Background:
Egyptian ʿAyn Shams University Professor Rashād al-Shāmī and fellow colleague al-Baḥrawy discuss the Western belief of anti-Semitism being more prominent in the Arab World than anywhere else. Al-Shāmī mentions the popular Egyptian writer ʾIḥsān ʿAbd al-Quddūs and criticises his work as being stereotypical of the Israelis, although he does not conclude the writer to be anti-Semitic. Al-Baḥrawy agrees, but argues that although al-Quddūs is an Egyptian writer, this view of anti-Semitism should not be generalised over the entire population of Egypt, as de facto al-Quddūs is not anti-Semitic.
Al-Shāmī is specialised in Modern Hebrew literature and has published many books. These books cover inter alia, subjects such as Modern Hebrew literature, Israeli Society and the history of the Hebrew language.
Side A:
Al-Shāmī as a knowledgeable author and scholar, criticises ʾIḥsān ʿAbd al-Quddūs’ “stereotypical” way of writing about Israelis. Al-Baḥrawy builds on al-Shāmī’s statement by saying that Egypt is not anti-Semitic and does not have racial tendencies against Jews or any other ethno-religious groups for that matter. Both al-Shāmī and al-Baḥrawy agree that anti-Semitism should be defined as a psychological sickness, which pushes people to be hostile against Jews. This hatred is due to a psychological fear of Jews, similarly to psychological fears of ghosts as expressed by the professors. Al-Baḥrawy sincerely believes in this definition of anti-Semitism, but denies its existence among Egyptians. Cornelis Hulsman asks the two men to explain the distribution of a widespread and known to be anti-Semitic book in Egypt: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The book had been banned in a number of countries due to its racist nature, but has been seen in several book fairs in Egypt. Al-Baḥrawy argues that this is possible due to the fact that there are no laws that advocate the banning of books, whereby Hulsman interrupts the man and brings up a case of a then-recently banned book, which had been proscribed due to its alleged anti-Islamic nature. Al-Baḥrawy replied by saying that he was not aware of this law. Hulsman continues asking al-Baḥrawy questions of possible anti-Semitic material that is distributed in Egypt, including a number of examples of anti-Semitic articles in Egyptian media that had been analysed at Leiden University, the Netherlands. Al-Baḥrawy argues that Israelis and Arabs have different understandings of the term anti-Semitism, and it is essential that they come to a consensus regarding the definition.
Side B:
Furthermore, the accusations of Arabs being anti-Semitic are used by Israel to justify its own-Anti-Arabism as said by Yael Lerer, an Israeli activist and publisher who is specialised in Arabic literature and Hebrew. Al-Baḥrawy claims that Yael Lerer is a woman he would love to meet one day and agrees completely with her bold statement. Additionally, Pope Shenūdah III is brought into the discussion and accused of being anti-Semitic, whereby al-Baḥrawy objects and claims that Shenūdah III is not against Christians going on pilgrimage to Israel because of the Jews, but that these comments have in fact been taken out of context. Al-Baḥrawy hopes that one day Israel can co-exist with the Arab world and that he accepts the state of Israel but objects to their political behaviours. He elaborates that he was asked to visit Israel but that he refused until the occupation of Palestine ends. Al-Baḥrawy advocates two rights for two nations and two lands for two peoples: the Israelis and the Palestinians. He adds that he feels that if he were to visit Israel at its current position, he would feel as though he is surrendering; giving the Israelis everything but not receiving anything in return.
Al-Shāmī further discusses the issue of stereotypical thinking regarding the Israelis, but also regarding the Arabs. Classic stereotypes of Israelis according to him are that the Israelis are traitors because they were enemies to Prophet Muḥammad when they betrayed him. Al-Shāmī claims that this stereotype is often associated to Jews as well because Jews and Israelis are often not distinguished, but he believes that they should be. New stereotypes of Israelis have arisen that are based on their political behaviours, these are: greediness, dominance, and their possession of nuclear bombs, says al-Baḥrawy. He believes that these stereotypes are not anti-Semitic, but have been brought to life by the Israelis themselves. These stereotypes have thrived from their political attitude, and al-Baḥrawy believes that if only they change their attitude, these stereotypes can and will be eliminated.
Romana Muṣṭafā Mūsā’s Comments:
Noticeably, both Rashād al-Shāmī and al-Baḥrawy continuously stress the fact that they are absolutely not anti-Semitic and that Egyptians are not either. According to them, there is zero evidence of Egypt being an anti-Semitic nation, however it is quite interesting to see that when Cornelis Hulsman mentions several cases of potential evidence of anti-Semitism in Egypt, al-Baḥrawy, in particular, is overwhelmed by Hulsman’s straightforwardness and what seems as an attempt to cover that up, argues that the definition of anti-Semitism is not globally shared.
