The recently concluded international conference on combating antisemitism in Jerusalem sparked a public outcry and strong indignation at the presence of political leaders from European far-right parties, including Jordan Bardella (president of the National Rally in France) and Marion Maréchal, granddaughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen, a notorious antisemite and founder of the first European neo-Nazi party after the Second World War.
We can fully understand the indignation of some European and American Jewish organizations, as well as the criticism and predictable negative reactions in the Israeli and international press.
In this context, how can we combat antisemitism when the scourge exists today, especially among the ranks of the far left? Since the massacre of October 7, 2023, the Jewish state has been accused of “ethnic cleansing and colonization of Palestinian territories.” Can’t Israel alone denounce the deception and lies? How can we win friends? Where is the support for the legitimate cause of the Jewish state in the fight against Islamists who spread purely antisemitic messages on social media and elsewhere?
Since its inception, the State of Israel has sought a better understanding of its existential problems and to build alliances with European parties of all stripes. During the Labor governments, there were ideological commonalities and connivance within the framework of the Socialist International. Since 1977, all Likud-led governments, from former Prime Minister Menachem Begin to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have been reluctant toward contacts with far-right parties. They have failed to create solid alliances and have been content with cordial relations with their right-wing counterparts within a purely parliamentary framework.
Today, on both the left and the right, the extremes dominate and have become essential in international relations. The leaders of the far-left parties, who always deny being antisemitic, remain more anti-Israel than ever. Moreover, hatred of Zionism is the only common point between non-believing communists and the Islamists of Hamas, affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Their hypocrisy is gaining ground in public opinion and on university campuses, and this policy has become a good means for electoral gain.
How would Jewish institutions and the international press have reacted if the Israeli government had invited representatives of the communist parties, environmentalists, or feminist movements to this conference? Would they not have applauded?
The fight against antisemitism transcends party lines and must not be based on criteria of political exploitation. It is of profound concern to all democratic countries.
Of course, double standards also exist within the far right. It’s classic: people will support the Israelis because they are fighting the “same Islamist enemy,” and thus they will more easily argue the agenda based on the dangers of immigration.
We reject this extreme ideology, always remembering that the Israeli people are made up of immigrants from all over the world.
However, October 7, 2023, has completely changed the geopolitical landscape. Its repercussions also concern public diplomacy. It is the only tool for better understanding all strategic and media issues. Therefore, it is very important to invite all parties on the international political spectrum to Israel. Its representatives, from both the left and the right, should see the reality on the ground with their own eyes and not judge the Jewish state from a distance and in ignorance of the facts.
Certainly, we are neither naive nor duped, but we reject any kind of boycott. Every political party elected by universal suffrage is entitled to open a frank and sincere dialogue.
In the history of Israel, let us emphasize that the national interest sometimes prevails over moralistic considerations:
The first dilemma obviously concerned normalization with Germany immediately after the war. Was it possible to reconcile with Hitler’s collaborators?
The second questioned diplomatic and commercial relations with South Africa, which applied abject discrimination – apartheid.
The third dilemma concerns the refusal to recognize the Armenian genocide in order to preserve relations with Turkey, the first Islamic state to recognize the existence of the State of Israel.
All these examples and others express the complexity and constraints, the great dilemma of Israeli governments.
Despite all the mistakes made in the preparation of this international conference on antisemitism, and despite the justified criticism, this important symposium held in Jerusalem is undoubtedly a historic turning point in Israeli policy. Let us hope that it has had a favorable response from all participants.
As for Bardella, himself from a family of immigrants, he will have to take action and not be satisfied with empty slogans and vague promises. He will have to clearly and officially state:
- Vichy France is responsible for the deportation of Jews.
- The Holocaust of the Jews was not a “detail of the war.”
- The study of the Holocaust in all French schools is essential.
- The relentless fight against the scourge of antisemitism is a priority. All perpetrators, without exception, will be brought to justice.
- We support Israel’s fight against Islamist terrorists.
It is only after the implementation of these actions that we will be able to know whether Bardella has truly turned the heavy historical page of the National Front and will be able to continue the dialogue with the Israeli government.
In this way, he will restore confidence to the Jews of France and allow them – if they wish – to vote for his own party – this time, with conviction and without any regret.
