BICOM

What happened: The French parliament has passed a resolution adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism that includes within its examples denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination and claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

• President Macron’s LREM party led the initiative that was backed by 154 votes to 72 in the French National Assembly.
• The resolution states: “The National Assembly… believes that the operational definition used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance allows for the most precise designation of what contemporary anti-Semitism is…It considers it an effective instrument for combating anti-Semitism in its modern and renewed form, in that it encompasses manifestations of hatred toward the State of Israel justified solely by the perception of the latter as a Jewish collective.
• Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz, said “The adoption of the resolution confirms President Macron’s remarks that anti-Zionism is the new face of anti-Semitism.  This is an important step in the struggle against anti-Semitism, and I call on other countries to follow in France’s footsteps”​
• Leader of Blue and White, Benny Gantz, said on twitter: “I applaud the French Parliament…It is high time that Europe uncovers and combats the ugly face of modern anti-Semitism.  I want to thank President Macron for his strong leadership in this regard.”
• Head of the Jewish Agency Isaac Herzog said on twitter: “We, as the representatives of the Jewish people around the world, commend and salute France’s National Assembly and President Emanuel Macron for a historic decision that stands as a moral beacon against manifestations of anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel.”

Context: The IHRA definition states that “antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

• The UK government adopted the definition three years ago in December 2016. Then Prime Minister Theresa May said, “It is unacceptable that there is antisemitism in this country. It is even worse that incidents are reportedly on the rise. As a Government we are making a real difference and adopting this measure is a ground-breaking step….It means there will be one definition of antisemitism – in essence, language or behaviour that displays hatred towards Jews because they are Jews – and anyone guilty of that will be called out on it.”
• In September 2018 the UK Labour Party National Executive Committee adopted the IHRA definition, but UK Jewish organisations criticised it for issuing a confusing additional statement that said: “This does not in any way undermine the freedom of expression on Israel and the Palestinians.” The Jewish Leadership Council accused the Labour Party of “acting shamefully to undermine the entire IHRA definition” and said the free speech caveat “drives a coach and horses through the IHRA definition”.

The IHRA definition includes a number of examples “as illustrations” which are as follows:

• Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
• Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to: Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews. Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Looking ahead: France joins Israel, Germany, the UK and 8 other European countries in adopting the IHRA definition and is expected to be adopted by French public bodies, institutions and organisations.