The United States passed a resolution rejecting labeling Israel an apartheid and condemning Antisemitism
Why is it valuable to include reference to Israel in defining Antisemitism today?
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023, the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution 412-9-1, stating: “the State of Israel is not a racist or apartheid state, Congress rejects all forms of Antisemitism and xenophobia, and the United States will always be a staunch partner and supporter of Israel.” The resolution was tabled by Republican Representative August Pfluger of Texas following comments made by Democratic Representative Pramila Jaypal that “Israel is a racist state,” for which she has since issued an apology.
This resolution came one day before Israeli President Isaac Herzog was scheduled to address Congress. For the sake of clarity, because we hear a lot about a different Israeli figurehead these days, Israel is a country with both a President and a Prime Minister. The Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, holds executive power, while the President, Isaac Herzog, is mainly a ceremonial figurehead.
The accusation that Israel is a “racist state” is one that has been bandied around a lot lately. The best I can tell this statement is an updated version of the insinuation that Israel is an apartheid state. The clause about Israel not being a racist or apartheid state is likely also the one which provoked nine democratic senators, three of whom (AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib) would go on to not attend President Herzog’s address, to vote against the resolution.
For the sake of acknowledging my own bias on this matter, I do support the resolution. While there are many things that can and should be criticized about Israel, the simple fact is that it does not meet the legal definition of apartheid for numerous reasons, and I firmly believe that we are long overdue for unequivocal statements opposing Antisemitism in the 21st-century. I also recognize that manifestations of Antisemitism have changed in a post-Holocaust world. For this reason, there is a question that comes to mind when reading the resolution that I do want to answer:
Is it necessary to include Israel in statements opposing Antisemitism?
Not all Antisemitism today invokes states about the Jewish state. A casual perusal of the internet will inform you that the impulse to blame things on the Jews or create conspiracy theories is alive and well. Holocaust denial features among the most common forms of Antisemitism today. When discussing Antisemitism, I generally don’t want to delve into the Israel and Zionism side of the equation, it is highly nuanced and extremely frustrating. But I firmly believe that it is necessary to include reference to Israel when making statements opposing Antisemitism.
Why?
If we condemn one of form Antisemitism but not the others we are creating a problematic hierarchy and promoting the false notion that we should be more inclined to let some inappropriate comments slide than others. Just as culture in general morphs over time, so to do manifestations of hatred. The demonization, deligitimization, and application of double standards to Israel is a major source of modern Antisemitism and one that it is essential to recognize and account for in the same way that we do Holocaust denial, blood libel, and other more traditional forms of Antisemitism.
The resolution concludes that the United States will always be a staunch partner and supporter of Israel. I sincerely hope that this is true, though I am wary of any statement using that particular A-word. Israel today is not an apartheid state, Palestinian and other Arab-Israeli citizens enjoy all of the same rights, privileges and obligations as any other Israeli citizen. This by no means should be taken to mean that there are not problems, there absolutely are, as weeks of protest make clear. If things ever were to get to the point where the policies and politics of Israel do genuinely meet the definition of apartheid, it can be hoped that the United States, as a partner and supporter of Israel, will stand up and say something as it would if any other nation made the same political choices.