From Pittsburgh to Christchurch: Why we must fight Islamophobia and anti Semitism together
By Ani White.
On the 27th of October 2018, a fascist terrorist killed 11 attendants at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburg, USA.
Five months later, on March 15th of this year, another fascist killed 50 worshippers at the Al Noor Mosque and the
Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, New Zealand.
It should now go without saying that both attacks reflected an international upsurge of the far right. Despite targeting
different faiths in different countries, both attackers were motivated by transnational far right ideas fuelled by
mainstream dog-whistles, and incubated in ugly corners of the internet. Both posted their plans on niche online forums
just before carrying them out.
However, the links between the attacks are more intricate than this simple observation. After the Christchurch shooting,
the Tree of Life synagogue released the following statement on their website:
“We stand beside our Muslim brothers and sisters and mourn alongside the families and friends who have lost loved ones
in this unconscionable act of violence. We will continue to work towards a day when all people on this planet can live
together in peace and mutual respect.”1
The group also established a gofundme to support the Muslim community in Christchurch, raising over $60,000.2 In the wake of the Pittsburgh attack, Muslim organisations raised over $200,000 for the victims.3
The Tree of Life synagogue's solidarity with Christchurch Muslims was a continuation of a long-standing policy. In fact,
their support for Muslims and refugees played a role in motivating the choice to target Tree of Life. The shooter posed
the following statement to white supremacist-friendly social media site Gab:
HIAS likes to bring invaders that kill our people.
I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered.
Screw your optics, I’m going in.4
The post refers to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), which helps resettle refugees in Pittsburgh. Although the
HIAS was founded to help Jewish refugees, in the 2000s the group expanded to help refugees from all backgrounds. Seven
days before the shooting, the HIAS led Jewish groups in a 'Refugee Shabat.'5 After the attack, HIAS senior vice president Melanie Nezer released a statement saying: “[T]here's no denying that this
is a devastating moment... But I don't think it lessens our resolve. If anything, it makes us feel more strongly that we
need to stand up for what's right."6
As pointed out in a Vox article at the time, an old conspiracy theory about Jews populating 'white' countries with refugees and immigrants
motivated the attack:
The obsession that appears to have tipped the gunman over the edge was a conspiracy theory insinuating that the migrant
caravan currently making its way through southern Mexico, and which President Donald Trump and conservative media have
treated as an existential threat to the United States, is a Jewish plot.
His response was an attack that was both anti-Semitic — an attack on Jews and Jewish values — and characteristic of
Trump-era xenophobia, which is generally expressed toward Muslims and Latinos.7
In other words, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism fed eachother in motivating the attack. This contrasts with accounts that
Israel's crimes motivate the rise of anti-Semitism: the far-right's Islamophobia undermines such an explanation. In fact
some on the far right have come to support Israel as a bastion against Islam, in spite of their continuing
anti-Semitism.
It's essential that we have a sharp analysis of the far right. Unfortunately, many left-wing responses to the situation
are grossly inadequate. After the Pittsburgh shooting, a branch of the UK Labour Party voted down a motion to condemn
the Pittsburgh shooting and anti-Semitism in general.8 At best this reflects a fight over the definition of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, prioritising factional battles
over the principle of opposing violent anti-Semitism everywhere. At worst, the decision reflects genuine anti-Semitism
in the Labour Party. The most convicing way to discredit accusations of anti-Semitism is to not behave anti-Semitically.
A dispute over what constitutes anti-Semitism may be legitimate, but not a dispute over whether to condemn
anti-Semitism.
Conversely, Israeli reactions to the Pittsburgh shooting were also inadequate. First of all, Israel's Ashkenazic chief
rabbi David Lau refused to recognise the Tree of Life synagogue as a synagogue, since it does not follow Orthodox
Judaism.9 Secondly, Israeli officials refused to condemn Trump for fuelling racial hatred, reflecting a recent tendency to
actually befriend racists and anti-Semites outside Israel. Finally, Israeli opposition leader Avi Gabbay said the attack
should motivate Jews to immigrate to Israel rather than staying in the USA.10 An article inHaaretz, a liberal Israeli newspaper, suggested that “American Jews may never forgive Israel for its reaction to the Pittsburgh
massacre.”11
In part, these inadequate responses reflect a strategic perspective of Zionism (note: modern political Zionism can be
most usefully defined as support for a Jewish state, on Palestinian land). For Zionist leaders, there is no point in
fighting anti-Semitism in the diaspora, rather Jewish people must migrate to Israel. In this account, the colonisation
of Palestine is the only way to ensure Jewish safety. In this sense, anti-Semitism in the diaspora fuels Zionism, as
Israeli leaders take advantage of anti-Semitic attacks to call for escape to Israel. It's often pointed out that Israeli
propagandists weaponise accusations of anti-Semitism to discredit legitimate criticism, but their refusal to fight
genuine anti-Semitism in the diaspora is a subtler strategy.
Combating anti-Semitism in the diaspora is therefore essential to undermining the Zionist colonial project. The Jewish
diaspora slogan “wherever we live, that is our homeland” must be demonstrated in practice, by proving Jewish and Muslim
communities can be safe and welcome everywhere.
Ultimately, combating Islamophobia and anti-Semitism must be one fight. This is not only a moral perspective, it is a
necessity, as both reinforce eachother. The solidarity between Pittsburgh and Christchurch, in the face of attacks that
seek to divide, is a model for all who seek liberation.
5https://www.timesofisrael.com/week-before-synagogue-massacre-hias-led-jewish-groups-in-refugee-shabbat/
6https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/jewish-refugee-aid-group-pittsburgh-undeterred-synagogue-shooting
8https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/02/local-labour-branch-rejects-motion-condemning-pittsburgh-synagogue/
9https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-s-chief-rabbi-refuses-to-call-pittsburgh-massacre-site-a-synagogue-1.6601043
10https://forward.com/fast-forward/412884/israel-opposition-chief-says-pittsburgh-shooting-should-teach-jews-aliyah/
11https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-americans-may-never-forgive-israel-for-its-reaction-to-the-pittsburgh-massacre-1.6616617
ends