March 1993, Page 48
Canada Calling
Alberta Student Newspaper Cartoon Ignites Human
Rights Dispute
By John Dirlik
A cartoon critical of Israel published in the student newspaper
of the University of Alberta has prompted calls for dismissal of
the editors by the campus Hillel association, and letters of support
from student newspapers across Canada. Published following Israel's
expulsion of some 400 Palestinians to Lebanon last December, the
cartoon depicted a 1992 nativity scene being broken up by Israeli
soldiers.
"We find the cartoon deeply offensive, as it promotes anti-Semitism,"
the Hillel Student Association charged. ''Though intellectual criticism
of a political nature is acceptable," campus Hillel co-president
Shari Levine explained, "this cartoon oversteps the boundaries
of what is considered appropriate."
Hillel and the Jewish Federation of Edmonton initially had demanded
an apology from the student newspaper, the Gateway, but called
for tougher measures when that was refused. "We can no longer
accept an apology," Levine said. "Firing or resignation
is the only acceptable action."
The cartoon also was criticized by the executive of the students'
union, and by University President Paul Davencourt, who told the
university board of governors he found it "offensive and not
appropriate to an institution which is committed to tolerance and
understanding for people of all backgrounds."
The Alberta branch of the Canadian Council of Christians and Jews
joined the fray, charging that "by its denial of the Jewishness
of Mary and Jesus and by its representation of Jews as 'Christ-killers,'
[the cartoon] evokes falsifications that have been used to expedite
and justify persecution of Jews for centuries." The Council
said it has taken steps to lodge a complaint with the Alberta Human
Rights Commission.
In response to the accusations, editor in-chief Karen Unland published
an editorial expressing regret that some members of the community
were offended, but insisted the cartoon was "neither anti-Jewish
in intent nor actuality, but rather a political commentary on human
rights abuses against the Palestinians." Unland told the Washington
Report she was disappointed that the Palestinian human rights
issue was overshadowed by the charges of anti-Semitism. "I'm
sorry that the point of the cartoon was lost," she said.
Much of the reaction was positive. The Gateway received
letters of support from student newspapers across Canada. A strongly
worded letter from a spokesman for the Canadian University Press
not on ly defended the rights of student newspaper editors to speak
out, but also slammed the mainstream media for not daring to do
so.
Student newspapers not only have the right but the responsibility
to voice controversial opinions, wrote Alayne Armstrong, "particularly
at a time when the mainstream media is becoming more and more homogeneous
and profit-oriented . . . A student newspaper without backbone isn't
much more than a rag, and students deserve more than that."
A letter of support also came from former U.S. Congressman Paul
Findley, author of They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions
Confront Israel's Lobby. The outspoken Illinois Republican described
in two chapters of his best-selling book some of the scare tactics
used to stifle criticism of Israel on university campuses.
"It would be a grave injustice if anyone connected with the
publication of this cartoon is punished," wrote Findley. He
conceded that the cartoon might not "win prizes for artistic
display," but said it fairly depicted life under Israeli occupation.
Denying that the symbols in the cartoon were anti-Jewish, Findley
said that, on the contrary, it was the human rights violations committed
by the Israelis that were a blot on Judaism. "In reality, the
cartoon protests against the anti-Judaic character of Israeli infractions,
not the other way around," he wrote.
The Gateway also was defended by the president of the Alberta
Civil Liberties Union. "I see this issue as one of free expression
and it would be a shame to stifle it," said Michael Greene,
who stressed he was expressing his own view and not necessarily
that of his organization.
Greene told the Washington Report that "the cartoon
is crude and may not be in good taste, but it is a political statement
rather than a racist or anti-Semitic one." He said his group
might consider intervening if the Alberta Human Rights Commission
rules against the campus paper.
Lawyer Edward Corrigan, who has counseled several student groups
involved in similar controversies in Canadian universities, questioned
the legal validity of the accusations against the Gateway. "Although
the Individual Rights Protection Act in Alberta prohibits defamation,
it also clearly protects , freedom of expression," he said.
The Canadian attorney cited what he called a "long tradition
that upholds the right to use symbols and metaphors to make political
points," and gave as example the work of other cartoonists
who used Christian biblical imagery in their criticism of Israel's
treatment of Palestinians. "I see no evidence of any intent
in the cartoon to defame Jews in Canada," said Corrigan. "If
some Canadian Jews support these Israeli practices, it would seem
they're the ones with a problem. " |