Information withheld by Rias persists
In a bid to combat the rising tide of antisemitism across Europe, the Research and Information Office on Antisemitism (RIAS) has developed a unique database technology for documenting, categorizing, and evaluating antisemitic incidents. RIAS is currently leading a newly established network, the European Network for Monitoring Antisemitism (ENMA), which includes Jewish and non-Jewish organizations from Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Italy.
The EU Commission is funding the ENMA project with 400,000 euros, and a Berlin foundation is providing an additional 44,000 euros. The project aims to build new pressure by expanding the methodology to other countries. However, the functionality of RIAS's database technology remains unclear, going beyond a simple Excel application.
The broad definition of "Israel-related antisemitism" by RIAS, which is based on the controversial and stricter IHRA definition, has been a subject of criticism. Critics argue that this definition brings many political statements close to antisemitism, such as portraying the state of Israel as a colonial project.
The Diaspora Alliance, a prominent Jewish advocacy group, has demanded that allegedly increasing antisemitic incidents be investigated by third parties. They have also called for more transparency from RIAS, stating that it often exaggerates antisemitic incidents and hinders prevention and combat. The nationwide Research and Information Office on Antisemitism (RIAS) will not publish most of its documented cases, making them neither scientifically nor journalistically verifiable.
Itay Mashiach, who wrote the study for the Diaspora Alliance, has criticized RIAS's data protection measures, stating that 80% of all incidents are without victims or affect institutions only. He hopes that the ENMA project will bring more transparency to RIAS's counting and reporting of antisemitic incidents.
The controversies surrounding RIAS are not unique. Efforts to combat antisemitism often face challenges due to debates over what constitutes antisemitism, politicization, concerns about transparency and accountability, and perceived methodological flaws.
In a related development, the International Criminal Court in The Hague has considered the genocide accusation against the state of Israel as a plausible initial suspicion. However, the court has not yet made a formal determination on the matter.
The ENMA project, like in Germany, will apply the controversial - and modified by RIAS - IHRA definition. Whether this will lead to a more transparent and effective approach to combating antisemitism remains to be seen.
- The technology developed by RIAS for documenting antisemitic incidents is crucial to the ENMA project, which is aiming to expand this methodology to other countries in Europe, despite its unclear functionality.
- The controversy surrounding RIAS's approach to Israel-related antisemitism, which employs a broad definition based on the stricter IHRA definition, extends to the ENMA project, as it will also utilize the IHRA definition, modified by RIAS.
