Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Can King Bibi hang on?

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, vote on March 23. While the prime minister’s party won the most number of seats in the Knesset, he will still struggle to form a government. (photo from IGPO)

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu makes a stunning deal with lawmakers to abandon his post and replace Reuven Rivlin as president of the country when the president’s term expires later this year. An agreement to pardon Netanyahu around corruption charges he currently faces is part of a deal that leads to Netanyahu ending his run as the country’s longest-serving leader. With “King Bibi” finally in a sinecure of symbolic eminence, the polarized Knesset manages to cobble together a coalition and stave off the fifth round of elections in two years.

This was one of the most fantastical possibilities mooted in a webinar presented by the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) March 25, just two days after Israelis voted in the fourth of a series of elections during a two-year period of instability.

The panelists were CIJA’s chief executive officer Shimon Koffler Fogel and Adir Krafman, the agency’s associate director for communications and analytics. They sifted the entrails of the convoluted election outcome.

While ideological schisms divide Israeli politics, as does the secular-religious divide and other fractures, Fogel and Krafman concurred that the elephant in any discussion of the next Knesset is Netanyahu. CIJA is a nonpartisan organization and Fogel emphasized that the panelists, and moderator Tamara Fathi, were not advocating any outcomes, merely commenting on possibilities.

And the possibilities are almost endless. The vote sent 13 parties into the 120-seat Knesset. Some of these are not even parties, so much as umbrellas under which different factions coalesced for electoral purposes, so the mosaic of the chaotic chamber could refract in countless ways. But, while there are myriad permutations of possible coalitions and strange bedfellowships, Fogel, Krafman and most commentators in Israel and abroad think the most likely outcome is a fifth election. That is how difficult it would be for either side to patch together 61 members of the Knesset to govern.

Krafman presented graphic evidence of the challenges the pro- and anti-Netanyahu factions face in reaching that magic number. The pro-Bibi side likely has 52 dependable seats; his opponents probably have 57. That means an anti-Netanyahu coalition could form with the support of Naftali Bennett’s Yamina party, which holds seven seats. For Netanyahu to eke out 61 seats would require the backing not only of Bennett but also of the four seats won by the Arab party Ra’am. Such a partnership would be historic and would have been almost unthinkable in the recent past. But Netanyahu of late has been making amenable noises toward Arab Israelis in general and to the Arab parties in particular. However, even if the prime minister and his unlikely allies in the Arab sector made a deal, it could upend the consensus on the other side, as some on the right would probably balk at joining a coalition that includes Ra’am.

Ra’am is one of the big stories of the election. Exit polls indicated the party would not make it over the 3.25% threshold to win any Knesset seats. That created a scenario where Netanyahu and his probable allies were seen as almost certain to form a government.

But, as actual counting took place through the night and into the morning, it became clear that Ra’am would cross the minimum support for representation. Instantly, the calculations shifted.

If Ra’am were to enter a coalition government, or even if it merely supported a government from the sidelines, it would be a turning point in the role Arab parties play in Israeli politics. Ra’am has already upended conventional Arab approaches to politics. The umbrella of Arab parties, recently running under the banner of the Joint List, has always played a spoiler role. They are oppositionist and anti-Zionist groups that are as much protest movements as conventional political parties.

photo - Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas has put his party into a potentially advantageous position — Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas has put his party into a potentially advantageous position. *(photo from hamodia.com)*

Perhaps learning a lesson from the outsized power of small, right-wing and Jewish religious parties, Ra’am adopted a more pragmatic and transactional position than their former allies in the Arab bloc. The leader, Mansour Abbas, has not ruled out supporting a coalition or playing a role in government. Like smaller Jewish parties, he would be expected to come to coalition discussions with a shopping list of demands, such as more funding for projects and programs that benefit his constituents.

Ra’am’s success makes it an unqualified winner in the election sweepstakes. Fogel and Krafman discussed other winners and losers.

“The first loser, I think, is Netanyahu,” said Fogel. “Despite his party winning the most number of seats, 30 seats out of 120 in the Knesset, [he] is still not able to form a government.”

That might have been survivable if other parties that are Netanyahu’s likely backers did not also come up short.

“The other two losers are other right-wing parties,” Fogel added. Naftali Bennett, whose Yamina took seven seats, and Gideon Sa’ar, whose New Hope party took six, had hoped to siphon off a larger chunk of Likud’s votes.

“Both of them really failed to do that, winning only a handful of seats,” said Fogel.

It is a profound statement about tectonic changes in Israel’s ideological fault lines that the Labour party, which took seven seats, and another left-wing party, Meretz, which took six, are viewed as having had a good night. In the days leading up to the vote, there were questions whether either party would overcome the minimum threshold. The Labour party was the indomitable establishment political party for the first three decades of Israel’s existence.

Another loser, Fogel said, was Avigdor Lieberman and his Yisrael Beiteinu party. Lieberman is a right-wing but avowedly secularist politician. He ran a campaign promoting separation of religion and state and against Charedi privileges. His message may have backfired: while turnout was down overall from the last election, Charedi voters turned out in greater numbers, possibly in reaction to Lieberman’s message.

The discussion turned again to what may be the most likely path for a right-wing government, which could be the exit of Netanyahu. There are centrist parties, Fogel said, that do not have issues with Likud policies so much as they do with the prime minister personally. With him gone, a bloc of anti-Bibi members might engage with Likud under a new leader and form a centre-right coalition.

As unlikely as this scenario might be, it would stave off another unsavoury development.

Any hope of forming a Netanyahu-led coalition probably depends on support from the extremist grouping called Religious Zionism. This new umbrella of racist, misogynistic and homophobic extremists, which holds six seats, would taint any coalition as the most far-right government in Israel’s history. (Click here to read this week’s editorial.)

Whatever happens – whether someone can manage to hammer together a government, or whether exhausted Israelis will trudge to the polls for a fifth time – there are serious issues facing the country.

“There are some pretty daunting challenges out there,” Fogel said. “Most especially on the economic side. We see that some other countries have already begun to emerge [from the pandemic] with a fairly robust recovery. Israel isn’t there yet…. There is a sense of urgency that they do have to get an Israeli government in place that is going to be able to effectively address these issues and it’s not clear that the election result will offer that to Israelis, so I think it makes a situation, if anything, more desperate.”

Israeli election jigsaw puzzle

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the start of a cabinet meeting this past January in Jerusalem. The two outside flags are the Moroccan national flags, placed there to celebrate the fact that Israel and Morocco had just established diplomatic relations. (photo by Haim Zach/IGPO via Ashernet)

The Israeli elections, which take place March 23, are not turning on conventional ideological schisms, according to two top observers. Rather than a left-right divide, the ballot question for most voters is yes-Bibi/no-Bibi.

Lahav Harkov, diplomatic correspondent for the Jerusalem Post, and Chemi Shalev, senior columnist and U.S. editor for Haaretz, analyzed the possible outcomes in a virtual event presented by the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs March 2.

Israel is in its fourth election cycle in two years, an unparalleled time of political turmoil. Harkov said she tends to err on the side of optimism but expects a fifth election before too long.

“I don’t see how we get out of this mess,” she said.

Shalev concurred, using a sports metaphor. “There is a saying in soccer, or football,” he said. “You play soccer for 90 minutes and, in the end, the Germans win, meaning no matter what you think during the game, the result is always that the German team wins and, in soccer, it’s usually true. In Israeli politics, it is also usually true.”

In each of the past three election campaigns, Shalev said, media and opponents of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu convince themselves he is headed for defeat. Then the votes come in and coalition talks begin and he holds onto office.

True to script, said Shalev, polls suggest Netanyahu’s support is faltering, estimating his Likud party will take about 28 of the 120 Knesset seats, down from the 36 he holds now. But, as much as Netanyahu will face an uphill climb to cobble together 61 votes to form a working coalition, his opponents face even steeper challenges.

Netanyahu, nicknamed Bibi, has led Likud since 2006 and has been prime minister since 2009. Having also served for three years in the late 1990s, Netanyahu is the longest-serving prime minister in Israeli history and his doggedness in holding on to power has earned him another nickname: King Bibi.

Shalev depicted Netanyahu’s manoeuvrings after the last vote, in March 2020, as a sheer political masterstroke. Benny Gantz led Kahol Lavan (Blue and White), a centre-left coalition whose principal promise was to keep Netanyahu from another term. When coalition talks appeared doomed and another election inevitable, Gantz entered into a power-sharing agreement that delivered another term to Netanyahu and, in the process, exploded the Blue and White coalition. The broad spectrum of centre-left politics that had come together under Blue and White disintegrated and some of those voters have drifted off to the right and may never return to the left, said Shalev.

Gantz is running again but, while the question last election was whether he could best Netanyahu, the issue now appears to be whether he can garner the 3.25% threshold needed to eke out any Knesset seats whatsoever.

In fact, many parties are hovering in the polls around the cutoff mark, which could be a defining factor in the outcome. The Labour party, once the indomitable force in national politics, is on the ropes. Likewise, another erstwhile force on the left, Meretz, could also be wiped out of the Knesset. On the other hand, the smaller parties that do cross the electoral threshold will have outsized influence on whether Netanyahu hangs on or whether another leader can topple him.

photo - Naftali Bennett speaks in Ramat Gan, in 2019. Among the parties Binyamin Netanyahu would need to form a governing coalition is Yamina, which is led by Bennett — Naftali Bennett speaks in Ramat Gan, in 2019. Among the parties Binyamin Netanyahu would need to form a governing coalition is Yamina, which is led by Bennett. *(photo from IGPO via Ashernet)*

Netanyahu’s political survival will depend on the ability of small right-wing parties to pass the electoral threshold to enter the Knesset and help him get to 61 seats. Among the parties Netanyahu would need to depend on are Yamina, led by Naftali Bennett, which is seen as an ideological heir to the defunct National Religious Party.

He would probably also need to rely on another new entity, called the Religious Zionist Party, which iss in an electoral agreement with two other small, far-right factions. The RZP, which tends to represent settlers and Charedi voters, is in partnership (for this round of elections, at least) with Noam, a party whose primary issue is opposition to rights for LGBTQ+ Israelis, which party adherents equate with the “destruction of the family.” The third party in the triumvirate is the extremist party Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power), which Harkov said is a descendant of the outlawed movement of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane.

Kahane was an anti-Arab politician whose speeches in the Knesset were usually boycotted by all other members, leaving him to speak to a room consisting only of the speaker and the transcriptionists. In 1985, the Knesset passed a law banning parties that incite racism, effectively outlawing Kahane’s Kach party. He was assassinated in New York City in 1990 by an Egyptian-born terrorist.

While Kahane and his compatriots were shunned in their time, Harkov noted that Netanyahu intervened with the smaller right-wing parties, encouraging them – including Otzma Yehudit – to band together to help them collectively pass the electoral threshold.

“If they had not run together, they probably wouldn’t have made it into the Knesset,” she said, adding that tens of thousands of right-wing votes would have been effectively wasted.

Harkov added that she found it “interesting and sad” that, in the first of this four-election cycle, Netanyahu encouraged the small right-wing parties to run together and this caused a huge scandal, given the extremism of Otzma Yehudit.

“When Kahane was in the Knesset, everyone would walk out, no one would listen to Kahane speak when he would have his racist rants in the Knesset,” Harkov said. “Now, the prime minister is encouraging them to be in the Knesset.”

She credits an exhaustion with politics for the lack of outrage over the alliance this time around.

Shalev agreed. Israelis have had more than enough, he suggests.

“I have never seen such fatigue and, if I venture something about the elections, [friends] all look at me as if I’m a lost case,” he said.

Where the fault lines in Israeli politics were once left versus right, that paradigm is at least temporarily inoperable. The Israeli left is in disarray and Netanyahu’s greatest challenges come from the right, including several former allies. Gideon Sa’ar challenged Netanyahu for the Likud leadership last year and was soundly defeated. Frozen out by the prime minister, he left the party and formed New Hope.

“Policy-wise, they’re not that different from Likud,” said Harkov. “Sa’ar is quite right-wing.” He is pinning his hopes on voters seeking more of the same with less of the corruption surrounding the incumbent, who is under indictment on a number of bribery, fraud and breach of trust charges.

The second-largest party in the current Knesset is Yesh Atid, led by Yair Lapid. This more centrist, secular grouping could bridge some of the divide and make Lapid a possible successor to Netanyahu, but, like all scenarios, would require a coalition-building process akin to a jigsaw puzzle. While there are factions that would be happy to support Netanyahu and others that would support anyone but Bibi, the divisions are exacerbated by internal grievances and personality clashes.

Given the moving parts in any coalition talks, Shalev predicted a potential “outrageous scenario.” Netanyahu has been courting Arab voters and, with the Arab Joint List in disarray, he hopes he can dislodge some votes from those quarters. However, after the election, he would face a new challenge. Cobbling together 61 members might require recruiting Arab parties, which would likely be met with flat-out rejection by the far-right and religious parties Netanyahu would also need to hold. Likewise, religious and secular factions that might agree on supporting a particular candidate for prime minister might balk at joining a coalition with one another. In other words, while there might be 61 members ready to support Netanyahu, they might refuse to do so if it required sitting alongside ideological enemies. Every potential prime minister faces a similar dilemma.

A recent high court decision threw the issue of religious-state separation and the influence of the ultra-Orthodox on national policy and life into the headlines. The ruling recognizes conversions by Reform and Masorti (Conservative) rabbis in Israel (but not abroad). While this re-ignition of the divide between secular and religious Israelis is significant, it may or may not have a major impact on voters. Yesh Atid is avowedly secular, as is Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party. Whether they will gain any political traction from the issue is a mystery.

While overseas observers assume the big political issues in Israel are the Palestinian conflict, Iran and national security, Harkov and Shalev say voters are more focused on bread-and-butter topics, including the pandemic and pocketbook issues. But the biggest question of all for voters, they both agree, turns on personality – primarily that of Netanyahu and voters’ feelings toward him.

Harkov believes Netanyahu has benefited from the Abraham Accords. It also won’t hurt him that Israel leads the world in the rollout of the coronavirus vaccine.

A particular challenge that a reelected Netanyahu would face is building a relationship with the new administration in Washington. Netanyahu bound his fortunes so personally to Donald Trump that Shalev believes it is impossible to build a meaningful connection with the Biden administration. Netanyahu was not an outlier on this front, he noted, citing opinion polls that suggested Israelis, were they able to vote for a U.S. president, would have supported Trump by a massive landslide.

Combat online hate

Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have been confronted by two viruses: COVID-19 and, in its wake, the rampant spread of online hate.

As much of the world has been forced indoors, our time on the internet using social media has increased, which has advantages. We have found new ways to engage, stay in touch with our loved ones, and maintain and transform our connections to our workplaces and the world.

But the same technologies that have allowed us to keep connected have also served as springboards for the spread of online hate and conspiracy theories, which form the perfect Venn diagram of antisemitism. Since the pandemic broke, we have witnessed the emergence of ludicrous conspiracy theories accusing Jews of being responsible for the spread of COVID-19 or of profiting from the havoc. As a community that has consistently encouraged compliance with public health measures, we may be tempted to dismiss these outlandish conspiracy theories as nonsense. It is a type of nonsense, however, that spreads quickly and remains a cause for great concern.

Recent history has taught us that what begins online as the absurd mutterings of a few haters can, and too often does, turn into real-world violence. What we witnessed in Pittsburgh, Christchurch and Halle can certainly happen again. The threat is even greater today because people are spending more time online while also under considerable financial and emotional stress, a combination that makes people even more susceptible to messages hate-mongers are peddling.

Curbing online hate has been a priority for the Jewish community – and, therefore, for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs – for nearly a decade. Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have remained on high alert, monitoring the emergence of antisemitic and hateful activity and bringing it to the attention of law enforcement and social media platforms.

Recently, we launched Stop the Transmission! (cija.ca/stop-the-transmission), a campaign powered by CIJA and funded by Canadian Heritage through the Anti-Racism Action Program. The campaign has provided practical tools and tips to hundreds of thousands of Canadians to identify and slow the spread of conspiracy theories, misinformation and deliberate disinformation.

We have also engaged directly with social media giants and are proud to have collaborated with our colleagues at the World Jewish Congress to urge Facebook to ban Holocaust denial, one of the most pernicious forms of Jew-hatred, from their platform, an action they took earlier this year.

We continue to call on social media companies to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, the most widely accepted definition in use today, including by the Government of Canada, who adopted it as formal policy in its 2019 Anti-Racism Strategy. In response to the global collective effort of our community, Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, said “the IHRA’s working definition of antisemitism has been invaluable – both in informing our own approach,” and that Facebook would “continue to refine” its “policy lines as speech and society evolve.”

A continuing aspect of our work is advocating for governments to advance policies to address online hate directly. Federally, we continue our call for a national strategy on online hate that includes clear, harmonized and uniform regulations that apply to platforms and providers operating in Canada, as well as an independent regulator to enforce them. You can help by visiting notonmyfeed.ca and taking action.

CIJA is also working with Canadian Heritage to host the Action Summit to Combat Online Hate, scheduled for April 14-15. You can pre-register at cija.ca/action-summit. The summit will feature discussions with experts, law enforcement, industry leaders and community groups like ours. The goals are to create greater understanding of the issue and develop concrete actions to address it.

Even once the pandemic is over, our migration to the digital world will endure. We, therefore, must stay committed and united in our efforts to combat antisemitism and other forms of hatred online.

Judy Zelikovitz is vice-president, university and local partner services, at the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

Community stronger

Rosh Hashanah is a time of new beginnings, a time to reflect on a year gone by and on the new year ahead. As is often the case with new beginnings, it is also a time of uncertainty. Last Rosh Hashanah, we wished one another a sweet year, unsure of the future but hopeful of things to come.

As we herald the arrival of this new year, we do so understanding that we control far less than we had thought. Normally, the uncertainty that comes with a new start is imbued with hope for the possibilities ahead. This year, however, it is uncertainty itself that dominates. As 5780 draws to a close, we have learned that we must seek what we can rely on: the strength of our community and our resolve to face these unprecedented challenges together.

In 5780, the challenges were many, and our community met them with an empowering, inspiring and united response.

When urgent help was needed, social service agencies and not-for-profits mobilized, delivering food, providing services remotely and offering support to those who needed it most. Jewish federations shifted their focus to emergency fundraising campaigns to meet the immediate needs of agencies on the frontlines, ensuring that the changing needs of our most vulnerable were met.

When COVID-19 hit, Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver immediately released $505,000 in emergency funds to meet these urgent needs and continues working with donors to generate additional funds for community recovery. CIJA advocated for the inclusion of not-for-profits in government support programs, such as the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, and helped ensure that Jewish schools were eligible. Volunteers mobilized by the thousands, responding to calls for assistance, helping the many seriously impacted by COVID-19.

Our community was tested in other ways, as antisemitism, the crafty shapeshifter that is always on the move, found new outlets during the pandemic. With Statistics Canada reporting a rise in antisemitic incidents through 5780, our community from coast to coast continued to unite, offering support where it was needed most. Indeed, this was the year we learned the many ways we could help and, for far too many, how to reach out to ask for help ourselves.

As we renew our talk of new beginnings at the conclusion of a year defined by uncertainty, many wonder: how can we plan for the year ahead?

For 5781, we must change our approach and, instead of planning according to dates on a calendar, look at our character for the coming year. As Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz z”l, wrote, “This does not mean, however, that, on Rosh Hashanah, one should make plans for the whole year. That would be impossible…. What one should do on this day is form a general picture of what ought to be the character and direction of this year.”

For 5781, we can accept the uncertainty of what is to come and focus on the knowledge that we can rely on the tested strength of our community. And that continued strength is up to us. We can commit to volunteering our time and, if we can, donating our money. We can commit to finding creative ways to give back and offering support to those experiencing hardship. Instead of planning large events or travel, we can plan to lean on our community when in need and support it every way we can. We can plan to check in on those who are vulnerable, to be more understanding of ourselves and others, and to be more present when given the gift of company among our loved ones.

As we reframe what planning looks like for 5781, it can be difficult to determine how best to dedicate our efforts. There are many good causes that need our help. Instead of being overwhelmed, be reassured that, for whatever assistance you can offer, there is a worthy cause, organization or initiative looking for someone just like you. Federations are great starting places. Check out your local campaign and learn what their various service agencies and not-for-profits are doing.

Though much of the past year has been uncertain, Rosh Hashanah presents us with a chance to start anew. We can still hope for and work toward a better tomorrow. The coming year will be defined not by our individual wishes and schedules but by our collective character and commitment to our community. Planning for uncertainty may seem counter-intuitive, but history has shown that we have the capacity to come together and overcome even the darkest of times. As we look ahead to 5781, amid all the unknowns, one thing remains certain: our community will continue from strength to strength.

Judy Zelikovitz is vice-president, university and local partner services, at the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

CIJA fights online hate

“We were saddened, horrified and deeply angered by the murderous terrorist attack in Christchurch, which was clearly motivated by hatred of Muslims that was at least in part fomented online,” Martin Sampson of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) told the Independent. “This is another disturbing example of how terrorists and mass murderers make use of social media – both before and after attacks – to spread their heinous message.”

On Friday, March 15, 50 Muslims were murdered by a white nationalist terrorist at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. On Oct. 27, 2018, 11 Jews were murdered at Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Penn. Both perpetrators had been active in spreading hatred online. In the case of Tree of Life Synagogue, the shooter had written a post announcing his intentions hours before the attack.

“This issue has been of interest to us for some time,” said Sampson. “We included it as a core federal priority in our Federal Issues Guide, which was released in September of 2018. The horrific shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in late October, and the fact that the assailant had been highly active in promoting antisemitism on social media – it is reported that he posted more than 700 antisemitic messages online in the nine months or so prior to the attack – underscored the urgency of the issue and the need to increase awareness about the connection between online hate and offline violence. This is why we launched notonmyfeed.ca.”

The goal of CIJA’s #notonmyfeed campaign is to reduce the spread of online hate speech. “In any democratic society that values freedom and individual rights, no right is absolute,” said Sampson. “Striking a reasonable balance between preserving free speech and protecting Canadians from those who systematically demonize and slander entire communities is a challenging, complex task, but not an impossible one.”

CIJA is calling for a comprehensive response that addresses hate in a variety of forms, not just antisemitism, he said. “We can preserve free speech while protecting Canadians from those who deliberately promote hostility – and even glorify violence – against entire communities.”

Sampson said there is a direct link between online hate speech and violence. “In countless cases – such as in the case of individuals who have been radicalized to participate in terrorism or hate crimes – online propaganda has been a significant factor,” he said. “This is a complex issue. Understanding it and developing tools to counter it is why we are calling on the government of Canada to take the lead by launching a national strategy to tackle online hate, working in partnership with social media platforms and internet service providers.”

Some people contend that, if online hate speech foreshadows offline violence, there may be some value in monitoring it, rather than forcing it underground. As well, if kicked off one social platform, those inciting hatred can just move to another one.

“In cases of ignorance, inappropriate statements or offhand comments that are bigoted, counter-speech is clearly the best response, and these types of online behaviours are not the focus of our calls for a national strategy to tackle online hate. In cases of propaganda being systematically produced by extremists – particularly when it includes the glorification of violence – allowing it to continue can in some cases pose significant risks to public safety,” said Sampson about these concerns. “Moreover, allowing such behaviour to take place on social media platforms often violates the basic terms and conditions of those sites. Social media platforms should enforce their own existing policies.”

The movement to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel over its treatment of Palestinians is controversial, with some seeing it as a legitimate tactic opposing human rights abuses and others seeing it as a form of discrimination rooted in antisemitism. “It is neither the focus of our policy position on online hate, nor can I perceive any scenario in which BDS would be implicated or affected by a national strategy to tackle online hate,” said Sampson, when asked whether BDS was one of the intended targets of CIJA’s campaign. “To be clear – we strongly oppose BDS and work to expose and counter the real agenda of the BDS movement, but that is a very separate challenge and completely distinct from our call for a national strategy to combat online hate.”

Asked if CIJA has any plans for addressing hate speech in the Jewish community itself, Sampson said, “Our position on online hate is that a national strategy should address hate in a variety of forms, not just antisemitism. This is why we have mobilized a coalition of communities, including the Muslim community, to join us in this effort. We believe every online account should be held to the same standard, regardless of the identity of the person who runs the account. When it comes to the Jewish community, we strive to set an example in how we manage our social media accounts, allowing debate and diverse opinions in the comments section of our posts, while having a zero tolerance policy toward bigotry and hateful comments.”

Matthew Gindin is a freelance journalist, writer and lecturer. He is Pacific correspondent for the CJN, writes regularly for the Forward, Tricycle and the Wisdom Daily, and has been published in Sojourners, Religion Dispatches and elsewhere. He can be found on Medium and Twitter.

On access to palliative care

The way a society treats its most vulnerable speaks volumes about its principles. There are few more vulnerable than those reaching the end of life. The physical, emotional, interpersonal and spiritual challenges confronted at life’s end are immense. Just as we expect our healthcare system to be there for us throughout our lives, so too must it support each of us – and our families – as we enter life’s final chapter.

Palliative care is a policy issue that has the potential to touch every family across the country. According to the Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association, only 15% to 30% of patients approaching the end of life have access to palliative care. With Canada’s population continuing to age, existing shortfalls in the system will only grow in the coming years.

While the federal government has taken the vital step of announcing additional federal funds for home care and palliative care, more can be done to ensure that no patient seeking palliative care is denied. This is why the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) has taken a lead role in mobilizing an interfaith coalition to urge Ottawa to take action on this issue.

Working with Catholic, Evangelical and Muslim allies, CIJA’s efforts achieved a key milestone in late 2017, when Parliament passed Bill C-277. This bill, which received strong support from MPs across party lines, called for the establishment of a national palliative care strategy. Our next step is to ensure that the national strategy that flows from Bill C-277 strengthens end-of-life care for all Canadians.

For this reason, in partnership with others, CIJA is organizing an expert working group to provide us with advice regarding Canada’s national palliative care strategy. An essential portion of these suggestions will be based on the patient and family experience, which is why I invite every reader to consider whether they have personal insights they can share with us.

Can you attest to the importance of high-quality palliative care, perhaps having had a loved one who received excellent end-of-life care? Or, do you have a family member who, despite seeking it, was unable to access appropriate hospice or palliative care? We want to hear your stories – and government policymakers need to hear how these policies affect real lives. Email [email protected] to share your experiences with palliative care.

It is an extraordinary act of chesed to care for a person in their final days of life. Our healthcare system, in which Canadians rightly take pride as evidence of our nation’s innate sense of kindness, must do better to ensure that those who need palliative care are never denied this essential service.

Steve McDonald is director, policy and strategic communications, at the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA).

Express your opinion

The good news is we’re again debating “who is a Jew.” This is good news, of course, only because it’s a topic that divides Jews mostly when external threats abate enough to allow the luxury of pilpul around denominational rights and definitions.

We can only assume that the state of the world – the Iranian threat, the unhinged American administration, Syria in collapse – looks fine enough from the Israeli prime minister’s office that we have the freedom to indulge in family squabbles.

A year-and-a-half ago, the Israeli government finally agreed to create an egalitarian prayer space at the Western Wall. The Charedim who legally control Israel’s Jewish religious character, including practices at the Wall, have imposed a strict gender division on prayer and ritual at the holy site. This has sent the message to Conservative, Reform and other non-Orthodox Jews that the holy site is not wholly theirs and, by extension, that their forms of Judaism are not authentic or proper. The creation of an egalitarian section was hailed as putting an end to a painful and divisive aspect of Israeli-Diaspora relations.

An egalitarian space would permit families to visit the Kotel together, allow girls to read from the Torah during their bat mitzvahs and give women the right to pray out loud, rather than following the existing rules by which women must pray quietly so that their voices may not be heard by men on the other side of the divided plaza. The agreement for a new egalitarian space would not alter the existing men’s and women’s areas, but rather add a new, third space, south of the traditional prayer areas.

At the time the agreement was reached, Anat Hoffman, chair of the board of Women of the Wall, a group that has been at the fore in advancing the goal of an egalitarian space and whose members are routinely arrested for praying at the Kotel with prayer shawls, said the decision by Israel’s cabinet was an acknowledgment “that there is more than one way to be Jewish.”

Last week, the Netanyahu government changed its mind and decided there is not.

Bending to pressure from the ultra-Orthodox members of his coalition, the proverbial tail that so often wags the dog in Israel’s political system, Netanyahu called a snap vote on whether the decision taken in January 2016 to create the egalitarian space should indeed proceed. Ministers who last year voted in favour last week voted against.

In for a penny, in for a pound, the government at the same time advanced a bill that would reinstate the Orthodox monopoly on conversions and lifecycle events, including marriage and burials. Among the implications is that Jews not converted under the auspices of the Chief Rabbinate – in other words, by Conservative, Reform or other non-Orthodox rabbis – would not be recognized as Jews.

On most issues, Israel should take Diaspora concerns into consideration only secondarily to what is right for Israel. We have said in this space before, for instance, that Israeli defence policies should be determined with the security of Israelis as the priority, not the comfort of Diaspora Jews who have to live with the political consequences, but not the life-and-death consequences facing Israelis.

This is different. Rules regarding prayer at the Western Wall – who, where and how – should be made with the interests of the Jewish people – not just Israelis – foremost in mind. Of course, if the rules were made with the majority of Israelis in mind, they would reflect the diversity of religious observance both in Israel and in the Diaspora. Instead, what we have is a narrow reflection of ultra-Orthodox priorities that is more a result of political realities in the Knesset than religious reality anywhere outside that chamber.

Ultimately, these decisions are a result of political, not religious, considerations. The political needs of the Netanyahu government’s coalition appear to be superseding the Jewish state’s respect for diversity and pluralism within the global Jewish peoplehood.

“We believe in Jewish unity, not uniformity,” states a letter to Netanyahu signed by scores of Canadian rabbis. “The spectrum of Jewish practice is diverse, but it need not lead to divisiveness. Our differences are eclipsed by all that unites us: millennia of shared history and a shared future. What happens to Jews today – no matter where they live or where they attend synagogue – invariably affects us all.… We are an indivisible people, which is why we are deeply concerned by these and any other actions that unnecessarily foment division within amcha.”

Most of us do not have a vote in Israel, but each of us has a voice. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs is urging each of us to contact the Israeli embassy to express our views on this vital matter. Please do.

Guide to Jewish campus life

On May 8, Canadian Hillels in partnership with the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) released Going Somewhere? The Canadian Guide to Jewish Campus Life. Inspired by Maclean’s annual university guide, Going Somewhere? Provides students with information about Jewish life on campuses across Canada, as well as tips on how Jewish students can make the most of their first-year experience.

Going Somewhere? includes campus-by-campus details on everything from Jewish student population numbers, access to kosher food, Jewish studies programs, academic exchanges with Israeli schools and popular housing locations for Jewish students, as well as Jewish social opportunities, such as holiday parties hosted by Hillel. Going Somewhere? also provides information about Jewish and pro-Israel campus advocacy opportunities, and paid internships offered by Hillel.

“We are proud to publish the first coast-to-coast Canadian guide to Jewish life on campus,” said Marc Newburgh, chief executive officer of Hillel Ontario, in a statement. “For Jewish students, the university experience provides a unique opportunity to connect with their community, shape their Jewish identity for the long-term and develop skills by engaging in Jewish and pro-Israel advocacy. Our hope is that Going Somewhere? will prove a valuable resource for students and their families.”

Judy Zelikovitz, vice-president of university and local partner services at CIJA, added, “CIJA is pleased to have contributed to Going Somewhere?… As the only Jewish student organization with staff on the ground at schools across the country, Hillel offers an unparalleled window into everything Jewish on campus. The practical advice and campus-by-campus details in Going Somewhere? make for required reading for every Jewish student as they consider their options for the fall.”

To download a free copy of Going Somewhere?, visit gettheguide.ca.

קמפיין חדש

המרכז לענייני ישראל והיהודים בקנדה יוצא בקמפיין חדש לבקש מהממשלה הפדרלית להגדיל את תקציב הביטחון להגנה על הקהילה היהודית

המרכז לענייני ישראל והיהודים בקנדה יוצא בימים אלה בקמפיין חדש וחשוב, בניסיון להגדיל את תקציב הביטחון להגנה על הקהילה היהודית ברחבי קנדה. הקמפיין מיועד לממשלה הפדרלית שמחזיקה בתקציב במיוחד למימון הביטחון של קהילות שונות בקנדה (שנקרא אס.איי.פי). התקציב המיוחד מאפשר בין היתר לבנות גדרות ביטחון להגנה על מתקנים ומבנים שונים בקהילות, הצבת תאורה חזקה וכן מצלמות מחוץ למבנים.

הקמפיין כולל בין היתר שליחת אימיילים לשר לביטחון הציבור בממשלה הליברלית, ראלף גודייל, ולחברי הפרלמנט האזוריים, כדי לתמוך בהגדלת תקציב הביטחון של הקהילות השונות, כדי להגביר את האבטחה במוסדות היהודיים באמצעות כלים מודרניים. “זו תמיד העדיפות העליונה של נבחרי הציבור בקנדה”.

מנכ”ל המרכז לענייני ישראל והיהודים בקנדה, שמעון פוגל, מציין ביתר כי לפי ‘סטטיסטיק קנדה’, בכל יום מתרחשים בממוצע שלושה פשעי שנאה ברחבי קנדה. מרבית פשעי השנאה מכוונים נגד חברי הקהילה היהודית. פשעים אלה גורמים לנטל תקציבי גדול מאוד על הקהילה היהודית וקהילות אחרות, שמפעילות בין היתר מרכזי דת ופולחן, בתי ספר דתיים יחודיים ומרכזים קהילתיים. הקהילות השונות נאלצות לשאת בעלויות הגבוהות של אבטחת חבריהן.

המרכז מזכיר לחברי הקהילה היהודית להצטרף, לתמוך ולעקוב אחר בפעילויותיו הרבות והמגוונות באמצעי המדיה השונים, בהם פייסבוק, טוויטר ואיסנטגרם.

מצטערים טעינו: תושב ונקובר שישב עשרים ושבע שנים בכלא שלא בצדק יקבל שמונה מיליון דולר מבריטיש קולומביה

טעות משפטית קשה עלתה לתושב ונקובר כעשרים ושבע שנים מחייו אותם בילה בכלא הסגור. בית המשפט העליון של מחוז בריטיש קולומביה הורה לממשלת המחוז לשלם לו שמונה מיליון דולר על העוול הגדול שנגרם לו.

איוון הנרי (69) נעצר על ידי משטרת ונקובר והורשע בעשרה סעיפים של תקיפות מיניות, אותן ביצע כביכול בנשים בחלק המזרחי של דאון טאון ונקובר, בין השנים 1980-1982. ב-1983 נגזר דינו בבית המשפט המקומי והוא נכלא מאחורי סורג ובריח כאמור לשנים רבות. הנרי טען לחפותו בכל אותן שנים והוא עירער בכל פעם שהתאפשר לו על האשמות כנגדו. המשטרה המקומית והפרקליטות של בריטיש קולומביה המשיכו לחקור במשך שנים רבות, את מעשי התקיפות המיניות באותה עת באזור המזרחי של הדאון הטאון. האחראים על אכיפת החוק הגיעו לבסוף למסקנה היוצאת דופן, שקרוב לוודאי שהנרי לא קשור למעשי התקיפה ואכן ונגרם לו עוול משפטי. לאור זאת הפרקליטות והמשטרה הודיעו לבית המשפט לעירעורים, כי לא יתנגדו עוד לערעור מחודש של הנרי על פסק דינו. על כן בית המשפט לעירעורים של המחוז קבע לפני מספר שנים, שהפרקליטות ביצעה טעות משפטית חמורה והאשימה את האיש הלא נכון (הנרי), בביצוע התקיפות המיניות בראשית שנות השמונים בוונקובר. בפועל התברר לאור המשך החקירות, שחשוד אחר באותה פרשה בשם דונלד מקרי, הוא היה אחראי לתקיפות המיניות נגד הנשים. מקרי נפטר בינתיים והנרי המשיך לשבת בכלא שנים על שנים.

לאחר קבלת עירעורו ושיחרורו מהכלא בשנת 2010, הגיש הנרי תביעה אזרחית נגד ממשלת המחוז ומשטרת ונקובר, בטענה שהפרקליטות סירבה לחלוק את האינפורמציה והמידע שבידה עם ההגנה בזמן משפטו, דבר שיכל להביא לזיכויו המוחלט. בית המשפט העליון לערעורים של בריטיש קולומביה פסק לו בימים אלה פיצויים בגובה של שמונה מיליון דולר. האם היה שווה להנרי לשבת בכלא עשרים ושבע שנים, לצאת לחופשי ולהפוך עתה למיליונר – לא בטוח בכלל.

A fresh look at Israel

David Decolongon participated in the first-ever mission organized by the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs designed exclusively for young people who originate, or whose families came from, East Asia. (photo from David Decolongon)

A Vancouver student who recently returned from Israel says he has a better understanding of the nuances of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – and other realities of life in the region – after participating in a mission for young leaders of East Asian descent.

David Decolongon is a student at Regent College, on the University of British Columbia campus. He graduated from UBC last year in political science with a minor in philosophy, and is considering whether to pursue a full master’s degree or complete a graduate diploma in Christian studies.

He was chosen to participate in the first-ever mission organized by the Centre for Israel and Jewish

Affairs designed exclusively for young people who originate, or whose families came from, East Asia. Decolongon, who was born in Vancouver, is of Filipino heritage.

“I connected with this trip in three major ways,” he said. “Number one, religiously. I’m a practising Christian and so being able to go to a place where a lot of this history took place was big enough for me. But also, over the summer, I was involved in a startup and so being able to connect with Israel through a startup team was big with me. But also to connect with it politically was big for me because I’m involved in politics, I work and volunteer for a political party right now.”

Though he said it is a “cop-out” to say the entire trip was a highlight in itself, he does identify a number of instances that stand out when he recalls the trip, which took place in February.

“Being able to go over to Ramallah and meet the Canadian attaché to the Palestinian Authority and to be able to go up north to see the Lebanese border and to learn the history of that area and to go to a lot of those places that you hear about a lot in the news is probably the significant highlight for me in this trip,” said Decolongon.

Though he had been to Israel before, on a church-organized trip, the variety of perspectives he witnessed on this occasion, combined with the diversity of fellow participants from across Canada, opened his eyes and mind, he said.

“When it comes to thinking about a hot topic such as Israel, people tend to use a lot of political rhetoric and they tend to take very pro- and anti-, very extreme, stances. I think when you’re on the ground and you see how these things affect people on a daily basis, whether they be Jewish-Israeli, Arab-Israeli, Palestinian, it becomes more real and, once you’re on the ground, the solutions that you bring to the table tend to be a lot more common sense, a lot more feasible and a lot more geared toward achieving peace for all groups,” he said.

Being pro-Israel, he added, does not mean being anti-Palestinian.

“You can take a pro-Israeli stance while at the same time wanting to push the well-being of Palestinians. People think it’s an either-or answer but when you’re on the ground and you get to see what really happens, you’re more interested in pushing forth the betterment of life for both groups,” he said.

People everywhere have the same desires for their children, said Decolongon.

“They want to make sure that their children can grow up in safety, that their young people have jobs coming out of college and university,” he said. “We come at it recognizing that both sides have common interest and it’s going to be messy and it’s going to be complex, but I think the solutions are attainable once you realize that both sides are human and that both sides can come to the table and either side may not get 100% of what they want but we can certainly make it livable for both sides.”

Decolongon was the only British Columbian among the eight participants, though the mission was led by Sarina Rehal, an employee in CIJA’s Toronto office who is from here and who graduated from UBC. The group met with a wide range of people, including an Arab-Israeli journalist, a leader in the region’s vibrant startup sector who thinks economic opportunity is the antidote to Islamic extremism, as well as political, military and academic experts.

The newly established East Asian Student Leaders program was created by CIJA as an experiential learning initiative for students of East Asian heritage or origin who demonstrate leadership in the areas of politics, journalism or campus activism.

Nico Slobinsky, director for the Pacific region of CIJA, said it is important to engage young leaders.

“It’s an ongoing dialogue and opportunity we are forging with these young leaders as they continue to engage in their communities, with our community, with civil society in Canada, in the years ahead,” said Slobinsky. “As they progress in their leadership, in their careers, into their life, they will continue to engage and that’s why we do this.

“In the case of this mission in particular, we were looking at emerging leaders in the pan-Asian communities,” he said.