THREAD: Dr Andreas Krieg (@andreas_krieg), a German academic who teaches at King’s College London, has commented on the hysteria in his native country regarding Israel and the Palestinians with the following tweet:
@andreas_krieg “I am becoming increasingly concerned about the criminalization of discourse on the Middle East in Germany. For the time being, I would stay far away from any event organized/hosted in Germany on regional security.”
As it happens, I was several months ago invited to participate in a workshop on the Middle East in Berlin. Although I have the highest respect for the distinguished German analyst who invited me, I felt compelled to decline the invitation. I did so for several reasons.
Most importantly, the workshop was co-sponsored by the Heinrich Böll Foundation (HBS). In August 2023 an international jury, jointly convened by HBS and the state government of Bremen, awarded the annual Hannah Arendt Prize for Political Thought to the Russian-American writer @mashagessen.
It is awarded once a year to “individuals who identify critical and unseen aspects of current political events and who are not afraid to enter the public realm by presenting their opinion in controversial political discussions”.
According to press reports at the time, the range of Gessen’s writings was an important factor taken into consideration by the jury when making its decision. “In its announcement today”, Publishing Perspectives wrote on 4 August, “the program notes the sheer breadth of topical and thematic concern reflected in Gessen’s work”, further noting that the jury considered Gessen “one of the most courageous chroniclers of our time”.
The appreciation of Gessen’s courage and topical breadth would however prove to be short-lived. On 9 December 2023, Gessen published “In the Shadow of the Holocaust” in The New Yorker. An exploration of “how the politics of memory of the Holocaust and antisemitism obscure what we see in Israel and Gaza today”, it ranks among Gessen’s finest and most powerful essays. It’s still available online, and well worth reading for those who haven’t yet done so.
Germany’s commissar class by contrast went thermonuclear. Gessen, who is Jewish and lost family during Germany’s WWII Holocaust, was roundly and viciously denounced for deploying precisely those qualities for which the Hannah Arendt Prize for Political Thought is awarded. Except that in this case these qualities were deployed to examine Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians, a taboo subject in today’s Germany.
In scenes that would have made Goebbels proud, the usual epithets and slander were trotted out and flung at Gessen with abandon by politicians, newspaper editors, and the like.
Instead of simply withdrawing the prize on the grounds that courage and controversy are verboten if the subject is Israel, the state government of Bremen cancelled the awards ceremony.
Determined to demonstrate it could be even more cowardly that its partner in crime, HBS issued a press statement lauding Gessen’s “unconditional commitment to democracy and to debating uncomfortable issues” before announcing its withdrawal from the awards ceremony on the absurd pretext that “the event has lost its venue”.
As I informed the workshop organisers: “In my view this cannot be characterised as anything other than an act of political cowardice, and an indefensible capitulation to illegitimate political pressure by advocates for Israel’s most extreme policies.
That HBS sought to justify its actions with reference to the change of venue instead of forthrightly condemning the campaign against Gessen, the tactics employed, and those committing this intellectual atrocity only adds insult to injury.
It should not have been particularly challenging to stand up for the legacy of Hannah Arendt.” As expressed more succinctly by Samantha Hill in The Guardian: “Hannah Arendt would not qualify for the Hannah Arendt prize in Germany today”
There was also a second reason I declined the invitation. As I informed the organisers: “As for my own position, I have made statements similar to those which HBS apparently found sufficient to throw Gessen under the bus.
Assuming that the thought police will also be carefully vetting the event I have been invited to, I must therefore take into account the very real possibility that HBS will also disassociate itself from me.
Since I do not have the stature of a Masha Gessen, and therefore won’t be besieged by the international media for comment or be offered public venues in Berlin to defend myself and my reputation,
I am unprepared to sustain the reputational damage that would come with being thrown to the wolves by an organization with the credentials of HBS.
More generally, I have been following with increasing alarm (and, frankly, disgust ) the campaign by the German federal government, as well as regional and local authorities in Germany, to stifle voices in support of Palestinian rights and/or opposition to Israel’s mass killings of Palestinians and other policies. These include positions that are considered legitimate within Israel but apparently not so in Germany.
I’m not averse to breaking the law where human decency requires this, but am not prepared to get on the wrong side of the law or be subjected to vilification by the German authorities on account of making an intervention consisting of factual statements
and analytical observations at an academic/policy workshop.
Unfortunately, the benefits do not justify the risks and potential costs.”
In further correspondence I explained why I was unprepared to reconsider my decision: “In view of the unethical manner in which HBS responded to political pressure to throw Masha Gessen to the wolves, I have to take into account the realistic possibility that it could come under similar pressure regarding my participation in the workshop.
In my case HBS would find it much easier to respond to such pressure and throw me under the bus, and this would cause me unnecessary reputational damage. »
Since in contrast to Gessen I do not have the recognition that would motivate the international media to investigate such a decision and public figures to denounce it, nor be offered public venues to defend myself, the ramifications of such a scenario would be serious and long-lasting.
An additional concern is the current atmosphere in Germany. I lived under military occupation in Palestine for nearly a decade, and thereafter for longer in Jordan.
Absent compelling reasons I prefer to avoid situations where for reasons of personal security I need to refrain from making perfectly reasonable factual observations in the public sphere.
By way of analogy, in 2011 I spoke at an HBS function in Berlin. When I questioned the wisdom of military intervention in Libya, a member of the audience accused me of endorsing genocide . I had my say, she had hers, and that was the end of it.
I suspect that in 2023 things would end very differently if I were to express similar objections to someone speaking out in support of Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip.”
When I read about the hysteria that seems to be – once again – the norm in Germany, and the multiplying number of incidents that are crudely racist and thoroughly surreal in equal measure, I’m reminded of Eugene Ionesco’s play, #Rhinoceros.
I read it many years ago in high school and only recall its broad outlines, but for some reason every new incident in Germany reminds me of that play.
Conclusion: Andreas Krieg is not being alarmist or dramatic, but providing constructive and necessary advice to a very real and escalating problem.
Following might even have a useful impact on the situation in Germany. END
:quality(70)/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/liberation/DRS6SBMALVHRLMUMY5B4PYHCNQ.jpg){kind=link}
