Canada – Page 24

These times call for solidarity

When a multicultural country like Canada faces a stark rise in hatred targeting one ethnic group, its social and ethical solidarity is put to the test. The question for Canada’s Jewish establishment is, how will it respond to the shocking spike in hatred targeting the Muslim community?

On the heels of the Quebec City mosque shooting, which left six worshippers dead, and then a hate-filled protest outside of a Toronto mosque, a private member’s motion to condemn Islamophobia was introduced in Parliament. Regrettably, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) is opposing the motion, at least in its current form.

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid introduced the non-binding motion (M-103) urging the government to “better reflect” the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by “quell[ing] the increasing public climate of hate and fear,” while “condemn[ing] Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.” Her motion also asks Parliament to convene a study to address these issues and “to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities.”

As the motion – intended to express the will of Parliament but falling short of having any legal force – acknowledges, there are already Charter provisions for opposing racism and discrimination. And Section 319 of the Criminal Code already outlaws “communicating statements in any public place, incit[ing] hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace.” But, sometimes, the law is not enough to signal collective revulsion.

The demonstrators outside the downtown Toronto mosque held signs such as “Ban Islam” and “Muslims are terrorists.” Interviewed on camera, one of the protesters makes the following chilling observation: “They [she presumably means Muslims] start out friendly and, before you know it, they grow so much in population that they take over.” The interviewer challenges her: “This is sounding a lot like what people said about Jews at one time,” to which the protester replies: “There’s no comparison. Jews were not evil.”

For its part, CIJA calls M-103 “flawed.” As CIJA head Shimon Koffler Fogel writes, the motion “requires us to silence legitimate concerns or suppress a public conversation about those strains of Islam that pose a real and imminent threat to Jews around the world,” adding that the motion “denies space and opportunity within the Muslim community to confront those strains of Islam that do indeed exist and do indeed cause harm to the majority of Muslims who do not subscribe to an extremist ideology.” For these reasons, CIJA is urging lawmakers to oppose it.

It’s not the first time a private member’s motion has been introduced to focus Canada’s attention on a specific form of hatred. In 2015, Conservative MP James Bezan asked “all members [of Parliament] and all Canadians [to] join me in denouncing antisemitism.” In 2015, Liberal MP Irwin Cotler asked the “House [to] condemn the alarming development of a new antisemitism….” And then, of course, there’s the 2010 Ottawa Protocol on Combating Antisemitism, which convened parliamentary representatives from an array of countries to call out antisemitism.

CIJA director of communications Martin Sampson shared with me the amended text of the motion CIJA proposed to Khaled, including trying to add a clause that would “recognize that criticism and condemnation of any and all forms of extremism is not only acceptable but necessary in a free and democratic society; and tasking the proposed study to define ‘Islamophobia in Canada.’”

Bernie Farber, former head of Canadian Jewish Congress and now head of the Toronto-based Mosaic Institute, a diversity, peace and justice organization, said he is “baffled and stunned” by CIJA’s opposition to the motion.

Is the lack of explicit acknowledgment of the legitimacy of criticizing religion a problem, as CIJA is suggesting? No. Parliamentary motions have no legislative force. The existing Criminal Code – including laws governing freedom of expression – will remain unaffected. Fogel’s claim that the motion will silence criticism by force of law is simply wrong. It may serve to dampen enthusiasm for the kind of hateful anti-Muslim demonstrations we saw in Toronto, but that is the point.

Or perhaps the vagueness of the term Islamophobia is a problem. Sampson calls the word “politically charged and imprecise.” Cotler, for instance, is suggesting that M-103 be amended to say “anti-Muslim bigotry.”

But, like homophobia, Islamophobia is simply the term that exists to denote this form of bigotry. When I asked historian of language Liora Halperin why the term got saddled with the more clinical “phobia” suffix instead of acquiring the more straightforward “anti” prefix, she acknowledges that phobias are psychiatric diagnoses, not ideologies. But, she adds, “in practice, fear is indeed part of racism.”

The term antisemitism – which, ironically, was coined by a German antisemite – captures the unique phenomenon of Jew hatred. Similarly, Farber argues, “hatred of Muslims needs its own specific word to get people to understand the importance of what this kind of hatred of Muslims can do. And we’ve seen it, sadly, right here in Canada.”

These times call for solidarity in the face of rising tides of antisemitism, Islamophobia and all other forms of racism. In the wake of the mosque massacre and the hateful protests on Toronto’s usually peaceful streets, coupled with the shadow of U.S. President Donald Trump’s xenophobic policies, the time is now for Canadians to stand together against Islamophobia. That’s the word we have, that’s the member’s motion being proposed, and that’s the wave of hatred – one prominent wave among many, sadly – that we urgently need to address.

Mira Sucharov is an associate professor of political science at Carleton University. She is a columnist for Canadian Jewish News and contributes to Haaretz and the Jewish Daily Forward, among other publications. A version of this article was originally published on haartez.com.

Guichon visit RJDS

The Hon. Judith Guichon with Richmond Jewish Day School students. (photo by Lauren Kramer)

Students at Richmond Jewish Day School were thrilled to receive a visit from the Hon. Judith Guichon, lieutenant governor of British Columbia, on Feb. 22. Guichon addressed students on her role in Canada’s constitutional monarchy and shared her ideas about a healthy, sustainable future. To mark the 150th anniversary of Canada’s Confederation, the lieutenant governor is visiting 150 schools across the province.

A swing and a hit play

Hasan (Nadeem Phillip) tells Haseena (Risha Nanda) about his dream of playing cricket in Canada. (photo by Emily Cooper)

I have to admit I’ve never seen a cricket match in all the years I’ve lived in Vancouver. I’ve seen games in other countries – but I never knew Stanley Park had a field for cricket going back to the 1890s and a clubhouse that just turned 100.

In fact, the pitch at Brockton Oval is considered rather hallowed ground by some and forms a focal point in The Men in White, the current production at the Arts Club Granville Island Stage.

Playwright Anosh Irani takes the audience from India, where dreamers see Canada as a land of refuge; to Canada, where dreams don’t always turn out the way people hope; to the world of cricket, where even a “duck” doesn’t hurt too badly as long as you don’t have to borrow a “box.”

Based partly on the author’s true experience at a chicken slaughterhouse, the play is set in two different locations – a chicken stand in Bombay and a cricket clubhouse in Vancouver.

In India, 18-year-old Hasan dreams of becoming a famous cricket player and playing in Vancouver with his brother. As he laments his lot in life, he admires a local girl from afar, trying to woo her, despite becoming tongue-tied and awkward whenever she comes by. His adoptive father, who owns the shop, looks after him, trying to impart wisdom about life, albeit in rather unorthodox ways.

In Vancouver, Hasan’s brother, Abdul, has been living and working in a restaurant illegally, after arriving on a tourist visa. He’s embarrassed to tell his brother of his circumstance, and the only thing that keeps his spirits up is to be able to play his favourite sport on a beautiful grass cricket field – a privilege for which he is immensely grateful. He’s particularly impressed because Don Bradman, a renowned cricket player, had said in 1948: “The Brockton Point ground is the prettiest upon which it has been my pleasure to play.”

In the clubhouse, Hasan and his teammates discuss the game, each other’s lives and the issues of the day, but come to blows when racist sentiment arises. A doctor who had emigrated from Bombay takes issue with Abdul. His angry outburst ends with him declaring, “I will not allow Muslims in this country!”

The scene is disturbing in its familiarity, given President Trump’s machinations, but also very touching, as the other team members rally around Abdul in support.

While thought-provoking, the play doesn’t offer up any answers. Its forte is in the writing and directing. The performance is jam-packed with witty repartee, sarcastic barbs and playful insults that are tossed at one another like verbal confetti.

Irani has a skill in wordplay and humour that leaves the audience feeling at once unsettled by some of what’s being said, while appreciating its delivery. With six of the cast members almost talking over one another at times, the outcome could have been rather messy, and the play needed the deft hand of Rachel Ditor at the helm to direct the characters in their split-second timing. The set design by Amir Ofek is minimalist, but in some ways reflects a cricket game. The two locations share one stage and action alternates between the two, as it would in a sporting match. Ofek’s design enables the sets to coexist, while still being visually separated by the few props and use of different lighting.

The Men in White runs at Granville Island Stage until March 11 (artsclub.com). Irani’s work – he is also an author – has gained national and international acclaim and honours. Take the opportunity to see it for yourself.

Baila Lazarus is a freelance writer and media strategist in Vancouver. Her consulting services are at phase2coaching.com.

The complexities of terrorism

Dr. Tami Jacoby, associate professor at the University of Manitoba, has been studying Middle East politics and international relations for nearly 20 years. (photo from Tami Jacoby)

Dr. Tami Jacoby, associate professor at the University of Manitoba, has been studying Middle East politics and international relations for nearly 20 years. She not only shares her expertise with students at the university, but the broader community as well, via books and lectures. She is currently teaching an eight-week class at Winnipeg’s Rady JCC called Terrorism and Political Violence.

After working toward her undergrad degree at the Hebrew University, Jacoby finished her studies at U of M. She then went back to Hebrew U for her master’s degree in political science and international relations. At that time, Jacoby made aliyah and started a family and life in Israel. Later, she moved to Toronto to do a doctorate in political science at York University. She eventually returned to Winnipeg, where she currently resides.

While doing her PhD, Jacoby traveled back and forth regularly between Canada and Israel, and did field work in Israel, conducting interviews and research on women’s protest movements.

Over the years, Jacoby has written several books, including Women in Zones of Conflict: Power and Resistance in Israel (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2005). Using the framework of “a case study of three women’s political movements in Israel: Women in Green, the Jerusalem Link and the lobby for women’s right to fight in the Israel Defence Forces,” the book, according to the publisher’s description online, “challenges the traditional view, which suggests a natural connection between women and pacifism, based on the feminine qualities of caring, cooperation and empathy.”

“What I did was a number of years of interviews and research on women’s protest movements … and the book that came out was a book on the diversity of feminism in Israel, but as a level of extremism,” Jacoby told the Independent. “I was interested in how women in one national context could have such radically different views on the same things, like feminism, the Arab-Israeli conflict and just run-of-the-mill party politics.”

One of the interesting things Jacoby found was that many women on the left were interested in things like dialogue with the Palestinians about a two-state solution, and feminism. In contrast, right-wingers’ idea of dialogue with the Palestinians was through protest, the media and policy.

“They were very driven by their fear of not only losing the state of Israel, but of losing their identity as Jews, as Israelis,” said Jacoby. “And the left-wing portion of the Israeli women’s movement was very interested in dialogue with Palestinian women. They wanted to get together with them and have cultural programs and social events. They wanted to listen to and get to know the stories of Palestinian women, to be able to walk in their shoes and completely understand them.”

The class that Jacoby is teaching at the Rady JCC – which started last week and runs to March 21 – looks at terrorism in Canada and the legal and political/social aspects of it.

“This class I’m teaching at the JCC is, in a sense, piggybacking on other research and teaching that I’m doing right at the moment,” she told the Independent before the course began. “So, I’d assume the people in the class will be interested in the kind of terrorism that Canada and Israel deal with…. But the class takes a step back and looks at the phenomenon of terrorism as a philosophical and structural issue….”

While Jacoby is teaching the class, she is also a student of sorts, as she is interested in hearing what people have to say.

“People have a lot to say and it’s not just off the cuff; it’s substantiated by empirical evidence and anecdotes that are based on experience,” she said. “What I try to do is open a little window on something that I’ve been very heavily researching … and open a discussion about things that people may not have thought of before … so people can bring things to the table and we can work to enlighten ourselves about the topic.”

Touching a little on what will be examined in the course, Jacoby said, “One of the things I’ve come to realize about terrorism is that it has a particular dynamic to it, no matter where it is and what period of history it is in. And that is, you have a small group of people trying to terrorize, make afraid, a large group of people … so they start to feel their life is untenable and then pressure the government to act. That’s the case with literally every terrorist group, regardless of their philosophy, background or tactics. That’s the logic of terrorism. I’m interested in seeing how case studies fit into that logic.”

Another topic will be how to pair counterterrorism with policies like multiculturalism, democracy and liberalism.

“The human tendency is to look for people who might look like them, causing a whole range of Islamophobia, antisemitism, racism and xenophobia,” explained Jacoby. “These are the kinds of problems not specific to any one particular form of terrorism, but that fuel a broader understanding of terrorism in general.”

Jacoby sees political violence like terrorism as a way in which people express themselves at the extreme end of the spectrum. “Political violence is quite broad,” she said. “It could be something quite innocuous, like threatening someone or inciting someone to violence … or, it could be throwing a fist or a bomb, or using nuclear weapons as a scare tactic.”

The Middle East will likely be discussed in terms of the ongoing cold war between Iran and Saudi Arabia and their backers, as well as both American and Russian policies.

“One thing that people seem to not understand nowadays is that people may oppose a terrorist group’s tactics, but they may also support the underlying goals … which can be quite honourable,” said Jacoby. “For example, terrorists might use violence to press their point about Muslim victims in the Middle East, [while] a moderate person might say they are against and shocked by the high casualty rate of Muslim victims. There are a lot of divisions out there, of which terrorists only represent a very small group … [an] active, vocal, radical, but miniscule, minority. While we may not like the tactic, many people may support the ultimate goals, which include justice and peace. The reason we can’t see the ultimate goals is because terrorism destroyed them … [and] in the end, makes it worse.”

As for possible solutions to terrorism, Jacoby said it “is one of the most difficult tasks to respond to.”

She explained, “I would say this: the effect of terrorism is more psychological than anything else. Fewer people die from terrorist attacks every year than from faulty wiring or furniture falling on them when they sleep. But, because of the media and the dramatic nature of its coverage of terrorism (pervasiveness, images, taboos, fear), people spend more time worrying about terrorism than any other more concrete and actual danger to their lives. My suggestion is we, as a society, need to be more ‘comfortable’ with the psychological discomfort that comes with terrorism. We must continue to be vigilant, but also live our lives to the fullest so that the terrorists won’t ultimately win.”

Rebeca Kuropatwa is a Winnipeg freelance writer.

הרפר יוצא נגד טראמפ

מצעד הנשים בוונקובר ,21 בינואר השנה. (צילום: Roni Rachmani)

ראש ממשלת קנדה לשעבר, סטיבן הרפר, יוצא במתקפה נגד הנשיא החדש של ארה”ב, דונלד טראמפ. עם זאת הרפר לא מגיב כלל ליחסים ההדוקים בין טראמפ ושר החוץ שלו, לבין רוסיה ומנהיגה ולדימיר פוטין. הרפר וממשלתו החרימו את רוסיה בעיקר בגלל פעילותיה באוקריאנה, והובילו את המאבק הנחרץ ביותר בקרב מחנה מדינות המערב נגד פוטין.

מעניין כיצד ראש ממשלת ישראל, בנימין נתניהו, היה מתייחס לדברי הרפר כנגד טראמפ. כזכור הרפר ונתניהו ניהלו מערכת יחסים הדוקה ביותר וראש ממשלת קנדה לשעבר נחשב לידיד הקרוב ביותר של ישראל. עתה נתניהו מרגיש שיש לו הרבה במשותף עם טראמפ שלא מפסיק להבטיח שיתמוך באופן משמעותי בישראל, ואף יעביר את שגרירות ארה”ב מתל אביב לירושלים.

הרפר דיבר ביום חמישי שעבר בניו דלהי וזו בעצם הפעם הראשונה שהוא מדבר ישירות על נושאים פוליטיים בינלאומיים, מאז הובס בבחירות הפדרליות בנובמבר 2015 על ידי הליברלים בראשות ג’סטין טרודו. נאומו החשוב (בן החצי שעה) של הרפר התקיים בפני הפורום של קרן המחקר אובזרוור, שדן בעתיד העולם בעידן טראמפ. הרפר התייחס בנאומו לסידרה של זעזועים פוליטיים המתרחשים בעולם כיום, בהם החלטת בריטניה לעזוב את אירופה ובחירתו של טראמפ לנשיאות בארה”ב.

הרפר קורא למדיניות החוץ של טראמפ חוסר ודאות גלובלית. לדבריו שלטונו הבדלני של טראמפ הוא המקור עיקרי לאי הוודאות הבינלאומית. מדיניותו החדשה של טראמפ היא ציון דרך של שינוי מדיניות החוץ של ארה”ב, לעומת שבעים השנים האחרונות. לדברי הרפר אין לנו מושג ברור מה מתכוון הנשיא החדש של ארה”ב לעשות, אך יש לנו מספר קווי מתאר רחבים, והמשמעותי שבהם כאמור הוא לחזור אחורה ולהפוך את אבני היסוד של מדיניות החוץ האמריקנית, שמתקיימת מאז מלחמת העולם השנייה.

הרפר אומר כי טראמפ מתכוון להפחית משמעותית את מעורבות ארה”ב בעניינים בינלאומיים עולמיים, והוא יהיה מונחה על ידי אינטרסים כלכליים צרים. והראשונה שעל הפרק היא סין, שנחשבת על ידיו בוחריו ליריב גיאופוליטי ולכן יש לנקוט במדיניות קשה נגדה. ראש ממשלת קנדה לשעבר חושב שהנשיא החדש של ארה”ב יעבוד עם דידים ובני ברית של ארה”ב, אך עתה הם יאלצו להביא נכסים אמיתיים לשולחן הדיונים עם השלטון האמריקני. הוא לא הזכיר את קנדה במפורש אך התכוון גם אליה. הרפר ציין עוד כי השינוי במדיניות עם מדיניות ידידותיות יבוא לביטוי בראש ובראשונה עם מדינות אירופה.

הרפר טען עוד כי טראמפ הוא נשיא חסר תקדים בהיסטוריה של ארה”ב, והוא דוחה את הרעיון שאמריקה לבד צריכה לקבל את האחריות על נושאים עולמיים. רבים ממנהיגים העולם לא יאהבו את השינוי במדיניות החוץ של ארה”ב, שתתבסס מעתה על אינטרסים לאומיים חיוניים של ארה”ב, המוגדרים באופן צר ובעיקר מתייחסים לאינטרסים הכלכליים. המדיניות הבינלאומית החדשה הזו של ארה”ב תיצור סיכונים משמעותיים לעולם.

הרפר מאמין שהשינוי המשמעותי הנוסף במדיניות הבינלאומית של ארה”ב תחת שלטונו של טראמפ, מתייחס כאמור לגבי סין. בעידנו ארה”ב תפסיק להתייחס לגידול של סין כדבר שפיר וחיובי, אלא שיש להפסיק ולממן את היריב הגיאופוליטי. זה הולך להדאיג מאוד בעיקר נוכח המאזן השלילי המאסיבי ביחסי הסחר בין שתי מדינות אלה. היחס של טראמפ לסין מתאים להשקפה בדעת הקהל האמריקנית שתמיד הייתה סקפטית בנוגע לגבי מדיניות החוץ של ארה”ב כלפי סין, והאם היא באמת יותר הזדמנות מאשר איום.

לאור נאום ג’ון קרי

ג’ון קרי בישראל בשנת 2013. (צילום: U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv via Wikimedia)

דוברת משרד החוץ של קנדה חוזרת על עמדתה הרשמית של ממשלת ג’סטין טרודו, שתומכת בהקמת מדינה פלסטינית לצד ישראל שתביא לסיומו של הסכסוך במזרח התיכון. דבריה נאמרו לאור נאומו של שר החוץ של ארה”ב, ג’ון קרי, שתקף בשבוע שעבר בנאום פרידה את ישראל, שלדבריו ממשיכה לבנות בשטחים ובכך מסכנת את אופציית הקמת המדינה הפלסטינית. לדברי מפלגת הירוקים הקנדית מדיניות נתניהו מהווה איום על השלום.

הדוברת של שר החוץ סטפן דיון, שנטל גניון, ציינה “שכתוצאה מהנחישות לבניית שלום קבוע בין ישראל והמדינה הפלסטינית, קנדה תתמוך במאמצים לקיים את פתרון שתי המדינות, וליצור את התנאים ששני הצדדים יחזרו לנהל משא ומתן ישיר למציאת שלום כולל, צודק ובר קיימא”.

חבר הפרלמנט מטעם המפלגה הקונסרבטיבית, פיטר קנט, תקף את ממשלת טרודו הליברלית לאור השתיקה שלה (אותה הגדיר “כמבישה אך לא מפתיעה”), על ההחלטה האנטי ישראלית שהתקבלה במועצת הביטחון של האו”ם. הוא הביע גם אכזבה מהממשל היוצא של אובמה בנושא. קנט ציין עוד כי עתה יותר מתמיד ישראל זקוקה לידידיה ולבני בריתה. לדבריו הדבר היחיד שמעניין את ממשלת טרודו הוא להיות שוב חברה במועצת הביטחון של האו”ם.

לעומתו חברת המפלגה הדמוקרטית החדשה, הלן לורדייר, וראש המפגלת הירוקים, אליזבט מאי, ציינו כי הן תומכות בדברי קרי לגבי ישראל והמזרח התיכון. לורדייר: “להתנחלויות הישראליות יש השפעה שלילית על הסיכויים לשלום. ומה שאנו רוצים באזור זה שלום לכולם”. ואילו מאי אמרה: “הייתי רוצה לראות שקנדה תנקוט עמדה תקיפה יותר. כמו שג’ון קרי אמר חברים הם שם גם כדי להגיד לך שמשהו אינו מתאים או אינו מקובל. המדיניות של נתניהו היא איום על תהליך השלום. אנשים צריכים להיות מסוגלים לומר את זה בכל רם מבלי שטון של לבנים ירדו עליהם”. מאי הוסיפה עוד כי חבל שארה”ב התמתינה כל כך הרבה זמן להפסיק עם החלטות הווטו שלה באו”ם.

יצויין כי מפלגת הירוקים הורידה מסדר היום את התמיכה בתנועת הבי.די.אס להחרמת ישראל, לאור איומיה של מאי לפרוש מההנהגה. המפלגה החליטה בראשית דצמבר לתמוך בהחרמת מוצרים ישראלים המיוצרים בשטחים.

כפי שפורסם בשבוע שעבר ראש ממשלת קנדה לשעבר, סטיבן הרפר, יצא נגד החלטת מועצת הביטחון של האומות המאוחדות שהכריזה לפני כשבועיים, כי ההתנחלויות של ישראל בשטחים אינן חוקיות ויש לפנותן. הרפר הגיב לתגובה של הנשיא הנבחר של ארה”ב, דונאלד טראמפ, שאמר: “בנוגע לאו”ם הדברים יראו אחרת אחרי העשרים בינואר”. הרפר בוודאי היה מסתדר עם טראמפ בכל הנוגע לסוגיית המזרח התיכון בכלל ולישראל בפרט. אך מעניין כיצד שני האישים היו מתנהלים אחד כלפי השני, בזמן שהרפר יצא נחרצות נגד פעילותה של רוסיה והעומד בראשה, הנשיא ולדימיר פוטין, והפעיל חרמות וסנקציות שונות, בעוד שטראמפ מסתדר עם רוסיה, מנהל מערכת יחסים די חברית עם פוטין והוא אף מינה לתפקיד שר החוץ אישיות מקורבת למנהיג הרוסי? הכל פוליטיקה.

ועוד בנושא ישראל: חברת הפרלמנט מטעם המפלגה הקונסרבטיבית שמנסה להתמודד על ראשות המפלגה, קלי ליץ’, והמכונה טראמפ של קנדה לאור ההתבטאיות החמורות שלה, ציינה כי אם תעמוד בראש המפלגה שגם תנצח בבחירות הכלליות ולכן תכהן כראש ממשלה, היא תעביר את שגרירות קנדה לירושלים. נוכח החלטת מועצת הביטחון ודברי קרי “על קנדה להפגין את תמיכתה בישראל” אמרה ליץ’.

טרודו וקסטרו

מנהיגה לשעבר של קובה, פידל קסטרו, שנפטר ב-25 בנובמבר. (צילום: Antônio Milena/ABr via Wikimedia Commons)

ג’סטין טרודו מאבד גובה: תמיכתו בפידל קסטרו גרמה לראש ממשלת קנדה לראשונה לחטוף מכל עבר

ראש ממשלת קנדה מטעם המפלגה הליברלית, ג’סטין טרודו, חטף לראשונה ביקורת קשה מאוד מבית ומחוץ, לאור תמיכתו הנלהבת במנהיגה לשעבר של קובה, פידל קסטרו, שנפטר ב-25 בנובמבר. רבים ממנהיגי העולם המערבי בהם ארה”ב וכמובן מנהיגי האופוזיציה (מהמפלגה הקונסרבטיבית) לממשלת טרודו בקנדה, ביקרו אותו קשות לאור הדבריו שאמר לזכרו של קסטרו. המועמד לנשיאות בארה”ב מטעם המפלגה הרפובליקנית, מרקו רוביו (שהפסיד לדונלד טראמפ), הגדיל לעשות כשאמר: “האם הצהרה זו אמיתית או פרודיה? כי אם זה אמיתי זה מביש”. ואילו פרשן יחסי החוץ של הוול סטריט ג’ורנל, ברט סטיבנס, העיר: “הודעה מחפירה של ג’סטין טרודו. לא ג’סטין, פידל לא ‘שירת’ את העם הקובני. הוא הפך את העם למשרתיו במשך 60 שנה”.

המנהיג הקובני היה ידידו של אביו פייר אליוט טרודו, שהיה המנהיג המערבי הראשון שביקר אותו באי ב-1976, מאז משבר הטילים עם ארה”ב והאמברגו האמריקני. קסטרו לא שכח וב-2000 הגיע להלוויית טרודו במונטריאול. טרודו הבן מיהר לצאת בהצהרה כתובה לאחר שנודע שקסטרו נפטר. בה אמר בין היתר: “פידל קסטרו היה מנהיג גדול מהחיים, ששירת במשך כמעט חצי מאה. היה מהפכן ונואם אגדי, שהביא לשיפור עצום במערכת החינוך וכן מתנגדיו הכירו בהתמסרותו ובאהבתו האדירה לעם הקובני, שרחש חיבה עמוקה ומתמשכת למנהיג”.

האמנם טרודו? מומחה לנושאי קובה וקסטרו, הסופר ובמאי הסרטים, ירון אביטוב, שחי בעבר בקובה, כתב בימים האחרונים רשימה על קסטרו שפורסמה בעיתון מעריב. בין היתר כתב אביטוב: “קסטרו היה אחד העריצים האכזריים ביותר בתולדות המאה ה-20 ונחשב לאכזר ומרושע. הוא רדף את מתנגדיו ורבים הושלכו לכלא ונמקו שם, בעיקר סופרים ועיתונאים. לאורך השנים מאות אלפים גלו מקובה, או ניסו לברוח ממנה למיאמי ברפסודות רעועות, וחלקם נטרפו על ידי כרישים. את הבשורה המהפכנית, שהייתה אמורה לשמש מודל וחיקוי במאבק נגד האימפריאליזם, השחיתות והסיאוב, המיר קסטרו ברודנות מושחתת ומסואבת, שרק מרקסיסטים עיוורים עוד דוגלים בה. במהלך כהונתו העשיר קסטרו את קופתו הפרטית על חשבון העם שהסתפק בנזיד עדשים, עד שזכה להיכלל ברשימת מאה עשירי העולם של המגזין פורבס. קסטרו הפך את קובה לאחת המדינות העניות המרודות בעולם. מדינה שרוב תושביה משתכרים סכומים שלא היו מספיקים לרכישת פלאפל ברחוב דיזינגוף. רוב תושבי קובה מתחננים בפני תיירים שירכשו עבורם תרופות שאין להשיגן, לא מעט מבנותיה מציעות את מרכולתן בשוק הבשר האכזרי, מדינה שסובלת מהפסקות חשמל ומים תכופות, מרבית אוכלוסייתה ניזונה מפנקסי קיצוב וכל אדם שפותח את הפה עלול להיות מושלך למאסר ממושך, ואף גרוע מכך”.

החשש מדונלד טראמפ: ארכיון האינטרנט האמריקני יצור עותקי גיבוי בקנדה

לאור החשש ממדיניותו הבעייתית והמסוכנת של הנשיא הנבחר של ארה”ב מטעם המפלגה הרפובליקנית, דונלד טראמפ, ארכיון האינטרנט האמריקני החליט ליצור עותקי גיבוי לעת חרום בקנדה. בהנהלת הארכיון הדיגיטלי חוששים כי טראמפ מסוגל להפעיל צנזורה קשה שתפגע בחופש הפעולה שלהם, ולכן הוחלט ליצור ‘אתר ראי’ שלא במפתיע ימוקם בשרתים הקנדיים שמעבר לגבול. עלות יצירת עותקי הגיבוי בקנדה תעלה מיליוני דולרים והארכיון מחפש עתה מקורות מימון ותרומות, להפעלת הפרוייקט המסובך.

הארכיון הדיגיטלי האמריקני (שהוא ארגון שלא למטרות רווח) פועל מזה כעשרים שנה, ומאחסן כל העת עמודי רשת. יצויין כי מדי שבוע הארכיון גדל בכשלוש מאות מיליון עמודי רשת חדשים, שכוללים ספרים, סרטונים, תוכנות, מוסיקה ועוד.

Landscapes alive with color

Sandy Blass’ solo exhibit No Other Country is at Zack Gallery until Dec. 12. (photo by Olga Livshin)

Artist Sandy Blass’ first solo show in Canada – No Other Country, a series of landscapes – opened last week at Zack Gallery.

Blass has always liked painting, and received her fine arts degree from the University of Calgary in 1984. She worked an office job full-time, raised her family in Calgary and painted as a hobby. Only after her children grew up could she allow herself the joy of following her heart into the arts. Although she still works – part-time at the Jewish Family Service Agency in Vancouver – she now considers herself a full-time artist.

Two important events contributed to her recent emergence as a full-time artist: first, she visited Israel for the first time in 2012; second, she moved to British Columbia in 2014.

Her show’s title, No Other Country, comes from the Hebrew song “I Have No Other Country,” about Israel, although, for Blass, a Jewish Canadian born and raised in Calgary, the sense of belonging is broader. “I belong in both places,” she said in an interview with the Independent, “Canada and Israel.” Her painting “Under the Same Sky,” an abstract play of lines and colors shaped like clouds, feels like the artist’s manifesto, reflecting her love for both countries.

Blass’ discovery of Israel and all things connected to Judaism came late in life. “My parents were Holocaust survivors. We didn’t talk about anything Jewish or about the war,” she explained. “Sometimes, my parents whispered about it but they never talked to me. Our home was secular and full of anxiety. My father always told me not to let anyone know that I was a Jew. Of course, after his concentration camp experience as a young boy, his fear was justified. I never questioned it.”

The older she grew, the more she wanted to learn about her roots and her family history. “I felt that I was missing something,” she said. “My father didn’t want to talk about the past, but my aunt did. She told me some of my family story when I was in my 20s. Later, I started painting with regard to my family history, exploring it through my imagery. I started going to shul. And, finally, I went to Israel.

“The first time – I traveled there in 2012 – I felt like I came full circle. I have family there, those who survived the war in Europe and immigrated to Israel afterwards. Since then, I’ve visited every year. I have even been thinking about aliyah, but not yet. I don’t feel that it is the right time.”

image - "Akko Beach" by Sandy Blass — “Akko Beach” by Sandy Blass.

After that first visit, Israel found a permanent place in the artist’s heart and in her paintings. “Since I reconnected with my Jewish identity, I paint both Canadian and Israeli landscapes,” she said. “I traveled to Europe, too, but I never painted there.”

Blass’ bright, vibrant compositions are half real and half abstract, although they are always linked to a particular place. “The sky is always imaginary though,” she said with a smile. “I love painting sky and water. Blue and green are my favorite colors. I love painting reflections, whether in the ocean, a mountain lake, a sea, or just a puddle. This way, water and sky come together, and the best medium to express their coupling is watercolors.”

She paints her landscapes exclusively in watercolor, her favorite medium. “I fell in love with watercolor in high school,” she said. “I love its flow, the transparency of colors. I tried other media over the years – oils and acrylic – but nothing worked for me, while I flourish in watercolors.”

Although watercolor is not the most popular type of paint for professional artists – the majority throughout the centuries has preferred oils – she is in good company. “Watercolors have a respectable place in art history. Joseph Turner, one of the foremost British landscape painters, worked in watercolors,” she said, listing well-known artists who used the same medium she does. “Toni Onley, one of the few Canadian artists represented at the Tate Gallery in London, worked in watercolors. I also want to make inroads into contemporary art in watercolors.”

One of the reasons for her love of watercolor, surprisingly, is that the paintings are not finished when the artist puts down her brush. “I don’t have complete control. The painting is only done when the water stops flowing, dries thoroughly,” she explained. “I experiment with the water flow sometimes. I have a special art table where I paint, and I might change the angle of the surface to affect the water flow. The results could be interesting. Also, the time it takes to dry could be important. Vancouver is more humid than Calgary, so it takes more time for the paintings to dry here. I like the end results better.”

No Other Country continues until Dec 12. To learn more about Blass’ work, visit blassart.com.

Olga Livshin is a Vancouver freelance writer. She can be reached at [email protected].

Scholar talks at Peretz

Prof. Ester Reiter, author of A Future Without Hate or Need, points to the U.S. election as a warning that the issues the Canadian Jewish left dealt with are as timely as ever. (photo from Ester Reiter)

On Dec. 1, Prof. Ester Reiter will speak at the Peretz Centre for Secular Jewish Culture to launch her new book A Future Without Hate or Need: The Promise of the Jewish Left in Canada (Between the Lines, 2016).

Reiter’s book documents “the varied political and cultural activities of those who were part of the secular Jewish left” – the movements in which many Yiddish-speaking immigrants and their children took part during the first half of the last century, made up of Yiddish schools, theatres, choirs, dance troupes, drama groups, sports leagues, union activism, newspapers, women’s groups and summer camps. Their members were animated by a vision of what many of them would have called a shenere, besere velt (a more beautiful, better world). There were groups throughout the country, with the strongest ones in Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg.

Many of these groups came together nationally in the United Jewish People’s Order (UJPO), founded in 1945. The book launch is being undertaken to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the founding of the Labor League – which later became part of UJPO – in Toronto in 1926. The launch is sponsored by UJPO, and co-sponsored by the Peretz Centre and the Shaya Kirman Memorial Foundation for Yiddish Culture. It will start at the Peretz Centre at 4 p.m.

Reiter, a sociologist by training and a senior scholar at York University in Toronto, grew up in New York in a milieu similar to the one she describes. “I grew up in the New York left, the sister version of the Canadian Jewish left. I was a child in the Yiddish shule [school] in Brooklyn and later the mittlshul [middle school] in Manhattan during the Cold War. Many of my teachers were well known in Canada – they were in the summer camps in Montreal and Toronto, and taught in Canada. The politics were virtually the same and shule materials used in Canada were produced in New York, particularly in the early years, the 1930s.”

This community was at its strongest from the 1920s to the 1950s. Yiddish-speaking immigrants were immersed in the secular Yiddish culture and literature that emerged in the late 19th century. “The Jewish left was the equivalent of a university for working-class women and men. The cultural activities – dance, choirs, orchestras – were accessible to both women and men. People working in the needle trades with no time to learn to read music would sing classical works in the choirs, learning them by heart.”

Reiter says of the Yiddish Arbeter Froyen Fareyn (Jewish Women’s Labor League) that, “the very act of getting together changed many of the women,” particularly in women-only groups, “where women felt more comfortable, they described how they learned to speak in meetings. Their political commitments, which involved activities such as walking picket lines, raising money for various causes, necessitated engaging in public life in a way that required and reinforced self-confidence. This participation in the wider world was empowering. They supported each other, made close friendships and had a lot of fun.”

Jews on the left in Canada, as elsewhere, were diverse – they included social democrats, Bundists, anarchists, Labor Zionists and Marxists. Reiter focuses on those whose outlook was Marxist and supported the Soviet Union after the 1917 October Revolution.

Reiter emphasizes that this sector of the Jewish left had a life of its own distinct from the Communist party. “The leadership were Communist party members, but approximately 95% of the membership of the UJPO and its predecessors were not. One could think and say what one felt in the Jewish left without concern over whether it was the ‘correct’ position. Many people came [to the Jewish left] because of the liveliness of the community, as well as the politics.”

Initially, Yiddish schools saw their purpose as conveying ideological values, but this later shifted to transmitting the Yiddish language and Jewish cultural identity for their own sake, including secularized versions of Jewish holidays and rituals. “In the early period, a Yiddish education in the shule was to ensure that the children learned they were the children of workers, and needed to care about racism and class exploitation. After Hitler came to power and antisemitism was growing, Yiddish was valued as an end in itself, and there was more acceptance of the different ways of identifying as a Jew. The community developed secular ceremonies around the bar/bat mitzvah, the High Holidays, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.”

The Jewish left experienced government harassment during the Cold War, especially in Quebec under premier Maurice Duplessis. Reiter notes that Canadian Jewish Congress defended civil liberties in the face of repression, but “dealing with pro-communist groups in their midst was a different matter.” UJPO was expelled from CJC in 1952 for dissenting from the Cold War consensus by opposing the postwar rearmament of West Germany and supporting the Stockholm peace petition.

The Jewish left for a long time saw the Soviet Union as a hope for a better society, in its outlawing of antisemitism and support for Yiddish culture in the 1920s, but their hope was shattered by the Stalin regime’s murder of Yiddish artists in the late 1940s and early 1950s. “For many years, people projected their idealism on[to] the USSR. When they found out about Stalin’s suppression of Jewish life, it was shocking. Most of the Jewish [Communist party] leadership from UJPO left the party. However, the rank and file in UJPO were never actually party people, so many felt that, although the USSR under Stalin was terrible, their activities in Canada – helping the unemployed, union support – were important and valuable.”

Reiter describes various factors in the shrinking of the Canadian Jewish left – Cold War persecution, disillusionment with Stalinism, the erosion of Yiddish by assimilation. However, UJPO itself has survived the disappearance of the milieu that gave birth to it, and has even attracted new members. Reiter reflects, “There certainly is a need. Our politics mean that we are inclusive of different kinds of families – gay, straight, trans, mixed racial and religious origin. Yiddish has pretty well disappeared, but the progressive politics remain. With respect to Middle East politics, there are a variety of views in the UJPO, but we all agree that criticizing the actions of the Israeli government does not mean that one is a self-hating Jew. We also continue with trade union support, First Nations solidarity, environmental activism. We exist because we have a community that has a good time together. As the organized Jewish community has moved to the right, we provide a place where one can have a Jewish identity and be progressive. Secular left Jews now have to think about what we have in common, not what separates us.”

Reiter points to the Nov. 8 U.S. election as a warning that the issues the Canadian Jewish left dealt with are as timely as ever. “The struggle against racism, sexism, homophobia and all this meanness and narrowness is an ongoing one – a call to remember and honor and value our own history and where we came from.”

Carl Rosenberg is a member of the United Jewish People’s Order and Independent Jewish Voices Canada. For many years, he edited Outlook: Canada’s Progressive Jewish Magazine.

Where will the money go?

The Canadian government has announced that it will resume funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The government made the announcement last week, allocating $20 million to UNRWA’s budget and an additional $5 million to support the emergency appeal issued by the organization in order to aid Palestinian refugees affected by the catastrophic war in Syria.

In a statement, the government said, “with this funding, Canada joins all other G7 countries in supporting UNRWA’s efforts to meet the ever-increasing needs of Palestinian refugees, assists in providing basic services for vulnerable people, and contributes to some stability in the region.”

Canada’s previous Conservative government backed away from supporting UNRWA, reducing funding from $32 million in 2007 to $19 million in 2009 and, in 2010, cutting funding entirely. The justification at that time was that UNRWA has ties to the terrorist group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip.

The $20 million just announced is expected to support health, social services and education “for millions of vulnerable Palestinian refugees,” according to Ottawa. But the announcement comes just days after renewed reports that raise concerns about the more than 200 Palestinian schools sponsored by UNRWA, which teach students between first and ninth grade.

One expert on the subject told a conference organized by the Centre for Near East Policy Research (CNEPR) this month that the textbooks reflect the educational principles introduced by Yasser Arafat when the Palestinian authority gained control over the education system in the West Bank and Gaza, and have not been cleansed of hate, antisemitism and incitement. Participants in the conference obtained textbooks from the warehouse that supplies Palestinian schools and they claim the books still encourage a violent struggle for the liberation of “Palestine,” which is defined to include all of present-day Israel, the rejection of historical facts about Jewish holy places and the demonization of both Israel and of Jews.

A spokesperson for UNRWA outright rejects the accusations, saying that two significant analyses of textbooks, including one by the U.S. Department of State, debunked the assertions of incitement in the curriculum. However, David Bedein, director of CNEPR, said he was prepared to present the U.S. government with evidence that contradicts the state department’s findings but told the Jerusalem Post he was rebuffed by the White House.

These conflicting reports are disconcerting. It should be possible for funders who send hundreds of millions of aid dollars to find out for sure whether their money is funding genocidal incitement. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs is certainly correct in declaring that donor countries “have a responsibility to ensure that aid is used for the purpose for which it is given, and we are pleased Canada has taken the lead in establishing a robust accountability protocol.”

In announcing the renewed funding, the federal government promised “there will be enhanced due diligence applied to UNRWA funding … accompanied by a very robust oversight and reporting framework, which includes regular site visits and strong antiterrorism provisions.”

This would be a positive step, to say the least. It would also be a positive step if these Canadian funds do actually provide health, education and social services to people who need them. But this, too, will be difficult to discern. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that an analysis by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicates that the Palestinian Authority budgets about $75 million a year to support Palestinian terrorists – about 16% of foreign donations the PA receives. A lack of transparency about where the rest of the money goes means the world has been unable to determine how much money is lining the pockets of cronies of the dictatorship and what proportion is making positive social and economic contributions in the lives of Palestinians. Notably, the Palestinians receive more international aid per capita than any other people in the world – by far. Even as the catastrophe in neighboring Syria has seen 250,000 killed and 6.5 million refugees displaced, Syrians receive $106 per capita in international aid, while Palestinians receive $176.

One could argue whether Canadian funds are needed by the Palestinian Authority at all. And, clearly, we cannot be entirely confident that funds are going to the places they are intended. But, if the Canadian government does indeed follow the money, as promised, and determines whether it is making life better for Palestinians or is instead inciting terrorism, this might finally answer some questions that today seem subject to accusations and denials. That would be money well spent.