About

Why Fight the Adoption of the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism?

1
THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THOSE PROMOTING THE IHRA DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM IS TO BAN OR CRIMINALIZE CRITICISM OF ISRAEL AND OF ZIONISM AND SUPPORT OF PALESTINIAN RIGHTS. AS SUCH IT REPRESENTS A THREAT TO THE STRUGGLE FOR JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN iSRAEL/PALESTINE, AS WELL AS TO ACADEMIC FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND THE RIGHT TO PROTEST.

2
TO BE CLEAR, ANTISEMITISM IS A REAL PROBLEM AND MUST BE FOUGHT IN ALL ITS FORMS. BUT THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO DO SO. THE REAL FIGHT AGAINST ANTISEMITISM MUST BE JOINED TO THE STRUGGLE AGAINST RACISM, XENOPHOBIA AND HATRED OF ALL ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS GROUPS, AND TO THE STRUGGLE FOR EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE, IN CANADA, IN ISRAEL/PALESTINE AND THE WORLD OVER.

3
THEREFORE, WE URGE PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL TO OPPOSE THE ADOPTION OF THE IHRA-WDA BY CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS, UNIVERSITIES, POLICE AND OTHER AUTHORITIES. WE ALSO URGE YOU TO OPPOSE AND FIGHT REAL ANTISEMITISM, WHATEVER ITS SOURCE.

Read our full report on the IHRA definition of antisemitism

IJV REPORT: HOW NOT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM
File Size:	398 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

Unfortunately, both the government of Israel and Zionist groups throughout the world — and Canadian organizations in particular — are currently using society's legitimate concern about antisemitism to redefine antisemitism to include criticism of Israel and of the Zionist ideology behind it. Their goal is to suppress, and even criminalize, criticism of Israel and support for Palestinian rights.

Imagine a definition designed for Palestinians. If “Denying the Jewish people their right to self- determination, and denying Israel the right to exist” is antisemitism, then shouldn’t “Denying the Palestinian people their right to self-determination, and denying Palestine the right to exist” be anti-Palestinianism?
— Kenneth Stern, author of the IHRA-WDA

Photo: Raghd Hamzeh

One of the primary vehicles that Israel and its supporters are using in this campaign to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's working definition of antisemitism (IHRA-WDA). An international campaign is currently underway to have this definition adopted by governments, universities and other public institutions.The IHRA-WDA is a deeply flawed document. It fails as an adequate objective standard with which to identify antisemitic incidents or antisemitic speech. It was initially written as a set of guidelines for researchers, agencies and governments monitoring incidents of antisemitism in Europe, and was never intended for legal and administrative purposes.

To insist that Israel cannot be protested or objected to, to mandate that collective Jewish power cannot be analyzed or debated, or to conclude that Jews, because they were once victims of one of humanity’s greatest genocidal crimes, are somehow immune from becoming perpetrators of acts of violence against other peoples, would only reinforce the anti-Semitic belief that Jews are a fundamentally different people.
— Barry Trachtenberg, jewish studies professor

The actual definition of anti-semitism in the IHRA-WDA is vague and tautological, and it provides virtually no help in deciding if a particular incident is or is not antisemitic. Seven of the eleven examples of antisemitism in the definition equate criticism of israel with antisemitism. Unfortunately, the examples are being taken up by advocates of the definition as absolute litmus tests.

THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THOSE PROMOTING THIS DEFINITION IS TO TO EITHER BAN OR CRIMINALIZE CRITICISM OF ISRAEL AND PALESTINIAN SOLIDARITY ADVOCACY. THIS HAS BEEN OBSERVED IN JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE ADOPTED THE IHRA-WDA, AND WE ARE SEEING EARLY SIGNS OF IT IN CANADA, WHERE THE CENTRE FOR ISRAEL AND JEWISH AFFAIRS (CIJA) IS LOBBYING TO HAVE THE DEFINITION ADOPTED BY ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, AND INCLUDED AS PART OF ALL UNIVERSITY CODES OF CONDUCT. IT IS ALSO WORKING TO “EDUCATE” POLICE ABOUT “THE NEW ANTISEMITISM” USING THE IHRA-WDA.

The Zionist strategy of adopting the IHRA definition is misguided. This is borne out by the results of a recent survey of Jewish Canadians done by Ekos research: Approximately 60% of Jewish Canadians do not see criticism of Israel as antisemitic in and of itself, and half believe that accusations of antisemitism are “often used to silence legitimate criticism of Israeli policies.”

CIJA MAKES CLEAR IN ITS OWN PRESS RELEASES THAT ADOPTION OF THE IHRA-WDA IS PART OF ITS CAMPAIGN TO FIGHT THE “NEW ANTISEMITISM” WHEREBY ISRAEL IS NECESSARILY A STAND-IN FOR JEWS, ZIONISM IS AN ESSENTIAL AND CORE JEWISH TENET, AND TRENCHANT CRITIQUES OF ISRAELI POLICIES AND ACTIONS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS MOTIVATED BY ANTISEMITISM RATHER THAN A LEGITIMATE CONCERN FOR PALESTINIANS OR FOR HUMAN RIGHTS.

READ THE IHRA-WDA