When House of Cards Becomes Reality

Ha’aretz 2.11.13

In the new, and may I say excellent, Netflix remake of the political thriller “House of Cards,” the main protagonist, Frank Underwood, played by Kevin Spacey, seeks to knock out the president’s choice for secretary of state. With some in-depth research and some dirty tricks, he links the nominee to an obscure op-ed written 40 years ago that criticizes Israel. Underwood then gets the Anti-Defamation League to come out and call the nominee anti-Semitic, and in the ensuing media storm the nominee is withdrawn.

Chuck Hagel, on the other hand, survived the media firestorm amidaccusations of anti-Semitism to arrive at the U.S. Senate confirmation hearing on his nomination as secretary of defense. But – in a life imitates art scenario – it wasn’t an easy ride.

While Hagel does have a record worth questioning – as would any other candidate for a high cabinet office, to ensure they are qualified for the post – his confirmation hearing made for uncomfortable viewing for anyone who really cares about Israel.

Israel was raised a stunning 178 times (according to the Lobe Log; Foreign Policy counted 166 mentions), with Senator Cruz (R-TX) even brining in an audio-visual display. The focus of the questioning was guided by the weeks of campaigning by groups such as Christians United for Israel and the Emergency Committee for Israel. Yet the uproar that these groups caused ahead of the hearing turned out to be that of a paper tiger; Not only did they have no material success, they ended up having the inverse impact on Israel’s image to that which they sought to achieve.

Stephen Walt, co-author of “The Israel Lobby” argues in his book that pro-Israel lobbies prevent Congress from holding open debate about U.S. policy toward Israel. He goes on to argue that this lack of genuine debate on Israel prevents a “generally positive impression of the Jewish State” to be shaped among politicians, and thus the American public. “Playing the anti-Semitism card stifles discussion even more and allows myths about Israel to survive unchallenged,” he writes in his book.

After the circus at Hagel’s confirmation hearing, Walt ironically thankedthe Emergency Committee for Israel, Jewish-American magnate Sheldon Adelson, and the Senate Armed Service Committee for “providing such a compelling vindication” of his views.

The Punch and Judy Show that the Israel debate has become in Washington is incredibly damaging to those who care about the U.S.-Israel relationship. While in 2008 there was a danger of it becoming a partisan issue, the bi-partisan consensus has truly been shattered by the debate shifting from the reality of the situation to the ideology of the religious right. The mainstream support of Israel is being battered by a singular slavish view that is more in line with the evangelical Christian community then that of the U.S. Jewish community.

This episode should serve as another reminder to the U.S. Jewish community to the fact that they are not the only players in the Israel-lobbying sphere. The mainstream Jewish groups sat out of the Hagel fight, yet Israel remained the number one issue in the confirmation hearing. The obsessive questioning further disconnected intelligent voters and Israel as a bi-partisan cause. The issue was appropriated and abused by a small group of resourceful and passionate activists, and through their abuse Israel was damaged in the eyes of many.

Pro-Israel lobbies should be careful not to lose the American Jews who are conflicted between their own “hugging and wrestling” with Israel and the desire to keep a united public front to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship. For if the pro-Israel standards that are expressed before the public continue to drift further and further to the political right, especially on prime-time television, Jews will find themselves attempting to identify with a consensus they no longer recognize.

Combatting Europe’s serious antisemitism problem

Ha’aretz 12/31/12

Growing up as an active Jew in London I always hated when Americans or Israelis would comment on anti-Semitism in Europe. Always hyperbolic and often boarding on racism, their declarations of doom and destruction of the Jewish community of Europe was as unwelcome as it was uneducated.

Yet looking at the events of the past few years, and from my new home in North America, I can say that Europe has a serious anti-Semitism problem. With the recent advice that it is no longer safe for Jews to openly walk around Copenhagen, the number of safe European capital cities has shrunk to a tiny number. London and Berlin are some of the last holdouts for Jews to feel safe walking around with a kippa on. Europe is definitely going backward.

This is not just the vain imagination of the Jewish community. A few weeks ago, the Economist ran a story about the ingrained nature of Hanukkah in U.S. culture, leading it with, “On the London Underground or the Paris Metro, only a brave passenger would dress as a Jewish version of Santa Claus. Such an outfit would risk stares, grumbles about Israeli policies, or worse.” This is not news to the Jews of Europe. Indeed, the new chief rabbi-designate of Britain, Ephraim Mirvis, has recognized this as a growing issue that will be on his agenda. The Community Security Trust, a British Jewish communal group, has set best practice on the reporting and prevention of anti-Semitism across Europe, often being highlighted by the U.K. government as a glowing example of how communities can work with local law enforcement.

Yet to the governments of Europe, at a local, regional, national and pan-European level, this issue is not being taken seriously enough. European decision makers often have two reactions when the subject of anti-Semitism is raised.

The first reaction is to section anti-Semitism off as a problem only of the far right. There is a growing problem with far right extremism on the rise in Hungry and Austria alongside nationalists in many European countries remembering their Jew hatred of the past. Today, however, the solutions to anti-Semitism cannot be found by only using the familiar coalitions against the far right.

The second reaction is one of abdication of responsibility. They see anti-Semitism as directly tied to foreign policy and thus blame others for the lack of safety of their own citizens. This is appalling. Regardless of one’s feelings for the Middle East, hateful and violent demonstrations against Jews and Jewish property is never justifiable.

European anti-Semitism is a domestic public policy problem that cannot be fixed with a magic wand, and blaming the victims of hate crime – something that the Mayor of Malmo does often - is an unacceptable solution.

As Europe’s demography changes, governments have to start systemically educating their citizens that hating Jews is not ok, and that it is unjustifiable. This means going beyond Holocaust education and getting into touchy, hard topics such as Israel and Palestine. If the hate, fear and loathing come from today’s political situation, states have the obligation to make sure their citizens are not being brought up on a diet of racism. That starts with educating each and every child.

Jews not living in Europe have a role to play as well. In America,supporting the office of the special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism is a good start. Jews in Europe need the United States and Canada to lobby their own governments to put pressure on the European Union to take the issue seriously. European Jews do not need Israelis or North American Jews to tell them about their own problem, but to support them in helping to make sure that their governments take it seriously.

Lastly and importantly, the global Jewish world must allow European Jews and their agencies, such as the Community Security Trust, to define what constitutes anti-Semitism. The Jews of Europe know their societies, their nuances and cultures better than anyone else. The Jewish world has an obligation to support the Europeans in this existential fight, but they must let the Europeans lead if we are to have any hope of victory.

Jewish conspiracy theories and anti-Semitism

Ha’aretz 9/7/12

As a fan of the first series of Homeland, based off the Israeli show Hatufim, I, along with many of my American compatriots am avidly awaiting the start of season two at the end of September. Having watched a steady diet of 24, Lost, and the X-Files, Homeland marks another great TV milestone in the conspiracy theory genre.

While I love a good conspiracy as a bit of escapism, there are millions around the globe to whom belief in vast conspiracy theories are a bedrock of their worldview.

The belief in grand conspiracy theories, from Free Masons to shadowy Zionists controlling the levers of every major world event are common sense in parts of the developing world, and strongly held beliefs that are being passed on to the next generation.

During my work in the U.K., my colleagues would go to public schools in different parts of the country to do educational sessions around the Middle East conflict and the people it affected. At two of these schools, with a high second and third generation immigrant population from the developing world, the conversation was dominated by questions about free masons. We were asked if we were free masons or if we knew anyone who was. These two schools were in two different parts of the country but the questions from the British kids were the same.

At the Harvard Kennedy School of Government this past year, a classmate of mine who had been working for the UN in Afghanistan remarked that every time he boarded a plane he would inevitably be sitting next to top officials in the Pakistani army. They would, as causal conversation, inform that no Jews were killed in 9/11 and that this proves how they were behind it.

One needs to look no further then the Hamas constitution to see the protocols of the Elders of Zion baked into the text verbatim. Egyptian TV shows profligate conspiracy theories thick with vast webs of shadowy individuals, often Zionist, who are responsible for every misfortune that befalls Egypt.

These beliefs should not be dismissed as fringe, or just explained away as cultural relativism. The public powerlessness at the hands of powerful conspiratorial others breeds victimhood, xenophobia and hate.

These beliefs are just as toxic and noxious as racism, yet they receive far less attention. While the ugliness of racism is spotted and condemned, these beliefs are often seen as kooky and tangential. This complacency is dooming generation after generation, whether in their countries of origin or newfound Western homes, to a culture of victimhood and irresponsibility. How can I be to blame for the misfortunes that befall me if there is always someone else, hiding behind a curtain of secrecy, to blame?

There are fewer thankless tasks that exist than trying to combat a conspiracy theorist. Conversations are circular and often seem pointless. The believers want us to give up, to be so frustrated that we are dismissive, to be so appalled that we just walk away.

We, as a community, have raised, spent and lobbied for millions of dollars to go toward Holocaust education and genocide provention. But the pernicious nature of conspiracy theories have the potential to threaten our educational safeguards. While the means to succeed in combating these viral lies are unclear, the need to do so is undeniable. They will not burn out on their own, especially with satellite TV and the Internet providing a counterculture rich in conspiracies and half-truths.

This task is too large, and the coalition needed to combat these myths is too great to leave the job to our communal institutions alone. Each of us needs to make an effort to highlight the intolerance and hate baked into these theories when we come across them in the virtual or real world. It might be a thankless task, but a vital one if we want to stand any chance at dismissing rumors that breed anti-Semitism like nothing else.

 

Airbrushing anti-Semitism out of the #Toulouse attack

Ha’aretz 3/29/12

Like Jews across the world, I was shocked, sickened and frightened by the senseless murder of a rabbi and three small children in France last week. With the end of Mohammed Merah’s life came the start of an operation on the psychosis that drove him to murder with such callousness. Analysts and political pundits attempting to establish cause and motive have come up with a range of options. Yet, absent from such analysis of many was the cause of anti-Semitism.

As a British Jew who has moved to the United States, my media diet has somewhat shifted to this new geographical location. Now that I do not read the European press daily, I was first made aware of the issue of the air-brushing of anti-Semitism from Merah’s causes by an excellent article in the Tablet by Michael Moynihan, where he picked through various accounts of peoples explanations of the killings and saw that hatred against the Jews did not feature.

	A man pays respect front of candles during a march in honor of the Toulouse victims, in Paris, Monday, March 19, 2012.
	Photo by: AP

Perhaps the most shocking piece written on the murders came from Oxford Professor and Islamic thinker Tariq Ramadan, who declared that Merah was a young man, “imbued neither with the values of Islam, or driven by racism and anti-Semitism.” He was merely attacking symbols, “the army and Jews.”

His analysis was joined by a piece on France 24 that his trigger was due to the loss of a job or a political act. The Guardian in their editorial worries about the politicization of the incident and the general threats to society of violent extremisms, but never mentions the term anti-Semitism.

The reduction of the French Jewish community to a mere symbol of a Western European society demonstrates a dehumanization of Merah’s victims. How does the slaughter of a religious leader and three small children of a particular minority community merely become a symbol of attacking society in general? Do the victims’ identities mean nothing to these analysts except to demonstrate this was another disaffected immigrant angry at the West and demonstrating that anger in just any way he knew how?

As someone who was once the convener anti-racist, anti-fascist campaign for the National Student Movement in the U.K., I understand the tinder box of inter community violence all too well. The desire for the far-right to have been the perpetrator, the boogie man that we can all agree to hate, is overwhelmingly strong. The last thing we want to do is exacerbate Jewish-Muslim tensions.

Yet this noble desire cannot mask the fact that this man’s victims were not random. They were Jews. His lip service to the Palestinian cause as justification makes him no more a symbol of their movement, as his victims were symbols of Western Society. Merah got it into his head that one should kill Jews; it was something that was correct in his eyes to do. His brother is proud of what he did. Is that also because he lost his job or is disaffected? When will it be allowed to say that these two people hated Jews?

The post-mortem of this terrible act needs to focus on how this understanding – that it was a good idea to gun down Jews – occurred. Mohammad Merah, and his brother it seems, have both been infected by eleminationist anti-Semitism. What is needed alongside the rest of the psychological analysis is finding the cause of the infection and callousing it from Western society. It must be burnt out.

The inabilities of some to even mention anti-Semitism as a cause terrifies me. Call a spade a spade; the victims deserve labeling this an act of anti-Semitism far more than the analysis of rightist politics in France’s political discourse.

Perhaps the only positive thing of note has been the reaction of the French Jewish community. After a rabbi and three small children were murdered in France, and declared by the persecutor as an act in the name of the Middle East conflict, there were no riots, nor firebombs lobbed at mosques. During the 2009 War in Gaza there were riots in London, shops smashed and firebombs thrown at synagogues.

The French Jewish community’s silent and powerful protest in arms with other communities in response to such violent provocation demonstrates that even at the pinnacle of rage rioting in the streets of Europe is not justified. So as we think about what lead a man to target Jewish children, let us also recognize the control of a community, a control that we could only hope to emulate if we found ourselves in such circumstances.

Why I have nothing to be ashamed of

National Union of Students 5/309

When I was campaigning to get elected at conference last year, I would go up to delegates and give them my election speech which revolved around my ARAF work and campaign on student housing. After speaking to one delegate, though, I was asked a question that I thought had nothing to do with my election. “Well, are you a Zionist?” A little taken a back, I said, “Yes, I believe in the concept of the state of Israel alongside the concept of the state of Palestine.” The delegate shook their head and said, “Sorry, I can’t vote for a racist,” and walked away.

At the time I shrugged this off as the ignorance of a single delegate and went on to try and persuade more people to vote for me. What I have discovered, though, is that whether in a students’ union or a seminar, the word Zionism is seen as a slur, something you say to make someone feel ashamed or embarrassed.

It’s important at this point to state that I am a proud Jew and a proud Zionist. I believe in the national self determination of the Jewish people in the same way that I believe in the national self determination of the Palestinian people. There is nothing shameful in this belief, nothing that makes me a racist. I am utterly perplexed and at times frustrated by people insisting that I am a morally corrupt person for believing in the above.

What I find astonishing is that it is becoming an acceptable view in the student movement that my belief in national self determination means that I am a legitimate target for hate. If I were to denounce any wish for self government, be happy with the concept of being a minority in every country, with no place to call home, then people would stop hating me and all would be well. If only I could understand that it was my belief in a homeland that leads people to the slip from anti-Zionism into antisemitism then I would see that the best way of avoiding being a victim of racism was to give up the concept of me being a people and settle for me being only a member of a religion – then I too could be a member of the progressive student community and no one would have to wonder if I have a sinister Zionist agenda.

Over the past two months there have been things said to me by students and colleagues, both in formal NEC meetings and informal ‘chats’, that range from offensive to outrageous. I have been told that I am an immoral Jew, that I am one of the bad ones who do not march against Israeli oppression and that there are good moral Jews who march and Zionist Jews who don’t (of course this was said by someone who is not Jewish). I have been told that rather than being a victim of antisemitism, I am the cause of antisemitism, I and my fellow nasty Zionists are responsible for everything that happens to the Jewish community in the UK. Not the people who attempt to burn down synagogues, attack school children on buses, graffiti over Jewish community buildings or who call for death to all Jews; not any of them, but I am the one responsible for the historic rise in antisemitism, I, a member of a people who deserve the homeland that the UN granted us sixty years ago. Lastly I was told that I do not understand how to fight antisemitism and, rather then oppose a rally that intertwines a swastika with a Star of David, I should march alongside that banner to educate the people there….

Sometimes clarity is very important so let me be clear. I have never heard of anyone in the student movement blaming a victim of racism for the abuse they get. I have never heard people justify racism when in pursuit of a political cause (whether legitimate or not). Anyone who racially abuses me because I am a Zionist is wrong as racial abuse is wrong. This is not about me smudging a line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, but rather pointing out that clear cases of antisemitism such as speakers going around saying it is a rational thing to blow up a synagogue or people actually trying to burn down synagogues, are being explained away by motivations that lie in the Middle East. I don’t give a damn how angry you are about what happens in another part of the world, there is no excuse for people putting up the names and addresses of people’s places of worship on a protest group. Yet it is justified and absolved because the Jews were asking for it – what do they expect if they have a prayer for the safety of the state of Israel in their services. Antisemitism is not contentious and I’m sick of people ringing their hands over it and making excuses.

My aim here is not to open a can of worms, that was done at the last EGM, but to state a message loudly and clearly. To those who feel that it is a slur to accuse someone of being a Zionist I stand up proudly as a Zionist, unashamed and willing to defend it passionately. To those who are disheartened with what they have seen, who are feeling intimidated and low, you have nothing to feel bad about. Though some people like shouting louder and will use more underhand tactics, tactics that they should have to apologise for, to achieve their goals, you have a legitimate voice that should and will be heard.