Thursday, March 11th 2010

By unknown

Riaz Sayani-Mulji

Another Israeli Apartheid Week, the fourth one at McMaster, is in the books. Leaving aside the argument of whether the actions taken by the state of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories constitutes a system of apartheid, the most troubling part of the week for me was not the events that took place at McMaster, but rather what was occurring in the Ontario Provincial Parliament.

A resolution was unanimously passed (only 30 MPPs voted) condemning the use of the word “apartheid”.

The motion was tabled by Progressive Conservative Peter Shurman, who claimed that “Israeli Apartheid Week is not a dialogue, it’s a monologue, and it is an imposition of a view by the name itself – the name is hateful, it is odious.” He also inferred that the use of the word “apartheid” is immensely offensive to the millions of blacks who suffered at the hands of the white apartheid regime in South Africa.

Even the New Democratic Party MPP present, Cheri DiNovo, supported the motion.

What is beginning to frighten me, a non-religious Canadian-Ugandan who has done solidarity work on campus for the Palestinian cause, is that this is only the latest manifestation of the Canadian government’s attempt to stifle criticism of the State of Israel.

While condemning the word “apartheid” may not seem like much, one has to take into account that at this very moment, the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (CPCCA) is working actively to pass legislation that would equate legitimate criticism of the State of Israel with anti-Semitism.

Consisting of 22 MPs from all four parties currently sitting in the House of Commons, the CPCCA is run by Irwin Cotler, an expert on human rights and international law, as well as Jason Kenney, the Conservative government’s minister of Citizenship, Immigration & Multiculturalism.

On the surface, one would simply think that this committee’s aim, as its mandate suggests, is to confront and combat the “global resurgence of anti-Semitism”. However, there’s a lot that is lying under the surface that is not being said, both by the media and by the CPCCA.

Kenney is already infamous for barring activist George Galloway from entering Canada due to the fact that he had recently led an aid convoy to the besieged and impoverished Gaza Strip.

Kenney has also reallocated funding away from the UNWRA for its assistance to Palestinian refugees; the Canadian Arab Federation; and KAIROS, a church-based NGO that spoke out for the Palestinian cause.

Cotler, on the other hand, has deep ties to Israel, as both of his daughters have served in the Israeli army and his wife is a native of Jerusalem.

The argument put forth by the CPCCA, in short, is that Israel, represents the “collective Jew”. By proclaiming that the Israeli government speaks for the all of the Jewish people in the world, criticism of Israel is considered to be inherently anti-Semitic.

Furthermore, this committee holds that there has been a resurgence in this “neo-anti-Semitism”, one that has manifested itself most severely on university campuses, referred to as “hotbeds of anti-Semitism”.

However, the logic underlying this argument is fundamentally flawed.

First of all, it is wrong (and somewhat racist) to claim and that Israel speaks for all Jews, or that all Jews are Zionists.

Personally speaking, I know plenty of Jewish people who not only disagree with Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, but also play an active role in planning IAW.

As such, it is absurd to claim that criticizing Israel’s domestic and foreign policy is rooted in racism towards Jewish people.

Most activists involved in solidarity work for the Palestinians would argue that it is the oppression, occupation, and humiliation of the Palestinians by the State of Israel that drew them into their work, and nothing more.

In addition, the evidence actually indicates that anti-Semitism is not on the rise in Canada.

The CPCCA argues that anti-Semitism is increasing without any external evidence, as well as without disclosing the sources of their research and funding.

Nevertheless, with all four federal parties complicit, it seems as if the recommendations made by the CPCCA will come to fruition.

This would fall in line with recent government policy, illustrated by Junior Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Kent who stated “an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada”.

What would this mean for activists like myself? By holding events like Israeli Apartheid Week and criticizing Israel’s inhumane and unjustifiable actions towards the Palestinians, we could be charged under section 319 of the Canadian Criminal Code and section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

However we would still, bizzarely, be able criticize our own government’s domestic and foreign policy, just not Israel’s.

Essentially, what we are seeing here is a McCarthyism-like witch-hunt, enforced by our own supposedly peace-loving government, against those who feel inclined to show solidarity with the Palestinian people.

This of course would apply equally to Jewish organizations, like Hamilton’s own Independent Jewish Voices, who would no doubt be charged and characterized as “self-hating Jews”.

So what can we, as Canadians, do about this gross violation of our rights? See for yourself what the CPCCA is all about and do some reading into its implications.

Spread the word about this dangerous committee, because regardless of whether you believe that the Palestinian cause is a worthwhile one, we should all be incensed and disgusted at our government’s attempt to stifle free speech and restrict academic freedom.