The fourth conference of the Global Forum Against Anti-Semitism took place in Jerusalem this week, for the first time under the patronage of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In a break with the past, the foreign ministry is of the opinion today that combating anti-Semitism is an Israeli interest; but subjugating the struggle against anti-Semitism to Israel's diplomatic agenda could be problematic. It is reasonable to assume that Israel will not allow activity against anti-Semitism in a particular country to undermine its interests in that country.

There has been a reversal in recent years in the way the struggle against anti-Semitism is viewed in the foreign ministry. In the past, the subject was seen as belonging to the Jewish world at large, regarded as an inferior arena in Israeli diplomatic circles. The ministry has since discovered, however, that playing the anti-Semitism card can produce unprecedented diplomatic results. It began with the 2004 Berlin Conference, which for the first time affirmed the Israeli government claim that criticism of its policies was sometimes used as a camouflage for the expression of anti-Semitic attitudes. In 2005, the United Nations General Assembly - traditionally a hostile place for Israel - passed by an overwhelming majority an Israeli proposal to declare January 27 as International Holocaust Remembrance Day. And just last month, in light of the Tehran conference, the General Assembly voted to condemn the phenomenon of Holocaust denial.

Israel's decision to coordinate activities dealing with the problem of anti-Semitism is seen in international circles as entirely natural. It is not at all certain, however, that the Israeli and the Jewish interest in fighting anti-Semitism will always coincide. For example, will Israel be prepared to risk compromising its relations with an important country just because there are anti-Semitic or neo-Nazi elements active there? Israeli foreign policy is hardly likely to allow the struggle against anti-Semitism to take place everywhere at all times with equal intensity.

	Advertisement

Another - related - question is whether the struggle against anti-Semitism should be the responsibility of the foreign ministry, or in the hands of a minister who deals with Diaspora affairs. Natan Sharansky, who was minister without portfolio with responsibility for Diaspora affairs in the years 2003-2005, prefers the latter. Sharansky claims that an elected minister is much more suitable than professional diplomats to coordinate between all the different Jewish organizations and personal egos.

In practice, however, that ministerial portfolio has been vacant for over a year, and there was even a recent decision to close the unit for Diaspora affairs that operated within the Prime Minister's Office. This was the background to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's decision to take the Global Forum under her wing. Had she not done so, it is doubtful whether the struggle against anti-Semitism would have attracted any attention at all from the present Israeli government.

The foreign ministry wants to retain control of the Forum, even if a new minister for Diaspora affairs is appointed. It is true, as the Israeli diplomats claim, that the foreign ministry is the only governmental body that has the organizational ability and the global reach to pull together a conference on anti-Semitism at an international level. That ability was proven by the unprecedented number of participants the ministry was able to attract, with less than three months to organize the event, and no budget to begin with. Credit for the achievement goes largely to the new Department for Combating Anti-Semitism, headed by Aviva Raz-Shechter, and the Department for Jewish Communities, headed by Akiva Tor.

This week, for the first time, the list of participants included foreign ambassadors, and a non-Jewish British parliamentarian by the name of John Mann. An outstanding feature of the conference was its practical and workmanlike approach. Apart from the regular sessions and speeches, there were seven working groups on this occasion. Two days of discussions produced a long list of proposals for combating anti-Semitism in different parts of the world, and in the media and academia.

The legal working group, for instance, shared ideas for special legislation on the subject of anti-Semitism, for an international network of jurists against anti-Semitism, for a professional database, and for activity in the United Nations and other international organizations.

The foreign ministry hopes to convene the Forum twice a year, and to establish an apparatus for monitoring the execution of its recommendations during the year. Only one thing remains to be seen: Whether the finance ministry will provide the necessary budget for the foreign ministry to realize its vision.