Canada’s CIJA doesn’t speak for all of us
By JOSH SCHEINERT
10/21/2012 21:50
Unless CIJA demonstrates greater willingness to account for the diversity of views within Canadian Jewry, I would appreciate it if they would stop presuming to speak for me.
Netanyahu walks with Harper Photo: REUTERS/Chris Wattie
For those determined not to go beyond the surface, Canada’s Jewish community
must appear to be a monolith. Operating almost in tandem with Stephen
Harper’s government, it is loathe to even contemplate that today’s Israel is
anything less than perfect. When it comes to Israel, the world has become black
and white.
Leading the charge for Canadian Jewry is the Center for Israel
and Jewish Affairs. CIJA, which came into being in 2004 shrouded in secrecy, has
anointed a group of unelected and unaccountable individuals as representatives
and spokespeople for Canadian Jewry on “Israel and Jewish affairs.”
CIJA
CEO Shimon Fogel took to these pages to proclaim success for the consolidation
of Canada’s Jewish community, and in particular its Israel advocacy under CIJA’s
banner. He takes credit for the role CIJA has played in shaping Canada’s Israel
and Middle East policies, as well as “educating fellow Canadians on these
matters.”
It is not in dispute that CIJA has found a partner in Prime
Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. Their values and ideals are
so much in tandem that it can be difficult to discern who writes whose speeches.
Support, however, is not confined to the Conservatives. As Fogel notes, all of
Canada’s major political parties are supportive of the State of
Israel.
This does not necessarily mean, however, that other political
parties fall in line with CIJA’s advocacy points as easily as the
Conservatives. Likewise, not all Canadians would be supportive of CIJA’s
advocacy points. And therein lies the catch. For the next deduction that it
would follow logically is that not all of Canada’s Jews fall in line with CIJA,
notwithstanding its claims to speak for all of us.
CIJA IS not interested
in what I have to say. Similarly, it is not interested in what Charles Bybelezer
has to say. Bybelezer took to these pages last week to articulate his misgivings
about CIJA’s advocacy, claiming they were too moderate for his liking. Fogel, in
his response, called him “totally disconnected from reality.”
Canada’s
Jewish community is incredibly diverse. CIJA would prefer to ignore the
left-leaning Jews; there can only be one manifestation of “pro-Israel.” That
Israel has become a complex, nuanced issue demanding serious engagement and
critical thought and analysis escapes CIJA. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu,
Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman are not a
modern-day holy trinity.
CIJA overlooks the numerous members of Canada’s
Jewish community, myself included, who have serious questions about certain
policies and realities promulgated by today’s Israeli government, but who still
wish to engage constructively with Israel from a position of
support.
From my own experience I know that it is possible to feel a
strong emotional connection to Israeli, visit it numerous times, and love it,
celebrate Israeli national holidays and enjoy Israel’s cultural gifts – from
music and film to food, but still question the wisdom behind certain Israeli
actions.
In their fictionalized and singular understanding of Canadian
Jewry it is Fogel and CIJA who are totally disconnected from
reality.
WHERE IS my voice in CIJA? Where is Bybelezer’s? If a page of
Talmud can be surrounded by half a dozen commentaries, why is CIJA so unwilling
to open itself up to voices that choose to express a commitment to Israel with
opinions that might give it pause? If the answer is that accommodating multiple
viewpoints detracts from its credibility as a lobbying organization, well then
stop pretending to speak for everyone.
I should disclose that I briefly
volunteered with the Darfur Action Committee of CIJA’s predecessor, the Canadian
Jewish Congress. I felt Darfur was close to my heart because I think Jews should
have a unique attentiveness to preventing genocide. CIJA put an end to the
Darfur Action Committee.
In fact, CIJA is totally devoid of anything
resembling the Jewish value of tikkun olam, repairing the world. The only
“non-Jewish” issue CIJA highlights on its website is a commitment to Canadian
immigration and refugee reform, championed by Canada’s minister of citizenship
and immigration, Jason Kenney.
Minister Kenney is set to receive an
honorary degree from the University of Haifa for his “steadfast position against
anti-Semitism, racism and intolerance and, in particular, for his solidarity
with the State of Israel and his condemnation of Israel Apartheid
Week.”
The organization has an agenda. And there is nothing wrong with an
organization having an agenda. But Fogel writes of Canadians wanting “our
profound attachment to Israel reflected by the support our government extends to
that country.”
The problem is that there is no “our.”
Fogel,
Bybelezer and myself all manifest our attachment to Israel in different ways,
and even in challenging times we have every right to do so. I do not claim to
speak for CIJA. Unless they demonstrate greater willingness to account for the
diversity of views within Canadian Jewry, I would appreciate it if they would
stop presuming to speak for me.
The writer is a lawyer in Toronto, and a
progressive Zionist.