Thread by @DovWaxman

#AmnestyInternational’s accusation that Israel is guilty of #apartheid is not antisemitic. Here’s why (a thread):

Are the report's authors motivated by antisemitism? There’s no reason to assume this. They’re not the only people to accuse Israel of apartheid. Palestinians have made this claim for many years, and recently some Israeli groups have as well. HRW also accused Israel of apartheid.

Surely they’re not all motivated by antisemitism?

Does Amnesty’s report contain any antisemitic ideas, stereotypes or tropes? There’s nothing in the language of the report that could be construed as antisemitic. If you don’t believe me, read it for yourself.

Does Amnesty’s report imply that Jews (and only Jews) have no right to national self-determination? No, it doesn’t deny Jews this right. Instead, it insists that Jews don't have the right to systematically discriminate against Palestinians living under Israeli rule.

Will Amnesty’s apartheid accusation endanger Jews? Jews living outside Israel have long been targeted in retaliation for Israel’s actions, but that doesn’t mean human rights groups shouldn’t critique Israel’s actions. Israel, like any state, cannot enjoy immunity from criticism.

If Jews are excluded, insulted or assaulted because they are wrongly blamed for Israel’s actions, we must counter such antisemitism by insisting on the distinction between the state of Israel and the Jewish people. We cannot blame those who expose Israeli human rights violations.

None of the above means that I fully endorse Amnesty’s report. In fact, I don’t think it's accurate to characterize all Israeli policies and practices towards Palestinians since 1948 (including Palestinian citizens of Israel) simply as apartheid, but it’s not antisemitic.