Local News
‘STAND-UP NATION” – New book highlights Israel’s many contributions to world through international development
Review by BERNIE BELLAN Elsewhere on this website we have a story about an event that was sponsored by JNF Canada at Camp Massad on Sunday, September 1, during which the guest speaker was someone by the name of Aviva Klompas.
As we noted in that story, Klompas is the author of a recently published book whose title, “STAND-UP NATION” is an unabashed emulation of the wildly successful ‘”START-UP NATION,” which was published in 2009.
As I noted in my review of ‘START-UP NATION” in the December 16, 2009 issue of The Jewish Post & News, “This book, simply put, is one of the most uplifting pieces of writing about Israel that has come out in a very long time. For anyone who is a strong supporter of Israel, the stories that (Dan) Senor and (Saul) Singer relate about Israel’s emergence as a high-tech superpower will be reminiscent of past stories about Israel’s military brilliance.”
Fifteen years later, Klompas adopts a very similar style that Senor and Singer employed in their book, which was to provide a series of case studies that illustrated how Israeli creativity and entrepreneurship combined to turn Israel into an economic success story.
While “START-UP NATION” suggested that Israel’s brilliance in the economic sphere was something that had only been a relatively recent development – beginning in the 1990s and fuelled largely by the influx of massive numbers of Russian immigrants, Aviva Klompas’s thesis is that Israel has had a tradition of international development and aid from the very beginning of the foundation of the state.
Her book was 10 years in the making, she explained in an interviews she gave at a recently held event near Boston. It first took root when she was Israel’s sole speech writer at the United Nations (from 2013-15), she said. In that capacity, Klompas noted, she had to immerse herself in a whole range of subjects – including international aid and development – about which, she admitted, she knew very little prior to her period of service at the UN.
But, as she learned more about how much international aid development had been a part of the very fabric of Israel’s founding ethos – especially as it was promoted by Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben Gurion, Klompas began to develop an especially keen interest in finding out as much as she could about how Israel came to be one of the very first nations that advanced the notion of international development in third world countries.
As Klompas explains in the book, the tremendous challenges that the newborn State of Israel faced in the first two years of its existence – when it absorbed over 800,000 new immigrants comprised of Holocaust survivors and refugees from Arab countries – leading to a doubling of Israel’s population almost overnight, “Despite the small population and lack of natural resources, the country’s leaders had big ambitions. Ingenuity and entrepreneurship were celebrated. Chutzpah took root as a national ethos. As time passed, the country’s confidence grew, and its citizens turned outward. They shared their success with other countries confronting similar challenges. With each passing decade, as Israel grew more secure and prosperous, it became a model and inspiration to developing countries that sought to achieve the same transformation.”
How Klompas came to write this particular book is an interesting story in itself. She said, during the interview that, after she left the UN, she began something called “Project Inspire,” in which she took young people on study tours to third world countries such as Kenya, Uganda, Nepal, Guatemala, and India.”
During those tours she encountered project after project that had been started by Israelis who had been inspired by a combination of idealism and experience. Of course, she uses the phrase “tikkun olam” quite often in her book, but that particular phrase is trotted out so often by Jewish organizations and is so general in its meaning that it loses its impact.
Instead, what Klompas does is tell a series of 20 different stories in which Israelis – often Americans who emigrated to Israel by the way, turn to using education and skills that they acquired in Israel into very imaginative projects in countries all around the world.
It was during the Covid epidemic that Klompas first thought of writing a book filled with stories of Israelis who had travelled to distant lands to initiate a variety of aid projects – often without any assistance at first, but then through a combination of fund raising and appealing to the governments of countries to which they had travelled, had achieved remarkable success almost always through their own ingenuity and resourcefulness,
What is so remarkable about many of these individuals is that their stories begin with travelling to a particular country, often backpacking – usually seeking adventure, and during the course of their experiences in those countries, they come to realize that they are well suited to providing exactly the sort of expertise that is so sorely needed in those countries.
Whether it’s in the areas of agriculture – which is a very common theme in the book, or often health care, Israelis time and time again have gone into some of the poorest parts of the world to offer assistance. And, in contrast to many other individuals from other countries that have also become involved in development projects, many of the Israelis profiled in “STAND-UP NATION” have stayed for years, rather than mere months. Often they’ve learned native languages – and customs, and rather than attempting to inject foreign concepts into the lives of the people with which they’re living, they adapt those concepts to native traditions.
Even after they’ve returned to Israel a great many of the individuals Klompas describes in the book have kept going back to the countries where they helped to initiate projects – often to check up on those projects or to begin new ones.
At the beginning of the book, Klompas describes Israel’s very first international development agency, known as MASHAV, and how it actually preceded international development agencies from countries such as the US, Canada, and Britain, as well as the UN’s own international aid agencies.
While Klompas does concede that, to a certain extent, MASHAV was intended to improve Israel’s image within third world countries, she notes that even to this day, MASHAV has training programs for thousands of individuals coming from countries that have been highly critical of Israeli policies – especially since Israel’s incursion into Gaza.
Given that the book was released only recently, Klompas often refers to how much Israel’s image in the world has changed for the worse since October 7. Yet, in a series of often poignant post scripts that she includes at the end of many of her chapters, Klompas quotes from many individuals who have either been working closely with Israelis in their respective countries or who have benefited from receiving training and education in Israel itself. In many of those excerpts from emails sent by various individuals, they remark upon how much anguish they feel for Israelis – also for Palestinians.
One question that did occur to me as I read this very well written book (and Klompas’s years of experience as a speechwriter shine through as she manages to imbue each story she tells with a freshness that keeps the book from bogging down into repetitiousness) is: How many of the many aid projects that had been undertaken by Israeli-based organizations have been severely affected by how badly Israel’s image has suffered in the past year? In many of the cases Klompas cites – and these were situations in which Israelis had gone to countries that either had no relations with Israel at all or had very poor relations with Israel, the Israelis going into those countries hid their identities as much as they possibly could.
Klompas also describes how Israeli disaster relief teams have gone into countries – such as Turkey and even Syria, to provide relief, often at great danger to the members of those teams.
One final note: Considering that Aviva Klompas was the special guest speaker at an event sponsored by JNF Canada Manitoba-Saskatchewan Region, and JNF Canada is now in the midst of a terrible situation in which its charitable license has been revoked by the CRA, I thought it appropriate to refer to a section of “STAND-UP NATION” in which Klompas writes about the many projects in which the JNF has been involved that have directly led to enormous benefits, not only for people in many third-world countries but, at least prior to October 7 – Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza as well. (Again, I would have liked to know to what extent projects involving students from the West Bank and Gaza have now had to cut ties with students from those areas since October 7. What a tragedy.)
Klompas writes about the Central Arava Research and Development Centre, “which is developing new crops and improving existing techniques so farmers in the Arava Valley can compete in the global produce market;” about the Kasser Joint Institute for Food, Water, and Energy Security, “which develops techniques and technologies to aid communities in arid and hyper-arid low income countries in addressing their food, water, and energy insecurities cost effectively and sustainably;” about the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies, which brings together “students from Israel and Jordan, along with Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip…who train together in the fields of sustainability and the environment;” and the Arava Institute for International Training, which is “attracting young men and women from developing countries all over the world.”
While Klompas doesn’t specify exactly how much the JNF has been involved in each of those projects, the point is that the JNF’s contributions to research in the areas of crop development in even the harshest, most arid conditions, have been of benefit not only to Israel, but to countries all over the world – also to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. And to think: the CRA has questioned JNF Canada’s “charitable object.”
Just as Israeli international aid organizations have been motivated by a combination of a desire to do good – as in the concept of “tikkun olam,” also to a certain extent, Israel’s desire to improve Israel’s image in the third world, what difference does it make so long as all those individuals working in third world countries are contributing so mightily to the well being of the people with whom they are working?
The same can be said of JNF Canada. While the CRA may be nit picking individual projects in which JNF Canada has been involved, saying the paperwork trail is deficient, how can one question the incredible humanitarian contribution that the JNF has been making for years – in ways Klompas cites?
Perhaps at some point we’ll be able to find out from Klompas how each of the 20 projects she profiles in this very important book have been affected by what’s been going on in Gaza the past 11 months. But, if anyone needs to get a better idea how enormous an impact Israel has had in the area of international development – on a scale the country has had in the area of entrepreneurship – as described in ‘START-UP NATION,” read “STAND-UP NATION.”
“STAND-UP NATION…Israeli Resilience in the Wake of Disaster”
By Aviva Klompas
213 pages
Published by Wicked Son, 2024
Available at the JNF office in Winnipeg (phone 204-947-0207) or an Amazon.ca
Local News
Thoughts on Sid Green
By GRANT MITCHELL (Grant Mitchell is a well-known lawyer in Winnipeg whose father, Leon Mitchell, was Sid Green’s law partner for many years.
Following are remarks Grant delivered at the meal of remembrance which was held following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9:
Sid was a Gold medallist in law in the class of 1955.
He knew that my Dad, Leon Mitchell, was in sole practice in the Confederation Building. Leon was 13 years older than Sid but graduated just the year before. Leon had been the business agent for the Civic Employees Union of the City of Winnipeg before and during law school, and his union connections gave him a client base to start a practice.
After obtaining his call to the Bar, Sid attended Leon’s office and informed him, “You need me.”
Leon was taken aback. He was physically disabled from a major bout of Guillen-Barre syndrome, but felt fully capable of practising solo. He told Sid he didn’t need anyone.
Sid told Leon, “You don’t understand. I don’t mean you need me to advise clients, I mean I can do the physical side for you, attending court and hearings and other functions that require mobility.”
With that understanding, they became Mitchell & Green, and later Mitchell, Green and Minuk when Sam Minuk joined the firm. They were the only labour firm in Winnipeg at that time that acted exclusively on the Union side.
In around 1960, a Mitchell & Green client did not have the money to pay for his legal fees and offered the partially constructed cottage he was building at Big Whiteshell Lake to the firm as payment, with the excess to be refunded to the client. Sid and Leon became co-owners of that cottage. For years it had no plumbing and an incomplete ceiling. When Leon died in 1987, Sid got the cottage.
When Sid went into politics, Leon supported the move, and in fact delivered the nomination speech for Sid to be leader of the NDP when he ran against Russ Paulley and then Ed Schreyer.
When Sid was made a Cabinet Minister in the Schreyer government in 1969, Leon also left practice to go into public service, as Chair of the Municipal Board, Chair of the Mental Review Board and Commissioner in the Churchill Forest Industries inquiry. Sam Minuk became a Provincial Judge. It was the end of Mitchell Green and Minuk. That practice was the foundation of what has become the Myers firm.
Sid and Leon’s paths would cross again when Leon was mediator of the Northern Flood Agreement and Sid was the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro.
They had been professional partners with profound mutual respect, but they were also personal friends and remained so for the rest of Leon’s life.
Leon had a huge admiration for people he thought were unusually intelligent. Sid was at or near the top of that list.
At the funeral, I spoke of Sid’s relationship with my father, Leon Mitchell.
I will just add that during their years at the Confederation Building and then in the Crown Trust Building, they hired an articling student named Bill Rachman, who made Sid and Leon nervous about everything he did. When the articling period ended, Sid told Leon that notwithstanding their reservations about Bill’s ethics and practicing skills, Bill would be far more financially successful than either Sid or Leon. Leon agreed. They were correct.
When Sid returned to private practice after his time in government, the unions and he had a falling out and he found himself acting against unions rather than on their behalf
Sid’s philosophy on unions was that protective labour laws produced weak unions, who would not represent their members’ interests effectively. He felt that Wagner Act type labour legislation, now universal in North America, was a tragic compromise by unions. He believed that the recognition strike and the wildcat strike were fundamental weapons for successful trade unions, and that certification of unions, the duty to bargain in good faith and mandatory grievance arbitration were the poor cousins of the recognition and wildcat strikes. This was opposite to the position of the union movement at that time, which lobbied strenuously for union-friendly legislation in the form of greater and greater regulation of the union employer relationship.
In fact, Sid said that the only labour laws that unions should need were to protect the right to picket, and to take away a court’s power to order a person to work. These 2 provisions are found in sections 56 and 57 of the King’s Bench Act to this day, more than 50 years later, and still known to people of my generation as the “Sid Green amendments”. No injunction to enforce a personal services contract. No injunction to restrict assembly on a public thoroughfare to communicate accurate information, that is, a picket sign.
Sid supplemented professors at the law school, Robson Hall, by delivering several lectures in each term about the fundamentals of labour law. I taught that course for 22 years and I had Sid come for a guest lecture, as he had done in the labour law class when I was a student.
He had a powerful and persuasive way of making his points. For example, he felt that a legislated duty to bargain in good faith was a mistake – let the parties fight it out, and let the stronger survive. If employers don’t bargain genuinely, the response is to hold a strike, not run to the labour board.
“If I offer $1, $2, $3, $5, $10 then I’m bargaining in good faith. If I offer $10, $10, $10, $10, then I’m bargaining in bad faith. But it’s still $10!”
He didn’t like certification and preferred the recognition strike. Settle disputes through battle, not argument. Conflict rather than compromise. He particularly objected to certifying unions by card count as opposed to secret ballot vote. A card signer had no meaningful way of revoking their support for the union if they changed their mind after the union applied for certification.
Sid said, “If I buy a vacuum cleaner from a door to door salesman, under the CPA I have a month to change my mind and get my money back. But if I sign a union card, the next day may be too late to change my mind. Which is more important, having a union take over my bargaining rights, or buying a vacuum cleaner?”
Apart from representing employees against unions, Sid also built a practice of representing lawyers who faced disciplinary action from the Law Society. When he ran to be a bencher, he received more votes than any other candidate, even though he was not affiliated with any of the larger law firms. As a bencher, he would send out a “Report from a Bencher” after each Bencher meeting, giving his analysis on the decisions the Society was making, often critical of the majority.
In so many ways, he believed in a “survival of the fittest” approach to human differences. He did not care for protectionist legislation like Human Rights laws. He particularly objected to affirmative action or any other form of “reverse discrimination”.
In one case I had with him, he was acting for Nabila Malik, an economist in the Cabinet secretariat who had been laid off. I was acting for the employer. He called me to tell me that he wished to amend his statement of claim. “I want to add a paragraph to the claim to say that in letting my client go, the government violated its own affirmative action policy because the policy said that there should be more women in senior civil service positions and yet my client, a woman, was let go when many men in senior civil service positions had remained employed.
“Do you object to my amendment?” “No.”
“You don’t think I believe in that affirmative action bullshit do you?” “I don’t know.”
“I DON’T!” But I say, ‘If you are going to preach bullshit, you have to practice bullshit.’”
Sid took up hockey when he was 50. As a young man, he had been a good athlete, quarterbacking the law school football team. It was a late stage of life to learn to skate and join a new sport but Sid approached it with the same gusto he applied to everything else. When he awoke after cardiac surgery a few years later, his first question was, “Will I still be able to play hockey?” You don’t have to be great at something to love it, as I well know. And Sid loved to play hockey, indoors or out.
An employer client of mine had one of its managers vilified in the union newsletter – the “Golden Turkey Award”. My client said, “We want a lawyer for the manager, and we want that lawyer be one with the kind of reputation that when the other side sees who is threatening to sue them, they will involuntarily cringe uncontrollably.” I gave them 2 names, with Sid’s being the second one. “Sid Green, that name sounds familiar. Who is he?” “Oh, he was once the Minister of Labour in the NDP government, but after he left politics, the unions treated him as a pariah, and now he fights them regularly.” “That’s the guy we want.” Sid took the case. He got a settlement offer so generous that the manager desperately wanted to accept it: full page retraction, apology, substantial payment. He may have been a turkey, but he was not foolish. Sid said it was not enough. He got more, before yielding to the client’s wish to settle. And oh, yeah, there were no more golden turkeys awarded.
Sid loved to litigate. He would rather fight than settle. His adversaries knew that, and as a result, he achieved great settlements. Sid’s rejection of an offer was never a bluff.
He had a fundamental belief in democracy, that the rules should be made by people who were elected, not appointed. If he had the choice, he would prefer to be a law maker rather than a lawyer or judge. He also felt that if a matter was worth taking on, it was worth taking all the way. I doubt that any private lawyer has been involved in more appeals.
Others know more about Sid’s career as a politician than I do. He did love to tell one story about his time in government. In 1975, Bob “Junior” Wilson had just been elected in a Wolseley by-election, narrowly defeating Sid’s friend, D’Arcy McCaffrey. In his first appearance in the Legislative Assembly, Wilson stood up to make his maiden speech. The protocol had long been that when a member speaks for the first time, they give a benign speech about how honoured they are to serve their constituents and how they look forward to working with everyone in the house. Instead, Wilson launched into an attack on the governing Schreyer government, accusing them of every misdeed known to politics, and demanding that they immediately resign and call a general election. It fell to Sid to respond on behalf of the NDP majority.
“The Honourable Member has ignored the usual protocol for new members. I don’t mind that. I have no particular affinity for protocols. I think members should say what they genuinely feel. So I commend the Member for being so frank. I have some difficulty with his message, however. He says that we should resign and cease to govern. But that would be undemocratic. A majority of Manitobans have elected us to run the Province. That is our duty. He may not like it, but the fact is that we are his government. But if he feels badly about that, he should imagine how I feel. He is my member!!”
I’ll close by saying that in Sid’s pre-politics practising days, there were many colourful lawyers that made being a lawyer a fascinating profession. By the time he returned to practice, there were only a few of the wild ones left. The profession needed a gadfly like Sid to make practice fun. The reason he got so many votes from the profession is that Manitoba lawyers recognized that in Sid there was a fearlessness mixed with skill, humour, joy and a profound understanding of the policy reasoning behind the letter of the law. There was no one like him, and I doubt that there will be one. I will miss him.
Local News
Sid Green – famed lawyer, one of the first Jewish provincial cabinet ministers, and first director of BB Camp – passes at age 96
By BERNIE BELLAN Sid Green, whose name was well known in so many different circles in Manitoba, passed away on Sunday, June 7, at the age of 96.
Green was perhaps best known as one of three Jewish Members of the Legislature who became cabinet ministers in the first ever NDP government in Manitoba, which came to power in 1969 under the leadership of Ed Schreyer. (The other two Jewish members who became cabinet ministers were the late Saul Cherniack and the late Saul Miller.)
Green, who had first been elected as an MLA in 1966 representing the riding of Inkster, led a challenge to then-NDP leader Russ Paulley in 1968, which eventually led to Paulley resigning as leader. The subsequent leadership race saw Green, who was only 39 at the time, facing off against a 32-year-old Ed Schreyer.
Although Green and Schreyer were later to part ways over a number of issues – especially over the issue of aid to private schools, Green and Schreyer were actually good friends.
In fact, Ed Schreyer, who is now 90, spoke at Green’s funeral, which was held Tuesday, June 9, at the Chesed Shel Emes (with interment following at the Hebrew Sick Benefit Cemetery).
Schreyer told some humourous stories about his and Sid’s competition for the NDP leadership back in 1969. Although the two were rivals they agreed occasionally to share expenses along the way as they toured various Manitoba locations, including one night in a hotel in Flin Flon (or it may have been somewhere else; I wasn’t taking notes at the funeral.) Regardless, they agreed to share a room that night but, as Schreyer recalled, it had to have “two beds.”
Another time during that race, when they were somewhere in western Manitoba, they both received a call from someone in a place on the eastern shore of Lake Manitoba. (Again, I don’t remember which location Schreyer said it was.) The caller said they both had to get there soon because there was going to be a crowd of several hundred people gathered for some other event – and it would have been a perfect time to do some politicking.
But, as they pointed out to the caller, that location was 250 kilometres away and they couldn’t possibly drive there on time – so they both agreed to hire a float plane to fly them there. Unfortunately, that was a very windy day, Schreyer noted, and the plane wasn’t able to land close enough to shore for the both of them to wade in. Instead they decided to jump off the plane’s pontoon – landing up to their armpits in water. They bravely went to meet the assembled crowd – in their soaking wet suits.
Green had a long career as an MLA, being elected to the Manitoba Legislature four times: in 1966, 1969, 1973, and 1977. Eventually he broke completely with the NDP and, along with fellow NDP MLA Ben Hanuschak, started a new party, called the Manitoba Progressive Party, in 1981, which failed abysmally.
I remember well how captivating a speaker Sid Green was when he was campaigning in 1981. One story that he told several times to different audiences went along these lines: After the NDP first formed government in 1969 – much to the surprise of almost everyone back then, Green was often called upon to speak at different venues because he was such a powerful orator.
One time he was somewhere in rural Manitoba and before he was called up to the podium to deliver his remarks, the person who was introducing Green said to the audience: “Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to introduce to you the ‘Green Minister.'”
Not missing a beat, Sid took to the podium and said something along the following lines to the audience: “My first appointment to Cabinet was as Minister of Energy, Mines, and Natural Resources. Well, I little knew about energy, even less about mines, and nothing at all about natural resources. So the title “the Green Minister” is an apt one.”
In his early years, Sid Green was a very active member of the YMHA on Albert Street, serving as president of the house council for several years. A dedicated athlete, Green competed in basketball and volleyball at the Y. At the age 50 he took up ice hockey – and was known for his fierce competitiveness. He was to serve on the board of directors of the YMHA for many years, right up until its closing in 1997.
Green was also the quarterback for the University of Manitoba law school football team during the early 1950s – and led them to two school championships. In a 2019 interview I conducted with Green about his early years at the YMHA, he noted that he was the only 5’6″ 150 pound quarterback in the inter-faculty league.
In 1954 Green became the first director of BB Camp, which had just moved to Town Island from Sandy Hook.
In 1955, Green graduated from the U of M law school, winning the gold medal in law that year.
He went on to become one of Manitoba’s most successful labour lawyers, subsequently pairing withfamed labour lawyer, Leon Mitchell, later to be joined by Sam Minuk (who was to become a provincial court judge) in what became the firm of Mitchell, Green & Minuk.
During his time as a lawyer, Green often represented employers – which might seem a little surprising for someone who such a staunch NDPer. But Green was staunchly opposed to entrenching laws such as anti-scab legislation or secret ballot voting to unionize. He thought it important to represent any client, including employers engaged in disputes with unions, no matter how much he might have disagreed with that client’s position, and because he was so skilful in arguing a case, he was much sought after by employers to represent them in labour disputes.
He was so respected as a lawyer, moreover, that he was often asked to represent other lawyers in cases before the courts.
Green was also very pro-Israel and extremely proud of his Jewish roots. Although not a religious man, during his many years at the Y – first on Albert Street, then later on Hargrave, Green was involved in developing many Jewish cultural programs.
In days to come we will have much more about the life of Sid Green. In the meantime, if you want to watch a video interview I did with Sid about his experiences at the Y on Albert Street, you can go to Sid Green reminisces.
Sid Green was predeceased by his wife Shleema in 2009 and is survived by his five children: Arthur, MIndy, Cathy, Sharon, and Marty, as well as 15 grandchildren.
For more about Sid Green’s career, read Grant Mitchell’s eulogy, which was delivered at the Meal of Remembrance following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9: Grant Mitchell on Sid Green
Local News
The Jewish Post Ltd.’s brand new website
Click here to be taken to our new website featuring foods you can find on Facebook Marketplace
