The Dirty Work for French Jewry

by Michele Sibony, French Jewish Union for Peace  

from The Alternative Information Center (AIC)

As every year, the Conseil Representatif des Institutions juives de France (CRIF) (www.crif.org) holds a gala banquet with all the important people of French politics. This year CRIF even allowed itself to boycott the political parties with which it does not agree, i.e. those which do not unconditionally support Israeli policies, and which are considered by it as anti-Semitic or as supporting anti-Semitism. It is horrific to hear the analyses of the media and certain politicians on these boycotts, and the importance they attribute to being present at this banquet out of fear of being considered anti-Semitic.   

In France, CRIF acts as a lobby in service of the Israeli government and the Israeli army (representatives of which regularly participate in ceremonies devoted to commemorating the Israeli army and to enlisting support for its projects), publishes political positions that garner extensive media coverage, positions to which the entire French public is exposed, and to which the government tends to conform. 

The Messages for 2009: The Year of Gaza 

This year, in preparation for the celebratory banquet of CRIF, two primary messages were formulated and directed toward the French government: 

1.     Anti-Semitism is on the Rise in France 

The President of CRIF, Richard Prasquie, is not embarrassed to talk about the “worrying explosion of hate” exhibited during demonstrations against the massacre in Gaza. This is the same Prasquie who dared to determine, in a demonstration to support the Israeli operation in Gaza, that 95% of French Jewry supports the massacre, a sentence that the editor of Marianne, Jean Francois Kahn, defined as utterly anti-Semitic. By raising the topic of anti-Semitism, Prasquie pulls out the winning card, the joker that shuts mouths about Gaza. 

The fact that the action in Gaza resulted in new heights in anti-Semitic acts and statements is not in doubt, and this itself is problematic and dangerous. So occurs each time that the Israeli army conducts a murderous operation against the Palestinian people of the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. However, CRIF and its leaders since 2000 must ask themselves about their level of responsibility when they knowingly act to identify every Jew in France with the acts of the occupation, settlements, the closure, war crimes and human rights violations of the Israeli government. This combination successfully works amongst the weakened and less political sections of French society and eases the decline to the past and anti-Semitic acts instead of an ascent to necessary political actions. 

In contrast, the actions of the national coalition of organizations for a just and sustainable peace between Israelis and Palestinians, and of the numerous collectives acting throughout France which initiated countless demonstrations against the Israeli operation in Gaza, must be applauded. These demonstrations all included one principle: we will not tolerate any racist slogan or flag. It is true that in the first demonstration in Paris, that the huge and unexpected number of demonstrators rendered the organizers’ work difficult in everything concerning the upholding of this principle, but already in the second demonstration we substantially increased the number of organizers and succeeded in upholding our commitment to not permit fascists or racist slogans to contaminate the demonstration. In this demonstration and in other demonstrations, a number of groups were forcibly removed which did not meet this criteria. 

Prasquie speaks of the hatred in our demonstrations. No! However, there was great rage against the wild violence (in the words of Tzipi Livni herself) employed by the Israeli army. Yes, there was limitless rage and pain in the face of the fate of the Gaza residents and the roaring silence of our political leaders toward these war crimes. In civil society, we were many millions who demanded that the war criminals be held accountable for their actions. This rage will not easily dissipate, not until the war criminals will be brought before an international criminal court in the Hague, the position of CRIF notwithstanding. The hatred we indeed saw in the phosphorous bombs in Gaza, aimed at schools, hospitals and mosques. The hatred we indeed heard in the declarations of Israeli leaders, in the analyses of a majority of the newspapers, and even in the words of so-called left-wing intellectuals. 

The truth is that CRIF and Prasquie have a difficult problem: their pathetic policy of distraction can, perhaps, succeed amongst sections of the political elite which would prefer to forget Gaza and that the Palestinians would agree to give up, but they have no chance of succeeding amongst civil society, which becomes angrier and refuses to give up the rights that the regimes are attempting to take away, there as here. This tactic once again imitates that of the Israeli government: just as in 2002, when Ariel Sharon called upon French Jewry to immigrate to Israel due to the rising anti-Semitism, so it is today with Avigdor Liberman—as a condition to his joining the Netanyahu (or Livni) government—with the establishment of a government cabinet that will be responsible for the absorption of immigration from Europe and North America, which will undoubtedly increase due to an apparent increase in anti-Semitism. This condition, by the way, was accepted by both political leaders. 

This attempt is doomed to failure, as only the convinced will be convinced, and we will not be tricked, and perhaps this is what Prasquie calls anti-Semitism: the refusal to keep quiet about Gaza and Palestine, the refusal to give in to the criminal blackmail. If anti-Semitism will rise in France, this will be a result of the pathetic and criminal tactic of Prasquie and CRIF, in addition to the enlisted media. We, from our perspective, remain on the side of the oppressed, against injustice and barbarity. Prasquie and CRIF are not gambling on public opinion and on rights, but on strength. 

2.     France must boycott the Geneva meeting against racism 

When dealing with the second United Nations meeting against racism, which is scheduled to be held in April this year, Prasquie chose to employ the expression accepted by the government of Israel and its supporters: Durban II, in order that the Geneva meeting be identified with the first meeting held in Durban in August 2001, at the height of the second Intifada. 

In the NGO Forum held then in parallel to the official meeting of states, anti-Semitic statements were indeed heard. The government of Israel exploited the opportunity, and intentionally mixed between the statements of certain associations and the decisions of the UN meeting, in order to annul them. In these decisions, which were couched in extremely moderate terms, was mention of the situation in the occupied territories, with an emphasis on the need to ensure the security of the State of Israel. The campaign against Durban in 2001 served to silence all types of criticism of the occupation and settlements, of the policy of extra-judicial executions, the killing of civilians, detentions without trial…and the list is long. 

These things states will do without the presence of Israel, of course, and without Canada, which has already given into the pressure, without the United States, which announced recently its withdrawal, and apparently without France, if the speech of the Prime Minister at the CRIF banquet is to be believed. This rejectionist position echoes the decision of the Israeli government to boycott the International Criminal Court, together with six other countries, including China and the United States. Israel views itself as being above the law, and is unprepared to be held accountable to any body, as its actions are in defense of its existence. Its message to Israeli and international public opinions can be summarized as thus: defense of what exists is above all, absolute and forever, and no court or committee has the right to intervene in its actions. This concept of self-defense is so rooted in the Israeli sub-conscience that in the wake of every “crisis,” the journalists and intellectuals repeat word for word the script intended to justify the unjustifiable. 

In Geneva French civil society, particularly those organizations acting for peace founded on respect and the rights of both peoples, will need to deal with a double challenge: on the one hand, to demand condemnation of human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including Gaza, of course, and the discriminatory policies against Palestinian citizens of Israel. This must be done together, French people of all origins. 

On the other hand, and in parallel, to express our absolute rejection of any expression of racism. Indeed, racism is not only utterly foreign to our world view and actions, it is also a trap intended to empty the conflict from its political content and transform this into an ethnic and religious conflict, thus delegitimizing one of the most just struggles in our period—the struggle to recognize the rights denied the Palestinians for more than sixty years. And this is the wet dream of CRIF and the state of Israel.