UC-Irvine Graduate Student Purveys Anti-Zionism While Rejecting Anti-Semitism

In early May, leaders of the Muslim Student Union (MSU) at the University of California-Irvine (UCI) hosted “Anti-Oppression Week 2019.” Sheikh Osman Umarji, A PhD student at UCI’s School of Education, delivered a sermon underpinned by anti-Semitism and a clear denial of Israel’s right to exist. In his speech, Umarji stated the need for “courage to fight Zionism” in order to “free the Palestinians from the oppression.” He rallied against “specific Israeli government policies and Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories” while repeatedly denouncing a Jewish state in any form. Umarji also brought up the controversy of the anti-Semitic tropes purveyed by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN); he echoed her comment on Jews’ dual loyalty by asking the crowd “are we living in an alternative universe, where allegiance to a foreign entity is more important than allegiance to the country you live in?”

An extremely charged moment in the speech was when Umarji declared himself and all other supporters of “Anti-Oppression Week” as anti-Zionists but “not as antisemites and as anti-Jewish.” This claim, which is being asserted with increased frequency by critics of Israel seeking to defend themselves against allegations of anti-Semitism, goes to the heart of the definition of the phenomenon. The U.S. Department of State 2010 Working Definition of Anti-Semitism and the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Anti-Semitism provide a framework for understanding when criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism. Both definitions incorporate Nathan Sharansky’s “3D Test”—rhetoric or incidents that demonize or delegitimize Israel or hold Israel to a double standard, are anti-Semitic. The definitions provide specific examples of rhetoric that falls into these categories, and assert that criticism of Israel can be masqueraded as hatred toward Jews that manifests in attacks against Jewish property, community institutions, and religious facilities. Umarji rejects Israel’s right to exist and denies the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. According to the IHRA and State Department working definitions of anti-Semitism, “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination” and “denying Israel the right to exist” are both examples of anti-Semitism. Umarji’s self-serving declaration, not withstanding, his rejection of Israel’s right to exist and his denial of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination, are antisemitic according to both internationally recognized definitions.

Furthermore, the PhD student’s vitriolic reproach of Zionism is more than a political statement; it is an attack on an ideology that is indelible to mainstream Jewish identity. Since the Jews’ expulsion from the Land of Israel centuries ago, the promise of a return to Zion became a foundation of Jewish communal existence in the diaspora. Only in the late-19^th century did Zionism become a political movement that encouraged the establishment of a Jewish state in the Jews’ biblically-ordained Land of Israel. The longstanding impact of Zionism on the collective Jewish consciousness shows the extent to which Umarji’s speech is offensive, insensitive, and ignorant of history. It fails to acknowledge Zionism as a key solution to the Jewish problem in the contemporary world, as forces of secularization and emancipation wrought deep public skepticism over the viability of Jews’ social, political, and cultural position in the modern nation-state.

The incident at UC Irvine is not an isolated case; the conflation of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism continues to be a problem on college campuses throughout the country. Recent data shows how it has contributed to the general uptick in anti-Jewish animus in higher education. An AMCHA Initiative study concludes that the growing presence of anti-Zionist student groups and faculty boycotters against the State of Israel has fueled the rise of antisemitism on campus. In 2015, a Brandeis University survey found that the number of Jewish students experiencing antisemitism spiked to nearly 75%, and among them, almost a third reported having been blamed for the actions of Israel. Many have been deeply affected by these trends, both in terms of their involvement with the Jewish community, connection to Israel, and perception of safety. In wake of these dynamics, it is critical to promote clear definitions of anti-Semitism in order to understand the phenomenon, identify when it becomes illegitimate criticism of Israel, and call out sermons like the one given by Umarji. The Brandeis Center will continue to be a leader in the effort to quell anti-Semitism on campus and in the public domain.