Journal of Diplomatic Language
JOURNAL OF DIPLOMATIC
LANGUAGE
JDL I:4 (2004)
AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESURGENCE OF ANTI-SEMITISM IN FRANCE
Sylvie Bacquet, M.A.
American Graduate School of International Relations & Diplomacy
Paris, France
In many parts of the world, we witness an increase of anti-Semitic expression and violence, fuelled by the international context. In France, the country with the largest Jewish community in Europe, the resurgence of anti-Semitism has been particularly acute and reached its peak in October 2000 with the beginning of the Second Intifada.
This paper proposes to study this phenomenon throughout: A description of the nature and the dimension of the resurgence of anti-Semitism; an examination of the national, regional and international response to anti-Semitism; and an assessment of its efficiency.
This study shows that while the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France is tightly linked to the international context, the situation is also a reflection of some deep-rooted problems within French Society.
It concludes that while the legal machinery has been successful in establishing a moral rejection of anti-Semitism, in the case of France, social change is also required.
1. Introduction
On September 2001, the United Nations convened the third World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban, South Africa. The conference was intended to highlight particularly serious patterns of racism and racial discrimination around the world and to shape appropriate global responses.
The conference made it clear that racism and racial discrimination need to be placed more squarely on the international human rights agenda. However, the success of the conference was undermined by a series of anti-Semitic attacks, fuelled by the debates at the meeting concerning Israeli practices in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.[1]
The outburst at Durban reflected a growing trend towards anti-Semitic expression and violence in many parts of the world. As highlighted notably by a number of NGO reports,[2] there is an alarming rise in anti-Semitic violence in Europe but also in other parts of the world.
Many attacks have been reported against Jews and synagogues, especially in France, which hosts the largest Jewish community in Europe, but also in Britain, Belgium, Germany and Russia.
The author of this paper who belongs to the French Jewish Community and witnessed the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France, felt that it would be particularly interesting to focus on this country, especially since it is the country in Europe with the widest manifestation of anti-Jews feelings within the past few years.
This paper analyzes the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France by considering several questions surrounding this phenomenon. In particular: what is the nature and the dimension of the resurgence of anti-Semitism? Where does it originate? What policies or activities have been pursued both at the national and the international level to counter the resurgence of anti-Semitism and racism in general? To what extent has this approach been efficient? And what are the limits of a strictly legal approach to anti-Semitism and racism in general?
Following some preliminary remarks on the origins of anti-Semitism, part 1 opens up with a description of the nature and the manifestation of the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France over the past three years. Part 2 and 3 critically examine the activities and policies pursued both in France and within the international human rights community to counter racism while Part 4 addresses the issue of whether existing legal instruments offer an effective response to the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France, looks at the value-added of regional and international bodies to national actions against hatred and reviews alternative non-legal means of dealing with the situation.
1.1 Preliminary Remarks on the Origins of Anti-Semitism
Before addressing the issue of the resurgence of anti-Semitism, one must examine for purposes of clarity, some preliminary issues such as: what is meant by the term 'anti-Semitism'? What are the origins and forms of anti-Semitism and how does it continue to exist in the twenty-first century?
1.1.1 What Is Anti-Semitism?
For nearly 4,000 years, the Jewish people has been subject to prejudice, persecution and murder on religious, economic, political, and social grounds. This hostility towards Jews, which continues into the twenty-first century, is usually called Anti-Semitism.
Anti-Semitism is a form of racism. At its root lies what can be regarded as the greatest enemy of tolerance: the fear of what appears different or strange. Today, it is mainly the people of the Islamic world who have become the proponents of anti-Semitism; in the last century, the Nazis sought to bring about the genocide of the Jewish people while in previous centuries, the Church attempted to eliminate the Jews through conversion, persecution and murder.[3]
1.1.2 Historical Origins of Anti-Semitism
The adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire by Constantine in the fourth century and the later establishment of Catholicism and Protestantism as state religions throughout Europe, inevitably left the Jews in a position of dissenters. Similarly, the Islamic conquest of the Middle East, North Africa, and the Iberian Peninsula placed the Jews of those lands in a minority posture.[4]
Anti-Semitic policies have generally sought to push Jews to the margins of society. Such marginalizations have been accomplished in various ways including: discriminatory restrictions on religious observance, on political participation, vocation, education, residence, attire, and other denials of human rights.
1.1.3 Forms of Anti-Semitism
Over the years, anti-Semitism has developed on religious, political or economic grounds.
Religious anti-Semitism originated in Christianism. Church theologians of the fourth and fifth centuries articulated an utterly degraded view of the Jews. Saint Augustine declared: 'The continued preservation of the Jews will be a proof to believing Christians of the subjection marked by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death.'[5] In the centuries following the establishment of Christianity in Europe, Church doctrine characterised Jews as murderers of Jesus and benighted deniers of Christ's revelation and affirmed over the course of the centuries, that there would be no respite for the Jews.[6]
Anti-Judaism can also be found in the Muslim world and in some Muslim religious sources, although not to the degree it existed in Christian Europe.
Religious anti-Semitism found expression in political action against Jews ranging from civil disabilities and disqualification, special taxes and ghettoization to deportation and extermination. Political discrimination against the Jews has commonly been predicated on the notion of the Jew as a 'wandering' community, a people without a land or nation.
The threat and reality of expulsion have been ever-present through the centuries. The practice began in earnest Europe at the end of the thirteenth century when, in 1290, Jews were expelled from England and, in 1306, from France. Expulsions continued throughout the years and it was not until the mid-nineteenth century, with emancipation that many legal impediments were lifted, allowing the Jews to participate more fully in civil society. [7]
Anti-Semitism both in Europe and in the United States perceived these communities as incapable of being assimilated, alien, and a threat to the majority culture.
Jews were also economically exploited. Special taxes were imposed on them by sovereigns since Roman times and they faced economic discrimination in the form of professional restrictions.
In modern times, European nations profited from stolen property of Jews persecuted during the Holocaust. Laws enacted in Nazi Germany in 1935 and in subsequent years repeated the old prohibitions, forbidding Jews from engaging in any number of professional activities, businesses, civil service, and the army.
1.1.4 Modern Time Anti-Semitism
While official anti-Semitism is rare today, unofficial anti-Semitism has survived. It is most commonly characterised by vandalism against Jewish institutions, verbal violence, but also more deadly attacks such as the 1982 bombing of the Goldenberg Kosher restaurant in Paris.
Political anti-Semitism today is reflected in the electoral successes of right-wing nationalists parties such as the Freedom Party in Austria and the National Front (FN) in France.
Moreover, the Middle East conflict exacerbates Muslim-Jews hatred and leads to manifestations of anti-Semitism. A phenomenon, which, as this paper makes clear, has become particularly visible in France since the outbreak of the Second Intifada and following the events of September 11th.
2. The Nature and the Dimension of the Manifestation of Anti-Semitism
2.1 Background to the Present Days
With over 5 million Muslims and 650, 000 Jews, France hosts both the biggest Jewish and Muslim communities in Europe ,[8] which makes the country very vulnerable to various manifestations of racism arising either between the two communities or from Nationalists movements as well as neo-Nazi groups.
In the 1980s, both the rise of nationalist movements such as FN, and the Middle East conflict resulted in anti-Semitic acts against the French Jewish community. In October 1980, for instance, a bomb exploded in a famous Paris synagogue on a Friday night, killing four Jews leaving religious service. In 1990, there was a new peak of anti-Semitic violence in the wake of the desecration by members of the extreme right (skinhead) of the Jewish cemetery of Carpentras.
Since 1991, (the Gulf's War), anti-Semitism had been in net decline; in October 2000 however, France became the setting for an unprecedented rise of anti-Semitic incidents, allegedly triggered by the beginning of the second Intifada.[9]
According to a report by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, among Western democracies, in the single month of October 2000, the highest numbers of anti-Semitic attacks were perpetrated in France (70). [10]
As can be observed in the chart below, prepared by one of the main organization of French Jewry, the Conseil Représentatif des Institutions Juives de France (CRIF), hundreds anti-Semitic incidents have been reported since October 2000 and have continued at a high level since then.
It is clear from the chart that that there have been three main peaks of violence between January 2000 and May 2002. The highest one in October 2000, coincides with the beginning of the Al Aqsa Intifada; the second peak, which is the lowest of the three occurred in September 2001 and thus could well have been triggered by the events of September 11th ; the third peak, which is higher than the second but lower than the first can also be linked to political events since it corresponds to the most critical phase of the second Intifada, marked by an unprecedented wave of suicide bombings in Israel, followed by the Israeli Defense Forces controversial response: Operation Protective Wall.
Based on the above data, one can thus make the assumption that in France, the resurgence of anti-Semitism is directly linked to political events. In order to understand this pattern, one must look closer at the form of anti-Semitic violence and the alleged perpetrators.
2.2 Nature and Dimension of the Threat
The rise of anti-Semitism in France has been largely documented by non governmental organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC) or the Simon Wiesenthal Centre (SWC). Therefore, this section will not provide the reader with a full list of recorded acts of anti-Semitism since this work is carried out by NGOs and reports can be consulted on relevant websites. Rather, the following section will attempt to give an overall picture of the situation, highlighting the general trends of the phenomenon and then looking closer into some of the origins behind the resurgence of anti-Semitic acts.
In France, the resurgence of anti-Semitism is characterized by increasingly frequent attacks of Jewish institutions such as synagogues, schools, cemeteries, buses, kosher shops, restaurants as well as Jewish homes. Targets are bombed, set on fire or targeted by Molotov cocktails; desecrations of cemeteries have also been reported. Anti-Semitic graffiti can often be seen on the walls of Jewish institutions including slogans like 'Death to the Jews' or swastika paintings. Cases of stone throwing have also become common as well as assaults on individuals especially teenagers and people visibly recognisable as Jews such as Orthodox men wearing beards and hats and verbal attacks or threats including 'dirty Jew' and 'we will gas you'.[11] In addition, there is an increasing number of racist, anti-Semitic or neo-Nazi websites available on the Internet. [12]
The phenomenon has also spread to French universities when the famous Paris VI University at Jussieu called early in 2003 to halt European Union contacts with Israeli Universities and urged an end to EU academic links and subsidies in a sign of disapproval of the policies of the Israeli Government. [13]
Moreover, pro-Palestinians demonstrations in France have deteriorated into particularly violent sloganeering against Jews. In one of the pro-Palestinian rallies, one could hear such slogans as 'les juifs au four' .[14] Moreover, many demonstrators bore posters with the slogan 'Sharon=Hitler' or equated the Star of David with the swastika. [15]
Most incidents have occurred in Paris suburbs and other neighbourhoods where Jews and Moslems live in close propinquity, as well as in other large cities such as Marseilles, Strasbourg, Lyon and Toulouse, most of which hosts a large part of foreigners of North African origin. Typical suspects are youth from the suburbs (the famous French 'banlieues'), most of them have previously been in trouble with the authorities.
In its report on racism, the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights states that most of the acts come from immigration circles, who find in this violence an escape from their feelings of frustration and marginalisation. [16]
A detailed report of these attacks was also prepared at the Ministry of Interior, based on the questioning of 42 suspects interviewed by the police and specifying the profile of the suspects.
Most are individuals largely involved in delinquency and claiming adherence to no particular ideology. They nevertheless seem driven by a fairly general feeling of hostility towards Israel, exacerbated by the exaggerated media coverage of the clashes in the Middle East...[17]
It appears that the resurgence of anti-Semitism originates in what can be termed the sociological frustration of the French North African Moslem identity; some of them express their identification with the Palestinian Islamic terrorism and Bin Laden. [18] The post September 11th US-led war against terror has created an immediate sympathy for Al-Qaeda especially among young, socially marginalized Moslems in France. In many cases the perpetrators of anti-Semitism also smeared graffiti in praise of Bin Laden such as 'Long Live Bin Laden.' [19]
This would confirm the hypothesis that the manifestations of anti-Semitism in France is triggered by political events abroad, reflecting into French society, which is particularly vulnerable due to the presence of different religious communities.
As a result, a climate of fear and insecurity has developed in France, leading in April 2002 to the victory in the first round of the presidential election of the leader of the National Front - Jean-Marie Le Pen, who polled 16.86 percent. Thus, it could be argued that the Middle East crisis, but also the events of September 11th have contributed in France to further hatred and violence, leading to a larger part of the population feeling insecure and being tempted to vote for nationalist parties who mostly put forward racist and discriminatory ideas such as sending back immigrants to their country of origin, giving priority to French nationals for employment and social services, or to 'free France from the ties of Europe'.[20]
Following the April 2002 French election, democracy was put at risk. The lessons to be learnt from this event is that the threat of racism is still present and if governments turn a blind eye on its various manifestations and fail to prosecute and punish those found guilty of such offences, it could have some very serious consequences on the French republican values and on human rights.
3. The Response
While the above examined data suggests that rising tension between the Muslim and Jewish community and acts of anti-Semitism are more the consequence of the political context than the expression of pure religious/racial hatred; some foreign Jewish groups, particularly in America and Israel have seen in those incidents evidence of acceptance of anti-Semitism and an echo of the dark days of the Vichy collaborationist wartime government which oversaw the deportation of 750, 000 French Jews to Nazi death camps.
As a result members of the Jewish community have been affected by a strong feeling of abandonment; figures show that immigration from France to Israel has doubled last year with 2, 566 Jews reported to have left France to go to Israel, allegedly as a consequence of the hostility. [21]
Whatever the nature of the latest resurgence of anti-Semitic violence, it makes no doubt that as a form of racism, it amounts to a violation of national and international law and as such, it cannot remain unpunished.
Before examining the content of the French response, one must have in mind the basis of the existing machinery to combat racism and racial discrimination. The following section lists the main existing provisions but it should not be regarded as an exhaustive exposé of French laws against racism which is beyond the scope of this paper.
3.1 Existing Machinery
· The Law dated 29 July 1881 on press freedom prohibits the circulation of messages in breach of public order (ordre public); this includes the circulation of racist and xenophobic messages. This law is complemented by the law dated 1st July 1972, dealing more generally with freedom of expression and freedom of thoughts.
· The New Penal Code (Nouveau Code Pénal) which came into force on 1st March 1994 (Acts of 22 July 1992, 16 December 1992 and 19 July 1993) brings together a large number of provisions directed against racism and xenophobia.
· Law n° 90-615 dated 3 July 1990 is intended to sanction racist, anti-Semitic or xenophobic acts and prohibits racial and religious discrimination.
The table below gives an overview of the functioning of those provisions and how they relate to sanctions. [22]
It is interesting to note that the French machinery to combat racism, as opposed to that of other European countries is based on discrimination and crimes committed throughout the press. There are no specific provisions providing for more severe sanctions to be applied to racist crimes, which at present are dealt with as other crimes.
Another area of concern with the French provisions on racism is that as a result of the prohibition to record data related to race, many incidents against Jews are not registered as such and thus they are not treated as acts of anti-Semitism.
These two weaknesses of the French system are recently under reform following the adoption by the French Parliament of the Law called 'Lellouch' on the increasing of penalties for crimes committed on racist grounds. This will be discussed in further details below.
3.2 The French Response
While in the first place the government has been reluctant to condemn acts of anti-Semitism as such, allegedly for fear that it might exacerbate already existing tensions between the Islamic and the Jewish community, a number of useful measures have emerged in the past two years, as a proof that the problem has finally been given due consideration by the authorities.
3.2.1 The Inaction in Political Circles
French officials first downplayed the racist, anti-Semitic nature of the attacks, suggesting that they were an inevitable side effect of the crisis in the Middle East when the second Intifada begun. President Chirac for instance was reported to have warned against over protesting anti-Semitism for fear of encouraging its increase.[23]
In June 2001, the French Foreign Minister, Hubert Vedrine, told a Wiesenthal Centre delegation that assaults on Jewish institutions were 'only acts of suburban hooliganism'.[24]
Similarly, in a June 2002 statement, a French spokesman acknowledged that 'a series of inexcusable assaults - physical, material and symbolic - has been committed in France against Jews over the past 20 months' however, he suggested that this was simply a reflection of the Middle-East conflict into France by asserting that most of the incidents were laid to 'poorly integrated youth of Muslim origin who would like to bring the Mideast conflict to France'.[25]
All this resulted in the trivialization of acts of anti-Semitism, which were made to become part of everyday life, allegedly because it came from a more acceptable source than far right extremism. This has suggested that the personality of the author of an anti-Semitic act might have more importance than the nature of the act itself, which yet remains the same. The perpetrators of this 'new anti-Semitism' have more often been labelled as 'anti-Jews' than anti-Semite,[26] thereby undermining the gravity of their action, although it equally constitutes a violation of human rights.
3.2.2 Latest Developments to Combat Anti-Semitism
· In Spring 2002 a large police operation was set up to anticipate and combat anti-Semitic and anti-Jews acts.[27] This operation was reinforced during the Gulf war.
· On 10 December 2002, Law Proposal (N° 350) aiming at increasing penalties of crimes with evidence of racist motives was passed unanimously both at the National Assembly and the Senate.[28]
The essence of this law is to make of the racist element of a crime, an aggravating circumstance, giving rise to a greater penalty than other crimes. The new law, which came into force on 3 February 2003 [29] will fill-in a gap within the French system to combat racism as well as placing France in line behind other European countries such as the United Kingdom and its Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Italy (Article 3 of the Law n° 205/1993), or Sweden (Article 2, Chapter 29 of the Penal Code).
· In January 2002, following the vigorous condemnation by President Chirac of a knife attack on Rabbi Gabriel Farhi of the Jewish Liberal Movement (MJLF) by a man shouting pro-Palestinian slogans, French government ministers attended a Jewish prayer service, as a sign of anger against the rise of anti-Semitism in France. [30]
· On January 25, 2003, the French Prime Minister, Jean Pierre Raffarin, on the occasion of the CRIF annual dinner recalled the latest violence and expressed his determination to prosecute those responsible for it. He also addressed the necessity to continue working on the remembrance of anti-Semitism and against the indifference which led to the tragedy of the Holocaust. To this purpose, he mentioned France's proposal to organise at school a 'National Day of Remembrance for victims of the Holocaust and the prevention of crimes against humanity'.
· In March 2003, the Prime Minister upon receiving the NCHR annual report on racism for the year 2002, called on French people to avoid any amalgam between the international context and the national situation 'We must avoid a transfer of international tensions into our national community.'[31] The report indicated that anti-Semitic violence had multiplied by six since 2001.[32]
· On 2 June 2003, the Prime Minister requested preliminary works to be carried out in view of the drafting of a law proposal for the creation of an independent administrative authority to counter all forms of discrimination. [33] As of March 2004, a law aimed at combating homophobia has been proposed to the National Assembly. [34]
· In November 2003, the arson attack of a Jewish high school in the Paris suburb gave a new impetus to the fight against anti-Semitism. French President Jacques Chirac convened an emergency cabinet meeting, which led to the adoption of a series of measures to combat anti-Semitism and racism in general and notably to the creation of a committee to fight racism and anti-Semitism. [35]
· Finally, as pointed out above, schools have been particularly affected by anti-Semitic attacks, leading to increasing difficulties for teacher to teach the Holocaust, although it is part of the History program.
This led Education Minister Luc Ferry to announce, in February 2003, a set of measures to combat anti-Semitism and racism at school. Among those measures, 10 were cited as immediately applicable. They include: the introduction of new tools to improve data collection and the creation of a special unit to monitor and respond to anti-Semitic and racist acts by schoolchildren and help schools to address the problem. In addition, a special commission has been asked to prepare a booklet redefining secularism and advising teachers on how to deal with potential conflicts. The Minister of Education has also stated the necessity to condemn all acts of anti-Semitism, including verbal attacks. [36] This is particularly important since an increasing number of youngsters are reported to claim what they call 'a right to be anti-Jewish'.[37] Thus, it is crucial to reassert the fact that there is a difference between freedom of expression on the one hand and racism on the other, which is punishable by law.
It is clear thus that there has been a twist in the French response to the resurgence of anti-Semitism. This change could be attributed to a number of reasons such as: the change of government, the fear produced by the results of the April 2002 election and pressure from NGOs and from the International Community.
3.3 International and Regional Level
At the international level, there is also a large number of provisions establishing the prohibition of anti-Semitism. The United Nations system was indeed established in the aftermath of the Holocaust and it is largely the search for an effective international response to racism including anti-Semitism that produced the main components of the United Nations human rights regime.
This led in 1948, to the adoption by the UN of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. [38] This was followed in 1963 by the adoption of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination [39] and in 1966 by the adoption of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) .[40] Article 4(a) of this Convention provides that State Parties undertake to:
(…) declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin.
The drafting of those two instruments began as a response to an outbreak of anti-Semitic incidents in Europe in 1959-1960. Those incidents were condemned by the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities and the Commission on Human Rights in a resolution adopted on March 16, 1960:
(...) noting with deep concern the manifestations of anti-Semitism and other forms of racial prejudice and religious intolerance of a similar nature ... which might be once again the forerunner of other heinous acts endangering the future...[41]
In addition, anti-Semitism has been a matter of concern to the UN's Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism. Over the years, the Special Rapporteur has not only examined specific incidents, but also made broad recommendations concerning efforts to halt anti-Semitism. For example, in 2001, in his report to the Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur Mr Maurice Glele-Ahahanzo of Benin recommended that States set up national human rights institutions 'with a particular emphasis on combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and anti-Semitism.' He noted in the same report that a series of 'attacks and anti-Semitic acts throughout the world' had been triggered by the recent outbreak of violence in Israel. [42]
Finally, the resurgence of anti-Semitism is high on the international agenda, as shows the increasing number of conferences dedicated to the issue.
In May 2003, the Wiesenthal Centre convened a three-days conference 'Educating for Tolerance: the case of resurgent anti-Semitism' at UNESCO headquarters in Paris. The conference was aimed at forcing the issue of anti-Semitism into the international agenda (in the words of Rabbi Hier). Koichiro Matsuura, UNESCO Director General said efforts to combat anti-Semitism should include promoting unbiased teaching, revising school textbooks to reflect universal values and introducing classes on religious, ethnic and racial tolerance. [43]
On 19 and 20 June 2003, the OSCE organised a Conference on anti-Semitism in Vienna. The Conference discussed ways to combat anti-Semitism including legislative and institutional mechanisms, government action; the role of governments and civil society in promoting tolerance and the role of education and the media. [44]
At the European level, there is also an important machinery to combat racism. Article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms [45] (1950) provides that:
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any grounds such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.
In addition to these legal provisions, several European intergovernmental institutions were created expressly to monitor and to combat racism and are available to assist governments in the region in the implementation of legislative, criminal justice, educational and other measures.
The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) created in 1993 is responsible for examining and evaluating the legislative, political and other measures taken by States to combat racism and stimulate action at local, national and European level. The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), created in 1997, is in charge with providing the Community and its Member States with reliable information on racism and xenophobia in order for them to take appropriate measures. ECRI and the EUMC have both addressed the rise of anti-Semitism intensively since the year 2000 and have highlighted some of the difficulties of monitoring and combating racist trends in the region. They have pressed for better data collection, more transparency and a deeper analysis of racist incidents by European governments.
It becomes clear thus that there is no lack of regional and international provisions to counter racism, including anti-Semitism. However, while it is precisely the fear of the resurgence of anti-Semitism, which acted as a motor for the creation of the existing UN machinery, we are faced today, some 40 years following the adoption of ICERD with a resurgence of anti-Semitic manifestations. Certainly, today's manifestations of anti-Semitism cannot be equated with those of 50 years ago, but one cannot turn a blind eye to the proportions the phenomenon has taken in some countries and the consequences they have had on democracy and human rights. This raises the issue of the limits of a purely legal approach to racism and anti-Semitism, which is discussed in the next section.
4. An Evaluation of the French Response to the Resurgence of Anti-Semitism
4.1 Comments on the Existing Machinery and its Effectiveness in Dealing with the Issue
In its concluding observations on France's last report, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination stated that French Penal legislation satisfied most of the requirements of article 4 of the ICERD but recommended that France 'ensures the effective prohibition of actions which are discriminatory in effect on the basis of race, ethnic or national origin.' [46] The Committee also evoked the need for France to provide more accurate statistical reports on racially motivated offences. The main lacuna of the French system has indeed been the absence of legislation to deal separately with offences motivated by racial discrimination or hatred. However, the recently voted law increasing penalties for offences motivated by racism should fill-in this gap and lead to improved data collection and more accurate reporting.
Despite the above-mentioned weaknesses, one could argue that the French mechanism to combat anti-Semitism and racism in general is relatively comprehensive and thus, the lack of legal tools alone cannot be blamed for the recent upsurge of anti-Semitic violence, all the more so that the French provisions are complemented by similarly comprehensive regional and international instruments.
The international human rights mechanism has been successful in creating a moral rejection of anti-Semitism and racism, setting international standards to combat racial discrimination and making states accountable for their actions or lack of actions. One must point out that the recent French legislative reform on racist offences was largely motivated by a decision at European level and that the shift in its response to the resurgence of anti-Semitism is largely owed to NGO pressure.
It is clear that since the end of WWII, anti-Semitism has been subject to close scrutiny, both at the national and at the international level; the latest resurgence of racist violence in France however, has met a different type of answer.
As described above, the first two years of the resurgence of anti-Semitism in France have been subject to much indifference in political circles and in the media. This has been attributed to the fact that it came from a different source than the usual nationalist and Neo-nazi violence [47] and as a result, the resurgence of anti-Semitism has not been given the consideration it deserved.
Within political circles, this silence has been justified by the fear of exacerbating tensions in the French 'banlieues' (suburbs), which already proved difficult to control. Moreover, with the April 2002 presidential elections approaching, there was caution not to disappoint the Muslim population, which forms a large part of the electorate. Pascal Boniface a member of the Socialist Party has even suggested in a Party meeting that it would pay more, in 2002, in order to obtain the votes of the Muslim community to modify the official policy towards Israel. [48]
This paper made it clear that the wave of anti-Semitism appeared to be both a consequence of the undeniable growth of Muslim extremism triggered by events in the Middle East, and a phenomenon rooted in social unrest in the suburbs, mainly among disaffected youth of Muslim (North African) origin. As a result, the French Jewish community was made to pay the price for Israeli politics although it bears no responsibility for it.
This situation left the French authorities facing a public dilemma: while there was a pressing need to condemn the violence, any response risked inflaming the situation and creating a state of chaos, to be avoided at a time of electoral campaign. However, the lack of response itself can also be accused of having contributed to the escalation of violence.
One can also argue that the media share the blame for the situation and that tension between the two communities has been exacerbated by television coverage of the Intifada. For many observers, the impact of TV pictures is the main explanation for the escalation of violence. According to Lallaoui, a community leader, the young perpetrators of the acts, when they see violent clashes on TV, feel a sense of solidarity and in empathy, attack Jewish symbols for lack of Israeli targets.[49]
When young Moslems from the suburbs see pictures of the Palestinian Intifada, they indeed identify with the young stone throwers, allegedly because they feel the same frustration. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and especially the situation in the Palestinian territories reproduces the picture of exclusion and failure to which they feel victim in France.
4.2 Comments on the Limits of a Strictly Right-Based Approach to Racism
The situation in France shows that, while the value of anti-discrimination laws cannot be questioned, in the case of racism, a purely right-based approach fails to treat the problem at its roots. In France, significant social change is also required: in particular, there is a pressing need to work towards putting an end to what is often called by commentators and by the media 'la crise des banlieues' (the suburbs crisis), resulting in the marginalization and lack of integration of the North-African Muslim immigrants. Arguably, this situation creates among young Muslims a sense of failure and frustration, which makes them more prone to turn to various forms of religious fundamentalism and delinquency.
It can be suggested that an educational approach is also needed in order to free people from ignorance, which too often results in the expression of various forms of racism. As recalled by the UN General Secretary on the occasion of the International Day for Tolerance (16 November 2002), education is the most efficient way to combat prejudice, hatred and discrimination. [50]
Thus, it is highly recommended that greater consideration be given to Article 7 of ICERD, which calls upon states 'to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the field of teaching, education, culture and information.'
It can be argued that French public schools should play a greater role in teaching respect for others and respect for the law; this could be achieved by devoting more time to the teaching of civics. France's last report to the ICERD points to the new school curricula which came into effect at the beginning of the school year in 1995. It places special emphasis on the diffusion of democratic values and provides for the teaching of civics and human rights. However, according to the report only one hour per week is devoted to civic studies in middle schools while in high schools, it is part of the history curricula. One can recommend that the new curricula be extended, especially in sensitive areas.[51]
In light of the proportion of school violence, especially in the region around Paris (Ile-de-France), the Ministry of Education has launched in October 2001 a campaign called 'Le respect, ça change tout' .[52] This campaign is part of a wider mobilization to combat violence at school and follows the creation in October 2000 of a National Committee against Violence at School.
While it is too early to measure the implication of those reforms on racism, it is hoped that they will foster tolerance and bring about structural changes within French society, which in the long term can lead towards the ultimate goal of the elimination of racial hatred.
Moreover, sanctions need to be applied within the education system for lack of respect towards teachers; too often in France, teachers, especially those working in sensitive areas, find themselves the victim of their students and cannot perform their job properly because they work in fear. For instance, a teacher that is verbally attacked by a student will mostly not respond, for fear of reprisals in the form of assault against himself, his family or damage to his personal property.[53] One can only hope that the above initiative to promote respect, together with the new measures announced in February 2003 by the Education Minister will bring about changes in this respect.
Finally, schools need to lead the way in promoting tolerance. On this aspect, French schools have come under strong criticism following the Islamic headscarves cases. The issue first arose when in the 1990s, a number of Muslim girls where expelled from schools for refusing to remove their hijab (the Islamic head scarf). The French government argued that wearing the jihab should not be allowed at school as it amounted to the expression of a political idea, denoting the acceptance of a fundamentalist and oppressive political agenda. The wearing of religious attire has generally been discouraged in French schools, which are strongly secular since the adoption of the Law dated 9 December 1905, on the separation of the Church and the State establishing secularism. [54]
While there is a point in the willingness of the French government to maintain schools as a place of liberty, free from any signs of sexual oppression of certain religions, it is legitimate to question the level of compliance of the above described behaviour with the inalienable right to freedom of religion contained in both national and international law.
In any event, the publicity of such cases has damaged the image of school as a forum for the expression of freedom and tolerance that was precisely intended with the concept of secularism. Aware of the fact that this concept has come under criticism, the government has announced last year the creation of a National Committee of Reflection and Proposals on the Principle of Secularism at School and the then Education Minister reaffirmed his willingness to restore the value of the principle of secularism, which he described as a principle of integration and harmony allowing a universal approach of differences. [55] Ironically, this culminated in the adoption by the French Senate, on 15 March 2004, of a law banning pupils in state-run schools to wear any religious attire. [56]
Secularism it can be argued might lead to ignorance of other religions and in some instances might endanger the right to freedom of religion and belief.
5. Conclusion
This paper has sought to analyze the latest resurgence of anti-Semitism in France by looking at the problem from a number of perspectives including, historical, political and sociological. The examination of available data from different sources has established a direct link of causality between this phenomenon and political events. In particular, the Al Aqsa Intifada seems to have acted as a trigger for the resurgence of anti-Semitic violence.
Thus, the 'new anti-Semitism' is the consequence of the expression of solidarity by some individuals within the French Muslim community for the Palestinians or Bin Laden and their opposition to Israeli policy. Nevertheless, it has extended beyond the limits of mere freedom of expression and has taken the form of racial hatred and aggression towards the French Jewish community although the latter cannot legitimately be blamed for Israeli policy.
An examination of the existing legal machinery, both at the national and at the international level has not revealed any major gap in the system that could solely be responsible for the upsurge of racial violence. Thus, it was established that the events were not the direct result of a lack of adequate legislation but rather the manifestation of some deep-rooted problems within French society.
France came under much criticism for its initial failure to react to the resurgence of anti-Semitism, giving the impression that the government condoned the resurgence of this 'new anti-Semitism'.
The recent amendments to the French legislation on racism, coupled with the efforts of the government to combat violence at school and promote respect are to be much welcomed. It is hoped that these efforts will contribute to bringing awareness among the public to the fact that the expression of racial hatred is an offence punishable by law and that the imposition of greater sanctions will have a deterrent effect.
As Kenneth Jacobson, pointed out, 'we cannot outlaw hate but we can rally nations around a credo of tolerance. We can promote and reward morally responsible action from government leaders and punish failures.' [57]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
C. Cohn-Sherbok, Anti-Semitism, (Suton Publishing Limited, 2002).
P.R. Ghandhi, Blackstone's International Human Rights Documents, (Oxford University Press, 2002).
W. Hallo, Heritage: Civilisation and the Jews Source Reader, (Greenwood Publication Group, 1984).
B. Lewis, The Jews of Islam, (New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1984).
Articles
K. Boyle, & A. Baldaccini, 'A Critical Evaluation of International Human Rights Approaches to Racism' in S. Fredman, Discrimination and Human Rights, The Case of Racism, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 135-191.
K. Boyle , 'Hate Speech - The United States versus the Rest of the World', Maine Law Review, (2001) Vol. 53:2.
C. Bremner, 'France toughens stance on attacks on Jews', TimesOnline, (8 January 2003), website, www.timesonline.co.uk, accessed on 11 February 2003.
P. Broussard, 'Vers Israël ou l'Amerique, la tentation de l'étranger', Le Monde (20 September 2003).
E. Conan, 'Les chiffres noirs de l'antisémitisme', L'Express, (6 December 2001).
M. Court, 'Des Mesures pour faire reculer le racisme à l'école', Le Figaro, (28 February 2003).
G. Frankel, 'For Jews in France, a "kind of Intifada"', Washington Post, (16 July 2003).
J. Henley, 'France takes on new waves of anti-Semitism in schools', The Guardian, (1 March 2003).
A. Perraud, 'Antisémitisme: Le désarroi des juifs de France', 21 May 2003.
M. Robinson, 'Europe must fight anti-Semitism', International Herald Tribune, (19 June 2003).
X. Ternisien and N. Weill, 'Faut-il réviser la loi de séparation des Eglises et de l'Etat?', Le Monde, (17 January 2003).
_____________________, 'Mr Chirac annonce la création d'une autorité indépendante de lutte contre la discrimination, Le Monde, (24 May, 2003).
J. Vasagar, 'Attacks against Jews increase', The Guardian, (21 February, 2003).
F. Viviano, 'The Scarf that split a nation', Free Press, (11 November 1994), website, http://www.well.com/conf/media/SF_Free_Press/nov12/french.html, accessed on 17 March 2003.
S. Zappi, 'Le racisme progresse et les actes antisemites se multiplient', Le Monde, 29 March 2003.
NGO Reports
Centre Simon Wiesenthal - Europe, 'Principal Antisemitic Attacks in France 1 January - 12 May 2002, a copy of the report is at www.simonwiesenthal.com
____________________, Historic Wiesenthal Center UNESCO Conference, Response, Summer 2003, Vol. 24 No. 2, a copy of the report can be obtained on the SWC website.
Commission Nationale des Droits de l'Homme, 'Evaluation du Racism et de la Xénophobie' (reports 2000, 2001 and 2002), a copy of the report is available at www.commission-droits-hommes.fr
Conseil Représentatif des Institutions Juives de France, 'La lutte contre toute forme d'antisémitisme, de racisme, d'intolérance et d'exclusion', website, http://www.crif.org/index. php? menu=6&sm2=histo_lutte, accessed on 25 February 2003.
International Council on Human Rights Policy, 'Human Rights After September 11', (2002), a copy of the report is available at www.ichrp.org.
S. Samuels, Centre Simon Wiesenthal - Europe, 'Anti-Semitism2002 in France, 'Intifada' Import or Domestic Malaise?', (January 2002), a copy of the report is available on the website of the Wiesenthal Centre at www.simonwiesenthal.com
The Stephen Roth Institute, Tel Aviv University, 'Anti-SemitismWorldwide 2001/2002 - France', website http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/france.htm, accessed on 11 March 2003.
The American Jewish Committee, 'Anti-Semitism: An Assault on Human Rights', (2002), website, http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/Publications.asp?did=419&pid=989/990, accessed on 11 February 2002.
The Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, 'France - Anti-Jewish Activities and Significant Events', website, http://antisemitism.org.il/english/articles/article1.htm, accessed on 7 February, 2003.
The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, 'Fire and Broken Glass; the Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe', (New York, 2002) a copy of the report is available at www.lchr.org.
Government Sources
Israeli Government Secretariat, 'Manifestations of Anti-Semitism Around the World, Follow-up Report No. 5, (19 October 1993), website, http://mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0b0t0, accessed on 7 February 2003.
P. Lellouche, Rapport sur la proposition de loi n° 350 visant à aggraver les peines punissant les infractions à caractère raciste et à renforcer l'efficacité de la procédure pénale, (6 December 2002), a copy of this report is available at www.assemblee-nat.fr
Ministère de la Justice, 'Evolution des lois anti-racistes', (August 2001), website, http://www. Justice.gouv.fr / textfond/antirac.htm, accessed on 21 February 2003.
Ministère de l'Education Nationale, 'Dossier de Presse : l'école du respect', (9 October 2001), a copy of this report is available at www.education.gouv.fr
Ministère de l'Education Nationale, 'Installation du Comité national de réflexion et de proposition sur la laïcité à l'école, (Press Release of 28 January 2002), website, http://www.education.gouv.fr/presse/2002/laicitecp.htm
The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 'The International Commission for Combating Anti-Semitism', website, http://mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0m3e0, (1999), accessed on 7 February 2003.
Speeches
Jacobson K., 'Hearing: Escalating Anti-Semitic Violence in Europe', Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, United States Helsinki Commission, (22 May 2002), website, http://www.csce.gov/witness.cfm?briefing_id=217&testimony_id=285, accessed on 31 January 2003.
Raffarin, J.P., 'Speech before the CRIF' (25, January 2003), a transcript of the speech is available at http://www.premier-ministre. gouv.fr
Documents
Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l'Homme, Avis portant sur la proposition de décision-cadre du Conseil concernant la lutte contre le racisme et la xénophobie, présentée par la Commission européenne, website,
www.commission-droits- hommes.fr/AffichageAvis.cfm?IDAVIS=668&iClasse=
Fourteenth periodic reports of States parties to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, due in 1998: France, 05/07/99 CERD/C/337/Add.5 (State Party Report).
International Consultative Conference on School Education in relation with Freedom of Religion and Belief, Tolerance and Non-discrimination (Madrid, 23-25 November 2001)
available at http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/7/b/cfedu-home.html
OSCE Conference on Anti-Semitism, Vienna, 19 and 20 June 2003, Consolidated Summary, 18 July 2003, Doc. PC.DEL/883/03.
Message of the United Nations Secretary General on the occasion of the International Day for Tolerance (16 November 2002), UN Press Release, SG/SM/8492.
Cases
LICRA v. Yahoo!, Inc. (TGI, Interim Court Order, 20 November 2000).
Robert Faurisson v. France, Communication No. 550/1993, U.N. Doc. [CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993(1996)].
Selected Websites
ENDNOTES
[1] J.C. Burher, 'Américains et Israéliens quittent la conférence de Durban sur le Racisme', Le Monde, (Paris, 5 Sept. 2001).
[2] See for instance the recent report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, (LCHR) 'Fire and Broken Glass; the Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe', (New York, 2002) at www.lchr.org.
[3]C. Cohn-Sherbok, Anti-Semitism, (Gloucestershire, Suton Publishing Limited, 2002) Preface.
[4]Ibid.
[5] W. Hallo, Heritage: Civilisation and the Jews Source Reader, (Greenwood Publication Group, 1984) 76-79.
[6] LCHR n. 2 above.
[7] LCHR n. 2 above.
[8] Ben Barber, 'May a Good Year be Sealed: Tensions disturb the Jewish Paris Community', April 2004, at http://www.worldandi.com/specialreport/2004/april/Sa23819.htm
[9] According to a report by the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (NCCHR) submitted to the French PM in 2000, 372 anti-Semitic incidents were reported in 1990, there was then a decline down to 60 incidents in 1999 but in 2000, the number of reported incidents rose to 603 - 85% of which took place in the last quarter of the year. The report entitled 'Evaluation du Racism et de la Xénophobie' is available at: www.commission-droits-hommes.fr
[10] S. Samuels, 'Principal Anti-Semitic Attacks in France 1 January - 12 May 2002', Centre Simon Wiesenthal (SWC) - Europe, available at: http://www.simonwiesenthal.com.
[11] Ibid.
[12] See LICRA v. Yahoo!, Inc. (TGI, Interim Court Order, 20 Nov. 2000).
[13] J.P. Raffarin, French PM, Speech before the CRIF, (25 Jan. 2003) at www.premier-ministre.gouv.fr.
[14] Translated as 'send the Jews to the oven'. P.Lellouche, 'Rapport sur la proposition de loi n° 350 visant à aggraver les peines punissant les infractions à caractère raciste et à renforcer l'efficacité de la procédure pénale', (6 Dec. 2002), 9 - at www.assemblee-nat.fr.
[15] The Stephen Roth Institute, Tel Aviv University, 'Anti-Semitism Worldwide 2001/2002, France', website, http//:www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/france.htm, accessed on 11 March 2003.
[16] NCCHR n. 8 above.
[17] A summary of the report was published in the weekly Marianne, (17-23, Sept. 2001).
[18] This is confirmed by the NCCHR in its report on racism, n. 9 above. See also A. Perraud, 'Antisémitisme: Le désarroi des juifs de France', 21 May 2003.
[19] The Coordination Forum for Countering anti-Semitism, 'France - Anti-Jewish Activities and Significant Events', at http://antisemitism.org.il/english/articles/article1.htm, accessed on 7 February 2003.
[20] In Jean-Marie Le Pen's words 'libérer la France du carcan Européen'. More details about his program can be found on the official website of the FN at http://www.frontnational.fr.
[21] According to a Press Release published by the Jewish Agency for Israel, there was a 100% upsurge in immigration from France to Israel in the first 9 months of 2002 or 1542 French Jews immigrating to Israel compared to 749 in the first 9 months of the previous year, website, www.jafi.org.il/press/2002/act/act.13htm.
[22] Table based on data provided by the French Ministry of Justice - fines have been deliberately converted from French Francs to Euros by the author and thus they are only approximate.
[23] C. Bremer, 'France toughens stance on attacks on Jews', Timesoline, (8 Jan. 2003).
[24] Report by the SWC n. 9 above.
[25] François Bujon de l'Estang, French Ambassador in the United States, 'A Slander on France', Washington Post, (22 June 2002).
[26] This was expressed by the Prefect of Bouches-du-Rhône following the burning of a Jewish school in Marseilles; E. Conan 'Les chiffres noirs de l'antisémitisme', L'Express, (14 Mars 2000).
[27] 'Dispositif de prévention et de lutte contre les actes antijuifs' at www.archives.premier-ministre.gouv.fr/jospin_version3/fr/ie4/contenu/3281.htm.
[28] Lellouche n. 13 above.
[29] Law n° 2003-88 published in the Official Bulletin on 4 Feb. 2003.
[30] Bremer, n. 22 above.
[31] Author's translation. Full text of the PM speech is available on the website of the NCHR.
[32] A copy of the report is available on the website of the NCHR.
[33] Communiqué du Premier ministre 'Création d'une autorité indépendante chargée de lutter contre toutes les discriminations' et 'Lettre de mission de M. STASI' (2 June 2003) at www.le114.com/pres_geld/flash.php
[34] Law Proposal nº1488, full text at:
http://www.assemblee-nat.fr/12/propositions/pion1488.asp
[35] http://www.premier-ministre.gouv.fr/fr/p.cfm?ref=41383&d=1
[36] M. Court, 'Des Mesures pour faire reculer le racism à l'école', Le Figaro, (28 Feb. 2003).
[37] Ibid, interview with Iannis Roder, History and Geography teacher for the last 7 years in a North of Paris suburb High School.
[38] UNGA res. 260 (III), 9 Dec. 1948.
[39] UNGA res. 36/55, 25 Nov. 1981.
[40] UNGA res. 2106 (XX), 21 Dec. 1965.
[41] E/CN.4/804.
[42] UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/21 para. 158.
[43] SWC 'Historic Wiesenthal Center UNESCO Conference', Response, Summer 2003, Vol. 24 No. 2, available on the SWC website.
[44] Full conference report available on the OSCE website.
[45] Rome, 4.IX.1950.
[46] UN Doc. CERD/C/304/Add.91.
[47] This was notably expressed by Jules Ferry, the French Ministry of Education, J. Henley, 'France takes on new wave of anti-Semitism in schools', The Guardian, (1 March 2003).
[48] Conan, n. 26 above.
[49] SWC n. 9 above.
[50] UN Press Release SG/SM/8492.
[51] UN Doc. CERD/C/337/Add.5.
[52] 'Respect changes everything'; Ministère de l'Education Nationale, 'Dossier de Presse: l'école du respect', (9 Oct. 2001), available at www.education.gouv.fr
[53] These comments are drawn from the own experience of the author but also come out from press reports.
[54] Full text at www.legifrance.fr
[55] (Author's translation), Installation du Comité national de réflexion et de propositions sur la laïcité à l'école, Decree of 24 Jan. 2002, Ministère de l'Education Nationale, Press Release (28 Jan. 2002) at http://www.education.gouv.fr/presse/2002/laicitecp.htm
[56] http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnTexteDeJorf?numjo=MENX0400001L
[57] Jacobson K., Hearing: Escalating Anti-Semitic Violence in Europe, U S Helsinki Commission, (May 22 2002), http://www.csce.gov/witness.cfm?briefing_id=217 &testimony id=285, accessed on 31 January, 2003.
Home.