04.11.21

Editorial Note

IAM recently published an article at the BESA Center of Bar-Ilan University, “The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism Is Itself Antisemitic.” IAM argued that when reading the Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism (JDA), its’ authors claim they intend to fight anti-Semitism, but by accepting the targeting of Israel alone for the abuse of human rights, while others abuse human rights far worse than Israel, such as the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, applying such double standards can be construed as anti-Semitic.  Moreover, the JDA accepts defining Israel as a settler-colonial state, which it is not, consequently accepting the denial of Jews the right to exist in the national home for the Jewish People while not denying other nations. This can also be construed as anti-Semitic.  

IAM also noted that the Al-Jazeera media outlet and the Palestinian BDS committee both dismissed the JDA. 

The JDA was conceived at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute during 2020. Now, Van Leer Institute issued a call for paper to push the JDA agenda again. Titled “Defining Anti Semitism between History and Politics,” a conference would take place between May 30, 2022, to June 1, 2022, at the premises of Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem. 

The call for paper states that the widely endorsed working definition of anti-Semitism by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which the JDA intends to replace, has “quickly became a site of controversy,” when 122 Arab and Palestinian academics, journalists, and intellectuals, issued a statement opposing the IHRA definition because it “purportedly promotes the suppression of Palestinian rights.”

The Van Leer Institute conference offers a space for scholars from different disciplines to examine the current debate over definitions of anti-Semitism. The conference will also address the different forms of criticism of the State of Israel: “its existence, its constitutional foundations, its identity as a Jewish state, its history, policies, or practices – and anti-Semitism.”  

Some of the questions raised in the call for paper include:

–       “Why is it that Islamophobia, alongside anti-Semitism, has been the main site of similar activity and controversy?”  

–       “How do definitions address or affect possible entanglements between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism?”

–       “In what ways is the debate over the definition of anti-Semitism related to the Palestine Question?”

IAM already mentioned Van Leer Institute in a February post, discussing The Main Reason for Israel’s Humanities Failure, which attributed the problem to political activism disguised as academics. IAM noted that one of the leading facilitators of political activism dressed in academic garb has been Van Leer Institute. It often hosts discussions for “leftists” who follow neo-Marxist, critical scholarship.   For instance, an event in memory of a famous anarchist described him as “one of the most fascinating and pioneering intellectuals on the renewed left [emphasis added] in the last decade.” 

Van Leer is controversial because it promotes one-sided research which falls well below academic standards.  Indeed, the Van Leer Institute is not registered with the Israeli Council for Higher Education list of institutions. While it is a clear breach of academic standards, for some academics, such as Prof. Shai Lavi, Director of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, from the Law Faculty at Tel Aviv University, this is acceptable.

Van Leer has a history of providing one-sided and biased information. For example, IAM reported in September that a Van Leer Institute fellow reviewed claims that some Palestinian school textbooks promote anti-Semitism and found no such evidence.  Soon after, a research panel found that these books included anti-Semitic statements.

IAM reported in July that a Van Leer Institute fellow wrote about the killer of Dafna Meir, who was murdered at her doorstep in Otniel, the Orthodox Israeli settlement in the West Bank. He wrote: “Try to imagine that the person who carried out the terrorist attack in Otniel, 16-year-old Murad Adais from Beit Amra in the southern West Bank, had not watched television in the days prior to the attack. What insight could be drawn from that? What would he have seen from the window of his home? Which Israelis would he have met? Soldiers at a roadblock? Settlers going around with weapons whose communities were built on Palestinian land?”   

By any moral standard, such whitewashing of terrorism is outrageous.

Two senior research fellows at Van Leer Institute, Prof. Amos Goldberg and Prof. Bashir Bashir, push the theory that the Holocaust and the Nakba could be equated. This theory appeared in an article, “Between the Holocaust and the Nakba, two histories – and maybe a shared future,” which minimizes the scale of the Holocaust to meet the self-inflicted Palestinian Nakba.

Missing from the Van Leer Institute vocabulary is Palestinian anti-Semitism. Some Palestinian protestors have used Nazi Symbols in violent demonstrations.  The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center recently published a report detailing “Nazism in Palestinian society and the use of Nazi symbols,” showing images and reports of Nazi symbols used by Palestinians.  The report gives a few examples: On August 14, 2021, during a demonstration by Palestinians from the village of Bayta near the outpost of Eviatar in Samaria, rags soaked in kerosene were set on fire, forming a swastika inside an image of the Star of David. On September 25, 2021, a video clip showed a Nazi flag hanging on power lines on the outskirts of the Palestinian village of Bayt Umar, near Hebron. A Nazi flag was also flown in Bayt Umar in July 2014. On October 22, 2021, Swastikas were spray-painted on concrete roadblocks. On June 29, 2021, a Palestinian youth attending Islamic Jihad military training in Gaza was interviewed with al-Quds al-Yawm TV station. Referring to Jews, he said: “We asked Hitler why he left some of you alive. He did it to show how wicked you are. We will come for you from under the ground to spread terror in your hearts and above the ground we will mangle your bodies with our rockets. Go run to your shelters, you mice, you sons of Jewish women.”

Van Leer could have also discussed the data provided by another report on global incidents in 2020 of anti-Semitic attacks. Titled “Antisemitism—Annual Report 2020 Situation Assessment, Trends, and Incidents,” this report was submitted to the Government of Israel by the Combating Antisemitism group at the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs in January 2021. It has been looking at incidents in the United States, Western Europe, France, Germany, Eastern Europe, etc.

One cannot expect the Van Leer Institute to denounce these incidents as it would conflict with the “shared future” message it wishes to promote. Clearly, the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute will forever push the failing JDA to meet its political agenda.

References

https://networks.h-net.org/node/28655/discussions/8806089/call-papers-defining-antisemitism-between-history-and-politics?page=1

CALL FOR PAPERS Defining Antisemitism between History and Politics International Workshop Monday, May 30 – Wednesday, June 1, 2022 At the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute

Discussion published by Amos Goldberg on Friday, October 29, 2021

Defining antisemitism has become a battleground. Advocates and opponents of contending definitions confront one another in the printed press, online, and in social media. The working definition adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016 was endorsed widely but quickly became a site of controversy. In recent months this controversy has become more intense. In November 2020, 122 Palestinian and Arab academics, journalists, and intellectuals issued a statement that declared their opposition to antisemitism and to the IHRA’s working definition thereof, which purportedly promotes the suppression of Palestinian rights. In March this year, the IHRA definition confronted a new challenge in the form of two alternative definitions: the Nexus Document, “Understanding Antisemitism at its Nexus with Israel and Zionism,” and the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA).

This conference aims to provide a space for scholars from different disciplines (including political science, law, philosophy, linguistics, and history) to examine the current debate over definitions of antisemitism and to explore what is at stake in this debate. In this conference we wish to address one of the most controversial issues, namely, the relationship between different forms of criticism of the State of Israel – its existence, its constitutional foundations, its identity as a Jewish state, its history, policies, or practices – and antisemitism. The conference will address questions pertaining to definitions of antisemitism from diverse historical, theoretical, methodological, and political points of view. It aims to give historical and theoretical depth to a heated political debate.

At the same time, the issues raised by the debate over the definition of antisemitism ramify widely. By addressing not only the relationship between antisemitism and antizionism but also these broader questions, this conference aims to promote new scholarly perspectives and better understanding of current debates and discontents.

• How does one account for the relatively recent appearance of public/formal/legal definitions of antisemitism and their turning into a subject of intense contention?
• How do these different definitions shape and reshape the meaning of antisemitism and how do they affect social and political relations between Jews and various non-Jewish groups?
• To define or not to define? Are definitions necessary for combating discrimination, prejudice, and hate?  
• What functions do we expect a definition of antisemitism and its attendant examples to perform? How has the question of definition developed in different national contexts, within intergovernmental bodies and in civil society?
• What’s in a “definition”? What role do tropes, analogies, and examples play in definitions of antisemitism? 
• How have definitions of antisemitism emerged and changed over time?
• As a matter of practice, what has been the role of the IHRA working definition in identifying, recording, and combatting antisemitism?  
• As a matter of practice, what has been the role of the JDA definition, if any, in providing an alternative to the IHRA definition to be used in social, political, and educational settings to frame the debate on antisemitism?
• What implications does the striving for a definition have for other racisms, forms of hate speech, racialization, and political hostility? Do we need a portfolio of definitions? Why is it that Islamophobia, alongside antisemitism, has been the main site of similar activity and controversy? 
• What impact do definitions and, more broadly, the regulation of speech have on the public sphere in liberal societies and on the tension between freedom of speech and its social and legal regulation?
• How do definitions address or affect possible entanglements between criticism of Israel and antisemitism?
• In what ways is the debate over the definition of antisemitism related to the Palestine Question?
• In what ways does this debate over definitions relate to other controversies, such as those over colonialism and postcolonialism? Does this debate express structures of political power and processes of marginalization? Who is eligible to participate in this discussion over definitions and whose voices are heard/not heard in it?

Scholars of all disciplines are invited to submit proposals for lectures to be delivered at the conference. Proposals (500–700 words) and a curriculum vitae should be submitted by email to dafnas@vanleer.org.il by November 15, 2021.

Academic Committee

Prof. Alon Confino, Director, Institute for Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Prof. Manuela Consonni, Director, The Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Antisemitism, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Prof. David Feldman, Director Birkbeck Institute, for the Study of Antisemitism University of London.

Prof. Amos Goldberg, Head of the Avraham Harman Research Institute of Contemporary Jewry, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Prof. Shai Lavi, Director of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute.

Prof Amos Morris-Reich, Director, The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism, Tel Aviv University.

Dr. Dafna Schreiber, Director, Jewish culture and Jewish thinking, The Van Leer Jerusalem Institute.

========================================================================

https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/nazism-in-palestinian-society-and-the-use-of-nazi-symbols/

NAZISM IN PALESTINIAN SOCIETY AND THE USE OF NAZI SYMBOLS

Published: 28/10/2021

FULL DOCUMENT IN PDF FORMAT

Overview

• On August 14, 2021, Palestinians from the village of Bayta held a demonstration near the outpost of Eviatar in Samaria. The outpost was evacuated in July 2021, but as part of the agreement with the Israeli government, the land is still controlled by the IDF, an issue which is currently being examined by the Civilian Authority. During they demonstration they ignited rags soaked in kerosene forming a swastika inside a Magen David.
• It was a display planed in advance by the Palestinians, who prepared it, brought it to the location of the demonstration and set it on fire, part of the night harassment units’ activities to protest the establishment of the outpost. The Palestinian Authority (PA) and Fatah support such demonstrations and always deliberately ignored such displays. Videos of the display and the demonstrators, including children, holding torches, were uploaded to the social networks and broadcast by Hamas’ al-Quds TV.
• On September 25, 2021, Israeli soldiers uploaded a video to the social networks showing a Nazi flag hanging from the power lines on the outskirts of the Palestinian village of Bayt Umar, near Hebron. Several hours later an IDF force arrived and shot the flag down. A Nazi flag was also flown in Bayt Umar in July 2014.

    
Right: Nazi swastika flag in Bayt Umar (social networks, September 25, 2021). Left: Nazi swastika flag on the outskirts of Bayt Umar (picture by Avraham Weiss for Tazpit News Agency, July 6, 2014).

•  On October 22, 2021, swastikas were painted on a roadblock on the Hawwara road, south of Nablus (Twitter account of Zvi Sukkot, October 22, 2021).

Swastikas spray-painted on a the concrete blocks of the roadblock
(Twitter account of Zvi Sukkot, October 22, 2021).

• On June 29, 2021, a Palestinian child attending a Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) military training camp (the Palestinian version of summer camp) in the Gaza Strip was interviewed for the organization’s al-Quds al-Yawm TV station. To the Jews he said, “We asked Hitler why he left some of you alive. He did it to show how wicked you are. We will come for you from under the ground to spread terror in your hearts and above the ground we will mangle your bodies with our rockets. Go run to your shelters, you mice, you sons of Jewish women.”

     
Camper at a PIJ training camp (MEMRI, June 29, 2021).

Click for Video

https://www.memri.org/tv/islamic-jihad-summer-camp-not-enjoy-play-sacrifice-tear-jews-bodies-rockets

• Such events reflect the Palestinian attitude, including the government’s official attitude, towards Nazism and its link to Jews and Zionism. Generally speaking, it has five aspects:
  • Defaming the Jews: It is possible to understand Hitler and the Nazis, because the [Ashkenazi] Jews [in Europe] were so detestable and loathsome the Europeans tried to get rid of them. Hitler did not kill all the Jews so that people who came after him, such as the Palestinians, could see for themselves that the Jews were inherently evil, understand and perhaps justify the Nazis’ actions. On occasion Mahmoud Abbas uses Nazi themes in his speeches without specifically referring to Nazis.[1] Over the past decade Nazi themes such as the glorification of Hitler have appeared in children’s books published in the PA and on the official Fatah Facebook page. In some instances, as happened recently in the Gaza Strip, the themes are used as a call to the Palestinians to finish what Hitler started. The message is plainly sent to the Palestinian target audience but downplayed and glossed over for foreign consumption.
  • The claim that Israel acts like Nazi Germany: Israel is accused of treating the Palestinians exactly or almost exactly as the Nazis treated the Jews. Zionism is the new Nazism (and the new apartheid), and the Palestinians are the new victims. The victims of Nazi racism have become Nazi racists themselves. That is the message sent by senior Palestinian figures, the Palestinian media and the many demonstrations, including the one held near the evacuated outpost of Eviatar. Senior Fatah figure Jibril Rajoub, who is a possible replacement for Mahmoud Abbas, repeatedly calls the Jews “the new Nazis.” The message is aimed at people overseas who are unaware of the actual facts, and resonates with the left, including its anti-Semites, around the world. The claims have two objectives, one to delegitimize the existence of Israel as a Jewish state, and the other to represent the Palestinians as the new victims of contemporary Nazism in order to enlist international support.
  • The claim that the Zionists were Nazi collaborators: The Palestinians accuse the Zionists of collaborating with the Nazis, helping them establish their regime and even kill Jews, in the belief that it would cause the Jews of Europe to emigrate to Israel [sic] to escape the fate awaiting them.[2] That twisted claim was the basis for Mahmoud Abbas’ PhD thesis, “The ties between Nazism and Zionism, 1935-1942,” and his book, The Other Face: the Secret Relation between the Nazis and the Zionist Movement, a reworking of his doctoral dissertation. Its main theme is “Zionism, the beginning and the end.” According to Mahmoud Abbas, the many attempts made by Zionists to utilize and manipulate Nazism to increase the willingness of the Ashkenazi Jews in Europe to emigrate to Israel, i.e., Mandatory Palestine, had little success. The source of the theme was apparently Russian communist propaganda from the 1950s and ’60s.
  • Accusations that Israel cynically exploits the Holocaust: Israel’s objective, according to the Palestinians, is to justify its positions and policies, and enlist international support. The Holocaust was admittedly terrible but Israel exaggerates it, and in any case the Palestinians and Arabs had no part in it. Therefore they should not have to suffer at the hands of the Zionists because the Jews suffered at the hands of the Nazis.
  • The adoption of Nazi symbols to show Palestinian hatred of the Jews: The Palestinians have adopted the swastika and the Nazi salute, and examples of such practices surface from time to time. Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the time and an ardent opponent of Zionism, collaborated with the Nazis and met with Hitler, a fact rarely mentioned in the Palestinian narrative, but neither criticized nor expressed with remorse.
• It is difficult to assess how widespread or deeply ingrained such ideas are within Palestinian society or in Palestinian political circles. Even the most limited and mild attempts to challenge them are met with sharp criticism. For example, the vehicle of Professor Muhammad Dajani Daoudi, who visited Auschwitz in 2014, was torched, he received death threats, the university he taught at, the al-Quds University in the PA, shirked all responsibility and he was forced to flee to the United States. No Palestinian politician came to his defense. The five aspects noted above are part and parcel of the policy of indoctrination and incitement to hatred of Zionists implemented by the PA and most of the Palestinian organizations, and all fit the definition of anti-Semitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

FULL DOCUMENT IN PDF FORMAT

[1] At the Palestinian National Council meeting on April 30, 2018, Mahmoud Abbas gave a long speech he called a “history lesson,” in which he claimed that the European Jews’ social activities, banking and high-interest money-lending were why they were hated. He used similar themes at a meeting of the PLO’s Central Council on January 14, 2018, claiming the State of Israel was a Western colonial settlement project backed by Christian countries that hated Jews and wanted to get rid of them, and the desire of the colonial powers to spread fear throughout the Arab world. ↑
[2] The Nazis rose to power in the 1930s, the State of Israel was declared in 1948. ↑

=======================================================

==========================================================

Click to access anti-semitism_2020%20YEARLY%20REPORT%20-%20FINAL%20(EN)_v7.pdf

Antisemitism—Annual Report 2020
Situation Assessment, Trends, and Incidents
Submitted to the Government of Israel in Commemoration of International Holocaust Remembrance Day
January 27, 2021
2
Antisemitism | Annual Report 2020
Table of Contents
LETTER FROM THE MINISTER OF DIASPORA AFFAIRS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7
MOST SIGNIFICANT EVENTS IN 2020 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
ANTISEMITISM ON SOCIAL MEDIA IN 2020: AN ANALYSIS OF THE ACMS …………………………………………………………………………………… 16
ANTISEMITISM 2.0 IN THE AGE OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 17
1. The Global Trends of 2020………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 2. An Analysis of Coronavirus-Related Antisemitic Discourse ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19
3. Insights ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24
ACMS ANALYSIS — ENGLISH …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 24
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24
2. Analysis of the Data and Discourse ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 25
3. The United States ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26
4. The United Kingdom ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 27
5. Insights ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28
ACMS ANALYSIS — FRENCH …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28 1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28 2. Data Interpretation and Main Hypothesis ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
3. An Analysis of Coronavirus-Related Antisemitic Discourse ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 33
ACMS ANALYSIS — GERMAN …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35
2. Content Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 37
3. Insights ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 38
ACMS ANALYSIS — ARABIC …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 39
ACMS ANALYSIS — SPANISH…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 43
ACMS ANALYSIS — RUSSIAN …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 46
INVESTIGATING SOCIAL MEDIA REGULATION OF HATE SPEECH: SITUATION ASSESSMENT …………………………………….. 49
LACK OF INTERNET REGULATION FUELS HATRED AND VIOLENCE ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 49 ADOPTION OF EU CODE OF CONDUCT AND NEW DIGITAL SERVICE ACT ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 50
SOCIAL MEDIA’S LATEST POLICIES AGAINST HATE SPEECH ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 51
ASSESSING SOCIAL MEDIA’S PROGRESS IN HATE SPEECH REGULATION VIA DATA FROM TRANSPARENCY REPORTS ……………………………………………. 52
1. The Case of Facebook and Instagram ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 52
2. The Case of Twitter ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 53
3. The Case of YouTube …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 55
AUDIT OF HATE SPEECH REGULATION EFFECTIVENESS AND THE QUESTION OF ALTERNATIVE PLATFORMS …………………………………………………………………. 55 1. Positive Trend, Yet Cautious Optimism …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 55 2. Migration to Alternative Social Media Ecosystem …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 56
ANTISEMITISM BY COUNTRY: 2020 OFFLINE TRENDS AND INCIDENTS ………………………………………………………………………………………… 59
UNITED STATES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 59
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 59
2. Coronavirus-Related Antisemitism in the US …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 61
3. The White Supremacist Threat ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 61
4. The Black Lives Matter Movement: Jewish Solidarity, Albeit Controversies ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 62
5. Dissecting Antisemitism in the QAnon Conspiracy Theory ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64
6. Antifa and Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 65
7. Antisemitism Surrounding Elections ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 66
3
Antisemitism | Annual Report 2020
8. Efforts at Combating Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 68
9. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 69
FRANCE ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 72
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 72
2. Main Sources of the Antisemitic Threat: Radical Islam, Radical Left, and the Far-Right ……………………………………………………………… 73
3. Governmental and Legal Crackdown on Antisemitism & Radicalization ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 76
4. Holocaust Education and Remembrance: A Key Strategy for Countering Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………….. 79
5. Holocaust Trivialization & Competitive Victimhood …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 80
6. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 81
GERMANY …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 82
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 82
2. The Extremist Scenes in Germany …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 83
3. Rise in Antisemitism During and Due to Covid-19 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 86
4. Perception of the Holocaust …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 89
5. Influence of Antisemitism on the Jewish Community ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 91
6. Efforts at Combatting Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 92
7. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 93
UNITED KINGDOM ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 95
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 95
2. Labour Party Antisemitism & the EHRC Report ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 95
3. Coronavirus-Related Antisemitism in the UK …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 97
4. BLM and the Twitter Blackout ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 98
5. Efforts at Combating Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 99
6. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 100
BELGIUM …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 102
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 102
2. Responses to Antisemitism from Institutions and the Government …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 103 3. The Ban on Ritual Slaughter ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 104
4. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 105
AUSTRIA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 106
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 106
2. The Extremist Scenes in Austria …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 107
3. Efforts at Combatting Antisemitism ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 109 SPAIN ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 112 AUSTRALIA ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 113
FORMER SOVIET UNION ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 115
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 115
2. Coronavirus-Related Antisemitism in the FSU ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 116
3. Breakdown by FSU Countries ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 116 4. The Nagorno-Karabakh Region …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 122 5. Insights ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 122 6. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 123
THE MUSLIM WORLD …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 127
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 127
2. Antisemitic Reactions to Normalization with Israel ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 127
3. Antisemitism in Regional Conflicts ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 128
4. Coronavirus-Related Antisemitism in the Muslim World ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 128
5. Emergence of a Separatist-Isolationist Islamic Discourse Following Events in France …………………………………………………………………. 129
6. Iran: Antisemitism as Official Policy ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 130
7. Bahrain Backs IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 131
8. Antisemitic Statements by Hamas and PA Personalities …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 131
4
Antisemitism | Annual Report 2020
9. Antisemitism in Jordan and Egypt ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 132
10. The Central Role of Islamic Scholars in Middle Eastern Antisemitism ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 132
11. Jewish Communities Past and Present and the Discourse About the Jews ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 133
LATIN AMERICA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 133
1. General Trends …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 134
2. Main Propagators of Antisemitic Discourse …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 134 3. Insights ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 138
4. Main Antisemitic Incidents in 2020 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 138
IHRA WORKING DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 142
5
Antisemitism | Annual Report 2020

*Click the link for the full report.