eHalal Palestine
🇩🇪 Hamas Activity Ban in Germany: Nancy Faeser’s Poison for Society
With the ban on Hamas activities, the Interior Minister is bringing violence to Germany. Criminal law is the wrong tool for combating racism. The federal government’s actions lack credibility, as they position themselves on the side of violence.
By Gert Ewen Ungar
“Antisemitism has no place in Germany, and we will fight it with all our might.”
This was the declaration of Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, justifying the ban on Hamas activities in Germany. Simultaneously, the Samidoun association is prohibited because, according to the federal government’s assessment, it spreads anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda. Specifically, this means that websites and online presences on social networks are censored, and funds are seized. Any further activities by these organizations in Germany are now subject to criminal penalties.
According to Nancy Faeser, this has solved the problem and effectively combated anti-Semitism in Germany. However, it’s immediately clear that the last statement provokes disagreement, as it reveals what most people understand: Faeser’s ministry’s bans fundamentally change nothing. The 450 Hamas supporters in Germany, as noted by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, will find alternative communication channels, finances will flow through different routes, and the ban only makes the organization more attractive to its sympathizers for further support.
Regardless of whether supporting Palestine equates to antisemitism, as seemingly believed by the German government, using criminal law as a tool to combat antisemitism and racism is, in many experts’ views, an unsuitable approach. In fact, some fear that it may further exacerbate the division within the already deeply fragmented German society, a divide that has grown considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The rationale for the ban is, in itself, quite contentious. Minister Faeser has put forth four points to justify the prohibition of the Samidoun organization: first, that the organization opposes the idea of international understanding; second, that it impairs and endangers peaceful coexistence while advocating violence to achieve and enforce political objectives; third, it allegedly supports attacks against individuals and property.
Using these four points as a basis for banning organizations could potentially lead to the prohibition of numerous groups and institutions in Germany. This list might include the Antifa movement, several state-funded think tanks, coverage by respected German journalism on topics such as COVID, the Ukraine conflict, and the Middle East conflict, and even the federal government itself. Consequently, the reasoning behind these recent bans appears unintentionally paradoxical, raising questions and concerns about their true objectives and effectiveness.
What the ban achieves is that Germany becomes once again more repressive because the ban must be enforced. This requires surveillance and control. It isolates and suppresses. The stated goal of combating antisemitism in Germany is not achieved. No one who condemns Israel’s policies and thereby exposes themselves to the accusation of being antisemitic in Germany will be persuaded to change their opinion and suddenly favor Israel’s policies due to a ban on Hamas activities. These individuals are more likely to become critical of the German government and its one-sided stance.
In general, it’s a recurring pattern in Germany that when there are social problems to be solved, German politicians tend to resort to tightening criminal laws and imposing bans. The goal is consistently to narrow the scope of what can be said, exclude and silence different opinions, stances, and beliefs. This is a method seen in authoritarian states.
To combat racism and anti-Semitism, relying solely on criminal law is a failure. Furthermore, conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism exacerbates the problem that one claims to be fighting.
This approach is unlikely to be effective, Mrs. Faeser, as the law “endangers the peaceful coexistence of Germans and foreigners.” Faeser is doing precisely what she accuses Hamas and the Samidoun association of.
“When only the criminal law comes to mind for combating racism and anti-Semitism, one has already failed. Furthermore, mixing and equating criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism only exacerbates the problem that one claims to be combating.
This won’t work, Mrs. Faeser, because the law “endangers the peaceful coexistence of Germans and foreigners.” Faeser is doing exactly what she accuses Hamas and the Samidoun association of.
Since Germany aligns itself closely with Israel and presents itself as a military supporter that is readily apparent, but Israel is unmistakably committing grave crimes against humanity, which are also legitimized and downplayed by the German government, it is to be expected that this legislative measure will be perceived for what it is: one-sided, authoritarian, and unjust. Resistance against it will arise. You don’t need to have studied psychology for twenty semesters to understand this mechanism.
With this ban, Faeser is treading on very thin ice, on which she is likely to stumble. This is because the German government endorses and supports the “use of violence as a means to achieve political objectives” in Ukraine and Israel, as Faeser also cites as a reason for the ban. The German government is doing what it wants to prohibit others from doing. This contradiction remains and cannot be resolved through argument but only through repression and internal violence.
Faeser said that holding spontaneous celebrations in response to Hamas terrorist attacks is “particularly repugnant,” which is why it must be banned. This seems particularly hypocritical because Nancy Faeser does not find holding spontaneous celebrations on social media when people in Russia lose their lives due to Ukrainian terrorist attacks to be repugnant or objectionable. According to German state policy, the right people simply die in these circumstances. It’s worth noting that the German government’s inability to take a strong stance against Russian aggression and its victims in the face of Ukrainian terrorism is well recognized there. The value of violence victims depends on their nationality according to the German government. This attitude is commonly referred to as racism.”
Instead of advocating for diplomacy and peace in the Middle East, and holding Israel accountable for its violations of international law, Germany is criminalizing groups that are engaging in a minuscule manner in what the German federal government is doing on a much larger scale for the other side, citing reasons of state. It should be abundantly clear that supporting injustice and violence should never be a matter of state policy. By branding criticism of this as antisemitic, the German government only further undermines its position.
Every member of the German federal government, every member of the Bundestag, should be aware that the West and Germany, with their one-sided support for Israel, have lost the last remnants of credibility in the world. After what political Germany condones in Gaza, justifying it with the “right to self-defense,” no one believes that Germany stands for any “value” anymore. The fact that the German government also aligns with violence in Ukraine doesn’t need to be mentioned. It fits the overall image that Germany presents to the world.
The Faeser Law has the potential to inflame domestic violence in Germany, as it is deeply unjust. It treats equals unequally, making it an injustice in the true sense. A rule of law that unconditionally supports Israel must also allow for the unconditional support of the Palestinians. Otherwise, it ceases to be a rule of law.
Those who reject the use of violence to achieve political goals must do so comprehensively to remain credible and work on all levels for diplomacy and understanding. In the Middle East, in Ukraine, everywhere. Germany does not do this. The stance of the German government, legitimizing and supporting the violence of Israel, inevitably leads to counter-violence – in the Middle East and predictably, more frequently on the streets of Germany.