In 2019, Vancouver became one of the first cities in Canada to deal with the infamous IHRA definition of antisemitism. A motion was submitted at that time to not only adopt the IHRA but also to share it as an additional tool with various civic departments, including the Vancouver Police Department. There was a quick and effective response from a broad cross-section of community and social justice activists, which resulted in the motion not being passed by council.
However, the civic election last month produced a new council with a quite different composition. The recently formed ABC Vancouver party won a significant majority of seats on council and also secured the Mayor position. Their election platform called for more funds for policing, and in an unprecedented move, they were even endorsed by Vancouver’s police union. Their platform also included a commitment to have Vancouver adopt the IHRA.
And they wasted no time in fulfilling at least their IHRA promise, as the same councillor who introduced the motion in 2019 gave notice to reintroduce it at the first business meeting of the new council.
Once again, local activists and organizations are mobilizing to express their opposition to this move. Although the chances are slim of it being rejected this time, many feel it is important that the critique of this anti-Palestinian and anti-free speech definition be known publicly. There are more voices than ever pointing out the major flaws in the IHRA definition, most recently from the United Nations.
Canada Palestine Association CPA, that has been active on the Vancouver scene for over four decades, issued a statement noting that the criticisms of the IHRA “that were valid in 2019 are still valid in 2022, as evidence increases of how the IHRA definition is being used to silence Palestinian voices and criticism of Israel.”
The BC Civil Liberties Association put out a letter on Nov. 7 reaffirming that they “are strongly opposed to the IHRA definition because of its threat to freedom of expression”. And in a welcome move, the Union of BC Indian Chiefs also penned a letter to Vancouver City Council in which they expressed “grave concerns” and urged them to “not proceed” with adoption of the IHRA. They stated: “We do not condone protecting Israel from criticism in relation to its settler colonial policies and mistreatment of Palestinians.”
And in the words of Sid Shniad, a founding member of Independent Jewish Voices Canada, “IJV has been campaigning against the IHRA definition of antisemitism since its inception. Even its author, Kenneth Stern, objects to the way it has been used to weaponize antisemitism in the service of Israel and Zionism. Their goal is to convince people that opposition to Zionism and to Israeli oppression of the Palestinians is antisemitic. Our responsibility is to open people’s eyes to what this is really all about.”
One of the most egregious, and less highlighted, aspects of the IHRA definition is its inherent anti-Palestinian racism. Zionism, as a settler-colonialist ideology, has impacted the indigenous Palestinians in ways that will take generations to heal. To tell Palestinians that the Zionist project is not a “racist endeavor” (as the IHRA definition does) is profoundly disturbing. In classic colonization tactics, the Palestinian nation and people were violently uprooted and dispossessed, by an Israeli state that gave, and continues to give, exclusive and preferential rights to Jewish Israelis over everyone else. Palestinians, like all other oppressed indigenous people, have the right to narrate their history and determine their own future; they also have the right to call out their oppressors and the racism inherent in the Zionist scheme.
The CPA statement concluded:
“The IHRA definition was wrong then and it is wrong now. Passing it now at Vancouver city council will not change that nor will it change our determination as Palestinian Canadians to raise our voices against our oppression, and against anti-Palestinian racism and all those who maintain it. We will continue to speak out forcefully and reject the concept that our narrative must be constricted and restrained. If other communities are granted the right during discussions of discrimination to say: ‘Nothing about us without us’, then so are Palestinian Canadians. Or are we to be treated differently, like lesser beings?
Passing this anti-Palestinian definition will not deter us, but it will tarnish the reputation of the city of Vancouver. No longer can Vancouver promote itself as diverse and tolerant. Rather, it will be presented internationally as a city that callously engages in racism against vulnerable minorities (in this case the Palestinian, Arab and Moslem communities), a policy that could have negative implications on tourism and investment.
We join hands with many allies, from progressive Jews to anti-racist and human rights groups to church and union organizations, to say #NoIHRA. Adopting this dangerous and vague definition of anti-Semitism will only serve to harm the reputation of Vancouver as a welcoming city for all people. “
“There are more voices than ever pointing out the major flaws in the IHRA definition, most recently from the United Nations.”
Shaul Magid ( Distinguished Fellow in Jewish Studies at Dartmouth, https://jewish.dartmouth.edu/people/shaul-magid ) addresses the issue of anti-semitism in a recent editorial – must read, in my opinion:
https://www.972mag.com/american-jews-zionism-denial/
Many Jews in the U.S. have grown uncomfortable voicing implausible defenses of Israel, yet cannot let go of their Zionism. Denial won’t solve the dilemma….The State of Israel, I said, is currently a place where Jews as a people are not oppressed, and are actually the hegemon limiting the individual and national aspirations of a non-Jewish population. To claim that Palestinians are oppressed by Israel is not a provocative claim but a descriptive one, which raises a string of important questions…Are acts against that state, in which a Jewish hegemon oppresses a non-Jewish population, antisemitic? Is it necessarily an antisemitic act, for example, if a Palestinian throws rocks at Israeli forces to protest against the occupation? Can it be compared to Cossacks ransacking a Jewish village in the Pale of Settlement under the auspices of the local government? The Palestinian stone-thrower may be engaged in illegal activity; his act may even, under certain definitions, constitute terrorism. But is it antisemitic?
The logic of the worst parts of the IHRA definition is that simply being a Palestinian and objecting to the ethnic cleansing of your own people makes you antisemitic. You have a moral obligation to agree that your family should have been expelled in 1948.
2 of 2
“BDS is a Palestinian-led movement encouraging non-violent pressure on Israel until it complies with international law. “In the same article, Sigmount Königsberg, the anti-Semitism commissioner for Berlin’s Jewish community is quoted as saying Waters is ‘an anti-Semite, a hate preacher with music that demonizes Israel.’
“Likewise, Uwe Becker, Spaenle’s Hessian counterpart says Waters is, ‘a bad example of aggressive, Israel-related anti-Semitism’ & that he is not welcome in the state.’
“Waters is not unique in having weaponized allegations of antisemitism wielded against him in Germany, the Euromed Human Rights Monitor recently expressed concern over the ‘anti-Arab purge in German media.’
“Waters has become an outspoken critic of Israel’s apartheid & oppression of the Palestinian people since he first visited the West Bank in 2006 & was approached by the BDS movement to support the campaign.
“Speaking on Joe Rogan’s Experience last month, considered the world’s most popular podcast, Waters exposed Israel’s ongoing apartheid against the Palestinians saying, ‘now it is very difficult for anyone to have a conversation about Israel & Palestine without using the word apartheid because it is in the lexicon, & the problem is far more in the light.’
“This year Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch published reports asserting Israel is committing the crime of apartheid.
“So far Waters’ tour has also illuminated Israel’s ongoing injustices against Palestinians, including the attacks made against Palestinian journalists. During his recent US shows, images of Israel’s apartheid wall were displayed as well as the name of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh who was shot dead by Israeli forces this year.
“And it is not just adoring fans who listen to Waters’ informed perspective on Palestine, in 2012 he gave an extended address at the United Nations as part of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine & has written many letters encouraging fellow musicians not to perform in Israel.
“Last year, distinguished Palestinian historian, Professor Rashid Khalidi (Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University) suggested that young Palestinians should, ‘stop listening to old people for advice’ on their activism… ‘actually there is one older person you should still listen to, of course, his name is Roger Waters….’
.
1 of 2
Roger Waters Fends Off ‘Antisemitism’ Smears in Germany Ahead of Live Shows – Palestine Chronicle
“Roger Waters Fends Off ‘Antisemitism’ Smears in Germany Ahead of Live Shows,” Palestine Chronical, Nov. 10/22″Pink Floyd rock legend Roger Waters has reaffirmed his commitment to perform in Germany next year as part of his This Is Not a Drill world tour in spite of vicious smears against him from German politicians & media outlets accusing him of antisemitism.
“On Friday, Waters wrote on Facebook to his fans saying The Mayor of Munich, some members of the Green & SDP political parties & others ‘have been slandering me, accusing me of being an anti-semite & also a Putin apologist. I am neither of those things. Never have been and never will be.’
“Waters, known for his outspoken commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights & as a proud supporter of rights for Palestinians, has been attacked by German officials attempting to have his upcoming shows canceled. According to Berliner Zeitung, Samuel Salzborn, the anti-Semitism commissioner of the Social Democratic Party, called for the cancellation of his upcoming concert in Berlin in May 2023.
“The German official recently described the musician as ‘one of the loudest voices in the music business, spreading anti-Israel anti-Semitism,’ in the German newspaper B.Z, according to Tagesspiegel.
“Salzborn has been criticized himself for his ‘deep intolerance against Palestinians’ by Palestinian journalist Ali Abunimah in the Electronic Intifada, following a Tweet he made in October 2019 (now deleted) which said: ‘When you’re sitting in the train & the people next to you start talking about ‘Palestine’ without any apparent reason, it means it is time to either get off the train, put on your headphones, or scream at them’.
“Abunimah said the tweet appears to be ‘a pure expression of his disgust even at the thought of Palestine or Palestinians existing.’
“An article published last week in Jüdische Allgemeine smears Waters even more viciously, the article titled ‘Jew hatred on tour’ says the Bavarian anti-Semitism commissioner Ludwig Spaenle recently called on the city of Munich to cancel the contract for the planned concert in the Olympiahalle if Waters did not distance himself from the Boycott Divestment & Sanctions movement.
law.” (cont’d)
To stipulate scenarios where it may not be antisemitic to criticise Zionism, as the Jerusalem Declaration, the Nexus Document, and IJV-C have, just isn’t good enough. It’s about time for antiracists to jettison the defensive rhetoric and call out the Zionists as the ones actually promulgating antisemitism.