Matthias Monroy

The RIAS organisation is considered the first port of call for documenting anti-Semitic incidents in Germany. This has been criticised from a Jewish-diasporic perspective

A theatre piece that was celebrated in Tel Aviv – and is considered ‘Israel-related anti-Semitism’ in Germany. T-shirts printed with ‘Free Palestine’ – evidence of hatred of Jews. A speech by historian Moshe Zimmermann on Holocaust Remembrance Day, in which he remarked that ‘Never again’ must also apply to Israel – and which is considered an anti-Semitic ‘incident’. Such accusations are investigated in a recently published study entitled ‘Biased – Anti-Semitism monitoring in Germany put to the test’. It focuses on the state-funded Research and Information Centre on Anti-Semitism (RIAS), which is a popular source for politicians, the media and authorities.

The 60-page study was published by the Berlin-based international Diaspora Alliance. It aims to connect overheard Jewish and diasporic voices and emphasises that the fight against anti-Semitism should not be directed against other marginalised groups. It believes that the anti-Palestinian discourse that dominates in Germany is wrong – it does not stop anti-Semitism, but is misused to legitimise right-wing politics. This also makes it more difficult to prevent and combat anti-Semitism.

The study was compiled by Israeli journalist Itay Mashiach. His argument: RIAS ‘overdramatises many anti-Semitic incidents’ and interprets the term ‘Israel-related anti-Semitism’ far too broadly. For example, the organisation ‘Palestine Speaks’ was listed as anti-Semitic because demonstrators wore T-shirts with maps of Palestine, shouted slogans such as ‘Israel is an apartheid state’ or displayed posters with slogans such as ‘Stop genocide’. The accusation was also levelled at a production in Berlin’s Gorki Theatre, in which a literary comparison was drawn between factory farming and concentration camps – inspired by a Holocaust survivor.

RIAS itself is described in the study as an organisation that avoids public debate. On several occasions, questions from Mashiach have been completely ignored. At the same time, RIAS contributes to ‘pro-Palestinian positions’ coming under pressure. In one case, for example, an unofficial dossier on an academic of Palestinian origin was passed on to third parties, which led to considerable professional disadvantages.

According to Mashiach, this practice is an expression of a basic political attitude: RIAS systematically disseminates narratives that are close to the Israeli government’s line. The author also criticises the organisation’s methodology: its case descriptions are vague and cannot be verified by independent research. The report speaks of a ‘decontextualisation’ in which statements are marked as anti-Semitic regardless of intention, location and situation – regardless of whether they were made on a theatre stage, at a demonstration or in a private conversation.

The fact that RIAS does not publish its documented ‘incidents’ for review is due to a lack of staff capacity, the Berlin section explained to ‘nd’. Such a chronicle was therefore discontinued in 2022. RIAS did not initially address the Alliance’s other points of criticism. ‘We have taken note of the paper in question and are currently reviewing it internally; we reserve the right to comment at a later date if necessary,’ said the spokesperson. However, RIAS rejects the accusation that it underestimates the threat posed by the far right.

Mashiach’s study was originally scheduled to be published at the end of 2023. Due to the heated German debate following the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October and the devastating Gaza war that ensued, the editors held it back. But now, according to the foreword, it is all the more important to finally have a discussion about the questionable practices of reporting centres such as RIAS.

Published in German in „nd“.

Image: Because a large banner by an Indonesian artists’ collective enabled anti-Semitic interpretations, it was censored and then removed from documenta 2022 after public pressure (C.Suthorn / cc-by-sa-4.0 / commons.wikimedia.org).