Anti-Zionism and Anti-Israel Related Academic

1
Magenta-Foundation Intervention, Amsterdam 23.2.2006
Juliane Wetzel, Center for Research on Antisemitism, Technical University Berlin
Anti-Zionism and Anti-Israel related Academic Antisemitism - Students and Civil
Society
Can we really talk about an Academic Antisemitism? Is it not rather the issue of prejudices
and stereotypes, which are part of the social majority and are likewise virulent in the
student ambience? Left-wing positions are certainly more widespread under students or are
being expressed more openly as in the average society. Stereotypes coming from this
political environment, which are pointed against Israel and include antisemitic
connotations, are therefore at least more articulated at Universities than in the nonacademic field. However, it is evident that the political interest of students is rather
declining and that students generally are today more pragmatic as earlier generations. The
political orientation of students today differs less from the social majority then it was the
case in the 60th, 70th and 80th. Although there is a preference for the Green party in
younger generations left positions are today more situated under persons of the age between
45 and 59 years.
The first study on antisemitic attitudes under students after the unification of Germany has
been a survey conducted at six universities in East and West Germany in early summer
1992. More than a third of the students saw Jews rather sympathetic, 5% frankly admitted
that they are rather not sympathetic to them. At that time one could state that the sympathy
for Jews obviously was the result of a learning process, also if a subliminal taboo of
antisemitic attitudes played certainly a role. But also in that period the antipathy against
Israelis showed a higher percentage: from the students of West Germany 18.5% (sympathy
20.9 %) bore an antipathy and of those from East Germany 30.1% (sympathy 12.4%). The
sympathy vis-a-vis the Palestinians was slightly higher (West: 24.1%; East: 21.5 %). 1
Eight years later, in the winter term 2000/2001 a survey at the University of Essen indicated
to what extent nowadays the role of a so-called secondary antisemitism that means an
antisemitism resulting from Auschwitz, has grown. Mentalities of a final stroke under the
Nazi past and affiliations of guilt against „the Jews“, in the sense of a perpetrator victim
reversal, were widespread under students. Newer empirical data concerning trends, attitudes
and diffusions of antisemitic prejudices among students are not available right now.
2
Therefore I might only present some highlights on the current situation. More research has
to be initiated and sponsored.
The Six-Day-War of 1967 changed a pro-Israel attitude in Germany in general but after all
in the New Left movement, when they adopted an anti-Zionism tinged with antisemitism
that emerged from - and fused with — an anti-Americanism inflamed by the Vietnam War.
The common denominator in this mix was the dominant critique of “the imperialistic and
neo-colonial politics of oppression,” whereby Israel was portrayed as America’s lackey in
the Middle East, while the PLO was glorified as a liberation movement 2 . A second
common denominator which has its strong impact also today had to do with the hidden
motif of rejecting guilt and for charging Israel and the USA: By labelling Israel and
America as “fascist” or “Nazi” the burden of one’s own past is thereby eased considerably 3 .
The political scientist Martin Kloke points to an additional psychological mechanism: both
the Americans, who stood in post-war Germany for democracy and liberalism, and the
Jews, who became the paradigm of Nazi-victims, were no longer living up to their
appointed stereotypes. Their belligerent behaviour in Vietnam and Palestine effectively
turned what identification and sympathy that may have existed before, into hatred.
Following this logic, on the extreme left it was now possible to identify with the “victims of
the victims”, i.e. the Palestinians, or, respectively, the Vietcong 4 .
With the beginning of the Intifada in December 1987, a harsher criticism of Israeli politics
began, which at that point included a broad political spectrum beyond the radical left. In
1989 40 per cent of all Germans supposed that the occupation politics of Israel were the
cause f “a more critical opinion of Jews,” 5 and in 2003 this figure rose to 65 per cent 6 .
During the Middle East peace process, as the position of the PLO concerning Israel’s right
to exist was changing, public interest diminished and the leftist Palestine committees
experienced a strong loss of members.
Since the end of the Cold War a range of developments and events has led not only in
Germany to political re-orientations, which have furthered antisemitic, anti-Zionist and
anti-American convictions.
The position of the extreme left is far from uniform, however. While the Al-Aqsa-Intifada
and the events of September 11th – the war in Iraq could be added to this list – have “put
the extreme left’s relationship to Israel onto an old anti-Zionist trajectory [these events]
3
have also … brought into play a radical counter-movement” 7 . In fact, the very act of taking
a position vis-à-vis Israel and antisemitism has become a divisive issue among the German
left. Today two camps oppose each other with numerous declarations and articles in the
media but sometimes they even turned violent 8 . On the one side we find the “anti-German
friends of Israel” which have as their intellectual home such periodicals as Jungle World,
Bahamas, Interim and konkret, and whose members count themselves as both belonging to
the radical left, while at the same time uncompromisingly adopting Israel’s position. This
group declares itself to be pro-American, views the Palestinians as an „aggressive antiSemitic collective“, and openly refers to “Islamic fascism” as the re-birth of National
Socialism 9 . They accuse the traditional Left to be antisemitic and to lack any factual
understanding of Israel’s emergence and to ignore the threats against it, such as world-wide
Arabic antisemitism. Such different positions do have also an impact on campus.
The political affections of students as also the survey conducted at Essen University
showed goes mostly from radical left to the center political attitude. Nevertheless the
feeling that Germans should finally have the right to be a “normal” folk connected with the
claim that a final stroke – a “Schlussstrich - has to be torn under the Nazi past which seems
to be connected more to the right is also widespread under students and overshadows the
differences of the various left positions. The representative survey at Essen University
approves the results of a poll by the German weekly “Die Woche” from May 2000 where
the mentality of a final stroke under the past has been more widespread under those
between the ages of 19 and 29 (69%; 15-17 years old: 81%) than under those over 60 years
old (53%). The survey at Essen showed that 36% of the students fully or mostly agree with
the item “It is time that the national-socialist past will be ruled off,” whereby there was a
higher percentage the younger the respondents were. 10 From those who agreed with a final
stroke under the past 25% categorized themselves as rather left, 40% as rather political
center, 64% as rather right and 41% as no specific political camp. Besides the higher quota
of men (40%) who agreed it is interesting to emphasise the result concerning the different
fields of study. Those who study to become a schoolteacher showed with 34% the highest
acceptance to rule off the past. This is an important result if we take into consideration the
fact that these young people are the future teachers and will influence the knowledge on
Holocaust and its remembrance. Concerning alignments which cover secondary antisemitic
(antisemitism because of Auschwitz) attitudes 19.7 % of the respondents fully or partly
agreed with the statement “Jews are good in taking advantage of the bad conscience of the
4
Germans” and 16.7% replied coinciding with the item “Many Jews today try to take
advantage of the past of the Third Reich and let the Germans pay for it”. 11 Anyhow the
results show that the students from Essen University in 2000/01 bore such stereotypes
minor than German population in general. A poll conducted by the American Jewish
Committee in Germany 2005 showed that the statement “Jews are using remembrance on
the national-socialist extermination policy for their own aims,” was fully or partly approved
by 42% of the Germans.
What is alarming in correlation with the “Schlussstrich” mentality is the lacking knowledge
of students concerning the Nazi period: Only 69% know the date of the beginning of the
Second World War, 76% are familiar with the occurrences of the “Reichskristallnacht” –
the November pogrom; only 29% were able to answer the question “What were the
Nuremberg Laws” and only 23% know what was planned at the Wannsee conference. 12
The survey from Bielefeld University within the ten years series of polls on “GroupFocused Enmity Syndrome—Longitudinal Empirical Observation of Attitudes of Enmity in
the Population” published in the series “Deutsche Zustände” in 2004 showed that 68% of
the respondents partly (23.8) or fully agreed (44.5) with the item “It is annoying that
Germans also today are charged with Nazi crimes”. But it was also obvious that antisemitic
Israel criticism was expressed by 31.7 % in the statement “Because of Israeli politics Jews
for me are getting more and more dislikable” and even 44.4 % partly or fully affirmed the
statement “Looking at Israel’s political agenda I am understanding very well that people
have something against Jews” and with the highest consent (68.3%) the item “Israel wages
a war of destruction [Vernichtungskrieg – Nazi term] against the Palestinians.” 13 But the
results of the survey also showed that respondents at the age from 22 to 34 hold the lowest
levels beyond all attitude items. On the other hand a survey by researchers of Leipzig
University in September 2004 on “right-extreme attitudes in Germany” produced a
surprising result: compared with a similar poll in 2002 right-extreme attitudes from
respondents with higher education increased. This makes obsolete the hitherto
achievements that a higher educational standard protected more against right-extreme and
antisemitic sentiments. 14 It is more than evident that we have to look deeper into this field
and have to initiate research projects to get a better overview on the current situation that
differs to a certain extent widely to earlier developments.
5
The experiences of the author and political scientist Matthias Küntzel with students of an
advanced technical college where he lectured at the seminar “Dimensions of Antisemitism”
in spring 2005 are typical for similar cases I and others who give lectures on today’s
antisemitism practised in the last years. After having told the students about the
characteristics of hate against Jews and about antisemitism in Arab countries and the
Muslim brotherhood Küntzel expected requests but instead of that the question came up
“Why Germany is still supplying Israel with weapons?” It was immediately clear that there
was no general criticism on arms transfer of the German government but that only the
relations to Israel were labelled. 15
The same Matthias Küntzel was also asked to write an expertise on antisemitic attitudes
coming up in a mailing list of the Hans-Böckler Foundation, the labor union owned
scholarship programme, in February 2003. The results of a paper with antisemitic
conspiracy theories spread by a foundation supported doctoral candidate with an Arab
background via the mailing list caused a heavy discussion within the foundation about
antisemitic stereotypes and attitudes. However, the debate was an internal one and the
foundation tried to evade any wider public attention and publication: “We don’t want the
case to be accessible in general public” 16 . Other doctoral candidates organized a conference
on “Antisemitism within the left” where heavy debates between different positions of the
split left movement were held. The Böckler-Foundation which supports around 250
doctoral candidates a year was not the only foundation where graduate students reported
from similar antisemitic occurrences and debates.
Interesting to follow was also a debate in an Internet Forum on “Antisemitism and AntiZionism in the academic ambience” in January of this year as a reaction on the
interdisciplinary team-taught lecture series “Germany – Israel-Palestine” at Leipzig
University in autumn last year. As it often occurs with speeches or conferences on the
Middle East conflict lecturers with a one-sided opinion or Jews with a controversial
standpoint on Israel are invited and then used as fig leaf for the political intensions of the
organizers. This was also to a certain extent the case at this Leipzig lectures. The organizer,
Prof. Georg Meggle of the Institute of Philosophy showed in his report on the lecture series
that anti-Zionist attitudes were transported and besides that included a cartoon by the
Brazilian caricaturist Carlos Latuff which was in itself a call for freedom but Latuff’s
6
cartoons generally are carrying antisemitic and anti-Zionist stereotypes as well as heavy
comparisons between Nazi crimes and the acts of the Israeli Defense Forces in the occupied
territories and are often publicised on the anti-globalisation website indymedia. In the
Forum some students discussing the lectures showed their secondary antisemitic feelings
and their mentality to rule off the past, served the cliché that there is a taboo to criticise
Israel and the resentment that because Prof. Meggle seams to be a Jew he might not carry
antisemitic stereotypes. Others countered on that and asked themselves what ideas are
behind students to serve such arguments. 17
At Hamburg University the offer of lectures and seminars on Israel, antisemitism and the
Palestine conflict with questions like “Are Jews themselves guilty for antisemitism?” by the
political science professor Rolf Hanisch caused counter reactions by students. What the
management of the University was not able to realize the students managed: with a
blockade of the lecture and the seminar they interrupted Hanisch’s teaching and the
seminars were closed down. 18
Heavy discussions on antisemitic incidents at different universities often resulted in
organizing networks against anti-Semitism. At Hanover the “Bündnis gegen
Antisemitismus” was founded which had very controversial discussions with anti-fascist
groups about the borderline between legitimate criticism of Israeli politics and antisemitic
stereotypes. They criticized harshly Flyers, which were spread from student groups with the
slogan “Solidarity with Israel means the end of left politics.” 19 A cartoon by the Algerian
caricaturist Khalil Bendib published in a student’s publication was part of the discussion as
well, due to its anti-Israel connotations. The cartoon could be seen as transporting
antisemitic sentiments (“Jewish nose”; rat- or mouse-tail) but Bendib on his homepage
provides explicitly antisemitic caricatures in the style of “the Stürmer” as a picture of
Sharon with a typical antisemitic grimace titled “Cannibal” and anti-Jewish conspiracy
theories combined with anti-Americanism. 20
This going together of antisemitism and anti-Americanism is today common in all political
segments from right-wing to the extreme left. In student environments anti-Americanism
plays an important role and is often combined with antisemitism using conspiracy theories.
Such an interdigitation was often virulent in anti-Israel demonstrations partly organized or
co-organized by student groups. How narrow the contents between some left groups and
7
right-wing groups in the struggle against Israel sometimes are could also be seen at
demonstrations as the one in Greifswald 2002 where members of the NPD were accepted
by the organizing Arab students. These “cross-front strategies” could be observed also at a
demonstration in Munich 2002 by the anti-globalization movement Attac where Skinheads
participated. 21
To a certain extent the networking with Islamist groups which can be seen generally only in
a virtual form on the Internet had also once a practical consequence. On 31st of March 2002
the radical Muslim organisation “Hizb-ut-tahrir” (Liberation Party) published a leaflet on
its German homepage containing the following statements: “The Jews are a people of
slander. They are a treacherous people who violate oaths and covenants (…). Allah has
forbidden us from allying ourselves with them. (…) Indeed, that you should destroy the
monstrous Jewish entity. (…) Kill all Jews (…) wherever you find them.” 22 The
organisation has been observed for a longer time period by the German Office for the
Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) but did not receive public attention
before they organised a public lecture on “The Iraq – e new war and its consequences” at
the Berlin Technical University in October 2002 where also representatives of the German
extreme right-wing party NPD (National Democratic Party) as Horst Mahler and Udo Voigt
participated. 23 The then Minister of Interior Otto Schily has forbidden the organisation on
January 15, 2003 because of its “anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli inflammatory propaganda”.
The development in Germany during the last years suggests the conclusion that today it
seems to be legitimate, sometimes even en vogue, to hold an anti-Israel attitude often
connected to antisemitic traditions. Therefore antisemitic structural thinking is creeping
into public and private discourse and more rarely is picked up as an issue or criticized in
society, politics and press. This results in an almost unnoticeable increasing acceptance of
antisemitic stereotypes. This is a phenomenon, which can be seen in all different parts of
society and is therefore also immanent in student circles.
8
Footnotes
1
Manfred Bursten, Wie sympathisch sind uns die Juden? Empirische
Anmerkungen zum Antisemitismus aus einem Forschungsprojekt über
Einstellungen deutscher Studenten in Ost und West, in: Jahrbuch für
Antisemitismusforschung 4 (1995), S. 10-129, hier: S. 110.
2
Cf.. Michael Hahn (Ed.), Nichts gegen Amerika. Linker Antiamerikanismus
und seine lange Geschichte, Hamburg 2003.
3
An early example is given by the author Hans Magnus Enzensberger, who
wrote against the background of the Vietnam War in 1967 the following:
“From the extermination bombardment to the most refined techniques for
manipulating the consciousness: its goal is political, economic and
military world domination.” Cf. Klaus Peter, Hans Magnus Enzensberger
über Amerika, Politik und Verbrechen, in: Sigrid Bauschinger et al.
Amerika in der deutschen Literatur, Stuttgart 1975, p. 357. Further
examples: Martin Kloke, Reflexe und Ressentiments. Deutsche Linke und die
USA, in: Tribüne 43, Issue 169, 2004, pp.134-150, here p. 138f.
4
Ibid. p. 141
5
Of all six possible causes included in the survey, Israel’s politics
were named most often; Emnid, Zeitgeschichte, Bielefeld 1989,Tab. 83
6
tns-Emnid, by order of the newspaper „Die Welt“, in: „Die Welt“ November
10th, 2003;
7
Martin W. Kloke, Israel und die deutsche Linke. Zur Geschichte eines
schwierigen Verhältnisses, Frankfurt a. M. 1990, p. 183.
8
In Hamburg a „bizarre demonstration“ took place, as the taz Hamburg
reported on April 27th, 2004: 180 Persons gathered with the flags of
Israel and the USA for the „first Communist, pro-Israeli demonstration
against Leftists, who are not solidly with Israel“. 150 opposing
demonstrators shouted slogans such as „death to the state of Israel“, and
„USA: International central for genocide“, threw eggs at the pro-Israel
demonstrators and became violent. (Thomas Haury, Der neue
Antisemitismusstreit der deutschen Linken, in: Neuer Antisemitismus? Eine
globale Debatte, ed. by Doron Rabinovici et al., Frankfurt a. M. 2004, p.
118).
9
Cf. Thomas Uwer et al. (Eds.), Amerika. Der „War on Terrorism“ und der
Aufstand der Alten Welt, Freiburg 2003, to which mostly journalists and
writers of the „anti-German“ periodicals bahamas, konkret and Jungle
World have contributed.
10
Klaus Ahlheim, Bardo Heger, Die unbequeme Vergangenheit, NSVergangenheit, Holocaust und die Schwierigkeiten des Erinnerns,
Schwalbach/Ts. 2002, p. 26
11
Ibid., p. 52.
12
Ibid., p. 63.
13
GMF-Survey 2004: Wilhelm Heitmeyer (ed.), Deutsche Zustände, Folge 3,
Frankfurt a.M. 2004.
14
Elmar Brähler, Oliver Decker, Rechtsextreme Einstellungen in
Deutschland, conducted September/October 2004 http://www.unileipzig.de/%7Emedpsy/pdf/rechtsextremismus_230605.pdf
15
Matthias Küntzel, dem Antisemitismus entgegentreten – aber wie?,
December 2005, website: http://www.matthiaskuentzel.de/contents/demantisemitismus-entgegentreten-aber-wie.
16
Ibid., p. 14. See also Matthias Küntzel, Unschuld und Abwehr. Über
einen Antisemitismusstreit in der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, in: Jungle
World, 11 May 2005; and
http://www.matthiaskuentzel.de/contents/interview-ueber-dieantisemitismus-debatte-in-der-hans-boeckler-stiftung.
17
Forum Die StudentInnen der Politikwissenschaft, Universität Leipzig
(http://www.uni-leipzig.de/fsrpowi/forum/showthread.php?id=2651)
18
Olaf Kistenmacher, Jungle World, 27.4.2005; see also
http://www.hagalil.com/archiv/2005/04/hamburg.htm.
9
19
Universität Hannover, Fachschaft Sozialwissenschaften:
http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/gruppen/fs-sowi/unantifa.htm.
20
Homepage Khalil Bendib http://www.bendib.com/palestine/.
21
Attac Deutschland, Erklärung des Ratschlags zu Antisemitismus und
Nahostkonflikt, 19.10.2003, in: Sand im Getriebe, internationaler
deutschsprachiger Rundbrief der ATTAC-Bewegung, Nr. 27.
22
Homepage Hisb-ut-tahrir, 31.3. 2002; Der Tagesspiegel online, 15.1.2003
(http://www.tagesspiegel.de), Sueddeutsche Zeitung online,
16.1.2003(http://www.sueddeutsche.de/dpa/AP). The German website “MuslimMarkt” (muslim market) just openly kept distance to Hizb-ut-Tahrir on
17.11.2002 (see http://www.muslim-markt.de/neues/neues.htm;
http://f25.parsimony-net/forum63498/messages/10858.htm) ; see also
Germany Bans Islamic Group, Washington Post online, 16.1.2003 (see
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63793-2003Jan16.html).
23
Anti-Semitic hate in plain public. Besides Hiz-but-Tahrir many other
Islamists agitate against Jews (Antisemitische Hetze in aller
Öffentlichkeit. Neben Hiz-but-Tahrir agitieren viele andere Islamisten
gegen Juden), Der Tagesspiegel, 31.10.2002, see also ibid., 29.10.2002
(see: http://www.tagesspiegel.de).