The plan for the Irish Government to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism could “increase antisemitism”, an academic has said.
In early January, the then Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin announced Ireland’s endorsement of the non-legally binding Global Guidelines for Countering Antisemitism and the IHRA’s non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism.
In a press release, the Department of Foreign Affairs said the decision was taken "in the context of Ireland’s longstanding commitment to supporting freedom of religion or belief, equality and non-discrimination".
"At a time when we are witnessing a global rise in intolerance and antisemitism, combatting antisemitism is an increasingly important and visible part of this work," the statement read.
Ireland is relatively late to adopting this definition in comparison to many other countries, yet there are many across country who have doubts over whether it should be done.
On Moncrieff, Academics for Palestine member Dr Barry Cannon said the definition itself is not where the problems lie.
“The actual definition itself is not problematic and very few people would have issue with it,” he said.
“The problem is in the examples that they give, that's where the issues lie.
“There is this conflation between Israel and Judaism and Jewishness - for example, you know, basically any criticism of Israel is seen to be antisemitic and that causes a chilling effect on free speech.
“Basically [you] cannot say that what is happening in Gaza at the moment is genocide, because genocide is associated exclusively with the Holocaust.”
Palestinians walk through the destruction in the wake of an Israeli air and ground offensive in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)Dr Cannon said the definition is “very vague” and therefore it can be “open to interpretation”.
Another issue, he said, is that the IHRA definition is not legally binding.
“There were different resolutions adopted by the Bundestag, that's the German parliament, but they were not passed into law,” he said.
“So anybody who got on the wrong side of those, for example, some people signed a petition in support of the Palestinians and therefore were denied particular positions in German academia.
“They cannot recur to the law because it is not a binding resolution. it's only a recommendation.
“That's one of the difficulties with this particular definition being used is that it has not been adopted legally by any of the states which are actually applying it.”
"Blurs the boundaries"
Dr Cannon said that a lot of Jewish people who are not Zionists are being called antisemitic under this definition.
“Lots of Jewish people have actually been accused by people who are not Jewish of being antisemitic on the basis of this definition,” he said.
“Lots of Jewish people are not Zionists and do not agree with Israeli policies in Gaza and as a result are being accused of being antisemitic.
“So, in actual fact, this could increase antisemitism because it blurs the boundaries between antisemitism against Jewish people because of the fact that they're Jewish and criticism of the State of Israel and of Zionism in general.
“Many Jews have argued that it may make antisemitism worse, rather than curing it.”
A view of the Israeli national flag in front of the Israeli Embassy in Dublin. (Photo by Artur Widak/NurPhoto). 22 January 2021Dr Cannon said the Irish Government has a lot of questions to answer to justify “why this particular definition is seen as the panacea”.
He also said the Government need to be clear about how they intend to implement the new definition.
Listen back here:
Jewish star of David symbol in architecture. Image: Alamy
