Israel Says Ireland ‘Crossed All Red Lines’ With ICJ Genocide Case After Closing Dublin Embassy

Debbie Weiss

Anti-Israel demonstrators stand outside the Israeli embassy after Ireland has announced it will recognize a Palestinian state, in Dublin, Ireland, May 22, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Molly Darlington

Ireland’s decision to join South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice and its support for redefining genocide in order to secure a conviction against the Jewish state is the key reason for shuttering Israel’s embassy in Dublin, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said on Monday.

The move to close the embassy, which Sa’ar announced a day earlier, marked the first time Israel has closed an embassy of a European Union member state. It was a significant escalation in already strained relations, with Jerusalem accusing the Irish government of undermining Israel at international forums and promoting “extreme anti-Israel policies.”

Ireland has “crossed all the red lines,” Sa’ar told reporters on Monday, calling the Irish government’s actions “unilateral hostility and persecution” rather than mere criticism.

“Zionism and Zionists have become derogatory words in Ireland. They called the IDF’s actions war crimes,” he said.

Sa’ar blasted Dublin for supporting legal actions against Israel at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), promoting double standards, and failing to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.

The announcement came after Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza, accusing the country of “the starvation of children” and “the killing of civilians” — remarks that Sa’ar slammed as “antisemitic” and historically insensitive. “Is Israel starving children?” Sa’ar asked.

“When Jewish children died of starvation in the Holocaust, Ireland was at best neutral in the war against Nazi Germany,” Sa’ar said. “In his victory speech at the end of World War II, Winston Churchill described how Ireland conducted an affair with Nazi Germany.”

Irish Chief Rabbi Yoni Wieder expressed regret at the embassy closure decision but echoed concerns about the Irish government’s approach.

“Ireland has chosen to vilify and roundly criticize Israel, without any recognition of the complexities of the realities in Gaza and Lebanon,” Wieder told The Algemeiner from Dublin.

“Irish political leaders have refused to acknowledge that Israel is waging war against jihadist terrorist organizations intent on its destruction. The anti-Israel narrative in Ireland has become extremely hateful, and is full of disinformation and distortions,” he added.

Wieder noted that Irish leaders had shown “no genuine concern for the plight of the hostages” taken by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, and failed to demonstrate solidarity with Israel after the attacks, in which 1,200 people were murdered and 253 taken hostage.

“In the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, while many other European countries flew Israeli flags above their government or public buildings, no such act of solidarity was shown in Ireland,” he said.

Wieder went on to say that while the embassy closure would “be a blow” for Israelis living in Ireland, many within that community view the move as inevitable.

Sa’ar accused Dublin of systematically working to harm Israel’s relationship with the European Union and adopting rhetoric that dehumanized Israelis and Zionists.

As relations with Ireland deteriorate, Israel plans to redirect diplomatic efforts elsewhere. Sa’ar announced the opening of a new Israeli embassy in Moldova, highlighting the government’s intention to focus on fostering ties with countries that show greater support for Israel.

“This is not only a matter of national pride but also of wise statesmanship,” Sa’ar said, emphasizing the importance of responding decisively to what he called persecution on the “diplomatic battlefield.”

“Acting sensibly against those who persecute the State of Israel is a matter of saving lives,” Sa’ar concluded.

Harris called the embassy decision “deeply regrettable.”

Ireland’s Foreign Minister Micheál Martin said there were no plans to sever diplomatic ties with Israel.

Ireland has been among Europe’s fiercest critics of Israel since Hamas’s Oct. 7 invasion of and massacre across southern Israel, amid the ensuing war in Gaza.

Last month, the Irish parliament passed a non-binding motion saying that “genocide is being perpetrated before our eyes by Israel in Gaza.” Ireland’s cabinet last week voted to join South Africa’s “genocide” case at the ICJ.

In May, Ireland officially recognized a Palestinian state, prompting outrage in Israel, which described the move as a “reward for terrorism.” Israel’s Ambassador in Dublin Dana Erlich said at the time of Ireland’s recognition of “Palestine” that Ireland was “not an honest broker” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Harris also called on the European Union to “review its trade relations” with Israel after the Israeli parliament passed legislation banning the activities in the country of UNRWA, the United Nations agency responsible for Palestinian refugees, because of its ties to Hamas.

Recent anti-Israel actions in Ireland came shortly after the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education (Impact-se), an Israeli education watchdog group, released a new report revealing Irish school textbooks have been filled with negative stereotypes and distortions of Israel, Judaism, and Jewish history.

Antisemitism in Ireland has become “blatant and obvious” in the wake of Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught, according to Alan Shatter, a former member of parliament who served in the Irish cabinet between 2011 and 2014 as Minister for Justice, Equality and Defense. Shatter told The Algemeiner in an interview earlier this year that Ireland has “evolved into the most hostile state towards Israel in the entire EU.”

Najlepszym sposobem na powstrzymanie Chin przed atakiem na Tajwan jest pokonanie Rosji w Europie. Jak powiedziała w tym miesiącu była prezydent Tajwanu Tsai Ing-wen: “Ukraińskie zwycięstwo będzie najskuteczniejszym środkiem odstraszającym przed przyszłą agresją”. Na zdjęciu: Tajwańczycy na marszu poparcia dla Ukrainy w Tajpej 13 marca 2022 r. (Zdjęcie: Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images)

Tajwan: przetrwanie Ukrainy jest naszym przetrwaniem

Gordon G. Chang

Tłumaczenie: Małgorzata Koraszewska

Australian PM Blames Antisemitism for Arson Attack on Melbourne Synagogue, Manhunt Underway for Suspects

Algemeiner Staff

Arsonists heavily damaged the Adass Israel Synagogue in Melbourne, Australia, on Dec. 6, 2024. Photo: Screenshot

German University Cancels Lecture by Israeli Historian Benny Morris Due to Student Protests, ‘Security Concerns’

Algemeiner Staff

Israeli historian Benny Morris in 2024. Photo: Screenshot

The University of Leipzig in Germany has canceled a lecture by Israeli historian Benny Morris following student protests described by the school as “understandable, but frightening in nature.”

Morris, one of Israel’s leading public intellectuals, was scheduled to deliver a lecture about extremism and the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, in which the Jewish state secured its independence, at the university on Thursday as part of a lecture series on antisemitism.

However, the school released a statement this past Friday announcing that it had canceled the planned event, citing protests over the lecture and what it described as security concerns.

“Our invitation to Prof. Morris was motivated by the desire to talk about his earlier work, which has had a profound impact on historical research,” the university said in its statement. “Unfortunately, Prof. Morris has recently expressed views in interviews and discussions that can be read as offensive and even racist. This has led to understandable, but frightening in nature, protests from individual student groups.”

The University of Leipzig did not elaborate on any specific comments by Morris, whose works include the seminal study The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, first published in 1988, and made a point of noting it did not endorse the historian’s views.

“In principle, inviting speakers to the university does not necessarily mean that we agree with their views, and we firmly distance ourselves from Prof. Morris’ controversial statements,” the school said. “The purpose of the event with him was to engage critically, not to endorse his theses or later statements. In our opinion, science thrives through the exchange of diverse ideas, including those that are challenging or uncomfortable. We trust that our students are able to engage constructively and critically with the guest speaker.”

Various groups including Students for Palestine Leipzig had called for the lecture to be canceled, arguing Morris — who has expressed political opinions associated with both the left and the right — held “deeply racist” views against Palestinians.

“Together with security concerns, the above points mean that Prof. Benny Morris’ lecture will not take place,” the university stated.

Morris, 75, told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that the decision to cancel the lecture was “disgraceful, especially since it resulted from fear of potential violence by students. It is sheer cowardice and appeasement.”

The groups protesting Morris pointed to comments he made in a 2004 interview in which he said that “in certain conditions, expulsion is not a war crime … When the choice is between destroying or being destroyed, it’s better to destroy … when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide — the annihilation of your people — I prefer ethnic cleansing.”

Morris, a former professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, also said that “something like a cage has to be built for” the Palestinians.

“I know that sounds terrible,” he continued. “It is really cruel. But there’s no choice. There is a wild animal there that has to be locked up in one way or another.”

The historian explained to Haaretz that those comments were made 20 years ago during the second intifada, or violent Palestinian uprising, “when terrorists were bombing buses and restaurants in Israel almost daily.”

“The word ‘cage’ that I used was indeed inappropriate, but my intention was correct — the need to place the Arab population in the West Bank and Gaza behind fences so they could not enter and explode in Israeli cities,” he said. “Israel eventually did so, and it ended the phenomenon of mass killings by suicide bombers. Perhaps today, the word ‘cage’ might very well be fitting for the Hamas murderers and their enthusiastic supporters.”

In an interview with The Algemeiner earlier this year, Morris argued that, while he “disliked” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he agreed with the premier’s policy of waging war against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.

“He’s right that the war should continue until Hamas is crushed, if only because around the region, we will be seen as losers if we don’t complete the job,” Morris said.

Despite canceling Morris’ lecture, the University of Leipzig expressed concern about the increased efforts to boycott and marginalize Israeli scholars because they are from the world’s lone Jewish state.

“Regardless of this case, we want to express our concern that a double standard is being established that is being applied to Israeli scholars, who are increasingly marginalized and excluded from events under the pretext of political differences of opinion, while other voices are given unhindered access to the university,” the university said. “This applies, for example, in Leipzig to events by colleagues who are close to the BDS movement, which is classified as a suspected extremist case in Germany. We are far from establishing a culture of cancellations, but the possibility should remain open to be able to discuss difficult and critical voices from both sides in a tough manner.”

The Algemeiner has reported extensively on wide-ranging efforts across academia to exclude Israeli scholars and institutions in accordance with the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate Israel from the international community as a step toward its eventual elimination.

America’s future depends on Trump’s promise to punish woke universities

Jonathan S. Tobin

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a rally at Mullett Arena on Arizona State University campus in Tempe, Ariz. on Oct. 24, 2024. Photo by Ash Ponders for “The Washington Post” via Getty Images.

Occidental College seemingly waved the white flag last week in its efforts to defend itself against charges of tolerating antisemitism on its Los Angeles campus. The school agreed to a “sweeping settlement” with the Anti-Defamation League and the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law that acknowledged the ongoing hardships, harassment and discrimination faced by Jewish students since the Hamas-led massacre in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Occidental’s apathy to all this, which was little different from what has been happening at dozens if not hundreds of other American institutions of higher learning, violated its obligations to prohibit such discrimination under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

But for many observers, the context for the agreement was not so much a belated interest by one school to address the wrongs suffered by its Jewish students. Rather, it was the fact that it came a few weeks after the election victory of Donald Trump. As one headline in a news article about the settlement put it, “College settles antisemitism claims before Trump can make good on accreditation threats.”

Trump repeatedly made clear during the 2024 election campaign that the educational establishment would be as much a target for his second administration as the denizens of the Washington “swamp” such as the liberal-dominated federal bureaucracy that did so much to sabotage and obstruct his first four years in the White House.

More will hinge, however, on whether he makes good on this promise than the fate of school administrators or even the safety of Jewish students.

Trump’s war on woke

The president-elect vowed to punish colleges and universities that tolerated not just the sort of antisemitism that went on at Occidental and so many other schools. He’s also determined to rid American higher education of the plague of “woke” ideology. That’s a term that refers to the way left-wing ideologues have conquered academia and imposed toxic ideas like critical race theory and intersectionality that divide humanity into two permanently warring groups of “white” oppressors and “people of color” who are their victims. The left’s long march through U.S. institutions—and that includes the arts, corporate America and government—has involved the indoctrination of a generation of students in the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) that trashes equal opportunity (the opposite of “equity”) and includes only certain approved minorities while excluding everyone else, including minorities like Jews.

Seen in that context, antisemitism is just one aspect of the broad damage that the adoption of this new secular religion by those in charge of education has been doing to America. It’s also fueling a surge in racial divisiveness and a war on the canon of Western civilization that is the foundation of a society grounded in the rule of law, which made America a great nation as well as one that was particularly hospitable to religious minorities.

That means the stakes involved in whether or not Trump keeps his vow to reform education and to turn the antisemites out are as important as any involving his second-term agenda. It represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reverse the left’s conquest of academia. If he and/or his appointees falter in their resolve, the consequences for the country as a whole and for Jews will be incalculable.

But as the coverage of the issue in liberal legacy corporate media like The New York Times and The Guardian indicates, the educational establishment and their allies on the political left and the press are determined to oppose Trump’s goals. They have already begun a campaign to obfuscate the issue and demonize efforts to roll back the woke orthodoxy as part of what they routinely and falsely describe as the next administration’s putative authoritarian putsch. The truth is just the opposite since the real authoritarians are the bureaucrats and “educators” who have been imposing their distorted neo-Marxist vision on the country while also fomenting and enabling a new wave of antisemitism.

Ironically, the legal settlement with Occidental, which was celebrated by both the ADL and the Brandeis Institute as a victory in the effort to push back against campus antisemitism, was an indication of just how feeble the effort to counteract woke antisemitism has been up until now.

The agreement involved some elements that are necessary such as efforts to train school administrators to be more aware of antisemitism and to take into account the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)’s working definition of antisemitism when dealing with instances of Jew-hatred.

But the lawyerly document Occidental signed leaves plenty of leeway for it to evade responsibility for future violations. It can be defended as probably as much as could be achieved in such a negotiation at this point in time.

Title VI antisemitism complaints to the U.S. Department of Education—the primary mode of carrying on the fight against this scourge in recent years—involves a lengthy process that has, to date, never resulted in any real punishment for even the most egregious violators of the rights of Jewish students. Stripping a university of its federal funding—something that is a given for any institution that engaged in open discrimination against African-Americans or Hispanics—is the sole remedy that could, if fully implemented, mean a much-needed fundamental change in the way American higher education operates.

And as long as schools retain their woke administrators and faculty, as well as curricula that discard traditional standards and help fuel antisemitism, agreements like the one with Occidental are almost certain to fail to create the kind of change that is needed.

Draining the swamp

That is why Trump’s scorched-earth approach is so necessary, even as it is being denounced by the same people who are responsible for creating or perpetuating the current mess as too extreme or even needed at all.

Trump’s stated intention of “draining the swamp” throughout the federal government is being depicted as evidence of his supposed authoritarian impulses and racism. But this is exactly the sort of argument based on a high-handed dismissal of genuine concerns and problems that have caused so many Americans to lose faith both in our educational system and in Washington.

His threats can seem crude to those accustomed to politicians being guarded in their remarks. Yet the events of the last few years—starting with the moral panic about race behind the Black Lives Matter riots and then on to the post-Oct. 7 surge in antisemitism—demonstrated that a restrained “business as usual” approach won’t cut it when the collapse of our most cherished institutions is at stake. Their transformation into purveyors of neo-Marxist indoctrination and toxic ideas that enable hatred for both the West and Jews is a crisis of enormous proportions. It is happening at both the college and graduate levels, as well as in K-12 schools where leftist teachers’ unions have also imposed the indoctrination of critical race theory.

The only reasonable response to this disaster is exactly the kind of tough-minded purge that Trump has envisioned. And far from this being an uninformed or extreme approach, Trump and his transition team are consulting with experts like Christopher Rufo, author of an authoritative and essential book on the woke plague—America’s Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything—and incorporating the ideas of “Project Esther,” a serious plan for dealing with campus antisemitism produced by The Heritage Foundation.

All of this has produced panic on the left and even among mainstream liberals who have been conditioned by partisan political rhetoric to believe that Trump is a second Hitler. They worry that he is already going too far in seeking accountability for institutions that engage in racial discrimination and tolerate antisemitism under the guise of DEI “anti-racist” policies, believing that somehow this will destroy academic freedom. What his critics fail to recognize is that American education is already enduring a catastrophic transformation that has silenced dissent against woke doctrines that seek to trash the Western canon.

A necessary sledgehammer

The only way to fix it is with the same sort of Trumpian sledgehammer that tossed aside failed ideas about the Middle East in his first term that enabled him, among other important policy changes, to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and forge the Abraham Accords. If that means executive orders reversing President Joe Biden’s DEI orders that created woke commissars in every federal agency and department, that should be welcomed. If it means closing the largely useless and counter-productive Department of Education and enacting far-reaching reforms that will defund institutions clinging to discriminatory ideas and actions, then that should be cheered by those who cherish the values of equal opportunity, merit and zero tolerance for hatred and discrimination.

More to the point, it will mean that policing antisemitism on campus will be shifted away from the ineffectual Title VI complaints to federal education bureaucrats to a campaign of lawsuits conducted not just by groups like the Deborah Project, valuable though they may be, but by the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, with all of the vast resources at its command. In this manner, a message can be sent that will likely motivate the vast majority of college administrations to discard DEI and the tolerance of hate for Jews that accompanies it.

It is impossible to know whether the new administration will succeed. But rather than worrying that he is the wrong instrument to carry out this effort or wasting time decrying his rhetoric, it’s likely that only an outlier like Trump could contemplate such a bold project or have the will to see it to its logical end. Indeed, so grave is the threat that DEI and other leftist ideas pose to the country’s future that anything short of what he has discussed would be inadequate. Instead of expressing horror at his determination to enact real change, fair-minded Americans of all faiths and in both major political parties should be rooting for him to keep his word and to do everything he promised to punish colleges and universities, in addition to any other entity that promotes the sort of woke hate that has made life for Jewish students and anyone else who dissents against the new secular orthodoxy so difficult.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him @jonathans_tobin.