Naujienos

Mr. Jiri Schneider, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic,

H.E. Ambassador Janez Lenarcic, Director, OSCE/ODIHR

Rabbi Andrew Baker, Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairman in Office for Combatting Anti-Semitism,

Esteemed representatives from the European and North American Academic communities,

Concerned members of the media,

Engaged representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations,

and last not least, fellow representatives of government ministries and bodies from  OSCE participating States,

Speaking on behalf of the OSCE Chairperson, Lithuanian Foreign Minister A.  Azubalis allow me to formally welcome you to this Prague High Level Meeting, “Confronting  Anti-Semitism in Public Discourse.”

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Issue of Anti-Semitism in the societies that make up the OSCE community of nations is hardly a new topic.

In preparing my remarks for today, I looked back over the conclusions from some twenty years of OSCE conferences, seminars and Ministerials addressing issues of human rights, minority issues, anti-discrimination, building up toleration and furthering respect for one another. 

And I read, time and again, our collective expression of concern over “manifestations of intolerance, discrimination, aggressive nationalism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, racism and violent extremism…” as threats to our OSCE value system.

It appears that despite our conscious efforts and continuous resolve over the years to deal with this scourge, this scourge of Anti-Semitism, we continue to see its threat in our midst, and the need to combat it.   

Why?

Not “why do we need to combat it?”  That is self-evident, I would hope.

But why does the threat persist despite all our efforts to contain it?  

Why are we not more successful in eradicating Anti-Semitism from our common society? 

What are we not doing right?

What should we done mora, what should be done better?

Where are we, as individuals and as societies, failing in our institutions, by our way of life, in our public discourse, that Anti-Semitism can keep coming back, and threaten the roots of our society with hatred and intolerance?

 In this High Level Meeting we will have an opportunity to take a fresh look, a current look, at three aspects of Anti-Semitism and how it is manifested in our public discourse:

1)       The “traditional” forms of anti-Semitism and stereotypes as they are still seen today;

2)       Linking international and political issues, including those in Israel and the Middle East as a means of justifying anti-Semitism;

3)       Effective ways to combat anti-Semitism in public discourse, addressing practical steps which all of us can take to combat this insidious evil. 

I do not intend this evening to pre-empt or anticipate our distinguished panelists in the discussions scheduled for tomorrow.  There are a few observations, however, which come to mind as I look at the program.

You know – we know – the old anti-Semitic stereotypes. 

If we are self-aware, we recognize them and can seek to dismiss them. 

The problem is, however, that the old stereotypes find ways to present themselves in new forms, in new clothing, as it were. 

Some of these you will recognize immediately, others may surprise you. What is disturbing is that they keep coming back again and again. 

They keep coming back, I believe, for at least two reasons:  First, too many people have been taught these stereotypes by their families, or friends, by society or religion when we were young, and easily impressionable.   A certain fundamental imprinting may occurred, and even with years of thoughtful self-examination and re-conditioning it is difficult to wholly erase what was once placed into their unconsciousness.  Rationally people can recognize it, but on an unconscious level it may still sneak up and impact their behavior and thinking, particularly when the idea or image comes in a new guise.

When I think of the unexpected attack of old anti-Semitic ideas in new forms, I think of it in terms of modern computer software.  There are new viruses being directed at our “software” every day.  And every day our awareness of the danger must be updated.  As we protect our computers, so we must also protect ourminds.

That is why we are here.  To update our awareness; to ensure that in our public discourse, in our hearing and our speaking, we protect ourselves and others from dangerous, new, viral infections. 

We need to consider ways to put an end to the cycle of re-infection.

Knowing the destructive quality of anti-Semitic images and stereotypes, we are called upon all the more to discipline our actions, attitudes ,speech that we ensure these impressions are not passed on to our children and our children’s children.  

We are called upon to find ways to teach, at an early age, the story of the Holocaust and inoculate children from the virus of Anti-Semitism.

In Lithuania we have benefitted from ODIHR which have allowed us to update existing teaching materials, and to prepare training seminars for teachers.  Other countries, Ukraine, Poland, Austria, Hungary and Latvia are following this example.  This is how we take practical steps to update our defenses against new forms and new guises of Anti-Semitism.

But I will speak about the second reason for the constant re-emergence of anti-Semitic ideas and arguments in our society, I believe, is that the framework for our “public discourse” has changed and continues to change so radically. 

Some one Hundred Fifty years ago the basis on which our public discourse was delivered  was the printed word of books, pamphlets and newspapers.  The number of writers, publishers and experts – and also readers -- was, relatively speaking, small. The tempo of the discussion was moderate.  The forum for our discussions was the town meeting, the public rally of several hundred people, a limited number in a limited place.

Some fifty years ago broadcast media added a significant new dimension to the public arena.  The numbers of participants and the speed of the discussions and exchanges grew dramatically.

But now, today, with the introduction of the World Wide Web, electronic communication and the social media, the realm of the “public discourse” has grown exponentially and proceeds literally at the speed of light.   

Every person is a potential “publisher,”

Every group can have one or more web-sites; every demonstration, gathering or rally can find voice and face on U-tube.

In short, the arena in which our public discourse takes place has become global,

and the number of participants has become almost limitless.

How are we to moderate the public discourse under these conditions?

How can there be a moderator, and yet preserve freedom of expression?

How can anti-Semitism in public discourse be identified and how to draw the distinction between acceptable and inacceptable speech?

Is it possible to prevent anti-Semitic statements without infringing on the right to free expression and freedom of the media?

Which good practices can be identified that encourage free debates in society while at the same time confront and combat anti-Semitic expressions?

To these questions there are no easy or quick solutions.

Now I turn to you with some challenges, also challenges for you for tomorrows discussions

These are rhetoric questions.

Can we the answers be found in the fundamental principles which underlie the OSCE comprehensive concept of security?

What practical role can the transparent implementation of the rule of law, protection of human rights and freedom of speech play in establishing genuine  respect for the dignity and integrity of minorities?

We know the OSCE participating States are a diverse assembly of societies and state systems.  How can we, in practical terms, build common institutions, structures, and practices to achieve and insure the lofty goals we have set for ourselves?

When dealing with Anti-Semitism, or any form of racism, or nationalism, or xenophobia or prejudices in our public and private discourse how do we balance freedom of speech and respect for the rights and dignity of “the other?”

Practically speaking, what new approaches can you suggest to create conditions of communication and trust where each party, or each group, can operate on a basis of respect for the other?

The experience of the OSCE demonstrates that only when mutual respect and trust can be established is it possible to fairly address the kernel of a complex and highly charged issue, and not be lost in the smoke, dust and heat of non-rational rhetoric surrounding it.

Much has been done, but there will always be more to do. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

Rabbi Baker,

Thank you for your role in bringing us together, we have to  to put our heads and hearts together to seek new and practical and effective solutions to the challenges to be addressed by this High Level Meeting.

I look forward with anticipation to the results of tomorrow’s panels, and discussions. All the best to you.