New antisemitism' is a flawed concept... here's why

Last month, a report commissioned by the National Union of Students NUS) and carried out by lawyer Rebecca Tuck KC published its findings into allegations of antisemitism. The main conclusions, which understandably made headlines, were that Jewish students have not felt welcome or included in NUS spaces or elected roles”, and that there have been numerous instances of antisemitism within NUS”.

- ANTONY LERMAN

The framing, focus and conclusions of the final report were welcomed by many, but this was not a universal response. In fact, some like myself believe the report to be deeply flawed in and of itself, and reflective of a far broader problem. I don’t say this lightly. I have been researching and writing about contemporary antisemitism for more than 40 years. I was interviewed in person by Rebecca Tuck, and am quoted twice in the report. But as I read through it, I was dismayed by what I found.

One weakness of the investigation and report is a lack of transparency; there is no record or evidence of the submissions made, experts consulted, or testimony given. Where sensitivity and privacy are an issue, names can rightly be redacted, but that piece of evidence must still be counted. But the key failing of the NUS report relates to what is known as the new antisemitism”.

My latest book, Whatever Happened to Antisemitism? Redefinition and the Myth of the Collective few’, traces how, over the last few decades, antisemitism has been redefined what I call the new antisemitism” to incorporate anti-zionism and various expressions of solidarity with Palestinians.