Transcript [00:02] [music] [00:04] You are listening to an art media [00:06] podcast. [00:22] It's 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, September [00:24] 17th in New York City. It's 5:00 p.m. on [00:26] Thursday, September 17th in Israel. as [00:29] Israelis begin to wind down their day. [00:33] The biggest story of this past week, at [00:35] least in terms of the press coverage it [00:37] attracted, was not the Houthi's attack [00:39] on Saudi Arabia's Red Sea ports or their [00:42] attempted attack on the holy city of [00:43] Mecca. It also wasn't that Israel and [00:46] Morocco agreed to open mutual embassies [00:49] or that three Jewish school boys were [00:52] tragically assaulted on a London bus. [00:55] No, it was a film that screened at the [00:59] Venice Film Festival which accuses [01:01] Israel of intentional mass civilian [01:04] killing in Gaza. The film titled Naza [01:08] received a 25minute longstanding [01:11] ovation, the longest standing ovation in [01:14] the history of the Venice Film Festival [01:16] and I assume just about any film [01:19] festival. But what makes this story [01:21] particularly bizarre is that while [01:23] millions of people immediately formed a [01:25] strong opinion about this film, the [01:27] number of people who actually watched [01:29] this film is smaller than the number of [01:31] people listening to this episode of Call [01:34] Me Back. And it is certainly smaller [01:36] than the number of people who've watched [01:37] the new season of Fa on Netflix, which [01:40] though fictional does recount the story [01:43] of Hamas's atrocities on October 7th. [01:46] Having not seen this film, I did not [01:48] feel like I had anything to add to this [01:50] discourse. Nor did I think that many of [01:52] the people who did actually contributed [01:54] much to it. That's until I listened to [01:57] Yosi Klein HVI and Danielle Hartman's [01:59] most recent episode on Ark Media's For [02:02] Heaven's Sake podcast. They too have not [02:05] seen the film. But while they themselves [02:08] have been critical of Israel's conduct [02:10] of the war at certain times, they also [02:12] point out facts that clearly illustrate [02:15] that the standing ovation, both at the [02:17] event and outside of it, has more to do [02:19] with the people clapping than the [02:21] accusations themselves. Because much of [02:24] the film's testimony is anonymous and [02:26] impossible to independently verify. [02:28] Meanwhile, the role of Hamas and its own [02:31] brutality against civilians disappears. [02:34] It is practically absent from the [02:36] narrative. If there's one conversation [02:39] you should listen to as it relates to [02:41] NAZA, it is this one. So, we decided to [02:44] drop it in our Call Me Back feed in case [02:46] you missed it, please give it a close [02:48] listen. We'll be right back with the [02:51] special replay of For Heaven's Sake. [02:57] I'm Deborah Parardes, the host of Ark [02:59] News Daily. What's happening in Israel [03:01] and the Jewish world right now matters, [03:04] but it can be hard to keep up, let alone [03:06] make sense of it all. And that's why we [03:08] started Ark News Daily. [music] [03:10] Every weekday morning, I walk you [03:12] through the most important news, give [03:14] you the context you need, and let you [03:17] know what to look out for next. I don't [03:19] try to convince you of anything, and I [03:21] don't want to waste your time. So, on [03:23] most days, I'll be in your ears for [03:24] about 10 minutes or less. Then you can [03:27] move on with your day, hopefully feeling [03:29] a little smarter than before. Subscribe [03:32] wherever you get your podcasts or follow [03:35] the link in the show notes. I hope to [03:37] see you tomorrow. [music] [03:42] The first thing that [music] we learned [03:46] about the film was not about the film at [03:49] [music] all. It was the standing [03:50] ovation. Nearly 25 minutes [03:55] of a standing ovation. [music] I can't [03:57] imagine what it's like to be clapping [03:59] your hands for [music] 25 minutes [04:02] without interruption. There's something [04:04] so profoundly totalitarian [music] [04:06] about that. It was a declaration of [04:08] disgust of Israel independent of the [04:11] movie. [music] And if you don't show [04:13] your disgust well enough, it's like you [04:16] sin if you only have 22 minutes [music] [04:18] of disgust. I embrace [04:22] all criticism, but with this movie, I [04:24] found myself like from the [music] [04:26] beginning just shutting down. [04:28] >> What you're describing, Denille, is a [04:30] textbook case of how not to galvanize [04:35] the society to have a moral [04:37] introspective conversation. [04:46] Hi friends, this is Denil Hartman and [04:48] Yosi Klein Halevi from the Shalom [04:49] Hartman Institute and this is our [04:51] podcast for heaven's sake in [04:53] collaboration with Ark Media. Today is [04:56] Tuesday, September 15th [04:59] and our theme [05:01] which echoes the conversation of every [05:04] single Israeli today. The theme is NAZA [05:09] when a film is the news. [05:12] For those of you who don't yet know what [05:14] NAZA is, go on [05:17] any news site um uh whether social media [05:21] news, Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post, [05:25] it's more it's bigger news in Israel and [05:27] in Europe. It's not huge news in the [05:29] United States. New York Times has a [05:32] little article about it. But this is [05:34] what Israelis are talking about. Naza um [05:37] stands for the Hebrew term Nzek agave [05:41] which means uh collateral damage [05:45] and uh it also and again I'm I'm doing a [05:49] little commentary right now the name [05:51] Naza also echoes Gaza and it echoes Nazi [05:58] but again so assuming that this is well [06:01] thought through it's a very powerful [06:04] motive [06:06] um uh title and uh [06:11] it's the news. [06:13] We're in the midst of Saudi Arabia [06:16] possibly imploding. Um our election [06:20] cycle, new polls have come out which are [06:24] presenting uh a continued shift to a [06:27] stalemate. [06:29] All there. [06:31] But what most Israelis are talking about [06:33] or at least what has attracted a deep a [06:36] deep uh uh attention of Israelis is this [06:39] movie and debating it. [06:41] >> A movie that none of us have seen. [06:43] >> A movie that nobody has seen. A movie [06:46] that ostensively argues [06:48] that Israel had a systematic policy [06:54] to stop worrying about collateral [06:58] damage. Now just again on a pure legal [07:00] sense um civilian deaths are accepted [07:05] within the context of a just war as long [07:09] as the civilian casualties aren't [07:11] targeted and that they are part of [07:14] collateral damage um collateral killing [07:18] um I remember Mosha Halbertal once [07:20] suggested stop using the word collateral [07:21] damage collateral killing it's like [07:24] damage is like to a cup a table it's [07:27] like someone is dying here collateral [07:29] killing and um as long as it also is [07:33] proportionate to the military benefit [07:36] and to the security that you're acrewing [07:38] from this act and it's so it's everybody [07:41] understands that uh that in the context [07:45] of war civilian casualties are [07:47] inevitable especially in the context of [07:49] a war such as Gaza [snorts] but the [07:52] argument of this movie which we've all [07:54] seen one minute little clips here and [07:56] there is that Israel ostensively [08:00] systematically [08:02] um embraced disproportionate [08:07] um civilian deaths and even was willing [08:10] like it didn't while in the past this is [08:12] something that that limited our behavior [08:15] here it was almost we we we embraced it [08:19] as part of our policy and the argument [08:22] then of the movie is is that genocide [08:25] even though it doesn't even have to make [08:26] that is that Israel is trying to wipe [08:28] out. If you're not fighting kamas and [08:31] and it's not really collateral killing, [08:34] but it's it's the objective that you [08:36] have, then you're basically this is [08:39] Israel um committing genocide in the in [08:44] in in under the umbrella of a war. This [08:46] this is the argument and it it [08:49] interviews 24 anonymous [08:53] soldiers on a rooftop in Tel Aviv [08:56] extensively from the 8200 intelligence [08:59] brigade [09:01] who are describing how Israel functions [09:05] in the war and no one has watched the [09:07] movie but in Israel yet but there's [09:11] there's [09:13] a few dimensions to the movie like [09:15] unlike the Kristoff article where there [09:18] was arguments. We did this, we did this. [09:20] Look at what we're doing like there's [09:22] something is happening here even without [09:24] knowing it's the effect of the movie. [09:27] The condemnation of it without knowing [09:29] the details is uh is it's it's it's the [09:34] title itself. You don't even have to [09:36] watch the movie to have an opinion about [09:38] the movie. And the amount of editorials [09:40] which have come out from people who [09:42] haven't watched the movie is very [09:43] interesting because we all more or less [09:45] know where where this is going. And so [09:49] let's talk about Naza. Um what is it? [09:53] And let's do it in a number of of of of [09:56] rounds. The first one, what is your [09:59] first response? Then let's go, what's [10:01] your second response? Then what's your [10:02] third response? And in each one, let's [10:04] peel it back more because each level is [10:08] it is is is talking about Israeli [10:11] society because Naza, while it's a film [10:15] that won an award in the Venice Film [10:17] Festival, [10:19] we're talking about it not as a European [10:21] phenomena, not in the film festival [10:24] context, but as an Israeli phenomena, as [10:27] something that's happened to us. Now [10:29] this film it talks about what happened [10:31] to Gazins but it also is a very powerful [10:34] window into Israeli society. So let's [10:38] tell the story. What's what was your [10:40] first response to to the movie? [10:43] >> You know the first thing Den [10:44] >> which you didn't see [10:45] >> which I didn't see. And the first thing [10:48] that we learned about the film was not [10:53] about the film at all. It was the [10:55] standing ovation. [10:57] Nearly 25 minutes [11:01] of a standing ovation [11:02] >> after the film was shown at the film [11:05] festival. [11:06] >> I can't imagine what that would feel [11:10] like. I can't imagine what it's like to [11:12] be clapping your hands for 25 minutes [11:16] without interruption. [11:18] There's something so profoundly [11:20] totalitarian about that. And you know [11:23] what? It's it's great on on Israeli [11:26] social media. people have been [11:27] circulating uh uh this wonderful uh [11:30] piece from uh Solja Nitsen uh from the [11:33] Gulag archipelago [11:36] uh where he describes a um a meeting [11:39] with Stalin and everyone is afraid to be [11:43] the first one to stop applauding because [11:45] you'll be taken out and shot. And he [11:48] said people were being carried out on [11:50] stretchers. [laughter] That was the only [11:53] way you could actually stop applauding. [11:56] Now that was not the case here. But what [11:59] was happening there? What was happening [12:01] in the mind? [12:03] I can't think of being in a in any [12:07] situation where someone received a [12:11] fiveinut [12:12] standing ovation that I that I was a [12:14] part of. Two minutes, three minutes, [12:17] you're already you're already, you know, [12:19] ready to pass out, you know, like when [12:21] is this going going to be over? 25 [12:24] minutes. So something's happening there [12:28] and I was trying to understand what was [12:30] happening and I and I felt you know [12:32] forgive the pun. I felt nauseated. [12:35] [laughter] I really Yeah, that's my f [12:38] that may be my first pun and for [12:40] heaven's sake. So [12:42] >> it's a good one though. May I say [12:43] >> it's not bad. [12:44] >> It wasn't I you just pulled it out of [12:46] nowhere and I that was pretty clever [12:48] >> and it deserves it. [12:49] >> And it deserves it. Okay. [laughter] [12:50] Good. [12:51] >> The standing ovation deserves it. and [12:54] and I saw a series of of photos that [12:58] were taken during the 25minute ordeal [13:03] where the director of the festival is [13:05] repeatedly looking at his watch and then [13:07] you see him signaling not yet not yet [13:10] and then he he does the signal. So what [13:14] what was he trying to achieve? The [13:17] previous record for a standing ovation [13:21] at the Venice Festival uh was last year [13:24] uh I think it was 23 minutes. He wanted [13:27] to break that because that would then [13:29] give more gravitas to the film. And so [13:33] the whole thing is staged. It's a setup. [13:38] And and I was trying to think to Neil [13:42] and really this is total speculation and [13:45] yes I'm looking at this through my own [13:47] particular lens but what could what [13:50] might have been in the minds of these [13:52] people? What did they think they were [13:55] celebrating? [13:56] An act of tremendous courage that here's [13:59] an Israeli coming from this [14:03] thoroughly corrupted society. a society [14:07] that has committed genocide and won't [14:10] own it. The Germans at least, you know, [14:12] eventually uh apologized. We are, you [14:16] know, we have nothing to apologize for. [14:19] We are the we are today the embodiment [14:21] of evil. And here's the good Israeli. [14:24] You know, there used to be good Germans. [14:26] Now there's a good the good Israeli. [14:29] And [14:31] I felt that they were honoring him the [14:34] way that one would have honored, for [14:36] example, the members of the White Rose, [14:40] which was a underground Christian [14:42] movement in Nazi Germany. They were all [14:44] beheaded. These were the heroes that [14:47] that the filmmakers are in the tradition [14:50] of the White Rose. [snorts] And so this [14:52] is this for me. I I'm watching this and [14:55] I'm just feeling sick. [14:57] >> It's interesting. So we're doing the [14:59] first round very immediate and it's [15:01] interesting when you [15:01] >> does that speak to you at all this um [15:04] the Germans [15:05] >> never mind the Germans but but [15:06] >> the first thing that I related to [15:09] >> was also the standing ovation [15:12] and uh it's interesting even in your [15:14] first response you have an articulate [15:16] historical correlation [laughter] this [15:18] is like this is when Yosi is doing just [15:21] spontaneous [15:22] >> exactly no for me for me you know this [15:26] is the this is your immediate world of [15:28] association [15:29] >> speaking from uh how do you say it in in [15:32] English [15:32] >> your kishkas [15:33] >> from mamote and you know speaking yeah [15:36] okayishkas [15:38] this is your immediate thing [15:40] >> it it comes out as a history lesson [15:42] great I can't wait to hear the second [15:45] round of like as we as we get deeper and [15:47] deeper because this was already very [15:49] very thick and um because I didn't sense [15:53] I don't have any Nazi Germany um [15:56] associations [15:57] But that 25minut standing ovation, first [16:01] of all, I'm committed never to go to the [16:03] festival. [laughter] It's like again I, [16:06] you know, I've had standing ovations um [16:09] a couple of times in my life. After [16:12] about 15, 20 seconds, even my mother of [16:15] blessed memory is embarrassed. You know, [16:17] it's like it's like, okay. [16:18] >> Well, now they they've set a new [16:19] standard for standing ovations. Anything [16:21] less than 25 minutes. But the point is [16:23] insult. [16:24] >> What are you afraid of? like and part of [16:27] me is it it was a declaration [16:32] in many ways of [16:36] I don't know if I want to say a [16:37] declaration of war but a declaration of [16:40] disgust [16:43] of Israel that's what it was independent [16:46] of the movie like this is we are [16:49] standing up now and declaring our [16:52] disgust and if you don't show your [16:56] disgust well enough. It's like you sin [16:59] if you only have 22 minutes of disgust. [17:02] There w there was that dimension. My [17:04] first response and we'll get into the [17:06] movie in the second response is I also [17:08] it was just this this theater [17:14] was also an was a deep expression of of [17:18] the loneliness and the alienation [17:20] of Israelis. So my first response [17:24] was not even the movie. Now we're going [17:25] to get to the movie. You'll see what was [17:27] your second response as you think about [17:28] the movie. But before even the movie, [17:31] this environment and I think about how [17:34] quickly things have changed [17:37] and how [17:39] almost the obligation to be disgusted by [17:43] Israel [17:44] exists in certain sectors in the world. [17:47] It's not anti-semitism. It's not, it [17:50] doesn't have that dimension. It has a a [17:53] moral self-righteous. It's a I think it [17:56] comes from a different place, but that [18:00] you are, if you're a moral person, [18:01] you're obligated to be disgusted by [18:05] Israel. And you have to show [18:08] >> that you are [18:09] >> Yeah. [18:10] >> that you are as seriously disgusted to [18:13] the extent that you're going to do a [18:14] 25minut standing ovation. That was and [18:16] it was lonely. It was there was a [18:18] sadness that that was associated um with [18:22] that um and uh and and a sense of [18:27] alienation also from the people in the [18:29] room regardless of what you think about [18:32] the movie and what you think about [18:33] Israel. Just that degree had a um you [18:39] were speaking about a fascist Stalinist. [18:41] It had a it had a fanatic dimension [18:44] >> to see the hatred, the demonization of [18:47] Israel at that level of fanaticism. It's [18:50] one thing to criticize, but 25 minutes, [18:54] that was that was the first level. That [18:55] was like the my first second and and the [18:58] sadness. Let's now delve into the movie [19:01] and let's um What was your second um a [19:05] second? Well, so thinking about the film [19:08] itself, [19:10] I felt it was a missed opportunity, a [19:13] profound missed opportunity for Israeli [19:16] society. [19:17] We desperately need a conversation here [19:21] on [19:23] what what might have gone wrong. And I [19:25] and I and I'm still phrasing it as a [19:28] question because I don't know and most [19:31] Israelis don't know. We don't have [19:34] anywhere near a a a total picture. What [19:38] we all or most of us do sense is that [19:41] the total picture that's being presented [19:43] in that film is a lie. [19:47] And so the question that that that we [19:51] have to start confronting is did we [19:55] abuse the category of uh as you call it [20:00] collateral killings [20:03] which is an inevitable category uh in in [20:08] any war even more so in a war under the [20:11] conditions that the IDF had to fight [20:14] where uh we're fighting an enemy me that [20:17] doesn't wear uniforms uh that [20:20] deliberately blends in with civilian [20:22] society that takes over civilian [20:24] infrastructure like hospitals [20:28] and generally when Israelis discuss the [20:31] question of collateral damage it ends [20:32] there [20:35] but there's a next step yes I we I think [20:39] most of us accept the fact that there is [20:43] no way around uh some collateral damage [20:47] and maybe under the conditions in which [20:48] we were fighting a great deal of [20:51] collateral damage. But does that cover [20:53] everything? Does it explain all the [20:55] decisions? [20:57] And when you come to us with a blanket [21:02] indictment [21:04] and [21:06] now again I haven't seen the film so I [21:08] don't know whether he's making an [21:09] explicit connection uh with genocide or [21:13] just implied but clearly from the [21:16] reaction that we've seen so far implied [21:18] is enough. [21:19] >> That's that's exactly that's what's [21:21] being conveyed. [21:23] >> You've shut down conversation. you've lo [21:25] you've lost us. And that's why, you [21:28] know, it's so interesting because [21:29] initially my I I initially I thought, [21:32] you know, we're having this conversation [21:35] when no one has even seen the movie yet. [21:37] Then I thought, well, we're actually [21:40] right to be responding viscerally with [21:44] such with such contempt and rage [21:47] >> because [clears throat] we understand [21:48] what the move is, [21:49] >> right? It's interesting. Um, [21:52] I was a Yosi at the second stage. You're [21:55] talking to me now about my third stage. [21:58] But I had a second stage before you got [22:00] to your third st before you got to your [22:02] second stage. And my second stage, I was [22:05] aware of something happening to me that [22:08] I know is profoundly unproductive [22:13] because in in in Hartman Parliament, we [22:16] have a category called X happened in [22:19] educational [22:21] um analysis and one that we're now [22:24] working extensively together on um on [22:27] updating it is how do you respond when [22:30] somebody says to you [22:32] something immoral happened under your [22:35] watch or by you. We called it X. So the [22:38] classic X was um was there a Nakba or [22:42] not? Um and now we have brand new X's. X [22:46] is genocide, apartheid, colonialism. [22:49] There's something immoral that you're [22:52] doing. And how do you respond? What do [22:55] you do? Now the classic response of [22:58] advocacy [23:01] which we have seen to be educationally [23:05] unproductive [23:06] is what our colleague Yehuda Kurtzer [23:09] called historical disputation. [23:12] >> Outright denial. [23:13] >> It didn't happen. [23:14] >> Right? [23:15] >> Someone says X happened. You're [23:18] committing genocide. Our response is [23:19] genocide didn't happen. And we could [23:22] respond the with the legal definition [23:24] you know like as Tal has lectured to us [23:27] and we are all are all now experts and [23:30] and Masu [23:32] genocide means ABC it's an intent to [23:35] destroy in all or impart a society or [23:38] all the above and without the intent [23:40] category it's irrelevant and if all of [23:42] you read in the Wall Street Journal just [23:44] you know it'll be in your show notes how [23:46] they're trying to now change the [23:48] category of genocide so that you don't [23:52] need to have intent so that they could [23:54] then accuse Israel, [23:55] >> you know. Well, Amnesty International [23:57] did something very similar with [23:59] apartheid. They shifted apart that from [24:02] being about racial separation to to to a [24:06] war between marriage. So so but we know [24:08] so X happened the one of the responses [24:12] of those who are very committed is [24:15] >> it didn't happen. [24:17] Didn't happen. And there's all these [24:20] explanations of how it didn't happen. [24:22] There's other ways to defend yourself. [24:24] There's moral justification. [24:26] There's it happened but it wasn't my [24:28] fault. There's um realism. It happened [24:32] but it's inevitable. This is war or [24:34] whatever. This is reality. The real [24:36] world functions this way. And the last [24:39] category is accountability. Yes, it [24:41] happened and I have to deal with it. [24:43] Which is what you are saying about what [24:45] we eventually have to do in the war in [24:47] Gaza. [24:47] >> Yeah. We at least first we need to to [24:50] understand what happened. Did something [24:52] go wrong [24:53] >> and and to address and to have room for [24:55] that conversation. But the first thing [24:58] as this was presented [25:01] I I went it didn't happen [laughter] [25:04] like I watched the m I watched the the [25:06] minute and the minute video clip um uh [25:11] showcasing the movie had two features to [25:14] it. One was this anonymous person who [25:18] you don't see there for in other words [25:19] there's no way to validate anything in [25:21] this documentary. None whatsoever. You [25:24] don't see the people. You don't know who [25:25] they are. there's no way for you to [25:27] follow up. There's it's all live [25:29] interviews. There's no factual [25:31] documentation which is has its own [25:34] interesting story. One was a soldier [25:37] saying yes um we were given permission [25:43] to kill a kamas terrorist. Um and we [25:49] asked till what number? Even till 500 [25:52] >> 500 civilians [25:53] >> civilians. So here it is collateral [25:55] killing 500 to1 is kosher [25:59] >> and everyone in this country knew that's [26:02] a lie. [26:02] >> Everyone because first of all if that [26:04] was happened then the then the number of [26:07] casualties not over a threeyear or a [26:10] 2year and a half year period of war. It [26:12] would have the numbers would have been [26:15] astronomical like they they grew by 10 [26:18] 20 100 constant with tens and tens of [26:21] bombs. we bombed the amount of bombs, [26:23] the amount of of targets that were in [26:25] the tens of thousands. And if that was a [26:28] ratio, you're talking hundreds of [26:29] thousands. And and we know like we [26:32] remember we know that the condition of [26:34] collateral killing was different in the [26:37] war of Gaza than it was in the past. Um [26:40] we know that and it shifted and for that [26:42] we do need to have an accountability. We [26:44] have to talk. Was it justified? Was it [26:46] not justified? You know, was it [26:48] necessary to bring back deterrence? Was [26:51] it necessary for the context of their [26:52] hiding behind their civilian population? [26:55] All of the above is a conversation that [26:56] I wish we would actually have which is [26:58] your stage two. But once he said 500 was [27:02] if they asked him to what number were [27:04] you allowed 500 immediately I said [27:06] didn't happen like I don't have to the [27:09] movie became irrelevant to me like the [27:12] first day didn't happen. I don't even [27:13] have to think about it and and people [27:15] know me. I'm I know things that have [27:18] happened. [27:20] I know. You say you don't know and it's [27:22] fair enough. I'm not seeing object. I [27:25] could say I know. I'm not saying um that [27:27] therefore everybody else has to agree [27:29] with me. I know that things have [27:30] happened. I think most of the world [27:33] knows that profound things have [27:35] happened. But this [27:38] didn't happen. And so immediately I said [27:41] this movie is uninteresting. And then [27:43] the second stage of this little video [27:46] clip um and look it up on YouTube. Look [27:49] up Naza on YouTube and you'll see it [27:53] is they are the proof is that there's a [27:57] soldier saying that for every apartment [28:01] in Gaza, every single house and [28:04] apartment there is a file for if we bomb [28:09] it. [28:11] what will be the number or the extent of [28:14] collateral killing that will happen? [28:17] And this was evidence that Israel was [28:21] embracing it when in fact that's a proof [28:24] of the opposite. [28:25] >> That's right. [28:26] >> Because wow, we actually have someone [28:30] went to the to the effort to to actually [28:33] count and to see what will be the price. [28:36] Now, if I want to commit genocide, bomb [28:39] away. like we actually there there's a [28:42] file to [28:43] >> that's a crucial point how much effort [28:46] it is to actually put together this data [28:50] and then to basically supplying room for [28:53] a conversation. So I'm looking at this [28:55] and I'm saying this is evidence of our [28:57] moral failure and I'm saying what's it's [29:00] the opposite. So, I was in this strange [29:02] place because I want a conversation [29:05] about Israel's [29:07] policy on on on collateral killing. I [29:12] don't believe [29:14] that Israel committed genocide in the [29:16] sense of trying to kill masses of [29:18] people. I do believe that there were [29:20] leaders in the Israeli government and [29:22] who are still there today [snorts] who [29:24] want all Gazins gone. And if all Gazins [29:27] are gone and they have the intent to do [29:28] so, that intent constitutes genocide. [29:33] Genocide is not a function of how many [29:34] people you kill. If you want to destroy, [29:37] but in the army, in the actions of the [29:39] army, in pursuing the war, was there the [29:42] was there an intent to do? I don't [29:45] believe there was. I don't believe there [29:46] was. I believe there might have been [29:48] some governmental certain ministers, all [29:50] of the above. The point the point you're [29:51] making is really important and I I just [29:53] want to linger on it for a moment [29:56] because [29:57] when you when you build your argument [30:02] around an Israeli conversation [30:06] that's really a debate about collateral [30:09] damage. The moment you're in that [30:12] parameter, you're in that conversation, [30:14] you're not in a genocide conversation. [30:16] Now, you could abuse it. Yes, we we can [30:19] argue about whether we abuse the [30:20] category of coll of what you and I are [30:23] calling collateral killings and that's [30:25] that's the crucial conversation we need [30:27] to have. But when you take that [30:30] conversation and turn it into its [30:32] opposite, which is an indiscriminate, [30:35] it's the exact opposite. So, I'm [30:37] watching it and then I found myself in a [30:39] very psychologically complicated place [30:42] for me to be in, [30:43] >> right? [30:44] >> Because I'm all in. I unlike some many [30:47] people actually even like most people I [30:50] embrace [30:52] all criticism. [30:54] If someone criticizes me I don't want to [30:56] waste it. I don't want to waste it. I [30:59] don't want to get into who are you? You [31:01] know do you have it? Is it right? Is it [31:02] wrong? It's it's just like I want I [31:05] don't want to embrace it as right. I [31:07] just want to embrace it as something [31:10] that I have to take into account. But [31:12] with this movie, I found myself like [31:14] from the beginning just shutting down [31:17] and then the gap between me and the [31:20] 25minute ovation or and then many people [31:24] around the world and I'm all in for a [31:26] moral conversation. It's like I found [31:28] myself profoundly [31:30] frustrated with myself, but I didn't [31:33] want to change because this movie was [31:35] over for me. Like it was a morally [31:37] insignificant [31:39] event. Now what you're describing what [31:42] you're describing denille is a textbook [31:45] case of how not to galvanize the society [31:50] to have a moral introspective [31:52] conversation. And you know right we're [31:54] we're we're we're speaking in the period [31:56] between Rosha Sha and Yam Kipur. This is [31:59] the most intense period of the Jewish [32:02] year for self introspection. And for [32:04] this film to come out it came out on [32:06] Rosha Shana. for this film to come out [32:09] now at a time when when really so many [32:12] Jews are ex we're were examining our are [32:14] our our certainly our our individual uh [32:18] acts of wrongdoing and then and then you [32:21] get hit in the face with this [32:24] and again I come back to what I said [32:26] earlier about a missed opportunity and [32:28] and what a squandered moment this is [32:30] especially on on the calendar the Hebrew [32:33] calendar and there's another element [32:35] here that's something I want to pick up [32:36] on what you were saying a moment ago, [32:39] which is that you're open to criticism [32:41] no matter what the source. In this [32:44] particular case, I think the source [32:47] matters because and again, you you [32:49] touched on this earlier, we have no way [32:52] of verifying any of these accusations. [32:56] Everything's anonymous and the incidents [32:59] themselves are vague enough so that we [33:01] don't know how to how to verify. In a [33:05] case like that, you really need to trust [33:09] the filmmaker. You need to trust the [33:11] messenger because I don't know who these [33:13] other witnesses are. And what I know [33:17] about this filmmaker is that he comes [33:20] from the anti-ionist Israeli fringe. [33:24] And I saw an interview with him recently [33:26] where he was he was speaking in Arabic [33:28] to an a a a Middle Eastern audience and [33:32] he was saying, "My goal is to help the [33:36] Palestinians [33:37] um even the the the power differential [33:41] with Israel." And the way to do that is [33:44] by getting the world on their side. My [33:46] goal is to galvanize world opinion. So I [33:49] see this is a guy who's not coming with [33:52] clean hands. He has an agenda, agree [33:54] with the agenda or not, but how can I [33:58] trust him when he's produced a film that [34:01] I have no way of verifying and his [34:03] motives are uh you know unclear? [34:05] >> I think your argument is very strong. I [34:08] just never It's interesting. I never [34:10] make that argument but I'm not attacking [34:12] it because you're right in this case who [34:15] are we trusting here? [34:16] >> Yeah. [34:17] >> So it's like one thing you know if [34:18] Kristoff [34:18] >> I can't trust the witnesses because I [34:20] don't know who they are. It's one thing [34:21] Kristoff says something so then [34:23] everybody could attack Kristoff like [34:25] your first thing is well who's Kristoff? [34:27] You remember we had this you know who's [34:29] Kristoff? Who is he? And then oh don't [34:31] you know he writes all these things that [34:32] aren't verified and blah blah blah. But [34:34] some of the things he does are serious. [34:36] Oh no, [34:37] >> let's not go back to [34:38] >> No, no, but I'm not. But I'm saying but [34:39] like that's an example. But there it's a [34:41] little Okay. But he made specific [34:44] claims. And so if empirically you can't [34:48] train a dog to rape a person, that's [34:51] actually something that's worth like [34:53] there's a claim that I could. So so I [34:56] also in general I I hate the ad homonym [35:00] attacks you know who are you? How could [35:03] you do it? Um are you against me from [35:05] the beginning? Could I trust you? Even [35:07] though I accept that in this case it's [35:09] different because there's no way to [35:11] validate anything. It's just [35:13] >> and you know, how is it that he couldn't [35:15] find even one former member of the of [35:19] the of the intelligence unit who's ready [35:22] to go on camera? [35:23] >> Okay, first of all, we don't know. None [35:24] of us have seen them, but I'm sens [35:29] All of those are great, but it's like I [35:31] I'm in a strange place [35:33] >> because I don't want to do that, [35:35] >> right? [35:35] >> It's like and I don't want to do it [35:37] about this issue. [35:38] >> I don't want to do it about this, [35:39] >> especially about this issue. especially [35:41] about the issue because I think this is [35:43] a I think Israel [35:46] used certain def self-defense arguments [35:51] to relax the category beyond where it [35:53] should have been relaxed, you know, and [35:55] we have so many examples that we've [35:57] seen, you know, there's a camera that's [36:00] uh that's filming us, so it's [36:02] endangering us. So, let's fire a tank to [36:04] take out the camera. and 12 journalists [36:07] or or or or or aid workers get killed, [36:10] you know, like in here. So, like we know [36:13] something in in in the operational [36:17] ease of pulling a trigger was wrong in [36:20] Gaza. Doesn't mean it was all wrong. [36:22] Doesn't mean the war was unjust. It [36:24] doesn't mean we're committing genocide. [36:25] Just doesn't matter. There was stuff. [36:27] And here I'm finding myself [36:30] >> in a place that I'm not it's not [36:33] natural. And it's even and then when I'm [36:37] looking at the way I know as our [36:39] colleague you know we were talking about [36:40] this before in our research seminar as [36:42] our colleague Elana Steinh said this is [36:45] going to be required watching in every [36:47] campus and then it's going to be fact [36:50] and here I want to add the other [36:52] dimension is not only am I frustrated [36:54] with myself [36:55] even though it's interesting this was [36:57] like for me it was just self-evident [36:59] there's no greater indictment of this [37:02] film than the fact that Denil Hartman is [37:04] coming out against it's it's [37:08] I don't hold myself in such high regard [37:10] that there's no greater but [37:12] >> allow me to fly. [37:13] >> Okay. Thank you very much. It's much [37:15] appreciated. But [37:17] what's even more frustrating for me is [37:20] to know how futile this is. And this is [37:24] an even deeper sadness than the [37:26] 25-minute ovation [37:28] because it's going to be shown [37:30] >> and it's going to become like Bible [37:33] >> and precisely because it can't be [37:34] refuted. That's what religion is. [37:37] Religion, one of its greatest strengths [37:39] is that no religion worth its salt [37:43] offers a claim that's refutable. [37:47] to survive as a powerful religion, [37:50] everything has to be um you know, it's [37:52] just you can't refute it. It's my belief [37:54] and you can go and and so here it is. [37:56] You can't refute it. It's going to be [37:58] it's going to be [38:00] >> scripture here and the messenger is [38:03] Israeli [38:03] >> and that that's your thing. I don't care [38:06] if it's Isra. It's just [38:08] >> No, I'm saying to that will add to the [38:10] credibility. [38:11] >> That's interesting. Uh that's [38:12] interesting. I accept that. But even if [38:14] it wasn't, it wouldn't matter if this [38:16] this became through this little film [38:18] festival or this big film festival, this [38:21] 80minute video unverifiable [38:24] with flaws [38:26] abound is now going to be sacred [38:29] doctrine. And I know that sacred [38:33] doctrine when your primary defense is [38:36] historical disputation, [38:39] you're irrelevant. [38:40] >> Yeah. And so there's a sadness of [38:44] >> they got us [38:45] >> for what? Like they got us [38:47] >> and uh that was my second round and [38:49] maybe my third round. Do you have [38:51] another round of this? It's it's a big [38:53] deal because then you wonder you know [38:54] and again I want to quote my colleague [38:56] Yehuda Kurtzer and I'm quoting you have [38:58] to know one of the great blessings of [39:00] our work is we get to sit in a research [39:03] seminar together every week for a couple [39:05] of hours with you know you and I and [39:07] Yehuda and Elana and Masua Sag and Tom P [39:11] a whole team of people and now a whole [39:14] new and and Sarita a whole group where [39:17] we learn from each other and one of the [39:20] things that that Yehuda mentioned And [39:22] maybe that's the reason why I shifted [39:25] here is that this is part of this. This [39:29] isn't a move. This is part of the [39:31] assault. This is part of the multiffront [39:34] war that we're engaged in. And in a [39:37] multiffront war, you respond to it very [39:40] very differently. It's it's not maybe [39:43] this because this wasn't criticism. [39:45] Maybe this is just part of that war. [39:48] >> The the film is an act of war. So it's [39:50] like it's it's an interesting feature. [39:52] Do you have you know let's do one last [39:54] round and um because each one of these [39:58] and it has such a deep effect on Israeli [40:00] society. Do you have another another [40:03] level of response that you wanted to [40:05] share? [40:06] >> Yeah. There's something that [40:09] this film points to about how Israel has [40:13] been how this war has been critiqued [40:16] which um and this film is an extreme [40:19] example of it but it's a pattern that [40:21] you see running through much of the [40:24] extreme criticism against Israel and [40:26] that is erasing [40:29] Hamas from the equation. This is not [40:33] this is not a war that Israel fought [40:36] against a terror regime. It's a war that [40:40] Israel declared against the civilian [40:42] population. [40:44] And you saw this very strongly in the [40:48] work of uh Omar Bartov. Omar Bartov is [40:51] the Israeli born once again Holocaust [40:54] historian uh who wrote wrote a series of [40:58] uh of op-eds for the New York Times that [41:01] were seinal in helping frame the [41:04] conversation and helping lay the ground [41:07] to accuse Israel of genocide. [41:09] >> And he says, "I'm a genocide expert." [41:12] >> Yes. [41:12] >> He's the one who always says, "I've [41:14] researched genocide. I am aware and [41:16] therefore [41:17] >> it's it's actually what he says is [41:19] >> I'm a Holocaust expert [41:22] >> and I know genocide when I see it. [41:24] >> So it's even okay [41:25] >> and and what's so striking in his work [41:29] on on Gaza is that he doesn't deal with [41:32] the battlefield conditions. This is not [41:35] a battlefield. It's a killing zone. And [41:38] yes, a Holocaust historian would look at [41:42] killing zones. But how do you look at at [41:45] a war and erase the battleground? [41:50] And so and and it's not there. And I and [41:52] I've I've started reading his book. He [41:55] does the same thing in the book. Kamas [41:57] is is almost an afterthought. [42:02] And I noticed you said started reading. [42:05] >> You probably put it. It's really hard [42:08] for me to to get through this stuff. Uh, [42:11] I need a research assistant to to to sum [42:13] it up for me [42:14] >> to give you the cliff notes. Yeah. [42:15] >> Really? [gasps] [42:16] >> It's painful. It's act it's it's [42:18] sometimes physically painful to read [42:20] this stuff and not for the reasons that [42:23] they that they were hoping it would be [42:25] painful to read. Uh, and um and so [42:30] here again, where's Kamas? [42:34] Where where are the hundreds of [42:35] kilometers of tunnels? uh where where [42:39] are the thousands of booby trapped [42:41] apartments? [42:43] It it's not there. And so the the eraser [42:48] required to get to these conclusions, [42:52] the systematic eraser of the other side [42:56] is is I think a crucial [42:58] part of this and and this film it seems [43:01] to me is really in some ways the peak [43:03] expression of that. You know it my last [43:06] and what this will conclude response was [43:10] or experience of the movie was the [43:11] Israeli response to it. [43:14] First of all the the the extensive [43:16] conversation the declaration of the [43:19] minister of uh of uh culture that we're [43:22] going to withdraw their citizenship of [43:26] the de the directors as if they could do [43:28] that. It's just you can't take away [43:30] people's citizenship just doesn't [43:31] matter. But the the the unproductive [43:35] response, [43:37] not only that X didn't happen, just as a [43:42] sadness to its lack of effectiveness, [43:45] cuz facts should matter. [43:48] And to know that we're in a world where [43:49] facts don't matter is is is a profoundly [43:52] frightening place, not just for Israel, [43:55] just in general. The whole world is just [43:56] a strange place. But it wasn't just [43:58] that. It was again the Israeli [44:02] return to anti-semitism. [44:05] And that's not to say that there aren't [44:08] anti-semitic dimensions to it. [44:10] >> You mean as our default response and [44:12] that doesn't mean, you know, and I think [44:14] a Jew could be anti-Semitic like, you [44:16] know, they could, as you said, I don't [44:18] it's like there's if there's a [44:19] definition, there's certain categories, [44:21] you know, it's to turn a Jew or Israel [44:23] into the evil dour. I don't care who [44:26] does it. anti-semitism could exist even [44:28] if it comes from a Jew. It doesn't make [44:29] it kosher, you know. And it might be and [44:31] some of the people in Venice in at the [44:34] film festival might have been anti I [44:36] have no idea. I'm not sitting here. I [44:38] don't know. But this [44:41] the the frustrating [44:45] return. [44:46] >> Yeah. [44:47] >> Constantly to ascribing everything to [44:51] anti-semitism. [44:53] And I hope I'm not insulting your [44:56] upbringing, [laughter] but like it's [44:58] just it is just so [45:01] ineffective. [45:03] It's not good for us. This goes to your [45:05] second point. Um it just shuts us down, [45:08] but it just makes us so irrelevant in [45:11] the world. [45:12] >> Yeah. and the world you know here um [45:16] there's uh there's a very interesting [45:18] article a declaration by the foreign [45:21] minister I think of of of Norway is it [45:24] or of uh [45:25] >> right [45:26] >> um [45:27] >> where he said you know and they're [45:29] they're considering now turning [45:31] assistance of uh to anybody who does any [45:35] trade with settlements into a criminal [45:38] act punishable by three years in prison. [45:40] I don't want to get into the the nature [45:42] of that's a whole other conversation um [45:44] Britney [45:45] >> which we should have [45:46] >> we should have at some point to talk [45:48] about what what what you know Miban's I [45:51] recommend that everybody read Miban's [45:53] speech and there's a whole thing foreign [45:55] the foreign minister of England uh maybe [45:57] we could also we should put that also in [45:59] in in the show notes these are important [46:01] things to read and to but he said [46:03] something he said for for years Israel [46:07] has been able to intimidate us [46:12] by saying [46:14] that you are an anti-semite [46:17] when you criticize Israel's violations [46:20] of international law. And in a profound [46:23] statement, he said that [46:25] defensive shield [46:29] which has enabled you to intimidate us, [46:34] that defensive shield is now gone. Now [46:37] our challenge is there's actually at a [46:39] time where anti-semitism is growing and [46:42] at the same time it's becoming less [46:44] effective as as a tool and when I look [46:48] at my country you know maybe Yehuda's [46:50] right this is part of the war this film [46:52] this is an assault this is an attack um [46:56] and we don't know like how do we how do [47:00] we survive in this realm of discourse [47:04] and how do we reacquire friends who [47:08] aren't going to give a 25-minute uh [47:10] standing ovation, but who might have a [47:12] question. And so my my last fear was to [47:16] look at this movie and to ask it's like [47:19] this is not an easy time. [47:21] >> Yeah. [47:21] >> But what do we need to do? Um I'm [47:25] sensing that you want to say something. [47:27] >> I do. I do. I I I I actually [47:31] uh want to just briefly talk about the [47:36] filmmaker. I saw an interview with him [47:39] uh yesterday on Israeli TV with Raviv [47:44] Duker, who's one of Israel's preeminent [47:46] journalists, very thoughtful, and um it [47:51] was a a a [47:53] real interview and not a um a frontal [47:57] attack. It was really trying to [47:59] understand uh what the film was about [48:03] whether the filmmaker [48:05] considered all of the different angles. [48:08] Why did you leave out um for example uh [48:12] comparing uh how Israel waged this war [48:15] with other armies and similar [48:17] situations? [48:18] And I want have two opposite thoughts [48:22] about the filmmaker. One is how childish [48:25] he is and [48:29] he could not have hoped for a softer [48:32] interview from an Israeli journalist. [48:35] Juker was really fair with him and he [48:38] was so thin skinned. He kept saying to [48:40] Juker, "Well, go make your own film if [48:42] you don't like uh if you think I I left [48:44] this out." What? That's just a childish [48:47] answer. But the other feel the other [48:50] response that I had was this is an [48:53] Israeli kid. [48:55] And what touched me despite despite [48:57] myself, I did not want to be moved by [48:59] him. But he said um uh Duker asked him, [49:04] "Are you worried about coming back to [49:05] Israel?" And he said, "Of course I'm [49:07] worried. Israel is my home. I want to [49:10] continue living in Israel." And suddenly [49:13] it just hit me, this isn't a [49:16] >> [snorts] [49:16] >> um this isn't a a self-declared enemy of [49:20] Israel. This is one of our our kids. And [49:24] I think he's really gone off off in in [49:28] in a deep way and he's done enormous [49:31] harm to us. But I suddenly felt [49:33] protective toward him because we know [49:35] what he's coming back into. He is now [49:38] the most hated person in the state of [49:40] Israel. There are people in this country [49:42] who are literally unhinged by the last [49:46] three years and and I'm I'm reading [49:50] responses by former hostages [49:53] that worry me. [49:55] People are are raging against this this [49:59] kid who has done enormous damage to us. [50:02] >> So it's like this this movie has [50:04] activated [50:06] something. I'm sorry you'll see. [50:08] >> No. Yeah. And I'm first of all, so I'm [50:11] worried about two things. I'm worried [50:13] for his physical safety because this is [50:15] not the society that uh that we we we [50:19] hope for where where even extreme [50:22] critics, even extreme deviants uh are [50:25] exposed to violence. So I'm worried for [50:27] him and I'm worried for us. I'm worried [50:29] what this is bringing out in us. [50:31] >> It's uh [50:34] to say may you live in interesting [50:36] times. um Naza when a film is the news [50:41] and when the film [50:44] activates [50:46] everything different dimensions of each [50:49] one of us. Um, stay tuned my friends. [50:53] Yi, it was a pleasure being with you and [50:56] maybe I'd like to wish all of our [50:57] audience again [50:59] >> a good year in Gumarimatva. [51:01] >> Shata everyone. [51:02] >> Shatua. [51:19] That was Danielle Hartman and Yossi [51:21] Klein Halevi on Arc Media's For Heaven's [51:24] Sake podcast. I strongly encourage you [51:26] to subscribe to this podcast and make it [51:29] part of your regular listening diet. [51:41] If Call Me Back is where you come for [51:43] honest conversations about Israel and [51:45] the Jewish world, [music] [51:46] please hit subscribe and also share it [51:49] with a friend. And if you missed our [51:50] last episode, it's [music] worth going [51:52] back for. See you next time.
