Three Ds of antisemitism

Last updated

The "three Ds" or the "3D test" of antisemitism is a set of criteria formulated in 2003 by Israeli human rights advocate and politician Natan Sharansky in order to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from antisemitism. The three Ds stand for delegitimization, demonization, and double standards, each of which, according to the test, indicates antisemitism. [1] [2]

Contents

The test is intended to draw the line between on one hand legitimate criticism of Israel, its actions and policies, and on the other hand antisemitism hidden behind a facade of anti-Zionism. [3] The three Ds test is intended to rebut arguments that "any criticism toward the State of Israel is considered antisemitic, and therefore legitimate criticism is silenced and ignored." [4] This test was adopted by the U.S. Department of State in 2010, [1] but later replaced by the Working Definition of Antisemitism in 2017. [5]

The test has been criticized for vagueness, and has raised concerns of possible abuse among some people that it labels legitimate criticism of Israeli policies as antisemitic. [6]

Author and history

The test has been formulated by Soviet dissident and Israeli politician Natan Sharansky. Natan Sharansky in the ceremonial unveiling of the Exodus monument (2).jpg
The test has been formulated by Soviet dissident and Israeli politician Natan Sharansky.

The concept was formulated by Israeli politician and Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky in 2003, [7] who at the time was a minister without portfolio in the Israeli government. It was first published in Jewish Political Studies Review, a journal run by the Israeli think tank Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, in 2004. [8]

Main concepts

According to Sharansky, the 3D test prevents situations where antisemitism is allowed to "hide behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of Israel". In other cases, the 3D test is used to identify when anti-Zionist rhetoric crosses the line into antisemitism, even if the original motivation was not antisemitic. Professor Irwin Cotler has said that "we've got to set up certain boundaries of where [criticism of Israel] does cross the line, because I'm one of those who believes strongly, not only in free speech, but also in rigorous debate, and discussion, and dialectic, and the like. If you say too easily that everything is anti-Semitic, then nothing is anti-Semitic, and we no longer can make distinctions." [9]

Delegitimization

The term "delegitimization of Israel" refers to the denial of the Jewish people's right to self-determination, for example, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. [10] This claim allegedly discriminates against Jews by singling them out as ineligible for the basic right for self-determination as it is determined by the international law. Since any discrimination against a specific ethnic, religious, racial or national group is considered a type of racism, delegitimization of the Jewish people right for self-determination is labeled as racism against Jews, i.e. antisemitism.

Former Deputy Prime Minister of Sweden, Per Ahlmark, an advocate in the combating of antisemitism, wrote: "compared to most previous anti-Jewish outbreaks, this new antisemitism is often less directed against individual Jews. It attacks primarily the collective Jews, the state of Israel and then such attacks start a chain reaction of assaults on individual Jews and Jewish institutions. ... in the past the most dangerous anti-Semites were those who wanted to make the world judenrein , free of Jews. Today, the most dangerous anti-Semites might be those who want to make the world Judenstaatrein, free of a Jewish state." [11] Prof. Irwin Cotler has defined delegitimization as one of the nine sets of what he calls "new antisemitism". Cotler uses the term political anti-Semitism to describe the denial of the Jewish people's right to self-determination and the de-legitimization of Israel as a state. [12]

Demonization

Cartoon demonizing Israel at a rally against the Iraq War in San Francisco, February 2003 AntiWarRallyFeb162003.jpg
Cartoon demonizing Israel at a rally against the Iraq War in San Francisco, February 2003

The second "D" refers to the portrayal of certain groups as evil, demonic, or satanic. The Working Definition of Antisemitism says that antisemitism "frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for 'why things go wrong'. It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and actions, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits". [10] If the criticism uses metaphors, images or rhetoric that implies that the Israelis or Jews are evil, it is once again a projection of antisemitic blood libels and rhetoric. One example of it might be making mendacious, dehumanization, demonization, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective—such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about the world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. [10] [11]

Double standards

The last "D" refers to the application of different sets of principles on similar situations. If a person criticizes Israel and only Israel on certain issues, but chooses to ignore similar situations conducted by other countries they are performing a double standard policy against Israel. [10]

The implementation of a different moral standard for Jews and Israel compared to the rest of the world, just like the delegitimization claim, discriminates against a specific group and is labeled as antisemitism. Similar arguments were made by Thomas Friedman, stating that Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movements that ignore the situation in Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are hypocritical and antisemitic. [13] On the same matter, Friedman has also written that the "criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is vile. But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction—out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East—is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is dishonest". [12] Prof. Irwin Cotler has also included double standards as one of the nine sets of what he calls "new anti-Semitism". Cotler offers the denial to Israel of equality before the law in the international arena (i.e., "the singling out of Israel for differential and discriminatory treatment in the international arena") as a new antisemitic act. [12]

Example of application

Abraham Foxman gives the following example. During the Second Intifada, a cartoon of an Israeli soldier pointing a rifle at a Palestinian baby was published. This kind of scene is not antisemitism. However, the baby was a typical depiction of the baby Jesus, who was telling to the soldier (in the caption), "Oh, you’re doing it to me all over again." Therefore, this is an example of the second "D", demonization via the antisemitic canard of Jewish deicide. [14]

Question of double standards on settlements in occupied territories

The largely exiled Sahrawi people are now greatly outnumbered by Moroccan settlers. Critics have accused the EU of double standards, citing it blocks certain deals with Israel but not with Morocco, despite both countries violating the Fourth Geneva Convention. 2006 Western Sahara protests in Madrid 3.jpg
The largely exiled Sahrawi people are now greatly outnumbered by Moroccan settlers. Critics have accused the EU of double standards, citing it blocks certain deals with Israel but not with Morocco, despite both countries violating the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Some Israeli politicians, professor Eugene Kontorovich of Northwestern University and former Israeli ambassador to Canada Alan Baker argue that the European Union (EU) is applying a double standard by blocking deals with Israel that include the settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They question why the EU imposes these restrictions on Israeli settlements into occupied Palestinian territories but have no such qualms about making deals that include Moroccan settlements in occupied Western Sahara or from Turkish settlements in Northern Cyprus. The settler population in Western Sahara is now believed to outnumber the native Sahrawi population, while the settler population in the West Bank make up around one-fifth of the resident population. The Fourth Geneva Convention states that an occupying power may not transplant its own civilians onto land that it occupies. [15]

Lars Faaborg-Andersen, then EU's ambassador in Tel Aviv, rejects the claim of double standards. He states that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank is a "totally different situations" compared to the Turkish occupation of Cyprus and the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara. According to Faaborg-Andersen, "the only parallel that exists is the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict", in which the European Union made sure that areas in Azerbaijan that were under Armenian occupation were excluded from any deals with Armenia. [15]

Limitations

Some scholars, such as Jonathan Judaken [2] and Kenneth L. Marcus [16] concede the usefulness of the 3D test either in terms of its mnemonic cleverness in identifying Judaeophobia or as a helpful point of departure for demarcating the unacceptable limits of anti-Israel sentiment. Nonetheless, they consider the test limited for policy usage if applied without considering further development or modification.

See also

Related Research Articles

Antisemitism or Jew-hatred is hostility to, prejudice towards, or discrimination against, Jews. This sentiment is a form of racism, and a person who harbours it is called an antisemite. Primarily, antisemitic tendencies may be motivated by negative sentiment towards Jews as a people or by negative sentiment towards Jews with regard to Judaism. In the former case, usually presented as racial antisemitism, a person's hostility is driven by the belief that Jews constitute a distinct race with inherent traits or characteristics that are repulsive or inferior to the preferred traits or characteristics within that person's society. In the latter case, known as religious antisemitism, a person's hostility is driven by their religion's perception of Jews and Judaism, typically encompassing doctrines of supersession that expect or demand Jews to turn away from Judaism and submit to the religion presenting itself as Judaism's successor faith—this is a common theme within the other Abrahamic religions. The development of racial and religious antisemitism has historically been encouraged by the concept of anti-Judaism, which is distinct from antisemitism itself.

New antisemitism is the concept that a new form of antisemitism developed in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, typically manifesting itself as anti-Zionism. The concept is included in some definitions of antisemitism, such as the working definition of antisemitism and the 3D test of antisemitism. The concept dates to the early 1970s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Natan Sharansky</span> Israeli politician and refusenik (born 1948)

Natan Sharansky is an Israeli politician, human rights activist, and author. He served as Chairman of the Executive for the Jewish Agency from June 2009 to August 2018, and currently serves as Chairman for the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), an American non-partisan organization. A former Soviet dissident, he spent nine years imprisoned as a refusenik during the 1970s and 1980s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Self-hating Jew</span> Pejorative towards Jews

The terms "self-hating Jew", "self-loathing Jew", and "auto-antisemite" are pejorative terms used to describe Jewish people whose viewpoints, especially favoring Jewish assimilation, Jewish secularism, limousine liberalism, anti-Judaism or anti-Zionism, are perceived as reflecting self-hatred.

Manfred Gerstenfeld was an Austrian-born Israeli author and chairman of the steering committee of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He founded and directed the center's post-Holocaust and anti-Semitism program.

Antisemitic tropes, also known as antisemitic canards or antisemitic libels, are "sensational reports, misrepresentations or fabrications" about Jews as an ethnicity or Judaism as a religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-Zionism</span> Opposition to Zionism

Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism. Although anti-Zionism is a heterogeneous phenomenon, all its proponents agree that the creation of the modern State of Israel, and the movement to create a sovereign Jewish state in the region of Palestine—a region partly coinciding with the biblical Land of Israel—was flawed or unjust in some way.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hannah Rosenthal</span> American diplomat

Hannah Rosenthal is an American Democratic Party political official and Jewish non-profit executive who served as the U.S. Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism from 2009 until 2012 during the Obama administration.

Formed in March 2009, the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA) was a group of Canadian parliamentarians organized for the stated purpose of confronting and combating antisemitism in Canada. In particular, the CPCCA focused on what it calls the "new antisemitism," which it saw as the revival of classically antisemitic beliefs in the guise of anti-Zionism.

The European Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism (EISCA) was established in 2007 as a think-tank to examine the growth and development of antisemitism in the world today and to explore new strategies for countering it in all its forms. Its website was last updated in mid 2011.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of Israel</span> Disapproval towards the Israeli government

Criticism of Israel is a subject of journalistic and scholarly commentary and research within the scope of international relations theory, expressed in terms of political science. Israel has faced international criticism since its establishment in 1948 relating to a variety of issues, many of which are centered around human rights violations in its occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Legitimacy of the State of Israel</span> Question of whether Israeli political authority is legitimate or not

Since the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, a number of countries and individuals have challenged its political legitimacy, its occupation of Arab territories, or both. Over the course of the Arab–Israeli conflict, the country's authority has been questioned on a number of fronts. Critics of Israel may be motivated by their opposition to the country's right to exist or, since the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, their disapproval of the established power structure within the Israeli-occupied territories. Increasingly, Israel has been accused of apartheid. Israel regards such criticism as an attempt to de-legitimize it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law</span> Nonprofit organization

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization founded by Kenneth L. Marcus in 2012 with the stated purpose of advancing the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and promoting justice for all peoples. LDB is active on American campuses, where it says it combats antisemitism and anti-Zionism.

There have been instances of antisemitism within the Labour Party of the United Kingdom (UK) since its establishment. One such example is canards about "Jewish finance" during the Boer War. In the 2000s, controversies arose over comments made by Labour politicians regarding an alleged "Jewish lobby", a comparison by London Labour politician Ken Livingstone of a Jewish journalist to a concentration camp guard, and a 2005 Labour attack on Jewish Conservative Party politician Michael Howard.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jewish Voice for Labour</span> British political organisation

Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL) is a British organisation formed in 2017 for Jewish members of the Labour Party. Its aims include a commitment "to strengthen the party in its opposition to all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism ... to uphold the right of supporters of justice for Palestinians to engage in solidarity activities", and "to oppose attempts to widen the definition of antisemitism beyond its meaning of hostility towards, or discrimination against, Jews as Jews".

The working definition of antisemitism, also called the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism or IHRA definition, is a non-legally binding statement on what antisemitism is, that reads: "Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities." It was first published by European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) in 2005 and then by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016. Accompanying the working definition, but of disputed status, are 11 illustrative examples whose purpose is described as guiding the IHRA in its work, seven of which relate to criticism of Israel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism</span> Guide on antisemitism

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) is a document meant to outline the bounds of antisemitic speech and conduct, particularly with regard to Zionism, Israel and Palestine. Its creation was motivated by a desire to confront antisemitism and by objections to the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism, which critics have said stifles legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and curbs free speech. The drafting of the declaration was initiated in June 2020 under the auspices of the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem by eight coordinators, most of whom were university professors. Upon its completion the declaration was signed by about 200 scholars in various fields and released in March 2021.

Zionist antisemitism or antisemitic Zionism refers to a phenomenon in which antisemites express support for Zionism and the State of Israel. In some cases, this support may be promoted for explicitly antisemitic reasons. Historically, this type of antisemitism has been most notable among Christian Zionists, who may perpetrate religious antisemitism while being outspoken in their support for Jewish sovereignty in Israel due to their interpretation of Christian eschatology. Similarly, people who identify with the political far-right, particularly in Europe and the United States, may support the Zionist movement because they seek to expel Jews from their country and see Zionism as the least complicated method of achieving this goal and satisfying their racial antisemitism.

The Nexus Task Force, created in November 2019, analyzes issues at the intersection of Israel and antisemitism. The task force has published the Nexus Document, described as "a resource designed for policymakers and community leaders, aiming to enhance their understanding of the issues that intersect at the nexus of antisemitism, Israel, and Zionism", the Nexus White Paper, titled "Understanding Antisemitism at its Nexus with Israel and Zionism", the Nexus "Guide to Identifying Antisemitism in Debates about Israel" and "A Campus Guide To Identifying Antisemitism In A Time Of Perplexity".

The exploitation of accusations of antisemitism for political purposes, especially to counter anti-Zionism and criticism of Israel, may be described variously as weaponization of antisemitism, instrumentalization of antisemitism, or playing the antisemitism card. Such bad faith accusations have been criticized as a form of smear tactics. Some writers have compared this to playing the race card.

References

  1. 1 2 Rosenthal, Hannah (Dec 5, 2011). "Remarks at the 2011 B'nai B'rith International Policy Conference". US Department of State. Archived from the original on December 2, 2012. Our State Department uses Natan Sharansky's "Three Ds" test for identifying when someone or a government crosses the line from criticizing Israeli policies into antisemitism: when Israel is demonized, when Israel is held to different standards than the rest of the countries, and when Israel is delegitimized.
  2. 1 2 Jonathan Judaken (2008). "So what's new? Rethinking the 'new antisemitism' in a global age" (PDF). Patterns of Prejudice. 42 (4–5): 531–560. doi:10.1080/00313220802377453. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-18.
  3. Cohen, Florette (September 2011). The New Anti-Semitism Israel Model: Empirical Tests. BiblioBazaar. p. 12. ISBN   9781243561398.
  4. Kenneth L. Marcus. Jewish Identity and Civil Rights in America. Cambridge University Press. pp. 60–62.
  5. United States Department of State "As a member of IHRA, the United States now uses this working definition and has encouraged other governments and international organizations to use it as well."
  6. Keskinkılıç, Ozan Zakariya; Langer, Armin (2021). "Konkurrenz vs. Solidarität: Überlegungen zu den Chancen und Herausforderungen jüdischmuslimischer Allianzen". Diskriminierung und Antidiskriminierung: Beiträge aus Wissenschaft und Praxis. transcript Verlag. p. 205. ISBN   978-3-8394-5081-9. Kritiker*innen bemängeln den Test dahingehend, dass er zu unkonkret sei undleicht missbraucht werden könne, um legitime Kritik an Israels Palästinapolitikals antisemitisch zu diskreditieren.
  7. Cardaun, Sarah K. (19 June 2015). Countering Contemporary Antisemitism in Britain: Government and Civil Society Responses between Universalism and Particularism. BRILL. pp. 79–. ISBN   978-90-04-30089-7.
  8. Sharansky, Natan (Fall 2004). "3D Test of Anti-Semitism: Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization". Jewish Political Studies Review.
  9. Cotler, Irwin (7 July 2011). "On judging the distinction between legitimate criticism and demonization". Engage – the anti-racist campaign against antisemitism. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  10. 1 2 3 4 "Working Definition of Antisemitism" (PDF). EUMC. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 January 2011. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  11. 1 2 Cotler, Irwin (October 13, 2011). "Irwin Cotler delivers remarks at signing of Ottawa Protocol on Combating Antisemitism". Archived from the original on 2014-02-19.
  12. 1 2 3 Dershowitz, Alan (2003). The Case For Israel. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 208–216. ISBN   0415281164.
  13. Friedman, Thomas (16 October 2002). "Campus Hypocrisy". The New York Times.
  14. Foxman, Abraham (11 April 2012). "Revisiting Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism". Huffington Post.
  15. 1 2 Ahren, Raphael (25 December 2013). "Why is this occupation different from all other occupations?". The Times of Israel.
  16. Marcus, Kenneth. "The New OCR Antisemitism Policy". Journal for the Study of Antisemitism. SSRN   1813192.

Further reading