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. "