Features
Access to Canadian records of Nazi war criminals
Introduction: Following upon the huge embarrassment caused not only to the Canadian Government, but to Canada as a whole, by the decision to invite a former member of a Ukrainian Waffen SS unit into the House of Commons where he was applauded as a “war hero,” we asked David Matas, renowned lawyer and expert on the issue of Nazi war criminals who were allowed into Canada following World War II, to write a piece providing an analysis how Canada has failed so badly, not only to prevent Nazis and individuals who cooperated with the Nazi regime, to enter Canada, but also to continually refuse to identify who those individuals were. Following is David Matas’s piece:
Getting access to Canadian Nazi war criminal records has to date been nearly impossible. Efforts to obtain access to relevant files and documents have been constantly frustrated and gone nowhere. The record is this.
On January 12, 2022, B’nai Brith Canada put in a request to Library and Archives Canada for Part II of the Report of the Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals. Part I was public in 1986 when the Commission reported. Part II was confidential.
Part II contained, according to Part I, 822 opinions on individual cases. The Commission recommended that the Government give “urgent attention” to investigating 20 files of alleged Nazi war criminals who might still be living in Canada. The report also recommended further investigation of 218 other possible Nazi war criminals living in Canada.
What happened to the 20 cases which were recommended for urgent attention and the further 218 which were recommended for further investigation? We have no idea. We know that there some cases which went to Court and we have the Court records of those cases. But which of these were part of the 20 or 218, if any, were not disclosed.
As of today, Library and Archives Canada, one year and ten months later, has not responded to the request for Part II, other than to acknowledge receipt and assign the request a file number. B’nai Brith Canada complained on December 5, 2022 to the Office of the Information Commissioner asking the Commissioner to issue an order setting a deadline for Library and Archives Canada to provide B’nai Brith with a copy of the Part II Report. That complaint, as of today, has not been decided.
Also on January 12, 2022, B’nai Brith Canada put in a request to Library and Archives Canada for records relating to investigations of alleged Nazi war criminals of the War Crimes Unit of the Department of Justice and the RCMP. Canada’s Program on Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Eighth Annual Report 2004-2005 stated that, since beginning this work, the Department of Justice had opened and examined over 1,800 files. Who are these people? What was the result of the investigations in these cases?
With that request too, Library and Archives Canada has not responded, other than to acknowledge receipt and assign the request a file number. B’nai Brith Canada complained as well on December 5, 2022 to the Office of the Information Commissioner asking the Commissioner to issue an order setting a deadline for Library and Archives Canada to provide B’nai Brith with copies of the war crimes records. That complaint, as of today, has, like the other complaint, not been decided.
B’nai Brith Canada on March 6, 2023 asked for an unredacted copy of Library and Archives Canada the September, 1986 report prepared by Alti Rodal titled “Nazi War Criminals in Canada: The Historical and Policy Setting from the 1940s to the Present” prepared for the
Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals. Justice Jules Deschênes who headed the Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals recommended release of the report in its entirety. He wrote: “This substantial study no doubt constitutes an outstanding contribution to the knowledge of this particular question and deserves wide distribution.”
Library and Archives Canada provided B’nai Brith Canada on July 5th 2023 a redacted copy of the report, albeit with fewer redactions than there were at the time of the original release of the report. B’nai Brith Canada complained to the Office of the Information Commissioner within 30 days of the refusal to release the unredacted report. That complaint remains undecided.
The 2000 International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Stockholm Declaration commits the signatories to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the opening of archives in order to ensure that all documents bearing on the Holocaust are available to researchers.” Canada joined the Alliance in 2009.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Monitoring Access to Archives Project recommended in 2017 that governmental archival institutions “release Holocaust related records, irrespective of any personal identifying information or national security classifications”.
The US Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1998 created an interagency war criminals records working group to locate, identify, inventory for declassification and make public all classified Nazi war criminal records. The records subject to the Act include records of the assets of persecuted persons. The Act kept existing exemptions to disclosure in general laws, but required that they be strictly defined, with a presumption against the exemptions.
In addition to general requirements of strict definition and presumption against the exemptions, some of the exemptions were themselves redefined to limit their scope. The exemption from disclosure in favour of privacy is redrafted to become an exemption where there would be “a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”. The exemption in favour of national security interests is redrafted to become an exemption where disclosure “would clearly and demonstrably damage the national security interests of the United States”. The exemptions in favour foreign relations and diplomatic activities is redrafted to become an exemption where disclosure “would clearly and demonstrably damage” foreign relations or diplomatic activities. The exemption in favour of emergency preparedness plans is redrafted to become an exemption for information that “would seriously and demonstrably impair” those plans.
The records which were disclosed as a result of US Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act give us an insight into why the documents were withheld. One set of documents showed that the US Government had a lot more detailed knowledge of the Holocaust while it was happening. Keeping this information confidential and not acting on it at the time, whether or not it fits arguably within any of the exemptions, does make the US government of the time look bad. There is presumably similar information in currently withheld documentation of other governments.
A second set of documents initially withheld and then disclosed through the US legislation was documents showing that the Government was providing haven for those complicit in Nazi war crimes because of their potential to assist the US in the Cold War. Again this sort of information now withheld may well be found in other archives.
A third set of documents initially withheld and then disclosed because of the legislation were documents which showed the initial unwillingness to bring Nazi war criminals to justice, and the argumentation both for and against within the government. This argumentation we know has been replicated elsewhere.
A fourth set of documents not yet fully available relates to the effectiveness and operational difficulties of Nazi war crimes prosecution efforts once those efforts got going. In Canada, there was a split between the investigation and prosecution efforts, with investigations allocated to the national police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and prosecution allocated to the Department of Justice. This fragmentation caused a sequence of operational difficulties about which we now have only partial knowledge.
There was also in Canada internal feuding within the Nazi war crimes Justice department unit, arguments whether the unit was too slow and cautious or overly energetic in the pursuit of their efforts. The documents we have now provide only a glimpse of this feuding.
A sixth set of documents not now completely disclosed is efforts of Nazi war crimes prosecution units that were established to obtain access to relevant documents in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. We know that there was a good deal of difficulty in getting that access and that eventually international agreements were negotiated that allowed foreign war crimes units direct access to those archives rather than working through local archivists. Again, this is a story which could be fully told only with release of all relevant documents.
A seventh difficulty is the inclination of archivists, government officials and Parliamentarians to address the difficulties in access to documentation all at once. Yet, attempting to do everything before one does anything is a recipe for doing nothing. Each request is particular, not least in the archival access issues it presents. An effort to resolve all these myriad issues in one fell swoop goes nowhere.
We can see in several countries self-exoneration and blame shifting as a form of Holocaust distortion. Everywhere the Nazis went they relied on local collaboration to identify, locate, detain and murder the Jewish population. What we see now in several countries is an effort to pretend that the locals were innocent, that the only perpetrators were the invading Nazis.
This whitewashing is not confined to the countries invaded. It is an attitude held within the populations which have emigrated from the invaded countries. This attitude had generated opposition to the effort to bring Nazi war criminals to justice and now generates opposition to disclosure of archives about those efforts.
Canadian privacy law allows for the lapse of the right to privacy twenty years after death. However, in the case of Nazi war criminal files, since the names of those, other than those whose cases have gone to court, are not known, neither is their dates of death. While the dates of death are not known to outsiders, they are either known or knowable to archivists.
The situation justifies these recommendations:
1) Obstacles to access to Nazi war criminal records stem from legislation which is general in nature. There needs to be legislation which is specific to Holocaust records and which provides an exception to these general requirements. The legislation needs to encompass Holocaust related archives concerning both perpetrators and victims.
2) National archives need to establish and maintain separate Holocaust records within their general collections.
3) Insofar as there is discretion in current legislation to allow for exceptions to prohibitions to access, that discretion should be exercised in favour of access to Holocaust related records, including Nazi war crimes records.
4) Parliament can obtain documents from Governments which the public can not obtain. Parliament should exercise that power to obtain Holocaust related records.
5) The public interest in access to Nazi war criminal files should prevail over the right to be forgotten.
6) There needs to be active review of Nazi war criminal files both to make publicly available the files where the dates of death are known and the fixed periods after dates of death in privacy legislation have passed, and to determine whether any of those to whom the files relate are still alive or, if dead, the dates of death, where the deaths or dates of death are not known.
Canada, as a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, is committed to Holocaust remembrance. To remember the Holocaust, we must remember the victims. We must also not forget their murderers. While the murderers are alive, that means bringing them to justice. Once they are gone, it means providing public access to the record of their atrocities.
During the Holocaust, the murderers were in Europe. After the Holocaust, the murderers scattered around the world to escape justice. Thousands came to Canada. Howard Margolian, a historian with the War Crimes Unit with the Department of Justice, in his book Unauthorized Entry, estimated that 2,000 Nazi war criminals and collaborators entered Canada after World War II.
It is understandable that files about individuals who are still alive are not made accessible to the public unless there is legal action. But once the individual has died, there is no reason why the file could not be made public, no matter what the state of the evidence about the individual. Not doing so amounts to covering up the haven Canada has given to those complicit in Nazi war crimes with a blanket of secrecy.
Philosopher George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Yet, we can not remember a past which remains hidden from us. To remember the past we must know the past. Only through public access to Holocaust archives can we learn lessons from those archives.
Learning lessons from the Holocaust is a legacy we can create for the victims, creating meaning from the senseless death of innocents. To learn those lessons, we need access to the archives which can convey them.
The effort at understanding, of learning the lessons from the Holocaust must never stop. For that history to be written, the files of those against whom there is compelling evidence of complicity in Nazi war crimes and who are now dead must be made public.
We have a duty to the victims, not just to remember that they died, but why they died, how they died. The picture of memory we paint must be real and complete. That picture must include the murderers.
Because we will soon be at a stage where the memory of the Holocaust conveyed by survivors will no longer be with us, access to Holocaust archives looms in importance for keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive. Access to Holocaust archives should be a matter of priority to Governments, Parliaments and archival collections.
David Matas is a Winnipeg lawyer and senior honorary counsel to B’nai Brith Canada
Features
What to Know About Canada’s Legal Cannabis Market
Canada legalised cannabis for adults in 2018, and the market has matured quietly ever since. What was once an unregulated guess is now a labelled, tested product sold through licensed channels. For adults who are curious but cautious, that shift changes everything.
In the regulated market, the printed label does the work that guesswork once did. Retailers such as The Herb Centre, an online dispensary, sit alongside the provincial stores in that legal system. This guide covers what the regulated market offers, how to read a label, and the habits that keep use lower-risk.
Why Does the Regulated Market Matter?
The regulated market matters because it replaces uncertainty with information. A legal product carries a label that states its potency, comes from a tested batch, and meets federal packaging rules. An adult buying it knows exactly what they are getting.
The old unregulated supply never offered that. Potency was a guess, and contaminants were a real risk. The legal route removes both unknowns.
Price is no longer the obstacle it once was. As the legal market has matured, the gap has narrowed, which makes the tested, labelled option the practical one for most adults.
What Should You Understand About Potency?
A few label figures do most of the work.
- THC percentage, the main psychoactive component, matched to your goal.
- CBD percentage, often non-intoxicating and used differently.
- The ratio of the two, which shapes the overall effect.
- Serving size, especially important for edibles and drinks.
- The product format, since each one acts differently.
- The batch and testing, the mark of a legal-market product.
Each figure is printed for a reason. Reading them is the difference between a predictable experience and an unpleasant surprise.
How Do Product Formats Differ?
Formats differ enough that the choice shapes the whole experience. Inhaled flower acts within minutes and fades within a couple of hours, which gives a controllable, short window. Edibles and drinks are the opposite. They can take up to two hours to take effect and last far longer.
That delay causes the most common mistake. Someone feels nothing after twenty minutes, takes more, then feels far too much an hour later. Starting low and waiting is the rule that prevents it.
Provincial health guidance is worth a look first, since each format carries its own risks. Knowing how a product will act, and for how long, is the core of using it responsibly. The slow onset of edibles is the single fact most worth internalising before a first try.
What Should You Check Before Buying?
A short pre-purchase pass keeps the choice sensible.
- Confirm it is legal-market product, with lab testing and a label.
- Check the THC and CBD figures against the effect you want.
- Read the serving and onset information, especially for edibles.
- Buy age-appropriately, since the legal age is 19 in most provinces.
- Use a licensed retailer, online or in store.
- Start with a small amount before buying in volume.
Photo by Sadi Hockmuller on Pexels
Alt text: A person reading a cannabis product label
Buying through legal channels is simple once you know what to look for. The provincial page on how to buy legal cannabis is a quick read, and licensed product is identifiable by its markings. Just as important, never get behind the wheel after using. British Columbia’s page on cannabis and driving is a clear reminder that the two never mix.
Before a First Purchase
A first purchase goes more smoothly after a quick mental check.
- Confirm legal-market sourcing, testing, and a clear label
- Note the THC and CBD percentages against your goal
- Read onset time and serving size, especially for edibles
- Buy only from a licensed retailer
- Respect the legal age, 19 in most provinces
- Start low, wait, and adjust on the next purchase
Why Informed Choices Serve Adults Best
Informed choices serve adults best because the legal market is built around clear, tested labelling. Someone who understands potency and onset avoids the bad first experience that puts people off entirely. The result is a predictable, controlled choice rather than a gamble.
A few baselines are worth remembering. Cannabis has been legal for adults nationwide since 2018. The legal age is 19 in most provinces. And a standard edible package is capped at 10 milligrams of THC, a sensible starting point for newcomers.
Adults today face a legal market their parents never had. As the wider local life carries on and the community marks its own milestones, the lesson stays simple. Read the label, start low, and let the regulated system do its job.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Cannabis Legal for Adults Across Canada?
Yes. Recreational cannabis has been legal for adults nationwide since 2018, though some rules vary by province. The legal age is 18 or 19 depending on the province, and public-use and purchase channels differ regionally. The federal framework itself is national, so the legal status is consistent country-wide.
How Do I Read a Cannabis Product Label?
Look first at the THC and CBD percentages, then the serving size and product format. Higher THC means a stronger psychoactive effect, while CBD is often non-intoxicating. The label also confirms it is a tested, legal-market product. Matching those figures to your goal is the key to a predictable experience.
Why Do Edibles Feel Stronger Than Expected?
Edibles act slowly, sometimes taking up to two hours, and the effect lasts much longer than inhaled cannabis. The common mistake is taking a second dose too soon, before the first has worked. Starting with a low serving and waiting prevents the overwhelming experience that catches first-timers off guard.
What Makes the Legal Market Safer?
Legal-market products are tested, labelled, and regulated, so the buyer knows the potency and that the product is free of contaminants. The unregulated market offers none of that assurance. For an adult who wants a predictable, lower-risk experience, the licensed channel is the clear and sensible choice.
Features
A Practical Guide to Planning a Long-Distance Move
A long-distance move is part logistics, part leap of faith. The packing is the easy part. The hard part is coordinating a truck, a timeline, and a new home that may be a thousand miles away, all without the plan falling apart in transit.
The good news is that a long move rewards preparation more than luck. Brokers like Coastal Moving Services coordinate long-distance residential and commercial moves across the United States, handling the logistics most households would rather not. This guide covers how to plan the move and choose the right help.
Why Do Long-Distance Moves Go Wrong?
Most moves that fail do so for the same handful of reasons. The timeline slips, the budget is guessed rather than quoted, or the moving company turns out to be something other than it claimed. None of these are bad luck. All of them are preventable.
Distance magnifies every mistake. A forgotten box on a local move is a quick trip back. On a cross-country move it is gone. That is why long moves reward planning that a short hop never demands.
The single biggest variable is the company you hire. Get that right and most other problems shrink. Get it wrong and even a simple move turns into a dispute.
How Far Ahead Should You Start Planning?
A clear timeline keeps a long move calm.
- Eight weeks out, research movers and request written estimates.
- Six weeks out, book the company and confirm dates in writing.
- Four weeks out, start decluttering and sorting room by room.
- Two weeks out, confirm logistics and arrange time off.
- One week out, pack an essentials box and label everything clearly.
- Moving day, do a final walkthrough before the truck leaves.
Each step is small on its own. Spread across two months, they turn a daunting move into a manageable checklist.
How Do You Choose a Reputable Mover?
Choosing the right company is where a move is won or lost. Get at least three written estimates, ideally after an in-person or video survey, and treat a quote that arrives without any questions as a warning sign. The FMCSA guidance on choosing a licensed mover is a solid checklist for vetting an interstate company.
Watch the deposit, too. A reputable mover does not demand a large cash payment up front. The FMCSA’s tips for a smooth move run through the red flags and best practices worth knowing before you sign.
A broker can simplify all of this. Rather than vetting carriers yourself, a licensed broker coordinates the move and matches it to a suitable carrier, which is useful for a complex long-distance relocation.
What Should You Confirm Before Moving Day?
A few confirmations before moving day prevent most surprises.
- The written estimate, with the type of quote clearly stated.
- The company’s licensing and insurance for interstate moves.
- The delivery window, and what happens if it slips.
- The payment terms, with no large cash deposit demanded.
- The inventory list, so nothing is lost or disputed.
- Your essentials box, packed and travelling with you.
Photo by Connor Scott McManus on Pexels
Alt text: A loaded moving truck in a driveway on moving day
Getting these in writing protects both the household and the budget. A clear paper trail is the best defence if anything goes wrong.
Moving Day From Start to Finish
The day itself stays calm when a few basics are handled in order.
- Confirm arrival times with the crew the night before
- Keep documents, valuables, and medications with you
- Do a final walkthrough of every room and cupboard
- Check the inventory against the truck before it leaves
- Keep a phone charged and the mover’s number handy
- Note the meter or mileage if the contract depends on it
Settling Into a New Community
The move does not end when the truck pulls away. Unpacking is one thing; building a life in a new place is another, and it takes longer than people expect. Giving yourself a few weeks of grace helps. The first month is for finding your feet, not finishing every box.
The timeline tells the story. Plan a long-distance move roughly 8 weeks ahead. Gather at least 3 written estimates before choosing a mover. And give a new city several months before it starts to feel like home.
A new city means new local institutions to discover, and the small community stories that make a place feel like home. Plan the logistics well, and you free up the energy for the part that actually matters.
Frequently Asked Questions
How Far In Advance Should I Book a Long-Distance Mover?
Aim to book about six weeks ahead, after researching movers around the eight-week mark. Booking early secures your preferred dates, especially in the busy summer season, and gives time to compare written estimates properly. Leaving it late narrows your options and often raises the price.
What Is the Difference Between a Moving Broker and a Carrier?
A carrier owns the trucks and physically moves your goods. A broker arranges the move and matches it to a suitable carrier. A reputable licensed broker can simplify a complex long-distance move by handling the coordination, while you still confirm that the assigned carrier is properly licensed and insured.
How Do I Avoid a Moving Scam?
Get multiple written estimates, verify licensing and insurance, and never pay a large cash deposit upfront. Be wary of quotes given without any review of your belongings, and read recent reviews. Consumer-protection agencies publish clear checklists for spotting the warning signs before you commit.
How Much Should I Budget for a Long-Distance Move?
It varies with distance, volume, and services like packing or storage, so a written estimate based on your actual inventory is essential. Build in a small buffer for extras and confirm exactly what the quote includes. A precise estimate beats a cheap-sounding figure that balloons on delivery day.
Features
American Graduation Speakers Deliver Antizionist Views
By HENRY SREBRNIK Colleges and universities in the United States have hosted and encouraged a surge of radical and pervasive antisemitism in recent years. Graduation commencement ceremonies (known as convocations in Canada) have been a source of tensions over Israel since Oct. 7, 2023. Multiple schools have disciplined students who made pro-Palestinian comments in their speeches.
But professors have also fanned the flames. Faculty members have played a significant role in legitimizing and amplifying antisemitism on college campuses. They have shown a propensity to whitewash Hamas and vilify Israel rather than examine the conflict dispassionately.
University of Michigan professor Derek Peterson praised campus pro-Palestinian student protesters during his commencement speech in Ann Arbor on May 2. The History and African-American studies academic and outgoing faculty senate chair told the graduates to “Sing for the pro-Palestinian student activists who have, over these past two years, opened our hearts to the injustice and inhumanity of Israel’s war in Gaza.” His remarks received loud applause.
“We regret the pain this has caused on a day devoted to celebration and accomplishment. For this, the university apologizes,” Michigan’s interim president, Domenico Grasso, responded. Michigan’s campus Hillel also condemned Peterson’s speech. “Commencement is a celebration of every graduate. It is not a stage for political statements that alienate the Jewish community,” it asserted. On campus, however, an open letter rebuking Grasso and defending Peterson’s speech had been signed by more than 1,100 faculty members, staff and students in less than 24 hours.
Protesters at the university have also vandalized the home of Jordan Acker, a Jewish member of the university’s board of regents. He will no longer serve on the board, while the attorney who defended the university’s encampment participants from some state-level charges received the Michigan Democratic Party’s nomination for Acker’s seat.
Amir Makled won the backing despite social media posts that praised Hezbollah and included antisemitic memes. Makled posted retweets of far-right antisemitic conspiracy theorist Candace Owens and referred to Hassan Nasrallah as a martyr after he was killed by Israeli strikes in 2024.
Administrators at Rutgers University in New Jersey canceled a commencement speaker on May 15, citing an “inflammatory claim” he tweeted about Israel. Rami Elghandour, a Rutgers alumnus, had his invitation rescinded when his April 20 tweet, which accused Israel of genocide and claimed that Israelis were “running dungeons where they train dogs to sexually assault prisoners,” was uncovered.
“They decided that the feelings of a handful of students who said that my social media posts ‘opposed their beliefs,’ were more important than the experience of the entire graduating class, the reputation of the school, the dignity and belonging of Arab and Muslim students, and the First Amendment,” Elghandour wrote. Rutgers Alumnus Christopher Markus, an Emmy Award-winning screenwriter, delivered the address instead, on May 17.
At Georgetown University, a law professor who disparaged legal efforts to curb pro-Palestinian student activism replaced Morton Schapiro, a pro-Israel Jewish economist and former Northwestern University president, at the commencement, after students launched a petition calling for Schapiro’s removal. The replacement, David Cole, is the former national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. In that role, Cole issued a statement soon after the Hamas attack in which he criticized Jewish groups for what he said were calls to “investigate, disband, or penalize pro-Palestinian student groups for exercising their free speech rights.” He compared Congressional investigations on campus antisemitism to McCarthyism.
Cornell University’s Student Assembly on March 12 voted to cut ties with Israel’s Technion University and condemned the university for hosting center-left Israeli politician Tzipi Livni, part of the school’s campus anti-Israel activism. She was accused of being “implicated in war crimes.”
The university’s Jewish president was involved in a recent campus altercation with pro-Palestinian protesters who had surrounded his car following a campus debate on Israel. The Ivy League school’s Board of Trustees issued a statement of support for Michael Kotlikoff following an investigation into the April 30 incident. “President Kotlikoff has shown a steadfast commitment to Cornell’s values and principles, and we are confident he will continue to lead with integrity.”
Following the talk, members of the protest group Students for a Democratic Cornell followed the president to his car and appeared to try to block its path. When he did edge his way out of his parking spot, they said he bumped some of the protesters with his vehicle. Despite all that, President Kotlikoff was himself the speaker at the university’s May 23 commencement.
A flag with swastikas surrounding the Star of David flew briefly atop a New York University building during a graduation event May 13, as hundreds gathered for an outdoor celebration called “Grad Alley” on West Fourth Street. “We are shocked and deeply troubled that this hateful symbol expressing antisemitism was raised on a flagpole overlooking Washington Square Park,” said NYU spokesperson Wiley Norvell.
Student government leaders at the university had objected to the selection of Jonathan Haidt as the graduation speaker at Yankee Stadium May 14, calling it “deeply unsettling.” An NYU social psychologist and author, he has been highly critical of the culture in which many young adults today are raised.
A network of anti-Israel activist groups coordinated “Nakba 78” protests across the United States the weekend of May 15, with organizers using the anniversary of Israel’s founding to challenge the Jewish state’s right to exist. University of California campuses have faced an antisemitism crisis, with dramatic increases in harassment, intimidation, and exclusionary conduct targeting Jewish students and others labeled “Zionist” or “pro-Israel.” Among many events, University of California, Berkeley lecturer Hatem Bazian spoke at a three-day “Islam, Memory and the Nakba” conference in Burlingame, Oakland and Los Gatos.
Even the UCLA campus Hillel was targeted. The Undergraduate Students Association Council condemned an April 14 Yom HaShoah event organized by Hillel featuring freed Israeli hostage Omer Shem Tov. He was kidnapped from the Nova music festival on Oct. 7, 2023, and held hostage in Gaza until his release in a prisoner exchange in February 2025.
“While we affirm the humanity of all people impacted by violence, we reject the selective platforming of narratives that obscure the broader reality of ongoing state violence,” they stated. “Israel is currently continuing to carry out what has been widely identified by human rights advocates as a genocide in Gaza, while also expanding its illegal military campaign into Lebanon.”
This has become part of an effort to delegitimize Hillel chapters, long seen as the main address for Jewish life on most American campuses. Hillel International asks all its affiliate chapters to maintain an unwavering commitment and support for Israel, discouraging criticism of the Israeli state.
The New School, a university in New York City, on May 2 rejected a student government vote to defund and cut ties with the campus chapter of Hillel. The student senate a day earlier had voted to strip funding and stop collaboration with the campus chapter of the Jewish student organization, claiming violations of “international law” due to volunteer opportunities it has offered with the Israel Defence Forces. They also cited Hillel’s promotion of 10-day Birthright trips and other programs in Israel. Hillel International and other Jewish groups have said that efforts to shut down the Jewish student organization are antisemitic.
But it seems to be working. Swarthmore College in 2015 became the first campus to break with Hillel International. They began to call themselves an “Open Hillel,” then rebranded entirely after the parent organization threatened legal action over a civil rights panel it deemed too critical of Israel. Now, the student leaders of the campus Hillel at Middlebury College have voted to rename its student group, moving to distance it from an international organization they say is too pro-Israel. It was renamed the Jewish Association at Middlebury. Might others follow?
Henry Srebrnik is a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.