Addressing 'anti-Semitism' just ain't gonna be a Trump priority

So that's it??? It looks like our new President just won't be explicitly acknowledging any kind of hatred targeting Jews, whether past or present. As with the prospect of releasing his tax returns, establishing a real blind trust or finally assuming a responsible, Presidential demeanor, calling anti-Semitism by its name probably won't be something he does during his tenure. If he were going to do so, last week's visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- the self-proclaimed "representative of the entire Jewish people" -- would have been the time...not that Netanyahu even seemed to care.

The White House belatedly issued a statement today condemning unspecified "actions", which in this case involved repeated bomb threats against Jewish community centers across the country. No mention of Jews or anti-Semitism. Likewise, our Tweeter-in-Chief has yet to even mention last month's mosque massacre in Quebec, even with the recent visit by Canada's Prime Minister. 

On a base political level, it's clear President Trump attracts his strongest support from the so-called "Alt-Right", what we used to call the white supremacist movement. His chief White House strategist, Stephen Bannon, used to run Breitbart, which he proudly labeled "the platform for the Alt-Right." 

Trump's core demographic hates Jews, Muslims and Latinos, as well as the Catholic Church -- especially under Pope Francis. Trump shares their animosity toward the latter groups. He happens to love Jews, especially his daughter and her family, and he seems to genuinely love Israel. But he also clearly understands the political convenience of not condemning his most fanatical followers. By leaving out mention of Jews, even from his official statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day, that should be sufficient to appease those supporters -- it's not like they're going to defect to the Party of Obama. 

Aside from legitimizing -- by default -- acts of hate within the United States, Trump's silence also undercuts the global fight against anti-Semitism and other forms of hate and xenophobia. The United States has been the locomotive for this cause and still sets the tone for international discourse. And on a practical level, we won't have credibility admonishing other governments to do better. Hopefully, the work we have accomplished with key governments and multilateral institutions during the past 25 years has become part of the legal and political cultures, and of law enforcement protocols... but this won't be pretty.

In India, one step forward, two steps back

The death sentences for four of the New Delhi gang rapists are a hopeful sign of accountability amid India's carefree rush to urbanization. But the more momentous news of the week revealed a major step backward for Indian society: The nationalist BJP Party named Narendra Modi as its candidate for Prime Minister in next year's national elections. With his ascension, unfortunately, India will probably not become a global good citizen anytime soon.

In India's 65 years of statehood, rarely has one man come to embody ethnic and religious hatred -- and violence -- as Modi has in his years as Chief Minister of Gujarat, the state sandwiched between Maharashtra and Pakistan. Hundreds of Muslims were butchered in 2002, in a wave of attacks egged on by Modi. 

Not only is Modi now the official flag-bearer of the BJP, but by next year he could be the leader of a major world power. If so, then this avowed hater of Muslims and of Muslim-majority Pakistan will have his finger on the button of India's nuclear arsenal, designed with but one purpose: the destruction of Pakistani cities. 

It should be remembered that when Serbia gave up Slobodan Milosevic to the International Criminal Tribunal, it was for political gains and not because Serbs were suddenly remorseful for their collective genocide against Bosnian Muslims. Serbian society still has far to go in earning a place at the civilized table, and so may India. 

The formalizing of Modi's candidacy is already a serious step away from the rule of law. His election would change the face of a country with 1.25 billion people and a decent stash of nuclear warheads waiting for a good excuse.

French democracy - for export only?

DEMOCRACY ABROAD


Let there be no doubt, democracy was advanced yesterday in Africa. And payback is aways nice, too.

The French just apprehended Laurent Gbagbo after weeks of brutal fighting and negotiations. Gbagbo was the President of Côte d'Ivoire who consolidated the country and led it out of a deadlocked and deadly civil war, only to lose the first free election since... But more importantly, the French had to enjoy the moment, since they have long backed the other side, in this case the side whose candidate won last November's vote. My question is, whether the same tanks that knocked through Gbagbo's palace in the name of democracy were the same ones France was using just a few years ago to try to get their rebel allies into power by sheer force. 

Somehow Gbagbo managed to head off France's interference long enough to get his country back on track, only he forgot that too much of a good thing, c'est trop. Instead of taking the villa in exile with trust fund, he'll now get a condo with bars.

XENOPHOBIA AT HOME

Meanwhile, back in the birthplace of Liberté, Égalité & Fraternité (i.e., Ile de France), the popular national ban on public display of full veils went into effect. Some months ago, an online video ridiculing this initiative went viral [warning: contains dangerous post-modern dichotomies and moral complexity]. French tolerance has gone from ridiculous to medieval, in under one year.