The conflation of «Judaism», «Jew», «Israel» and «Netanyahu» is simplistic and dangerous
It is the reduction of the French Jewish community to the State of Israel that is a major factor in the development of antisemitism and is responsible for the importation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict onto our soil. France will go to the very end of this confusion when Emmanuel Macron invites Benjamin Netanyahu to commemorate the Vel d’Hiv roundup on 16 July 2017 (even before the 2018 law!), the first in a long series of diplomatic errors. Indeed, he was thus making the quality of being «Jew» take precedence over nationality. He was taking the exact opposite stance to Jacques Chirac great protector of the French Jewish community while not confusing it with the State of Israel, holding a balanced position in the conflict, the only reasonable one: respect for international law and Security Council resolutions. There is absolutely no contradiction between the two attitudes; quite the contrary. It is unacceptable that military protection is necessary for French Jews to be able to go to the synagogue in relative safety for Shabbat. And that is even assuming the religious building is secured and the slightest intrusion by a worshipper is scrutinised, with fear in one's stomach, lest it be a terrorist. Anti-Semitism is not an option or an opinion, it is an offence and sometimes a crime. However, it is entirely acceptable and legitimate to denounce a state that considers itself above international law, hurtling at high speed towards the unflattering but well-deserved description of a rogue state.
Netanyahu's openly provocative and segregationist policy provides fertile ground for antisemitism
Acts of antisemitism are fuelled by the images coming from the Gaza Strip, but also from Jerusalem and the West Bank, for several years, because This is not the first time Israel has carried out disproportionate retaliation. The Torah mentions the principle «an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth» three times, that is to say, the principle of proportionality, while calling for a morality of transcendence when possible. «Do not say: As he treated me, I will treat him, I repay each according to his deeds.» And if compassion was, on 7 October, the first natural instinct, it has, conversely, become incomprehensible not to oppose the massacres perpetrated in Gaza more effectively. It is the policy pursued by Benjamin Netanyahu, an uninhibited proponent of Greater Israel (his ideological wrapping), which mass-produces anti-Semites (and future terrorists). He cares nothing for this, because his ultimate goal is to remain in power indefinitely, even if it means slaughtering civilians (to make people forget his initial responsibility), even if it means disfiguring Israel's image in the world among all peoples, who are uncorrupted, unlike many of their leaders. Netanyahu is not Judaism, merely a ruthless opportunist with no vision whatsoever, for whom human lives are merely one of the instruments used to retain power.
Another antisemitism, of Islamist origin-jihadist
Jihadist Islamism is another vector of antisemitism. It targets not only Jews but also Christians and Muslims who refuse to submit to its rules. It aims to undermine all the foundations of the Republic, of democracy, of secularism. A large Arab-Muslim community lives in France and Europe and often holds the nationality of its state of residence. A resurgence of religion among the second generation is palpable often in an uncontrolled or radical form. Indeed, these youths from the suburbs, socially alienated and lacking guidance, considering that they have not much to lose, have received no religious education from their parents who wished to be secular in order to assimilate. They know nothing of the Arabic language and can be susceptible to preachers skilled in manipulation, giving them the feeling of restoring meaning to a life that has little, and quick to denounce the «crusaders» (Christians and assimilated Jews) as well as secularised Muslims. This phenomenon certainly does exist Well then, it is responsible for antisemitic acts (difficult to quantify in the overall count). It is concerning. European democracies showed a culpable naïvety in letting him thrive, the «Londonistan» of the 1990s reflecting the quintessence of this blindness. France reacted faster than others, but nevertheless too late. This partly explains why the Maghreb countries refuse to readmit certain of their nationals who have committed crimes or offences (who do not hold dual nationality) to their territory, considering that it is in Europe that they became radicalised and that it is not for them, while fighting this scourge, to pay for an open-air radicalisation that took place elsewhere. European democracies have not finished paying for this culpable blindness.
The Europeans showed of an unforgivable ignorance when they confused both Christian Democracy and the Muslim Brotherhood. In one case, it is a matter of giving politics a moral connotation within a secular framework, in the other of an islamisation of society from the bottom up before entering the political arena to impose religious rules there. Thus, I was greatly surprised and even appalled while attending, as a diplomatic adviser, several summits of the European People's Party (EPP, right-wing and centre-right, of a Christian Democratic tendency), in the 2010s, to note that senior Ennahda leaders were invited guests of honour. The very same people I had seen heavily sentenced by the Bourguiba regime in the 1980s for their outrages against women who refused to wear the veil (throwing vitriol in their faces).
To get out of this untenable situation, there are several paths.
The first is to move away from the absurd concept of the clash of civilisations, of Israel as the vanguard of the West or of Christendom in the fight against terrorism or in a major conflict to come. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict was not a religious war, it is a nationalist conflict over disputed land[1] (cf. Tribune of 24 November in www.Marianne.net) Is there any need to point out that many Palestinian «terrorists» of the 1970s were of the Christian faith? That it is Israel that took the initiative to give a religious dimension to this conflict partly because the current Israeli government is supported by ultra-religious parties, but well before that, Israel deliberately favoured Hamas and encourage its financing, to weaken the Palestinian Authority. Ehoud Barak mentioned this in an interview with www.lepoint.fr[2], on 7 December 2023, the text message exchanges between Netanyahu and Yahya Sinwar[3] and the pride the former took in it. Hamas was Netanyahu's useful idiot just as Netanyahu was Hamas's useful idiot. For Netanyahu, the aim was to make the creation of a Palestinian state impossible by manufacturing an unacceptable Palestinian façade. For Hamas, it was to seize leadership of the Palestinian cause and provoke hostile reactions towards Israel. It is this pact that shattered on 7 October. Since international leaders are not up to the task (to put it mildly) of what is currently at stake, we must hope and believe that the Israeli people will eventually force this individual, who has so much Arab and Jewish blood on his hands, to leave power for good.
The second is to treat as normal any apprehension one might have regarding the State of Israel, which is accountable for its actions like any other state.. The Holocaust is a tragedy that will forever scar the conscience of humanity. It came from Europe and not from the Arab world. The Holocaust does not justify derogative treatment granted to the State of Israel by those very people who caused the misfortune of the Jews. Blind support for the criminal actions in Gaza makes them guilty of complacency regarding practices from which no one can absolve themselves by pleading ignorance.
Finally, a stepping back from Netanyahu's actions by the French Jewish community would be welcome even if sympathy and goodwill towards Israel are natural. Likewise The presence of dignitaries from the Muslim community at the «march against antisemitism» would also have been welcome. Many extremist voices have been heard, very few calling for respect for international law and for peace. In the United States, the situation is changing; American Jewish students and the American Jewish community are making their voices heard and distancing themselves from the annihilation of the Gaza Strip. Could France have media-wise become the last neoconservative bastion?
In the French Republic, there exist only citizens who have the right to have (or not) a religion of their choice which falls within the private sphere. In France, one is French before being Jewish, Muslim or Christian. Making one's solidarity with a foreign state or one's religion take precedence over one's status as a citizen amounts to engaging in separatism or, at best, communitarianism..
[1] Erwan Davoux: «7th October, a geopolitical shock rather than a clash of civilisations», (marianne.net)
[2] Ehud Barak: «The challenge for Israel is XXL, our leaders are size M» (lepoint.fr)
[3]Yahya Sinwar is considered the main person responsible for October 7.
Erwan Davoux is a graduate of the Paris IEP and INALCO
Former project manager at the Presidency of the Republic, he has advised numerous right-wing political figures internationally.
French 
English 
Chinese 
Arabic