Antisionism

The antisionism (or anti-Zionism) indicates the opposition to the Sionisme and, by extension, the hostility with creation, then with the maintenance or the extension of the State of Israel as a State Juif for various reasons, as well ideological as political or religious.

Definitions and types of antisionism

The antisionism consists of an opposition to the Zionism is with the political movement having for object the constitution of a Jewish State in Palestine and with the political ideology which affirms a " droit" with the establishment of such a Jewish State. The antisionism appears in reaction to the Sionisme itself appeared at the end of the 19th century. The confrontation on this ground of the modern Jewish national movement to the arabo-Palestinian part goes up with the Années 1880. In addition to the antisionism in the Arab countries, the movement also exists in the European countries by solidarity with the Palestinian people, being coupled sometimes with drifts anti-semites.

History

Before the creation of the State of Israel

Jewish Antisionism

At the end of the 19th century and with the whole beginning of the 20th century, the antisionism in Palestine is on the one hand the fact of the orthodoxe religious Jewish population, on the other hand, that of the Arab population.

Alain Dieckhoff distinguishes as for him the not-Zionism from the anti-Zionism to indicate the non-adhesion of the Jews to the Zionist project.

The Jewish population of the time is mainly made up of Jews attached to the tradition, and very piles. The opposition to the Zionism is then more important with Jerusalem than in the remainder of the country, in particular in the district of Méa Shéarim, historical quarters of the monks traditionalists, the Haredim of the sainte^city,.

Indeed, the orthodoxe rabbis were hostile with the Zionism, of a theological hostility: because they thought that if God had decided dispersion of the Jewish people, one did not have to go against this turning which the history had taken and since, the religion prescribed only waiting of the Messie. But these same rabbis were also hostile with the laic character of the movement Zionist.

However, as of 1840, in the monks Ashkénaze S of Eastern Europe appeared current for which it is a divine command for the Jews to settle out of Holy Land. In 1891, it is on this basis that an association Zionist nun, the Mizrahi, is formed.

Already, the Jewish pre-nationalism of the Years 1840 - 1880, Messianic than national, forces to establish in Eretz Israel a Jewish community which answers the biblical commands. Bensoussan, the Zionism vis-a-vis its detractors, op.cit Différents rabbis preach the return in Israel to hasten the arrival of the Messiah, the such Alkalaï rabbi of Sarajevo, Kalisher of Prussia, Natonek of Hungary who adopt modernity to perennialize the Judaism. Bensussan, COp cit. p. 35 & 37; Henry Laurens op.cit. ; Anne Gringerg p. 26 Certain historians of the Yishouv (Ben Zion Dinur, Itzhak Baër) think that it is the bond with the ground of Israel which preserved the Jewish people. For what it is necessary to add the thinkers of the religious Zionism then: Shmuel Haïm Pram, of the movement religious Zionist Mizrahi, and Martin Buber, Gershom Sholem, Shmuel Hugo Bergmann, Judah Magnes and association Brit Shalom, founded in 1926.

The new Jewish institutions are then badly perceived by the Jews very pious autochtones of Palestine, which, brings back Maurice Kriegel, invite “ to break any relation, at the price even of tearing of the family ties, with whoever belongs to the Jewish community governed by the new institutions Zionists ”.

The Jewish antisionism concerns mainly religious reasons: the character laic, political, modern, of the Zionism is not shared by the most religious Jews within the indigenous Jewish population, which designs Israel like the “Holy Land” following the example Christians for Jerusalem and neighborhood, named the “Holy Land”. The contacts of the religious Jews with the first like the vague second of immigration are quasi non-existent. The historical Yishouv speaks then about “fight against the Zionism when this one grows until invading the Holy Land”.

Criticisms are sometimes very violent with respect to the Zionism, shown “ to divert the Jews of the Judaism and to corrupt their heart ”.

Attempts of the representatives of the immigration Zionist, whose Haïm Weizmann, to represent the whole of the Jews of Palestine brings tensions then. The rabbinical authorities of the Jews autochtones are divided on the funds brought by the world Organization Zionist to the yeshivoth. In 1921, an assembly creates a rabbinical structure intended to unify those resulting from the Othoman presence, in the shape of two stations of chief rabbis, a Ashkénaze and a Sépharade. But the tensions reappear then with the nomination of the first chief rabbi ashkénaze, the rabbi Kook, rather favorable to the institutions Zionists. The founded orthodoxe movement in 1912, the Agoudath Israel, then refuses to maintain the relationship with the Jewish National council organized by the representatives Zionists. According to the Agoudath Israel, carried out in particular by the Sonnenfled rabbi, the pious Jews cannot collaborate with the Council which would have emitted “ a solemn proclamation which deposits God and the Torah like sovereigns of the Jewish nation ”.

In February 1924, the Sonnenfeld rabbi subjects a memorandum to the King Hussein, to have the guarantees that the Juifs orthodoxe autochtones will be legitimately consulted on the future of Palestine. Guarantees of peaceful coexistence are then brought in the text: “ We ensure His Majesty which the Jewish population refers to its neighbors with a fraternal harmony everywhere where it exists, and out of Holy Land also we will conform to this tradition and will collaborate in the future with all the inhabitants in the construction and the prosperity of the ground for a blessing and a peace for all the ethnicities”.

However, starting from the Years 1930, the difficulties of finding a land of welcome, for the Jews of Europe persecuted and constrained with the exile, lead them to re-examine their critical position with respect to the Zionism and of the project of construction of the Jewish State. They then start talks with the parties Zionists to organize immigration. Thus Isaac Breuer, one of the principal leaders of the religious party Agoudat, hitherto adversary of the Zionist project, creates it the movement Poalei Agoudat Israel, which the majority of the members leave for Palestine. But some refuse to share the Zionist project, policy, and create a group with share, Edah Aredit, literally the “Craignants God” whose center is in Jerusalem.

From the years 1930, consequence of persecutions of the Jews in Europe, the orthodoxe movements adopt the theses Zionists, even if, that is not the case of the orthodoxe extremists (haredim): the orthodoxe movement Agoudath Israel knows a scission in 1938, whose the minority antisionist is detached from the haredim.

Arab Antisionism

It appears as of the end of the XIX {E} century in the area of Palestine, with the development of Jewish immigration. The antisionism is quite present in all the actions of Arab resistance to the English, who were organized by the large Mufti of Jerusalem as of the Années 1920, and which are also actions of resistance to the Zionism. Since the Accords Sykes-Barb indeed, which were signed between France and Great Britain in 1920, and which put an end to the project of large Syria including the province of Palestine, large Mufti Al-Husseini becomes the main leader of the current antisionist of which he is the initiator. The antisionism bursts even more openly at the time of the great revolt of Palestine of 1936, which was caused and organized by the Large Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Al-Husseini, giving to the antisionism religious aspects. In 1936, it is about a revolt against the English at the time where they control Palestine, since the end of the Ottoman Empire, insofar as the English, with the Déclaration Balfour allowed Jewish immigration. Revolt against the English, consequently, which has character openly antisionist, because it is a question of preventing the creation of a Jewish State.

Palestinian Antisionism

At the time of the beginnings of the movement Zionist in Palestine with the end of and the beginning of the 20th century, certain movements and Arab representatives consider an alliance with the movement Zionist.

For example Fayçal ibn Hussein, the son of Hussein ibn Ali, sherif of Mecque, which had helped the Arab revolt against the Othomans, signs an agreement with Chaim Weizmann at the time of the conference of peace in Paris in 1919. The agreement, underlining the bonds linking the people Jew and Arabic, supports their closer cooperation in the development of the Arab States and Palestine. The agreement also supports the Déclaration Balfour and wants to encourage the emigration of the Jews towards Palestine on a broad scale, enabling them to establish colonies and offering means to them to cultivate the ground.

For a certain number of reasons, the agreement is not carried out. On the one hand, Fayçal had put for condition at its support for the Balfour declaration the realization of the British promises on the independence of the Arab nations, promises which were not held. Moreover, it has only weak supports on this position. The Palestinian Arab leaders, among whom Large the Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Al-Husseini, rejects this agreement reached on their behalf. The Arab population of Palestine also rejects all that would separate Palestine from the world arabo-Moslem. While a Jewish minority has existed in the area for several centuries, Palestinian Arabic is strongly opposed to the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish State created by immigration, and in fact to any immigration which would call into question the Arab majority to Palestine. Thus, Jewish immigration on small scales, the such first aliyah of the Years 1880, is accepted and seen favorably for economic reasons, but the movements of immigration to more large scales were denounced and fought.

Once the Balfour declaration clearly poses the project of Jewish national hearth in Palestine more than one simple encouragement with Jewish immigration, the Arab opposition is reinforced. Confrontations proceed in the Années 1920 (riots of 1920 and 1929) and 1930 (activities of Aldine Izz Al-Qassam, movement Al-Qaff Al-Aswad or the Great Arab Revolt of 1936-1939).

In Europe

In the beginning, the Zionism, laic political movement, do not achieve the unanimity at the Jews, because it meets a strong opposition on behalf of part of the religious Jews. But the bond of the Jewish people to the ground of Israel is however very extremely as well at part of the socialist Jews, as for a good portion of the religious Jews which, more and more, are perceived like a nation, because they are regarded more and more as such in the movement of nationalities in Europe Bensoussan op.cit. ; “Zionism vis-a-vis its detractors”. The religious antisionism does not relate to nevertheless all the Judaism: part of the monks are also Zionists.

During the British mandate in Palestine, certain British mediums remain hostile with the Zionist project, in particular by fear of an increasing opposition of Arab nationalism to Great Britain. After the “great Arab revolt” in Palestine (at the end of 1935-1939), this current becomes majority within the British cabinet. It will lead to the adoption of the White paper of 1939. This one envisages a unit State judéo-Arabic in 1949. It envisages also a strong limitation of Jewish immigration. The State which must be created in 1949 will be thus with Arab majority.

Before the rise of the Fascism in Europe in the Years 1930 and the Second world war which sees the triumph of the Nazisme and its racial Politique, a majority of the Jews does not adhere to the idea of a Jewish State. Indeed, the Jews of Europe, before the Nazism, divide themselves roughly into four categories:

the Communist S and Socialiste S still says at the time social democrats in many countries which await the going beyond of the problem of persecutions towards the Jews of the realization of an equality between all the people by the going beyond of the nations realized by the Internationalisme Communiste or the Socialisme to come. Political movement which in Poland founds the Bund where mainly the Socialists with also Communists find themselves. They are also the Jews which in the other European countries join the rows of the various Communist parties.
the liberal Jews, which believe in a viability of the political solution within the democratic nations, is the assimilation because of citizenship granted to the Jews, which would be likely to put an end to the historical Antisémitisme.
the religious Jews which await the redemption and safety with the arrival of the Messie at the end of times, which are represented by the traditional Judaïsme: the meeting of all the people with Jerusalem as announced with Messianic peace. A part, most orthodoxe, are not Zionists, even antisionists, however that part of the religious Jews, are also Zionists, because of the historical link of the Jews to the ground of Israel (which the historians describe: Walter Lacquerer, Georges Bensoussan, Elie Barnavi, A. Gruynberg, etc).
the Zionists itself, whose majority pole is socialist

The antisionism also takes over existing traditional anti-Judaism in the Christian mediums (Jesuits in particular) and is grafted sometimes on the anti-semitism. Indeed the topic antisionist appears at the same time as the 1st Congress Zionist organized by Herzl in Basle (1898). Lastly, the antisionism is a topic very present in the circles of extreme-right-hand side and ultra catholic line, coupled to anti-semitism.

Soviet Antisionism

Starting from the end of the Years 1920, the Zionism is compared in Soviet Union with a “middle-class nationalism” and to speak in praise of it among the Jews is prohibited. During the years of being able of Joseph Stalin of 1927 to 1953, the Jews are frequently denounced like Zionists, although the majority of them at that time were not it. After the creation of Israel, many Soviet Jews start to favorably judge Israel, this movement raising of the tensions with the Soviet capacity which sees in the Zionism a form of disloyalty.

At the time them last years to be able of Stalin, between 1948 and 1953, the anti-semitism and the official antisionism intensify.

After having supported Israel at its beginnings, and to have helped it to arm itself, at the time of the Israeli-Arab war of 1948-1949, the USSR changes position to support the Arab countries and their liberation movements main road against the western powers present in the past in the area. And more and more, the USSR will leave free-course to a propaganda antisionist perceived more and more like not stripped of the features characteristic of the anti-semitism. The French academic André Taguieff sees there one of the “ sources on the left of the current hatred of the Jews ”.

War of 48 with that of 1967

The Arab countries always present a hostility to the maintenance of the State of Israel.

However, at the time of the independence of the State of Israel, some personalities, like king Abdallah of Jordan, however positively see the integration of the Jewish community in an Arab State under its control.

The more contemporary antisionism in the Arab world has various ideological bases: local nationalism, side-Arabism, Islamism, socialism, or anticolonialism. The principal objections with the Zionism which the various Arab antisionisms have jointly are that the Palestinian ground was taken to them in an illegal way by the British Empire (via the Balfour declaration) and consequently by Israel, initially in 1948 then in 1967, process which is seen prolonged by the occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

Simultaneously with the rise of a feeling anti-Zionist in the Western countries, seat a hostility in Israel takes on the international scene. During the Years 1950 and 1960, made Israel of important efforts to maintain good relationships with the all new States of Africa and Asia, and the hostility in Israel remains confined in the world arabo-Moslem and the communist bloc. This situation changes radically during the Années 1970.

From 1967 with the agreements of Oslo

The conflict of 1967 is one of the factors which modify the reports/ratios of Israel to a great number of nations. The phenomenon is amplified with the decline of the American prestige which follows the war of Vietnam and the weight growing of the producing oil nations. While feelings anti-Westerners take seat in Africa, the Soviet Union, China and Cuba take a more important diplomatic place.

Thereafter, the Palestinian nationalist movements, the laic movements (like the Fatah), those of influence Marxists (in particular PFLP) then, in the years 1990, those of islamist tendencies, adopt a general line anti-Zionist more or less marked. In Egypt, this movement is followed by the Muslim brothers.

The tendency anti-Zionist appears at the beginning of the Années 1970 by organizations like the Organization of African Unity and the Mouvement of non-aligned the, which vote for resolutions condemning the Zionism and comparing it to racism and apartheid. In November 1975, the General meeting of the United Nations votes for the resolution 3379 which presents the Zionism like “a form of racism”. The resolution is voted by 72 votes against 35, and 32 abstentions. The 72 votes are those of the worldwide Arab, 12 other States whose population is mainly Moslem (of which Turkey), 12 communist States, 14 African States not-Moslems, and 14 other States (of which Brazil, India, Mexico and Portugal).

Case of Iran

The Iran, since the Islamic revolution of 1979, regards the State of Israel as illegitimate, and by the expression “entity Zionist indicates it”.

Before this date, Iran however maintains the cordial diplomatic relations with Israel since the creation of the State, in particular under the Pahlavi dynasty. Iran is one of the first nations to recognize Israel, and is then regarded as one of its supports in the Muslim world (with Turkey). This period of good agreement is intersected by the election with Mohammad Mossadegh, which reconsiders this recognition. The mode of the Shah does not recognize Israel formally, but a permanent delegation is established in Teheran, which takes the role of semi-official embassy. The economic relations between the two countries are important, in particular on the oil market. After 1967, the relations become more tended and Iran votes for resolution 3379 in 1975 of the General meeting of the United Nations which associates the Zionism with a form of racism. The two countries keep forms of military cooperation however.

The opposition to Israel in general and the Zionism in particular comes from the Ayatollah Khomeini who declares Israel “enemy of Islam” during his countryside against the Shah. After the second phase of the Iranian revolution, Iran reconsiders any form of recognition of the Hebrew State and cut all official diplomatic relations. Reports/ratios attest however that Israel continues to provide a military aid to Iran during its conflict with Iraq, for an amount estimated at 2,5 billion dollars.

The Ayatollah Khamenei, then the reformist Mohammad Khatami, maintain a rejection of the existence of Israel. The first indicates Israel as a “cancerous tumor which must be isolated area”, and the second speaks about “illegitimate State”. Mohammad Khatami insists however in same time so that the Jews feel “in safety in Iran”. With funerals of the pope Jean-Paul II, the Israeli president Moshe Katsav, of Iranian origin, affirms to have been able to tighten the hand and to discuss with Mohammad Khatami, which the latter will deny.

Other sources indicate that Iran undertakes a bringing together with Israel, which would include an official recognition presented to the United States. The terms of the Iranian proposal would have been rejected by the United States.

In 2006, the relations with Israel harden with the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Calling into question the reality of the Jewish genocide, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad estimates that the duty of repair returns to the Western nations and refuses that Palestine remains the place for a Jewish State:

Certains European countries says in an insistent way that during the Second world war, Hitler burned million Jews and put them in concentration camps. Any historians, commentator or scientist who give this in doubt is imprisoned or condemned. Although we do not accept this declaration, if we suppose it true, if the European countries were honest, they should give part of their territory in Europe - for example in Germany, Austria or elsewhere - to the Zionists, and the Zionists could found their State in Europe. Offer part of Europe, and we will support you.

In 2006 and 2007, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad multiplies the declarations inviting “to sweep Israel of the chart” (disappearance which it compares, thereafter, with the collapse of the Soviet Union).

Since the agreements of Oslo

In 1991, the international situation is modified by the collapse of the Soviet Union as well as the first War of the Gulf which reinforces the American influence. Under the pressure of Israel and the United States, resolution 4686 of December 16th, 1991 reconsiders the conclusions of resolution 3379. The General meeting decides with 115 votes against 25,13 abstentions and 17 delegations absent. Thirteen of the 19 Arab countries, of which some engaged in negotiations with Israel, vote against the resolution. Six others are absent. No Arab country votes in favor of the resolution and PLO denounces the vote. All the communist ex-States and the majority of the African countries vote the abrogation of the conclusions of resolution 3379 of 1975. Only three nonMoslem countries vote against this revision: Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam. However, only a country whose population is mainly Moslem votes the revision, Albania, while the others abstain from or are not present at the time of the vote.

In April 1996, PLO modifies its charter which aimed at a Palestinian State on the whole of the Holy Land. However, the rallying with the concept of Jewish State among intellectuals and policies Palestinian make debate.

Today

Arab and Moslem side

The voices which most strongly protest against the Zionism come today mainly from the whole of the parties Palestinians, and the majority of the Moslem countries. Jordan, Egypt, Turkey recognized Israel but not like country of the Jewish people. The Arab League today was declared ready to recognize Israel in exchange of the withdrawal of Israel of all the occupied territories in 1967 and exchange of the creation of a viable Palestinian State and whose Jerusalem East is the capital. The movements such as the Hamas, the Hezbollah and Al-Qaida call with the destruction of Israel, not admitting the existence of the Jewish State. However, these movements represent only the radical wing of the Arab antisionism.

In Europe

Today, the current antisionist in Europe appears by organizations such as the Juifs Europeans for a peace fair (JEPJ), the French Jewish Union for peace, the Union of the Jewish Progressists of Belgium (UPJB), the Réseau of the Jews against the occupation (Italy) and the organization Jews for Justice for Palestinians (the United Kingdom) which fight against the Zionism within the meaning of policy colonialist at the expense of the Palestinian people.

In Israel

Today, the antisionism in Israel is represented by a religious Jewish current and a laic current. In the laic current there are various movements like Hadash (Communist party), in the Arab population of origin mainly, and in other forms, within a fraction of the Israeli revolutionary left like Matzpen or the intellectuals of the Olga call (in particular like Michel Warschawski, in favor of a State Bi-national). Certain politicians or historians hold of the positions antisionists while calling into question the relevance of fundamental laws establishing a preference for the Jews in Israel, such Ilan Pappé or Meron Benvenisti.

Also, there exists always a fort running antisionist among the Jews haredim (ultraorthodoxe), justifying it by not arrived of the Messiah, whether it is in Israel or in the diaspora. Moreover, during the creation of Israel in 1948, the pact between the Zionists and Haredim was that the latter did not take part in the military service not to guarantee this ideology. This pact perdure still nowadays and creates a cleavage within the Israeli company between the laic ones and the monks.

On the other hand, in other religious currents, Daniel Lindenberg estimates that “ the religious ultra-orthodoxe current which was antisionist is this " today; Judaism intransigeant" who expresses in the colonization of the West Bank, an enthusiasm pioneer of which it points out that it for a long time deserted the laic camp Zionist ”.

The Jewish character of the State of Israel is disputed by the political representatives of the Palestinians citizens of Israel, like Azmi Bishara. The latter assert a Constitution which would give of Israel “a A report on all its citizens”. The leader-writer Avraham Tal brings back at the end of 2006 that the leaders of the Arab minority in Israel call more and more into question of the bases of the Jewish character of the State of Israel, in what it describes as “declaration of war”.

Some of the requests presented in these “visions” are new, like the defamatory calls to guarantee to the Arab minority the right to veto on decisions of national importance, a delegation separated in all the international institutions, and other things of this kind. There are also calls to change the flag and the national anthem, with a return in abandoned villages and to the equality in the rights to immigration in Israel

Avraham Tal worries about the demographic consequences such claims, estimating that they lead to the renunciation of a Jewish national hearth.

Lastly, one also finds not-Zionists who affirm that, even if the creation of Israel could be an error because of the privileged statute which it granted to the Jews with respect to the not-Jews, the danger posed by the Arab anti-semitism is insurmountable, and which a return to the status quo handle is not possible. Holding from this point of view plead simply for a Pacific regulation of the current conflict. It is in particular the case of the rabbis Elazar Menachem Shach or Avigdor Miller, which wrote several works on this subject.

In the United States

Today, there does not exist any more fundamental opposition of the orthodoxe monks to the Zionist project except some marginal currents the such current “Neturei Karta”. There exists indeed with the the United States a Jewish antisionist but very minority current, represented on the one hand by orthodoxe Jewish organizations which dispute the Zionism in the name of the fundamental values of the Judaism (Neturai karta, True Torah Jews,…), and in addition Jewish movements progressists opposed to the colonization of Palestine. Demonstrations of Jews antisionists joined together several tens of thousands of people.

International Antisionism

Many among the most important ethical authorities of the 20th century contributed to the debate on the Zionism, with, for some among it, like Mahatma Gandhi, the expression of an opposition to the movement Zionist.

Zionism and racism

At the time of the Conference of Durban in 2001, several movements engaged in the support for the Palestinians allotted to the Zionism a racist character.

The Palestinian academic Edward Saïd, personally taking positions antisionists by his wish of single State on the whole of geographical Palestine, then at the end of his life for a stage of two States side by side, strongly criticized what he judges like a wave of anti-semitism pulled by the antisionism, by denouncing the Arab intellectuals fascinated by Roger Garaudy.

According to Yakov Rabkin, Israel also contributes to generate the anti-semitism in the world. Indeed, Israel speaking officially in the name of the Jewish people (whereas only the Torah should link these people), includes voluntarily or not, all the Jews of the world by their actions - soldiers inter alia, thus generating an amalgam between the Jews and the Zionists.

Antisionism and anti-semitism

In France, the leader-writer of the newspaper the Point, Claude Imbert, written in 2004: “ the anti-semitism is of nothing a national passion. But the fact is that, in its alternative Islamiste, an anti very minority Judaïsme, moreover condemned by the French Moslem institutions, prevails indeed in some waste lands of the nation. More strange, it is even profiled, behind a poisonous antisionism, at a quarter of clerks of the French left the evocation of an international plot where the Jewish State, " Small Satan" , the hand gives to the " Large Satan" American crûment points out propaganda anti-semite of the Nazism ”.

Certain historians and analysts like Anne Grynberg, G. Bensoussan or the Israeli professor of political sciences Ilan Greilsammer ^, estimate that the antisionism does not admit only the only people which are not entitled to an political organization, and a political existence, that is to say the Jewish people, which concerns according to them the Antisémitisme. G. Bensoussan recalls that far from putting an end to the diaspora, the Jewish national movement on the contrary contributed to reinforce it by conceiving a laicized Jewish identity.

Or Antoine Spire, of the national management of the League of the human rights: “ Today, the antisionism, even if he does not want to be anti-semite, aims not only the oppressive policy of Israel against the Palestinians, but also Israel and its bond with its supports as a diaspora which one shows without always going there to see inconditionnality; he comes from there to challenge the existence even Jewish State. It is there that can tie the bond between antisionism and anti-semitism: antisionism with the wish of disappearance of the Hebrew State, it has only one wire there, and of the disappearance of the Hebrew State to the hatred of those which militate for the right to the existence of the State of Israel, there is only one step ”.

According to the French sociologist Pierre-André Taguieff, the charge of racism with regard to the Zionism is unfounded.

The Ruffin report/ratio, given to French the Prime Minister judges that it emerges a form of anti-semitism per procuration which constitutes the radical antisionism strongly represented within a mobility of extreme left altermondialist and green.

French justice distinguishes what raises of an allowed criticism of the Zionism even if it is outrageous what concerns the anti-semitism (prohibited by the French law) but the limits were not clearly fixed by the court of appeal.

In 2005, the European Observatory of the racist and xenophobe phenomena (EUMC), which belongs to the the Council of Europe, defines a relation between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism. It specifies which are according to him the manners of attacking Israel or the Sionisme which are likely to raise of the Antisémitisme.

The feeling antisionist with the international scales, just as the antisionism within the States, follows mainly the events of the Middle East. Thus, the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 revives the antisionism in certain countries.

The question of the antisionism to the the United Nations

The Zionism was condemned on November 10th, 1975 by the General meeting of the United Nations in the resolution 3379 which in its preambles proclaims the Zionism a “ racist ideology and imperialist ” and states in its conclusion that “ the Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination ”. The conclusion of this resolution is cancelled on November 10th, 1991 by the General meeting. Kofi Annan, general secretary of UNO, will publicly disapprove the resolution of 1975 by describing it as “lamentable demonstration of Antisémitisme”.

Religious Antisionism

Christian Antisionism

Georges Bensoussan reports that the first form of antisionism is contemporary birth of the Zionism and first Congress Zionist organized by Theodor Herzl:

the Jesuits, the first, launch topic plot Zionist in February 1898 in their body Civilta Cattolica. “Jewish plot”, the Jesuits pass quickly to the “plot world Zionist”, and open, by doing this, the way with the fabulous career of a forgery of which they are however not the authors.

The topic of the “plot Zionist” is inherited the history of the counter-revolution, takes form at the time of the first congress Zionist (at Basle, 1897), and when in France begins the Affaire Dreyfus.

The “Théorie of the plot” sees in the plot the key of the History. One of its major forms was the topic developed as of the 19th century of a “world Jewish conspiracy”.

The Jesuits thus prepare the ground for the Protocoles of Wise of Sion, celebrates false compound by the secret police of the Tsar. Then the “conspiracy” Zionist will be comparable with a Jewish revolution, identified with the revolution Bolshevik, within the framework of the propaganda anticommunist which uses at the same time of the “Protocols” and resorts to the vision conspirationnist of the history.

Moslem Antisionism

The anti-Zionism mulsulman rests on the anti-Judaism and the problem of “the ground of Islam”.

Anti-Judaism : Following the refusal of the Jews of Médine to convert with the new religion and the massacres which resulted from this, certain passages of Coran are very critical:

Sourate 5-60-64 And the Jews say: (the hand of God is closed!) That their own hands are closed, and cursed they are to have said it

Sourate 4 - 155 (cursed We them) because of their rupture of engagement, them mécréance with the revelations of God, their unjustified murder of the prophets

Don't Sourate 5-63-79 Why the rabbis and the doctors (of the religious Law) prevent them holding of the untrue remarks and from eating illicit profits? How their actions are thus bad!

“ground of Islam” : Coran considers any territory having been managed would be this one day by Moslems like a ground belonging to Islam and where this last with the obligation to reign politically. This relates to not only Israel but also Spain, India, old Othoman Eastern Europe and many other countries. The not-Moslems are then tolerated with a statute of Dhimmi.

The Muslim community has, according to the times, taken these verses with relativism or literally. With the decline of the Sufism and the rise of the Salafisme, the current trend is rather with a reading with the first degree.

Random links: