BRUSSELS - Let me start with two Belgian stories - unfortunately, not funny ones.
The first concerns Andre Flahaut, the Socialist defense minister of this country from 1999 to 2007. This past May, the man, who is not known to be a political genius, participated in a kind of anti-Israel street theater in the city of Nivelles. The event, organized by a far-left NGO on the town's weekly outdoor market day, was a reenactment of the nakba, as the Palestinians call the renaissance of Jewish statehood in the Land of Israel. The participants, duly divided into Palestinian victims and the Israeli soldiers who brutally forced them into trucks on their way to exile, were outfitted in kaffiyehs and army uniforms, respectively, and they performed enthusiastically under the eyes of bewildered Sunday shoppers.
Flahaut, who wasn't in costume, took the stage during the masquerade to deliver an emotional speech about justice and injustice, peace and war, the Socialist struggle for good against evil. In his comments, Flahaut made a direct link between Israel's occupation of the West Bank and his own ongoing fight against any form of "Nazism." The umbrella body of Belgian Jewry (CCOJB) in return accused him of delegitimizing Israel and described his remarks as anti-Semitic.
Flahaut took the unprecedented step of suing the CCOJB for slander (the case is still in court). And the reaction of the Belgian political class and media was unequivocal - silence, except for some criticism of the Jewish community for taking a position against free speech. The entire business had a farcical quality.
The second event was less farcical, but perhaps more revealing. Last July, I interviewed Louis Michel for the Belgian Jewish monthly Contact J. Unlike Flahaut, Michel, a leader of the Liberal Party, is a highly regarded statesman, a former Belgian foreign minister and the current European commissioner for development and humanitarian aid. We talked about human rights in the Palestinian territories. Michel claimed that the Israeli government shows no understanding of the matter and tramples the basic rights of the Palestinians. After a long tirade against Israeli actions in the West Bank, he burst into a passionate plea against what he saw as an intolerable mixing up by many Jews between legitimate criticism of a government and an assault against the very existence and legitimacy of the people and state this government represents: "I am a victim of this confusion, in the way I am accused of anti-Semitism each time I speak out against Israel's policies. I always was, I still am and I'll always be a genuine friend of Israel and of the Jewish community of my country, but I can no longer tolerate being insulted by members of the community."
These two tales are typical of the gap of understanding that divides Belgian Jews, indeed European Jews in general, and the national communities they belong to. The Jews often feel lonely, even abandoned, when they hear Israel subjected to public criticism, and they react angrily. Most politicians and commentators in turn fail to perceive anything but paranoia in their response. Michel and Flahaut genuinely do not see themselves as anti-Semitic, and believe they are sincere friends of Israel and the Jewish people. The Jews, on the other hand, are shocked by their attitudes toward Israel, and tend to see them both as enemies, who conceal their hatred of Jews under the cloak of opposition to Israel's government.
To be be clear: Whatever his intentions, Flahaut's comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany unequivocally falls under the general criteria of anti-Semitism, as defined in the working paper of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Michel, on the other hand, is in more of a grey area, as he has never been associated with actions or comments delegitimizing Israel or the very right of the Jews to political autonomy.
The Belgian political class does not understand the sensitivity of the Jewish community, which tends to see verbal attacks against "their" state as an avatar of the old threats, rooted in old prejudice, against their people. The Jews often do not grasp the difference between criticism of a sovereign state whose policies might be considered problematic - and sheer anti-Semitism. In this gap of perceptions lies the problem.
This is not only a Belgian problem, not even a solely Jewish problem. In the whole of Europe, the strong national ethos has given way to an array of antagonistic communal feelings and demands. It feels as if the effort to create a set of values shared by all has vanished, only to be overcome by particular identities fighting each other for mutually exclusive recognition and respect.
What is to be done? To be sure, putting an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be helpful. In the meantime, one should negotiate red lines compatible with a democratic way of life.
We Jews need to be more prepared to accept criticism in line with what Israelis themselves direct toward their own regime. But by the same token, Europeans should be careful not to confuse Israel with the Jewish citizens of Europe. Nor should they confuse criticism with xenophobia, and must distinguish between rejection of the ephemeral policies of an elected Israeli government and an attempt to deny Jews the freedom to their own state. It is not okay to deny Jews the human rights to which every people is entitled; it is okay to debate achieving a solution that will restore and preserve the human rights of both Palestinians and Israelis. These should be the red lines of the public discourse.
Claude Kandiyoti is a Brussels-based entrepreneur and the publisher of Contact J, a monthly of the Belgian Jewish community.
