Adopting the full IHRA definition (including its illustrative examples) is only one part of the battle against antisemitism
By ASHER FREDMANWhite House senior advisors Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and others stand behind U.S. President Donald Trump as he holds up an executive order on anti-semitism that he signed during a Hanukkah reception in the East Room of the White House in Washington, U.S(photo credit: REUTERS//TOM BRENNER)
At the dawn of 2020, the global conversation on the Holocaust and antisemitism will reach a fever pitch, as dozens of world leaders arrive in Jerusalem in January for a historic gathering commemorating 75 years to the liberation of Auschwitz. All those engaged in countering antisemitism should dedicate 2020 to a global campaign aimed at advancing the one step which will make it easier to combat this evil world-wide.This step is the adoption of the full International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) antisemitism definition, not just by parliaments, but by all levels of government and civil society, including municipalities, law enforcement, political parties, universities, student associations, unions, religious institutions and NGOs.This is a goal that can be advanced all who are concerned with rising antisemitism, from the largest international organizations to local activists.Of course, adopting the full IHRA definition (including its illustrative examples) is only one part of the battle against antisemitism, which must include physical security, law enforcement, judicial action, education, social-media monitoring and many other elements. However, to paraphrase productivity guru Gary Keller, it is the one thing that makes everything else, in the battle against antisemitism, easier. To effectively counter a threat, it must be defined. The IHRA definition helps decision-makers at all levels identify the actions and statements which should be condemned and countered.The most well-known instances of the adoption of IHRA have been the approximately 20 countries that have passed parliamentary resolutions or government decisions supporting the definition. While in some cases the resolution does not explicitly clarify whether the adoption includes the illustrative examples, deeper inquiry often reveals that it does. For example, in response to a Freedom of Information Inquiry regarding Scotland’s adoption of IHRA, the government answered unambiguously, “The Scottish Government formally adopted the IHRA definition... including all of the examples of antisemitism which accompany the definition.”While the parliamentary resolutions receive wide coverage, the full range of bodies that have adopted IHRA is less well-known. It is important to examine the diversity of entities that have adopted IHRA, in order to highlight potential arenas of action for those working to combat antisemitism.The leading country in terms of the adoption of IHRA, despite or perhaps because of the rising number of antisemitic incidents, is the United Kingdom. The broad array of bodies which have adopted IHRA, in addition to the UK government, Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly, includes 180 local councils, the Crown Prosecution Service, the College of Policing, universities such as Kings College London and the University of Bristol, the National Union of Students, trade unions such as GMB, the Church of Scotland, and even the Labour National Executive Committee.In Germany, in addition to the Bundestag’s affirmation of the IHRA definition, the definition has been adopted by numerous student associations, and by the student wings of the major political parties, including those of the Social Democrats and the Greens. There is now an effort underway to have an increasing number of states and cities adopt the definition.MUNICIPAL-LEVEL ACTION is an important option when national governments include members that are tainted with antisemitism. In Spain, for example, where it appears that the Iran and Venezuela-linked Podemos Party will be a major coalition partner, the first resolution proposing the adoption of IHRA has just been tabled in the regional parliament of Valencia.The definition is starting to spread to Latin America as well. In November, the University of Cuyo, in Mendoza, Argentina, because the first university in Latin America to adopt IHRA. (While the Organization of American States has adopted IHRA, it, like the European Union, has not clarified whether this includes the illustrative examples that give content to the definition.)
In the United States, the IHRA definition was spotlighted by President Donald Trump’s executive order regarding Title VI and campus antisemitism. However, it is important to note that this order was preceded by the adoption of IHRA by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, the states of South Carolina and Florida, and, thanks to the leadership of Mayor Gabe Groisman, by the Village of Bal Harbour and the Miami-Dade County Police. The president of the Miami-Dade Police Chiefs Association explained the significance of this adoption, noting that it assists police agencies “to establish protocols on when there are reports of antisemitic crimes or hate crimes. It gives them a codified definition... of what antisemitism is, what hate crimes are.”Obviously, the adoption of a definition is not enough. The definition must be effectively implemented. Experience to date has shown that effective implementation and oversight is most likely to occur when there is a high-level point person given responsibility for coordinating the fight against antisemitism.Here too, efforts to promote the appointment of counter-antisemitism coordinators need not be limited to the national level. For example, 12 German states have already appointed such coordinators, in addition to German Government Commissioner on Antisemitism Dr. Felix Klein.In November, President Reuven Rivlin invited Dr. Klein, as well as the envoys for countering antisemitism from the US, EU, UK and France, to an emergency meeting at the President’s Residence. The one country which attended the meeting that does not have a high-level envoy for countering antisemitism is Israel.This gap should immediately be filled. While there are officials at the Diaspora and Foreign ministries charged with countering antisemitism, Israel should appoint a high-level envoy to coordinate government efforts in this fight. This envoy should be someone with international stature, who will be responsible for working vis-à-vis the full range of governmental and civil society bodies to promote concrete policies and legislation. Despite the current Israeli political paralysis, this is an issue with cross-party support.If all those dedicated to countering antisemitism focus in 2020, 75 years to the end of the Holocaust, on advancing the IHRA definition, the definition can be transformed into a clear international consensus. This will help ensure that the historic declarations against antisemitism become historic plans of action.The writer served as chief of staff to Israel’s Strategic Affairs minister, and is currently a fellow at the Kohelet Policy Forum, and a strategic communications consultant. Follow him on Twitter @fredman_a.
