The Shame of Israel Apartheid Week
By Matthew M. Hausman
Published
at, and reproduced from http://www.israpundit.com/archives/53428#more-53428
Reading this article I was strongly reminded of Phyllis Chesler's book "The New Anti-Semitism" first published in 2003 by Jossey-Bass and I wonder, again, why it is that seemingly intelligent. apparently open-minded people can be so seduced by anti-Israel propaganda that they shut their eyes to Israel's points of view and the 3000+years with which Israel has been associated with the Holy Land. I have to conclude that they do so because of the age-old inherited prejudices against the Jews. And I know of no answer. "The blood libel seems to have gained respectability in the halls of academia now that Israel Apartheid Week has become an annual rite on college campuses across North America. Characterized by hate-speech promoted as political discourse, Israel Apartheid Week (“IAW”) proclaims its goal “is to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system and to build Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns as part of a growing global BDS movement.” Its architects contend they are not antisemitic. However, Israel is not an apartheid state under any definition of the term, and to argue otherwise requires the repetition of odious lies and the denial of historical facts. Because the claim of Israeli apartheid is a malicious fiction, the antisemitic motivations underlying Israel Apartheid Week cannot be minimized or ignored.
The
International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute of 2002 defines “apartheid” as a
crime consisting of acts similar to crimes against humanity “committed in the
context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination
by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with
the intention of maintaining that regime.” Though the term evokes images of
South Africa under Afrikaner rule, it just as easily could describe any country
in which racial and ethnic minorities are systematically segregated and
discriminated against by operation of law. An argument could be made that
Sharia states qualify insofar as they subjugate and isolate “infidels” in
accordance with their interpretation of Islamic doctrine. The past confinement
of Jews in the mellah in Morocco or in ghettos and separate towns in
Iran offer apt examples.
In
contrast, Israel is a democracy in which Jews and Arabs have equal rights under
the law. The Arab-Muslim world and its left-wing allies accuse Israel of
apartheid despite the absence of any Israeli laws or policies creating such a
system. Israeli Jews and Arabs generally live where they choose and benefit
from the same health, welfare and infrastructure policies and programs. The only
difference is that Israeli Arabs are exempt from military service, whereas all
other Israelis, including Jews, Druze and Circassians, are not. Thus, Arab
citizens receive the same governmental benefits as other Israelis without being
required to bear any of the national cost. Although the promoters of IAW
contend that Israeli Arabs are second-class citizens, they in fact enjoy the
highest standard of living, highest rates of longevity and literacy, and lowest
rate of infant mortality of any Arab-Muslim population in the Mideast.
Israel
also has an open political system in which Arabs vote, run for office, and
serve in government. Moreover, they have freedom of speech to a degree not
tolerated in the Arab-Muslim world – as demonstrated by those Arab Knesset
members who openly identify with Israel’s enemies and engage in seditious
conduct that would not be countenanced in other countries. Whereas American law
requires all who serve in Congress to swear an oath to uphold the U.S.
Constitution, Israel presently requires no similar pledge of loyalty. Clearly,
Israel does not practice apartheid, and in fact does not even employ the same
kinds of safeguards against sedition and treason that are taken for granted in
the United States and other western democracies.
When the
canard of Israeli apartheid is deconstructed, it clearly resembles the “Big
Lie” preached and perfected by the Nazis, who believed that the constant
repetition of audacious lies would promote their acceptance by the public and
facilitate the spread of propaganda. The Nazis believed that the most brazen
lies would resonate most deeply because of the common perception that
unbelievable stories would not be repeated if they weren’t true. Thus it is
with the slander of Israeli apartheid, for which there would seem to be no
greater proof than the endorsement of academia. Given the leftist orientation
and pro-Islamist bias of many university faculties, college campuses have
become natural staging grounds for anti-Israel agitprop.
Brooklyn
College in New York was the site of IAW activity this year with a program
entitled, “BDS (Boycott, Divestments, and Sanctions) Movement against Israel,”
which was co-sponsored by the political science department. Despite public
criticism against allowing the event on campus, and though the college
administration disclaimed any official endorsement, it would not bar the
program or condemn it in any meaningful way. The program featured speakers who
denied Israel’s right to exist, praised Islamist terrorists who attack civilians,
and called for the blacklisting of Israeli academics.
The
college took the position that co-sponsorship by one of its departments did not
imply institutional support for the program, but the hollowness of this
explanation was exposed by the failure to provide equal time to opponents
wishing to voice their opposition. Supporters denied antisemitic bias and
claimed that the event implicated free speech. However, the program featured
speakers who advocated conduct, i.e., the blacklisting of Israeli professors,
that is intended specifically to discourage free and open discourse. If
Brooklyn College truly cared about speech rights, it would have provided a
forum for those wishing to address the event’s factual distortions and expose
it as propaganda. The failure to do so indicates only a fair-weather commitment
to freedom of expression, and raises the question of whether the college in
fact endorsed the program through its conduct despite its disclaimers.
Furthermore,
allowing such a blatantly provocative program on campus seems inconsistent with
the institution’s own “Commitment to Pluralism and Diversity,” which provides:
Brooklyn College is committed to values and policies that enhance
respect for individuals and their cultures. In fact, the college’s cultural,
racial, and ethnic diversity-our pluralism-is one of our distinguishing
characteristics. Our student body and our workforce are notably composed of
people of color, of women, of immigrants, of older adults, and of persons with
disabilities. Students at the college can trace their ancestry to more than 120
different countries. To reap the rewards of diversity, the college has
developed and will continue to develop programs that combat bigotry and other
biases in all their forms and will build on the strengths offered by our
multicultural, multiracial, and multigenerational campus.
(http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/offices/diversity/commit.php.)
It is difficult to see how providing a forum for anti-Israel and antisemitic
speech, while denying equal time to opposing viewpoints, shows a commitment “to
values and policies that enhance respect for individuals and their cultures” or
is consistent with the college’s pledge to “develop programs that combat
bigotry and other biases in all their forms…” Indeed, Brooklyn College’s
failure to acknowledge the program as hate-speech suggests that its diversity
statement is applied only selectively.
The
malicious intent of Israel Apartheid Week is clear considering its connection
to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. The conceit of BDS is that
it feigns kinship to the movement that helped bring about the end of apartheid
in South Africa through coordinated efforts to turn that country into a pariah
state. It uses terms like “occupation” and “colonialism” to perpetuate the
falsehood that Israel is a colonial state and that the Palestinians are an
ancestral people whose country was dismantled by foreign Jewish interlopers. In
so doing, the BDS movement disparages Jewish national claims that are a matter
of historical record and not based, as are Palestinian claims, on myth, polemic
and doctrinal hatred.
In truth,
the Jews are indigenous and have the longest record of habitation in their homeland.
At no time was there ever a sovereign nation called Palestine or an ancient
Palestinian society that created any touchstones of nationality or unique
culture in the Jewish homeland. As the late Zahir Muhsein famously stated in
the Dutch newspaper Trouw in 1977, “[t]he ‘Palestinian People’ does not exist.
The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
against the State of Israel.” Arafat made similar admissions in his
autobiography. Thus, in pretending that Israel is a colonial creation and that
Jews are strangers to the Mideast, the BDS movement engages in the same deceit
and dishonesty.
If BDS
partisans were truly concerned about forcing change in repressive regimes, one
must wonder why they ignore Saudi Arabia, where women are suppressed, freedom
of religion is unknown, and money flows to support terrorism abroad; or Iran,
where religious minorities are harassed and discriminated against, Jews fear
for their lives and gays are put to death. Why are they not concerned about
Egypt, where Copts are slaughtered and their churches desecrated, or Sudan,
where Arab Muslims engage in genocide against African Christians? The BDS
movement’s pernicious intent is exposed by its pathological focus on Israel,
which has the only open society in the Mideast where all citizens are free to
live where they choose, speak as they will and worship as they please. By
claiming Israel to be what she clearly is not, the movement perpetuates a
colossal fabrication evocative of the Big Lie. And by actively promoting the
BDS farce, those who sponsor, support or enable Israel Apartheid Week do the
same.
Reasonable
minds can disagree over specific policies of any government, including
Israel’s. However, those who deny her right to exist and accuse her of
apartheid when she actually has the only democratic society in the Mideast are
not engaging in neutral criticism. They are promoting antisemitism. The
singular focus on Israel for imagined offenses such as ethnic cleansing and
apartheid, coupled with the refusal to target countries where such atrocities
actually occur, constitutes antisemitism purely and simply. Not surprisingly,
the demonization of Israel has become de rigueur on the political left. Unfortunately,
it has also found an audience among members of progressive Jewish groups, such
as J Street and the New Israel Fund, whose commitment to left-wing ideals
causes them to rationalize, support or provide forums for those who impugn the
Jewish State.
There is
also a disturbing trend on college campuses of progressive student groups
protesting mainstream Jewish organizations that oppose the BDS agenda. The
Harvard College Progressive Jewish Alliance, for example, recently organized a
protest against the campus Hillel’s ban on partnering with organizations that
support BDS programs. Ironically, although progressives and their supporters
typically invoke free speech principles to shield Israel bashers, they are
quick to brand dissenting opinions as hate-speech in order to silence those
with whom they disagree. Likewise, they jump to label any critical discussion
of political Islam as “Islamophobia,” but remain silent regarding the doctrinal
antisemitism that is so prevalent in the Muslim community.
Ironically,
Gentile supporters are often quicker and more willing to come to Israel’s
defense, as they have done in Canada with Israel Truth Week, a conference
dedicated to combating the dissimulation of Israel Apartheid Week. Israel Truth
Week has become an annual event in Hamilton, Ontario, drawing speakers,
academics and legal experts from Canada, the United States and Israel. Though
the event was created by a dedicated group of Jews and non-Jews working
together, it would not have grown so quickly without the commitment of Gentiles
who support the Jewish State for reasons of history, justice and equity.
The
inspiration for this conference came from Mark Vandermaas, a Canadian whose
family history made him acutely aware of the horrors of antisemitism.
Vandermaas was adopted and raised by Dutch parents who lived through the German
occupation of the Netherlands, where they saw their Jewish neighbors deported
for slaughter and where his father was interred [sic] in a Nazi work camp from which
he escaped. [I think Hausman means 'interned'] Vandermaas was motivated to act upon hearing of unrestrained antisemitism
roiling the campus of the University of Western Ontario, where Jewish students
were physically abused and harassed, and his indignation gave rise to Israel
Truth Week. What started as a grassroots program has grown and begun attracting
the attention of major Jewish organizations in Canada.
Although
Israel Apartheid Week is now in its ninth year, mainstream Jewish organizations
have yet to formulate a unified, systematic response. Some organizations have
issued strong denunciations while others have resolved not to work with
progressive groups that support the BDS movement. Still others have displayed
timidity in choosing to ignore it. But ignoring it lends credence through
silence. Instead, Israel Apartheid Week should be answered with thoughtful, coordinated
counterprograms. Though Israel Truth Week is only in its second year and has
not yet ventured beyond the borders of Ontario, the breadth of its agenda and
the diversity of its speakers should provide a model for Jewish organizations
to follow. If some Gentiles can be so assertive in advocating on behalf of
Israel, there is no reason why Jews cannot do the same."
posted by longfuse @ 1:22 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home