Moderated by local Jewish Voice for Peace activist Lincoln Shlensky, the panel is called "In Search of Peace: Voices From the Peace Camp." It will feature an Orthodox man who is pro-peace despite the murder of his son by Hamas terrorists, a conscientious objector, an American-born feminist and a representative of the more mainstream left Shalom Achshav, or Peace Now.
The panel follows two films, "Street Under Fire" and "The Jahalin," both about how the current unrest is affecting civilian populations -- Jews in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo, who are being fired upon by Palestinian gunmen from the nearby Arab village of Beit Jala, and Bedouins living near the West Bank Jewish settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim. Amrani claims the panel is "one-sided and unbalanced" and does not show an accurate representation of the views of the people of Israel.
But Janis Plotkin, director of the film festival, countered that "any nonprofit organization must maintain its own curatorial independence and integrity."Since its inception 21 years ago, the festival's board decided it could not accept any money -- either from foundations or corporate sponsors -- if programmatic directives were attached, she said, and the current situation was no different. The annual festival, which began July 19 and runs through Aug. 6, has come under heavy criticism in the past from Israeli activists who claimed the event did not welcome centrist and right-wing voices. But Plotkin noted that no funder had ever withdrawn its support. For an independent organization, she said, "it's well known that you just don't go there."
But Amrani maintained that the current state of heightened tension in Israel has caused an unprecedented situation, calling for a different approach."I know the situation is tragic and dramatic and critical," Amrani said. "But this is time for unity, to reach out and explain to American Jews what is needed of them."
Acknowledging that the film festival is one of the most effective vehicles in reaching out to the unaffiliated, he said, "This is a great way to talk to them, but they're not getting a balanced message."
The consulate's involvement in the film festival dates back to the early 1990s, when former Consul General Harry Kney-Tal began providing airline tickets for Israeli directors, who spoke to audiences following their films.
Daniel Shek, Amrani's predecessor, instituted an annual grant to the festival of $2,000, and it is that grant Amrani has revoked. The consulate has remained involved in the planning of the festival throughout this year, with cultural attach·Donny Inbar suggesting Israeli films and networking with Israeli directors. But when Plotkin tried to discuss speakers on the panel with Amrani before the festival program was to be printed, she said he canceled their meeting because of a scheduling conflict. Plotkin said she invited Amrani to speak at the festival, as Shek had done the past two years, but he refused. Amrani countered that he never received such an invitation.
When film festival representatives and Amrani finally did meet, Plotkin said the consul general "had an emotional reaction that belied decent diplomacy"
.....could not resist cutting in here: LBO is not the only place...
"in reaction to the proposed speakers. He then threatened to withdraw funding if the panel did not include two people he suggested. Amrani recommended Nahum Barnea, a journalist who also lost his son to a terrorist attack, and Meir Shalev, a novelist. Those suggestions were not based on their political points of view, which the consul general did not know, but because he said they were more representative of the varying viewpoints in Israel.
Plotkin never claimed that the panel was representative of all views. But with the right-wing perspective of the current government in the newspapers daily, she said, she wanted to honor the film festival's mandate: allowing those lesser-known voices to be heard. With Israeli conventional wisdom saying that "the left is dead," and "there is no left anymore," she added, she wanted to prove otherwise. Quoting from the Talmud, Plotkin said, "For the sake of peace, we must talk about peace. "In this year of pain and acrimony, the efforts by these peace activists give us hope, and we're looking for hope."
Furthermore, she said, "the fact that the film festival is being demonized because we're talking about peace is more a reflection of the misunderstanding between Israelis and the diaspora Jewish community." Plotkin said the rift between Israelis and diaspora Jews on the issue continues to grow, and since that is the case, "I would think the consul general should have bigger things to worry about other than peace groups speaking in Berkeley."
Amrani countered by saying that for a country of 6.5 million people and as many, if not more, opinions, "bringing people who are identified with one cause and one cause only doesn't project the right image of the country." Suggesting that those on the panel were the only true advocates for peace was irresponsible, he said -- most Israelis want peace, although they may disagree on the most effective means to achieve it. "This one-sided, unbalanced approach doesn't serve my cause or the cause of Israel," Amrani noted. "It's not a question of the government line; it's where Israel is on this issue. "This is not a debate on Israel. This is Israel being portrayed by a group I wouldn't even think of as mainstream."
As to whether the grant will be reinstated next year, Amrani said that would depend on whether the film festival showed a willingness to cooperate. While he said he hoped the relationship between the two organizations would continue, the same conditions would apply. "If our financial support is being requested, we will not be surprised" by film festival content, he said. "We are the major source of information about Israel in this region and we need to be consulted."
Plotkin said she, too, hoped that the connection between the consulate and the festival would continue. "I look forward to our continuing relationship with the consul" as long his input is limited to suggestions rather than directives. "I think his position was not sensitive to the needs of our community." Plotkin further said that after 20 years of putting on the film festival, she knew what Bay Area audiences expected, and suggested that by being new, perhaps the consul general was not aware of the way the festival conducted its business. "It would serve our consul general well to get to know the community that he serves, to come to know us and see who we are," she said.
Amrani responded that Plotkin "should not analyze my knowledge. I would appreciate it if she would give me that decency or respect. This is not the first time she's done so without being willing to engage in discussion about it."
Meanwhile, the Jewish Community Relations Council sent out a letter suggesting its members attend the panel, as well as other Israel-themed films at the festival. The letter, signed by both JCRC President Daniel Grossman and Executive Director Rabbi Doug Kahn, said that "participating in the discussion following the films is one important way of ensuring that there is a full spectrum of views about Israel." Said Kahn: "I think we've had our share of disagreements with the Jewish Film Festival over the years. But at the same time, they provide an exceptional array of important films about Israeli society that we strongly believe should be seen and discussed, and that's why we encouraged our members to attend." As the moderator of the controversial panel, Shlensky had no role in putting it together. Nevertheless, he had this to say of the dispute: The four panelists "have shown extraordinary courage in working to humanize Israeli society. I cannot fathom why the Israeli Consulate would not want to actively promote such voices of sanity."