The academy had been informed in advance on several occasions, and the Federal Government’s Antisemitism Commissioner had also voiced his objections. But they knew better. In our letter we therefore ask in all seriousness: where do you stand? What is your agenda?Dear Sir or Madam,
it is scandalous and intolerable that you should staff a conference on the „inability to conduct constructive dialogue“, which is „prevented by campaigns from various quarters“, with a preponderance of speakers who belong to, or are close to, the antisemitic BDS campaign.
In any dispute, every side invokes the fundamental right to freedom of expression. It is quite another matter, however, whether constructive criticism is levelled at the actions of the Israeli government or whether representatives of the BDS campaign are given a forum in which to stage their anti-Israel views. For alongside their mostly very one-sided criticism of Israel and the frequently oversimplified way in which they present the facts, supporters and sympathisers of BDS – by the very act of endorsing the BDS campaign – at the same time endorse that part of the campaign which rejects Israel’s existence and displays further antisemitic elements. One example is support for an armed and murderous „Palestinian resistance“ that is frequently directed against Israeli children and civilians as well. These aspects cannot simply be ignored.
Applied to your current conference, this means: even if you had wished to strive for balance among the speakers, you are nonetheless giving a platform to an overwhelming majority of BDS supporters – Jewish ones included (in Mr Melzer you have invited someone whom the courts have confirmed may even be described as a „notorious antisemite“).
You are likewise cooperating with highly controversial organisations such as Pax Christi. Whoever you give a platform to has their statements made socially acceptable under the protection of freedom of expression. Your guests’ proximity to the BDS campaign, repeatedly recognised at the highest political level as antisemitic, you at best studiously overlook and at worst deliberately promote.
For days now you have been made aware, away from the public eye, of the highly questionable concept behind your event, and you now publish, with your eyes wide open, a statement that clearly and unmistakably demonstrates your imperviousness to reason. Where do you really stand? What is your actual agenda?
As long as you hold events of this kind, please remain silent at the next demonstration against antisemitism, for it lacks sufficient credibility.
With irritated regards
