Equations in Contemporary Anti-Zionism: a Conceptual Analysis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Equations in Contemporary Anti-Zionism: a Conceptual Analysis Equations in Contemporary Anti-Zionism: A Conceptual Analysis Shalem Coulibaly* 1. INTRODUCTION This article, which is based on several articles and research projects, aims first and foremost to present the criminogenic nature of contemporary antisemitism, which certain people, including people of African descent, have unfortunately adopted—through mimicry or imitation—as a result of ignorance or political calculation.1 It forms the final part of a larger work entitled “Africa and Antisemitism: From Indifference to Tempta- tion and Antisemitic Speech.” It is resolutely opposed to antisemitism, especially among some Africans who have contributed to diatribes against Jews in France. 2. FALSE EQUATIONS BETWEEN ANTI-ZIONISM AND ANTISEMITISM: THE ART OF MISREPRESENTING HISTORY AND POLITICS Many intellectuals who cannot be suspected of antisemitism reject the equation of anti- Zionism with antisemitism. The questions that I wish to raise in this context are as follows. Have they reflected on the contours of Durban I? Have they taken the time to decipher the logic of the anti-Zionist discourse, its critical ambiguities and the silence that it tends to impose on any defense of the Jewish cause? For me, the contemporary anti-Zionist discourse encompasses a dangerous performative contradiction. Combating antisemitism amounts to accepting the need to demonstrate the conceptual limits of the most objective criticisms. When anti-Zionists claim that they are not antisemites, how is one to interpret or gauge their scathing attacks on the legitimacy of the State of Israel? How is one to understand their calls for sanctions against Israel and the very existence of Jews in Israel! And not just in Israel but elsewhere. There are dangerous forms of objec- tivity. America is not Zion, but anti-Zionists are silent when the American flag and the Israeli flag are burned side by side with the same rage. This demonstrates the primary and basic anti-Americanism of the anti-Zionists, if not a performative contradiction. * Professor of Philosophy, University of Ouagadougou (UO), Burkina Faso. Former Senior Visiting Scholar, YIISA, Yale University. 1 In 2006, during a Paris march in support of Lebanon organized by anti-Zionists, many young Africans among the protesters chanted the slogan: “Zionism is the criminal DNA of mankind.” Marches in support of the Lebanese people also took place in several African countries. In Senegal, for example, the Israeli flag was burned by a mob that included several elected politicians. 37 Charles Asher Small (ed.), Global Antisemitism: A Crisis of Modernity. © 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV. ISBN 978 90 04 21457 6. 38 SHALEM COULIBALY Anti-Zionism thus does what it claims not to do, namely to be against the Jewish state but not against the Jews. We must remain lucid. Is it not so that the denial expressed by the prefix “anti” in anti-Zionism and antisemitism nowadays follows the same logic as the hatred of Jews and the desire to wipe them of the face of the earth? Until we have conceptualized and deconstructed the equation of these two terms, we must treat them as identical in the fight against antisemitism. Even a critical and objective anti-Zionist knows very well that, in a conflict, one cannot innocently set oneself up as a critic or judge of the protagonists. In fact, the differentiation between anti-Zionism and anti- semitism is formalistic and specious, because, strictly speaking, they involve the same intent, the same hatred of the Jews. In L’Imprescriptible,2 Jankélévitch explains that anti- Zionism is a form of linguistic trickery to justify antisemitism. An anti-Zionist, he argues, is a person who gives himself the right to be democratically antisemitic and to democratically popularize his hatred. Jankélévitch observes: Anti-Zionism is in this respect an unexpected windfall, because it gives us permission and even the right—even the duty—to be antisemitic in the name of democracy. Anti- Zionism is justified antisemitism, finally put at the disposal of all. It grants permission to be democratically antisemitic. In reality, anti-Zionism has the same target as antisemitism, namely the Jews. Otherwise, why plant bombs in synagogues in Paris or murder children and teachers at a Jewish school in Toulouse? Paris is not Jerusalem. Toulouse is not Tel Aviv. The era of globali- zation would thus appear to be an opportunity for anti-Jewish ideologies to prosper. Africans must understand this anti-Zionist hoax in order not to misunderstand this quagmire of antisemitism, which fraudulently posits the following equations: Zionism = colonialism, Zionism = apartheid and Zionism = racism.3 These equations, which are genuine historical travesties, relate to problems about which all Africans should be deeply concerned. They amount to nothing more than a revisionist form of African history and suffering. After all, have the people who come up with these equations even considered the history of colonialism and the desire of colonizers to civilize the savages? When have the Jews ever wanted to Hebraicize Palestinians so that they become Jews? Those who deceitfully establish these false equations should re-read Aimé Césaire’s Discourse sur le Colonialisme! In order to prove that this so-called objective criticism of Israel’s is actually a refusal to engage with the Jews, I will analyze another anti-Zionist equation, which posits that: economic boycott of Israel = Middle East peace. 3. THE ANTI-ZIONIST ECONOMIC BOYCOTT AND THE REJECTION OF PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST The era of globalization that characterizes the 21st century is a period of homogenization of modern economic, political, and cultural habitus. This bold global desire to transcend 2 Vladimir Jankélévitch, L’Imprescriptible (1986), pp. 19-20. 3 These equations are an unwholesome form of revisionism. After a visit to the Middle East, Desmond Tutu compared Palestine to a ghetto and Israeli democracy to apartheid. There can be no doubt that this was a misrepresentation of history and a sell-out of African suffering in the name of the Palestinian cause. .
Recommended publications
  • Forming a Nucleus for the Jewish State
    Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................... 3 Jewish Settlements 70 CE - 1882 ......................................................... 4 Forming a Nucleus for First Aliyah (1882-1903) ...................................................................... 5 Second Aliyah (1904-1914) .................................................................. 7 the Jewish State: Third Aliyah (1919-1923) ..................................................................... 9 First and Second Aliyot (1882-1914) ................................................ 11 First, Second, and Third Aliyot (1882-1923) ................................... 12 1882-1947 Fourth Aliyah (1924-1929) ................................................................ 13 Fifth Aliyah Phase I (1929-1936) ...................................................... 15 First to Fourth Aliyot (1882-1929) .................................................... 17 Dr. Kenneth W. Stein First to Fifth Aliyot Phase I (1882-1936) .......................................... 18 The Peel Partition Plan (1937) ........................................................... 19 Tower and Stockade Settlements (1936-1939) ................................. 21 The Second World War (1940-1945) ................................................ 23 Postwar (1946-1947) ........................................................................... 25 11 Settlements of October 5-6 (1947) ............................................... 27 First
    [Show full text]
  • 'The Left's Views on Israel: from the Establishment of the Jewish State To
    ‘The Left’s Views on Israel: From the establishment of the Jewish state to the intifada’ Thesis submitted by June Edmunds for PhD examination at the London School of Economics and Political Science 1 UMI Number: U615796 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615796 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 F 7377 POLITI 58^S8i ABSTRACT The British left has confronted a dilemma in forming its attitude towards Israel in the postwar period. The establishment of the Jewish state seemed to force people on the left to choose between competing nationalisms - Israeli, Arab and later, Palestinian. Over time, a number of key developments sharpened the dilemma. My central focus is the evolution of thinking about Israel and the Middle East in the British Labour Party. I examine four critical periods: the creation of Israel in 1948; the Suez war in 1956; the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 and the 1980s, covering mainly the Israeli invasion of Lebanon but also the intifada. In each case, entrenched attitudes were called into question and longer-term shifts were triggered in the aftermath.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism
    ANTI-ZIONISM AND ANTISEMITISM WHAT IS ANTI-ZIONISM? Zionism is derived from the word Zion, referring to the Biblical Land of Israel. In the late 19th century, Zionism emerged as a political movement to reestablish a Jewish state in Israel, the ancestral homeland of the Jewish People. Today, Zionism refers to support for the continued existence of Israel, in the face of regular calls for its destruction or dissolution. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Jews having a Jewish state in their ancestral homeland, and denies the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. HOW IS ANTI-ZIONISM ANTISEMITIC? The belief that the Jews, alone among the people of the world, do not have a right to self- determination — or that the Jewish people’s religious and historical connection to Israel is invalid — is inherently bigoted. When Jews are verbally or physically harassed or Jewish institutions and houses of worship are vandalized in response to actions of the State of Israel, it is antisemitism. When criticisms of Israel use antisemitic ideas about Jewish power or greed, utilize Holocaust denial or inversion (i.e. claims that Israelis are the “new Nazis”), or dabble in age-old xenophobic suspicion of the Jewish religion, otherwise legitimate critiques cross the line into antisemitism. Calling for a Palestinian nation-state, while simultaneously advocating for an end to the Jewish nation-state is hypocritical at best, and potentially antisemitic. IS ALL CRITICISM OF ISRAEL ANTISEMITIC? No. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism (“the IHRA Definition”) — employed by governments around the world — explicitly notes that legitimate criticism of Israel is not antisemitism: “Criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”1 When anti-Zionists call for the end of the Jewish state, however, that is no longer criticism of policy, but rather antisemitism.
    [Show full text]
  • Down with Britain, Away with Zionism: the 'Canaanites'
    DOWN WITH BRITAIN, AWAY WITH ZIONISM: THE ‘CANAANITES’ AND ‘LOHAMEY HERUT ISRAEL’ BETWEEN TWO ADVERSARIES Roman Vater* ABSTRACT: The imposition of the British Mandate over Palestine in 1922 put the Zionist leadership between a rock and a hard place, between its declared allegiance to the idea of Jewish sovereignty and the necessity of cooperation with a foreign ruler. Eventually, both Labour and Revisionist Zionism accommodated themselves to the new situation and chose a strategic partnership with the British Empire. However, dissident opinions within the Revisionist movement were voiced by a group known as the Maximalist Revisionists from the early 1930s. This article analyzes the intellectual and political development of two Maximalist Revisionists – Yonatan Ratosh and Israel Eldad – tracing their gradual shift to anti-Zionist positions. Some questions raised include: when does opposition to Zionist politics transform into opposition to Zionist ideology, and what are the implications of such a transition for the Israeli political scene after 1948? Introduction The standard narrative of Israel’s journey to independence goes generally as follows: when the British military rule in Palestine was replaced in 1922 with a Mandate of which the purpose was to implement the 1917 Balfour Declaration promising support for a Jewish ‘national home’, the Jewish Yishuv in Palestine gained a powerful protector. In consequence, Zionist politics underwent a serious shift when both the leftist Labour camp, led by David Ben-Gurion (1886-1973), and the rightist Revisionist camp, led by Zeev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky (1880-1940), threw in their lot with Britain. The idea of the ‘covenant between the Empire and the Hebrew state’1 became a paradigm for both camps, which (temporarily) replaced their demand for a Jewish state with the long-term prospect of bringing the Yishuv to qualitative and quantitative supremacy over the Palestinian Arabs under the wings of the British Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • The Holocaust: Factor in the Birth of Israel? by Evyatar Friesel
    The Holocaust: Factor in the Birth of Israel? by Evyatar Friesel It is widely believed that the catastrophe of European Jewry during World War II had a decisive influence on the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948. According to this thesis, for the Jews the Holocaust triggered a supreme effort toward statehood, based on the understanding that only a Jewish state might again avoid the horrors of the 1940s. For the nations of the world, shocked by the horror of the extermination and burdened by feelings of guilt, the Holocaust convinced them that the Jews were entitled to a state of their own. All these assumptions seem extremely doubtful. They deserve careful re-examination in light of the historical evidence. Statehood in Zionist Thought The quest for a Jewish state had always been paramount in Zionist thought and action. For tactical reasons official Zionism was cautious in explaining its ultimate aims, especially when addressing general public opinion. Terms other than "state" were used in various political documents or official utterances by leading Zionist statesmen: Jewish home, Jewish National Home, commonwealth, Jewish commonwealth. But there is no reason to doubt that the ultimate aim of the Zionist mainstream was the creation of a state in Palestine. The question remained as to what methods should be used in order to reach the consummation of these hopes. One possibility was the evolutionary path, implied also in the political relations between the Zionists and leading British statesmen between 1917 and 1920. It found implicit expression in the terms and the structure of the Palestine Mandate approved by the League of Nations in July 1922.
    [Show full text]
  • The Balfour Declaration Pdf
    The Balfour Declaration Pdf natheless.Unplumb and Ulysses sideways caliper Sawyere awkwardly? still overdid his dubbin blackly. Prolific and bung Barde plasticises northerly and decree his dauphines fanwise and The Balfour Declaration The Origins of the ArabIsraeli. For an expert impact on extremely biased about its seat too. The Balfour Declaration as partition became same was by letter end on 2 November 1917 by making then Foreign. Are Lone Wolves Really Acting Alone? It is intimately and america, such a fascinating story doubtless improved with their ultimate goal was sent a major streets in english hebrew arabic. Bernard Regan iThe Balfour Declaration Empire the. Word Pro The Balfour Declaration Steinlwp. The passage that Britain wronged the Palestinians with the Balfour Declaration is premised on two beliefs The ridge is that Britain acted unilaterally in. President Sadat of Egypt became habitat first Arab leader or visit the Jewish state sitting in what sign of iron new relations between doing two countries, he addressed the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. If you have access beneath a journal via a taunt or association membership, please browse to train society journal, select an ancestor to directory, and sip the instructions in value box. Feisal Agreement having regard is both Jewish immigration and drink purchase. Two weeks of talks failed to come intern with acceptable solutions to the status of Jerusalemand the right of crest of Palestinian refugees. Jews civil lord james balfour declaration, but gentiles if only those british empire, roosevelt came in fact that? Easy unsubscribe links are hence in every email. A Short History writing the Balfour Declaration book Read reviews from world's largest community for readers.
    [Show full text]
  • The-Balfour-Declaration-Lookstein-Center.Pdf
    The Balfour Declaration - November 2, 1917 Celebrating 100 Years There are those who believe that the Balfour Declaration was the most magnanimous (generous) gesture by an imperial nation. Others believe it was the biggest error of judgment that a world power could make. In this unit, we will discover: What was the Balfour Declaration Why the Balfour Declaration was so important How the Balfour Declaration is relevant today 1. Which of the following Declarations have you heard of? a) The United States Declaration of Independence, 1776 b) The Irish Declaration of Independence, 1917 c) The Balfour Declaration, 1917 d) The Israeli Declaration of Independence, 1948 e) The Austrian Declaration of Neutrality, 1955 What was the Balfour Declaration? The Balfour Declaration was a letter written in the name of the British government, by Lord Arthur James Balfour, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, to the leaders of the Zionist Federation. 2. Read the letter: Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet. “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Jewish State Now? Author(S): Raef Zreik Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol
    Why the Jewish State Now? Author(s): Raef Zreik Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Spring 2011), pp. 23-37 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Institute for Palestine Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jps.2011.XL.3.23 . Accessed: 06/06/2011 11:07 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and Institute for Palestine Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Palestine Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel at a Crossroads Between Civic Democracy and Jewish Zealotocracy
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE Israel at a crossroads between civic democracy and Jewish zealotocracy AUTHORS Pappé, I JOURNAL Journal of Palestine Studies DEPOSITED IN ORE 14 July 2014 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/15198 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication Israel at a Crossroads between Civic Democracy and Jewish Zealotocracy Author(s): Ilan Pappe Source: Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Spring, 2000), pp. 33-44 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Institute for Palestine Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2676454 . Accessed: 28/03/2014 10:32 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and Institute for Palestine Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Palestine Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish Immigration to Israel
    Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish Immigration to Israel Corinne Cath Thesis Bachelor Cultural Anthropology 2011 Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish immigration to Israel Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish Immigration to Israel Thesis Bachelor Cultural Anthropology 2011 Corinne Cath 3337316 C,[email protected] Supervisor: F. Jara-Gomez Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish immigration to Israel This thesis is dedicated to my grandfather Kees Cath and my grandmother Corinne De Beaufort, whose resilience and wits are an inspiration always. Aliyah and the Ingathering of Exiles: Jewish immigration to Israel Table of Contents Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................... 4 General Introduction ............................................................................................. 5 1.Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................... 8 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 8 1.1 Anthropology and the Nation-State ........................................................................ 10 The Nation ........................................................................................................ 10 States and Nation-States ................................................................................... 11 Nationalism ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recognizing Anti-Zionism As an Attack on Jewish Identity
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 68 Issue 4 Fall 2019 Article 8 2019 Recognizing Anti-Zionism as an Attack on Jewish Identity Alyza D. Lewin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Society Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Alyza D. Lewin, Recognizing Anti-Zionism as an Attack on Jewish Identity, 68 Cath. U. L. Rev. 643 (2019). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol68/iss4/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Recognizing Anti-Zionism as an Attack on Jewish Identity Cover Page Footnote Alyza D. Lewin is President & General Counsel of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and partner at Lewin & Lewin, LLP. This Article reflects the author’s remarks delivered at the Heritage Foundation Symposium, “The Future of Religious Liberty in America,” at the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law on November 9, 2018. The author would like to thank Aviva Vogelstein, Emma Enig, and Hilary Miller for their assistance in putting together the materials for her remarks and this Article. The author also wishes to thank the editors of this publication for identifying and adding additional source materials in footnotes to this article. This article is available in Catholic University Law Review: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol68/iss4/8 RECOGNIZING ANTI-ZIONISM AS AN ATTACK ON JEWISH IDENTITY By Alyza D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Balfour Declaration from the Perspective of the Palestinian People Rashid Khalidi, Columbia University It Is a Great Honor T
    United Nations, November 2, 2017 The Balfour Declaration from the Perspective of the Palestinian People Rashid Khalidi, Columbia University It is a great honor to be asked to speak here on the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration. I am grateful to HE Ambassador Fodé Seck of Senegal, Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, to the Committee, to the chair today, HE Ambassador Jerry Matjila of South Africa, and to the dedicated staff of the UN Secretariat for making this event possible. It is particularly fitting to be speaking today at the United Nations, which has played such a large role in the Palestine tragedy. Today I will be addressing the impact on the Palestinian people of the Balfour Declaration, and of the League of Nations mandate based upon it. I can only hope that if we can all become more aware of this historical background, the United Nations may be able to address the harm caused by this Declaration, and all that followed, more fairly and effectively than it has done over the past 70 years. The momentous statement made on behalf of the British cabinet on November 2, 1917 by Arthur James Balfour, His Majesty’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, is usually regarded in light of British imperial interests, or in terms of its ostensible subject, a “national home for the Jewish people.” We know a great deal about Britain’s commitment to Zionism. We know less about what the support of the British Empire via this declaration meant for the aims of the Zionist movement – which for nearly half a century proudly described itself as a colonial endeavor, and which at the same time was a national movement in the making.
    [Show full text]