on a balanced mix of
sources:
- NGOs related to the Jewish
communities (Forum gegen Antisemitismus [sub-organisation
of the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde Wien],
ESRA, Israelitische Kultusgemeinden
Salzburg, Innsbruck, and Graz);
- Other NGOs (ZARA,
Dokumentationsarchiv des österreichischen Widerstands [DÖW],
Ökologische Linke [OEKOLI],
Österreichische HochschülerInnenschaft);
- relevant journalists;
- Federal Ministry of the
Interior.
The media analysis included monitoring of
the following dailies:
Der Standard, Die Presse, Wiener Zeitung,
Salzburger Nachrichten, Kurier, Kleine Zeitung,
Oberösterreichische Nachrichten and Kronen
Zeitung. The NFP looked for the keywords
“anti-Semitism”,
“anti-Semitic”, “Jew(s)” and “Jewish” in the online archives of these papers.
In addition, the following right-wing
papers were scrutinized: Zur Zeit published weekly by
FPÖ-members, Aula edited monthly by the
National-freiheitliche Akademikerverbände
Österreichs, an umbrella
organisation of the national-“liberal” fraternities, and Der Eckart
published monthly by the Österreichische
Landsmannschaften.
Internet
The keywords “anti-Semitism - Austria”
“Jews - Austria” were used for the general search
on the Internet.
Portugal
The NFP gave reference to official
institutions, Jewish organisations and anti-discrimination
NGOs and the media in a general way.
Finland
Data was collected from three main
sources:
- Interviews with a
representative of the Finnish Jewish community, a representative of
the Friends of Israel Association and the Ombudsman’s office;
- Newspapers;
- Internet.
Intrinsic problem: Although there are some
institutions that monitor the situation, they do it
usually from a very narrow point of view,
specialising their efforts on some particular issue.
Sweden
Sources and methods:
The only Swedish institution compiling a
formal index of anti-Semitic incidents is the
Swedish Security Police (Säpo); however,
such statistics are only published annually the year
following the incident.
To compile this report the NFP has made
use of its contacts with all three Jewish communities
and is continuously receiving reports on
registered anti-Semitic incidents. The NFP is also in
continuous contact with a number of
individuals researching the topic, either in a private or in
an academic capacity.
The gathering of information has been done
basically through telephone calls that were
prepared by sending out the questions well
in advance of the calls.
Other information, especially about
activities on the Internet and articles in papers, stems
from the normal daily collection of
information by the NFP.
Manifestations of anti-Semitism in
the European Union
European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia
10
5
United Kingdom
This report is based on the compilation by
the Center for Research on Anti-Semitism, Berlin.
Sources used:
- Data from the Community
Security Trust (CST), the monitoring body, which has been
accorded third-party reporting status by
the police. This allows it to report anti-Semitic
incidents to the police and act as a
go-between between the police and those victims who
are unable or unwilling to report to the
police directly. Michael Whine, Anti-Semitism on
the streets, in: Is there a new
anti-Semitism in Britain., online www.jpr.org.uk/Reports;
- Lawyers Committee for
Humans Rights, Fire and Broken Glass. The Rise of Anti-
Semitism in Europe, Strasbourg, May 2002;
- Amnesty International
Press Release, AI Index: EUR 3.1.2002 (Public) News Service No:
84, 10.5.2002;
- Anti-Defamation League,
Global Anti-Semitism: Selected Incidents Around the World in
2002;
- Anti-Semitism Worldwide
2000/1, online, United Kingdom;
- Survey: Anti-Defamation
League, European Attitudes Towards Jews, Israel and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, 27. 6. 2002;
- Newspapers;
- Internet.