Newsletter
Newsletter Support JNS

Study: Some governments embrace IHRA definition ... and its opponents

New data from NGO Monitor shows that a dozen European countries and Canada battle antisemitism while funding groups at cross purposes.

Anti-Semitism
Defining anti-Semitism. Credit: Lobroart/Shutterstock.

About 30% of non-governmental organizations that have an anti-IHRA agenda receive grants from Western governments, including some governments that have adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.

That’s according to new research from NGO Monitor, which notes the contradictory approach that Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland have adopted.

Of 45 campaigns that 345 NGOs have used to target IHRA, 52% have received government funding, according to NGO Monitor. Just 39% of the anti-IHRA campaigns that NGO Monitor studied sought to influence public opinion, while 9% targeted professional organizations.

The IHRA definition is “the most effective means of identifying post-Holocaust hatred of Jews in different forms,” according to Gerald Steinberg, NGO Monitor president.

Groups named in the report “receive millions from European governments under the false label of ‘civil society,’” he noted.

“Every candle on those birthday cakes represents another year of a life that hatred failed to extinguish,” New York City Council member Virginia Maloney told JNS.
“Anyone who attempts to pose a threat or attack Israel will face devastating consequences,” said Danny Danon, Israeli ambassador to the global body.
The reversal “sends an unfortunate signal at a time of rising antisemitism and sustained efforts to isolate Israel economically,” Evan R. Bernstein, CEO of B’nai B’rith International, told JNS.
Former justice minister Alan Shatter said Herbert Park Hotel declined the conference after asking about an IDF connection, and later released delegates’ rooms.