Germany’s clamp-down on antisemitism regulations

This month, the German Bundestag passed a resolution titled ‘Never Again is Now: Protect, Preserve, and Strengthen Jewish Life in Germany,’ signifying a notable legislative response to combat rising antisemitism following the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023, and subsequent, arguably genocidal Israeli retaliation. Despite the resolution’s apparent support for Jewish communities and condemnation of antisemitism, a closer examination reveals a policy riddled with inconsistencies and detrimental ramifications. This resolution fails to address true antisemitic hatred by confusing antisemitism with anti-Zionism. It also silences legitimate criticism of Israel, promotes Islamophobia, and erodes Germany’s commitment to free speech and human rights.

This framing not only distorts the concept of antisemitism but also delegitimises valid dissent against Israel’s policies

Antisemitism vs. Anti-Zionism

The resolution’s adherence to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which includes denouncing Israel as a Jewish collective, is a central component. The resolution’s endorsement of this definition fallaciously conflates the legitimate opposition to Zionism or Israeli state policies with Jew hatred. This framing not only distorts the concept of antisemitism, but it also hampers appropriate criticism of Israel’s actions.

Fundamentally, anti-Zionism is a political criticism of Zionist doctrine and Israeli government policies. Anti-Zionists, including many Jews, oppose Israeli policies for their colonial and exclusionary treatment of Palestinians. This has been documented by numerous human rights organisations, as well as the International Criminal Court (ICC) who have recently issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes. To label such dissent as antisemitic is an injustice which silences voices advocating for human rights and accountability. By conflating antisemitism with anti-Zionism, Germany aligns itself with a troubling and contradictory global trend of suppressing pro-Palestinian advocacy under the guise of fighting hatred.

Honest efforts to fight prejudice should build bridges instead of walls.

Blaming Immigrant Communities and Fuelling Islamophobia

The resolution’s excessive focus on immigrant groups, particularly those from the Middle East and North Africa, exacerbates its false connection between antisemitism and anti-Zionism. By portraying antisemitism as an ‘imported’ problem, the resolution is specifically blaming Muslim and Arab communities for the increase in antisemitic incidents, therefore fuelling the growing Islamophobia across Europe.

The resolution not only undermines efforts to combat antisemitism but also fractures solidarity between marginalised groups. Human rights organisations including Amnesty International have expressed concern that this scapegoating may result in additional surveillance, discrimination, and exclusion of already marginalised groups, further dividing society. Policies that blame one group whilst claiming to protect another ultimately drive Jewish, Muslim and immigrant communities apart, despite the fact that they frequently share similar experiences of exclusion.

Honest efforts to fight prejudice should build bridges instead of walls. This resolution, on the other hand, has the opposite effect; it makes people less trusting and strengthens a worrying European trend of separating the Muslim and Jewish communities. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) have both reported that antisemitism and anti-Muslim sentiment are both on the rise across Europe. For example, throughout Europe, false accusations against Muslim communities for violent attacks have fuelled riots and violence, explicitly showing the risks of such divisive narratives. Germany’s resolution will do nothing but heighten these tensions, failing both Jewish and Muslim communities.

This resolution, on the other hand, has the opposite effect; it makes people less trusting and strengthens a worrying European trend of separating the Muslim and Jewish communities.

Impeding Free Speech and Academic Freedom

The consequences of this resolution goes beyond merely stifling political dissent, extending to restricting the freedom of expression in academic and cultural settings. By urging cultural and educational institutions to adopt ‘antisemitism-critical codes of conduct,’ the resolution is fostering an environment of censorship and fear, rendering it possible for legitimate criticism of Israeli policies to be met with punitive repercussions. For instance, the resolution’s proposal to cut off public funding to groups, organisations and institutions which support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement or challenge Israel’s legitimacy is a particularly concerning aspect as it transforms public funds into a weapon of censorship that is used to impose ideological conformity. This silences groups and organisations who advocate for Palestinian rights, violating fundamental principles of free speech. This tactic also mirrors the chilling 2019 Bundestag resolution that stigmatised the BDS movement, sparking widespread condemnation for undermining constitutional freedoms.

Recent incidents highlight the daunting effects of such policies. Previously this year, Ghassan Hage was dismissed from the Max Planck Institute after accusations of making drastic statements critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, while Nancy Fraser lost her professorship at the University of Cologne for condemning Israel’s apartheid-like policies. These cases illustrate how this resolution is just the latest addition to a broader trend aimed at ensuring institutions prioritise political alignment over intellectual discourse, hindering valid political critiques under the pretence of combating antisemitism. This climate fosters self-censorship among academics and artists wary of backlash. Open discussion and criticism are essential to academic and cultural settings, yet they are being progressively restricted by laws like these which run the risk of turning these spaces into platforms for state censorship.

By intertwining antisemitism with legitimate political critique, the resolution inhibits free speech and intellectual freedom, two values which are essential to democracy. In an attempt to combat antisemitism, the policy paradoxically weakens the freedoms needed to address hatred effectively.

Policies must address systemic discrimination in all of its manifestations whilst also preserving the right to free speech.

A Call for Justice

The resolution passed by the Bundestag is an unsuccessful attempt to combat antisemitism that ultimately causes more harm than good. It is critical to clearly distinguish between Jew hatred and valid criticism of Israel in order to tackle antisemitism successfully. Policies must address systemic discrimination in all of its manifestations whilst also preserving the right to free speech. This resolution fails on all counts. Human rights activists, scholars, and leaders everywhere must oppose such laws and call for a more equitable strategy.

Freedom of speech, solidarity among marginalised communities, or justice for Palestinians must not be sacrificed in the fight against antisemitism. Any nation can only create a future free from hatred and division by adopting these ideals.