Abc of antisemitism

The handbook “ABC of Antisemitism” offers everything you need to know about contemporary antisemitism in one place. It is the first information resource of its kind in the Republic of Serbia, intended primarily for professionals in the media, the culture of remembrance, and education.

Info-circled Info-circled

About This English Edition

This English edition is a translation and adaptation of a handbook originally written for use in Serbia and the Western Balkans. Its emphasis reflects regional realities, common misconceptions, forms of antisemitism, public debates and educational needs most relevant to this context. The handbook can be used more broadly, but readers should keep in mind the Serbian and regional setting in which it was developed.

Author: Miško Stanišić; Expert advisors: Dr Aleksandar Stojanović and Nevena Bajalica;
Download the PDF edition of the handbook. You can receive a printed edition by mail for the cost of delivery.

Antisemitism is present in every European society, including our own—to varying degrees, sometimes more openly, sometimes less visibly. Unfortunately, this is nothing unusual. For centuries, antisemitism was woven into ideologies and worldviews that shaped our understanding of the world and the societies in which we live. Even today, when we understand how toxic and dangerous it is, it remains part of our collective subconscious, lurking in the darker corners of European cultural identity.

As in other countries, different manifestations of antisemitism and antisemitic attitudes can be found across the entire social and political spectrum in the Republic of Serbia: from the radical political left, through the centre, to the extreme right. We can hear it wrapped in pro-Russian and anti-EU propaganda. It occasionally surfaces in discussions on television channels with national broadcasting licences, just as it sometimes “slips out” in opposition media. We find it hidden behind political propaganda and the manipulation and misuse of Holocaust history. It can be glimpsed behind nationalist slogans and warnings that “we are under threat.” We hear it in casual everyday conversations over afternoon coffee, in passing, at work, on the bus. Sometimes we even encounter it in the classroom—voiced by a history teacher. We see it on walls covered with graffiti and in marker scribbles in lifts. We can even find it in some bookshops, openly displayed on shelves. It is almost impossible to avoid on social media. And if we look a little more closely, and more honestly, into the darkness, perhaps we may even find traces of it within ourselves.

To confront antisemitism, we must first be able to recognise it. And to recognise it, we need at least a basic understanding of what antisemitism is and how it manifests itself.

When our colleagues from the NGO Haver Serbia in Belgrade were targeted in a vicious antisemitic attack on 7 November 2023, I honestly—and naively—believed that the public in the Republic of Serbia would be appalled by the words written on the wall outside their premises: “Haver, get out of Serbia.” I was certain that the media, non-governmental organisations and civil society, as well as state institutions—including the Ministry for Human and Minority Rights, the Ministry of Education, not to mention the police and the public prosecutor’s office—would respond swiftly and forcefully. I expected them not only to condemn this shameful antisemitic act, but also to initiate a whole range of measures and activities. I thought the perpetrators would be quickly identified and brought to justice, that institutions would introduce preventive and educational measures, and that we would be better prepared to ensure that something like this would not happen again.

Instead, there was silence.

That silence shocked me even more than the attack itself. The fact that there are people willing to write “Haver, get out of Serbia” is horrifying, but imaginable. What is devastating is that, by and large, our entire society—or so it seemed—simply did not care.

The few statements that were issued, and the very limited attention the incident received in the media and wider public discourse, were nowhere near sufficient or proportionate.

On social media, by contrast, the attackers—although hidden behind avatars and without revealing their real identities—openly gloated, shared photographs of their “successful operation,” mocked others, and continued repeating antisemitic hate speech. By far the largest number of comments beneath their posts were positive and supportive. The small number of people who expressed criticism were overwhelmed by dozens of others who insulted or ridiculed them.

When I wrote a critical post about all of this on LinkedIn—a professional network where people generally communicate without the comfort of anonymity—the discussion that developed beneath my post completely shocked me. Dozens upon dozens of people, all using their full names, listing their workplaces and the companies they worked for, openly posted antisemitic statements without hesitation, shame, or apparent fear of consequences.

Alongside insults and threats directed at me personally, the “discussion” ranged from ignorance to prejudice, from lies to myths, from one increasingly bizarre conspiracy theory to the next. People explained who Jews “really are,” which wealthy Jew supposedly has more power than another and actually runs the world, how “Jewish Nazism is the worst,” whether Hitler was Jewish or merely a Khazar and a Freemason, and which Jews are “good” and which are “part of the renegade tribe.” I simply could not tell where expressions of hatred ended and complete ignorance began—or whether the two had become inseparable.

The level of ignorance was shocking, as was the fact that participants had no hesitation about saying such things publicly under their full identities. Apparently, they either genuinely believed these claims were true and part of commonly accepted opinion, or they assumed that there would be no consequences for them—legal, moral, or professional. I had assumed that, if nothing else, people might refrain from writing such things out of concern that a potential employer or business partner might find them one day.

In these discussions, I also noticed that some participants interpreted the warning that antisemitism exists in our society, and the call for a systematic response to it, as some kind of “accusation” against the Republic of Serbia or the Serbian people. Some reacted to it emotionally and aggressively, with insults and threats. This is a completely unfounded and mistaken interpretation. Opposing discrimination against citizens from minority communities is a sign of the strength and responsibility of a state and society—something that should be a source of pride for all of us, not shame.

It is important to emphasise that, alongside civil-society initiatives in this field, there are also positive examples and tendencies in institutional work. The Republic of Serbia is a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). On 26 February 2020, the Government of the Republic of Serbia adopted the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism, an important first step and a foundation for further work. Nevertheless, long-term, effective and systematic strategies for combating antisemitism are still lacking.

In the meantime, a number of further antisemitic incidents have taken place. The most serious was certainly the attack in which a radicalised Islamist who attacked a gendarme guarding the Israeli Embassy in Belgrade was killed. The attacker, a Serbian citizen, had previously surveyed potential targets: the Sukat Shalom Synagogue in Belgrade and the Jewish Community building on Kralja Petra Street, before ultimately choosing the Israeli Embassy. This shows that the targets were Jews—any Jews—not specifically Israel. Once again, however, neither public discourse nor official statements unequivocally identified the attack as antisemitic. It was described as terrorism, but the word antisemitism was not used.

The silence after the attack on Haver Serbia, the reactions that followed on social media, and the absence of institutional measures and long-term strategies for combating antisemitism—together with an insufficient understanding that such measures are needed—led me to think about what we could do, simply and quickly, to begin changing this situation in the Republic of Serbia for the better.

This led to the realisation that it would be useful to have a single reference resource containing at least the most basic information about key concepts and the most common questions and misconceptions related to antisemitism. Such a resource would need to be written in clear, accessible language and in a concise format. It should primarily serve those who shape public opinion and public understanding of antisemitism: media professionals, those working in the culture of remembrance, educators, policymakers and decision-makers.

At the same time, such a reference document should be available to everyone who cares about building a society grounded in human dignity, the rule of law, pluralism and tolerance, and who would like to broaden their understanding and consider how they themselves can help ensure that antisemitism and other forms of intolerance, discrimination and hatred are recognised and confronted before they are allowed to spread.

The result of this idea is ABC of Antisemitism—a collection of 26 sections providing concise explanations of key questions and concepts related to antisemitism.

I invite media professionals, educators, cultural professionals and decision-makers to use ABC of Antisemitism as a reference for finding answers about antisemitism, for responsible reporting, for education, and for developing policies to confront this centuries-old hatred.

January 2025

Miško Stanišić
Director of Terraforming, President of the Center for Combating Antisemitism (CBA), and member of the delegation of the Republic of Serbia to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)

Book in hand
Download Download DOWNLOAD PDF

1. Who are the Jews?

Jews are a heterogeneous ethnic community linked by a certain sense of collective Jewish identity. As with other peoples the sense of identification and belonging to the Jewish community is individual and can be based on very different elements: from upbringing, culture, and tradition, a sense of connection with relatives and the local community, shared historical experiences, to religious, spiritual, or philosophical motives.

More than 3,500 years ago, Judaism emerged as a monotheistic religion among the Jewish people. By the end of the second millennium BCE, Jewish kingdoms had emerged in the ancient Land of Israel. Following a series of conquests and periods of foreign rule, the Romans destroyed the Second Temple in the 1st century CE and, following further Jewish revolts, expelled or displaced large numbers of Jews from the region. Jewish communities had already existed outside the Land of Israel, and over the following centuries the Jewish diaspora grew and spread across many parts of the world—from Europe and the Middle East and North Africa to North and South America, South Africa, and Australia. As a result, Jewish culture and identity encompass elements of many different cultures, languages, and traditions, while Jewish communities have also left their mark on the societies in which they have lived. Throughout history, Jews have made significant contributions to world culture, science, art, philosophy, and many other fields.

As with other nations and ethnic groups, a sense of belonging to the Jewish people is a central element of identity for some people, while for others it plays a less significant or only marginal role. A person’s sense of belonging or identification with a national, ethnic, or religious group can vary depending on the context and may become more or less important at different points in their life.

For religious Jews, Judaism is an important part of their identity. For secular Jews, important elements of Jewish identity may include culture, traditions, customs, a sense of family and ancestry, and connections with immediate and extended family.

For many Jews, a shared history is an important part of their identity. This includes centuries of experiences of discrimination, persecution, and pogroms, as well as experiences of survival, resilience, resistance, and achievement.

Another important element of collective Jewish identity for many Jews is the experience of the Holocaust—the systematic attempt by Nazi Germany and its collaborators to murder the Jews of Europe during the Nazi era.
For some Jews living in Israel, Israel is an important element of their national identity.

However, despite the shared experiences and connections that contribute to a sense of collective Jewish identity, Jews living in the same country or in different countries around the world hold diverse political, economic, cultural, religious, and other views, attitudes, and interests. In this sense, Jews are a highly diverse group, like most other peoples.

2. What is antisemitism?

Antisemitism is a specific form of hatred directed at Jews based on deeply rooted prejudices, stereotypes, and lies. Antisemitism can be directed at Jews as a group or as individuals, the Jewish community, institutions, and organizations, but also at non-Jews. Antisemitism is the oldest form of hatred in history that remains widespread today. Antisemitism permeates European history and is embedded in European cultural heritage and identity. It is present today throughout the world, including in Serbia.

Antisemitism is a form of xenophobia and racism that can be most simply defined as hatred of Jews. It is rooted in prejudice, stereotypes, forgeries, lies, and myths. Antisemitism can also be directed at non-Jews, individuals, groups, or organizations whom antisemites perceive as Jewish or associate with Jews, even when they are not Jewish. It may target individuals, whether ordinary citizens or public figures; the ethnic and cultural identity of Jews; Judaism as a religion; the State of Israel as a symbol of the Jewish collective; real or imagined Jewish institutions and organizations; and even political, scientific, philosophical, and other views, movements, and ideas, regardless of whether they have any actual connection to Jews.

3. Antisemitism is the "canary in the coal mine"

The appearance of antisemitism signals social problems and indicates a threat to the basic rights and freedoms not only of the Jewish community but of all citizens and society as a whole. The presence and prevalence of antisemitism is an indicator of a broader social crisis, and a society’s response to antisemitism is a measure of the threat to or the strength of pluralism and the democratic order in any society.

The term “canary in the coal mine” is used to describe antisemitism as an indicator of a broader social crisis. In the past, miners used canaries to detect toxic gases: if a bird died, it was a warning that the miners were in danger. Similarly, antisemitism can be one of the first signs that other freedoms and rights in society are under threat. When antisemitism becomes more visible in society, it may indicate that other minority groups are also at risk. Combating antisemitism is not only a fight for the rights and safety of Jews, but also a fight to protect fundamental human rights and democratic values. Historically, societies that tolerated or encouraged antisemitism often descended into authoritarianism, violence, and oppression. Therefore, combating antisemitism is essential to preserving pluralism and the democratic order in any society.

4. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism

The non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), adopted in 2016, has established itself as the most important globally accepted document relied upon by governments, parliaments, international bodies, institutions, sports federations, universities, civil society, business entities, and many others to understand and identify antisemitism, and to create strategies and guidelines for the fight against antisemitism. By July 2024, the definition had been adopted or endorsed by the parliaments and governments of over 45 countries, including the Government of the Republic of Serbia by a decision on February 26, 2020.

With 35 full member countries, including the Republic of Serbia, which joined in 2011, and permanent partner organizations such as the United Nations, UNESCO, the OSCE, the Council of Europe, and the European Union, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) is the leading intergovernmental organization and international authority on identifying challenges, shaping policies, and developing and implementing guidelines and recommendations related to Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism.

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism, a non-legally binding document, was adopted in 2016. Since then, it has become one of the most widely recognized international frameworks for understanding and identifying antisemitism, and is used by governments, parliaments, international organizations, institutions, sports federations, universities, civil society organizations, and others. The definition has been adopted or endorsed by governments and parliaments in more than 45 countries, including the Government of the Republic of Serbia, which formally adopted The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism on February 26, 2020, at a session of the Government. In Serbia, the document can therefore serve as a basis for developing policies and guidelines for identifying and combating antisemitism, as well as strategies for strengthening the knowledge and professional capacities of relevant institutions and professionals, including those working in public administration, the judiciary, the police, journalism, education, and culture.

The full definition is available on the website of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), including a Serbian translation. It reads:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The definition goes on to explain:
“Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for ‘why things go wrong.’ It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.”

The definition also provides a series of contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and religious settings.

Read the full text on the IHRA website:
IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism

5. The term "antisemitism"

Although the thesis of “Semitic peoples” as a racist concept is outdated in contemporary science, and the word “antisemitism” itself was created as an expression of hatred toward Jews, the term “antisemitism” has remained to this day and denotes a specific form of hatred directed toward Jews. The term “antisemitism,” since it was coined, refers exclusively to Jews. It has never had other meanings. Claims that the term ‘antisemitism’ refers, or can refer, to peoples or groups other than Jews are incorrect and unfounded.

The concept of “Semitic peoples” in a racial context emerged as early as the 1770s. At the beginning of the 20th century, pseudoscientific theories rooted in racist worldviews promoted the idea of “Semitic peoples” as a distinct ethnic, cultural, and racial category encompassing Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians, and other peoples. Today, the concept of “Semites” or “Semitic peoples” is considered outdated and is rejected by contemporary scholarship. The term is no longer used in this sense, except in linguistics, where it refers to a group of languages known as the “Semitic languages.”

The term “antisemitism” was coined and popularized by the German journalist and politician Wilhelm Marr in the late 19th century. Marr was an outspoken antisemite and a fierce opponent of the emancipation of Jews and other minority groups in modern German society. By introducing the term “antisemitism,” he sought to emphasize hostility toward Jews based on their perceived ethnic origin rather than solely on religious grounds. In 1879, Marr also founded the Antisemites’ League, the first German organization dedicated specifically to combating what it portrayed as the alleged “danger” posed by Jews to German society.

Thus, the term “antisemitism” itself emerged as an expression of hostility toward Jews, essentially, the very form of hatred that we today call antisemitism.

6. How is antisemitism expressed?

Antisemitism can manifest in many ways and in different forms: from subtle antisemitic allusions, discrimination, the spread of antisemitic conspiracy theories, and threats, to physical violence. Every manifestation of antisemitism is toxic and unacceptable, even in cases where the act of antisemitism takes place where there are no Jews.

Antisemitism can be expressed and encountered in virtually every form of human communication and interaction and in all spheres of life: through “jokes,” indirect or explicit verbal attacks and accusations, graffiti in public spaces, caricatures, and internet “memes”; through the desecration or destruction of Jewish symbols and property; through Holocaust denial and distortion; through anonymous or direct threats against Jewish individuals, communities, or institutions; and, ultimately, through violence, pogroms, and murder.

Antisemitism can be expressed openly and directly, targeting a specific victim, whether a Jewish individual, an ordinary citizen, a public figure, or the Jewish community or its institutions. In such cases, the antisemitic act is intended to intimidate, insult, humiliate, distress, or harm the victim. However, antisemitism can also be expressed in contexts where no Jews are present and there appears to be no direct victim. It is important to emphasize that such acts are still antisemitic incidents, because every manifestation of antisemitism is harmful and unacceptable.

Antisemitism can take the form of political, economic, and social conspiracy theories. It can be found in the rhetoric and political views of groups on both the far left and the far right, and may be clearly visible in banners, flags, symbols, and slogans displayed at demonstrations organized by such groups. It is also present in football stadiums, where certain fan groups use antisemitic chants and symbols. Antisemitic views can also be found among some religious leaders and in religious propaganda, both Christian and Muslim. Antisemitism is particularly dangerous when it is exploited by groups that use the language of faith as a cover for radicalization and terrorist recruitment. It can also appear in education, in schools and universities, among teachers and professors, in textbooks and teaching materials, and among pupils and students.

Antisemitism often manifests itself through indirect references and insinuations in everyday conversations. It can also be found in popular culture and pseudoscientific literature. It is particularly widespread in the digital sphere, including social media, websites, and online news portals. Antisemitic content may also appear in video games and is frequently disseminated through social media posts, comments on posts and articles, podcasts, and other digital formats.

Antisemitism is often expressed through “coded” language, in which Jews are not mentioned directly but are referred to through indirect allusions. Such references may include claims about “globalists,” “wealthy families who rule the world,” “Khazars,” “Masons,” “Zionists,” “those behind the deep state,” or “the powerful who really control global monetary policy, the stock market, or the media,” and similar expressions.

7. How are victims of antisemitism affected?

Antisemitism has serious consequences for its victims, who often feel isolated, helpless, and abandoned. Insults, harassment, humiliation, threats, and fears for personal safety can leave victims of antisemitism especially vulnerable. The existence of latent or open antisemitism in society often leads the victim to hide their Jewish identity. Antisemitism leaves psychological and emotional consequences that can be transmitted from generation to generation.

Antisemitism can have profound psychological and social consequences for its victims. People exposed to antisemitism may feel compelled to hide their Jewish identity for fear of discrimination or violence. A persistent sense of insecurity can lead to isolation, anxiety, and depression. Antisemitism affects not only individuals but also entire families and communities, which may face vandalism, attacks on synagogues, and other forms of violence. Its long-term consequences can include social marginalization and the weakening of a sense of shared identity.

To avoid “revealing” their Jewish origins or connection to the Jewish community, victims of antisemitism may hesitate to express their opinions, avoid socializing with other Jews, refrain from observing Jewish holidays, or stop practicing their culture and traditions. In extreme cases, under prolonged stress and pressure, victims may decide to emigrate, hoping that elsewhere they will be able to live in safety and enjoy the same freedoms and rights as other citizens.

When young people witness or experience antisemitism in their communities, they may feel particularly humiliated, frightened, and vulnerable.

8. Who are the antisemites?

As the oldest form of hatred, antisemitism has for centuries been widespread and therefore, antisemitism can still be found today in all parts of society—among the rich and poor, men and women, old and young, highly educated and uneducated. Antisemites are individuals or groups who express hatred toward Jews and everything they consider “Jewish” or associate with Jews, whether for political, cultural, religious, nationalist, or racist motives, and sometimes as a result of misinformation. Regardless of the motives, all forms of antisemitism are unacceptable not only because they threaten the Jewish community but also basic civic and democratic values, and thus all citizens.

Antisemitism is often associated with far-right or far-left ideologies and with religious extremism. Some antisemites are open about their views and clearly express hostility toward Jews, while others are more subtle, including individuals and movements that use antisemitic rhetoric in less explicit ways. However, it is important to understand that antisemites are not limited to fascists or religious extremists, as is sometimes assumed. Antisemitic attitudes can also be found among ordinary people in our communities. Antisemites come from different social backgrounds and ideological perspectives—from outspoken extremists and entrenched antisemites to ordinary people who have been influenced by stereotypes and conspiracy theories.

Sometimes, people are unaware of their own prejudices or fail to recognize that their words and actions can deeply offend and seriously endanger Jewish individuals and communities. In this way, they may contribute to the spread and normalization of antisemitic stereotypes, lies, and conspiracy theories without realizing how directly their actions can affect people in their immediate surroundings: fellow citizens, neighbors, colleagues at work or school, and even close friends. Unfortunately, there are also those who knowingly spread hatred and disregard its consequences. Groups and organizations that deliberately promote antisemitism are generally aware of the nature and potential consequences of their actions.

9. Antisemitism through history

The characteristics and manifestations of antisemitism have changed over time, adapting to different cultural, religious, and political contexts. One of the defining features of antisemitism is its persistence and its ability to transform and adapt to new social situations in different periods. Although it has changed throughout history, antisemitism has always been based on old and well-known myths and stereotypes that only changed form, but not essence. We can define several of the most characteristic forms of antisemitism through history:

  • Christian antisemitism,
  • Traditional antisemitism,
  • Racial antisemitism,
  • Nazi antisemitism,
  • Contemporary antisemitism.

Antisemitism has evolved over the centuries, shaped by a range of cultural, religious, and political factors:

  1. Christian antisemitism: This form of antisemitism emerged with the rise of Christianity and efforts to assert Christianity’s superiority over Judaism as the older monotheistic religion from which Christianity drew its roots, and over the Jews as the people on whose fate the Old Testament is based. Characteristic is the blaming of Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, that is, accusations of “deicide.” Christian religious antisemitism created deeply rooted prejudices against Jews in Christian societies, which led to various forms of persecution for centuries.
  2. Traditional antisemitism: During the Middle Ages, Jews were often declared guilty of the most diverse social problems. Jewish communities were subjected to expulsions and pogroms (England 1290, France 1306, Spain 1492). They were accused of blood libel (the absurd lie that Jews use the blood of Christian children in religious rites) and usury (lending money with interest) and were victims of violence in mass riots, especially during crises such as the plague epidemic, when Jews were accused of spreading the disease.
  3. Racial antisemitism: In the 19th century, with the development of pseudo-scientific racial theories, antisemitism shifted from religious prejudice to racial hatred. Jews were now seen not as a religious group, but as a separate, essentially different inferior “race” that could not be assimilated into the newly formed nations. This form of antisemitism emphasized biological determinism and was linked to European colonialism and imperialism.
  4. Nazi antisemitism: Under Nazism, antisemitism reached its most destructive form. Deeply rooted in racial antisemitism, Nazi ideology portrayed Jews as an existential threat to the German people and the “purity of the Aryan race, responsible for all social problems and as being behind all of Germany’s ‘enemies,’ from capitalism to Bolshevism. This culminated in the systematic murder of six million Jews during the Holocaust—a crime in which, besides the Germans, numerous collaborators and associates, and millions of passive observers across Europe, participated.
  5. Contemporary antisemitism: After the Second World War, antisemitism did not disappear. Today it manifests in various ways, including the denial or distortion and abuse of Holocaust history, the demonization of Israel, as well as numerous conspiracy theories suggesting that Jews control global finance, the media, or governments. Many of the antisemitic myths in contemporary society have their roots in very old absurd accusations against Jews, so that, for example, the conspiracy theory that Jews were behind the Covid-19 pandemic is in fact only a modernized form of the old accusation about poisoning wells and spreading the plague. Antisemitism is often linked to other forms of xenophobia and racism. Characteristic of contemporary antisemitism is also hostility toward the State of Israel, especially when hostility is disguised as criticism of Israeli policy while denying Israel’s right to exist. Today, antisemitism remains a constant threat, characterized by violence, terrorism, and attacks on synagogues, Jewish schools, and individuals.

The history of antisemitism reflects its persistence and adaptability across different periods and contexts, as well as its deep roots in cultural, religious, and political systems. From early Christian anti-Judaism to Nazi antisemitism and contemporary forms of hatred, antisemitism has remained a powerful and dangerous force. Understanding its historical context and evolution is essential to recognizing and combating its contemporary manifestations.

10. Antisemitism in Serbia

Although Jews are an integral part of Serbian history and culture, antisemitism has been present in Serbia in various forms. Between the two world wars, right-wing and pro-fascist movements in Serbia propagated antisemitic ideas. After the war and the enormous suffering of Jews in the Holocaust, antisemitism was present in less obvious forms, but it has strengthened again since the 1990s. Contemporary antisemitism in Serbia appears in different forms. It can be found in xenophobic narratives about minority groups, pro-Russian and anti-European propaganda, conspiracy theories, the abuse and manipulation of Holocaust history, anti-Israel forms of antisemitism, traditional antisemitism, and nationalist narratives. Antisemitism in Serbia today is promoted and spread by various anti-democratic forces, right-wing and left-wing extremists, radical Islamists, but also ordinary citizens, many of whom are not even aware that they are expressing and spreading antisemitic views, which makes the problem more complex.

In the period between the two world wars, as in other parts of Europe, antisemitism inspired by racist ideas and fascist political ideology emerged in Serbia. During the Second World War, the occupying authorities were assisted by the Nedić government, the Ljotić movement, the gendarmerie and special police, as well as by parts of the Chetnik movement, in spreading antisemitic propaganda and in identifying, arresting, detaining, and systematically murdering Jews in Serbia.

Over the past thirty years, since the wars of the 1990s, antisemitism has become more visible in Serbian society. Contemporary antisemitism in Serbia occurs within a broader context of radicalization, intolerance, xenophobia, and racism, characterized by hostility, and often open hatred, toward various minority groups and toward those perceived as “other” or different.

Antisemitic literature is available in bookstores in Serbia. Hundreds of antisemitic titles have been published by various publishing houses, including both new works by Serbian authors and reprints of works by Serbian collaborators and other known antisemites from the Nazi era.

Certain tabloids occasionally publish antisemitic texts or articles by authors whose views can be associated with antisemitism. Some television stations in Serbia, including some with national broadcasting licenses, periodically invite guests who express antisemitic views and promote antisemitic propaganda. There have also been instances in which television stations have broadcast openly antisemitic material produced abroad or taken directly from controversial and racist YouTube channels.

As in many other countries, social media are a major channel for the dissemination of antisemitic propaganda in Serbia. Various groups and individuals periodically publish antisemitic content on popular social media platforms. Some of this content originates abroad and is shared without translation into Serbian; some is translated and adapted, while other content is produced in Serbia.

Contemporary antisemitism among right-wing organizations in Serbia is characterized, among other things, by the celebration of and efforts to rehabilitate Serbian fascists and collaborators such as Milan Nedić and Dimitrije Ljotić. Some right-wing organizations that are significant carriers of antisemitism in contemporary Serbia draw inspiration from the work and ideas of Nikolaj Velimirović. Among some left-wing organizations in Serbia, antisemitism may be associated with opposition to globalism, imperialism, and capitalism, which is sometimes linked to longstanding antisemitic myths about “world Jewish power” and Jewish conspiracies. In some cases, anti-Jewish propaganda is presented as criticism of Israel. Serbia is also home to radicalized Islamist groups that promote antisemitic views and goals. These groups and organizations have engaged in various activities in which antisemitism has been present, ranging from demonstrations and the writing of graffiti to attacks on Jewish property and institutions, such as the attack on the premises of the NGO Haver in November 2023, and acts of terrorism, such as the June 29, 2024 attack on the Israeli embassy in Belgrade.

However, the spread and promotion of antisemitic ideas and propaganda is not limited to members of extreme political or radicalized groups. Ordinary citizens may also contribute to their dissemination, sometimes deliberately and sometimes as a result of ignorance, prejudice, or misinformation.

Antisemitism has often emerged and spread in Serbian society during periods of crisis and insecurity. During the NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, for example, the “loyalty” of the Serbian Jewish community was frequently questioned, with Jews accused of complicity in the NATO aggression or of “not doing enough to prevent it.” Such accusations drew on the antisemitic myth of “world Jewish power.” During the COVID-19 pandemic, some conspiracy theories accused Jews of creating and spreading the infection, while Dr. Predrag Kon was repeatedly targeted with antisemitic insults and accusations.

The comparison of Jewish and Serbian suffering, which is characteristic of Serbian nationalist narratives of Serbian martyrdom, is often accompanied by the distortion and instrumentalization of history for nationalist propaganda and the spread of fear and hatred. Such narratives may also draw on antisemitic stereotypes.

In the Republic of Serbia, there are currently no sufficiently developed mechanisms for reporting, monitoring, and documenting antisemitic incidents, nor is there a national strategy or action plan specifically dedicated to combating antisemitism. This makes it difficult to objectively monitor and assess the prevalence and forms of antisemitism in Serbian society.

11. Stereotypical "Traits" of Jews

For centuries, and still today, prejudices and beliefs about certain stereotypical, most often negative, characteristics supposedly “typical of Jews” persist in many societies. These stereotypes are often contradictory. In everyday conversations, newspaper articles, literature, theatrical and film works, popular culture, and through memes on social media, Jews are often portrayed as cunning, insidious, fickle, greedy, immoral, disloyal, and hostile towards all non-Jews and followers of other religions. At the same time, certain alleged physical characteristics are attributed to them, such as short stature, large nose, hunched posture, a “bloodthirsty” gaze, prominent, thick and often long beards, long gnarled fingers, and similar.

These prejudices are present today, even in our society, in the broadest public discourse: in culture, politics, in jokes, discussions and analyses in the media, in overt or discreet anti-Jewish propaganda, and even in schools.

Attributing a common set of traits to all members of an entire people is unfounded and meaningless, especially when that people, as in the case of Jews, have lived dispersed throughout the world while becoming deeply integrated into different local cultures and societies. For centuries, prejudices about supposedly “typical Jewish traits” have been used to justify discrimination, segregation, and violence.

The belief that all Jews, regardless of their origin, culture, or the societies in which they live, share certain, most often negative, character traits has deep historical roots.

In addition to the “negative moral and personal characteristics” traditionally attributed to Jews, they are often visually represented through exaggerated references to particular aspects of Jewish religion and tradition, especially those associated with Hasidic and other Orthodox Jewish communities. They may be depicted wearing black coats and white shirts, with long beards and distinctive hats, with peyot (curled sidelocks) visible beneath them. In other cases, Stars of David are prominently displayed on necklaces, badges, or other objects. In reality, Jewish religious and cultural traditions are extremely diverse. Different Jewish communities follow very different forms of dress and religious practice, while many Jews are secular or observe religious customs in less visible ways.

Jews are sometimes depicted as wealthy industrialists or bankers, portrayed as obese figures with exaggeratedly large bellies, wearing expensive suits and hats. More recently, drawings and internet memes have often depicted Jews holding knives or other weapons, with blood on their hands, or in other ways that emphasize supposed bloodthirstiness and criminality.

Many of these supposed “traits” are also contradictory. For example, Jews may be portrayed on the one hand as ugly, dirty, and repulsive, and on the other as seductive figures who sexually exploit young non-Jewish women.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, pseudoscientific racial theories introduced supposedly “biological” characteristics into antisemitic representations of Jews. Political propaganda then transformed these ideas into caricatures, illustrations in children’s books and textbooks, posters, and other forms of visual communication designed to spread hatred. Nazi propaganda, in particular, constructed the image of the “dangerous” and “parasitic” Jew through such stereotypes.

The same visual clichés continue to circulate today, repackaged in internet memes and other digital formats. The form may be more modern, but the function remains the same: to normalize hatred and contribute to the dehumanization of Jews.

Unfortunately, the same or similar patterns continue to appear in different forms today, while their underlying logic remains rooted in prejudice, stereotypes, lies, and generalizations. These generalizations do not reflect reality; they are products of prejudice that have been used for centuries to dehumanize Jews and justify hatred. It is therefore important to recognize and reject such clichés in everyday speech, the media, education, and politics. They are not harmless stereotypes, but mechanisms that can contribute to the spread and normalization of antisemitism.

12. How to Recognize Antisemitism? The 3Ds: Delegitimization, Demonization, and Double Standards

The 3D methodology provides a clear framework for identifying antisemitism, especially in the context of criticism of Israel, but also in other cases involving manifestations of antisemitism towards Jewish (and non-Jewish) individuals, communities, institutions, and organizations. This methodology helps distinguish legitimate criticism from antisemitism, which can be disguised and subtle. The name “3D” refers to three key elements: Delegitimization, Demonization, and Double Standards. When analyzing various situations to define whether it is antisemitism or legitimate criticism, the following questions are asked: Is the right to exist denied only to Israel or also to other states? Is the criticism based on evidence and facts, or on stereotypes and emotions that demonize the Jewish people or the State of Israel? Is Israel treated by the same standards as other states in similar circumstances?

Applying the 3D methodology, Delegitimization, Demonization, and Double Standards, can provide a structured framework for recognizing certain forms of antisemitism. The methodology was developed by Natan Sharansky, a former Soviet dissident and human rights activist.

1. Delegitimization
Delegitimization occurs when Israel’s right to exist as a sovereign state is denied. This goes beyond criticism of specific government policies or political decisions and challenges the fundamental right of the Jewish people to self-determination. In practice, this may take the form of statements that the establishment of Israel was a historical “mistake”; claims that the State of Israel has no right to defend itself; political initiatives aimed at abolishing the State of Israel; or academic and cultural campaigns promoting the idea that Israel’s existence is “illegitimate,” among other examples.

The 3D methodology can be applied by asking: Is the right to exist being denied only to Israel, or is the same principle being applied to other states?

2. Demonization
Demonization involves portraying Israel or Jews, including individuals, groups, communities, or institutions, as inherently evil, dangerous, or destructive. It can be recognized in comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany; media reports that use false or distorted claims to portray Israel or Jews as a global threat; public demonstrations featuring offensive symbols or caricatures based on antisemitic stereotypes; or disinformation intended to portray Israel as inherently immoral, among other examples.

Such rhetoric can cross the boundary between legitimate criticism and antisemitism when it is no longer directed at specific policies or actions, but instead relies on negative stereotypes about Jews or portrays Israel or its people as inherently evil or uniquely threatening.

Here, the 3D methodology asks: Is the criticism based on evidence and facts, or does it rely on stereotypes and emotional claims that demonize Jews or Israel?

3. Double Standards
The use of double standards involves holding Israel to standards that are not applied consistently to other states in comparable circumstances. For example, when Israel is condemned for alleged human rights violations while similar actions by other countries are ignored or minimized, this may indicate a double standard. In this context, disproportionate attention and condemnation directed specifically at Israel may also be a warning sign of antisemitism.

This can take the form of disproportionate criticism of Israel compared with other states responsible for similar or more serious human rights violations; media or political campaigns that condemn Israeli actions while overlooking comparable actions in other conflicts; or academic boycotts targeting Israeli scholars and universities while maintaining cooperation with institutions in countries where serious human rights violations or other crimes are taking place, among other examples.

The practical application of the methodology focuses on the question: Is Israel being judged by the same standards as other states in comparable circumstances?

Conclusion

The 3D methodology is not intended to silence legitimate criticism of Israeli policies, but to provide a framework for considering when criticism may cross the line into antisemitism. The distinction depends on the content, context, and manner in which criticism is expressed. Criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic and remains legitimate when it concerns specific policies, actions, or decisions without denying the right of the Jewish people to self-determination, relying on antisemitic stereotypes, or applying demonstrably unequal standards.
The 3D methodology can therefore serve as one useful tool for recognizing potentially antisemitic rhetoric while encouraging a more consistent and context-sensitive approach to public discourse.

13. Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy theories are narratives claiming that important events, social phenomena, and even natural phenomena are secretly orchestrated and carried out by usually small, exclusive, but powerful groups acting in a coordinated and hidden manner. They typically offer no credible, verifiable evidence and possess a so-called self-sealing logic: any evidence to the contrary is interpreted as part of the alleged cover-up.

On the one hand, contemporary antisemitism is largely rooted in conspiratorial thinking and is often expressed through various forms of conspiracy theories. On the other hand, antisemitic ideas are deeply embedded in most contemporary conspiracy theories, even those dealing with entirely diverse phenomena and topics unrelated to Jews.

Conspiracy theories are most often based on prejudice, stereotypes, emotional reactions, and unreliable or unfounded claims. Despite this, they are popular and widespread around the world, including in Serbia.

Conspiracy theories typically explain an event, situation, or process as the result of actions by secretive, powerful, and malicious actors pursuing their own interests at the expense of others, often, allegedly, “all of humanity.” They tend to offer a single, overarching explanation for complex phenomena and are characterized by deep distrust of official or expert accounts, making their claims difficult or impossible to verify or refute through facts and evidence.

In the information age, the widespread use of the internet and social media has contributed to the rapid dissemination of such narratives: from the “flat Earth” theory and the “Great Replacement” theory, which claims that demographic change is being deliberately engineered, to the “deep state,” an alleged network of powerful individuals operating through parallel structures within the state outside democratic oversight; various conspiracy theories about the origins and course of the COVID-19 pandemic; and interpretations of major disasters, assassinations, and technological developments as parts of a single, coordinated plan.

Antisemitic conspiracy theories have deep historical roots—from the attribution of collective guilt to Jews for the death of Jesus Christ, through narratives about an alleged alliance between Jews and Freemasons aimed at “overthrowing Christian civilization” and nation-states, to the central role such myths played in shaping the worldview of Nazism.

Contemporary antisemitism is often intertwined with conspiracy theories. These include narratives about “globalists,” the “deep state,” or a “world financial lobby.” Such narratives are often merely new forms of longstanding antisemitic myths. A prominent example is the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an antisemitic forgery first published in the early 20th century. Although its fraudulent nature was exposed, the text was used as a propaganda tool and presented as “proof” of an alleged Jewish conspiracy, contributing to the demonization of Jews and having tragic consequences in the 20th century. The Protocols continue to circulate today as supposed “proof” that Jews control world events and are still available for purchase in some Serbian bookstores.

14. Coded Language of Antisemitism

Some antisemites are aware of the legal consequences and moral condemnation that may follow the public expression of antisemitic views. In an effort to avoid sanctions and moral condemnation, but also to more easily reach a wider audience and disseminate their ideas to more people, antisemites often use coded language, employing symbols, metaphors, allegories, allusions (hidden references), and specific terms and expressions. In context, these coded references can often be recognized as references to Jews or to alleged Jewish influence. Furthermore, within neo-Nazi and racist circles, specific abbreviations, words, punctuation marks, and numbers are used that have coded meanings in the context of expressing antisemitism.

Words and phrases that may appear to refer to general concepts or groups have entered everyday discourse, but in certain contexts they can function as coded, antisemitic references.

Examples of such references, which in a particular context may be used to mean “Jews” or “Jewish influence,” include “globalists,” “world elite,” “cosmopolitans,” “world financial lobby,” “bankers,” “media moguls,” and “Zionists” when the term is used as a blanket label for Jews. Other examples include “Israeli lobby” when it is used to mean “Jews in general,” or references to the “Rothschilds” or “Soros” when an individual or a single family is invoked as a stand-in for “all Jews.” Similarly, “Hollywood machinery” may be used in narratives alleging Jewish control over culture. These and similar expressions are not inherently antisemitic; their meaning and significance depend on the context in which they are used and the ideas they convey.

Antisemitic discourse can also employ dehumanizing and demonizing metaphors, including expressions such as “This plague is spreading…,” “scourge,” “tumor,” “parasites,” “leeches,” or an “octopus” with “tentacles”—a metaphor for a supposed “world octopus” that reaches into every sphere of life. Other examples include a “multi-headed hydra,” portrayed as constantly regenerating and impossible to eradicate; a “spider web”; a “snake pit”; or a “grey eminence from the shadows,” used in narratives about secret forms of control or governance. Although Jews may not be mentioned explicitly, the broader context may make the antisemitic message clear. Such metaphors can also be used against other groups, which is why it is essential to consider the context and the overall message when determining what they refer to.

The purpose of coded antisemitic language is often to normalize and disseminate anti-Jewish messages through indirect references rather than explicit statements, while also allowing those using such language to deny its meaning (“We didn’t say that; we didn’t mention Jews!”).

In practice, coded language can occur alongside hate speech, the relativization or denial of the Holocaust, and calls for violence. Understanding the origins and functions of such codes is therefore important for recognizing and analyzing contemporary antisemitism.

Coded antisemitic language became increasingly widespread in the late 20th century, first through graffiti, fanzines, and propaganda produced by neo-Nazi and other racist and extremist groups, and later, with the development of the internet, through chats, forums, blogs, memes, and social media comments. Certain numbers have also become recognizable as antisemitic codes. For example, 88 is used in neo-Nazi circles as an abbreviation for “Heil Hitler,” because H is the eighth letter of the alphabet. Another example is the use of triple parentheses—“(((…)))”—to mark Jewish individuals, organizations, or topics in some online antisemitic communities, a practice sometimes referred to as the “echo.” Such coding is intended both to evade moderation and sanctions and to make messages recognizable to those familiar with the codes.

Understanding these codes can help us recognize and address antisemitic messages at an early stage and better understand the persistence and presence of antisemitism in contemporary society.

15. Antisemitism and the Internet

The internet expands opportunities for access to knowledge and learning, but at the same time, it also enables the rapid spread of false information, antisemitic hate speech, and digital violence (violence in the digital environment). Simultaneously, the internet offers tools for distributing high-quality educational materials, fact-checking, and reporting hate speech.

The key lies in developing media and digital literacy, recognizing patterns of antisemitic propaganda, and creating tools and practices for timely response to harmful content and digital violence.

As a global network, the internet provides access to vast amounts of information of varying quality and credibility and enables the instantaneous exchange of information and opinions. As a result, antisemitic narratives are no longer shaped exclusively by local circumstances, traditions, cultures, and socio-political conditions, but increasingly take on a global character. Anonymity, algorithmic recommendations (content suggestions based on users’ behavior), and the sheer scale of online communication can facilitate the normalization of intolerance, hate speech, prejudice, and conspiracy theories. Hidden behind avatars and usernames, antisemites can find and recruit like-minded individuals, organize in closed groups, circulate memes, and, when necessary, use coded language to evade moderation.

Online antisemitism appears in many forms, including posts, blogs, and podcasts. These may include explicit insults and threats, memes and jokes, pseudo-analyses based on conspiracy theories, revisionist or denialist content, and coordinated campaigns targeting individuals or institutions. Comments beneath news articles and social media posts have become one of the most common channels for disseminating antisemitic messages. Although website and platform moderators often remove such content, not all online spaces are moderated, and coded language is increasingly used to conceal the antisemitic nature of messages. Major events—including wars, terrorist attacks, and political or economic crises—are often accompanied by sharp increases in anti-Jewish comments and content. In Serbia, significant increases in antisemitic content were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic and following the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

Research indicates that antisemitic memes, coded humor, and the glorification of Nazism can normalize Holocaust distortion and denial and may contribute to radicalization and violence. It is therefore crucial to strengthen media, information, and digital literacy so that users can critically evaluate online content and recognize attempts at manipulation. The engagement of digital platforms and regulators is also important, as is encouraging content creators and responsible companies to combine effective moderation with fact-checking and links to reliable and authoritative sources. Such measures can help counter antisemitic propaganda and Holocaust denial and distortion with verified information.

In the Republic of Serbia, there are currently no centralized authoritative resources of this kind. The AboutHolocaust.org website, an educational resource developed by UNESCO and the World Jewish Congress (WJC), is available in Serbian and provides verified information about the Holocaust, as well as materials for addressing Holocaust denial and distortion online. Another useful resource is the Holocaust Encyclopedia of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM). For resources specifically addressing antisemitism, the “ABC of Antisemitism” is currently the only guide available in Serbian.

Useful practices also include systematically documenting and reporting problematic content, monitoring antisemitic incidents online, and providing support to victims. In the Republic of Serbia, there are currently no specialized tools for reporting, monitoring, and documenting such incidents. In schools and cultural institutions, Holocaust education should therefore be complemented by training on recognizing contemporary forms of online hatred and developing media and digital literacy.

It is important to strike a careful balance between freedom of expression and measures against hate speech. This requires a strong and functional rule of law, cooperation among different actors—including civil society and the Jewish community—and investment in digital citizenship and “digital hygiene.” In this context, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism provides an important framework for understanding and recognizing antisemitism and for distinguishing legitimate pluralistic debate and critical discussion from expressions that cross the line into antisemitic hate speech.

16. Antisemitism and Israel

The establishment of the State of Israel (1948) and conflicts in the Middle East are often used as a pretext to impose responsibility on all Jews for the real or imagined actions of the State of Israel or individual politicians or other representatives of Israel.

It is legitimate to criticize the decisions, statements, or actions of official bodies and representatives of the State of Israel, just as it applies to the policies and politicians of any other state. Antisemitism begins where double standards are applied to the State of Israel, when Jews are denied the right to self-determination, Israel is denied the right to exist, or calls are made for its destruction, or where classic antisemitic myths and symbols are used in discourse about Israel.

Negative generalization and demonization of any entire people is always an expression of hatred. It is particularly dangerous when criticism of Israel is expressed through insults, threats, and violence against local Jewish communities.

During the Ottoman period, there was no single administrative unit under one name encompassing the territory of present-day Israel. When the British established their administration in 1917, they used the name “Palestine,” known in Arabic as “Filastin,” while the Hebrew name “Eretz-Yisrael” (“Land of Israel”) also appeared in official inscriptions.

Organized Jewish settlement in the territory began in the late 19th century, while it was still part of the Ottoman Empire. Jewish immigration took place in waves known as aliyot (singular: aliyah). Some of the early Jewish immigrants arrived after pogroms in the Russian Empire, while others came from different parts of Europe, in the context of the emergence of modern Jewish nationalism, Zionism, and the development of the idea of establishing a national home for the Jewish people. Jewish immigration continued after the establishment of British rule in 1917 and increased significantly during the 1930s, as the rise of Nazism forced many Jews to flee Europe. Following the Holocaust, in which six million Jews were murdered and Jewish life in much of Europe was devastated, hundreds of thousands of Jewish survivors and refugees immigrated to the territory, seeking safety and the opportunity to rebuild their lives.

The State of Israel was established in 1948 as the national state of the Jewish people. Even after its establishment, large numbers of Jews from different parts of the world continued to immigrate to Israel. In the following decades, Israel fought several wars with neighboring Arab states, including Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. In the propaganda of some states and political actors in the region, as well as in Iran, criticism of Israeli policies has at times been accompanied by hostility toward Jews as a people, the spread of antisemitic stereotypes and prejudices, Holocaust denial or distortion, and calls for violence or the destruction of Jews. In some such contexts, antisemitic conspiracy theories are widespread, and publications such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an antisemitic forgery, have been presented as historical evidence and distributed to broad audiences.

It is particularly problematic when criticism of Israel or Israeli policies turns into insults, threats, or verbal or physical attacks against Jewish communities in other countries, including individuals, institutions, community representatives, places of worship, or communal and private property. The same applies when other institutions or organizations are targeted because they are perceived as “Jewish” or associated with Jews, even when they are not. Such acts are manifestations of antisemitism, regardless of whether they are motivated by criticism of Israel or by other political grievances.

In Europe, North America, and other parts of the world, antisemitism can also be found among some political movements on the left, where criticism of Israel may cross the line into demonization of Jews as a people, calls for violence or the destruction of Israel, or attacks on local Jewish communities. Such forms of antisemitism have, for example, been reported in connection with some pro-Palestinian protests at universities in the United States and other countries, including incidents involving Jewish students, professors, and other university staff.
In practice, the distinction between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism can be considered through several indicators. Criticism of a specific policy, statement, or action by a politician or state institution, including military or police actions, is legitimate. Concerns may arise when: (1) Israel is subjected to standards or demands that are not applied to other states in comparable circumstances (double standards); (2) the Jewish people’s right to self-determination or to a national state is denied (delegitimization); or (3) language is used that dehumanizes Jews or portrays Israel through antisemitic stereotypes (demonization).

A particularly harmful form of antisemitic rhetoric involves comparing Israel or Israelis to Nazis or Nazi Germany in ways intended to demonize Jews, humiliate Holocaust victims, or relativize or trivialize the Holocaust. Such comparisons should therefore be assessed carefully and in context.

When addressing antisemitism related to Israel or criticism of Israel, good practice for the media, schools, and cultural institutions includes using precise terminology, providing sufficient context, avoiding inaccurate or misleading labels, clearly distinguishing political actors and state institutions from Jewish communities and religious or ethnic groups, and relying on verified and authoritative information.

17. Antisemitism and Zionism

Zionism, as a movement for the right of Jews to their national identity and homeland, is sometimes the target of criticism that crosses into antisemitism. Rhetoric that challenges the right of Jews to self-determination and their own state is always an expression of antisemitism. Zionism is often wrongly and maliciously presented as an expansionist, imperialist, or racist ideology, sometimes intentionally, out of purely antisemitic motives, and sometimes out of ignorance and lack of information.

Zionism is a Jewish political and national movement that emerged in the late 19th century with the goal of establishing a national home for the Jewish people. The movement developed in response to rising antisemitism and persecution of Jews in Europe, as well as growing aspirations for Jewish national identity and self-determination at a time when nationalist movements were shaping the political landscape of Europe and contributing to the formation of new nation-states.

Throughout its history, Zionism has elicited a wide range of responses among Jews, from strong support and enthusiasm to opposition. With the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the movement achieved its central political objective, although Zionism has continued to exist as a political and ideological movement both in Israel and among Jewish communities around the world. Today, Zionism can mean different things to different Jews. For some, it primarily represents support for Israel as the national home of the Jewish people and for the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. For others, it may also encompass efforts to preserve Jewish identity, culture, and community.

18. Antisemitism and the Holocaust

The Holocaust, the genocide perpetrated by the Nazis and their collaborators against Jews (1933–1945), in which approximately six million Jews were murdered, represents the most extreme expression of antisemitism in history. Antisemitism was the foundation of Nazi ideology and state policy, shaping German war aims and encouraging the active participation of other fascist, ultranationalist, and collaborationist regimes across Europe in the Holocaust.

The Holocaust demonstrates that antisemitism as a state ideology is in direct opposition to democracy, the rule of law, and human dignity. Therefore, the fight against contemporary antisemitism is simultaneously a fight for the preservation of the fundamental democratic values of society as a whole, and not just the rights of the Jewish community. Deepening knowledge about the Holocaust is important, but not sufficient for understanding and suppressing contemporary antisemitism. A specific strategy for combating antisemitism in the Republic of Serbia currently does not exist.

The Holocaust was the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of Jews carried out by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945. In this genocide, six million Jews were murdered, making the Holocaust the most extreme manifestation of antisemitism in history.

Nazi ideology was racist, antisemitic, and ultranationalist. The Nazis mobilized centuries-old anti-Jewish prejudices to normalize the exclusion and persecution of Jews and developed antisemitism into a central element of a racially based state ideology.

As a totalitarian regime, Nazi Germany permeated public life with antisemitic ideology. The Ministry of Propaganda controlled the press, film, and cultural life. Youth and professional organizations, labor organizations, schools, and other educational institutions were brought into the service of ideological conformity and propaganda.

Antisemitism became a central pillar of the Nazi worldview and German state policy. Measures ranged from the boycott of Jewish businesses and book burnings to legal segregation under the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, which established racial criteria for determining who was classified as a Jew, stripped Jews of their civil rights, prohibited marriages between Jews and non-Jews, and introduced other discriminatory measures. These policies transformed antisemitism into an organizing principle not only of domestic policy but also of Nazi war aims, paving the way for systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder—from Kristallnacht to the “Final Solution” across occupied Europe.

The Holocaust took place within the broader context of wartime violence in which many other groups were also persecuted and murdered. Governments, movements, and individuals across Europe, including fascist, ultranationalist, and collaborationist forces, actively participated in the persecution and murder of Jews, motivated by a range of factors, including antisemitism. In some cases, local authorities and movements carried out persecution and murder on their own initiative, without direct German orders. The Holocaust also unfolded in full view of millions of people who, in different ways and to varying degrees, witnessed the persecution of their Jewish neighbors and fellow citizens.

Antisemitism could not develop from a widespread social prejudice into a pillar of state ideology and a central component of a world war without the prior erosion of democratic values and civil rights. Through legislation, propaganda, and the systematic dismantling of democratic institutions, hatred was gradually normalized, while discrimination and violence became increasingly accepted. The Holocaust demonstrated under Nazism that antisemitism is fundamentally opposed to the democratic and Enlightenment ideals that place reason, human dignity, and universal rights at the center of social order. For this reason, combating contemporary antisemitism is also a struggle to protect fundamental democratic and human rights.

It is important to emphasize that, in contemporary society, Holocaust remembrance and education alone are not sufficient to understand or combat antisemitism today. Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism are distinct, though interconnected, areas. Knowledge of one can contribute to a better understanding of the other, but they are not interchangeable. Specific measures and long-term strategies are needed to strengthen the capacity of individuals and institutions to recognize and resist antisemitism. This includes professional development programs for decision-makers and policymakers, educators, cultural professionals, journalists, public-sector employees, police officers, members of the judiciary, and others, as well as the integration of education about contemporary antisemitism into school curricula.

In 2021, the European Union adopted the “EU Strategy on Combating Antisemitism and Fostering Jewish Life 2021–2030”. The strategy identifies “Preventing and combating all forms of antisemitism” and “Education, research and remembrance of the Holocaust” as separate but complementary priorities. To date, 23 EU Member States have developed specific national strategies or action plans to combat antisemitism. The strategy also calls for the development of national action plans and regular monitoring of their implementation.

In the Republic of Serbia, there is currently no national strategy or action plan specifically dedicated to combating antisemitism. The Center for Combating Antisemitism and Intolerance (CBA) was established with the aim of initiating efforts toward the development of such a national strategy.

19. Antisemitism and the Abuse and Distortion of Holocaust History

Holocaust distortion is a phenomenon based on the misuse of history, not denying that the Holocaust happened, but using only a portion of the facts, taking events out of context, manipulating conclusions and interpretations of historical facts “to produce a past that is politically and socially more convenient and useful.” Holocaust distortion threatens democracy, normalizes antisemitism, and encourages extremism, and often serves as a tool for rehabilitating ideologies of hatred and individuals or groups of perpetrators. Some characteristic forms of Holocaust distortion include relativization, instrumentalization, and the abuse of the Holocaust for the promotion of nationalist and populist propaganda. Every distortion of the Holocaust is, at its core, a manifestation of antisemitism.

Holocaust denial refers to discourse and propaganda that deny the historical reality and scope of the crimes committed against Jews during the Holocaust, including the methods and mechanisms of mass murder, such as gas chambers, mass shootings, ghettos, and deportations, as well as the genocidal intent to destroy European Jewry. In simple terms, Holocaust denial involves claiming that the Holocaust never happened, that it was much smaller in scale than established historical evidence shows, or that it was deliberately exaggerated or fabricated, allegedly so that “Jews could benefit from it.” Today, explicit Holocaust denial is less widespread than in the past, in part because the Holocaust has been extensively documented and researched, making claims that it did not happen increasingly difficult to sustain.

Holocaust distortion is a particularly significant contemporary threat to the historical understanding and legacy of the Holocaust. Unlike denial, distortion does not necessarily reject the fact that the Holocaust occurred. Instead, it misuses or manipulates historical facts by presenting only selected information, removing events from their historical context, or distorting conclusions and interpretations in order “to produce a past that is politically and socially more convenient and useful,” as Professor Yehuda Bauer has stated. Holocaust distortion can involve justifying, minimizing, exaggerating, or otherwise misrepresenting established historical facts about the Holocaust. It can undermine democratic values, normalize antisemitism, and contribute to extremism, while also serving as a tool for rehabilitating ideologies of hatred and individuals or groups responsible for crimes. Common forms of Holocaust distortion include relativization, instrumentalization, and the use of Holocaust history to promote nationalist and populist narratives.

Relativization involves comparing the Holocaust with other events in ways that obscure its specific historical character and scale. For example, comparing pandemics, political conflicts, or individual tragedies directly with the Holocaust can trivialize the genocide and diminish its historical significance. Such comparisons can also contribute to misinformation about the causes, nature, and consequences of the Holocaust.

Instrumentalization of the Holocaust refers to the use and manipulation of Holocaust history as a political tool, particularly in conflicts between political groups or opponents. This may include rhetoric in which political opponents are compared to Nazis or Hitler, or to other perpetrators of mass violence. Such comparisons can trivialize the genocide and turn the memory of the Holocaust into an instrument of political manipulation.

The use of the Holocaust to promote nationalist and populist propaganda involves appropriating Holocaust history to construct narratives of national victimhood, innocence, or moral superiority. Political elites, particularly in nationalist and populist contexts, may portray their own nation primarily or exclusively as a victim while minimizing the suffering of others or overlooking the participation of members of their own society in persecution, collaboration, or other crimes. By presenting their own people as righteous and innocent while shifting responsibility for the Holocaust or other historical crimes onto other nations or political opponents, such narratives can serve to avoid historical self-reflection and questions of responsibility. This form of distortion, which can also be found in Serbia, may deepen ethnic and political divisions, foster aggressive nationalism, fuel hostility toward others, and undermine the universal message of the Holocaust about the dangers of intolerance and extremism.

The distortion, misuse, and manipulation of Holocaust history and memory through state policies and official narratives occur in various parts of Europe.

These practices may include:

  • denying or minimizing national or societal responsibility for crimes committed against Jews or for collaboration with Nazi Germany and other perpetrators;
  • rejecting responsibility for crimes while shifting blame onto other nations or groups;
  • restricting academic and public discussion of Holocaust history through legislation or sanctions;
  • political interference in the representation of history in museums, exhibitions, textbooks, historical sites, and commemorative events;
  • denying or diminishing the significance of Holocaust memorials, monuments, or authentic Holocaust sites;
    glorifying, honoring, justifying, or “rehabilitating” historical figures from the Holocaust era despite their involvement in crimes, collaboration with Nazi Germany, or direct participation in the persecution and murder of Jews.

The Government of the Republic of Serbia has officially adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Holocaust Denial and Distortion.

Holocaust denial and distortion can constitute direct expressions of antisemitism and undermine an accurate understanding of Holocaust history and its legacy. Such narratives may be explicitly motivated by antisemitism or, even when driven by other motives, may contribute to the dissemination and normalization of antisemitic ideas. Instead of serving as a universal warning about the consequences of hatred and intolerance, distorted Holocaust narratives can become tools for deepening hostility and fueling contemporary conflicts.

It is important to distinguish legitimate scholarly debate about historical details, based on reliable sources and sound methodology, from attempts to deny that the Holocaust occurred or to minimize its scale and significance. Good practice in education and the media includes working with primary sources, such as testimonies, historical documents, and court judgments, encouraging critical reading, clearly identifying denial and distortion, and equipping students and audiences with the skills needed to recognize historical manipulation.

Holocaust denial and distortion not only disrespect the memory of the victims but can also cause harm to their families and endanger contemporary Jewish communities by contributing to the spread of antisemitism.

20. Antisemitism and the misuse of Nazi and fascist terms, images, and symbols

Antisemitic prejudice and hatred toward Jews were at the core of Nazi ideology and an important element of several fascist movements in Europe. It was precisely these ideas that led to the Holocaust. Invoking Nazi and fascist symbols, slogans, or gestures normalizes these ideologies, relativizes the Holocaust, and represents a recognized form of antisemitism. The affirmative use of Nazi and fascist terms, images, and symbols signifies identification or glorification and is punishable in many countries.

In the Republic of Serbia, there are also followers of fascist movements, and graffiti with fascist slogans and symbols can be found.

Racist ideas about the “Jewish threat,” portraying Jews as “parasites” or a “lower race,” were among the foundations of Nazi propaganda and policies in Germany that ultimately led to genocide. Similar antisemitic ideas were also present in a number of fascist and ultranationalist movements across Europe. Examples include the Ustaše movement in the Independent State of Croatia (NDH), Dimitrije Ljotić’s Zbor movement in Serbia, and the Arrow Cross Party in Hungary, a pro-fascist, radical-right, and explicitly antisemitic movement, among others. These movements are rightly recognized as antisemitic, and their symbols and slogans—including the swastika, SS runes, the Nazi salute, the “Za dom spremni” slogan associated with the Ustaše regime, and others, are inseparably linked to the persecution and genocide of Jews and other victim groups.

Contemporary extremists and adherents of these ideologies sometimes use coded versions of such symbols, including numbers, acronyms, or stylized versions of historical symbols, to conceal their meaning or circumvent bans and moderation. The use of such symbols, even when presented as “just a joke” or used “ironically,” can revive antisemitic and other extremist ideas, intimidate contemporary Jewish communities, insult the memory of Holocaust victims, encourage hatred, and contribute to the relativization of the Holocaust.

In the Republic of Serbia, there are also examples of movements that use fascist symbols and promote the rehabilitation of historical perpetrators and collaborators, as well as graffiti featuring fascist symbols and slogans. Swastikas and terms such as “Judenfrei”—a Nazi term used to describe territory from which Jews had been expelled or murdered—can still be found in public spaces. Similar patterns can be observed in initiatives aimed at rehabilitating historical figures associated with war crimes and collaboration, which seek to justify or normalize ideologies and practices that were integral to the persecution of Jews and other groups.

In many countries, the public display of Nazi and fascist symbols is subject to legal restrictions, particularly where such displays constitute hate speech or incitement to violence. In the Republic of Serbia, such conduct is specifically addressed by the Law on the Prohibition of Manifestations of Neo-Nazi or Fascist Organizations and Associations and the Prohibition of the Use of Their Symbols and Insignia (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 41/2009).

(See also sections 18, “Antisemitism and the Holocaust,” and 14, “Coded Language of Antisemitism.”)

21. Holocaust Memorialization and Education on Antisemitism

Remembering and learning about the Holocaust are important elements in understanding the dangers of antisemitism, but they are not sufficient and must not be treated as a substitute for learning and raising awareness about antisemitism. Similarly, specific educational programs on contemporary antisemitism must certainly touch upon the topic of the Holocaust, but they are not and cannot be a substitute for learning about the Holocaust. These two topics overlap in certain segments, but each requires a separate approach, as well as sufficient time and space for adequate processing in education, commemoration, and public discourse.

The Holocaust was the genocide of the Jews, systematically planned and carried out by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945 across Europe. We preserve the memory of the Holocaust first and foremost out of respect for the victims. To forget those who were murdered would, in a sense, mean allowing the Nazis to succeed in their aim of destroying the Jews and erasing all traces of their existence. Beyond preserving the memory of the victims, Holocaust remembrance serves as a warning to humanity and reminds us of the horrors that can arise when hatred and prejudice prevail over fundamental human values. It therefore does not merely commemorate the past, but also plays an important role in shaping a moral compass that can help prevent similar crimes from happening again. Through remembrance, we learn empathy, recognize the dangers of discrimination, and understand the importance of solidarity in protecting civil and human rights.

Holocaust remembrance plays an important role in raising awareness of the dangers of antisemitism, the hatred that became a central pillar of Nazi ideology and ultimately contributed to the murder of six million Jews. Memorials, museums, and educational programs dedicated to the Holocaust remind us of the devastating consequences that can follow when societies fail to confront prejudice and hatred. However, Holocaust remembrance alone is not enough to understand and combat antisemitism in a contemporary context. The Holocaust represents a specific historical manifestation of antisemitism, but hatred of Jews neither began with the rise of the Nazis nor disappeared with their defeat in 1945. On the contrary, antisemitism remains very much present today, continuing to evolve and take new forms, including conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial and distortion, the demonization of Israel, and online hatred.

It is therefore necessary to combine the study of Holocaust history with contemporary education that helps people recognize and address antisemitism in all its forms. Holocaust remembrance can serve as a starting point, or as one important part of a broader process of raising awareness and deepening knowledge, but it should be complemented by targeted activities that empower individuals to recognize antisemitism today and respond to it in their communities. Such an approach is essential for ensuring that the lessons of the Holocaust remain relevant and for building lasting resilience against antisemitism, both today and in the future.

See also sections: 18. Antisemitism and the Holocaust; 19. Antisemitism and the Misuse and Distortion of Holocaust History; 24. Antisemitism after October 7; 26. What Can I Do?; 4. International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism.

22. Antisemitism and Nationalism

Nationalism is a set of ideas and political practices based on the view that the political community should coincide with the nation. In practice, there are different forms of nationalism: from civic nationalism, based on citizenship and equal rights, to ethnic and exclusive nationalism, based on origin, religion, or “blood and soil” (German: Blut und Boden, originally a Nazi slogan, later present in extremist circles). Antisemitism is particularly intensified in exclusive, homogenizing versions of nationalism, in which narratives about the “internal enemy,” the “fifth column,” the “dual loyalty” of Jews, or “world lobbies” are spread.

Patriotism and legitimate concern for the public interest are part of civic and social engagement. The problem arises when Jews are collectively labeled as a threat, deprived of equal rights, or when, as a minority community, they become hostages to the autocracy of political power-holders.

Modern political antisemitism emerged in the 19th century, alongside the rise of modern nationalism and national movements. In times of crisis—whether economic, political, or military—exclusive forms of nationalism often seek a “scapegoat.” In this context, Jews were accused of having “dual loyalty,” “undermining the nation,” or “controlling finance and the media.” By the mid-to-late 19th century, such ideas had developed into political campaigns, as illustrated by the Dreyfus Affair in France. In the 20th century, nationalist and fascist movements in several countries transformed anti-Jewish narratives into discriminatory laws, repression, and violence. The Nazi concept of a “people’s community” without Jews (Volksgemeinschaft) represented an extreme fusion of aggressive nationalism and antisemitism, ultimately leading to genocide.

In the history of our region, there were also movements and regimes that built nationalist ideologies on antisemitic foundations, including the Ustaše movement, Dimitrije Ljotić’s Zbor movement, and the Arrow Cross in Hungary. Today, historical revisionism and attempts to rehabilitate collaborators, often accompanied by the relativization or denial of their involvement in the persecution of Jews, can also be linked to narratives glorifying an ethnically or ideologically “pure nation.”

In contemporary political discourse, national-populist narratives can sometimes combine antisemitic tropes with anti-immigrant and anti-universalist messages. References to “globalists” and “world networks,” for example, may be used to promote claims that such actors are deliberately “imposing migration” or “destroying national identity.” In some contexts, these narratives draw on older antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish control and influence.

In nationalist autocracies and in illiberal or hybrid democracies, where civil rights, the rule of law, media freedom, and free and fair elections are weakened or threatened, minority rights are particularly vulnerable. In such circumstances, every minority community, including Jewish communities, may be at increased risk. Without independent institutions capable of limiting the concentration of political power, the state can easily be instrumentalized to promote social homogenization and exert pressure on minorities.

Minority communities can become dependent on political power-holders and may feel compelled to publicly demonstrate loyalty to the government in order to maintain a basic level of security and access to resources. Patterns that may emerge include “loyalty tests,” portraying minorities as a “fifth column,” selective or politically motivated enforcement of laws—often through police or administrative pressure—financial pressure on organizations that are perceived as politically undesirable or preferential treatment of those considered “suitable,” media attacks and stigmatization campaigns, and efforts to undermine the autonomy of cultural and religious institutions. In such an environment, parts of a minority’s leadership may be co-opted, while the wider community may adopt a form of “preventive patriotism,” distancing itself from aspects of its distinct identity and publicly expressing loyalty to the government in order to avoid retaliation.

It is important to distinguish legitimate criticism of specific policies or political decisions from narratives that demonize an entire group or deny Jews an equal place in society. Inclusive civic patriotism, grounded in respect for minority rights, pluralism, and the rule of law, can strengthen the cohesion and security of society as a whole. Protecting minority rights is not an “optional extra,” but an important indicator of the health of democracy as a whole.

23. Antisemitism and Islamism

Islamism is a political ideology that sees Islam as a complete state-social order. One should distinguish Islamism as an ideology from Islam as a religion, as most Muslims are not Islamists. Antisemitism holds a significant place in some Islamist currents. This phenomenon is relatively new: it strengthened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, during the weakening and collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and gained institutional expression with the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928. After a series of turning points in the Middle East, from the founding of the State of Israel and the 1948 war, through the 1956 Suez Crisis, to the 1967 Six-Day War, some Islamist movements intensified antisemitic narratives, often combining selective religious interpretations with imported European antisemitism, and even Nazi ideas. In extreme organizations, antisemitism is open and explicit, as seen in the rhetoric of the Iranian regime, Hamas, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda, and in its extreme form, it is expressed through violence and terrorist attacks. At the same time, it is necessary to point out that part of the hostility toward Israel and Israeli policy, especially among Palestinians, is not always the result of hatred toward Jews, but stems from a political-national conflict.

Islamism, sometimes referred to as “political Islam,” encompasses a range of political ideologies and movements that seek to make Islam a central organizing principle of public life, law, and the state. One characteristic feature is the demand that Sharia (Islamic law) serve as a basis for legislation, together with the idea that Muslim society should be politically organized according to Islamic principles. These ideas are advocated by a wide range of groups and organizations, from non-violent political parties and social movements to jihadist organizations that use terrorism. It is important to distinguish between Islam as a religion and Islamism as a political ideology. They are not synonymous, and the vast majority of Muslims are not Islamists.

In Muslim-majority countries and in Muslim communities around the world, antisemitism has a complex history and cannot be reduced to a feature of Islam or Muslim societies. Modern forms of political antisemitism in parts of the Muslim world became more prominent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, influenced by a combination of local political developments, the decline of the Ottoman Empire, European colonialism, the emergence of modern nationalism, and the spread of European antisemitic ideas.

Throughout much of the history of Arab and other Muslim societies, Jews lived as religious minorities under systems of legal inequality and, in many contexts, paid special taxes such as the jizya. Their status varied considerably across different periods and places. Although there were episodes of persecution, violence, and expulsion, the large-scale pogroms and systematic expulsions characteristic of parts of Christian Europe were generally less frequent. Following the expulsion of Jews from Spain in 1492, many Sephardic Jews found refuge in the Ottoman Empire, where Jewish communities subsequently flourished in a number of cities.

Significant changes occurred during the late 19th and early 20th centuries as the Ottoman Empire weakened and nationalist movements gained strength. Christians in various parts of the empire increasingly demanded greater political rights and independence, while Jews also participated in different national and political movements, including the emerging Zionist movement. The Ottoman Empire, the last major Islamic empire and the seat of the caliphate, gradually lost political power and eventually collapsed after the First World War.

The political and intellectual crises that accompanied the decline of the Ottoman Empire, European colonial rule, and the growing economic, scientific, and military power of Europe contributed to debates about the future of Muslim societies. While the new Republic of Turkey pursued a secular model of state organization, some Muslim intellectuals and political activists argued that a return to Islamic principles was necessary to address the perceived crisis. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 with the aim of reforming society and the state through a return to Islamic principles and the gradual implementation of Sharia. The movement became one of the most influential currents in modern Islamism. (The Muslim Brotherhood would later influence a number of Islamist movements, including Hamas.)

Within some Islamist ideologies, antisemitism became increasingly prominent, particularly in the context of major political conflicts and traumatic events in the Middle East. These included the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the Arab-Israeli war and the displacement of large numbers of Palestinians, the Suez Crisis of 1956, and the Six-Day War of 1967, when Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. Some Islamist movements reinterpreted the relationship between Islam and Judaism as an “eternal conflict,” a historically inaccurate simplification, and incorporated anti-Jewish interpretations of religious texts that had previously played a more marginal role. These ideas were sometimes combined with European antisemitic theories, including Nazi propaganda. The activities of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who spent part of the Second World War in Berlin, supported the Axis powers, and participated in antisemitic and anti-Allied propaganda, also contributed to the transmission of European antisemitic ideas into parts of the Arab and Muslim political sphere.

In extremist Islamist movements, antisemitism can be expressed openly and explicitly. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has repeatedly used dehumanizing language to describe Israel, including the metaphor of a “cancerous tumor.” Hamas’s 1988 Charter contains antisemitic conspiracy theories and explicitly refers to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an antisemitic forgery. ISIS and Al-Qaeda have likewise promoted narratives portraying Jews as a global enemy. The official slogan of the Houthi movement in Yemen includes the words “Death to Israel” and “A Curse Upon the Jews.” These are examples of explicit antisemitic rhetoric, which can contribute to the normalization of hostility toward Jews and, in extremist contexts, the justification of violence.

It is important to emphasize that antisemitism is not a “characteristic of Islam” or of Muslims as a group. Muslim communities around the world are diverse, and in many countries Muslims and Jews live peacefully alongside one another. Muslim individuals and Islamic institutions have also played an important role in efforts to combat racism, discrimination, and antisemitism and to promote minority rights. In addition, several Arab states have established diplomatic relations with Israel through peace or normalization agreements, demonstrating that political relations between Israel and Arab states cannot be reduced to a single pattern.

It is equally important to distinguish hostility toward Israel or opposition to Israeli government policies from antisemitism. In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, some hostility toward Israel, particularly among Palestinians, is rooted in political, territorial, and national grievances rather than hatred toward Jews as Jews. Criticism of Israeli policies or political actions is not in itself antisemitic. The distinction becomes important when political criticism is accompanied by anti-Jewish stereotypes, collective blame of Jews, conspiracy theories, attacks on Jewish communities, or other forms of antisemitic rhetoric.
In this context, radicalization should also be considered. Radicalization is a process through which an individual gradually adopts extremist ideas and may come to justify violence in pursuit of political or ideological goals. For some individuals, radicalization may involve the adoption of Islamist ideology and, in the most extreme cases, lead to jihadist violence. However, Islamism and violent jihadism should not be treated as synonymous, just as Islamism and Islam should not be conflated.

In the Republic of Serbia, there have also been antisemitic incidents associated with Islamist radicalization. An extreme example is the attack on the Israeli Embassy in Belgrade on June 29, 2024, when a radicalized attacker, Miloš (Salahudin) Žujović, attacked a member of the Gendarmerie responsible for the embassy’s security with a crossbow. The attacker was subsequently killed by the police officer. ISIS later claimed responsibility for the attack in one of its publications. Investigators also established that the attacker had previously surveilled several potential targets, including the Belgrade synagogue Sukat Shalom and the Jewish Community building on Kralja Petra Street. This information suggests that his targeting was not necessarily limited to Israeli state institutions and that Jewish institutions and communities may also have been considered potential targets.

24. Antisemitism after October 7

The terrorist organization Hamas carried out surprise attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023. The victims were mostly Israeli civilians and young attendees of a music festival. About 1,200 people were killed, and 251 people were taken hostage to Gaza. A strong response by the Israeli armed forces in the Gaza Strip followed, with great destruction and civilian casualties. After October 7, a sharp increase in antisemitic incidents was recorded worldwide: attacks and threats, desecration of synagogues and monuments, targeting of Jewish pupils and students, online intimidation, and boycott campaigns. The rise in antisemitic incidents was also felt in Serbia.

One of the consequences of this crisis is that many Holocaust memorial centers and museums, institutions, organizations, and individuals involved in Holocaust studies and countering antisemitism receive threats and insults, monuments are damaged, and teachers increasingly hesitate to address topics about Jews and the Holocaust. Because of this, Holocaust education and public advocacy for the fight against antisemitism are particularly difficult in these circumstances. These phenomena were also condemned by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

On October 7, 2023, Hamas carried out a large-scale surprise attack on Israeli communities and civilian areas near the border with the Gaza Strip. The communities affected included predominantly kibbutzim, small communities with a cooperative tradition, as well as the cities of Sderot and Ofakim. One of the early targets was the Nova (Supernova Sukkot Gathering) music festival, attended by approximately 3,500 people. The attack primarily targeted civilians, including people in their homes and workplaces and attendees of the festival. Approximately 1,200 people were killed, and 251 people were abducted and taken hostage to the Gaza Strip.

Israel responded with a large-scale military campaign in the Gaza Strip which, alongside significant losses among Hamas and other armed groups, resulted in extensive destruction of infrastructure and a very high number of civilian casualties. The war led to intense polarization in public opinion and the media around the world, with social media becoming a major channel for disseminating narratives and mobilizing protests. In the hours and days immediately following October 7, content appeared in some media outlets and, particularly, on social media celebrating the attack on Israeli civilians or expressing approval of it, before Israel’s subsequent military response had begun. Photographs and videos showing the abuse and killing of civilians, including material recorded by the attackers themselves, were also circulated online, sometimes accompanied by expressions of approval or support.

In the weeks and months following October 7, unusually high levels of antisemitic incidents were reported in several countries, including attacks and threats, vandalism and desecration of synagogues, harassment of Jewish pupils and students, intimidation and online threats, boycott campaigns targeting businesses perceived as “Jewish,” and the marking or damaging of Jewish-owned residential and commercial properties. In some political environments, including parts of the far left, antisemitic rhetoric and incidents increased sharply following the attack. Similar incidents were also recorded in the Republic of Serbia. In Belgrade, pro-Palestinian graffiti appeared on buildings and properties associated with Jews, Jewish or Israeli businesses, alongside graffiti containing explicitly antisemitic messages.

One of the more serious incidents was the attack on the premises of Haver Serbia in Belgrade, a Serbian Jewish non-governmental organization working to promote tolerance and Jewish culture. The walls were sprayed with red paint and, among other messages, the words “Haver march out of Serbia” were written. The incident was subsequently accompanied by expressions of gloating and the circulation of photographs on social media. The perpetrators were not held accountable, and the incident received limited media attention and little broader public condemnation.

The escalation of the conflict following October 7 also created serious challenges for Holocaust education, Holocaust remembrance, and the security of Jewish communities. Around the world, memorial centers, museums, organizations, and institutions dedicated to Holocaust education and remembrance, as well as Holocaust survivors, have received threats and abuse, faced boycott campaigns, and in some cases seen Holocaust memorials damaged or defaced with graffiti and antisemitic messages. These developments have created significant challenges for Holocaust education. Some educators have become hesitant to address Jewish history and the Holocaust, while calls to boycott Jewish cultural content have also been reported. Jewish communities in many countries have faced increased pressure, harassment, threats, and intimidation.

Large demonstrations in support of the Palestinian cause have taken place around the world. While support for Palestinian rights and criticism of Israeli government policies are legitimate forms of political expression, some demonstrations have also featured antisemitic rhetoric, symbols, or incidents. Jewish students and professors at some universities have reported harassment and have expressed concerns about their safety. In such circumstances, promoting awareness of antisemitism and organizing educational activities addressing contemporary antisemitism can become particularly challenging. These developments were condemned by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

Legitimate criticism of the State of Israel and its policies is an essential part of democratic debate and should not be conflated with antisemitism. Criticism may become antisemitic when Jews are held collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government or Israeli military, when antisemitic stereotypes or conspiracy theories are invoked, when Jewish people are denied rights afforded to other peoples, or when Jews or Jewish communities are targeted because of events in Israel or the Palestinian territories.

Slogans such as “From the River to the Sea” require particular attention to context. The slogan has been used by different political movements and individuals with different intended meanings; in some contexts, it has been used to express a vision of Palestinian political freedom and equality, while in others it has been used to call for the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. It is therefore important to examine the surrounding language, symbols, and circumstances rather than automatically treating the slogan itself as proof of antisemitic intent. Regardless of the political position being expressed, harassment, threats, or attacks against Jewish communities under the guise of criticism of Israel are unacceptable and constitute antisemitism when Jews are targeted as Jews.

(See also sections 13. “Conspiracy Theories,” 14. “Coded Language of Antisemitism,” 15. “Antisemitism and the Internet,” and 16. “Antisemitism and Israel.”)

25. Antisemitism and Intersectionality

Intersectionality is an analytical framework that explains how different forms of oppression overlap and reinforce each other. It starts from the recognition of the multi-layered identities of individuals and communities. Applying an intersectional approach to the analysis of antisemitism shows that antisemitism often intersects with various other forms of hatred and xenophobia, such as racism, sexism and misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, antigypsyism, anti-immigrant attitudes, etc. This explains why a rise in antisemitic rhetoric often goes hand in hand with the growth of other forms of hatred. The intersectional approach helps us recognize the cumulative harm suffered by people at the intersection of multiple identities, to build coalitions based on solidarity, and strengthen the common struggle for dignity, equality, tolerance, and civil rights.

Intersectionality is a term introduced as an analytical framework by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 to describe how different forms of discrimination and oppression, such as racism and sexism, can overlap and create distinct experiences of discrimination and privilege. Intersectionality has its roots in Black feminist debates of the 1970s, which highlighted the ways in which different forms of oppression intersected—for example, the struggle against sexism within the Civil Rights Movement and against racism within the women’s movement.

An intersectional approach to understanding antisemitism is important because it recognizes the multiple and overlapping identities of individuals and communities. Jews, like any other group, do not exist in isolation but have different social identities and backgrounds—including race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and religion—that can shape their experiences of discrimination and privilege.

Antisemitism does not exist in isolation from other forms of prejudice, nor do other forms of hatred. An increase in antisemitic rhetoric can occur alongside an increase in other forms of hatred, including Islamophobia, antigypsyism, anti-immigrant sentiment, homophobia, and misogyny. These forms of hatred have their own specific characteristics, but they can also share common narratives and mechanisms, including scapegoating, dehumanization, conspiracy theories, and the demonization of the “other.”

These overlaps are not necessarily accidental. To effectively combat antisemitism, it is important to understand how it can coexist with other forms of discrimination, recognize the experiences of different groups, and raise awareness of the connections between different forms of prejudice and xenophobia.
Viewing antisemitism through an intersectional lens helps illuminate the complexity of the phenomenon and highlights the need for inclusive and nuanced approaches to combating it. It also helps strengthen broader efforts to promote equality, human rights, and social justice.

Antisemitism and racism

Historically, antisemitism has often taken a racial form, most notably in Nazi ideology, which constructed Jews as a distinct and supposedly inferior “race.” Today, antisemitism can intersect with racism when Jews are viewed through a racialized lens or when antisemitic rhetoric is combined with broader racist ideologies.

Antisemitism and Islamophobia

In some contexts, antisemitism and Islamophobia overlap, particularly when Jews and Muslims are targeted by the same groups or ideologies. This can occur within far-right movements that promote broader xenophobic and exclusionary agendas directed against both communities.

Antisemitism and sexism

Antisemitism can also intersect with sexism, particularly in the ways Jewish women are stereotyped or targeted. Jewish women may, for example, experience forms of misogyny that are intertwined with antisemitic stereotypes about Jewish identity, behavior, or appearance.

Antisemitism and homophobia

LGBTQ+ Jews may experience discrimination on the basis of both their sexual orientation or gender identity and their Jewish identity. In some contexts, antisemitic tropes may be combined with homophobic rhetoric, creating forms of hostility that target both aspects of a person’s identity.

Antisemitism and anti-Zionism

Criticism of Israel and its policies is not inherently antisemitic, and anti-Zionism as a political position should not automatically be equated with antisemitism. However, anti-Zionist rhetoric can become antisemitic when it relies on antisemitic stereotypes, holds Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the State of Israel, targets Jews because they are perceived as Zionists, or denies Jews rights that are recognized for other peoples.

Antisemitism and antigypsyism

These two historically rooted forms of hatred, deeply embedded in European history and culture, can share mechanisms such as dehumanization, conspiracy theories, and scapegoating. Both have historically contributed to violence, persecution, and social exclusion, and both Jews and Roma were victims of genocide during the Nazi era and under allied fascist and ultra-nationalist regimes across Europe. Both forms of hatred must therefore be addressed as part of the broader struggle against racism and discrimination. The memory of the victims of the Holocaust and the Samudaripen—the genocide of the Roma, must be preserved and protected against denial and distortion.

Antisemitism and anti-immigrant attitudes

Antisemitic conspiracy narratives about “population replacement,” “globalists,” or “world lobbies” can portray Jews as the alleged organizers or beneficiaries of migration, while migrants themselves are portrayed as a threat to society. Such narratives can reinforce both antisemitism and xenophobia, contributing to stigmatization and, in some cases, violence against both groups.

Recognizing these overlaps helps us better understand the particular challenges faced by Jews who also belong to other marginalized groups. An intersectional approach can also help build coalitions and solidarity among movements working to combat different forms of discrimination and oppression, ensuring that antisemitism is addressed as part of a broader commitment to equality, human rights, and social justice.

26. What Can I Do?

Countering antisemitism is not the task of Jews and the Jewish community, but must be a joint effort of all citizens in order to live in a democratic and safe social environment—in school, at work, on the street, and online.

The starting point and basic principle is that antisemitism must always be immediately, unequivocally, and in principle condemned whenever it appears. Developing competencies for a democratic society, primarily critical thinking, empathy, and tolerance, as well as media literacy, also prevents the emergence and spread of discriminatory behavior.

Countering antisemitism is of crucial importance for the survival and further development of Jewish communities, both in Serbia and in the world. Actively opposing antisemitism and working on its suppression not only protects our Jewish fellow citizens but also strengthens a democratic and tolerant society and our own commitment to human dignity and democratic values.

What can you do?

  • Learn and share what you learn.
    Learn about the history and contemporary life of Jewish communities in Serbia. Find out more about antisemitism and how to recognize it. Use internationally recognized tools such as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. Develop critical thinking and learn to assess sources of information: Who is the author? What evidence is provided? What is the context? Cultivate empathy, tolerance, and respect for diversity.
  • Use responsible language and practice good digital hygiene.
    Avoid generalizations, check facts before sharing information, and use precise terminology and appropriate context. Do not amplify harmful content by liking or sharing it. Instead, report it to the relevant platform and, where appropriate, provide reliable and verified information to counter antisemitic lies and propaganda.
  • Speak out against hatred.
    If you witness a verbal or physical antisemitic attack, do not remain a passive bystander—but make sure you stay safe. Where possible, make it clear that such behavior is unacceptable. The same applies when you encounter antisemitic content online or antisemitic graffiti in public spaces: document and report the incident to the appropriate institutions or authorities, such as relevant staff at your school or workplace, online platform moderators, editors or newsrooms of television and other media outlets, or law enforcement authorities. You can also inform the local Jewish community or a non-governmental organization working on education, monitoring, and combating antisemitism, such as the Center for Countering Antisemitism and Intolerance (CBA), Terraforming, or Haver Serbia.
  • Support those affected.
    Offer a word of support, provide practical assistance, and, when necessary, help connect people with the local Jewish community or with organizations that provide support and work on education, monitoring, and combating antisemitism.
  • Build networks and cooperation.
    Connect with local communities and organizations working in education and in the fight against antisemitism. Share resources and organize workshops, forums, and discussions to learn from one another and exchange experiences.

Some guidance on what each of us can and should do to combat antisemitism can be found in the Global Guidelines for Countering Antisemitism, adopted in Buenos Aires on July 17, 2024. The document was developed through an agreement among government representatives, special envoys, and national coordinators responsible for combating antisemitism, in cooperation with international organizations and other partners. It was endorsed by 32 countries, including the Republic of Serbia.

Appendix

Abc of antisemitism

QUESTIONS

  1. Who are the Jews?

  2. What is antisemitism?

  3. Antisemitism is the “canary in the coal mine”

  4. International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism

  5. The term antisemitism

  6. How is antisemitism expressed?

  7. How are victims of antisemitism affected?

  8. Who are the antisemites?

  9. Antisemitism through history

  10. Antisemitism in Serbia

  11. Stereotypical “traits” of Jews

  12. How to recognize antisemitism – 3D: delegitimization, demonization, double standards?

  13. Conspiracy theories

  14. The coded language of antisemitism

  15. Antisemitism and the internet

  16. Antisemitism and Israel

  17. Antisemitism and Zionism

  18. Antisemitism and the Holocaust

  19. Antisemitism and the misuse and distortion of Holocaust history

  20. Antisemitism and the misuse of Nazi and fascist terms, images, and symbols

  21. Holocaust memorialization and education on antisemitism

  22. Antisemitism and Nationalism

  23. Antisemitism and Islamism

  24. Antisemitism after October 7

  25. Antisemitism and Intersectionality

  26. What can I do?

“ABC of Antisemitism” was developed with the support of the Federal Foreign Office of the Federal Republic of Germany through the micro-grant programme of the European Practitioners Network against Antisemitism (EPNA).