Conference on Antisemitism

Today I went to a conference at Kingsborough Community College on the Resurgence of Antisemitism: A Global Perspective. A friend was running it, so I thought I would attend. I only stayed for the first panel discussion. Dr. Michalel Bernebaum, Kenneth S. Stern, Mark Weitzman, and Tal Becker spoke. They were all OK. Nothing too academic, mostly just talking to a lay audience about anti-Semitism. There was a lot of interesting stuff said there.

Ken Stern made some interesting points about how the language of human rights has been co-opted to promote anti-Semitism. Words like "aparthide" and "racism" are now serving the purposes of those who have little interest in justice, but rather being anti-Semitic.

I found out that there was a conference on denying the Holocaust planned for Beirut a year ago. There was also a plan for one in Verona, and one took place in Jordan.

Tal Becker spoke well, I thought. He is the Legal Advisor to the permanent mission of Israel to the UN.

(I embellish his words, but their spirit follows:)

Tal spoke about the difference between the way Israel views itself and the way it is viewed in the UN. Israel views itself vis a vis the palestinians as a country with a territorial/political conflict with a neighbor. Israel and the palestinians did not recognize each other nor each other's right to exist. The handshake on the White House lawn between Arafat and Rabin was there to show that they now recognized each other's humanity and agree that each has the right to exist and the right to rights.

Others look at the conflict differently. The view at the UN is that there is a villian and a victim. Israel is of course the villian and the palestinians are the victims. Israel is incapable of being the victim.

He repeated something I have said before, and also something Thomas Friedman said in a recent column. It is OK to criticize Israel. That does not make one an anti-Semite. Every Israeli newspaper does that daily. It is OK to hold Israel to a VERY high moral standard. They actually appreciate that. Moreover, he stressed, it is OK to criticize Zionism. It may not be a universalist doctrine to everyone's liking. There is room there for reasonable people to disagree. What is repugnant, is when there is selective justice. Selective justice, he claimed, was when Israel is held to a standard that no one else is held to. When that happens, and say, Israel is criticized for responding with innappropriate force to a suicide bombing, and the suicide bombing is not criticized, then the person is not interested in any type of justice, rather they are interested in using justice as a weapon against the Israelis. That is anti-Semetic.

He also pointed out that the Human Rights Commissioner for next year will be from the Lybian (sic) delegation.

Becker mentioned a response he got from some EU delegate when they supported some resolution condemning the Israeli human rights issues vis-a-vis the palestinians. He asked why they are singling out Israel for such treatment. The answer he got was that "you gave us a guilt trip for the last 50 years, now it is our turn".