Abstract: Auch 70 Jahre nach dem Holocaust hat sich in Deutschland noch immer kein flächendeckender Konsens über die Unteilbarkeit der Menschenrechte durchgesetzt. Antisemitismus, Islamophobie und Fremdenfeindlichkeit sind besorgniserregend weit verbreitet. Ein Viertel der Deutschen sind antisemitische Israelkritiker, bei denen juden- und islamfeindliche Einstellungen miteinander Hand in Hand gehen, und deren (scheinbare) Parteinahme für die Palästinenser ihnen letztlich nur als Mittel dient, „das wahre Gesicht der Juden“ zu entlarven. Gut ein Zehntel vermeidet es, Kritik an der israelischen Politik zu üben, „weil man ja nicht sagen darf, was man über die Juden wirklich denkt“, und selbst jenes Viertel der Deutschen, das der Politik Israels wohlwollend gegenübersteht, tut dies oft nur, um selbst vor der Welt gut dazustehen.
Jedoch kritisieren immerhin vier von zehn Deutschen die israelische Politik deshalb, weil sie für die Menschenrechte eintreten, Antisemitismus und Islamophobie gleichermaßen ablehnen und eine Politik verurteilen, die nicht nur den Palästinensern Unrecht antut, sondern auch Israel von innen heraus zu zerstören droht. Auch sie des Antisemitismus zu bezichtigen, kann weder im Interesse Israels noch im Interesse der in Deutschland lebenden Juden sein.
Abstract: This thesis looks into representations of Palestinian and Israeli-Jewish non-elite civilians in the liberal press
in Britain, namely the Guardian and the Independent newspapers. The period examined in the research
follows the al-Aqsa Intifadah (since September 2000) and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the 2000s (2000-
2010). The research findings look specifically into the coverage of the peace months of July and December
2000. The primary proposition of the thesis follows the burgeoning literature regarding the parallel,
centuries-old histories of the Arab, Jew and the Idea-of-Europe in tandem, in one breath as it may (e.g.,
Anidjar, 2003, 2007; Kalmar and Penslar, 2005; Boyarin, 2009). This theorisation finds the Arab and Jew
as two formational Others to the Idea-of-Europe, with the Jew imagined as the religious and internal enemy
to Europe and the Arab as the political and external enemy (Anidjar, 2003). This research enquires how
liberal-left forms of racialisations (not only extreme right racialisations) towards the Arab and Jew are
contingent upon these centuries-old images and imaginaires, even during moments of peacemaking (not
only times of heightened violence). The main hypothesis of the research is that in the mediated, Manichean
packaging of the Arab-Israeli conflict in both newspapers the Palestinian and Israeli-Jew are reduced to
two sediment polarized identities where no Palestinian exists outside the articulation of being oppositional
to the Israeli-Jew through difference marked by violence, and vice versa. Critical Solidarity is proposed as
a mode of Peace Journalism (e.g., Galtung, 2000; Lynch and McGoldrick, 2005; Kempf, 2007) which hopes
to address concerns at the intersection of news reporting about the conflict and race.
Abstract: Die Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Israel sind einzigartig. Geprägt von der Erinnerung an die Shoah und getragen von dem Anspruch, daraus praktische Konsequenzen für heute zu ziehen, gelten sie als „besonders“. Doch was bedeutet diese Besonderheit im Jahr 2025? Haben der Terrorangriff der Hamas auf Israel am 7. Oktober 2023 und der nachfolgende Krieg Israels gegen die Hamas im Gazastreifen Spuren im bilateralen Verhältnis hinterlassen? Wie blicken Deutsche und Israelis heute aufeinander, welche Erwartungen und Bilder prägen das gegenseitige Verhältnis, und welche Verantwortung resultiert daraus in einer Zeit wachsender geopolitischer Spannungen und gesellschaftlicher Polarisierung? Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Fragen gibt die vorliegende Kompaktauswertung einen ersten Einblick in die Ergebnisse unserer aktuellen Studie zur gegenseitigen Wahrnehmung von Israelis und Deutschen. Auf Basis einer repräsentativen Doppelbefragung in beiden Ländern gibt sie Aufschluss über das politische Selbstverständnis in beiden Gesellschaften, die Rolle der Geschichte für die Gegenwart, die Erwartungen an die deutsche Nahostpolitik sowie die Wahrnehmung von Antisemitismus und internationaler Verantwortung. Die Ergebnisse zeichnen ein ambivalentes Bild, geprägt von Nähe und Distanz, Zustimmung und Kritik, Hoffnung und Skepsis. In dieser Auswertung legen wir einen besonderen Fokus auf die Erhebung in Deutschland und ziehen die israelischen Befunde vergleichend heran. Eine umfangreiche Darstellung aller Ergebnisse ist in Vorbereitung. Mit dieser Studie setzt die Bertelsmann Stiftung ihre langjährige Reihe empirischer Analysen zur Entwicklung der deutsch-israelischen Beziehungen fort. Die Studie erscheint in einem Jahr, in dem sich die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen zwischen beiden Staaten zum sechzigsten Mal jährt. Ein Anlass, nicht nur auf das Erreichte zurückzublicken, sondern auch für eine kritische Selbstbefragung: Wie können wir, Deutsche und Israelis, unsere Beziehung in Zukunft verantwortungsvoll gestalten?
Abstract: In the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 attacks, reports of anti-Israel expressions at German universities have raised questions about the prevalence and nature of such sentiments in academic environments. Traditional survey-based research on antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment is often limited by response biases and social desirability bias. This study introduces a novel field-experimental approach to measuring anti-Israel sentiment in a real-world university setting. Using event history analysis, it examines the removal probability of stickers of the Israeli flag compared to German, US, Palestinian, and rainbow flags at a German university. Over a 24-week period, 600 stickers were placed on 50 public notice boards and were monitored for 14-day cycles. The results provide strong evidence of anti-Israel sentiment. The Israeli flag had the highest removal rate, with only 47.5% of the flags remaining at the end of the observation period—significantly lower than the survival rates of the other flags (which range from 68% to 80%). Cox regression analysis confirms that Israeli flags faced the highest removal hazard, being 3.3 to 3.7-times more likely to be removed than the rainbow flag and nearly twice as likely as the German flag. Politically motivated removals, though less frequent, disproportionately targeted Israeli flags as well. Removal rates were highest in hallways of the humanities, shared humanities/social sciences as well as in central facilities hallways. Hallways in the natural sciences, the human- and social sciences and economics had lower removal rates. Areas with higher student traffic exhibited fewer removals. Overall, the findings indicate a pronounced anti-Israel bias on campus, distinct from attitudes toward other nationalities or symbols.
Abstract: Reports have indicated an increase in anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitic incidents following the Hamas terrorist attack in Israel on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza. In two studies (NStudy1 = 354 and NStudy2 = 490), we experimentally investigated the impact of priming with material referring to the war in Gaza on hostility toward Jews, and on antisemitism as well as other various ethnic groups (to determine whether this exposure specifically affected attitudes toward Jews or had a broader impact on ethnic attitudes in general). We also examined the indirect relationship between political orientation and anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitism, through sociopolitical factors such as global identification, out-group identity fusion, social dominance orientation, and misanthropy. Our results showed an experimental effect of increased negative attitudes toward Jews, as well as toward Britons and Scandinavians, but did not reveal an increase in antisemitism. This effect was not replicated in Study 2, possibly due to reduced media attention. The indirect effects suggested that political orientation (left vs. right-wing) was positively associated with anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitism through social dominance orientation. In contrast, conservative political orientation was negatively associated with antisemitism through out-group identity fusion with the Palestinian people. Our findings imply two distinct political pathways to antisemitism: one linked with classical political right-wing orientation and the other to a complex identity-based conflation of attitudes toward Israel with prejudice toward the Jewish ethnic group.
Abstract: Dem Staat Israel kommt in Deutschland regelmäßig eine im internationalen Vergleich große Aufmerksamkeit zu. Fast immer geht es hierbei um dessen Rolle im Nahostkonflikt, also in den jahrzehntelang bestehenden politischen Auseinandersetzungen mit den palästinensischen Akteur*innen, arabischen sowie weiteren Staaten der Region (wie etwa dem Iran). Diese Aufmerksamkeit verläuft konjunkturell und folgt dem Verlauf von Eskalationsphasen des Nahostkonflikts. In den letzten Jahre wurde der (mögliche) antisemitische Gehalt "israelkritischer" Positionen zunehmend diskutiert: "Debatten um Fragen des aktuellen Antisemitismus sind immer öfter zugleich Debatten um Wahrnehmungen Israels und des Nahostkonflikts" (Niehoff 2021, 73). Beide Themen werden häufig und zunehmend miteinander assoziiert. Gleichzeitig sind Unklarheiten und Unsicherheiten weit verbreitet, welche Positionierungen gegenüber dem Staat Israel, der sich als Nationalstaat des jüdischen Volkes versteht, als antisemitisch zu bewerten sind (und, so die Konsequenz, moralisch geächtet werden sollten) und welche Haltungen demgegenüber als "kritische" 1 einzustufen sind (und als solche legitimer Teil der kontroversen politischen Auseinandersetzung seien). Zu einer entsprechenden Sensibilisierung haben insbesondere Studien und Berichte mit dem Fokus auf Perspektiven von Betroffenen von Antisemitismus (Zick u.a. 2017a; Bernstein 2020; Chernivsky u.a. 2020) sowie die professionelle zivilgesellschaftliche Arbeit etwa von Monitoringstellen antisemitischer Vorfälle (Bundesverband RIAS/Internationales Institut für Bildung, Sozial-und Antisemitismusforschung 2021) beigetragen. Auch wissenschaftliche Forschung widmet sich verstärkt der Problematik. Deutlich sichtbar wurde diese insbesondere im Mai 2021, als anlässlich von militärischen Auseinandersetzung zwischen der palästinensischen Hamas und der israelischen Armee antiisraelische Demonstrationen in Deutschland stattfanden, in deren Kontext (vermeintliche) jüdische Personen, Synagogen sowie der Staat Israel bedroht und attackiert wurden (vgl. ebd., 14, 51-65). 1 Irritationen entstehen regelmäßig u.a. deswegen, da völlig unterschiedliche Nutzungen von "kritisch" in diesem Zusammenhang existieren (vgl. z.B. Schwarz-Friesel/Reinharz 2013, 194-209). Die Bandbreite reicht von Begriffsverständnissen, die alle nicht-antisemitischen negativen Positionierungen unter "kritisch" subsummieren, andere Verständnisse grenzen den "kritischen" Bereich eng(er) ein.
Abstract: This chapter explains contemporary manifestations of antisemitism in Southeast European football by analysing football fan cultures of three post-Yugoslav states: Croatia, Serbia, and especially Bosnia and Herzegovina, where several antisemitic incidents have occurred during the last decade. The geographic scope is determined by the cultural proximity of these fan cultures, allowing for a comparative analysis of region’s forms of antisemitism, as well as socialist (dis-)continuities of political antisemitism. Whilst international football governing bodies and international media readily condemned the incidents in Bosnia-Herzegovina, social media discussions amongst their football fans proved to be diametrically opposed, especially in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The chapter examines the nature of anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and antisemitic fan (and non-fan) practices and narratives, to extrapolate their inherent political nuances and to illustrate their transformations over the last two decades. By evaluating their significance for the wider public discourse, the chapter provides a more nuanced reflection of the issues at stake, within football and beyond.
Abstract: his chapter primarily focuses on antisemitism in French football since the turn of the new millennium, which has seen an intensification of debates about nationality, diversity, and identity in France, as well as a rise in antisemitism. France has historically had few high-profile Jewish players and lacks a major club that is seen as being ‘Jewish’. However, antisemitism has been a very real issue within professional and amateur levels of men’s football in recent decades, with abuse directed at players, team officials, and fans who are – or are perceived to be – Jewish, taking a variety of forms. The chapter examines the broader history of antisemitism in France and how this has influenced the French state’s relationship with religion today and is linked to both contemporary domestic issues and international matters, such as Israeli–Palestinian tensions. In addition, the chapter argues that French football has struggled to tackle, or sought to minimise, several forms of discrimination.
Abstract: In Germany, pro-Palestine protests in the form of camps and institute occupations have occurred and continue to take place at universities. Antisemitic incidents have been reported at many of these protests. Following the initial data collection in December 2023, this report provides a new, focused, up-to-date assessment of the opinion climate in the context of the Middle East conflict and antisemitic attitudes at German universities. Exactly one year after the first report, the results of two recent surveys by the Higher Education Research Unit (AG Hochschulforschung) are summarized here. First, based on a large online survey conducted in December 2024 with over 1,800 students, we report on these students’ assessments of the conflict and antisemitic tendencies among them. This follows
on directly from the previous study mentioned earlier (Hinz et al., 2024), enabling us to describe possible changes compared to last year. In some places, we also examine the assessments and attitudes of students compared to a sample from the general population. Second, we present the results of a simultaneous survey of university rectorates on antisemitic incidents and the universities' reactions to these incidents. At the invitation of the German Rectors’ Conference (HRK), a total of 94 university management teams took part in this separate online survey.
The results indicate that universities have been strongly affected by antisemitic incidents and that antisemitic resentment remains at a constant level. A high level of vigilance is still required, particularly
with regards to Israel-related antisemitism
Topics: Attitudes to Israel, Attitudes to Jews, Holocaust, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Israeli-Arab Conflict, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Culture and Heritage, Memory, Literature, Film, Television
Abstract: Examines an important relational shift in British and German cultural depictions of Palestine and Israel since 1987
Develops relationality as a critical tool to challenge mainstream ideas about Israeli and Palestinian narratives as separate and not connected to European histories of the Holocaust and colonialism
Argues that Israel and Palestine are used as geopolitical and imaginary spaces to discuss social and political concerns in the United Kingdom and in Germany
Examines works by authors and directors from outside of Israel and Palestine, including those with no direct link to the conflict, thus extending our understanding of Palestine and Israel as signifiers in the contemporary period
Offers a comparative analysis of British and German literature, TV drama, and film which focuses on country-specific case studies to identify common trends in imagining and reimaging Israel and Palestine since the first Palestinian Intifada
Discusses works published since 1987 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians since 1947 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians and their narratives since 1947
Isabelle Hesse identifies an important relational turn in British and German literature, TV drama, and film published and produced since the First Palestinian Intifada (1987-1993). This turn manifests itself on two levels: one, in representing Israeli and Palestinian histories and narratives as connected rather than separate, and two, by emphasising the links between the current situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the roles that the United Kingdom and Germany have played historically, and continue to play, in the region. This relational turn constitutes a significant shift in representations of Israel and Palestine in British and German culture as these depictions move beyond an engagement with the Holocaust and Jewish suffering at the expense of Palestinian suffering and indicate a willingness to represent and acknowledge British and German involvement in Israeli and Palestinian politics.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Attitude Surveys, Antisemitism: Christian, Antisemitism: Definitions, Antisemitism: Discourse, Antisemitism: Education against, Antisemitism: Far right, Antisemitism: Left-Wing, Antisemitism: Monitoring, Antisemitism: Muslim, Antisemitism: New Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Online, Internet, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Attitudes to Jews, Anti-Zionism, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Methodology, Social Media
Abstract: This open access book is the first comprehensive guide to identifying antisemitism online today, in both its explicit and implicit (or coded) forms. Developed through years of on-the-ground analysis of over 100,000 authentic comments posted by social media users in the UK, France, Germany and beyond, the book introduces and explains the central historical, conceptual and linguistic-semiotic elements of 46 antisemitic concepts, stereotypes and speech acts. The guide was assembled by researchers working on the Decoding Antisemitism project at the Centre for Research on Antisemitism at Technische Universität Berlin, building on existing basic definitions of antisemitism, and drawing on expertise in various fields. Using authentic examples taken from social media over the past four years, it sets out a pioneering step-by-step approach to identifying and categorising antisemitic content, providing guidance on how to recognise a statement as antisemitic or not. This book will be an invaluable tool through which researchers, students, practitioners and social media moderators can learn to recognise contemporary antisemitism online – and the structural aspects of hate speech more generally – in all its breadth and diversity.
Abstract: In this report:
This landmark report looks at how the October 7 attacks on Israel and the war in Gaza have impacted the British Jewish community one year on. The report demonstrates the profound impact the events of the last year have had on Jews in the UK by analysing the responses of over 4,500 adult British Jews to the JPR Jewish Current Affairs Survey in July 2024 – the largest survey of British Jews since October 7, 2023.
Among other things, the report explores how the original Hamas attack and the subsequent war have affected how British Jews view Israel politically, how the public reaction to the conflict has affected Jews’ sense of security and trust in critical organisations in the UK, and how the conflict has impacted the Jewish lives of British Jews – their connections to Israel and the Jewish community. The findings also form the basis for the second series of the JPR/JW3 “Jews Do Count” podcast, available on the JPR website and all major platforms.
Some of the key findings in this report:
British Jews express far more concern today about the state of Israel’s democracy than they did fifteen or so years ago. Nevertheless, more still believe it to be alive and well today than do not, by 52% to 38%.
British Jews are more likely to agree than to disagree that the IDF is acting morally and according to international law, though we see much division in the responses. 50% of British Jews feel that the IDF military action against Hamas since October 7 has been unsuccessful
For all the division and criticism, British Jews are still more likely to have felt proud of Israel than ashamed since October 7.
Just 54% of Jews in the UK agree that a two-state solution is the only way Israel will achieve peace with its neighbours, compared to 77% who did so in 2010. Only about one in four (26%) British Jews think that most Palestinians want peace with Israel, compared to nearly half (47%) in 2010.
Nearly four in five British Jews say that they often feel that they are being held responsible by non-Jews for the actions of Israel’s government, with 43% ‘strongly agreeing’ with this statement.
Nearly half of British Jews (46%) say that antisemitism is ‘a very big problem’ in the UK today, compared to 28% in 2018 and only 11% in 2012. In total, 83% of British define antisemitism as a problem in Britain, the highest proportion found since records began over a decade ago.
Nearly three in four respondents say they feel less safe as a Jewish person living in the UK, and almost two in three adult British Jews said they feel less confident displaying their Jewishness since the October 7 attacks.
Although most British Jews report no overall change in this regard, substantial proportions of British Jews say that they feel closer to their Jewish friends since October 7 (39%) and less close to their non-Jewish friends (24%). The findings also suggest a notable increase in levels of attachment to their local Jewish community.
Attachment levels of British Jews to Israel were steady before October 7 but have risen significantly since then, with half of British Jews saying they are ‘very’ attached to Israel today (up from 40% in 2022).
About two in three British Jews (65%) identify as Zionist, up slightly compared to before October 7. 10% identify as anti-Zionist, also up slightly.
Levels of anxiety among British Jews are higher than they were before October 7 and are notably higher than they are among the general population of Britain.
There is no evidence to indicate Jews are leaving the UK in elevated numbers in the past year – on the contrary, emigration levels are generally low and stable and have been for several decades. At the same time, a slight change in sentiment around this issue has occurred over the past year, with many moving up one notch from wherever they were on it before October 7.
Topics: Antisemitism: Attitude Surveys, Antisemitism: Monitoring, Antisemitism: Online, Antisemitism: Left-Wing, Antisemitism: Muslim, Antisemitism: Discourse, Israel Criticism, Anti-Zionism, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Policy, October 7 2023 attacks + aftermath
Abstract: In this policy paper:
How have levels of antisemitism in the UK and across Europe changed since the October 7 attack on Israel and the war in Gaza? Using the most recent survey data from July 2024, this policy paper demonstrates how the antisemitic incident reporting figures most commonly quoted significantly underestimate the number of incidents happening in reality. The paper also introduces the concept of ‘ambient antisemitism’ – Jews experiencing antisemitism that isn’t personally directed at them –looking at how the context in which Jews are living today affects their perceptions of antisemitism. It also explores the general population’s attitudes to Jews and Israel before and after October 7, 2023.
The paper concludes that better research methods are required to accurately assess the general population’s attitudes to Jews and Israel and Jewish people’s perceptions and experiences of antisemitism. It points to a critical gap in research compared with the EU and calls on the UK Government and philanthropic community to plug it as a matter of urgency.
Some of the key findings in this policy paper:
Reports of antisemitic incidents increased dramatically in the months following the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 in multiple European countries.
Survey data demonstrate that the number of antisemitic incidents being recorded by the police and community monitoring agencies vastly underestimates the amount of antisemitism taking place.
An evident rise in antisemitism since October 7 has had a significant impact on Jewish people’s feelings of safety and security in the UK and across Europe.
The degree to which the Hamas attacks on October 7 were marked by open celebration and affirmation of violence reveals a level of antisemitic hate that exists within parts of Western Europe that poses a severe threat to Jews living on the continent.
A culture of ‘ambient antisemitism’ has emerged in the post-October 7 period, marked by incidents such as defacing or tearing down posters of Israeli hostages, that, whether strictly antisemitic or not, create a broader milieu that feels threatening and hostile to many Jewish people.
Inaccurate and irresponsible media reporting can lead directly to an increase in antisemitism, although more research is required to understand how and when this occurs.
There has been a significant increase in sympathy for the Palestinians among young people and those on the political left since October 7; levels of sympathy for Israel are much lower, even in the very immediate aftermath of the Hamas attacks.
The lack of sympathy for Israel is likely to lead to many Jews feeling a greater sense of alienation from the societies in which they live over time.
Given the apparent levels of concern among Jews today, much more needs to be done to invest in a robust and systematic approach to measuring antisemitism in society and its effects on Jews as part of a serious strategy to combat it going forward. This is particularly the case in the UK, which has fallen far behind the EU since leaving the European Union in this respect.
Abstract: The report looks into what Jews in the UK think of key Israeli political leaders and the country’s future, drawing on data from the responses of over 4,500 adult British Jews, members of the JPR Research Panel, to the JPR Jewish Current Affairs Survey, held in June-July 2024. The report reveals that levels of pessimism about Israel’s current situation have increased significantly among British Jews when compared to data gathered before the October 7 attacks on Israel and the war in Gaza.
Some of the main findings in this report:
Three-quarters (74%) of Jews in the UK describe Israel’s situation as “bad” (37%) or “very bad” (37%), increasing from 57% measured in Apr/May 2023. Overall, Jews in the UK characterise Israel’s current state more negatively than Israelis.
95% of adult British Jews have an opinion on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the most widely known leader among those examined. Four in five Jews hold an unfavourable opinion of him, with 65% saying they “strongly disapprove” and 15% saying they “somewhat” disapprove of him.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich (-78%), Minister of Security Itamar Ben-Gvir (-77%) and Netanyahu (-68%) are the Israeli leaders British Jews least approve of when looking at their net approval ratings. Former Prime Minister Yair Lapid (+12%) and former Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister Benny Gantz (+10%) are the only two leaders showing positive net ratings among those examined.
Lapid is the only leader examined showing an increase in net approval rate compared to data from before October 7.
Politically ‘right-leaning’ Jews were much more likely to approve of Netanyahu than those who are ‘left-leaning’.
Abstract: Seit dem tödlichsten Angriff auf jüdisches Leben seit der Shoah am 7. Oktober erreicht der offene Antisemitismus auch in Deutschland eine beispiellose Qualität. Dabei nehmen die Berührungsängste zwischen islamistischen, antiimperialistischen und sich selbst als progressiv verstehenden Milieus immer weiter ab. Im Zuge dessen wird Islamismus verharmlost und israelbezogener Antisemitismus verbreitet. Es kommt zu einer folgenschweren Radikalisierung, die insbesondere eine Bedrohung für Jüdinnen und Juden ist. Im Zivilgesellschaftlichen Lagebild #13 widmen wir uns diesen antisemitischen Allianzen, die Terror verharmlosen, Kultureinrichtungen und Geschäfte mit roten Dreiecken beschmieren, dem Symbol der islamistischen Hamas, die auf diese Art Feinde und mögliche Anschlagsziele kennzeichnet. Die vergangenen Wochen weit über den 7. Oktober haben gezeigt, dass diese Allianzen zu blankem Antisemitismus führen. Das stellt seit Monaten eine bedrohliche und gefährliche Situation für Jüdinnen und Juden in Deutschland dar, die droht auf kurz oder lang in Terror gegen Juden umzuschlagen.
Unsere Kernbeobachtungen:
1. Für Jüdinnen*Juden ist die Lage seit dem 7. Oktober katastrophal, auch in der Diaspora
Die sicheren Räume werden weniger und die Bedrohungslage ist dramatisch. Israelbezogener Antisemitismus greift um sich, getragen von einer Allianz aus Islamismus und Antiimperialismus.
2. Die antiimperialistische Linke erneuert im Kampf gegen den Staat Israel ihre altbewährte Allianz mit Islamist*innen
In den Auseinandersetzungen um den Hamas-Terror vom 7. Oktober 2023 fand eine erneute Fusionierung des antiimperialistischen mit dem islamistischen Antizionismus statt. Gruppierungen aus beiden Lagern stehen Seite an Seite, ihre Demosprüche fließen ineinander.
3. Rechtsextreme instrumentalisieren den Kampf gegen Antisemitismus und Israelhass, um ihren Rassismus offen überall platzieren zu können
Die Reaktionen nach dem 7. Oktober 2023 haben einmal mehr gezeigt, dass Teile der extremen Rechten ein instrumentelles Verhältnis zu Jüdinnen*Juden und zur Feindschaft ihnen gegenüber haben. AfD & Co. nutzen die Verherrlichung des Hamas-Terrors als Anlass, um Rassismus zu verbreiten.
4. Israelhass wirkt identitätsstiftend
Die Rede von und die Forderung nach bedingungsloser Solidarität mit Palästina führt immer wieder zu israelbezogenem Antisemitismus und bedeutet schließlich auch die Unterstützung palästinensischer Terrororganisationen wie Hamas und PFLP, was eine Gefahr für die Demokratie darstellt. Sie bietet eine Gelegenheit, sich über Trennendes hinweg eine gemeinsame Identität zu konstruieren.
5. Soziale Medien spielen in der Allianzbildung eine entscheidende Rolle
Die Gruppierungen und Netzwerke der antiimperialistischen Linken und des Islamismus sind in den sozialen Medien sehr aktiv. Einige heizen, durch manipulatives Framing und Desinformation, die Stimmung gegen Jüdinnen*Juden und den Staat Israel an. Gerade antizionistische Influencer*innen nutzen die Dynamik, um Hetze zu verbreiten
Abstract: Der Beitrag untersucht, inwiefern sich der „Nahostkonflikt“ auf das Sicherheitsgefühl von in Deutschland lebenden Jüdinnen und Juden auswirkt. Ausgehend vom Theorieansatz der „politisch-kulturellen Gelegenheitsstrukturen“ untersuchen wir, ob das „Nahostkonflikt“ bezogene Sicherheitsgefühl davon abhängt, wie offen oder geschlossen diese Strukturen von den (potenziell) Betroffenen wahrgenommen werden. Unsere Befunde zeigen, dass je günstiger die Gelegenheiten für antisemitische Mobilisierung erscheinen, desto negativer wirkt sich der „Nahostkonflikt“ auf die hiesige jüdische Gemeinschaft aus, weil in der Wahrnehmung der Betroffenen antisemitische Übergriffe nicht angemessen thematisiert und juristisch verfolgt werden. Mittels Daten einer Online-Befragung von in Deutschland lebenden Jüdinnen und Juden (n = 295) weisen wir nach, dass vor allem die Befürchtung, die Bevölkerungsmeinung gegenüber Jüdinnen und Juden in Deutschland hinge mit dem sogenannten „Nahostkonflikt“ eng zusammen, zu einem stärkeren „Nahostkonflikt“ bezogenen Bedrohungsgefühl beiträgt. Misstrauen in die Fähigkeit von Gerichten und Medien, auf Antisemitismus angemessen zu reagieren, sind weitere statistisch signifikante Korrelate.
Abstract: The Gaza War is a watershed moment not only in the Middle East. It has also increased political divisions in Germany, where Israel’s security and the fight against anti-Semitism are part of its historical legacy and political and moral identity. Incidents of anti-Semitism have increased dramatically, as have overdrawn accusations of it. An analysis of controversies about the definition of anti-Semitism, about the use of the term apartheid for the situation in the West Bank, of the BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), and particularly the characterization
of Israel as a settler-colonial state shows how difficult it has become to maintain a fair, honest, and frank discussion considering different points of view. The current crisis should be used as an opportunity for Germany to, on the one hand, face the unavoidable contradictions in its responsibilities stemming from the crimes of its Nazi past and, on the other hand, come to grips not only with Arab and Iranian terrorism and eliminationist rhetoric but also with the deficiencies in Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians. Germany’s new leitmotiv ought to be: ‘Between the River
and the Sea, Jews and Arabs should be free.’
Abstract: This chapter introduces the notion of ‘enabling concepts’: concepts which may or may not themselves constitute a mode of hate speech, but which through their broad social acceptability facilitate or legitimate the articulation of concepts which can be more directly classed as hate speech. We argue that each distinct hate ideology will contain its own, partly overlapping set of ‘enabling concepts.’ In this chapter, we will focus on the enabling role of references to apartheid for the constitution of antisemitism in British online discourse around Israel. This argument does not rest on agreement as to whether the ‘apartheid analogy’—comparisons between contemporary Israel and the former Apartheid regime in South Africa—itself constitutes a form of antisemitism. The chapter draws on qualitative analysis of more than 10,000 user comments posted on social media profiles of mainstream media in the UK, undertaken by the Decoding Antisemitism project in the wake of the May 2021 escalation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict. We will show how web commenters frequently use the apartheid analogy to trigger more extreme antisemitic stereotypes, including age-old tropes, intensifying and distorting analogies (such as Nazi comparisons) or calls for Israel’s elimination. The results will be presented in detail based on a pragmalinguistic approach taking into account the immediate context of the comment thread and broader world knowledge. Both of these aspects are relevant preconditions for examining all forms of antisemitic hate speech that can remain undetected when conducting solely statistical analysis. Based on this large dataset, we suggest that—under the cover of its widespread social acceptability—the apartheid analogy thus facilitates the articulation and legitimation of extreme antisemitic concepts that would, without this prior legitimation, be more likely to be rejected or countered.
Abstract: In this report:
Five weeks after the barbaric attack on innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas, this factsheet uses data from recent polling by two major polling agencies, Ipsos and YouGov, alongside historical data on these issues, to shed light on what people in the UK think about the conflict, where their sympathies lie, and what they believe the British government should do in response to the latest events in Israel and Gaza.
Some of the key findings in this report:
Since the 7 October attack, the proportion of British adults sympathising with the Israeli side has doubled from a pre-war level of about 10% to about 20%, whereas sympathy for the Palestinian side has fallen by a few percentage points from 24% to around 15%-21%;
Nevertheless, levels of sympathy for the Palestinian side have been gradually climbing since October 7, and are now approaching their pre-war levels;
Young adults are much more likely to sympathise with the Palestinians than the Israelis; older people hold the opposite view;
British adults are over twice as likely to think that Israel does not try to minimise harm to civilians than it does make such efforts;
British adults are more likely to think the UK should be more critical toward Israel than it has been, as opposed to more supportive. The younger respondents are, the more likely they are to believe the UK should be more critical;
British adults are twice as likely to think the police should be making more arrests at pro-Palestinian demonstrations than less, though there is are clear generational differences of opinion on this issue;
Almost all subgroups think the police should arrest people who openly support Hamas at demonstrations in the UK.
Abstract: From Introduction:
Antisemitism is global and multifaceted. One area in which ADL has seen a growth of antisemitism is within elements of the political left. This often takes the form of anti-Zionism, a movement that rejects the Jewish right to self-determination and of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, and frequently employs antisemitic tropes to attack Israel and its supporters. It also manifests through the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, a campaign that promotes diplomatic, financial, professional, academic and cultural isolation of Israel, Israeli individuals, Israeli institutions, and Jews who support Israel’s right to exist.
Political actors and advocacy movements associated with some left-wing political organizations have engaged in such antisemitism both in the U.S. and in Europe. While antisemitism from individuals associated with left-leaning political organizations is generally less violent than right-wing antisemitism, its penetration into the political mainstream is cause for concern and has in some cases alienated Jews and other supporters of Israel. Concerns are both political and physical. As described in this report, Jews and Jewish institutions have been targeted and have suffered violent attacks, associated with anti-Zionism, often in the wake of fighting between Israel and the Palestinians, most recently in 2021.
The challenges facing Jewish communities in Europe can be a bellwether for what is to come for the U.S. Jewish community, as evidenced for example by the recent rise in violent antisemitism in the U.S., which has plagued European Jewish communities for many years, and the increase in anti-Zionism in U.S. progressive spaces, something that has existed in Europe for some time. To better understand this phenomenon in Europe, ADL asked partners in the UK, France, Germany and Spain to describe some of the expressions of left-wing political antisemitism and anti-Israel bias in their countries. The individual contributors are responsible for the content of those chapters and their positions may differ with standard ADL practice and/or policy.
Our British partner, the Community Security Trust, is the British Jewish community’s security agency, which monitors, reports on, and educates about antisemitism among other vital tasks for the safety and security of the Jewish community.
Our French partner, the politics and culture magazine “K., The Jews, Europe, the 21st Century,” reports on contemporary challenges and opportunities for Jewish life in France and elsewhere in Europe.
Our German partner, Amadeu Antonio Foundation, is one of Germany's foremost independent non-governmental organizations working to strengthen democratic civil society and eliminate extremism, antisemitism, racism and other forms of bigotry and hate.
Our Spanish partner, ACOM, is a non-denominational and independent organization that strengthens the relationship between Spain and Israel, and whose work is inspired by the defense of human rights, democratic societies, civil liberties and the rule of law.
Those European contributions comprise the first sections of this report. Based on those essays, in the subsequent chapter, ADL analyzed common themes and notable differences among the four countries.
The final section adds ADL’s perspective on left-wing antisemitism in the political and advocacy spheres in the U.S. and provides suggested actions that can be taken to address antisemitism. To be sure, while not all antisemitism that has manifested in some elements of the political left in the U.S. is imported from Europe, lessons can be learned from this transatlantic phenomenon to protect against the mainstreaming of such antisemitism in U.S. politics.
Abstract: This chapter addresses the effects of the German politics of memory and the historical overdetermination of the discourse on antisemitism in the country. German antisemitism discourse builds on an exceptionalist conception of antisemitism as delusional and exterminist, which is derived from the experience of the Holocaust. This conception has proven to be unhelpful in understanding, tackling or fighting contemporary manifestations of antisemitism in all their diversity, varying formative contexts and differing degrees of severity or threat, especially with regard to the overlap between antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The current debate on BDS, along with the range of legal and quasi-legal efforts to severely restrict the movement, is symptomatic of this discourse. Rather than conceptualising (and criticising) the movement in all its heterogeneous facets and ideological and practical ambivalences and contradictions, the bulk of the German anti-BDS discourse tends to equate BDS with the Nazi boycott against Jews. The IHRA’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, with its blatant weaknesses, gaps, internal contradictions and political bias, is applied as a helpful tool in these efforts. This chapter outlines the German debate on DBS, including various public scandals and tightening administrative measures tied to Germany’s symbolic anti-antisemitism. In doing so, it highlights trends towards the juridification, securitisation and ‘antifa-isation’ of the discourse on antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Abstract: What do Jews in the UK think in regard to Israel’s military conflict with Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza? This report looks into the opinions of over 4,000 of JPR’s Research Panel members, following the May 2021 conflict between the sides. Respondents were asked to state how much they agree or disagree with two different statements: “Israel’s government handled the military aspects of the conflict appropriately” and “Israel’s government engaged in the conflict primarily for political rather than military reasons”.
The report finds that overall, Jews support Israel’s right to defend itself militarily but that this support is not uncritical. Moreover, Jews in the UK do not hold uniform views on Israel: levels of attachment to Israel, support for Britain’s Labour Party and holding a degree level qualification were found to be the key predictors of attitudes.
Some of the key findings in this report:
57% of the respondents agreed that Israel’s government handled the military aspects of the conflict appropriately, while 33% disagreed.
42% of the respondents agreed that Israel’s government engaged in the conflict primarily for political rather than military reasons, while 47% disagreed.
The main predictor of attitudes about this conflict is a person’s level of emotional attachment to Israel. Those with stronger feeling of attachment are more willing to give Israel the benefit of the doubt, independent of other variables such as political stance, religiosity and education.
In general, respondents who felt more weakly attached to Israel, or who were younger or more secular, or politically leftist, or university educated, were more likely to hold a more critical stance than those who were older, or more religious, or politically rightist, or non-university educated
