JO, KULTURINSTITUTIONER KAN GODT SIGE FRA OVERFOR FOLKEMORD – ET ÅBENT BREV TIL FESTIVALENS LEDELSE
(English below)
I kølvandet på den kritik, der nu to år i træk har været rettet mod CPH:DOX og i forlængelse af vores dialog før og under festivalen, samt Niklas Engstrøms debatindlæg i Dagbladet Information d. 9.4, vil vi fra Filmfolk For Våbenhvile følge op med vores refleksioner.
Kritikken af festivalen omhandler især tre punkter:
1. at CPH:DOX’ undlader at udkomme med en klar fordømmelse af Israels ulovlige krigshandlinger, samt medvirker til at sløre realiteternes alvor med vage formuleringer.
2. at CPH:DOX legitimerer den siddende statsministers krigsstøtte, ved at invitere hende som hædersgæst til festivalens åbningsgalla.
3. at CPH:DOX bidrager til at normalisere krigsforbrydelserne ved at huse en statsstøttet Israelsk salgsdelegation, CoPro, som samarbejder med den Israelske ambassade.
Engstrøm fremfører i sit debatindlæg, at kritikken bunder i to forskellige opfattelser af kulturinstitutionernes ansvar. Når han retorisk skriver “Skal man bruge sin magt på konsekvent at fremme bestemte holdninger, eller skal man gennem kunsten åbne et rum, hvor alle kan komme ind og få udvidet deres perspektiv?”, er det en manipulatorisk forenkling, som behændigt placerer kritikerne i den første (dogmatiske) kategori og ham selv i den anden (rummelige).
Festivallederen undgår helt at forholde sig til spørgsmålet om, hvordan dialogen konkret ser ud, når den sårbare part føler sig nødsaget til at forlade rummet som følge af festivalens valg. Det gælder bla. flg. der trak sig fra samarbejdet med CPH:DOX 2025: Den norsk-palæstinensiske psykolog Mustafa Jayyousi; Palæstinensisk Kulturinstitut; Adoptionspolitisk Forum; Palestine Solidarity Network på DTU samt den dansk-palæstinensiske instruktør Omar Shargarwi, som brugte sin medvirken til en protest mod CPH:DOX. Ingen af disse er nævnt i Engstrøms indlæg.
At Israels sønderbombning af Gaza overgår enhver etisk, moralsk og menneskelig målestok er veldokumenteret og burde ikke kræve en gentagelse her. Alligevel fremstiller Engstrøm det som en ligeværdig konflikt mellem to jævnbyrdige parter, eller “nationer”, som han skriver. Han vil ikke holde med én nation frem for en anden. Samtidig bedyrer Engstrøm, at han og festivalen holder med de civile. Men i Israels kontinuerlige massakrer på palæstinenserne er det jo netop civilbefolkningen, der står for skud. Herunder filmfolk, som ikke kan tage på festival, fordi de er dræbt eller indespærret i Israels krigsinferno i Gaza.
Engstrøm ønsker “ikke at tage stilling”, men som nobelpristageren Elie Wiesel skrev, her citeret af en læser fra kommentartråden til Engstrøms debatindlæg: “Neutralitet hjælper altid undertrykkeren, aldrig den undertrykte. Neutralitet opmuntrer undertrykkeren til at fortsætte.”
FESTEN FOR DE STÆRKE
Mette Frederiksens regering har igennem de sidste 16 måneder været blandt verdens mest loyale støtter af Israel og USA og deres udryddelseskrig i Gaza. Statsministeren støtter aktivt den israelske besættelsesmagt gennem salg af våbendele og presser personligt på for at forfølge og udvise borgere i Danmark, der sympatiserer med palæstinenserne. Samtidig er regeringen i gang med en storstilet oprustning, som omfatter amerikanske militærbaser på dansk jord.
Om CPH:DOX’ åbningsfilm, Facing War, kan man sige, at den trods interessante optagelser i NATOS indre gemakker, ikke fremstår som en nysgerrig film, men som et stykke bombastisk krigspropaganda, der flugter med den frygt-retorik og det os-og-dem-narrativ som statsministeren excellerer i.
Med valget af åbningsfilmen og Frederiksen som hædersgæst til gallaceremonien, skabte CPH:DOX en festlig platform for fejring af den siddende statsministers kontroversielle synspunkter. Disse synspunkter kunne være blevet udfordret i den efterfølgende paneldebat, men blev det ikke. At tro, at disse markante valg signalerer “ikke at tage stilling” forekommer noget virkelighedsfjernt.
Kritikkens tredje punkt går ikke, som Engstrøm fremfører, på, om der bliver vist film af israelske filmskabere, men på det direkte eller indirekte samarbejde med den Israelske stat, sådan som vi så det med salgsdelegationen CoPro og deres charmeoffensiv på den israelske ambassade.
Ved at nægte at tage afstand fra den israelske stat og deres udsendinge og således undlade at følge PACBI’s retningslinjer for, hvordan vi bør agere overfor apartheid og etnisk udrensning, forsømmer CPH:DOX at beskytte de palæstinensiske stemmer, de hævder, at favne. Ved retorisk at forvrænge kritikken, skader man deres sag yderligere.
Mustafa Jayyousis begrundelse for at trække sig fra en paneldebat på CPH:DOX, lyder bla.: “Jeg deltager ikke i events sammen med virksomheder eller personer, der normaliserer et folkemord og etnisk udrensning af mit folk. (…) Jeg kan ikke deltage i et event, hvor politikere, som har støttet og tjent penge på at dræbe min familie, får lov til at holde åbningstaler.”
Eller med Omar Shargawis ord: “Kan I virkelig ikke se det absurde i at være vært for både bødlen og offeret? I at sidestille dem og kalde det ‘balance’?”
DEN UDDELEGEREDE AKTIVISME
Når Niklas Engstrøm skelner hårdt mellem aktivistens og kulturinstitutionens roller, outsourcer han ansvaret for solidariteten til folk, der ikke har den samme magt som han selv. “Aktivister” er borgere med liv og arbejde ligesom festivallederen. Ved at aktivist-brande andre, fritager Engstrøm sig selv for spørgsmålet om, hvad han og CPH:DOX kan gøre, med den magt der ligger hos en prestigefyldt og indflydelsesrig kulturinstitution.
I et andet interview med IDA magazine argumenterer Engstrøm for, at CPH:DOX’s rolle begrænser sig til at vise film, der kan tilskynde til nye perspektiver, og at en stillingtagen blot vil skabe et ekko-kammer for dem, der allerede støtter den palæstinensiske sag.
Men burde CPH:DOX ikke være mere bekymret for, om festivalen skaber et ekkokammer for dem der i forvejen har magten, sådan som vi ser det i mange regimer, vi nødigt vil sammenlignes med?
I en virkelighed, hvor civile rutinemæssigt bliver dræbt og lemlæstet; hvor den palæstinensiske diaspora vedvarende kalder på deres regeringers og kulturinstitutioners solidaritet, og hvor fredsaktivister bliver forfulgt, arresteret og deporteret under falske beskyldninger om anti-semitisme, har vi brug for modige institutioner til at skabe momentum, pres og reel forandring.
Da Hamdan Ballal, en af instruktørerne bag den Oscar-vindende No Other Land, for nylig blev angrebet og kidnappet af den Israelske besættelseshær, var en række branche-organisationer, herunder CPH:DOX, hurtige til at vise utvetydig solidaritet. Ballals løsladelse viser med al tydelighed, at den massive offentlige protest havde effektiv gennemslagskraft. Men udelukkende at solidarisere sig med enkeltpersoner, mens deres familier bliver slagtet, peger ind i en sær parallelvirkelighed. Tænk hvad vi kunne opnå i fællesskab, hvis en sådan solidaritet ikke kun tilfaldt Oscar-vindere?
Instruktøren Joshua Oppenheimer, som i The Act of Killing og The Look of Silence har undersøgt eftervirkningerne af folkedrab i Indonesien, understreger i et aktuelt interview tavshedens ætsende virkning på sjælen og kalder på sammenhold og handling: “Lige nu er der brug for, at vi ærlige overfor os selv: Hvad kræves der af os? Vi løser ikke vores problemer alene, på sociale medier eller i små bobler. Vi stopper kun folkedrabet i Palæstina ved at stå sammen og sige: aldrig igen.”
Og som Shargawi understreger i sin kritik, er der ingen tid at spilde: “Vores ansvar gælder nu – mens forbrydelserne finder sted, mens et folkedrab udfoldes for øjnene af os.”
Mens dette bliver skrevet og institutioner som CPH:DOX overvejer deres stillingtagen, eller bruger energi på at forsvare deres lunkne humanisme, overgår virkelighedens overgreb atter vores fantasi. I disse dage udfører Netanyahus regering den endelige etniske udrensning af palæstinenserne fra de sidste rester af deres oprindelige land, akkompagneret af sørgeligt impotente protester fra deres trofaste støtter, såsom vores egen regering.
Som filmfolk med en lang tilknytning og kærlighed til CPH:DOX, håber vi at anspore til en fornyet selvransagelse hos festivalledelsen. Vi håber at CPH:DOX fremover vil tage ansvar for at beskytte de forfulgte og marginaliserede grupper, festivalen ønsker at rumme, ved at positionere sig utvetydigt imod militarisme, vold og undertrykkelse. Og ikke mindst, at festivalledelsen finder modet til at sige fra over for Israels folkemord.
Hilsen,
Filmfolk For Våbenhvile / Filmworkers for Palestine
YES, CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS CAN TAKE A STAND AGAINST GENOCIDE – AN OPEN LETTER TO THE FESTIVAL MANAGEMENT
In the wake of the criticism that has been directed at CPH:DOX for two years in a row and in continuation of our dialogue before and during the festival, as well as Niklas Engstrøm’s opinion piece in Dagbladet Information on April 9, we from Filmfolk For Våbenhvile would like to follow up with our reflections.
The criticism of the festival mainly concerns three points:
- That CPH:DOX fails to issue a clear condemnation of Israel’s illegal acts of war and contributes to obscuring the seriousness of the realities with vague formulations.
- That CPH:DOX legitimizes the current prime minister’s support for the war by inviting her as an honorary guest to the festival’s opening gala.
- That CPH:DOX contributes to normalizing war crimes by hosting a state-supported Israeli sales delegation, CoPro, which collaborates with the Israeli embassy.
Engstrøm argues in his opinion piece that the criticism is based on two different perceptions of the responsibility of cultural institutions. When he rhetorically writes, “Should one use one’s power to consistently promote certain views, or should one, through art, open a space where everyone can come in and expand their perspective?”, it is a manipulative simplification that skillfully places the critics in the first (dogmatic) category and himself in the second (inclusive).
The festival director completely avoids addressing the question of what the dialogue looks like when the vulnerable party feels compelled to leave the room as a result of the festival’s choices. This applies, among others, to the following who withdrew from cooperation with CPH:DOX 2025: The Norwegian-Palestinian psychologist Mustafa Jayyousi; Palestinian Cultural Institute; Adoption Policy Forum; Palestine Solidarity Network at DTU as well as the Danish-Palestinian director Omar Shargarwi, who used his participation for a protest against CPH:DOX. None of these are mentioned in Engstrøm’s article.
That Israel’s bombing of Gaza exceeds any ethical, moral, and human measure is well-documented and should not require repetition here. Nevertheless, Engstrøm presents it as an equal conflict between two equal parties, or “nations,” as he writes. He does not want to side with one nation over another. At the same time, Engstrøm asserts that he and the festival side with the civilians. But in Israel’s continuous massacres of Palestinians, it is precisely the civilian population that is targeted. This includes filmmakers who cannot attend the festival because they are killed or imprisoned in Israel’s war inferno in Gaza.
Engstrøm wants “not to take a stand,” but as Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel wrote, here quoted by a reader from the comment thread to Engstrøm’s opinion piece: “Neutrality always helps the oppressor, never the oppressed. Neutrality encourages the oppressor to continue.”
THE PARTY FOR THE STRONG
Mette Frederiksen’s government has, over the past 16 months, been among the world’s most loyal supporters of Israel and the USA and their extermination war in Gaza. The prime minister actively supports the Israeli occupation through the sale of weapon parts and personally pushes to persecute and deport citizens in Denmark who sympathize with the Palestinians. At the same time, the government is engaged in a large-scale rearmament, which includes American military bases on Danish soil.
Regarding CPH:DOX’s opening film, Facing War, one can say that despite interesting footage in NATO’s inner chambers, it does not appear as a curious film but rather as a piece of bombastic war propaganda that aligns with the fear rhetoric and the us-and-them narrative that the prime minister excels in.
With the choice of the opening film and Frederiksen as guest of honor at the gala ceremony, CPH:DOX created a festive platform for celebrating the current prime minister’s controversial views. These views could have been challenged in the subsequent panel discussion, but weren’t. To believe that these significant choices signal “not taking a stand” seems somewhat detached from reality.
The third point of criticism does not, as Engstrøm argues, concern whether films by Israeli filmmakers are shown, but the direct or indirect cooperation with the Israeli state, as we saw with the sales delegation CoPro and their charm offensive at the Israeli embassy.
By refusing to distance itself from the Israeli state and its envoys and thus failing to follow PACBI’s guidelines on how we should act towards apartheid and ethnic cleansing, CPH:DOX neglects to protect the Palestinian voices they claim to embrace. By rhetorically distorting the criticism, they further harm their cause.
Mustafa Jayyousi’s reason for withdrawing from a panel debate at CPH:DOX includes: “I do not participate in events together with companies or individuals who normalize genocide and ethnic cleansing of my people. (…) I cannot participate in an event where politicians who have supported and profited from killing my family are allowed to give opening speeches.”
Or in Omar Shargawi’s words: “Can you really not see the absurdity in hosting both the perpetrator and the victim? In equating them and calling it ‘balance’?”
THE DELEGATED ACTIVISM
When Niklas Engstrøm sharply distinguishes between the roles of activists and cultural institutions, he outsources the responsibility for solidarity to people who do not hold the same power as he does. “Activists” are citizens with lives and jobs just like the festival director. By branding others as activists, Engstrøm exempts himself from the question of what he and CPH:DOX can do with the power that lies with a prestigious and influential cultural institution.
In another interview with IDA magazine, Engstrøm argues that CPH:DOX’s role is limited to showing films that can encourage new perspectives and that taking a stand would only create an echo chamber for those who already support the Palestinian cause. But shouldn’t CPH:DOX be more concerned about whether the festival creates an echo chamber for those who already hold power, as we see in many regimes we would rather not be compared to?
In a reality where civilians are routinely killed and maimed; where the Palestinian diaspora continuously calls for solidarity from their governments and cultural institutions, and where peace activists are persecuted, arrested, and deported under false accusations of anti-Semitism, we need brave institutions to create momentum, pressure, and real change.
When Hamdan Ballal, one of the directors behind the Oscar-winning No Other Land, was recently attacked and kidnapped by the Israeli occupation army, a number of industry organizations, including CPH:DOX, were quick to show unequivocal solidarity. Ballal’s release clearly shows that the massive public protest had an effective impact. But solely showing solidarity with individuals while their families are slaughtered, points to a strange parallel reality. Imagine what we could achieve together if such solidarity did not only benefit Oscar winners?
Director Joshua Oppenheimer, who in The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence has examined the aftermath of genocide in Indonesia, emphasizes in a current interview the corrosive effect of silence on the soul and calls for unity and action: “Right now, we need to be honest with ourselves: What is required of us? We do not solve our problems alone, on social media or in small bubbles. We only stop the genocide in Palestine by standing together and saying: never again.”
And as Shargawi emphasizes in his criticism, there is no time to waste: “Our responsibility applies now – while the crimes are taking place, while a genocide unfolds before our eyes.”
While this is being written and institutions like CPH:DOX consider their stance or spend energy defending their lukewarm humanism, the reality of the atrocities once again surpasses our imagination. These days, Netanyahu’s government is carrying out the final ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the last remnants of their original land, accompanied by sadly impotent protests from their loyal supporters, such as our own government.
As filmmakers with a long association and love for CPH:DOX, we hope to inspire renewed self-examination in the festival management. We hope that CPH:DOX will take responsibility in the future to protect the persecuted and marginalized groups the festival wishes to embrace, by positioning itself unequivocally against militarism, violence and oppression. And not least, that the festival management finds the courage to take a stand against Israel’s genocide.
Filmfolk For Våbenhvile / Filmworkers for Palestine