Conference of European Rabbis

5d •

Europe’s streets cannot become platforms for intimidation, incitement or the glorification of terrorism.

The Conference of European Rabbis is calling on European authorities to prosecute those who incite violence, hold organisers accountable when incitement repeatedly occurs, and ban organisations that repeatedly glorify terrorism.

Europe must enforce the law without fear or favour and protect the safety and dignity of all its citizens.

Read CER’s “A Call to End the Violent Hatred” Manifesto: https://lnkd.in/eRueUqGk

#Europe #EU #JewishLife #StopAntisemitism #StopHate

The Conference of European Rabbis Manifesto focuses narrowly on domestic European security while omitting the geopolitical context of the war in Gaza, creating a sharp division between local protection and global realities. [1, 2]

The Omission of Gaza

Narrow Scope: The statement treats European antisemitism as an isolated domestic issue.
Global Silence: It avoids mentioning the humanitarian crisis or military actions in Gaza.
Political Strategy: By staying silent, the CER avoids taking a foreign policy stance that could divide its own leadership or members. [1, 2]

The "Reaction" Argument

The Claim: Critics argue that rising street protests and anger in Europe are a direct emotional or political reaction to events in Gaza.
The Danger: Viewing local harassment as a natural "reaction" can risk justifying or minimizing unlawful intimidation.
The Principle: European law treats targeting local minority communities based on foreign conflicts as a violation of civil order, regardless of the trigger.

Critical and Logical Assessment

Separation of Safety and Politics: The CER argues that a citizen’s safety in Europe must never depend on foreign wars. Logically, holding local citizens or religious sites responsible for actions of a foreign government is a form of collective blame.
Incomplete Picture: While the CER is right to demand legal protection for vulnerable communities, ignoring the root catalysts of public rage makes their analysis incomplete. Security laws stop violence, but they do not solve the underlying political grievances driving social polarization.
Accountability vs. Free Speech: Calling for the ban of organizations requires clear legal proof of incitement. Blurring the line between legitimate political protest against foreign military actions and illegal antisemitic hate speech remains a core tension in European courts.