Human Rights and the Jewish Community

 

The Jewish community has long promoted international human rights. Felice D. Gaer continues this tradition as director of the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights at the American Jewish Committee, vice-chair of the U.N. Committee Against Torture, and commissioner on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. PresenTense spoke to Gaer about how her Jewish values inform her own commitment to human rights, the current tensions between the Jewish community and the wider human rights community, and the importance of finding common ground.

 

What made you decide to pursue a career focusing on international human rights?

I never intended to make a career in this area. When I started, 'human rights' was not a profession as it is today. But I was haunted by the history of the Holocaust and the revelations about US diplomatic passivity towards the enslavement and annihilation of the Jews. I studied and worked on Soviet and East European politics and policy while the Cold War raged. I found it was impossible to address East-West policy issues without understanding how the absence of freedom distorted all human interactions. When the opportunity arose to head a human rights organization, I saw an opportunity to combine Jewish values of justice, equality, and responsibility with legal argument and the use of modern advocacy techniques.

 

What are some priorities for Jewish human rights activists such as yourself?

Promoting religious freedom for all, fighting anti-Semitism worldwide, promoting humane treatment for all, stopping torture, ending violence against women, fighting for non-discrimination and equality throughout the world.

Key to these or any human rights advocacy is to ensure accountability for the perpetrators of gross abuses and preventing genocide and gross violations of rights. This is itself a means of protecting the rights of communities we are concerned about. In other words, social justice starts with knowing you have human rights, and claiming them requires that when there are violations, there must be an effective means to complain to and challenge the State, seeking redress for injustice.

 

What are some of the most significant issues that arise in the organized Jewish community’s relationship to the human rights community?

The most significant issues have been (a) finding substantive areas of agreement on issues to address; (b) ensuring there are similar standards for assessing human rights (no double standards) and (c) finding ways to collaborate as well as to speak out for one another, including interacting on the basis of respect for one another.

In particular, a decade ago it became clear that the human rights community, as a whole, did not see or treat some issues of great concern to Jewish groups. In particular, they haven't often addressed anti-Semitic acts as a human rights matter worthy of reporting about, though there are some exceptions. Things deteriorated when human rights groups refused to address the issue and other forms of intolerance prior to the 2001 Durban World Conference on Racism. Even when that Conference itself was marked later on by anti-Semitic actions and demonstrations (e.g., handbills with Hitler’s picture saying “What if I had won?” and the explicit equation of Zionism with racism), mainstream human rights groups refused to respond to requests for support. It has taken years to begin to address this sudden silence.

 

What explains some of the hostility to Israel?
The international human rights community has been criticized for speaking out on Israel and the US disproportionately. This may either stem from the fact that it's easier to compile data and discuss abuses when dealing with open democratic societies (and to echo groups based inside the country) or because of a desire to prove that they are impartial in their criticism. There are also different standards used for democratic states like Israel as opposed to closed dictatorships.

Sometimes there are also different understandings of context-- the context of basic freedom and democracy as opposed to the context of repression and dictatorship. The context of peaceful societies and the context of societies beset by armed conflicts, terrorist attacks, and the like. This kind of distinction often doesn't come through. It leads to divergent approaches as to where to devote one's attention and institutional resources, and to differences about forums and methods that can be utilized.
The Jewish groups often say it is important to recognize there is no moral equivalence between terrorism and fighting to protect people from terrorism. The human rights groups say that their methodology is impartial and applies neutrally to everyone. The Jewish groups say it isn't as pristine as that.

 

How do you, personally and professionally, reconcile support for Israel with support for a community that often seems unfairly critical of Israeli actions?

This isn't such a dichotomy – Israel is a robust democracy, even a super-heated democracy. The effort to make Israel's institutions more accountable and more effective in ensuring rights is absolutely vital. While the criticisms of international human rights groups may seem inappropriate to some, it helps build attention and support to strengthen those institutions. The question is whether the means used should be by the UN, international courts, or sanctions, or by working with groups inside the country.

 

Where do you believe criticism of Israel from the human rights community “crosses the line” into something more worrisome?

The denial of the right of the Jewish state to exist. Denial to Jews of the same rights as peoples throughout the world – particularly the Jewish people's right to self determination and thus, indeed, of Zionism itself.

When the criticism becomes so politicized that it is used only against one country and no others. When classical anti-Semitic symbols and tropes are used. Demonization of Israel in international institutions such as the UN or UNESCO is nothing new. But isolation and outright contempt for Israel among human rights groups, labor unions, and public advocates of many kinds aimed at broad sanctions is something new and more problematic.

 

Where do you see progress being made in the relationship between the Jewish community and the human rights community?

The Jewish community is there when the rights groups want supporters advocating immigration rights or hate crimes legislation, for example. Jewish values lead the groups in supporting social justice, human rights, and redress for victims of abuse.

We need to work actively to overcome the divisions and strains between such groups, as there is so much each has in common with the other. Moreover, the issues cry out for attention – religious repression, physical abuse, discrimination, intimidation, violence, dehumanization, and more.

Particular issues that we’re cooperating on are human rights in China, ending torture and giving information to the mothers of Tiananmen Square victims; working to achieve freedom of expression, such as opposing the global blasphemy law and ensuring religious liberties; and supporting the referendum in south Sudan and a comprehensive peace in that region.