Palestine

A better future possible

This feels like a turning point. Few people who observe international affairs, especially in the Middle East, would doubt that the conclusion of the two-year-long war means a significant change in the dynamics of the region.

It is an understatement to say that wars cause upheaval. The result of any war is always catastrophic death and destruction. But wars also, by definition, upend status quos.

The First World War decisively ended the age of empires. The Second World War ushered in, among much else, a new world order including the concept of universal human rights.

Every war, among its other consequences, is like throwing a deck of cards in the air. What emerges in the aftermath is to some extent beyond the control of any of the belligerents, including the victors (such as there are ever true victors in war).

In Israeli history, it has sometimes seemed as though a war ends and things return to the status quo ante. Israeli-Arab wars have ended before with little or no decisive change in the broader context of conflict. New wars, sadly, have always erupted. Perhaps the end of the Gaza war will usher in a time of changed dynamics or maybe the region will revert to its perpetual bottom line of Zionists-versus-anti-Zionists and little will change. The eight-decade battle over Israel’s right to exist is unlikely to be conclusively settled, whether or not the current ceasefire holds.

This feels different, though, in many ways.

The global engagement with this particular conflict – the diplomatic condemnations, the isolation of Israel, the worldwide street protests, the systematic boycotts of Israelis and Jews, the raging antisemitism that paralleled it – set this war apart from others of the past. One thing almost all Jews are probably watching closely is whether the easing of military tensions in the Middle East leads to an easing of antisemitic tensions worldwide. Many of us hold our breath awaiting that verdict.

The US administration plays a distinct wild card. It helped broker the ceasefire, but also has floated some provocative ideas of how to rebuild Gaza.

The talk about rebuilding Gaza, to which some European powers have committed and to which Arab states have given at least lip-service, is a physical necessity. As formidable as that reconstruction process will be, a moral and political rebuilding will be far more daunting. “De-Hamas-ification,” to update a term from a previous war, is a stated objective of Israel and its supporters. But, as some commentators have noted, Hamas may be as much a symptom of an extremist intolerance in elements of Palestinian society as a cause. This is likely particularly true without broad and sustained supports for Palestinian voices and aspirations that are anti-authoritarian or desiring of coexistence or peace with Israel. Militaries can be defeated perhaps more easily than some of the tenacious ideas that they represent.

Additionally, it will be fascinating to see whether the world, having made Gaza the almost singular focus of international affairs for the past two years, will now take any responsibility for ensuring the safety and prosperity of the Palestinian people, or whether we will collectively abandon them again until the next catastrophe reawakens our sense of humanitarianism.

Despite the Madison Avenue mantra, “new” does not always mean “improved.” Sometimes, things can change for the worse. But this does seem like a moment of opportunity.

On the one hand, it has become clear that “From the river to the sea …” is not a practical strategy. On the other, for those who seek peace, we have understood that we are not powerless witnesses to history. Each of us, in our way, has influence. Many erstwhile apolitical people have been motivated to action, to engage in dialogue across social and political boundaries, and to be part of the efforts to bring about a better life for all sides.

Now that the immediate war is over, we should hope coming together is possible among those of differing perspectives to advance a future of mutual benefit. What we do now, as individuals, as countries, as Jews, as humans, and in whatever context we act and whatever forms our actions take, can have a powerful impact on what happens next.

Canada recognizes Palestine

On Sunday, Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a statement on Canada’s recognition of Palestine as a state.

“Recognizing the state of Palestine, led by the Palestinian Authority, empowers those who seek peaceful coexistence and the end of Hamas,” said Carney. “This in no way legitimizes terrorism, nor is it any reward for it. Furthermore, it in no way compromises Canada’s steadfast support for the state of Israel, its people and their security – security that can only ultimately be guaranteed through the achievement of a comprehensive two-state solution.”

photo - Prime Minister Mark Carney — Prime Minister Mark Carney announced on Sunday that Canada would recognize Palestine as a state. *(photo from Office of the Prime Minister)*

Carney noted: “Since 1947, it has been the policy of every Canadian government to support a two-state solution for lasting peace in the Middle East.” He said there was an “expectation that this outcome would be eventually achieved as part of a negotiated settlement,” but “this possibility has been steadily and gravely eroded” by several factors.

In addition to other criticisms of both Hamas and Israel, Carney lists the “pervasive threat of Hamas terrorism to Israel and its people, culminating in the heinous terrorist attack of Oct. 7, 2023,” and Hamas’s rejection of Israel’s right to exist; “accelerated settlement building across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, while settler violence against Palestinians has soared”; “the E1 Settlement Plan and this year’s vote by the Knesset calling for the annexation of the West Bank”; and the “Israeli government’s contribution to the humanitarian disaster in Gaza, including by impeding access to food and other essential humanitarian supplies.”

Carney said the Palestinian Authority “has provided direct commitments to Canada and the international community on much-needed reforms, including to fundamentally reform its governance, to hold general elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part, and to demilitarize the Palestinian state.”

In reaction to the prime minister’s Sept. 21 statement, Noah Shack, chief executive officer of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, said, “Hamas is not an isolated phenomenon. It is a violent manifestation of the rejection of the right of the Jewish people to a state in our ancestral home – a rejection that runs deep within Palestinian society.

“As Prime Minister Carney himself has noted, a Palestinian state must be a Zionist state. Today’s announcement undermines that objective and gives Hamas and other Palestinian rejectionists a sense of victory. This will only make it harder to secure the release of hostages and build a better future for Israelis and Palestinians.”

Shack acknowledged that, while the “announcement does not come as a surprise, the details are important. The government has stated that, while it is extending recognition, normalization of relations with a ‘state of Palestine’ is an ongoing, long-term process…. We will argue that this must not proceed so long as hostages are in tunnels, Hamas remains in power and the Palestinian leadership rejects Israel’s existence as a Jewish state.

“And we will continue,” said Shack, “to make it clear that, with anti-Jewish hate escalating, our government must recognize the unintended effect foreign policy has on the climate in our own country.”

B’nai Brith Canada also issued a response to Carney’s statement.

“The PA has shown, time and again, that it cannot be trusted,” said Richard Robertson, director of research and advocacy for B’nai Brith Canada. “It is unable to govern the Palestinian Territories and has repeatedly demonstrated it is unwilling to deliver on the very commitments upon which Canada’s recognition is supposed to be predicated.

“The commitments include democratic reform, free and fair elections in 2026 without Hamas, and the full demilitarization of the Palestinian Territories.

“None of these conditions have been met. Hamas continues to arm itself, hold hostages and carry out terror attacks. Recognition under these circumstances does not bring us any closer to lasting peace, it only further compromises the prospect of a two-state solution.”

Robertson said the “government has chosen appeasement over principle.”

On Sunday, the United Kingdom, Australia and Portugal made similar announcements to that of Canada. Reaction from Israel was critical.

“After the atrocities of Oct. 7, while Hamas continues its campaign of terror, and while it continues to cruelly hold 48 hostages in the tunnels and dungeons of Gaza, the recognition of a Palestinian state by some nations today is, not surprisingly, cheered by Hamas,” wrote Israel’s President Isaac Herzog in an X post.

“It will not help one Palestinian, it won’t help free one hostage, and it will not help us reach any settlement between Israelis and Palestinians. It will only embolden the forces of darkness.

“This is a sad day for those who seek true peace,” he concluded.

Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said he will release a formal response after he returns from the United States. However, in a widely reported Hebrew-language video statement, he said, “I have a clear message to those leaders who recognize a Palestinian state after the horrific massacre on Oct. 7 – you are handing a huge reward to terror.

“It will not happen,” he added. “A Palestinian state will not be established west of the Jordan.”

According to various news reports, Hamas did indeed applaud the recognition announcements, as did the Palestinian Authority.

Harper speaks at local event

At the Canadian Shaare Zedek Hospital Foundation (CSZHF) event on Sept. 7, which marked the foundation’s 50th anniversary: left to right, Col. Ilan Or, Israeli defence attaché to Canada; Rafi Yablonsky, CSZHF national director; Dr. Marla Gordon, CSZHF Western region board member; Dr. Arthur Dodek, CSZHF Western region board member; former prime minister Stephen Harper; Dr. Robert Krell, 2025 Western Region recipient of the Kurt and Edith Rothschild Humanitarian Award; Rabbi Andrew Rosenblatt of Schara Tzedeck Synagogue; Ilan Pilo, CSZHF Western Canada director; and Sam Sapera, CSZHF board chair. (photo by Alina Ilyasova)

Former prime minister Stephen Harper was on friendly ground when he addressed a packed sanctuary at Congregation Schara Tzedeck earlier this month. The former Conservative leader, who led the country from 2006 to 2015, is known as a stalwart ally of Israel and the audience of mostly Jewish Vancouverites welcomed him heartily.

The Sept. 7 event was the first fundraising gala for the newly formed Western region of the Canadian Shaare Zedek Hospital Foundation. The event and the surrounding campaign succeeded in funding nine incubators for the hospital’s pediatric department.

The event featured Harper in conversation with former BC premier Gordon Campbell, who told the audience that, of the prime ministers he served with concurrently when he was premier from 2001 to 2011, Harper was his favourite.

Harper said people ask him why he supports Israel so strongly.

“Has it got to do with religion or your view of the Jewish community?” he asked rhetorically. “I mean, there are a million reasons, but, as prime minister of Canada, the reasons were really simple. Here is this one country in the Middle East that shares our values and that is a friend of this country – and the people who are the enemies of that country are enemies of this country.”

Harper told the audience that there are a lot of loud voices condemning Israel and threatening Jewish Canadians, but, he said, they are not unanimous. “There are still a lot of people in this country that understand the value of our Jewish community, that are friends of the state of Israel, and that thank you for everything you do,” he said.

Harper lauded Israel for its actions to set back Iran’s nuclear program, arguing that the brief Israel-Iran conflict has positively realigned the region. People had warned that Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear capability was a dangerous escalation that could “lead to World War Three,” he said.

“We know that not only was [the nuclear program] set back considerably, but the United States and Israel sent a real message that, if we see it again, we’re going to do the same thing again.”

The results of the Israeli actions were overwhelmingly positive, Harper said. There was a very limited Iranian response – and, notably, no other nations coming to Iran’s aid, he said.

There were broader repercussions around Israel’s action against Iran and in the larger regional conflict, he added. Hezbollah was decapitated and the Lebanese government is now trying to push Hezbollah out. Hezbollah’s allies in Syria lost power. Hamas is massively degraded.

Campbell expressed dismay at Prime Minister Mark Carney’s statement that Canada would recognize Palestinian statehood at the United Nations if the Palestinians meet a number of conditions.

“My problem with that … the Palestinian Authority has never done one of the things that the prime minister said,” Campbell said.

“I’m trying to give the new government a chance,” Harper replied, calling the Carney government a “kind of improvement” on the previous administration. “The only interpretation you can put on it is in fact rewarding the events of Oct. 7th.”

Harper said he cannot recall any precedent for Canada, or any other country, recognizing a state that does not exist.

“But, on top of that,” he said, “Who exactly are you? … There is no leadership among the Palestinian populations, including the [Palestinian Authority], that actually unequivocally recognizes the right of a Jewish state to exist. It’s great to say, ‘I favour theoretically a two-state solution,’ but the problem is this other state would be a state that does not support a two-state solution. You’d actually be moving further away from that objective.”

While Israel’s military actions have improved the geopolitical situation in the Middle East, Harper acknowledged there has been a concurrent spike in antisemitism in Canada.

“I really feel a lot of sympathy for ordinary Jewish people who face this in their private [and] professional lives and feel intimidated,” he said. “I guess that the only advice I can give you is to be resolute.… You can’t let those occasions slip. You can’t let them go by.”

Harper said he has been accused of dismissing criticism of Israel as antisemitic, an assertion he rejects.

“Being opposed to policy of the government of Israel is not antisemitic,” he said. “But being opposed to Israel because it is the only Jewish state in the world is the definition of antisemitism.”

Harper spoke, as he has previously to Jewish audiences, of his father, Joseph, who came of age during the Second World War, when the world was existentially threatened by fascism.

“One of the consequences of that is he grew up just as a very determined opponent of antisemitism in a period – we’re talking the ’40s, ’50s – where some of these things were expressed openly. He was very vocal in opposing that. And, frankly, he is just turning over in his grave watching some of what is happening today.”

Despite almost a decade out of office, the former Conservative prime minister did not shy away from politics, crediting the Liberal party with running an excellent campaign earlier this year and identifying shortcomings in the Conservative party’s approach.

Harper cited Donald Trump’s intervention in the campaign as a factor and anxieties around the Canada-US relationship for upending conventional wisdom, including polls that had predicted a Conservative landslide before former prime minister Justin Trudeau resigned.

“I do think the [Conservative] party has to take a hard look at what went right and what went wrong,” said Harper. “The Liberals displayed incredible tactical flexibility, and we did not show the same level of flexibility.”

Of the Conservatives, he said: “We ran a very principled campaign, but we need to show a lot more adaptability when circumstances change.”

Harper and Campbell also addressed economic issues. The former prime minister said the challenges presented by the current American administration are a chance to diversify Canada’s trade relationships.

“If we have an opportunity to be a genuine globally connected economy, instead of just kind of an economic appendage to the United States, which in some ways we have become, I [see] opportunity,” he said.

Both Harper and Campbell, in their time, were advocates for the economic benefits of resource extraction.

“Resources are not the only thing we have, but it’s a big, big comparative advantage,” Harper said. “We’re the country that has an unlimited range of natural resources in a rule-of-law environment, far removed from conflict zones. Do you know how rare that is in the world when it comes to vital resources? And that’s what we have. And we’re not getting them out of the ground, and we’re not getting them around the world.… We’ve got to get our energy to Asia. We’ve got to get our energy to Europe.… It will bring billions of dollars into Canada, create thousands and thousands of jobs in Canada. We are up against the clock, and the clock doesn’t care much about us.”

The Sept. 7 program began with a video showcasing Shaare Zedek Hospital’s achievements in maternal and neonatal care, as well as the range of advanced medical procedures for which the hospital is known. The religious and ethnic diversity of the hospital’s staff and patients is a particular source of pride for the facility’s leadership and their Canadian supporters.

Harper spoke highly of the hospital, which treats more than a million patients a year.

“The Shaare Zedek Hospital is, to me, emblematic of just so much of what has made Israel a remarkable country,” he said. “[It has] become a world-leading institution that services people beyond politics, race, religion, ethnicity … just a tremendous institution.”

The event was presented by the Canadian Shaare Zedek Hospital Foundation in partnership with the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver, Congregation Schara Tzedeck, the Jewish Independent and the Jewish Medical Association of British Columbia. Organizers expressed special thanks to CJPAC, the Canadian Jewish Political Affairs Committee, for their community support.

Ilan Pilo, Western Canada executive for Canadian Shaare Zedek Hospital Foundation, announced the success of the event, which resulted in funding for nine “Giraffe” incubators – each one costing $50,000 – for the hospital where 22,000 Israeli babies are born annually.

Dr. Robert Krell was awarded the Kurt and Edith Rothschild Humanitarian Award. (See jewishindependent.ca/harper-speaks-at-gala.) The award was presented by Dr. Arthur Dodek, a member of the board of the Jewish Medical Association and of the CSZHF, and Sam Sapera, chair of the board of the CSZHF, which marks its 50th anniversary this year.

The event was co-emceed by the Jewish Medical Association’s Dr. Marla Gordon and Zach Segal, who was a Conservative candidate in this year’s federal election.

Flawed drama popular

A scene from Annemarie Jacir’s Palestine 36, which screens at the Vancouver International Film Festival Oct. 9-10. (still from film)

Bethlehem-born filmmaker Annemarie Jacir’s historical epic Palestine 36 had its world premiere Sept. 5 at the Toronto International Film Festival. It screens at the Vancouver International Film Festival Oct. 9-10.

While Jacir is an accomplished filmmaker and spokesperson for her people, her flawed drama is unlikely to bring clarity to events then – or now.

Shot in Israel, the West Bank and Jordan, and incorporating colourized archival footage from the 1930s, Palestine 36 tells the story of the Arab Revolt against the British Mandate from 1936 to 1939 through the eyes of Yusuf, played by Karim Daoud Ananya. Other stars include Jeremy Irons, Hiam Abbass and Liam Cunningham.

Depicted in Palestine 36 are characters like British High Commissioner Sir Arthur Wauchope and anti-insurgency experts Maj.-Gen. Orde Wingate and Sir Charles Tegart. Alas, they are all depicted as cartoon characters protecting Britain’s imperial interests even as they violently suppress the revolt and implement the emergency measures acts still used in Israel today. While Wingate was a Bible-quoting, onion-chomping eccentric, Jacir’s depiction of his behaviour and absurd haircut are egregious.

What struck this reviewer most was the lack of nuance about Arab society in 1930s Palestine. (At the time, Jews called themselves Palestinians while Arabs avoided that name.) The country’s foremost leader in the years before the bloody revolt, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, does not appear in the film. Nor does rebel leader Fawzi al-Qawukji. Both escaped the British dragnet and made their way to Iraq, where they staged a pro-Nazi coup in 1941, then fled to Berlin during the war. Their bitter rivalry is well documented.

Since neither man graced Jacir’s film, there was no need to explain the clan divisions, mutual contempt and assassinations that characterized Palestine and prevented the country’s Arabs from uniting. A militant Muslim triumphalist and genocidaire, al-Husseini aimed to destroy Palestine’s Sunday People once he had dealt with the Saturday People. Perhaps surprisingly, given that Jacir is Christian, this detail was omitted. Instead, the film falsely gives the impression that, rather than being marginalized, her co-religionists fought alongside their Muslim neighbours as equals.

The natural hero of Izz ad-din al-Qassam is also missing from Palestine 36. A teacher from Syria who bravely faced the British soldiers and their bloodhounds until hunted down in the Galilee, al-Qassam’s name graces the missiles today’s Gaza terrorists lob at Israel.

Typical of Jacir’s striving for accurate details while omitting the big picture, she depicts British customs officers in Jaffa Port uncovering a barrel of smuggled Mauser rifles, but fails to mention the guns’ German source. Indeed, there’s the rub of this movie – while correctly pursuing the policy that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, the Palestinians’ alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy is not part of the story.

Judging from the 10-minute standing ovation at Roy Thompson Hall, such a huge omission is unlikely to spoil the impact of Palestine 36 in Vancouver and elsewhere. In Pallywood – and the rest of the film industry, for that matter – facts can’t stand in the way of a good story. Indeed, Zionist mega-hits like Exodus and Cast A Giant Shadow are both kitsch films with a huge impact. Palestine 36 is likely to join them.

VIFF’s mixed offerings

Franz stars newcomer Idan Weiss. (photo from lene Film Production)

As it does every year, the 2025 Vancouver International Film Festival, which runs Oct. 2-12, has offerings of particular interest to the Jewish community. Below are the synopses (less some of the hyperbole) from the festival’s website of the three films featuring Jewish content, as well as the three films about Israel, all of which are from Palestine and other countries – there are no films from Israel in this year’s festival. The Jewish Independent, which has been a media partner of the festival for more than 20 years, has chosen to sponsor Franz.

Franz

You don’t need to have read Kafka to know what “Kafkaesque” means – the idea that the world is a nightmare, a sick joke at your expense, continues to resonate a century after the writer died. Franz Kafka’s “uneasy dreams” have inspired filmmakers like Orson Welles, David Lynch, Michael Haneke, Terry Gilliam and Roman Polanski, to name a few, and now director Agnieszka Holland has delivered a biopic that’s Kafkaesque and then some.

Holland blends scenes from Kafka’s life as a German Jew in Austro-Hungarian Prague with dramatizations of his short stories and – at the film’s most surreal – documentary footage of Kafka’s present-day tourist economy (“Who will join me for a Kafka burger?”). Franz (2025) is densely layered but lively, starring newcomer Idan Weiss, whose tragicomic presence suggests a persecuted clown somewhere between Charlie Chaplin and Adrien Brodie.

Franz is in German and Czech with English subtitles, and runs 127 minutes. It screens Oct. 7, 8:45 p.m., at Vancouver Playhouse, and Oct. 11, 3:30 p.m., at Granville Island Stage. (18+)

Orphan

Orphan (2025) is set in communist Hungary in the late 1950s. Conceived during the war and brought up by his mother, Andor (Bojtorján Barabás) is convinced his father will return one day. Instead, another man emerges to stake his claim to both mother and child. Berend (Grégory Gadebois) is a butcher and a gentile and, even worse, a divorcee. Appalled, Andor is determined to save his mother from this brute.

The latest film from Son of Saul director László Nemes builds Andor’s world from the inside out, through the child’s troubled eyes. This personal vision grants us access to the wider history unfolding on the edge of the frame, which Andor barely comprehends: the fallout from the Holocaust, the crushing grip of the communist state.

Orphan is in Hungarian with English subtitles, and runs 132 minutes. It screens Oct. 2, 8:45 p.m., at Fifth Avenue Cinema (19+) and Oct. 4, 6:30 p.m., at International Village 9. (18+)

Cover-Up

Cover-Up (2025) pulls viewers into the uncompromising ethos of journalist Seymour Hersh. From exposing the My Lai massacre to unraveling CIA abuses and Abu Ghraib atrocities, Hersh has spent decades dragging concealed histories into the light – often at great personal and political cost. In this portrait, Oscar-winning filmmaker Laura Poitras (Citizenfour) and Emmy-winning Frontline producer Mark Obenhaus trace Hersh’s process. “I barely trust you guys,” Hersh quips, establishing a candid and often thorny dynamic between subject and directors.

Cover-Up is a meditation on source protection, moral clarity and the imperative to report when it’s needed most. Its story bridges past and present: Hersh is still reporting, now turning his gaze toward Gaza.

Cover-Up has a content warning for graphic violence. It screens at Fifth Avenue Oct. 11, 5:45 p.m. (19+), and at International Village 10 on Oct. 12, 3:45 p.m. (18+)

Divine Intervention

Palestinian Elia Suleiman is at the height of his powers with this series of deadpan, interconnected, absurdist vignettes about Palestinian life on either side of an Israeli military checkpoint. Mutely following the travails of two lovers – one who lives in Nazareth, the other in Ramallah – as they navigate the wall between them, Divine Intervention (2002) is surreal, satirical and biting in its political criticism. It’s both sad in its vision of the world but also warm in its humour.

All but forgotten from the mainstream filmgoing consciousness, Jacques Tati’s innovations with form and tone have been repurposed by filmmakers as varied as Roy Andersson, Aki Kaurismäki, Ulrich Seidl and, perhaps most of all, Wes Anderson. But Suleiman’s method of feeding the Tati-esque through the prism of Palestinian experience creates something completely new that walks a line between melancholy and absurdity. And what an amazing soundtrack!

Divine Intervention is in English, Arabic and Hebrew with English subtitles, and runs 92 minutes. It screens Oct. 6, 8:45 p.m., at VIFF Cinema, and Oct. 12, 3:45 p.m., at the Cinematheque. (18+)

Palestine 36

Set during the 1936 Palestinian uprising against British colonial rule, this historical drama follows an ensemble of characters. Yusuf (Karim Daoud Anaya), a peasant, straddles two worlds – the city of Jerusalem and his farming village. Denied fair wages, a Jaffa port dockworker (Saled Bakri) joins the rebel movement. Elsewhere, a widowed mother (Yafa Bakri) stashes away an heirloom gun in hopes of defending her family from the British military’s raids.

Shot on location and interspersed with archival footage, the film boasts an international cast, including Hiam Abbas, Jeremy Irons and Liam Cunningham. Palestine 36 (2025) is the third feature from writer-director Annemarie Jacir to be selected as the Palestinian entry for best international feature at the Academy Awards.

Palestine 36 is in Arabic and English with English subtitles, and has a running time of 118 minutes. The film is at Fifth Avenue Oct. 9, 9 p.m., and Oct. 10, 11:45 a.m. (19+)

With Hasan in Gaza

Three unearthed MiniDV tapes from 2001 offer a time capsule of life in Gaza before devastation. What begins as a search for a former prison mate leads to a road trip from the north to the south of Gaza, accompanied by Hasan, a local guide whose fate remains unknown. As the camera moves through Gaza’s streets and landscapes, it captures fleeting moments of everyday life: vendors, schoolchildren, shopkeepers, relatives and strangers, all going about their days in a place that, today, has been forever altered.

In With Hasan in Gaza (2025), Palestinian filmmaker Kamal Aljafari transforms forgotten footage into a time capsule. What was once ordinary is now precious, even endangered. “It is a film about the catastrophe and the poetry that resists,” Aljafari writes.

With Hasan in Gaza is in Arabic with English subtitles, and runs 106 minutes. It screens Oct. 10, 3:30 p.m., at VIFF Cinema and Oct. 12, 6:30 p.m., at International Village 8. (18+)

– from viff.org

Writers fest starts soon

he 38th annual Vancouver Writers Festival takes place on Granville Island Oct. 20-26. Among the 130-plus local and international authors at 87 events are several members of the Jewish community. A glance through the lineup finds, in order of appearance, Rachel Hartman, Marsha Lederman, Guy Gavriel Kay, Katherine Ashenburg, Jill Yonit Goldberg, Eve Lazarus, Sam Wiebe and Jerry Wasserman. There are, no doubt, others.

Hartman, author of the bestseller Seraphina, comes to the festival with Among Ghosts, which has a found-family theme set in a vibrant fantasy world. She participates with other writers in Paranormal Activity: Ghost Stories for YA (grades 8-12) on Oct. 21, 1 p.m., at Granville Island Stage ($12).

Lederman talks with Linden MacIntyre about his latest work of nonfiction, An Accidental Villain, on Oct. 21, 6 p.m., at the NEST ($27), and she is in conversation with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on Oct. 22, 5:30 p.m., at the Revue Stage ($27), about her own new book, October 7th: Searching for the Humanitarian Middle. October 7th is a collection of Lederman’s columns for the Globe and Mail, which have been a real-time archive capturing a period of deep division and trauma.

Kay, the internationally bestselling author of Tigana, All the Seas of the World and A Brightness Long Ago, talks about his latest fantasy novel, Written on the Dark, which is set in a magical version of medieval France, replete with ambitious royals, assassins and invading armies. He also talks about his overall body of work with moderator Robert J. Wiersema on Oct. 24, 8 p.m., at the Revue Stage ($27).

Ashenburg, author of Margaret’s New Look, published her first fiction book at the age of 72. She will join two other writers in the session called Wisdom, Age & Beauty, which takes place Oct. 25, 5 p.m., at Waterfront Theatre ($27). She also participates with several other writers in the Afternoon Tea on Oct. 26, 3:30 p.m., at Performance Works ($50), which includes high tea delicacies, including a signature glass of sherry.

The Soundtrack of Life panel, on Oct. 25, 8 p.m., at the Revue Stage ($27), includes Jill Yonit Goldberg with her book After We Drowned, a haunting coming-of-age story with a fierce feminist subplot set in 1984 to the music of Tina Turner, Madonna and Stevie Nicks.

On Oct. 26, 10:30 a.m., at Performance Works ($40), Lazarus joins six other authors of nonfiction in an event described as TED Talk meets café social, with a morning snack included. Lazarus explores a forgotten tragedy in Beneath Dark Waters, an account of the 1914 sinking of the Empress of Ireland.

The Crime Scene on Oct. 26, 7 p.m., at Waterfront Theatre ($27) is moderated by Jerry Wasserman and the authors featured include Sam Wiebe, whose The Last Exile finds PI Dave Wakeland at the centre of gang warfare on the streets of Vancouver.

In addition to Lederman’s October 7th, there are a couple of other Israel-related books included in the program, the first directly, the second only tangentially.

Palestinian-Canadian author Saeed Teebi is one of the writers joining Blood in the Pen: Stories, Crises, Repair and the Writer on Oct. 21, 8:30 p.m., at Granville Island Stage ($27), and he will be in conversation with Adel Iskandar on Oct. 22, 8:30 p.m., at Waterfront Theatre ($27). Teebi is also one of the writers featured in A Doctor, a Lawyer and a Journalist Walk into a Literary Festival, on Oct. 23, 8:30 p.m., at Waterfront Theatre ($27). He describes his memoir You Will Not Kill Our Imagination as exploring “what it means to be a Palestinian in this moment, the effects of the genocide on Palestinian art and imagination, and that to even claim a belonging to the land from a country thousands of miles away is an act of subversion.”

Queer Stories on the Map on Oct. 23, 8 p.m., at Revue Stage ($27) includes Ziyad Saadi, whose reimagining of Mrs. Dalloway, Three Parties, follows a Palestinian refugee who plans to come out to his entire family at his birthday dinner party.

For more information about festival events and to purchase tickets, visit writersfest.bc.ca.

– from Vancouver Writers Festival program

It’s important to vote

You may have received anxious emails or other messages from friends in the last few days. Throughout the community, there is concern about a Vote Palestine campaign for Monday’s federal election. Emails and social media posts are flying.

However wrongheaded you may think this advocacy campaign is, its proponents are doing exactly what they should be doing during an election campaign. They are highlighting the issues that are important to them and encouraging others to support them. You may disagree with the approach and policies, but there is nothing fundamentally different in what they are doing from what plenty of Jews and community organizations are doing right now.

The Vote Palestine campaign is an initiative of several groups of usual suspects, including Independent Jewish Voices and other anti-Israel groups. The platform, which federal election candidates can choose to endorse, calls for a two-way arms embargo on Israel; ending Canadian support for settlements (whatever that means); combating anti-Palestinian racism and protecting pro-Palestine speech; recognizing the state of Palestine; and funding Gaza relief efforts, including through UNRWA, the controversial UN body that has been at the centre of this conflict for almost 80 years.

By press time, 124 New Democrats, 44 Greens and 13 Liberals had endorsed this platform. Given that there are 343 electoral districts in the country and the three largest parties are running candidates in almost every seat, the number of endorsers should be, frankly, a bit of an embarrassment for the campaign’s organizers. Almost all the endorsers are candidates for the New Democratic and Green parties. Of the Liberals who have signed on, just one is in British Columbia: West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country incumbent MP Patrick Weiler.

Most of the candidates who have endorsed the campaign and its platform are unlikely to be elected. That, though, is largely beside the point. The issue, we believe, is not the Vote Palestine campaign, but our community’s overwrought reaction. It is a symptom of a particular sort of impulse that seems to believe people do not have a right to raise issues in an election campaign in the manner that the Vote Palestine organizers are doing.

Though they may not have come across your social media feeds or in other ways to capture your attention, there are probably scores of organizations right now campaigning for or against policies that are important to you. Many organizations are encouraging Canadians to vote based on candidates’ positions on such things as the climate crisis, taxes, housing, and the cost-of-living. Agree or disagree with the positions, many of these campaigns fulfil an important civic purpose, assuming they comply with our country’s election laws around third-party advocacy spending.

The next time you receive an email or catch wind of some sort of advocacy campaign that you disagree with, here is how you should respond: take the anger and energy that you would otherwise direct into sharing your outrage with your friends and family and redirect it instead to something positive, a result you desire and hope to achieve.

Here are a few ideas …

Find out which of your local candidates share your values on the issues most important to you. If you find one that suits you, express your support. Get a lawn sign to let your neighbours know who you support. Donate to their campaign.

Offer to volunteer – it’s not too late! Election day is the most intense time in a campaign. You can drive voters to the polls or otherwise help your preferred candidate. (Check out cjpac.ca for more info.)

Ensure that friends and family go out to vote. Contact them over the weekend to make sure they plan to cast a ballot.

On Monday, message or telephone everyone you know who agrees with you on the issues most important to you and make sure they have voted. Suggest they block out at least an hour or maybe two or even three – advance voting statistics tell us Canadians are deeply engaged this election, so high turnout is expected. Prepare for lineups. Bring water and snacks for yourself and your neighbours in line.

Check the voting card you received in the mail to confirm your polling place so you know where to go on election day. If you did not receive a card in the mail, go to elections.ca right now and ensure you are registered to vote.

Democracy is threatened in countless places around the world. Voting is a right and a privilege we should never take for granted.

Meanwhile, as we know from the flurry of messages making their way around the community in the past few days, people who may disagree with you are planning to vote. They are organized and ready to mobilize. The most important thing you can do in response is to make the trek to your polling place and mark a single X on a ballot.

Anti-racism work at risk

Selina Robinson resigned Monday as British Columbia’s minister of post-secondary education and future skills. She also announced she would not seek reelection as the member of the Legislature for Coquitlam-Maillardville – though she said the latter was a decision she had made earlier.

The resignation Monday afternoon was the culmination of a remarkably speedy controversy that erupted late last week, after video circulated of Robinson, during a B’nai Brith Canada panel discussion, referring to pre-state Israel as a “crappy piece of land with nothing on it.” That she qualified the statement immediately, saying “there were several hundred thousand people, but, other than that, it didn’t produce an economy, it couldn’t grow things, it didn’t have anything on it,” is cut off from almost all the video clips.

The language choice was problematic and careless, no question. The Zionist movement has often been criticized for consciously or unconsciously overlooking the presence of existing populations in the land that became the modern state of Israel. One of the original slogans was: “A land without a people for a people without a land.” Robinson certainly knows this history.

What she meant – as she clarified again after the controversy erupted – was that the land had few if any natural resources or economic development. There is nothing historically inaccurate about that. Not only did Palestine not have an abundance of natural resources but, for hundreds of years, it had been an ignored piece of a failing Ottoman Empire, then, for two decades, an abused outpost of British colonialism. Regardless, the way in which Robinson spoke is not a fair or productive way to talk about a land that clearly (so clearly) means so much to so many people. Resources, economic or otherwise, are not the markers of the inherent value of a land or its significance to Indigenous peoples or anyone with a close relationship to place. That said, the feverish response to her words has been out of proportion. There is a world in which her clarification and apology would have sufficed. But, of course, this is politics.

And it is more than just politics. It is Israel and Palestine politics – and that is a particularly vicious game, even here in peaceable Canada. Annamie Paul, former head of the Green Party of Canada, learned tragically what can happen to a Jewish political leader who dares to take a nuanced position (or, really, anything but a wildly anti-Israel approach) to Middle East affairs. Some of us feared Robinson’s principles on this front put a similar target on her back. We’ve been proved right.

Robinson has been an outspoken pro-Israel voice, never more than since Oct. 7. There is no doubt that some were looking for an opportunity to knock her down – and she stumbled in a bad way, leaving her open to precisely the sort of attack some people were no doubt itching for.

Protesters, who, since Oct. 7, have been ready to mobilize about Israel with any provocation, moved into action. Social media erupted in such performative ferocity one would think British Columbians had suddenly discovered one of our leaders was a member of the Klan.

A major New Democratic Party fundraising gala Sunday night was canceled, apparently because they feared a protest that would distract from the party’s message in an election year. A news conference on Monday on a completely unrelated issue was also canceled, presumably for the same reason.

Groups accused Robinson of “blatant bigotry.” Anjali Appadurai, who ran against the current Premier David Eby for party leader, accused Robinson of “racist views.” Protesters Monday and people on social media accused her of “white supremacy.” After the controversy arose but before she resigned, Robinson had agreed to take anti-Islamophobia training.

It is perhaps most remarkable that the people most loudly condemning Robinson probably intersect significantly with the demographic that contests the widely accepted definition of antisemitism, contending, in effect, that Jews make up false “smears” about bigotry for political gain. This, of course, is precisely what happened to Robinson: an offhand (and, yes, offensive) remark is recast as “Islamophobia” by activists who have been waiting to pounce on precisely this sort of slipup. Not incidentally, it sidelines one of Canada’s few Jewish, pro-Israel elected officials.

The rhetoric being used around whiteness, settler colonialism and vulnerable communities also reinforces narratives about Israel that are deeply troubling and rooted in antisemitism and ignorance. Robinson’s comments, heard through an already flawed lens, produced a result that was all but predetermined by entrenched narratives. This is a disturbing reality, one that hurts more than Jews and their allies. Such abuse of terms like racism and white supremacy offend the serious work we must do as a society to confront these problems. Mobilizing these terms for crude political gain, as they have been against Robinson, undermines the fight against racism.

Robinson, and many in the Jewish community, no doubt feel heartbroken this week. In the long run, though, it is the people of British Columbia who are the losers. They have lost the services of a committed public servant.

More than this, our political culture and the fight against racism in all its forms have been debased.

Roots of Arab-Israeli conflict?

The historic milestones that led to the creation of the state of Israel are well known: Theodor Herzl’s Zionist congresses, the Balfour Declaration, the Partition Resolution, the War of Independence. Oren Kessler – who participates in the Cherie Smith JCC Jewish Book Festival on Feb. 13 – believes that a significant chunk of history has been largely overlooked and he sets out to right that wrong in his new book, Palestine 1936: The Great Revolt and the Roots of the Middle East Conflict. The Arab uprising of 1936 to 1939 in Palestine, he writes, “was the crucible in which Palestinian identity coalesced.” It also set in stone the intransigence toward Jewish self-determination in the region.

An Arab reaction to increased Jewish migration to Palestine – presaging both the potential for an eventual Jewish majority in the British-controlled Mandate and an even more alarming political outcome, a Jewish national homeland – inspired three years of Arab terror and British colonial repression, with the Jews inevitably caught between, argues Kessler.

Beginning with a series of strikes and protests in April 1936, the haphazard opposition to British rule and Jewish immigration was soon corralled and led by the notorious Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, into a mass movement of terror and anti-colonial (and anti-Jewish) violence.

While the British, on the one hand, hammered the Arab guerrillas – and plenty of civilians – they also rewarded that violence with policies such as those emerging from the 1937 Peel Commission report and the 1939 White Paper, both of which effectively caved to Arab demands by massively reducing Jewish immigration just as the Nazis were closing their fists across Europe. At the same time, the British left the Arabs unsatisfied by throwing tiny offerings to the Jews as a sign of compromise.

So unyielding was the mufti’s opposition to even considering Jewish migration that his Arab Higher Committee boycotted the various commissions’ hearings.

“Amid Hajj Amin’s boycott, no Arabs came forward,” writes Kessler. “Jerusalem Vice Mayor Hassan Sidqi Dajani, the mufti opponent who had once contemplated testifying, was found along the train tracks outside the city with two broken hands and two bullet holes in his forehead.”

In the end, the revolt was a disaster for everyone.

“The great revolt had exacted a withering toll on Palestine,” writes Kessler. “About 500 Jews had been killed and some 1,000 wounded. British troops and police suffered around 250 fatalities in their ranks. But the most onerous price of all was paid by the Arabs themselves: at least 5,000 – perhaps more than 8,000 – were dead, of whom at least 1,500 likely fell at Arab hands. More than 20,000 were seriously wounded.”

The Arab economy in Palestine was ruined, even as the Jewish economy hummed along.

Kessler’s thesis is that the events of 1936-1939 deserve to be recognized more as pivotal to the history of the region as a whole. There are also voluminous parallels and lessons for contemporary times in his review of that era.

The uprising did not, in the end, prevent Jewish national self-determination in Palestine. What it did prevent was a refuge for the Jews of Europe when they needed it most – and, for at least some of the players in this tragic drama, like the Hitler-allied mufti, perhaps that was a reward in itself.

The Cherie Smith JCC Jewish Book Festival runs Feb. 10-15. For tickets, visit jccgv.com/jewish-book-festival.

The omission of antisemitism

Many Jewish students are worried to go to campus in view of threatening and hateful messages and even open hostilities at some Canadian campuses. These are taking place within a wider context of antisemitic incidents in the wake of the eruption of the Hamas-Israel war.

The silence of some Canadian universities in addressing antisemitism, in particular when considered alongside otherwise active approaches toward equity, diversity, inclusion, decolonization (EDID) and racial justice needs to be explicitly addressed.

Legal action has recently been filed against some Canadian universities for failing to address antisemitism.

Anti-Palestinian racism, antisemitism

I’m an education scholar whose work centres on equity, diversity, inclusion, decolonization and anti-racism.

My engagement in this work has been shaped by my own background migrating to Canada from Israel 12 years ago. My graduate studies in Jewish history, with focus on Holocaust memory, made me attuned to injustice.

My migration was informed by concern my children wouldn’t be able to grow up without absorbing the racism against Palestinians that is pervasive in Israeli society. I now fear that my children, and students, will be absorbing antisemitism.

Antisemitism in society at large, on campus

Antisemitism — the prejudice, hatred, and oppression of Jews and one of the oldest forms of racism — is an ongoing concern in Canada.

There has been work at some post-secondary institutions to consider how EDID frameworks need to address antisemitism and also Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism both in the context of Israel and Palestinian issues and in the everyday.

But many EDID frameworks — both of specific institutions, and larger guiding frameworks — do not explicitly address these problems. For example, the Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences’ 2021 “Charter on EDID,” which states the need for “a more resolute effort to achieve [EDID] in our disciplines [and] fields of inquiry,” mentions categories of race, ethnicity and does not name antisemitism.

Addressing covert and explicit discrimination

Because racism and discrimination are often covert in higher education institutions, EDID initiatives focus on creating systemic and institutional changes in all levels and aspects of institutions, including through policies, leadership, hiring, curriculum and student experiences. But this frame is also applied to specific discrimination cases and complaints in higher education.

Universities’ equity, diversity, inclusion and decolonization initiatives are emerging and should rightfully comprehensively respond to specific forms of racism and discrimination. For example, in 2020, work on the Scarborough Charter on Anti-Black Racism and Black Inclusion in Canadian Higher Education was launched and multiple universities have since signed it, pledging “shared recognition of the realities of anti-Black racism.”

Focus on decolonization

Inspired by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and its 94 Calls to Action, decolonization and Indigenization of Canadian higher education plans have become central for conceiving EDID work.

For example, the second part of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council’s Igniting Change 2021 report, from the Advisory Committee on Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Decolonization, focuses on “Principles, Guidelines, and Promising Practices of Decolonization.”

In Canadian universities, an EDID focus on issues of decolonization and racism is important, given histories and legacies of colonial oppression, racism, exclusion and marginalization affecting Black, Indigenous and people of colour in Canada.

Yet this focus, in specific institutional approaches to EDID, fails to address and at times downplays the history of antisemitism and its ongoing reality in Canada.

Whiteness and Jews’ ambivalent racialized status

Several factors have contributed to this. The majority of North American Jews self-identify as white. “Whitening” allowed white-passing Jews to become part of a white Christian mainstream in ambivalent ways.

This process has reduced Jewish heritage to simply a religious/faith affiliation, even while Jews remain vulnerable to pernicious white supremacist and antisemitic beliefs about Jewishness being “in the blood.”

No doubt, it is complex to identify Jews as a category under “race,” since such a categorization is reminiscent of Nazi ideology. On the other hand, if we understand race as a social construct, the absence of naming antisemitism in EDID frameworks is deeply problematic.

Tools to acknowledge antisemitism

This prevents scholars and educators from acknowledging the historical, institutional, ideological and cultural underpinnings of antisemitism.

Academics working on anti-racism issues trying to bring up antisemitism are often told this is not part of the EDID agenda.

A report by a senior adviser on antisemitism at the University of Toronto’s medical school described how instances of antisemitism were dismissed as political activism against Israel, protected under academic freedom even while this activism was rife with antisemitic dog whistles (such as seeing Jews as “controlling the media” or “owning the university.”)

This conflation points to EDID settler-colonial discourses that position Jews as white colonial forces.

This framing fails to acknowledge the historical, cultural, and spiritual ties of Jews to the land of Israel and also erases the reality that Jews both in Israel and in diasporic communities globally are not a uniform ethnic group. For example, about half of the Jewish population of Israel are “Mizrachi”, descendants of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa.

Not about shielding Israel from critique

Addressing the complexity of Jewish identities doesn’t mean justifying Israeli state politics or shielding Israel from critique.

Critiquing Israel is not antisemitism. Many Jewish and Israeli scholars have strong criticisms toward Israeli politics, just as many Jews object to the killing of civilians in Gaza, and support “free Palestine.”

CBC news video announcing the death of Canadian Israeli peace activist Vivian Silver who was killed in the Hamas attacks.

Unpacking history and current events is important for EDID work.

But portraying Jewish peoples as the embodiment of colonial oppression is an antisemitic trope that legitimizes hate and violence.

Antisemitic tones, slogans in political calls

Antisemitism was seen after Oct. 7 when some academics publicly celebrated the Hamas massacre as a form of decolonizing and liberation, while victim-blaming those murdered and kidnapped.

Colleagues shared video with me of people at University of British Columbia marching and chanting “there is only one solution: Intifada revolution.” For many Jews, this chillingly evokes the “final solution.”

In other protests, demonstrators have carried signs saying: “Keep the world clean,” portraying a trash can with a Star of David in it.

Including all experiences

The failure of EDID to address antisemitism makes Jewish students targets of microaggression and hate on campuses.

Universities must aim to create educational institutions in which all lived experiences are included.

A good way to address antisemitism would be for specific universities and the higher education sector to launch a task force. In so doing universities would also need to address hard political conversations surrounding Israel and settler colonialism. Universities have tended not to address this because of complexity, but this can no longer be avoided.

Jewish students should not be made to feel less than or illegitimate as they attend university. We have a responsibility to condemn and actively address antisemitism as part of our commitment to EDID.

Lilach Marom, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.