Skip to main content
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track on the Olympic Games
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track onthe Olympics Games
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Brian Masse and Peter Julian look on as NDP leader Jagmeet Singh speaks at the start of a two day caucus meeting in Ottawa, Jan. 22, 2020.

Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press

A debate over the definition of anti-Semitism has spilled over to the federal New Democrats ahead of the party convention next month.

Nearly 50 NDP riding associations have endorsed a motion that opposes a working definition of anti-Semitism set out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.

Critics of the definition say it chills legitimate criticism of Israeli policy. Those who back it say it crystallizes understandings of anti-Semitism, which they say includes demonization of the Jewish state.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada adopted the definition as part of the federal government’s anti-racism strategy in 2019, one of more than two dozen countries to enshrine the non-legally binding parameters.

B’nai Brith Canada is calling on NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh to ensure resolutions against the definition are rejected.

“The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism really is the bedrock of a global effort to confront the scourge of anti-Semitism, which is just Jew hatred by a different name,” said Michael Mostyn, who heads the advocacy group.

“It does not stifle criticism of Israel whatsoever. That is a major mischaracterization, and it is something that some on the political left and within the NDP movement unfortunately seem to be picking up on.”

Some advocates and New Democrats disagree.

“The IHRA definition does very little to actually protect Jews against anti-Semitism. What it serves to do is simply to conflate anti-Semitism with legitimate protest against Israel,” said Aaron Lakoff, a spokesman for Independent Jewish Voices Canada.

B’nai Brith Canada has characterized the movement promoting boycotts, divestments, and economic sanctions against Israel as anti-Semitic under the IHRA definition, an example of how organizations can “weaponize anti-Semitism to shut down Palestinian voices,” Lakoff said.

Story continues below advertisement

His group is asking party members to support the resolution rejecting the IHRA definition.

The point of contention is not the 39-word definition itself, which describes anti-Semitism as expressions of hatred toward Jews, but rather the appended list of examples that contextualize the statement and the way some groups have applied the definition.

“The IHRA definition has already been used to attempt to silence voices of solidarity with the Palestinian people,” said former NDP MP Svend Robinson.

Referring to Twitter posts in January that created a storm on social media, he added: “It’s been used to target NDP MPs Charlie Angus and Leah Gazan, who spoke out on the issue of Palestinian access to vaccines.”

Similar accusations have been levelled about the definition being unfurled to stifle academic research and campus demonstrations.

“We also have to fight anti-Semitism with every bone in our body. Anti-Semitism is a real and grave threat. But a definition that is overly broad undermines the fight against anti-Semitism,” Robinson said.

Story continues below advertisement

The definition, with examples that include Holocaust denial and stereotypes about Jews, also states that “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination” amounts to anti-Semitism. Critics say the phrase implicitly excludes Palestinians and their right to self-determination.

But B’nai Brith rejects that argument, citing the definition’s qualifier that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.”

A letter endorsing the definition and signed by more than 100 Canadian Jewish organizations ranging from social service agencies to synagogues to summer camps landed on the desks of Singh and other NDP MPs earlier this month.

Blowback against the working definition comes from “activists” and “fringe groups,” said Richard Marceau, general counsel for the Toronto-based Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

“The NDP is in front of a choice between continuing to fight for its egalitarian open, social justice-oriented values, or make it about being Jew-obsessed,” he said.

In a meeting with members of the Jewish community in Toronto in December 2019, Singh expressed support for the IHRA definition as a non-binding measure.

Story continues below advertisement

Asked about the issue and the riding association resolution, the NDP responded with a statement from the party’s national director, Anne McGrath.

“Our conventions are guided by a democratic process that allows members to openly and freely discuss and vote on a variety of issues,” McGrath said.

“As always, there will be no tolerance for hateful speech or any form of discrimination. Jagmeet Singh and the NDP will always stand up against antisemitism and all forms of racism.”

Know what is happening in the halls of power with the day’s top political headlines and commentary as selected by Globe editors (subscribers only). Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies