The Balfour Project’s findings on the problems with the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
JVL Introduction
Jonathan Coulter’s article outlines some of the work of the Balfour Project and notes that: “research provides some empirical support for the widely held belief that the IHRA definition is having a very damaging effect on freedom of expression in British Universities, and suggests that it is proving largely unhelpful to Jews in those universities”.
Their research found, even for many who support the IHRA working definition, rather than the condemnation and silencing we have seen, wanted a broad programme of education that would facilitate dialogue while respecting the different experiences of those impacted
This article was originally published by CAMPAIN on Wed 23 Feb 2022. Read the original here.
Balfour Fellows cast light on the impact of the IHRA definition
Loading article text…
Research is indeed needed into the effects of the IHRA because some of its proponents, notably Dave Rich of the CST, still maintain that it has no chilled free speech whereas we know from a multitude of incidents such as the Whitworth Gallery, Shahd Abusalama, Ken Loach etc. demonstrate the exact opposite.
Jonathan writes about the reluctance of parts of the Palestine solidarity movement, most notably PSC, to avoid the whole ‘antisemitism’ issue in favour of solidarity. Jonathan argues that:
‘To focus on bombs, bullets and barbed wire, while ignoring the propaganda, is a serious omission – one that sells short the long-suffering Palestinians and British sympathisers who are unjustly put through the mincer of smears. It is vital that we consider this issue in the round, including all its component parts.’
There is another even more compelling reason. Accusations of ‘antisemitism’ are specifically designed to undermine Palestine solidarity work by equating with anti-Semitism. There is no doubt this inhibits people or makes them wary.
Not to respond is to leave the field clear for the liars and defamers
‘This country’s historic responsibility?’ An interpretation of who is responsible for Balfour Agreement, akin to saying to young Germans that they are responsible for 2 World Wars. I would also question the assertion that the BBC & the Guardian has ever taken the time to represent the views of Palestinians & perhaps someone could tell me who labels themselves as ‘progressives’ as though anyone else is retarded?
Stephen,
‘ … young Germans … responsible … ‘
Only if you accept the contentious assumption of exclusive German war guilt.
Stephen, As a Brit I do feel SOME measure of personal moral responsibility for the past and current conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis.
Balfour was a British Prime Minister so we have a greater responsibility than other nations for trying to put right as best we can the wrongs he did. Especially as Balfour’s ability to do harm rested on the power, prestige and international agreements the British Empire had.
Stephen – Far be it for me to say much in supporting the Guardian on the subject of Palestine/Israel. But in fairness, there was a brief window during which the likes of Chris McGreal and Suzanne Goldenberg wrote with great sensitivity about the oppression of the Palestinians, with McGreal even daring to write about the similarities between South African and Israeli apartheid.
Wikipedia states – In 2004 he won the Martha Gellhorn Award (London), for reporting of Israel & Palestinian territories that “penetrated the established version of events and told an unpalatable truth”.[3]