Anti-Semitism Testimony  - 05.22.2002

 

 

 

ORAL STATEMENT OF MARK LEVIN

Click here for unofficial transcript of full hearing.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS SMITH: Next we'll be hearing from Mark Levin, who is the executive director of the NCSJ for the last decade, and is a leading expert on national and international, political and legislative issues. He has led efforts in support of financial and technical assistance to the new independent states of the former Soviet Union. He has served as a public member of the U.S. delegation to various OSCE meetings.

And on a very personal note, now, we were roommates on my first human rights trip, which was with Mark in 1982, January, when we went to Moscow and what was then Leningrad, and we were there for 10 days. We met with Sharansky's mother, Dr. Lerner and a whole host of refuseniks. And I deeply appreciate the leadership he has shown.

As a matter of fact, he came down after a speech that I'd given on the floor and invited me to go on that trip. And that opened up, at least my eyes, to the horrific mistreatment of Jews in what was then the Soviet Union. And he invited me on that trip, and I deeply appreciated it and his counsel over these many, many years…

MARK LEVIN: Mr. Chairman, first, thank you for those very kind words. It's hard to believe it has been 20 years since we first started working together. And in some sense it is hard to believe that some of the issues we first addressed 20 years ago we're still having to address.

I want to thank you and Mr. Cardin in particular for your ongoing support.

And, Senator [Voinovich], I want to welcome you to one of the most important bodies I believe that was ever formed and created within the U.S. Government to promote human rights. We have come so far in the last 27 years, and yet we still have so much ground to continue to cover.

I want to limit my remarks. You all have my full statement. And I want to really focus on what this Commission can continue to do and what the governments of the former Soviet Union need to do to address the ongoing problems of anti-Semitism.

As all of you know, NCSJ is an umbrella organization representing 50 national Jewish organizations and over 300 Jewish federations and community relations councils. In fact, two of the organizations that belong to NCSJ are represented today: the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League.

Mr. Chairman and Members, we appreciate the ongoing commitment of the Commission and the dedication of your staff to our issues.

Since the last time I testified before the Commission, many positive changes have occurred in the successor states. It is almost ironic to sit here and listen to what's happening in the western part of the European continent.

However, anti-Semitism in the former Soviet Union remains a serious issue. Today, for the most part official or state-sponsored anti-Semitism does not exist. We are dealing with popular or "street" anti-Semitism, which is a more complicated issue to resolve.

As I said, rather than cataloguing and analyzing incidents or reviewing past successes in our work together, all of which I do in my written statement and in additional submissions, let me address the question of where we go from here. I want you to, when you have a chance, review a sampling of anti-Semitic incidents in the former Soviet Union that I'll submit for the record that we've compiled.

Also, we have the ADL annual review of anti-Semitism and xenophobia in Russia for submission, Mr. Chairman.

SMITH: Without objection, your full statement, Mr. Levin, and your selected incidents in the former Soviet Union and the ADL statement will be part of the record.

LEVIN: Thank you.

The disease of post-Soviet anti-Semitism has now been diagnosed, not only by those of us on this side of the Atlantic, but increasingly by our respective counterparts in the successor states. The remaining problem is how to treat the disease.

As you all know quite well, the underpinnings of anti-Semitism in the former Soviet Union are of limited relationship to the ongoing crisis in Western European. However, it is important to note that some in Western Europe are using a similar tactic of the Soviet past; trying to espouse anti-Semitic views under the guise of anti-Zionism. It did not work when the Soviet Union existed and it will not work today.

The work of this Commission and several other bodies and processes throughout the U.S. government continues to be vital in the following areas, and I want to highlight five specific points:

  • It is important, first, that monitoring, analyzing and publicizing trends and popular anti-Semitism through legislative initiatives, hearings such as this, and contacts with people from the region continue.  

  • Proposing, implementing and evaluating programs to combat anti-Semitism and promote tolerance is a second step.

  • Third, outreach to your counterparts in the OSCE community, particularly in the upcoming meetings, is vital, and it is vital to further sensitize those from the successor states. I know in the next month or so all of you will have opportunities to do just that.

  • Fourth, through official and informal statements at all levels of the U.S. Government, communicating the message that anti-Semitism and xenophobia, intolerance, all manifestations of this disease are unacceptable.

  • Fifth, when granting benefits to these countries, whether in trade, military cooperation or cultural exchange, underscore the role that shared values play in advancing our bilateral relations with each of these countries. And this is something that this Commission had done for many years and it is more necessary to do it now than ever before.

In summary, we need to criticize these countries' shortcomings, but recognize their efforts and successes.

Here is what can be done by the governments of the former Soviet Union and to some extent is being done on the ground in some of these countries:

  • First, the enforcement of existing laws in passing new measures that combat extremism, protect minority rights and send the message that a tolerant society is a successful society.  

  • Second, use the bully pulpit. Leaders at every level of society must speak out in general and against specific acts of movements that espouse anti-Semitism and bigotry.  

  • Third, translate statements and actions by top national leaders and to follow through at the regional and local levels through training and exchange programs, developing citizens' initiatives and public campaigns. This is something that the United States can help each and every one of these countries. We need to share our experiences, our knowledge in how to promote a tolerant and open society.

  • Fourth, place priority on education efforts, especially at younger students, by integrating Holocaust and tolerance units into standard curriculum. Again, this is something that's barely scratch the surface in many of these countries. And given the experience of my colleagues at this table and others, it is something that the United States Government and the governments of the OSCE need to support, not by mere words, but by concrete action through support of specific proposals.

  • Finally, religious leaders must play a special role, particularly since religion so often is misused in our world for destructive purposes. It reaches so deep into the soul of society.  

Two weeks ago, one of the leaders of the Russian Jewish community visited Washington and talked about the continued support by the Russian Orthodox Church for The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Something like this is very easy to stop and needs to be stopped, and can only be stopped through leadership.

Finally, as I said, we are working together on most of these issues together at this end and together in the successor states. The latest statements and legislation introduced by Russian President Vladimir Putin are very encouraging. However, reviving the 1997 religion law will go one step further. We still have far to go, but we have already come far indeed when dealing with the countries of the former Soviet Union.

I think it is important to note and to recognize that just a few weeks ago, President Putin did speak out forcefully against extremism and intolerance. What we need to do, whether it is President Putin, President Kuchma, the leaders in the Central Asian and Caucasus countries or anywhere in the former Soviet Union, is to translate their words into concrete deeds.

We need to emphasize this at every point of contact. It is our hope and it is our expectation that when President Bush meets with President Putin in Moscow later this week that he will carry this message, that he will recognize the positive steps that have taken place, but outline what next steps that need to be taken by the Russian government. And it is also important to note that President Bush will be meeting with NGOs in Moscow to give them the support and recognition that they deserve. And in St. Petersburg, he will make a symbolic visit to the Choral Synagogue and meet with the full representation of Jewish communal leadership throughout Russia.

I hope my analysis and recommendations will help guide this important work – your important work – in the future. And once again I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Commission, and I look forward to answering your questions.

return to top

FULL PREPARED STATEMENT 
OF MARK LEVIN

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission, it is my privilege to appear before you this morning as a supporter and as your partner in the mission to realize the fullest promise of the Helsinki process.  The Helsinki Commission is unique in the federal system, uniting the Executive and Legislative Branches with the non-governmental sector, with Commissioners and long-serving staff devoted to the Helsinki process and related international mechanisms. 

In large part due to Congressional initiative and the example and vision of this Commission, new U.S. Government partners have arisen to address these concerns.  Among these are the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the Office of International Religious Freedom and the Ambassador at Large in the Department of State, the U.S. Government Roundtable on Religious Freedom, and annual reviews such as the State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices and on Religious Freedom.  The involvement of the non-governmental community in each of these processes is a cornerstone of their authority and their success.

As you know, NCSJ is an umbrella of nearly 50 national organizations and over 300 local community federations and community councils across the United States.  We coordinate and represent the organized American Jewish community on advocacy relating to the former Soviet Union, and our membership includes the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, B’nai B’rith International, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, United Jewish Communities, and many other well-known agencies devoted to promoting tolerance and combating prejudice and anti-Semitism around the world.  This combined experience and expertise has significantly informed my comments to you today.

return to top

UNEASY PROGRESS

As this is not the first opportunity I have had to testify before the Commission, let me reflect on an irony from a previous occasion, a Commission hearing on January 15, 1999.  We could already see that state-sponsored anti-Semitism was effectively extinct, but that popular anti-Semitism was on an alarming rise in certain quarters of post-Soviet society.  At that time, I concluded with the following warning:

Anti-Semitism remains a serious threat in Russia today. Totalitarian philosophies, such as those cited above, are not concerned with human rights, and have negative views toward minority groups. Meanwhile, weak democratic structures exist in the former Soviet Union, allowing the unchecked freedom to propagate ethnic hatred and violence. The Soviet Jewry movement has made great achievements over the past three decades. Now is not the time to let a reactionary voice override these accomplishments. Now is the time for Russia’s leadership to exhibit a greater resolve in addressing this issue.

It is critical that the Russian government understand the importance of its commitment to human rights and the rule of law, and that it adhere to that commitment. It is critical that Russia develop the necessary infrastructure to support economic development, and guarantee law enforcement and the protection of civil rights of all its citizens. It is critical to advocate the prosecution of anyone, from common citizen to government official, who propagates ethnic hatred. This is the time to send a strong message to Russia, denouncing the growing anti-Semitism and urge these officials to take concrete action to eradicate anti-Semitism.

The news I bring you today is better, if not entirely comforting – better than three years ago, and better as well than at this moment in the established democracies of Western Europe.  Who would have thought that the concerns I just recalled from 1999 would become so immediate throughout the European continent?

Yevgeny Satanovsky, President of the Russian Jewish Congress, suggested an explanation for this seeming discrepancy between East and West:  While Russians and others in the successor states have only recently begun learning lessons of the Holocaust, Western Europeans may already be forgetting those same necessary lessons.  Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar of Russia spoke out last year when extremist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky dismissed the significance of the Holocaust for Russians:  “The memory of the Holocaust is a guarantee of democratic changes in our country and that it will never again turn back toward totalitarianism and any forms of hatred,” Rabbi Lazar said.

I doubt whether anyone present here today has ever taken Western European enlightenment for granted, however, least of all the member organizations of NCSJ.  This would be a luxury we cannot afford, as for us the lessons of the Holocaust and repeated persecution will always run deep.

What positive example can Western Europe offer to its eastern neighbors?  Surely, many cultural and political accomplishments come to mind.  Yet, when it comes to sensitivity on minority issues, sadly Western Europe has taken too much for granted.  Thus it is not surprising that Russians can defend restrictions on minority faiths by pointing to comparable practices in France, Belgium, and Germany.  Nor is it surprising when successor states defend votes in favor of anti-Israel and seemingly anti-Semitic United Nations resolutions by claiming to follow ‘the Western European example.’ 

The repeal of the infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution by the United Nations, passed the same year the Helsinki Final Act was signed, meant anti-Semites would have one less weapon in their arsenal of legitimacy.  Last summer’s World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, threatened to restore some of this respectability. 

Those of us in this room who confronted the Soviet-era Anti-Zionist Committee and other stale canards know the lengths to which anti-Semitic movements can hide behind the popular labels of “anti-Zionism”.  To those who would disavow any connection to anti-Semitism, we can safely reply: We know it when we see it.  My colleagues, from B’nai B’rith and Hadassah to the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, saw it and heard it in Durban.  My colleagues at United Nations Watch in Geneva experience it year-round.  These international assemblies are political and intellectual feeding tubes to millions around the world, and we must continue our combined efforts to keep out the hate and inject the spirit of tolerance and humanity.

Let me devote a few more moments to irony.  At a March 2002 conference in Bucharest, organized by the American Jewish Committee, Latvian Jewish leader Gregory Krupnikov remarked, “There is no state anti-Semitism. Obviously there is some level of public ‘street’ anti- Semitism, although it does not differ from the degree of anti-Semitism that typically exists in Europe.”  Fortunately, Latvia has not experienced “the degree of anti-Semitism” that has prevailed in Europe in the weeks since the Bucharest conference.

In conjunction with the annual International Leadership Conference of the American Jewish Committee, my colleagues and I had the opportunity earlier this month to consult with community leaders from six of the successor states, including Russia and Ukraine, and with leaders like Mr. Krupnikov from the communities in Latvia and Lithuania.  Each of these activists, for whom the Holocaust and Stalinism are local landmarks, pointed to the ironic situation in which roles have been reversed.  While in 1999, most Jewish leaders in the successor states saw a promising peace process in the Middle East and sought assistance with anti-Semitism at home, today they freely mobilize political support for an Israel under assault and consider how they can assist their Western European brethren cope with unchecked violence and hate.

How ironic that Latvia, so long under the yoke of Soviet occupation and the site of the worst kinds of atrocities during the Holocaust, should have been among the few courageous nations in Durban to vocally denounce the anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish draft platform of the World Conference.  How ironic that, while France struggles to keep its balance between the fascist super-candidacy of Jean-Marie le Pen and the unbridled attacks on Jews by North African and Muslim gangs, it is Russia whose President – Vladimir Putin – denounces xenophobia and pogroms in his recent State of the Nation address to the Duma.  How ironic that it is President Putin who is now pushing the Duma to pass new anti-extremist legislation.

Behind this irony lie decades of hard work by this Commission and many U.S. Government bodies, non-governmental organizations, and by their counterparts in the former Soviet Union.  This work is far from complete, and we must not allow the latest Western European eruption of anti-Semitism to make us forget about the very real and ongoing societal undercurrent of anti-Semitism which persists especially in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova.

We hold these post-Soviet governments accountable on efforts to condition public attitudes through education and public statements, and we challenge them to enact and enforce laws to protect minorities and others.  We do not judge their societies by how they found them among the shards of Soviet tyranny, we judge them by their commitment to moving forward.

The 1990 Copenhagen Document of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe commits the parties to “take effective measures, including the adoption, in conformity with their constitutional systems and their international obligations, of such laws as may be necessary, to provide protection against any acts that constitute incitement to violence against persons or groups based on national, racial, ethnic or religious discrimination, hostility or hatred, including anti-Semitism…”  This is a standard we have applied as a nation again and again. 

 

Incidents, legislation and statements do not tell the full story.  The counter-factuals are also instructive:  the appeals to anti-Semitism which were not evident during Ukraine’s recent national elections; the relative lack of serious incidents in Russia during last month’s anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s birthday.  As we hold nations accountable for their failures, we must also recognize their successes.

The status of anti-Semitism cannot only be measured by the number or severity of incidents.  It resides in the comfortable privacy of prejudices and whispers, and in the public insinuation of veiled references and calls for order or revolution.  In September 1999, the Anti-Defamation League released results of its "Survey on Anti-Semitism and Societal Attitudes in Russia."  The poll of 1,528 adults found that 44 percent of Russians hold strong anti-Semitic views.  Such studies are vital to assessing the scope of the problem, refining and targeting efforts to counter anti-Semitism and xenophobia, and measuring the progress.  The ADL study represents an important baseline for future research in this area.

return to top

THE SCOPE OF ANTI-SEMITISM

I have provided, as a separate attachment, a sampling of anti-Semitic activities that occurred in the former Soviet Union over the past year.  Many incidents go unreported, or uninvestigated by law enforcement, but these selected items highlight the shape of current trends in the region. 

I also wish to submit the summary of a recent report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), detailing anti-Semitism in Russia during 2001.  As the ADL summary points out:

It is believed that current Russian leadership's positive attitude toward Jewish life is a key factor helping to increase ethnic and religious tolerance and to improve the acceptance of Jews in the general society. Yet, serious steps against various manifestations of aggressive nationalism have yet to be taken on both the federal and local levels.

Our reports focus on the significant acts of anti-Semitism.  As in the United States, many random and minor acts occur in the way of vandalism or insults.  Incidents of a more serious nature involve physical harm, organized violence, systematic threats, public demonstrations, or inflammatory remarks by public officials.  Enactment and enforcement of appropriate laws must be combined with forceful public condemnation by officials of such acts. 

The following examples highlight the nature of recent incidents in the former Soviet Union:

2001

Ø      Russia, May: The Duma rejected a motion condemning anti-Semitism and fascism.

Ø      Ukraine, July: The Monastery of the Caves, a historic Orthodox church in Kyiv, printed a pamphlet with strong anti-Semitic language.

Ø      Russia, July: Arsonists attempted to burn down a synagogue in Kostroma.

Ø      Russia, December: Yekaterinburg Prosecutor’s Office charged the local Orthodox diocese of Yekaterinburg with distributing The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

2002

Ø      Russia, January: David Duke sold his newest book in the Russian Duma.

Ø      Ukraine, February: Some 200 people participated in an anti-Semitic demonstration in Lviv.

Ø      Belarus, March: Officials approved demolition of a historic synagogue to make way for the construction of apartments.

Ø      Russia, April: A homemade explosive charge detonated near the Krasnoyarsk synagogue.

Ø      Russia, April: The head of the Jewish community in Ulyanovsk was severely beaten by a radical right-wing thug.

Ø      Ukraine, April 13: Fifty youth marched two miles to get to attack Kyiv's historic Brodsky Synagogue.  Groups of youths beat at least two victims, the Head of the Lubavitch Yeshiva and the son of Kyiv Chief Rabbi Moshe-Reuven Asman.

While Russia’s new anti-extremism legislation is a positive development, its recent introduction fails to redress the many instances of political anti-Semitism and racism, whether they occur in parliamentary sessions or through regional legislation.  And during the many months and years that the Russian administration and Duma have deliberated on or failed to pass such legislation, the Jewish community and other minority groups have suffered threats, instances of vandalism, and violent physical attacks.  In some cases, communities have appealed to municipal and federal authorities, with little success, or the victims have encountered apathy or hostility from police investigating these crimes.  In fewer cases have police protection and arrests of perpetrators been forthcoming.

The sources of anti-Semitism differ from country to country.  While older Russians retain the anti-Semitism born of communism and the youth have adopted fascist dogma, Ukrainian nationalists have used anti-communist appeals to anti-Semitism.  Such variations have not, however, prevented Russian National Unity from gaining a foothold in other successor states.

Josef Zissels, Chairman of the Vaad of Ukraine, has explained the distinction between his country’s approach and that of Russia:  While Russians have seen Jews as agents in defeating Russia’s national goal of empire, many Ukrainians see Jews as a key bridge to their own national goal of integrating with the West.

In Armenia, some are using Israel’s close relationship with Turkey to fan the flames of anti-Semitism among Armenia’s younger generation. 

return to top

RESPONSE TO ANTI-SEMITISM

The nature of anti-Semitism in the Soviet successor states is notably different from Western European manifestations in two respects – the relative absence of a Middle Eastern or North African connection to the violence, and the absence of a clear pattern or motivation. 

In a further ironic twist, it is the national political leaders in the former Soviet Union – the historic hotbed of popular anti-Semitism – more than Western Europe who are speaking out strongly against anti-Semitism and xenophobia.  Unfortunately, most of Russia’s local and regional leaders have not followed suit.

These ironies in no way minimize the remaining challenges in the former Soviet republics.  We need to continue supporting programs that foster tolerance and understanding, public campaigns to lift the cloak of legitimacy from those resorting to anti-Semitism, official condemnations of actions or statements that diminish the humanity of any individual or group, and legal and institutional commitment to this cause.

RUSSIA

In his November 13, 2001, letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell, in the context of discussions to “graduate” Russia from the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov wrote:  “The fundamental objectives of our policies are to ensure personal freedom, prevent intolerance based on race, religion, and ethnicity, and our migration practices are fully compliant with the international standards… I would like to reaffirm our firm commitment to these principles, which we consider an indispensable condition for Russia’s existence and development as a multiethnic country and the development of a civil society on the basis of generally recognized rules of international law and universal morality.”  Our decades-long insistence on human rights and minority protection as the touchstone for integration into the West is beginning to pay off on a national level, and we must ensure that it filters out to the regions as well. 

The U.S. Congress most recently reaffirmed this American commitment with the introduction of Senate Resolution 234, “Reiterating the sense of the Senate that religious freedom is a priority of the United States in the bilateral relationship with the Russian Federation, including within the context of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.”  It is no coincidence that this Resolution, introduced with 26 additional cosponsors, was originated by Senators Gordon Smith and Hillary Rodham Clinton – both Members of the Helsinki Commission.

As I mentioned previously, Russian President Vladimir Putin included the following call in his April 18 State of the Nation Address to the State Duma:

The growth of extremism poses a serious threat to stability and public security in the country. Above all, I mean those who stage pogroms and beat and kill people under fascist and nationalist slogans and symbols. But the police and public prosecutors often do not have adequate instruments making it possible to bring the organizers and inspirers of such crimes to justice. In many cases only immediate perpetrators stand trial. In point of fact, however, extremist bands act as organized communities of criminals and are, therefore, subject to similar prosecution. A draft bill concerning the struggle with extremism will soon be put before the State Duma.

UKRAINE

As I have noted, the campaigns for the March 31 Ukrainian elections were notably devoid of significant anti-Semitic incidents or appeals.  In Kyiv last month, dozens of youth marched across town from a football stadium to the historic Brodsky synagogue, where they beat two members of the Jewish community, shouted anti-Semitic slogans, and smashed windows in the synagogue;  police responded with rapid arrests, although they discounted anti-Semitism as a motive. 

These and other incidents should be understood within the broader context of a sweeping revival of Jewish life.  Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, in a December 17 letter to President Bush concerning his own nation’s efforts to be “graduated” from the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, stressed the following points:

On my part, I deem it important to underline that during the years of independence our state, perhaps the only one of the post-Soviet countries, not only managed to maintain inter-ethnic peace and tolerance among the religious confessions, but also established conditions for the development of ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of national minorities.  This task is one of the major constitutional duties of the state…

The state pays special attention to creation of tolerant relations between representatives of different nationalities and confessions as well as preventing extremism and anti-Semitism.  As a result of such a policy, no facts of antagonism on the ground of anti-Semitism nor bias attitude toward members of Jewish public and religious organizations have been reported in the last years.  I take this opportunity to inform you of the preparation to the anti-Fascist congress “For a World Without Terrorism, Xenophobia and Chauvinism” to be held in Kyiv on the initiative of influential Jewish organization and under my patronage.

LITHUANIA

As an example of the situation in the Baltic States, I wish to cite from a report delivered at the Bucharest conference by Emanuelis Zingeris, Chairman of the Foundation for Jewish Cultural Heritage in Lithuania and a former leading Member of the Lithuanian Seimas:

Lithuanian intellectuals of the older generation would argue that only the appearance of anti-Semitism exists in their country, and that casual, marginal hatred of Jews has no significance. However, a poll taken two years ago by the leading Lithuanian daily, Lietuvos Rytas, revealed Jews to be among Lithuania's least popular national minorities, surpassed only by Roma. The results showed that despite the increasing availability of information on Jews, typified by the government's highly promoted release of new textbooks with a more in-depth treatment of Jewish history and the Holocaust, some anti-Semitic attitudes still prevail in Lithuania.

 

At the same time, anti-Semitic stereotypes are slowly fading from the parlance of the educated youth. The language of the mass media has become less crude in the last two or more years, although anti-Semitic content resurfaces with unexpected force in public discussions on the Middle East, particularly in anonymous exchanges on the Internet…

 

In my view, anti-Semitism has not disappeared – it just has acquired a more latent form. It may appear, for example, in public attitudes and official statements against the restoration of the Vilnius Jewish historical quarter. The surge in anti-Semitic expression that occurs in Internet discussions on the Middle East is remarkable, though.

return to top

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The following points are recommendations to make these post-Soviet societies more open and to cement the gains to date:

  • The need to monitor incidents and attitudes, practices and policies, in the successor states has never been so obvious in light of the alarming developments to their west.  Monitoring empowers local activists, it compels our diplomats to become experts and advocates in this area, and it reminds foreign governments and societies that these issues are integral to the Western culture they seek to emulate.
  • Legislation to counter extremism and racial violence is also gaining support in the region, as evidenced by the new Russian proposal.  Religion laws that set up two classes of religion – traditional and non-traditional – or abdicate decision-making authority to local officials give further credence to the notion that the state can decide which religious groups are legitimate and which are non-legitimate.
  • Without enforcement of laws on the national and local level, obviously, no legislation can have an impact.  This requires active supervision by senior officials, as well as training programs for police, government workers and community leaders in tolerance and in combating hate crimes. 
  • Without an effective court system, either violators go free or public opinion doubts the fairness of their sentencing.  This may be the most neglected facet of efforts to reduce outbreaks of anti-Semitism and xenophobia, and to transform post-Soviet societies.  If judges cannot become role models, their statements and decisions ultimately have little impact.
  • Public education efforts are gaining momentum, particularly in the Baltic States which are teaching children the lessons of the Holocaust, and the United States would do well to redouble support for such efforts.  To be truly successful and far-reaching, these efforts must be undertaken at the earliest possible age, but should also encompass opportunities for adult learning.
  • The ‘bully pulpit’ is not only available to presidents.  Public statements by government leaders at every level are indispensable to motivating society, bureaucracies, and legislators.  Official condemnation of anti-Semitism and calls for greater protection of minorities help shape public attitudes and reduce ambiguity. 
  • American leaders as well have made important public statements.  President Bush is now departing for Europe, where he will join non-governmental leaders in Moscow and visit the Choral Synagogue in St. Petersburg.  Beyond what either President Bush or Putin will say, such meetings constitute statements in themselves.  Although American statements – including Congressional letters and resolutions – reflect the values of our society, Russian statements may reflect the values to which that society aspires.  These gestures and messages carry great weight.
  • Religious leaders must also take responsibility.  The Lithuanian Catholic Church condemned anti-Semitism at a March 2000 bishops’ conference, and expressed regret that during the German occupation “a portion of the faithful failed to demonstrate charity to the persecuted Jews, did not grasp any opportunity to defend them, and lacked the determination to influence those who aided the Nazis.”  The Russian Jewish Congress has made some progress in bringing together religious leaders of major faith communities in Russia, including the Orthodox Church as well as others not recognized as “traditional” denominations in the 1997 Law on Religion.  In March, U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow convened an inter-religious panel in Kazan, with the representative of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, the Islamic Mufti, and the Archbishop of Kazan and Tatarstan.

In all of these pursuits, have no doubt that the member agencies of NCSJ and our member communities throughout the United States are already engaged and willing to step forward to share their experience and expertise.  Several organizations have major projects underway in the successor states, as well as in Central and Western Europe.  Numerous communities in the United States have partnership programs with sister communities in the former Soviet Union. 

We can also challenge our Western European allies to apply these approaches to their own societies and to increase assistance to their eastern neighbors in the same regard.  Despite the latest outbreak in the West, or perhaps because of it, there may be homegrown European approaches to this dangerous phenomenon.  Through assemblies of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), this Commission could pursue discussions along these lines.  In any international forum, not only in the OSCE but in the United Nations and related organs, countries must be held to a high standard in their speeches and voting. 

I testified in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 5, 2000, on the subject of anti-Semitism, in a hearing chaired by Senator Gordon Smith who is a Member of this Commission and who has proven himself a tireless champion and genuine ally in this cause.  In my statement then, I cited a lesson from the late Ambassador Morris Abram, a leader in the American civil rights movement and in so many American, Jewish and international causes – including the Soviet Jewry movement and NCSJ:

Responsible for the famous 1963 “one man, one vote” landmark Supreme Court ruling, Morris Abram maintained that appeals to racism and bigotry are effective only so long as society tolerates it. As America’s opinion-leaders began making clear in the 1960s that racist rhetoric was unacceptable, mainstream politicians and others stopped using it. In much the same way, delivering a strong, public and consistent message to Russian society is the most obvious way for Russian leaders to impact the public attitudes that reward anti-Semitic and xenophobic appeals.

 

We still have far to go in Russia and the other successor states.  But at some point, we must be able to discern whether the policies of our government and civil society are having an impact, and whether the efforts of post-Soviet society are also bearing fruit.  Rather than inviting complacency by comparison with the current unrest elsewhere, the real progress in these countries further obligates us to continue outreach and education, cooperation and admonition, recognition and critique.  It obligates those societies and their governments as well.   

return to top

Selected Recent Incidents in the Former Soviet Union

Violence
Political Anti-Semitism
Threats/Propaganda
Vandalism
Other Developments of Concern

VIOLENCE

2001

Belarus, November: A Jewish man is attacked by a group of unidentified people, and subsequently hospitalized in serious condition. Events preceding the attack suggest it was anti-Semitic in nature: thugs dressed in black stalking the man and his wife, telephoned threats, and anti-Semitic graffiti on their apartment door.

2002

Russia, April 22: The head of the Jewish community in Ulyanovsk is severely beaten by a radical right-wing youth.

Lithuania, April 8-12: Lithuanian Parliament members make anti-Semitic remarks in session in connection with Israel’s Holocaust Memorial Day.

Ukraine, April 13: Fifty youth marched through the streets of Kyiv for two miles to the historic Brodsky Synagogue, where they smashed windows with rocks and shouted violently anti-Semitic phrases. They beat at least two victims, the Head of the Lubavitch Yeshiva and the son of Kyiv Chief Rabbi Moshe-Reuven Asman. Official response was swift – eight arrests were made almost immediately.  However, official police reports also characterized the attacks as “brutal hooliganism” coming in the wake of a local soccer game rather than as premeditated anti-Semitism.

POLITICAL ANTI-SEMITISM

2001

Russia, February: Kremlin intensifies efforts to choose Jewish leadership, combined with efforts throughout 2000 to harass those Jewish groups out of favor.

Russia, April: Several Duma deputies, including ultra-nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, refuse to hold a moment of silence in the Duma for Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Russia, May: Nikolai Denisov (former aide to Krasnodar Governor and vocal anti-Semite Konstantin Kodratenko) accused of anti-Semitism as Krasnodar’s candidate to the State Duma. He wins election to the Duma.

Russia, May 18: Duma rejects motion condemning anti-Semitism and fascism in Russia.

Russia, November 6: Duma Deputy Nikolai Denisov employs strongly anti-Semitic rhetoric in Duma session.  

2002

Russia, January: American David Duke sells his newest book in the Russian Duma and reportedly garners support from many Duma members.  

Ukraine, February 26: A parliamentary candidate for the Ivano-Frankivsk region makes virulently anti-Semitic remarks and gestures on local television.

Russia, February 28: The new People’s Patriotic Party led by Igor Rodionov and other party officials quoted in the Russian press making blatantly anti-Semitic statements.

Latvia, March: Commemoration of SS Unit causes controversy.

Belarus, March: Property listed on historic register as a synagogue is deregistered by Belarusian officials and demolished to make way for the construction of apartment blocks.

Lithuania, April 16: Saulis Ozelis, the Chairman of a radical right-wing group, burns the Israeli flag at the town square in the town of Taurage to protest the return of property to the local Jewish community.

Russia, April 19: A homemade device explodes near the synagogue in Krasnoyarsk. Community leaders suspect the incident is tied to events marking Hitler’s birthday.

Russia, April 23: The Volgograd Regional Administration cancels an anti-Semitic program broadcast on an Administration-owned channel and threatens to stop funding to the anti-Semitic newspaper The Cossack Circle, in response to repeated appeals by the Jewish community. The editor of The Cossack Circle retires as a result.

Ukraine, March: Ivano-Frankivsk City Council proposes to grant World War II SS (Halychyna) division veterans status of ‘freedom fighters’. Heated criticism from Jewish and non-Jewish groups in Ukraine and Russia leads Council to scrap the proposal.

THREATS/PROPAGANDA

2001

Ukraine, July 27: The historic Orthodox Church known as the Monastery of the Caves, in Kyiv, prints a pamphlet with strong anti-Semitic language.

Ukraine, November: Communist Pavlo Baulin, a Ukrainian Rada Member, delivers an address before the Ukrainian House of Representatives in which he claims that “the Jewish-Gay Mafia” has gained control of state funds.

Latvia, December: Yakov Pliner, a Jewish Member of Parliament and frequent target of anti-Semitic mail, alerts the police to two pieces of particularly vicious hate mail.  

2002

Ukraine, February 20: Some 200 people participate in an anti-Semitic demonstration in the Ukrainian city of Lviv. The demonstration was organized by the Organization of Idealistic Ukrainians, which publishes the virulently anti-Semitic newspaper The Idealist.

Lithuania, March 26: At a basketball game in Vilnius between the local team and an Israeli team, some of the Lithuanian fans yell anti-Semitic epithets at the opposing squad.

Lithuania, April 20 : The radical right-wing Freedom Union, denounces the return of Jewish property in strong anti-Semitic language.  

Ukraine, April 20: A Jewish organization in Kharkiv receives an anonymous e-mail threatening an attack (‘pogrom’) on Hitler’s birthday.

Russia, April 24: Man calls in bomb threat against Moscow's Marina Roscha synagogue.

VANDALISM

2001

Russia, July: Suspicious fire causes extensive damage to Kazan’s Jewish Day School. Kazan city administration attempts to block rebuilding efforts for over a month. School is provided temporary location following lobbying by Israeli, German, U.S. and Russian governments. Kazan administration promises that permanent location will be found for school during 2002.

Russia, July: Moscow Anti-Defamation League reports vandalism of a monument to Holocaust victims in Smolensk.

Ukraine, since the end of October 2001: The offices of the Jewish Agency in Chernihiv have been experiencing harassment by skinheads, who repeatedly come to the office, curse workers and others who come to the building, smear defamatory graffiti on the walls and throw stones. Past break-ins have also been attributed to skinhead activity.

2002

Belarus, February 15: Swastikas are marked on a subway station in Minsk, and the Russian National Unity party hands out literature on their nationalist, anti-Semitic platform.

Belarus, April: Cemetery in Vitebsk is vandalized several times. Authorities accused of doing little to find perpetrators and prevent future such attacks.

Russia, March 31: Skinheads vandalize synagogue in Kostroma.

Russia, April 16: Radical right-wing elements attack the building of the Hesed Jewish charitable organization in the town of Taganrog, smashing windows and stealing plaques from the wall. Anti-Semitic slogans frequently appear on the building’s walls.

Russia, April 22: “Death to the Jews” is written on a wall of the Perm synagogue.

Russia, May 7: A synagogue door in Rostov is set on fire on Saturday. Two hours later, a window at the synagogue is shattered.

Ukraine, April 22: The Jewish community of Mykolayiv reports that a synagogue window was smashed with a rock, just missing the rabbi, who was inside.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF CONCERN

2002

Russia: Krasnodar Governor Aleksander Tkatchov has systematically deprived minority groups in the region of basic civil rights, and has recently made legal their deportation from Krasnodar. Governor Tkatchov has also reportedly failed to prevent frequent well-organized attacks by Cossack militia groups on these groups.

Russia and Ukraine: In the wake of numerous skinhead attacks on foreigners and people of dark complexion around the time of Hitler’s birthday, numerous articles in the press have questioned official motives for condemning such extremism, and even questioned the existence of racism, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism in those countries.

return to top

Anti-Semitism and Xenophobia in Russia in 2001: An Overview

Anti-Semitism remains one of the most common expressions of ethnic and religious intolerance and bias in Russia. Despite its specific characteristics and historical uniqueness, in contemporary Russian situation anti-Semitism often represents a broader phenomenon of xenophobia and intolerance that still remain widespread in Russia.

For most of Russian history of the last two centuries, anti-Semitism was official or semi-official government policy. Since the beginning of the policy of reforms instituted by Mikhail Gorbachev in the mid-1980's, and especially after the fall of Soviet Union in 1991, anti-Semitism has no longer been employed by the state or any branch of power in Russian Federation. Jewish roots no longer hinder careers, college acceptance or holding of key posts with the government institutions to which there are numerous examples.

While life has dramatically improved for Russian Jews since the fall of the Soviet Union, both in their ability to practice their religion and to emigrate if they chose, most Russian Jews still believe anti-Semitism remains a threat.

In present-day Russia, anti-Semitism continues to express itself through the activism of nationalist and extremist organizations, in various publications, and most recently via the Internet. The government of Russia appears to realize the threat anti-Semitism is posing to the Jewish minority as well as to the foundations of the nascent Russian civil society. In 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a number of statements to this effect.

It is believed that current Russian leadership's positive attitude toward Jewish life is a key factor helping to increase ethnic and religious tolerance and to improve the acceptance of Jews in the general society.

Yet, serious steps against various manifestations of aggressive nationalism have yet to be taken on both the federal and local levels. 

The presence of anti-Semitic attitudes, prejudices and beliefs across the social spectrum of Russian society usually has an indirect effect on the actual Jewish community. Outbreaks of anti-Semitic violence were relatively rare in 2001. The major concern of the Jewish community in Russia and beyond its borders remains a generally lax response on both federal and local levels when an anti-Semitic incident does take place or anti-Semitic activities are exposed. Russian civil and criminal legislation provide sufficient grounds for prosecution of those responsible for hate crimes - which constitute a punishable misdemeanor in Russia. In reality, however, legal actions are rarely taken against any of the suspects in hate crimes.  Such attitude toward hate-based crimes is evident on the part of the police and the prosecutors who are responsible for the investigative process. As a rule, Russian courts also take a relatively lax attitude toward acts motivated by bigotry, and very few cases of this nature have ever ended up in court.

The general level of violent attacks against Jews and Jewish property in 2001 remained consistent with the data gathered and published by the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish and human rights agencies for the previous year.

The major international developments that seriously affected anti-Jewish activities worldwide in 2001, the ongoing Palestinian intifada, the September 11th attack in the United States and the subsequent US-led international war on terrorism, all had a relatively minor effect on anti-Semitic activities in Russia.

In the immediate aftermath of terrorist attacks on the United States, some growth in anti-Semitic and nationalist violence has been recorded across the Russian Federation. A series of violent anti-Semitic attacks perpetrated in the course of two weeks was seen as a ripple effect of the September 11 attacks in the U.S. and the subsequent growth of minority bashing across much of Europe. In one incident, a gang of skinheads attacked four yeshiva students in Moscow. On the same day, Jewish school pupils were assaulted in the city of Orenburg, in eastern Russia, and hooligans attacked a rabbi and four Israeli Jews in the city of Omsk, in Siberia. Hooligans drew swastikas and scrawled anti-Semitic graffiti on the gate of the central synagogue in Moscow, and the next day cut a swastika into the front door of the offices of a religious Jewish umbrella organization in the Russian capital.

The most serious hate incident of the year (which did not involve anti-Semitism) took place in Moscow on October 30. Three people were killed and twenty-two injured when about 300 young people stormed an open-air market, attacking dark-skinned vendors and passers-by.  The attackers, mostly teenagers, were soccer fans. Both city and federal authorities promptly condemned this racially motivated act of violence, and police made arrests. A group of suspects in the crime is now awaiting trial at a Moscow court.  

VIOLENCE AGAINST JEWS, JEWISH INSTITUTIONS AND PROPERTY

The number of major violent attacks on Jews and Jewish property in 2001 stood at about the same level recorded by the Anti-Defamation League a year earlier, the first time that ADL applied its years-long expertise to monitoring of anti-Semitic incidents to Russia.

Twenty-four major attacks on Jews and Jewish property were reported during the year, compared to 18 incidents in 2000. Like a year before, it is widely believed in the Jewish community and among human rights groups that many more incidents, especially cases involving personal harassment, remain unreported to police, human rights watchdogs or Jewish organizations.

There were four cases involving violence against individuals on the basis of their Jewish religion or ethnicity, compared to two cases a year ago and one two years ago.

The number of incidents involving vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, usually one of the most common types of hate crimes, increased from 2 in 2000 to 5 in 2001. Two synagogues were targeted by arsonists last year, the same number as a year before. Last year vandals in five cities also attacked other types of Jewish institutions, such as charities, schools and offices of Jewish organizations.

Anti-Semitic incidents occurred in at least thirteen cities across the country in 2001, compared to nine locations a year before and seven in 1999.

Among the incidents that took place in 2001 were:  

  • the beating of Orthodox Jewish schoolboys in Moscow in September

  • the beating of Jewish school pupils the city of Orenburg in September 

  • the racially-motivated beating of a 56-year old Jewish man in Moscow in July

  • arson attack on a synagogue in Kostroma in July

  • vandalism in Jewish cemeteries in Perm, Arzamas, Velikie Luki, Krasnoyarsk, Saratov 

  • two subsequent attacks on the new synagogue in Tyumen carried out by a local neo-Nazi skinhead group in October.

 

return to top
 

    

   Home   About   Mission   Links   Interns   Kehilla   Statistics   Donations   Search   Contact

     
  2020 K Street, NW, Suite 7800, Washington, D.C. 20006 
  Phone: (202) 898-2500       Fax: (202) 898-0822  
  Email:  ncsj@ncsj.org       Web site: www.ncsj.org