Nexus Task Force

According to the Nexus Document, it is antisemitic:

• To promote myths, stereotypes or attitudes about Zionism and/or Israel that derive from and/or reinforce antisemitic accusations and tropes. These include:
  • Characterizing Israel as being part of a sinister world conspiracy of Jewish control of the media, economy, government or other financial, cultural or societal institutions.
  • Indiscriminately blaming suffering and injustices around the world on a hidden Jewish conspiracy or of being the maligning hand of Israel or Zionism.
  • Holding individuals or institutions, because they are Jewish, a priori culpable of real or imagined wrongdoing committed by Israel.
  • Considering Jews to be a priori incapable of setting aside their loyalty to the Jewish people and/or Israel.
  • Denigrating or denying the Jewish identity of certain Jews because they are perceived as holding the “wrong” position (whether too critical or too favorable) on Israel.
• To use symbols and images that present all Jews as collectively guilty for the actions of the State of Israel.
• To attack and/or physically harm a Jew because of her/his relationship to Israel.
• To convey intense hostility toward Jews who are connected to Israel in a way that intentionally or irresponsibly (acting with disregard to potential violent consequences) provokes antisemitic violence.
• To treat Israel in a negative manner based on a claim that Jews alone should be denied the right to define themselves as a people and to exercise any form of self-determination.
• To advocate a political solution that denies Jews the right to define themselves as a people, thereby denying them – because they are Jews – the right to self-determination.
• To treat Israel differently solely because it is a Jewish state, using standards different than those applied to other countries.

However, according to the Nexus Document:

• As a general rule, criticism of Zionism and Israel, opposition to Israel’s policies, or nonviolent political action directed at the State of Israel and/or its policies should not, as such, be deemed antisemitic.
• Even contentious, strident, or harsh criticism of Israel for its policies and actions, including those that led to the creation of Israel, is not per se illegitimate or antisemitic.
• Opposition to Zionism and/or Israel does not necessarily reflect specific anti-Jewish animus nor purposefully lead to antisemitic behaviors and conditions. (For example, someone might oppose the principle of nationalism or ethnonationalist ideology. Similarly, someone’s personal or national experience may have been adversely affected by the creation of the State of Israel. These motivations or attitudes towards Israel and/or Zionism do not necessarily constitute antisemitic behavior.)
• Paying disproportionate attention to Israel and treating Israel differently than other countries is not prima facie proof of antisemitism. (There are numerous reasons for devoting special attention to Israel and treating Israel differently, e.g., some people care about Israel more; others may pay more attention because Israel has a special relationship with the United States and receives $4 billion in American aid).

Some Jewish organisations have criticized the inclusion of the Nexus Document and/or downplayed its significance:

• The Zionist Organization of America called the National Strategy a “lopsided document” because it includes the Nexus Document and insufficiently embraces the IHRA definition.[24]
• B'nai B'rith wrote "We are, however, disappointed in the document’s mention of the Nexus definition of anti-Semitism. We believe that definition allows the more invidious of Israel’s nemeses to hide their animus behind 'strident' criticism of Israel. The important and well-established IHRA definition addresses this issue in a far superior manner."[25]
• Ronald Lauder, head of the World Jewish Congress, said that "The inclusion of a secondary definition in addition to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism is an unnecessary distraction from the real work that needs to be done."[26]
• The Anti-Defamation League's CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt stated that "The White House plan elevates and embraces IHRA as the preeminent definition that it is now using to understand antisemitism in all its forms. Whereas previously only the State Department and Department of Education were using it, now it’s the position of the entire administration."[27] Downplaying the significance of the inclusion of the Nexus Document, Greenblatt added, "They did welcome the Nexus Document, but they didn’t cite their definition."[27] The latter statement is hard to understand as the Nexus Document is the Nexus definition. So in citing the Nexus Document, the strategy does cite the Nexus definition.

Responding to criticism from some Jewish organizations of the inclusion of the Nexus Document, Deborah Lipstadt, the United States Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism, said that “there are portions of the Nexus Document which almost are more explicit than the IHRA."[28]

She quoted from the Nexus Document: "It is antisemitic to promote myths, stereotypes or attitudes about Zionism and/or Israel that derive from and/or reinforce antisemitic accusations and tropes."[28]

According to the Nexus Document, these include: "Characterizing Israel as being part of a sinister world conspiracy of Jewish control of the media, economy, government or other financial, cultural or societal institutions; Indiscriminately blaming suffering and injustices around the world on a hidden Jewish conspiracy or of being the maligning hand of Israel or Zionism; Holding individuals or institutions, because they are Jewish, a priori culpable of real or imagined wrongdoing committed by Israel," and so on.[2]

"That's pretty explicit,” Lipstadt said. “I think some of the things that have been said about Nexus are not accurate. There were parts in there that some people can see as troublesome. I'm not denying that, but we didn't adopt or embrace Nexus. We recognize that because of where it's explicit there, that is helpful to us."[28]

Following the Hamas terror attack of October 7, 2023, when some left and pro-Palestinian advocates demonstrated support for Hamas despite the murder of innocents, Nexus Task Force member David Schraub wrote a column with Alan Solow, a former Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, asserting that the Biden administration's National Antisemitism Strategy is a more effective tool for forming alliances across the wide range of American constituencies and communities because it incorporates the Nexus Document and does not rely solely on the IHRA definition.[29]