Why the Israeli ambassador's letter should shame us

Irrespective of why the ambassador spoke, his letter should be a matter of concern and shame for us

Israeli Ambassador to India's letter to filmmaker Nadav Lapid condemning him should shame the government of India, the ruling party that runs it, and in a way, all of us. In the letter, the ambassador has cursed the filmmaker of his own country. Telling him that because of his statement, the life of the ambassador and the rest of the Israeli citizens in India has become unsafe.

Why are they feeling insecure or scared? Are they afraid of the Government of India? But he is an ambassador; why should he be afraid of the government? Or do they fear non-governmental violence? Who will do that violence? Pro-government goons? And how did this fear arise? Why did filmmaker Nadav become the reason for this?

The Israeli filmmaker made a statement on behalf of the jury of the International Film Festival of India in Goa, expressing his opinion about India's entry into the competition category of the festival. It was about the film 'The Kashmir Files'. The filmmaker called it a vulgar propaganda film and said that the jury was disturbed to see it in the competition category of a film festival of this stature. The remaining 14 films in the competition category were artistic films of high quality, and it was a matter of pity and surprise for them to have an artistically crude film like 'The Kashmir Files' among them.

After his opinion on 'The Kashmir Files', there was a storm in the Bharatiya Janata Party and Hindutva circles. Swords are usually drawn on fellow Indians, who are Muslims, Christians and intellectuals, but this time they are being waved at Israelis. Who, till yesterday, were the closest friends of this ruling dispensation. The Israeli ambassador is on record that the inbox of the embassy is overflowing with abuses and threats. Threats can turn into physical violence. It is this apprehension which made the ambassador tell the filmmaker that he would win accolades for his ''brave'' statement, but he wouldn't live here to face the consequences. Israelis, like the ambassador and his compatriots, will have to pay for his words!

Why did the ambassador feel that other Israelis would be targeted for the statement of an individual who happens to be an Israeli? Is it because he has recently seen that due to the crime of a person named Aftab, an atmosphere of violence is being created against all Muslims? That too by those who are supporters of the ruling party! If an outsider has this kind of perception about India, is it respectable for us?

But why has the hell broken loose over the criticism by an artist about one film? Why is Israel's ambassador saying that India has been insulted by this criticism? Does this film represent India? Is it even made by the Government of India? It should have been left to the director of the film to respond. But we know why the Hindutva gangs are upset.

We all know that 'The Kashmir Files', according to its director, is a film based on violence on Pandits and their exodus from Kashmir. Can the fact of that violence be denied? Is Lapid even doing it? Even before he aired his opinion, film critics have been saying that this film has been made with the aim of creating hatred against Muslims. It is a divisive film. Many among the Kashmiri Pandits say that the film obliterates the context and that it targets Muslims. One of the leaders of the Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti has also said that this film sells the pain and suffering of Pandits and is not an honest film. It has been made with an Islamophobic intent. Anti-Muslim slogans were raised in the cinema houses where this film was screened. The BJP not only publicised this film but also showed it free of cost to the people.

The Prime Minister himself promoted this film. It was an unprecedented event in Indian cinema history that a ruling party should promote a movie, and the entire government, including the Prime Minister, would get involved in pushing the film. This film becomes suspicious only because of this one thing.

Filmmaker Lapid would probably be familiar with these things related to the film. But he did not say anything on the subject of the film. He did not say that there was no violence against Kashmiri Pandits. To divert attention from the film's poor quality, lies are being spread that Lapid denied the violence against Pandits. Lapid reiterated clearly that he did not intend to comment on the violence in Kashmir. Because he does not know enough about it and does not intend to speak on something he does not know.

Lapid knows cinema. He was speaking in the capacity of a film director. He said it did not deserve to be included in the category of artistic films because it was a propaganda film. It is bad from the artistic point of view. He said that he could differentiate which film is propaganda. For this, deep knowledge of the subject of the film, in this case, the violence against Kashmiri Pandits, is not necessary. This is a strong opinion, and the words are harsh. In India, where it is customary to treat even murderers with respect, people have been taken aback by such outspokenness and frank language.

Lapid is the chairman of the jury. In that capacity, he has the right to give his opinion on the films he has watched. It is his duty and responsibility. There was also a time in India that it was not extraordinary for artists to criticise the government's stand, and after that, they were not attacked by gangs of pro-government goons. In the free world outside India, artists can criticise the President and the Prime Minister even before them. Lapid is an outspoken critic of the policies of his country Israel. His films are known worldwide for their critical political voice. He is a respected name in the international cinema community for his artistic experimentation. His words have value. That's why his opinion about 'The Kashmir Files' will be taken seriously outside India.

Lapid is an Israeli but not the official representative of Israel. He was not invited by the Government of India on a diplomatic mission. He was at the Goa Film Festival in a professional capacity for a specific assignment. At the end of the ceremony, his job was to tell the jury's opinion about the films. He said that all the films were excellent in their own way. But the shoddiness of 'The Kashmir Files' was so evident that they were astonished that one could even think of placing it among these world-class films. He felt so disturbed by choice of film that he thought it necessary to express it. He is not so naive as not to anticipate the kind of reaction his remarks would elicit. He said this even later amid all the uproar.

He said it would have been dishonest if he did not give this opinion. Should he have talked about the beach and the food? Reaffirming his stand, he said he could imagine a situation of such a film being made in Israel. Then he would like a non-Israeli to critique it.

Lapid has stuck to his word. Rather, using more harsh words, he said that it was a fascist film. It propagates anti-Muslim violence while manipulating the audience emotionally. Knowing this is a film backed by India's anti-Muslim ruling ideology, Lapid has not backed down from his point. Since he felt that 'The Kashmir Files' was a dishonourable entry for the Goa Film Festival, he honestly expressed his opinion to protect its reputation.

Israel's ambassador said that Lapid did not care about India's hospitality. But Lapid was actually speaking because of concern for India's reputation. After all, India for them is the India of Satyajit Ray, Mrinal Sen, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Aparna Sen, etc. He does not want India to fall in his eyes. Israel's ambassador has a different concern. He knows the nexus between the violent mobs and the ruling party of today's India. He is witnessing a combination of state violence and anarchic violence here. Then there is also an ideological affinity between the ruling ideology of India and the ruling ideology of Israel.

Irrespective of whether the ambassador spoke due to government pressure or out of fear, it should be a matter of concern and shame for us. Instead of talking about it, we are debating whether there was violence against the Pandit community in Kashmir or not and whether Nadav Lapid denied it when he lambasted 'The Kashmir Files'. That is not the issue Lapid wanted to discuss. But we can see that to deflect attention from his criticism of the film, Kashmiri Pandits are again being used.

(The writer teaches at Delhi University)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.