Jagmeet Singh

United against antisemitism

Among those on stage as Irwin Cotler received a lifetime achievement award from the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs last month were, left to right, Yves-François Blanchet (Bloc Quebecois leader), Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Ariela and Irwin Cotler, David Posluns (one of the event co-chairs), Steven Kroft (one of the event co-chairs), Pierre Poilievre (Conservative Party leader) and Shimon Koffler Fogel (head of CIJA). (photo by Dave Gordon)

It was a conference months in the making, but Antisemitism: Face It, Fight It took on heightened poignancy in light of the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks on Israel and the subsequent spike in Jew-hatred globally.

Produced by Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), the conference took place in Ottawa Oct. 16 and 17. Speakers included activists, politicians, experts and analysts on antisemitism. In attendance were 250 student leaders and some 600 others, Jews and non-Jews, according to organizers.

Shimon Koffler Fogel, chief executive officer of CIJA, noted there was an outpouring of support from the major political party leaders, as well as from minority, faith and other groups – “a uniform conclusion about Hamas and their actions, and we should embrace that.”

This message was echoed throughout the two days of the conference.

“It can’t just be Jews who talk about the rise of antisemitism. It can’t just be Muslims that talk about anti-Muslim hate,” said Farah Pandith, senior advisor to the Anti-Defamation League. “It can’t be. Whether we are talking about LGBTQ or issues of heritage or gender, we’ve had to stand up for each other. As a Muslim, it’s what my religion tells me I must do for the other.”

Former premier of Alberta Jason Kenney, who was elected as an MP in 1997, said he became a supporter of the Jewish people after the “unravelling of the Oslo process,” and learning of the antisemitism coming from Palestinian mosques and leaders.

“Do not take for granted the positions being expressed here in Ottawa today,” said Kenney. “You must redouble your efforts intelligently to build coalitions across the pluralism of this country, and to be a voice of clarity and courage with our political leadership.” Citing examples of possible coalitions, he told the JI that “the Jewish community has to continue to reach out to Muslim and other communities, find allies.”

“I know we can best tackle what we are seeing when we work together, when we are not siloed,” said Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Arif Virani, an Ismaili Muslim, in his speech. “Hatred and intolerance against any minority community is a risk to every minority community. That’s why groups promoting equity have to have each other’s backs.”

Emily Schrader, digital strategist and senior correspondent of Ynet News, observed, “We see now that all over the world there are Iranians organizing and participating in rallies to support Israel … despite knowing that the Iranian regime is the biggest supporter of Hamas. The Iranian people have a complete rejection of the regime.”

Canadian human rights advocate Irwin Cotler received a lifetime achievement award from CIJA “in recognition of his enduring commitment to the pursuit of justice” and “the advancement of human rights for the world’s most vulnerable and oppressed.”

In his acceptance speech, Cotler applauded the multi-partisan groups standing up against antisemitism, “who heed this call to action, where we act in concert on behalf of our common humanity.”

Cotler was a parliamentarian from 1999 to 2015 and is a former minister of justice. Over the course of his legal career, he represented clients such as Natan Sharansky and Nelson Mandela. Until recently, he was the government’s special envoy on antisemitism. He said “2023 is not 1943” and “there is a Jewish state as an antidote to Jewish powerlessness.”

“In 1943,” he said, “the Jews could not get a meeting with the president of the United States, and, in 2023, the president has been a leader in calling out this [Hamas’s] moral evil.”

Cotler told the JI that young Jews should bravely step forward to “call out antisemitism when they see it, unmask it, expose it.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called out Hamas as a “terrorist organization that launched an attack of unspeakable brutality” and said “Canada supports Israel’s right to defend itself in accordance with international law.” He said the only thing Hamas stands for is “more suffering for Israeli and Palestinian civilians.”

In addressing “scary rising antisemitism,” Trudeau said “families are worried about what they face if they go to synagogue, and I’m sure you are all seeing hateful rhetoric online.” He ended by saying, in Hebrew, “gam zu l’avor” – “this too shall pass.”

Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre, head of the Conservative Party, vowed that his party would stand with Israel, and acknowledged the fears of many Jewish Canadians. About Oct. 7, he said, “the terrorists that carried out this attack did so as part of a deliberate agenda: to maximize bloodshed not only of the Jewish people, but actually to maximize the bloodshed of Palestinians and Muslims as well. These are the actions of sadistic, criminal terrorists who can only be defeated and not negotiated with.”

Poilievre added that, especially in light of Iran’s fingerprints being on the attacks, governments must “respond with crippling sanctions – the strongest legal action – and by criminalizing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.”

Jagmeet Singh, leader of the New Democratic Party, said, “These are horrific attacks and we strongly condemn them. There is no place in our world for terrorism. The international community must work together to ensure that there is an end to terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.”

Singh acknowledged that Jews in Canada are “deeply afraid” and “worried about their safety.”

“It’s wrong and I’m deeply sorry it’s happening,” he said.

In noting pro-Hamas rallies around the world, Singh said, “We’ve seen horrible celebrations for the attacks on Israelis civilians. This is abhorrent. This is antisemitism. Violence against civilians is never justified.”

He concluded: “I know that not everyone will agree with our position on a ceasefire, but I believe the only way to peace is to talk to each other.”

Historian and author Gil Troy encouraged the audience to not forget the courage of “our citizen’s army, our plainclothes commandos, our kibbutzim Rambos and our army,” who saved innocents from much worse.

“When I heard these stories, I shift[ed] from the victim mentality to the Zionist mentality. The Zionist is one that says ‘yes, we sometimes suffer,’ but we are not passive and we are not victims. The Zionist story says we are not alone. We can’t let them win.”

Calgary-based communications consultant Emile Scheffel, who is not-Jewish, told the JI: “History shows that those who threaten the Jewish people are enemies of freedom and dignity for the rest of us as well. I stand with Israel because the Jewish state embodies the values of freedom, democracy and pluralism that are important to me.”

He added, “the conference was an important call to action for non-Jews to stand with our Jewish friends and neighbours in opposing hatred and discrimination. A united front is essential to making sure that antisemitism doesn’t gain any more ground in Canada, and that Jewish Canadians can live in peace and security.”

Attendee Nika Jabiyeva, member of the Network of Azerbaijani Canadians, said she was proud to “stand against hate, shoulder to shoulder with our friends in the Jewish community and many multifaith allies.”

“Our voices carry more weight when we speak up for one another,” she said, “especially during trying times.”

Dave Gordon is a Toronto-based freelance writer whose work has appeared in more than 100 publications around the world. His website is davegordonwrites.com.

Extremism not helpful

Over the Labour Day weekend, while many Canadians were soaking up the declining rays of summer or doing last-minute back-to-school shopping, Middle East politics eclipsed everything else – well, for those of us who track these things closely, which, it turns out includes Jagmeet Singh, leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party.

In fairness, it is not clear when Singh hit send on an email that made the rounds over the holiday weekend. But the contents led the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs to send out not one but two urgent emails on the issue, both of which included the word “outraged” in the subject line.

And “outrage” is a fair reaction to the contents of Singh’s missive.

“We believe Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories is at the centre of the challenges facing the Palestinian and Israeli people,” wrote Singh. This essentialist view ignores the reality that the occupation continues due to a complex interplay between anti-Israel terrorism, a lack of political will, and intractability around a two-state solution or some other coexistence plan that would lead to greater peace, which includes a lack of willingness to coexist from factions on both sides of the conflict.

“We all want to see a future where Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side, in peace,” Singh writes. But then he goes on to outline a list of grievances that places responsibility only on Israelis and which, therefore, is unlikely to do anything to realize such a future.

The demands include that the Canadian government increase funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, “which supports Palestinian refugees.” The letter makes no reference to the controversial nature of UNRWA’s definition of refugees, which has refugee status passing down generations, thereby continually increasing their number, perpetuating rather than ameliorating the problem. Nor does the NDP letter mention the organization’s Palestinian education curriculum, which contains antisemitic elements that directly impede any progress towards peace in the region; allegations of corruption and mismanagement of the agency; and even UNWRA’s witting or unwitting aid of the terrorist group Hamas, with tunnels reportedly being found under UNRWA schools and rockets stored on their premises. Instead, the letter calls on Canada to “condemn the Israeli government’s attacks on civil society in Israel and Palestine, including the recent designation of six Palestinian human rights groups as ‘terrorist.’”

There are wishes for “peace in Israel and Palestine” in the NDP letter, but the lack of peace is blamed solely on one side, without acknowledging the violence and harms inflicted on Israelis. The fundamental fact of the issue is that no blatantly one-sided position will make things better for either Palestinians or Israelis and any position that places all the blame on one side will not lead to a resolution. Such a stance will only perpetuate conflict. Peace and coexistence in that region will depend on compromise on both sides.

In the larger scheme of world events, an imbalanced missive from the leader of a Canadian political party is largely irrelevant. Singh’s catalogue of blame will move the dial in Israel and Palestine not an inch. What it does is inflame the issue here at home and reinforce the trend in Canadian politics that sees this issue as a political football. At the same time as there are legitimate and important critiques of Israel’s behaviour and treatment of Palestinians, particularly those under occupation, Jewish self-determination should not be anyone’s campaign talking point.

There is a lesson here for those who support Israel, too. There is a strain that sees Israel supporters as more moral, more fair and more realistic than the activists who march against “apartheid,” “genocide” and what Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas recently called “50 holocausts” against Palestinians. However, the incessant and dishonourable contesting of the very existence of Palestinian people – if you haven’t seen it, you’re not on Jewish social media – does nothing to advance the cause of Jewish self-determination or end the human suffering or move anyone towards peace.

Extremism is not a Canadian value, nor a Jewish one – and it will not result in an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Nor will it solve any of the countless challenges we are facing around the world. We need to resist the attraction of simplistic solutions to complex human problems. We need to do, think and behave better. And we need to demand that our leaders to do so, as well.

JSA takes stock of the year

The Jewish Seniors Alliance of Greater Vancouver’s annual general meeting took place on Sept. 23, with a few board members in the sukkah at Congregation Beth Israel and many others participating on Zoom.

Gyda Chud, co-president of JSA, welcomed everyone, acknowledging that the meeting was taking place on unceded Indigenous territory and expressing hope in the moving forward of truth and reconciliation. She also called for a moment of silence for JSA supporters who had passed away during the past year.

This being the second year that JSA members were unable to celebrate together with a dinner and the recognition of volunteers who have contributed to the well-being of older adults, Chud expressed the wish that, next year, we would all be able to break bread together.

Rabbi Adam Stein, associate rabbi of Beth Israel, who is on the board of JSA, said the blessing for sitting in the sukkah and spoke about Sukkot. Pointing to the different parts of the lulav and etrog, he said the myrtle could be compared to an eye, the willow to a mouth, the palm to a human body and the etrog to a heart. This personifies the work of JSA and its volunteers, he said, helping them physically and spiritually, to be seen (myrtle), to be heard (willow), to stand up tall (palm) and to have heart in all they do.

The minutes of the past meeting and the agenda for the present meeting were accepted. Treasurer Alan Marchant presented the financial report, prepared by J. Stein & Associates, noting that the wage subsidies from the government had been helpful.

Larry Shapiro, JSA co-president, presented the presidents’ report. JSA continued to deliver services in spite of the difficulties of COVID, and re-organized as necessary, he said.

He and Chud look forward to a third year of working together, Shapiro added, and he thanked the board, staff, committee chairs and all of JSA’s supporters for their work.

The chairs of the various committees then presented their reports, which are available in full on the JSA’s website, jsalliance.org.

The report of peer support services, which is chaired by Rita Roling, was presented by Chud. All of the services had to be delivered by phone or online. Staff were trained on Zoom so that weekly webinars for volunteer development could be provided. Peer services also held three picnics in the park, as an outdoor barbecue. Margot Beauchamp was thanked for the quality assurance reports to Vancouver Coastal Health.

Tammi Belfer spoke for the communications committee. She thanked Rochelle Garfinkel, Jenn Propp and Liz Azeroual for their help in producing a monthly newsletter with the goal of informing and educating the community of the ongoing work of JSA.

Lyle Pullan then reported for the membership committee. JSA has 550 supporters, he said, as well as 146 life members.

In discussing the fundraising, Serge Haber emphasized the help that various foundations have given to JSA over the years.

I gave the report for the program committee. As in past years, this committee is once again co-hosting the Empowerment Series with other seniors organizations in the community. This year, the theme is “Be Inspired.” The committee also puts on two forums, one in the fall and one in the spring.

Editor Dolores Luber noted that Senior Line is now a 40-page magazine, completely written by volunteers. She thanked Propp for her graphic design work and all of the writers and readers. Anyone can sponsor a page in the publication, she said.

Tony DuMoulin of the advocacy committee highlighted the paper they produced on long-term care, as well as the all-candidates meeting that JSA co-sponsored with a number of other seniors groups. He thanked Beauchamp for her work with the committee. And one of the committee’s initiatives for the coming year – a seniors advocacy council to combat ageism – was put to a vote and the resolution passed.

This was followed by the nomination committee’s report, presented by Ken Levitt. Motions to fix the number of directors at 21 for the coming year and approve the nomination slate were passed.

A short video about the peer support program concluded the meeting, which was organized by Tamara Frankel and Tammi Belfer, with technical support from Marchant and other help from JSA staff.

Shanie Levin is program coordinator for Jewish Seniors Alliance and on the editorial board of Senior Line magazine.

Vibrant democracies

On Monday, Canada and Israel each embarked on a new adventure in governance. Here at home, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal party had a surprisingly robust showing in the federal election, winning the irrefutable right to form a minority government, or to form a coalition of some description.

The Liberals’ relatively strong showing – 157 seats to Andrew Scheer’s 121; just 13 short of a majority – opens the door for a government with Jagmeet Singh’s New Democrats holding a balance of power. Just a few days before the election, polls suggested a race so tight, and with the Bloc Quebecois and NDP taking so many seats, that any configuration to reach the magic 170 number would have required not two parties, but three. That complicated scenario was averted, leaving the Liberals free to face the House with either a formal agreement with the NDP or a tacit knowledge that the now-fourth party is in no financial position to return hastily to the election battlefield.

In Israel Monday, President Reuven Rivlin called on Blue and White leader Benny Gantz to attempt to form a government after incumbent Binyamin Netanyahu failed to do so after the second inconclusive election this year. Gantz has said he hopes to form a “liberal unity government,” but that is as challenging as Netanyahu’s failed effort to coalesce a majority. He may be hoping that, if Netanyahu is indicted in the coming days, Likud under a new leader might be a viable partner – or perhaps some MKs unfettered from Netanyahu’s long years of leadership will break away and form a faction to join Gantz. Another plan has Gantz propping up Netanyahu unless and until Netanyahu is charged, at which point Gantz would stand up as prime minister, which seems a strange compromise with a tarnished leader. As usual in Israeli politics, there are a vast number of moving parts.

Multiple moving parts is less typical of Canadian politics, where our tendency toward majority governments typically sequesters any moving parts in the all-powerful Prime Minister’s Office. Not so during a minority Parliament, when individual MPs on all sides are able to wield power in ways they can only dream of in a majority scenario.

In what must be a jagged pill for the once and future prime minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould, whose testimony about Trudeau’s treatment of her was the single most detrimental arrow in Trudeau’s reelection armour, was herself reelected as an independent in Vancouver Granville. A large number of Jewish British Columbians, now, are represented in Parliament by an individual who belongs to no party. This will be fascinating to watch in many respects, not least how she pursues politics from the opposition benches as the SNC-Lavalin affair continues to percolate.

Other sidebars in the result include the scuttled effort by a leading anti-Israel figure to re-enter Parliament. Svend Robinson, who, during 25 years in Parliament, was one of Canada’s most vociferous voices against Israel, threw his hat back in the ring but came up short in Burnaby North-Seymour – being narrowly defeated by the incumbent Liberal despite this being ground zero in the battle over the Liberals’ Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

More notably, Maxime Bernier, leader of the nascent People’s Party, lost his own seat in Quebec. His party made effectively no impact anywhere, sending the hopeful sign that messages of populist xenophobia that seem to be resonating elsewhere in the world still fall largely on deaf ears, at least electorally, here.

Canada will almost certainly have an easier time forming a government than Israel will but, in both cases, the drama plays out against the backdrop of healthy, vibrant, disputatious democratic systems. No matter what the outcomes, we should be thankful for that.

Religion and politicians

In an interview with the CBC last week, federal Green party leader Elizabeth May was asked who her personal hero is. She responded, “Jesus Christ.” Almost immediately, she apologized, saying that she had responded while failing to “self-edit.”

Canadians, by and large, are not so open to publicly discussing matters like religion, politics or other things that could be perceived as controversial. But political leaders should be prepared to discuss things in their lives that have shaped them. In fact, religion seems likely to be more central in this election than it has been in decades.

New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh felt compelled to address his religion in an ad (notably aimed at Quebec voters) about how his identity as a Sikh influences his worldview.

While Quebec’s Bill 21, which bans the display of religious symbolism in the public service, means Singh would not be permitted to teach in the province or hold certain roles in the civil service, he managed to finesse the issue quite neatly. He found a sort of common ground by acknowledging that Bill 21 is an effort by Quebecers to protect and preserve their identity, the importance of which he acknowledged paralleled his own pride in his identity and the importance it holds in his life.

Over the weekend, he also managed to continue discussing the topic while having a few laughs, which rarely hurts. Singh, who has struggled to connect with voters in the pre-election period, may come out of this round a winner by making Quebec voters and other Canadians take a good look at him for the first time.

Meanwhile, Liberals are trying to portray Conservative party leader Andrew Scheer as having a hidden agenda, based on his Catholic religious beliefs, on issues like reproductive freedom and equal marriage.

Scheer and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, both Catholics, have taken similar approaches, asserting that their religious views will not dictate party or government policies. However, there is probably a different calculation being made on each side. Trudeau’s policies are probably more liberal than the teachings of his church, so segmenting the two prevents an undesirable schism with his church. Scheer is probably calculating that his beliefs in the teachings of his church are not shared by the majority of voters; therefore, segregating his political and religious positions may have a hint of political expediency. In both cases, Trudeau and Scheer have been vague and both have attempted to move past the topic. (This is tougher for Scheer, whose grassroots supporters, in many cases, are more religiously conservative than the average voter. Working on not alienating them while courting middle-of-the-road voters places him in a bit of a bind.)

The reticence by Trudeau and Scheer to enthusiastically discuss their religious views, and May’s odd flip-flop on Jesus, may be a consequence of a root misunderstanding around the separation of church and state: the concept is that religious institutions should not unduly influence, or be influenced by, governments. It does not mean that individual elected officials should neuter their religious views as they cross the threshold into the legislature. If one’s deeply held religious beliefs and values are what make up a person’s identity, worldview and morality, these are things that should very much be on the table for people seeking the public’s trust. By example, there is plenty in biblical literature that May could have cited as motivators for her environmental priorities. That kind of openness would be refreshing. Singh tried it. We’ll see what happens.

If religious adherence is an important part of who a candidate is, it would be nice to think that they would not be embarrassed or shy to share these perspectives with us. Canadians would perhaps understand our leaders better – including when they say that they personally believe one thing but would not legislate it on the country, which is an entirely legitimate position.

What likely makes voters suspicious or skeptical is when a politician seems to be hiding something, is ambiguous about how their beliefs might guide policy positions, or is ashamed of who they are.