Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of
Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism

Tel Aviv University, TOPICAL BRIEF NO. 7, 2011,
Editors: Dr. Roni Stauber, Beryl Belsky

DIE LINKE: BETWEEN ANTI-ZIONISM AND SOLIDARITY
WITH ISRAEL

Stefan Kunath[1]

The
position of the German left vis-à-vis Israel and the Middle East conflict has
been in a state of flux in recent years. This is a consequence of the
transformation undergone by the German left itself, which culminated in the
foundation of a new party, Die Linke (The Left), in June 2008. Formerly a
parliamentary faction since September 2005, Die Linke consists of a
conglomeration of several radical left organizations and former Social
Democrats from West Germany, as well as members of the former ruling party of
the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS).[2]

The result of such a disparate
grouping is disunity on several issues. The position toward Israel is one of
the most debated issues in the new party and its youth movement. The “Free Gaza”
flotilla in May 2010 and Israel’s reaction to it[3]
3  added fuel to the fire, especially
since three Die Linke activists were on board: Bundestag members Annette
Groth and Inge Höger, and Norman Paech (member of the Bundestag until 2009).
Their participation prompted questions about the ideology of the German radical
left, especially after political scientist Samuel Salzborn from the University
of Gießen accused the party of cultivating antisemitism in Germany.[4]

Prior to
the flotilla incident, a number of disputes arose within Die Linke regarding
the approach that should be taken toward the Middle East conflict. Three
examples are keys to understanding the situation in Die Linke today: 1) the
discussion surrounding an invitation extended to senior Hamas official Dr.
Ghazi Hamad to a Middle East conference organized by Die Linke’s parliamentary
faction in 2007; 2) the working group BAK Shalom, which has become a leading
advocate for pro-Israel positions within the party’s youth movement; and 3)
Gregor Gysi, a leading party activist who works to combat anti-Zionist
attitudes. A brief analysis of these subjects will be followed by an
elaboration of the debate over the flotilla. In the last section, possible
future developments in the party will be discussed.

Actors in Die Linke:
Israel Supporters and Anti-imperialists

In 2007,
the first public disagreement within the party arose over how to approach the
political situation between Israel and the Palestinians during the preparation
of a conference about the Middle East conflict organized by Die Linke
parliamentary group, together with the socialist Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.[5]

 The idea was to invite independent experts on
the subject representing various views in order to obtain a comprehensive
survey of the situation in the Middle East. When an invitation to Dr. Ghazi
Hamad, government spokesperson of Hamas in Gaza at the time, was under
consideration by the parliamentary faction, a group of members of Die Linke and
its youth movement launched a petition to prevent his participation. They
argued that Hamad could not be viewed as independent as long as he was the
spokesperson of a ruling party. In addition, they expressed opposition to
inviting a leading Hamas activist: “Hamas is an anti-democratic party, whose
radical antisemitic program and policies are aimed at the destruction of
Israel,” they stated.[6]
The party should not invite an antisemite at a time of increasing antisemitic
activity in Germany, a step that might also endanger the radical left camp.
Moreover, they asserted, Die Linke had a responsibility to combat antisemitism,
and providing a platform to a Hamas representative contradicted this principle.[7]

While the
campaign was not a complete failure it was also not successful. On the one
hand, Hamad was unable to attend the conference because the German government
refused him entry; on the other, the discussion in Die Linke took place mainly
at the district level, without the involvement of leading members, whose
positions were not made public. Nonetheless, this was the first time a debate
had been held about providing a platform to a movement that denies Israel’s
right to exist.

An
important development in this respect was the establishment of BAK Shalom in
spring 2007 as an ideological working group within Linksjugend Solid,[8]
Die Linke’s youth organization, in Berlin. BAK Shalom became a counterforce in
the debates over Die Linke’s relations with Israel and its attitude to extreme
anti-Israel manifestations. Defining itself as a task force against antisemitism,
anti-Zionism, antiAmericanism, and regressive anti-capitalism within Die Linke,
the group stands for strong solidarity with Israel, “including solidarity with
defense measures of any kind.”[9]
Antisemitism, they believe, is an integral part of capitalism and modern
society, and flourishes with the regression of the latter into barbarism, as
demonstrated by the case of Nazi Germany. The image of the Jew as a capitalist
exploiter is an important component of modern antisemitism, whose proponents
does not exclude some socialists and leftists. Since the nineteenth century
antisemites have automatically blamed Jews for the failures of capitalism
instead of studying its conceptual and structural problems. 

For BAK
Shalom, the Jewish homeland is the right and just solution for the negative
consequences of modern society’s attitudes toward the Jews. At the same time
BAK Shalom calls for solidarity with all emancipatory movements in the Middle
East that are struggling for secularization, liberalization, and democratization,
such as women’s and students’ movements in Arab and Muslim nations.[10]

In April
and May 2008 the first public showdown took place between BAK Shalom and Norman
Paech, then spokesperson for foreign policy of Die Linke parliamentary group.
On April 23, 2008, he called Israel an apartheid state, which “sprayed
Palestinian fighters with bullets and killed them.”[11]
He claimed Israel might use illegal uranium enriched bullets because
Palestinian medical practitioners were unfamiliar with the kinds of injuries
they caused.[12] Moreover,
he trivialized Hamas attacks on Israel by referring to Qassam missiles as “New
Year firecrackers” and argued against a two-state solution to the conflict.[13]
BAK Shalom demanded his immediate resignation as spokesperson because of his
alleged anti-Zionism and sympathy for Hamas.[14]
However, since it numbered only 60 members, mainly young professionals and
students, the group was not strong enough to bring down Paech. Nevertheless, it
was the first time that large media networks reported on the dispute within Die
Linke. Paech ignored the criticism and branded the BAK activists “clearly
stupid.”[15]

As a result
of high media interest in the dispute within the new party, senior Die Linke
politicians began to intervene. In May, on the occasion of Israel’s 60th
anniversary, MP Gregor Gysi, leader of the parliamentary group, stated that
antiZionism was no longer an arguable position for the left in general, and for
Die Linke, specifically, “because if we choose a position of enlightened Jewish
anti-Zionism… we still have the problem of ignoring the worst experiences of
the twentieth century, which expose enlightened Jewish anti-Zionism as a total
illusion.”[16]

Gysi also
distanced himself from traditional Soviet anti-imperialism in relation to
Israel since it did not take into consideration the emancipation of peoples.
Soviet anti-imperialism was an instrument used in international relations to
define and distinguish Soviet allies and their enemies during the Cold War.
Israel is perceived as an imperialist nation because it is an ally of the U.S.
in the Middle East, he said.[17]

In late
May, some Linke members and sympathizers responded to Gysi’s arguments in an
open letter.[18]  The most well-known were Sahra Wagenknecht,
MEP until 2009, and since September 2009 a Bundestag deputy; leader of the
orthodox leftwing Communist Platform (Kommunistische Plattform) within Die
Linke, MP Ulla Jelpke; and Hans Modrow, a leading politician in the GDR during
the period leading up to reunification. Regardless of the political use of
anti-imperialism by the Soviets, they said, this concept was necessary for
revealing and reducing imperialist profit and the threat of war it poses at the
international level. Their criticism of Israel, they claimed, should be seen as
part of the “anti-imperialism concept,” because Israeli policy was influenced
by American ambitions, which were undoubtedly imperialist. Moreover, Israel
colonized the West Bank, oppressed Palestinians as second-class citizens, and
behaved aggressively toward other Arab nations. As to the issue of antisemitism
and its relation to criticism of Israel, which had become a central issue in
the debate, they argued that its existence was not a reason to accept Israeli
government policy without question, but that critics should be careful to avoid
any antisemitic overtones.[19]

Today
anti-imperialists in Die Linke accept Israel’s right to exist, but are
extremely critical of Israeli policy; at the same time, they ignore the
antisemitic ideology of Islamist organizations such as Hizballah and Hamas, as
well as their terrorist attacks against Israel, since these groups are viewed
as political actors fighting against Israeli oppression and for Palestinian
independence. According to the anti-imperialists, violations of human rights by
Israel, and not by Hamas the oppressed, should be condemned. During the
two-year period 2008−9, the pro-Israel faction of Gysi and BAK Shalom gained
strength thanks to the publicity surrounding the debate. Since early 2010 the
dispute has risen to a new level, centering mainly on determining how to
analyze the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While BAK Shalom and some Die Linke
members regard these efforts as motivated by anti-Zionist attitudes and
demonization of Israel, traditional anti-imperialists are concerned about the
labeling of Israel critics as antisemites. 

The
escalation of the debate in 2010 was manifested in several events.

1. Anti-imperialists:
Peres is preparing for war against Iran

On January
27, 2010, International Holocaust Remembrance Day marking the anniversary of
the liberation of Auschwitz in 1945, Israeli president Shimon Peres addressed
the Bundestag about the Iranian threat to Israel. After the speech, while the
rest of the house rose to their feet to applaud him, a few Die Linke
representatives remained seated to demonstrate their disapproval, among them,
Christine Buchholz, a member of the party’s executive board and activist in the
party’s Trotskyist Marx21 network, and Sahra Wagenknecht. After Michael Leutert
(MP), co-founder of BAK Shalom, criticized Buchholz, she explained that she
rejected Peres’ comparison of Iran to Nazi Germany. His analogy with the policy
of appeasement until 1939 was inappropriate and only served as “ideological
armament for a new war in the Middle East.”[20]

Criticism
of Sahra Wagenknecht centered mainly on her candidacy for the party’s deputy
leadership position. Leutert explained that he might not be able to vote for
someone who did not show due respect for the Israeli president.[21]
BAK Shalom said the memorial day for the victims of National Socialism should
not be used for criticizing Israeli policies.[22]
Wagenknecht responded that her attendance at the ceremony testified to her
respect for the victims. However, she could not applaud someone who was
responsible for war. Additionally, Wagenknecht claimed that contrary to what
Peres said, Iran had no nuclear weapons. His alarmist talk of another Holocaust
was just a pretext to start more wars.[23]

Wagenknecht’s
candidacy was extremely important for the party’s unity and balance between
radical and more moderate members and between representatives from the East and
the West. Therefore, Leutert’s and BAK Shalom’s criticism was interpreted as an
attack on party unity. That is why some members did not condemn her conduct in
public although they disagreed with her anti-Israel position. The campaign of
Leutert and BAK Shalom against Wagenknecht’s candidacy failed. At the party
conference in May, she was elected deputy leader and Bochholz obtained an
executive position. 

2. “Finkelstein
successfully averted!”[24]

24

BAK Shalom
and its supporters were more successful in the next dispute, which concerned an
invitation to the Jewish anti-Zionist Norman Finkelstein to be guest speaker at
a meeting in the capital in February 2010. The Palestinian community and the
district working group “Peace and International Policy” of Die Linke in Berlin were
the organizers of the event, called “One Year after the Invasion of Gaza − the
Responsibility of the German Government and the Continuing Siege of the
Palestinian People.” Immediately, BAK Shalom began planning protests.
Finkelstein could not be an ally of the left, they explained, because he
advocated relations with Hizballah and accused Israel, inter alia, of misusing
the Holocaust for financial and political purposes. After the Heinrich Böll
Foundation, affiliated with the Green Party, was informed of Finkelstein’s
views, they promptly canceled financial aid for the event. The organizers then
requested funds from the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, which initially gave a
commitment. However, after BAK Shalom and the district working

group of
the party’s youth movement in Berlin called for a protest rally in front of the
foundation’s headquarters, it withdrew its support and Finkelstein canceled his
flight to Germany.[25]
Christine Buchholz, Sahra Wagenknecht, Norman Paech, Jan van Aken, and other
MPs expressed their outrage to Heinz Vietze and Florian Weis, managing
directors of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, accusing them of bowing to the
pressure of a few.[26]

Under the
headline “Anti-Zionist Jews Out?” [27]
published in the antiimperialist daily Junge Welt, Ulla Jelpke asked why Die
Linke was afraid of inviting an anti-Zionist scientist who wanted to talk about
German responsibility toward the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Zionist
organizations had created a real “Holocaust industry,” she claimed, extorting
support for Israel by exploiting the suffering of Jews murdered by German
National Socialists. German Zionists were doing a great disservice to the
struggle against antisemitism with their demand to muzzle the speech of
anti-Zionist Jews.[28]
A large number of articles appeared in Junge Welt arguing against BAK Shalom
and pro-Israel supporters in Die Linke, and demanding an unconditional and free
debate regarding the Middle East conflict and surrounding issues.[29]

BAK Shalom
dismantled the main arguments and defended its claims of combating
antisemitism, in an article called “Debates Yes − Antisemitism No.”[30]
In the first part, they cited “antisemitic messages” published by Finkelstein
years before, such as the claim that Israel was using the Holocaust to obtain
financial and military aid.[31]
 Additionally, the working group provided
proof of Finkelstein’s sympathy for Hizballah and pointed out that his theses
were supported by extreme right organizations in Germany and the Czech
Republic.[32]
BAK Shalom denied it was preventing a discussion about the Middle East conflict
and Die Linke’s position toward Israel and the Palestinians. “But that does not
mean that Israel haters should have a podium on which to debate the issue of
Israel, when in fact they were debating about Israel’s right to exist.”[33]

The
situation during this dispute resembled that which prevailed during the
disagreement over the invitation to Hamas official Ghazi Hamad in 2007. In
contrast to the latter episode, however, in this case, one section of the party
held a public demonstration against another part. The reaction to the
cancellation of Finkelstein’s visit was expressed in insults and the accusation
that pro-Israel members were using Nazi SA methods.[34]
The radical anti-imperialist group within Die Linke waited for an opportunity
for take its revenge; [35]
this came in the form of participation in the “Free Gaza” flotilla in May 2010,
after the party congress.

3. Humanitarian aid to
Gaza or support for Hamas?

Groth,
Höger and Paech participated in the “Free Gaza” flotilla in May 2010, claiming
they were motivated by the wish to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinians in
Gaza and to stop the siege, which Groth alleged was “contrary to international
law.”[36]
Höger declared that the aim of the flotilla was to generate publicity against
Israeli policy.[37]

BAK Shalom,
for its part, issued a press release, warning of another escalation in the
Middle East conflict to which Höger, Paech and Groth’s participation in the
flotilla would contribute. Moreover, they cautioned that leading Hamas members
were on the ships.[38] 

Emotions
intensified following the violent confrontation between the Israeli navy and
those abroad the Marvi Marmara, including Paech, Höger and Groth. Gregor Gysi
immediately denounced Israel for the siege of Gaza and for stopping ships in
international waters.[39]
There were also concerns about the conditions under which the three Die Linke
members were being held, as expressed by MP Jan van Aken, vice-chairman of the
parliamentary group, in his press release demanding their liberation and
branding the Israeli raid “an act of piracy” and “kidnapping.”[40]

Following
their release, Groth, Höger and Paech began spreading their version of the
Israeli operation, mainly condemning the IDF’s brutality, labeling it a war
crime, and claiming that the conduct of all the activists had been peaceful and
innocent throughout the mission.[41]

On June 2,
Gysi met with Israel’s ambassador to Germany, Yoram Ben-Zeev, to discuss the
incident.[42]
BAK Shalom was in a difficult position. The group was accused of supporting
Israel unreservedly, no matter what it did. On the other hand, they were
expected to show solidarity with Höger, Groth, and Paech. The group’s silence
during the first week after the incident benefited the anti-imperialist camp.
MP Niema Movassat, for example, canceled his participation in a panel organized
by BAK Shalom on the question of whether sanctions against Iran might be
helpful in bringing down the Iranian regime.[43]
Both the party youth movement in Movassat’s state of North Rhine-Westphalia and
the Hamburg youth movement fiercely attacked BAK Shalom.[44]
Linksjugend Solid Hamburg also questioned why BAK Shalom was still tolerated
within Die Linke and its youth movement, and why several MPs still supported
some BAK Shalom members and employed them in their Berlin offices.[45]

 Nevertheless, in their release about the
incident the federal board of Linksjugend Solid did not refer to BAK Shalom,
and only blamed Israeli policy. Israel was committing piracy and kidnapping in
international waters, it said, and demanded an end to the siege of Gaza.[46]
On June 23, Linksjugend Solid held a panel in Berlin, called “Free Gaza! − Die
Linke and Their Resistance against the Siege of Gaza,” with Inge Höger, who
discussed the strategy of “left-wing resistance.”[47]

One week
after the incident, BAK Shalom responded. They presented a list of participants
known for their Islamist and antisemitic attitudes and quoted some of the antisemitic
and anti-Zionist statements they had made.[48]
Moreover, they demonstrated the connection between the Turkish IHH (Foundation
for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief), which had organized the
flotilla, and Hamas.[49]
Besides calling for an explicit condemnation of Hamas, the group demanded the expulsion
of the three Die Linke members for participating in the flotilla, denouncing them
for failing to criticize Hamas’ conduct in exploiting the suffering of the Palestinians
for political propaganda purposes and denying them any political freedom.
However, they defended neither Israel’s operation off the coast of Gaza nor the
siege itself. Finally, BAK Shalom explained that solidarity with Israel was incumbent
upon the group due to the antisemitic accusations leveled against Israel[50]
after the operation during several pro-Palestinian demonstrations and on social
networks.[51]

On June 10,
Annette Groth reported her experiences on the flotilla to the Bundestag. She
denied that the Turkish IHH supported terrorism and accused the Israeli media
of disinformation. Being neutral in a situation of oppression, she said (referring
to herself), turned one into an oppressor, and she pledged to continue fighting
against the siege of Gaza.[52]

Since the
incident, Inge Höger has been traveling throughout Germany and speaking of her
experiences aboard the flotilla and in an Israeli prison. In Leipzig, 40 of the
90 participants at one of these events criticized Höger for not dissociating herself
from the Islamist movement.[53]
Prior to Höger’s arrival in Bremen on June 24, the local Jewish community
contacted Petra Pau, vice-president of the Bundestag and representative of Die
Linke parliamentary group, demanding a comment about the “Free Gaza” flotilla
and the participation of the three Die Linke members. Her response was the only
public criticism from a leading Die Linke member. In her letter, Pau said she
thought the Israeli siege of Gaza was a political mistake. However, she opposed
the flotilla and hence the participation of Die Linke members. In addition, she
criticized the flotilla participants for cooperating with Turkish organizations
“that are suspected of being pro-fascist,”[54]
strengthening Hamas, and demonizing Israel worldwide. She claimed their actions
added fuel to the fire of antisemites, who were now spreading hate against Jews
throughout the world, and especially via social networks.[55]

Possible Future
Developments

The dispute
over the “Free Gaza” flotilla was the culmination of Die Linke’s debates about
its relationship to Israel and the Palestinians. Because the majority of party members
feared for the lives of Höger, Paech and Groth when the Israeli army stopped
the Marvi Marmara, their views about Israeli policy deteriorated further. In the
statements of several politicians and members of the youth organization, Israel
was a brutal nation that disregarded humanitarian values.[56]

Besides BAK
Shalom and Petra Pau, no one else in the party openly criticized the flotilla
and the alliance between Turkish Islamists and left-wing activists. On the one
hand, this could be regarded as a victory for the anti-imperialists and their struggle
against the pro-Israel wing in Die Linke; on the other, the silence of many leading
members could indicate a wish to wait out the criticism directed against the party
for cooperating with Islamists. 

A possible
future direction could be agreement on the basis of the parliamentary faction’s
official position toward the Middle East conflict. Accordingly, the deputies
underline their responsibility to Israel because of the Holocaust; they also condemn
antisemitism and racism and favor a two-state-solution to the Middle East conflict.
The main criteria for the end of the Israeli occupation and the establishment of
a Palestinian state are human rights and international law.[57]

Moreover,
the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation could be instrumental in resolving the struggle
between anti-imperialists and Israel supporters within the party. For example,
the head of the foundation’s office in Tel Aviv, Angelika Timm, tries to present
a more balanced picture of Israel. Additionally, the foundation’s work with human
rights activists and Jewish-Arab projects in Israel might offer an opportunity for
developing constructive criticism of Israeli policy without antisemitic and
anti-Zionist motifs.[58]