CIJA – Page 8

Choose to shine light

While settling into a fresh hotel room, one may be tempted to open drawers and doors, survey the facilities, and thumb through the room service menus or local entertainment guides that are usually provided to help guests plan outings. There’s often a Gideons Bible in a bedside table as well.

But guests in six Coast Hotels in British Columbia recently got more than they expected when they flipped through the pages of Apple Town, a magazine in English and Japanese that they found among the room offerings. Instead of suggestions for day trips or restaurant options, the magazine proffered antisemitism.

“‘International finance capital’ means ‘Jewish capital,’” one article reads. “Jewish people control American information, finance and laws, and they greatly benefit from globalization because they move their massive profits to tax havens so they don’t have to pay any taxes. Many Jewish people support the Democratic party. They are the top 1% as described by Thomas Piketty, and the remaining 99% feel dissatisfaction and anger towards them.”

Shortly after the “literature” was brought to wide public attention last week through social media, individuals and Jewish advocacy agencies, including the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), demanded that the hotel chain remove the offending materials. In short order, Coast Hotels complied and the president of the company declared that the antisemitic opinions “in no way reflect the values of Coast Hotels, its leadership team or its employees” and that the company does not believe “there is any room for commentary that causes offence or concern to any group.”

Yet, how does material like this find its way into B.C. hotel rooms in the first place?

A few months ago, Coast Hotels was purchased by Japan’s APA Group. That corporation’s president, Toshio Motoya, is a prominent figure in right-wing Japanese politics. (APA is an acronym for “Always Pleasant Amenities,” which contradicts the experience of some who thumbed through Apple Town magazine last week.) Motoya supports the militarization of Japan and is an historical revisionist who whitewashes Japan’s actions in the Second World War. He claims that the Nanking massacre and the use by Japanese soldiers of sex slaves, euphemistically called “comfort women,” are fictions perpetrated by China and Korea.

In the fashion of Henry Ford, who in the early part of the 20th century distributed antisemitic and historically dubious propaganda through his car dealerships, Motoya’s political imaginings are featured in Apple Town, which is apparently distributed through his hotels.

Kudos to all those who took action to have the magazines removed from B.C. hotels. But we do wonder about how many other hotel guests in Japan and possibly elsewhere in APA’s chain are getting antisemitic amenities with their complementary toiletries.

This is, of course, one small incident in a world that seems to be experiencing a flurry of hateful expressions. But in such darkness there is always room for light. The actions of a few can have a positive impact, as the outcry against Apple Town indicates.

The hundreds of people who gathered in Vancouver Saturday night to mourn the six people murdered at Muslim prayers in Quebec on Jan. 29 are another example. Nothing can bring back the lives of those murdered, but demonstrations such as this – and others that occurred across the country – can help heal the fears and isolation of the targeted community.

And then there are smaller acts of decency, like those of passengers on a New York subway car on the weekend. The train car had swastikas drawn in felt pen on every window and on every advertisement. Across one ad was written “Jews belong in the oven.” Passengers took it upon themselves to remove the graffiti with hand sanitizer and tissues. It was a small collective act that resonated across social media.

The world today has many situations that can cause us anxiety and sadness. One of the simplest and wisest axioms of our tradition declares it is better to light a candle than to curse at the darkness. Each of us has the potential to shine a little light through our actions and words. That is important to remember in times like these.

Leaders meet with Horgan

From left to right: Ezra Shanken, chief executive officer, Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver; Jason Z. Murray, chair, Local Partner Council, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs; Penny Gurstein, volunteer leader, JFGV; Candace Kwinter, member of the CIJA LPC; Stephen Gaerber, chair of the board, JFGV; John Horgan, MLA, leader of the Official Opposition; Yael Levin, manager of partnerships, CIJA Pacific Region; David Berson, member of the CIJA LPC; Shelley Rivkin, vice-president, allocations and community relations, JFGV; and Nico Slobinsky, director. (photo CIJA Pacific Region)

On Nov. 28, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) and the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver (JFGV) hosted discussions with Jewish community leaders and British Columbia Leader of the Official Opposition John Horgan and Selina Robinson, member of the Legislative Assembly for Coquitlam-Maillardville.

The discussion underscored the Jewish community’s relationship with the provincial New Democratic Party (NDP) and provided Horgan with details regarding issues faced by the approximately 30,000 members of British Columbia’s Jewish community.

Lay leaders and professional staff representing a wide range of perspectives discussed such priorities as antisemitism, community security, affordable housing, elder care, Jewish education, ethno-cultural cooperation and the centrality of the state of Israel to the Jewish community.

Horgan expressed his appreciation for the Jewish community and recognized the importance of working with them to confront hatred and intolerance wherever it exists.

“British Columbia’s Jewish community cherishes the historic, enduring and constructive relationships existing with both the B.C. NDP and B.C. Liberal parties,” said Nico Slobinsky, CIJA’s Pacific Region director. “CIJA is committed to strengthening our relationship with all provincial parties to affirm our shared values and work together on the challenges facing B.C.’s Jewish community and other ethnic and religious minorities.”

Greens’ policy on Israel

On Saturday, Dec. 3, at a meeting in Calgary, the Green Party of Canada (GPC) passed a resolution updating the party’s position on the Israel-Palestine conflict. It puts the entire onus for the conflict’s continuation on Israel, specifically on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

“The possibility of a two-state solution is diminishing directly due to the Netanyahu government’s support for illegal expansion and increasingly brutal military occupation,” reads the Dec. 4 statement on the Green party’s website. “Even over 200 former members of Israeli Defence Forces (‘Security First’ [plan for West Bank, Gaza]) have decried the worsening security situation for Israelis and Palestinians – and laid the blame directly on Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies. The former Israeli military officers have raised the alarm of a ‘humanitarian crisis in Gaza’ and the diminishing chances for a two-state solution.

“Clearly,” continues the statement, “Canada needs to do more to register with the Israeli government that flouting international law and threatening the security of its own people while violating the human rights of Palestinians is not acceptable. In doing so, Canada must continue to condemn violence from the militant elements of Palestinian society.”

While rejecting the boycott, divestment and sanction movement – as its goals “do not include supporting the right of the state of Israel to exist” and are “incompatible with Green party policy”– the addendum to the party’s policy “is based on clear differentiation between ‘legal’ Israel, as within the 1967 borders, a democracy respecting the rights of citizens of all ethnicities within its borders, and ‘illegal’ Israel – the occupied territories beyond Israel’s legal borders. The Palestinian civilians within the occupied territories are subjected to virtual continual abuses of their human rights. The occupied territories are maintained under a brutal military occupation. Products from illegal Israel should not be granted the preferred trading status of products of legal Israel.”

With this in mind, the Green party would like to see the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement renegotiated, the “termination and indefinite suspension of all military and surveillance trade and cooperation” between Canada and Israel, and the repeal of “the House of Commons resolution condemning the BDS movement.”

According to the Dec. 3 article “Greens vote for new Israel policy without BDS” by James Munson on ipolitics.ca, “Approximately [350] members voted on the ‘compromise’ resolution that purged the party’s policies of any reference to the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, which pressures companies, governments and institutions with ties to Israel.”

The article cites Green party president Ken Melamed as saying, “The party wanted to be careful not to align with a particular organization or movement. The essence of it, I think, is that the party feels that diplomatic approaches to achieving peace and justice in the Middle East have been ineffective and it’s time to move to economic actions.”

The article said that, according to Melamed, about 85% of those who voted at the meeting supported the resolution – others opposed or abstained – but that it still had to be voted on electronically by all 20,000 party members before it became official policy.

Shimon Koffler Fogel, chief executive officer of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), condemned the resolution. In a Dec. 3 statement, he noted, “The new policy is rife with historical distortions and places the Green party at odds with the Canadian consensus that BDS is discriminatory and counter-productive to peace. The Ontario legislature just voted by a tenfold margin to reject the differential treatment of Israel, underscoring how out of touch the Green party has become.

“Elizabeth May and the party’s leadership have turned their backs on the mainstream Jewish community, including the many Jewish Greens who no longer feel welcome. Despite repeatedly flagging that the anti-Israel vote was scheduled to take place on the Jewish sabbath, senior Green party officials insisted on holding the vote today, thereby excluding many Jewish Green party members from voting. This is an alarming development and a stunning failure of leadership.”

The December resolution replaces a resolution that was passed at the Green party convention in August.

In the backgrounder to Fogel’s statement, CIJA notes, “The party’s decision to endorse economic penalties against Israel is incompatible with the wishes of the party’s grassroots. A survey of Green members conducted by the party after their convention revealed that, of 2,800 respondents, 28% agreed with the decision to support BDS, 44% wanted it repealed and 28% thought it should be amended to remove any reference to a specific movement or country.”

The backgrounder further explains, “The text’s exclusive recognition of Palestinians as ‘the indigenous people’ of the region implies that Jewish people have no ancestral or indigenous roots in Israel. This misleading suggestion contradicts millennia of archeological and documentary evidence.”

And, CIJA warns, “The one-sided nature of the resolution and its call for extreme measures against Israel puts the Green party outside the international consensus for achieving peace, which emphasizes the need for both parties to compromise and negotiate.”

Note: This article has been edited to reflect later reports that about 350 party members voted on the resolution, versus the number cited on ipolitics.ca, which was approximately 275.

BDS puts Green party in turmoil

In early August, the Green Party of Canada voted at its national convention to endorse boycott-divestment-sanctions (BDS) measures against segments of Israel’s economy and society. BDS advocates were quick to claim victory, citing that the Greens are now the first Canadian political party of any significance to support BDS.

But not so fast.

In the wake of the vote, party leader Elizabeth May immediately declared she was “devastated” by the decision and “disappointed that the membership has adopted a policy in favor of a movement that I believe to be polarizing, ineffective and unhelpful in the quest for peace and security for the peoples of the Middle East.” May added that, “as is the right of any member, I will continue to express personal opposition to BDS” – a breath-taking statement to hear from a party leader, particularly when the leader is the party’s sole voice in Parliament.

In the weeks that followed, May openly mused to the media about how this entire episode was causing her to rethink her future in the Green party. In an interview with CBC Radio, May talked about the possibility of walking away from the party: “I would say as of this minute I think I’d have real difficulties going not just to an election but through the next month. There are a lot of issues I want to be talking about with Canadians, and this isn’t one of them.”

And May wasn’t alone. The leader of the Green Party of British Columbia, Andrew Weaver, issued a scathing statement disavowing the federal party’s decision. “This is not a policy that I nor the B.C. Green party support,” said Weaver. “I think the Green Party of Canada needs to take a careful look at their policy process and ask themselves how a policy that goes against Green party values could have been allowed on the floor of a convention.”

Various Green candidates likewise condemned the decision. One from Ottawa said, “I’m in a state of disbelief.… I don’t agree with it, I don’t like having that over me going into [the next] election.” Another, from Halifax, said the policy is “destructive for the party.… Every country has its issues. When we specifically single out Israelis, I worry about the buzzwords and subtext and code language, which is antisemitic.”

A party torn apart. A leader willing to quit. Controversial headlines eclipsing anything else the party intended to highlight coming out of convention. Is this what a BDS victory looks like?

The fight against BDS revolves around psychology much more than economics. Israel’s economy is strong, with trade and ties growing despite calls for BDS. But, on the psychological level, BDS activities have the potential to poison attitudes toward Israel among civil society organizations and demoralize the Jewish community. On both levels, BDS proponents failed when it comes to the Green party.

While May has since declared she will stay on as leader, every Green voter should be outraged that BDS activists – in using the party to promote their own marginal agenda – nearly pushed the Greens’ only voice in Parliament out of the party. If anything, this initiative has exposed the toxic nature of BDS to those it intended to seduce. As CIJA Chair David Cape recently wrote: “Once again, BDS has proven bitterly and publicly divisive for political parties that contemplate endorsing it. In this case, BDS has sown resentment among Greens and come at a great cost for anti-Israel activists.”

And when it comes to the morale of the Jewish community, this issue has mobilized thousands of Jewish Canadians across the political spectrum (including former Green party members) to speak out and condemn the party’s hostility toward Israel. In a matter of weeks, CIJA galvanized some 7,500 Canadians to email the Green party’s leadership to express their opposition to this initiative. Without question, our united efforts had an impact, with May openly admitting BDS is “very clearly a polarizing movement that leaves most of the Jewish community in Canada feeling that it is antisemitic.”

Hopefully, this will spur May and other Greens to take the steps needed to annul the BDS policy and regain control of the party’s direction from those behind this hateful agenda.

Steve McDonald is deputy director, communications and public affairs, at the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

A 22-year-old open wound

Every year on July 18, thousands of people gather to remember the victims of the AMIA bombing, and demand that justice prevails. (photo by Jaluj via commons.wikimedia.org)

After more than 20 years, an entire nation continues to search for answers and justice.

With an estimated population of 330,000, Argentina’s Jewish community is the largest in South America and, outside Israel, the sixth largest in the world. First arriving in Argentina in early days, Jews have continued to immigrate ever since. During its “golden era” (1900s to 1950s), an estimated 500,000 Jewish people lived there.

The vast majority of Jews in Argentina are Ashkenazi, from central and eastern Europe. From the start, this active, prosperous and engaged community has left its mark in local business, infrastructure, culture and politics. My family was part of this group; Argentina was the place we called home and where four generations of my family were born. AMIA (Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina or the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association) is the central support organization for all Jews in Argentina, tracing its roots back to 1894.

Everything changed the morning of July 18, 1994, at 9:53 a.m. While I was attending a history class, more than 600 pounds of explosives hidden in a vehicle were detonated in front of AMIA. The explosion was followed by a cloud of smoke and dust seen for miles. In seconds, along with the iconic Jewish organization in Argentina and everything surrounding it, the building housing all of Argentina’s rich Jewish history was, simply, gone. This tragedy was followed by panic, mayhem, sirens, ambulances, calls for help, deaths totaling 85 and hundreds more victims, severely injured and traumatized, transported to hospital.

At my school, phones started to ring. The principal rushed into our classroom to have a private word with our teacher, who then broke the news that AMIA in Buenos Aires was bombed. We were in shock. The same black dusty cloud that could be seen above AMIA descended upon the student body, the teachers and the administrative staff. Frantic activity ensued and, within a few hours, the school was deserted.

My first reaction was concern for my family and friends, many of whom worked at AMIA. I would soon learn that, although one miraculously survived under the rubble and a few others were spared, having not yet arrived at the time of the attack, three died in the explosion. I would learn of the tremendous cultural and historical loss of books, manuscripts, community records, art, pictures and more. I would learn of the disorientation felt by so many who could not comprehend the magnitude of the attack. And I would learn of the rage of those who survived their loved ones. To this day, I will never forget the conversations around the dinner table that revealed the pervasive feeling we were no longer safe.

Some of my friends were immediately withdrawn from the private Jewish school I attended and transferred to the public school system. I would learn of sentiments such as “Jews should be concentrated in one place and live together so innocent Argentines would not suffer.” Yet, in my mind, we were all Argentines.

Over the following years, as I transitioned from my teenage to adult years, I would learn of government cover-ups, of the miscarriage of justice, and of injustice done in the name of greed and corruption. I would also learn of Hezbollah, Iran and other terrorist elements suspected of involvement one way or another. And I would be constantly reminded of the pain of those left behind, and the impunity of the perpetrators, which reinforced the sense of insecurity that took over a proud and vibrant Jewish community.

In spontaneous reaction, hundreds showed up to the site where the AMIA building had stood. Many, my father was among them, were volunteering to assist in the rebuilding process. Those were dark days. The community needed to reorganize. Within a week of the attack at Pasteur 633, a community building a few blocks away began to function. As the temporary head office of AMIA, the Ayacucho 632 site became the place where families sought information about the victims of the attack and where AMIA resumed essential operations, especially those pertaining to social services and community relations.

The Ayacucho building also became the place in which I started my journey as a Jewish community volunteer and where I later decided to pursue a professional career serving the Jewish community.

Five years after the attack, on the original site, a new building was opened that symbolized the creative drive of a community willing to preserve the heritage of a cultural tradition that honors life and collective memory.

This July 18, as every year, the bombing was commemorated with a ceremony in front of the new, now heavily fortified, AMIA: This year’s ceremony marked 22 years since the attack, Argentina’s deadliest bombing ever.

The AMIA bombing was an assault on all society and one that has left deep political scars, not just upon Argentina’s Jewish community. It is a symbol of the entire Argentine state and a society still searching for the truth. And the truth – about a sophisticated terrorist act of mass murder that sent a brutal message of destruction and death – must come to light. The attack is a wound that remains open to this day.

I vow to neither remain silent nor rest until those guilty of these attacks are apprehended, and I hope that the Argentine government will make every effort to ensure that the terrorists responsible for this horrendous act are brought to justice.

Viviana, Cristian and Guillermo, I will never forget. Porque tenemos memoria, exigimos justicia. Because we have memory, we demand justice.

Nico Slobinsky is director, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Pacific Region. He was born and raised in Argentina before immigrating to Israel and, later, to Canada.

Fogel on health, Trudeau, BDS

Shimon Fogel, chief executive officer of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (photo from CIJA)

Shimon Fogel, chief executive officer of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), was in Vancouver June 20 to speak at the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver’s annual general meeting. He spoke with the Jewish Independent prior to the gathering.

“CIJA does not regard itself as an independent organization with an independent ego,” he said. “We very much see ourselves as an internal mechanism of the community. We regard making a presentation at the AGM as addressing our stakeholders and providing an assessment of what value we add to the Federation program, and giving an opportunity to receive feedback.

“This takes us back to what the rationale was in consolidating different Jewish organizations together and the value of integrating all of the different silos that emerged in the Jewish community, for good reasons in their time,” he said, referring to the merging of Canadian Jewish Congress and the Canada-Israel Committee to form CIJA in 2011. “Integrating everything ensures that there is an holistic approach. It also provides us with an opportunity to show Canadians that we are not unidimensional. If I were just working within the Canada-Israel Committee, you would think that there were no issues of importance to me other than Israel, but the truth is that I am as seized with the issue of the protection of transgender rights as I am with immigration issues and having a meaningful response to the international refugee crisis.”

The dissolution of CJC and the CIC was controversial at the time, however, and there are community members who still feel their absence.

“We were never sanguine about people’s attachment to the CJC,” said Fogel. “It had a long and storied history. There were points during that history when the CJC shined as an example not just in Canada, but internationally. There was never an intent to diminish that or marginalize the importance that they had. The reality was that the political landscape changed, pressures within the community in terms of limited resources came to bear, and there was a need to eliminate the kind of competition that was emerging between one agenda and another…. Confusion was beginning about this alphabet of acronyms and who does what, and this made it obvious that there was real benefit in consolidation.”

The issues with which CJC dealt remain on CIJA’s agenda, said Fogel. “On balance, at any given time, we’re spending way more than 50% of our time and resources both staff and programming on things other than Israel,” he said.

As an example, the week prior to when Fogel spoke with the Independent, an interfaith coalition called on elected officials “to support a robust, well-resourced, national palliative care strategy.” CIJA was involved in this initiative.

“The recent discussion about physician-assisted dying (PAD) [prompted by Bill C-14] begs a larger question, one that we have been concerned about for a long time, but didn’t lend itself to the kind of focused attention that we were able to secure in the last few weeks,” explained Fogel. “All evidence, if we look at the countries that have adopted some kind of protocol with regard to PAD, points to the conclusion that almost no one in a given society accesses that option to manage their end-of-life situation.

“If we were to translate it to Canadian terms, I don’t know that we would have two dozen a year who would be availing themselves of that option. What that means is a need to ensure that resources are in place to provide support for the individual who is suffering the illness and, no less importantly, for their family members, the front-line caregivers, who are assisting and supporting the individual as they approach end of life. Because there was such a focus on PAD, we felt that it should not be lost in the course of the public policy debate that what’s really important for Canadians to appreciate is that as we are confronted by an aging population and we need to look at improving palliative care options. We had to wrap our heads around a national strategy that was going to ensure the same set of standards that are applied to other dimensions of the health-care system. A discussion now about palliative care is an important and therapeutic complement to the narrow-band discussion about PAD.”

Palliative care covers a much broader range of issues and affects a much larger group of people than PAD. With the aging population, said Fogel, “we have adult children who have become caregivers, who are being torn in multiple directions, between home responsibilities and work, between attending to their parents and attending to their children; it is costing them physically, emotionally and financially.

Accommodation in the workplace is not what it should be, and the provision of relief support is not there in an adequate way and, sometimes, not there at all; for example, in communities outside of the largest urban centres.

“We want governments to direct their attention to this. We are coming up to a new national-provincial agreement on the provision of health care in the next year or so. This is a health-care issue, not a social or political issue. It has to be seen as part and parcel of the package of health-care services that are provided, or there is no hope of getting it addressed in any kind of meaningful way.

“There are things that are unique to the Jewish community but most things are generic and we have to constantly reinforce that the experience of the Jewish community is simply a reflection of the broader experience within Canadian society,” he added. “Because we are a little more sophisticated in our infrastructure and the importance that we attach to communal organization, we are often at the leading edge of issues, so reaching out and partnering with others is both important to advance the issue and provides us with an opportunity to develop relationships that are important both for Canada as a society and for us.”

One of those to whom CIJA reached out was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau – well before he and the Liberal party were elected last fall.

“There were some challenging times a number of years ago and, in that period, the Conservative party asserted themselves as a party that was remarkably sensitive and responsive to the needs of the Jewish community, not just with regards to Israel but on issues of antisemitism and inclusion,” Fogel said. “That skewed things perceptually more than they might have been otherwise, but we’ve never stopped investing in the Liberal party.

“People like Justin Trudeau were individuals who we reached out to and brought to Israel long before he was a candidate. He went with his wife and then facilitated all of his advisers to participate in trips to Israel, so we greeted the new government knowing all of the principals and having developed a very, very close and positive relationship.

“That it’s a very different government is beyond question and that’s really genetic to their whole approach to things,” Fogel acknowledged. “They attach a great deal of importance to multilateralism and that’s distinct from the approach of the previous government, which was fond of saying that it was driven by principle and principle alone. The Trudeau government sees inherent value in partnering with other countries. That brings its own challenges because, when you are just responsible for your own opinion, you can articulate whatever opinion you want; when you want to join with others, it means accommodating different views, whether they are substantially different or it’s just nuance.

“That having been said, I think that the record over the last eight months has been remarkably strong. I’m fond of pointing to what many saw as a low point as proof that things really are quite good. You will recall back on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, some were quite upset that in the initial comment from the PMO [Prime Minister’s Office] there was no explicit reference to Jews. Now, I know how that happened. January is still very early days in the new government, they were still staffing up. This was a whole new government and really a whole new generation – 10 years is a long time in politics. Not everything was in place [for the Liberal government], and this was an absolutely honest oversight.

“The real test,” said Fogel, “wasn’t that a comment was released that didn’t include the word ‘Jewish’ – the test was that, within half an hour after we had flagged for them that this wasn’t being well received, a new statement was issued which was quite explicit. The degree of responsiveness that the government demonstrates for a concern expressed by the Jewish community is the real test for the quality of the relationship.”

CIJA does not take its relationship with the government for granted.

“We’re grateful for it,” said Fogel. “Even in terms of things that are Israel-related. We think the French-led initiative on an Israeli-Palestinian peace process is not just unhelpful, it has the potential to push back a peace process rather than serving as a catalyst for it. Now, because of Canada’s desire to be part of the international effort on anything, doesn’t matter what, Canada wanted to participate in a conference on that a few weeks back, which we accept because that’s the orientation of this government.

“What we had asked for was for Canada to advocate for a particular direction, and they were very responsive. They made the point about nothing replacing direct negotiations and that established resolutions like [the 1967 United Nations Security Council Resolution] 242 had to be seen as the foundation for anything going forward. For good measure, they threw in that Israel was their strong ally, language which does not go way back in Canadian descriptions of the relationship with Israel.

“I don’t think it’s going to remain so consistently good on each issue that comes up,” he cautioned. “I think there will be times we differ from the government. People find it a little hard to believe, but we differed from the last government too and the relationship was sustained notwithstanding.”

One issue on which the current and previous federal governments have agreed is their condemnation of the boycott, divestment and sanction movement against Israel. The issue is high on CIJA’s agenda, of course.

“I see the BDS movement as inherently toxic,” said Fogel. “I see it as antisemitic and I see it as a base, cynical strategy. What it does is exploit the natural and rightful resonance that human rights language has. The language of human rights has become almost a secular religion and it resonates with people so, when that is the language used in order to promote and advocate for something, the default inclination of most people of goodwill would be if not to embrace it, at least to refrain from criticizing it. Yet, we know that the genesis of the BDS movement is in anything but human rights, and core promoters don’t hide their core agenda to delegitimize, isolate and dismantle the Jewish state. What I’m gratified at is that the progressive majority have come to recognize that BDS is not about critiquing a particular Israeli government or position, it’s about denying the right to self-determination of the Jewish people in a way that differentiates from the way you would treat any other group. The way that it iterates antisemitic tropes has prompted many to push away from association with BDS, so I do take some encouragement from people finally starting to apply critical thinking to and connecting the dots and saying, no, this isn’t what it appears to be.”

When asked what are the most effective strategies for the Canadian Jewish community to fight against the negative aspects of the BDS campaign, Fogel said, “I don’t think it is limited to BDS – I think the best strategies to advance understanding boil down to three things.

“We have to be intellectually honest about who we are. The Jewish community offers something valuable to the larger society, and we should be eager to share that and to use that as a way to achieve the second thing, which is to partner with others. We have much more in common with others than that which separates us. We have a rich legacy to share. We have experiences that are instructive and helpful to others in terms of challenges that they face and, very often, we find ourselves in the position of providing advice and direction.

“The third is recognizing that we have to reach out to others on the basis of what is meaningful to them. I can feel whatever I feel about anything but I will never be able to present a persuasive argument if they can’t relate to the terms of reference. This has been, I think, both our greatest source of success and the greatest source of criticism from some sectors of the Jewish community. We can’t indulge in those emotionally satisfying but superficial arguments where we pound our fist on the table and say that we’re right because we have justice on our side; because, for most, that has no meaning and we’re simply relegated to the same place as our adversaries by those who can relate to neither. We have to communicate on the basis of shared values.”

Matthew Gindin is a Vancouver freelance writer and journalist. He blogs on spirituality and social justice at seeking her voice (hashkata.com) and has been published in the Forward, Tikkun, Elephant Journal and elsewhere.

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.

Help strengthen community

Anyone who has visited a synagogue in continental Europe or South America can attest that – even in liberal democracies welcoming of diversity – the Jewish community is an at-risk minority requiring extensive security measures. While Canada is relatively safe for Jews, Statistics Canada data nevertheless show that, of the on average three hate crimes per day in Canada, our community is the most frequently targeted.

Canadians outside the Jewish community are often surprised to learn of the significant security measures required in our synagogues, day schools and Jewish community centres. And, although security concerns are a commonplace reality for Jewish institutions, members of our own community are often shocked to discover the enormous price tag that comes with such requirements as security guards, cameras and enhanced locks.

Many community institutions struggle to foot their security bill. Fortunately, the Government of Canada’s Security Infrastructure Program (SIP) helps certain eligible institutions offset some of the costs of external security measures. SIP both helps communities afford vital protection and sends a strong message that the government stands with at-risk minorities.

Indeed, it’s not just the Jewish community that has benefited from SIP. While our institutions are disproportionately affected by hate crimes, Sikh gurdwaras, Islamic mosques, Hindu temples and Christian churches have also been targets. Without SIP, institutions in these diverse communities would be on their own in financing security upgrades.

CIJA’s priorities are guided by feedback from our community, and we have heard from many across the country that community security is a foremost concern. This is why CIJA recently launched an online campaign to call on the federal government to significantly expand SIP to better protect at-risk communities:

First, the federal government should increase SIP’s budget. In Canada, $1 million is available through SIP to vulnerable communities each year. In comparison, £11 million ($20.4 million) is available in the United Kingdom to secure their synagogues and Jewish day schools alone.

Second, the federal government should allow funds to be used to finance the cost of both external and internal measures such as security guards, interior cameras and access controls. These types of protections are effective but expensive. By helping offset their costs, SIP would prove even more helpful to at-risk communities.

Finally, the federal government should make SIP more accessible to institutions with modest resources, including places of worship that serve smaller or lower-income congregations. At present, SIP includes a 50/50 funding formula that leaves many vulnerable institutions unable to access support through SIP simply because they do not have the capacity to match funds. Unfortunately, these are often the institutions most in need. By amending the program to allow for needs-based approval, more of the most vulnerable Canadians would receive protection.

These are all reasonable requests that are attainable through a concerted advocacy effort on the part of our community. You can join thousands of others across Canada by joining CIJA’s campaign. It will take just two minutes and a visit to cija.ca/sip.

Jason Z. Murray is chair of the Local Partner Council, Pacific Region, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

Seek Peace initiative

Steve McDonald, deputy director of communications and public affairs for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs. (photo from of Steve McDonald)

Every day, a handful of the approximately 500 volunteers at Road to Recovery head to one of the crossing points in Israel, pick up Palestinians who have medical permits for appointments or treatments in Israeli hospitals, and escort them there and back. Entirely volunteer-driven, this is the kind of peaceful bridge-building that rarely makes the media headlines, but that the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs is hoping to highlight through its recently relaunched program, Seek Peace and Pursue It.

“This program is designed to encourage Canadian individuals and organizations who are concerned about the absence of peace in the Holy Land to rethink the issue by engaging in practical, positive initiatives that help build peace from the ground up,” said Steve McDonald, deputy director of communications and public affairs for CIJA. “Rather than getting distracted by destructive initiatives like the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, Road to Recovery is exactly the sort of thing that will bolster Israeli initiatives to bring the two sides together and keep activists focused on positive engagement.”

The idea for Seek Peace was hatched by former CIJA executive Len Rudner in 2012, after the United Church of Canada declared it would boycott Israeli settlements. At that time, CIJA reached out to UCC leaders.

“We told them BDS does nothing to advance peace or improve life for average Palestinians, we don’t think it fulfils your own interest in helping Palestinians,” said McDonald.

The efforts were in vain and the UCC continued to advocate a boycott, something McDonald says was a betrayal of average UCC members in Canada, as well as an undermining of longstanding Jewish-Christian ties in this country.

One of McDonald’s tasks is to develop CIJA’s relationship with Christian churches and leaders in Canada, many of whom are interested in Israel and want to get engaged in peace-building activities. At the end of May, he will deliver a presentation at the Toronto School of Theology to Baptist, Anglican and Catholic representatives. His focus will be on one organization: Hand in Hand, a network of Jewish-Arab integrated bilingual schools focused on mutual recognition, inclusion and equality.

“There’s tremendous interest among some of our Christian partners for this sort of work,” explained McDonald. “When they see we’re pro-Israel but not anti-Palestinian, they are somewhat surprised that the organized Jewish community is so interested in peace. We want to show them there are constructive alternatives to BDS, positive ways we can be helping build peace.”

Seek Peace is not directly about fundraising, but rather about providing a catalogue of positive initiatives. The organizations featured include Heart to Heart, where Jewish and Palestinian Israeli youth live together in a camping environment for three weeks and tackle politics, culture and identity through dialogue. There is Project Rozana, which is about delivering medical access for Palestinian-Israeli children who need pediatric intensive care, and there is Tsofen, which promotes the integration of Israel’s Arab citizens into the high-tech industry. These are just a handful of the many constructive, peace-building programs that Seek Peace is trying to bring to the forefront, organizations doing impressive work that often goes unreported.

Within a few years from now, McDonald said he’d love to see churches and synagogues partner to host events that highlight one of these particular or similar causes.

“My goal would be for this to be taken on at a local and national level by our Christian friends,” he said, “but it’s not specifically for Christians – any community can get involved.”

In Vancouver, the CIJA team already has strong interfaith relationships and is well-positioned to pitch this project to its existing contacts, he added. “I think Vancouver is a place where there could be a lot of appetite for this kind of thing,” he said.

For more information on Seek Peace, visit cija.ca/resource/seek-peace-and-pursue-it.

Lauren Kramer, an award-winning writer and editor, lives in Richmond. To read her work online, visit laurenkramer.net.

Bleak future for Israel

Raphael Hoult, winner of the inaugural Barry Rubin Prize Essay Competition. (photo from Raphael Hoult)

“A Game of Clocks: An Analysis of the Situation in the Middle East and Its Effects on Israel” by Winnipeg’s Raphael Hoult is the winner of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs’ inaugural Barry Rubin Prize Essay Competition.

Hoult, a physics major at the University of Winnipeg in his second year of studies, conjured up a mind-bending theory about the stability of Middle East security and consulted expert sources for his essay.

In physics, Hoult’s interests lie in the field of quantum gravitation, which attempts to combine two major theories – those of general relativity and quantum mechanics.

“These two theories don’t play well together,” said Hoult. “They conflict in places. The biggest place they conflict is in that every force in the universe has been quantized, meaning that we’ve found a very small, discrete package of it in the universe. For example, electromagnetism is delivered by something called a photon. The other forces have something that delivers them, as well. But, with gravity, we’ve found no such thing yet. What we say is we haven’t been able to quantify it, though there are a lot of theories out there for how to solve that problem. There’s string theory. Another is loop quantum gravity, that attempts to bring some parts together.

“I want to help look for a theory of quantum gravity, so we can finally resolve this dilemma … combine the two theories into one bigger theory, a more complete theory. And, hopefully, that will give us a lot more insight into the way gravity works and allow us to do more with our understanding of gravity – to utilize it more, similar to the way our deeper understanding of electricity and magnetism has allowed us to do more intricate electronics in the past couple years.”

According to Hoult, this reconciliation of quantum mechanics and general relativity has been the Holy Grail of physics for the past 50-some years, and solving it will be huge for physicists and the world as we know it.

“The proposed theoretical messenger particle for gravity is the graviton, which is something we’ve not yet observed at all,” he said. “Quantum mechanics requires there to be a graviton…. General relativity in no way makes reference to a graviton.

“The main thing is quantum mechanics works really well with very small things, general relativity works really well for really big things. Things with a lot of mass are usually very large. The problem comes when you have things that are very massive and also very small, such as neutron stars or black holes. These are very dense, have a lot of mass and exert a lot of gravitational force, but they are also very small. In the case of a black hole, they are actually on the atomic level. So, quantum mechanics is very important to the way they work, but general relativity also is in play. When our two theories don’t work and they are supposed to be working at the same time, that’s a problem and something we want to fix.”

In addition to his knowledge of physics, Hoult is also well-versed in Israeli politics. “I’ve actually never taken a political science course at university,” he acknowledged, “but I went to Gray Academy [of Jewish Education in Winnipeg], so I had a very strong basis in knowledge about Israel. I had a good grounding there. I also read the Times of Israel and Haaretz every day.”

When Hoult saw an advertisement for the Barry Rubin Essay Competition on Facebook, it piqued his interest. The contest topic was, “What does the current regional turmoil in the Middle East mean for Israel?”

In his essay, Hoult said, “The three main critical points I talked about were the constancy of Hezbollah, Hamas and Daesh (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS]). I wrote about the fact that Hezbollah is involved in the war in Syria, specifically as affiliates of Bashar Al-Assad. They support him and are fighting on behalf of him. On the flipside, a branch of ISIS, called Al-Wilayat Sinai, is operating in the Sinai Peninsula desert against the Egyptians, making their lives very difficult. They’ve also struck up an alliance with Hamas.”

According to Hoult, the main three players in regards to Israel involve Hezbollah in the north, Hamas in Gaza and Al-Wilayat Sinai (Daesh) in the south. Hoult does not delve into the Iranian threat in his essay, apart from Iran’s role in supporting these groups.

“My hypothesis was that these three forces are connected to one another,” he said. “And, because of the ongoing campaign against ISIS, my hypothesis is that, as soon as that campaign succeeds and breaks down ISIS, all hell will break loose for Israel.”

Hoult explained that this theory takes into account Hezbollah’s huge military arsenal, which is estimated at around 100,000 rockets, and their ability to hit every point in Israel from Metula to Eilat, combined with the southern threat from Hamas and from the Al-Wilayat Sinai, which, so far, has been mainly fighting the Egyptians.

“Once ISIS collapses in the north, the Al-Wilayat Sinai … will suddenly be like a tentacle that has been cut off from the squid,” he said. “It will have no control and will be in desperate throes to stay alive, making it likely that it will involve at least a couple cross-border raids. If those involve any Israeli deaths, it will force Israel to respond, which is an issue, due to the fact that Israel can’t cross the border without Egyptian permission.

“There is also the fact that Hamas is having another military build-up,” he added.

Hoult predicts this will likely lead to another war in 2017 and, once that war is over, he said Hezbollah would have had ample time to gather its troops and possibly attack Israel from the north. “This is not a good thing for Israel, as Hezbollah is dead set on destroying Israel if they can,” he said.

As to why Hoult thinks his essay was selected as the winner, he said he is not sure, although he imagines it may have “had something to do with all the sources cited, creating a compelling likelihood of my hypotheses coming true.”

One of his many concerns is that “the primary backer of Hezbollah and Hamas is Iran. Iran has just had billions of dollars unlocked, due to the nuclear deal … which I’m not going to condemn or support, though I’m a little bit skeptical of whether or not unlocking those funds was a good thing.”

Rebeca Kuropatwa is a Winnipeg freelance writer.