Features
Decision to invite former member of Nazi-aligned Ukrainian military unit to House of Commons raises questions about why he was allowed into Canada in the first place
By BERNIE BELLAN (Originally published Sept. 25 in The Jewish Post & News)
The storm that erupted over the revelation that a former member of a Ukrainian unit that fought with the Nazis during the Second World War was invited to attend the appearance by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky when he spoke to the House of Commons on Friday, September 22, has led to a whole series of questions:
- Who is Yaroslav Hunka, the 98-year-old Ukrainian-Canadian who received a standing ovation from members of all four parties in the House of Commons on Friday, September 22, when he was introduced by House of Commons Speaker Anthony Rota prior to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s speech in the House of Commons?
- What was the Wafen-SS Galicia Division (also known as the SS 14th Wafer Division)?
- How is it that many former members of the Wafen-SS Galicia Division were allowed entry into Canada following World War II?
- Why was there no vetting of Hunka by anyone prior to his having been invited to attend the House of Commons on September 22?
The fierce reaction from various Jewish Canadian groups, including the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre for Holocaust Studies, B’nai Brith Canada, and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, was unrelentingly critical of the decision to invite Hunka to attend Zelensky’s appearance in the House of Commons.
Hunka’s past participation in the Wafen-SS Galicia Division was well known. As an article that appeared on Wikipedia on September 24 noted: “Yaroslav Hunka (Ukrainian: Ярослав Гунька; born c. 1925) is a veteran of the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician), a Nazi Germany military formation. Hunka was born in Urman, then in Poland, and volunteered for SS Galizien in 1943. He emigrated to Canada after the conclusion of World War II. In 2023, Hunka made international headlines after he received a standing ovation from the House of Commons of Canada, and was recognized by Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Later, it was revealed Hunka was affiliated with Nazis, and Canadian government officials apologized to the worldwide Jewish community. Hunka is retired and lives in North Bay, Ontario.
Biography
“Yaroslav Hunka was born in
“Yaroslav Hunka was born in Urman, Second Polish Republic (now Ukraine) c. 1925. In 1944, Hunka was deployed into combat against Red Army forces on the Eastern Front of World War II. Following the conclusion of World War II in Europe, Hunka immigrated to Canada and joined the Ukrainian-Canadian community.] As of 2022, Hunka lived in North Bay, Ontario, and travelled to Greater Sudbury to protest against that year’s Russian invasion of Ukraine.”
The question why so many former members of a Ukrainian military unit that fought for the Nazis were allowed into Canada following WWII is laced with controversy. A website that is very sympathetic to Russia lists a number of very serious allegations about Canadian complicity in allowing those individuals into the country:
“In the immediate postwar period, Canada’s then Liberal government, working in close cahoots with US and British intelligence, opened Canada’s doors to Ukrainian Nazi collaborators. These included members of the infamous 14th Grenadier Division of the Waffen SS, also known as the Galicia Division.
“The scale of the influx of Nazi collaborators only became public knowledge in the 1980s. A comprehensive study carried out by Alti Rodal on behalf of the federal government-appointed Deschênes Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals in Canada uncovered records proving that US intelligence agents in Europe had funneled Nazi collaborators from Eastern Europe through the Canadian immigration system using false papers. Rodal revealed that large numbers of identically typed applications were received by Canada’s immigration department from one address in West Germany. On closer inspection, this address turned out to be a US military base.
“The Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney established the Deschênes Commission in 1985, in response to a mounting public outcry over exposures of Nazis and Nazi accomplices who had found a safe haven in Canada and tasked the inquiry with identifying Nazi war criminals residing in Canada.
“Around the same time, the Simon Wiesenthal Center estimated that upwards of 2,000 Nazis and Nazi collaborators emigrated to Canada in the years after the war. A quarter-century later, in 2011, it would give Canada an “F minus” in its annual report ranking countries on their efforts to prosecute war criminals. This placed Canada on a par with Ukraine and the former Baltic republics, i.e. countries where the right-wing, nationalist regimes that have emerged since the Stalinist bureaucracy’s dissolution of the Soviet Union openly venerate the ultranationalists who aligned with the Nazis when they invaded the USSR.
“War criminals in Canada
“A significant number of those who made their way to Canada were members of the Nazi SS’s Galicia Division, which was made up of Ukrainian nationalist volunteers who fought on the side of the Wehrmacht against the Red Army during the Nazis’ war of annihilation against the Soviet Union. This preplanned onslaught—launched in June 1941 when a 3 million-strong force comprised of German troops, their Axis allies and fascist volunteers invaded the Soviet Union—led to the deaths of 27 million Soviet citizens and the Holocaust.
“In waging war, suppressing the population, and pursuing the annihilation of the Jews, across Eastern Europe and above all in the USSR, Hitler’s Wehrmacht and SS shock troops relied on the loyal collaboration of ultraright-wing, anti-Semitic forces. Among the Ukrainian nationalists, in both occupied Poland and the USSR, the Nazis found eager collaborators. The Galicia Division was formed in 1943 out of a faction of the Stepan Bandera-led Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists Bandera (OUN-B) and fought with the Nazis against the Red Army throughout 1944.
“Massacres perpetrated by the division against Polish and Jewish civilians have been well documented, including at Huta Pieniacka, Podkamien, and Palikrowy. At Podkamien, 100 Polish civilians were massacred in a hilltop monastery, and at least a further 500 in surrounding villages as the Red Army approached the German-occupied area in March 1944.
“Members of the Galicia Division were initially prohibited from entering Canada due to their membership in the SS. But in 1950, Britain made an appeal to the Commonwealth for volunteers to accept a total of 9,000 division members who were at that time residing in the UK after being disarmed by British troops at the war’s end.
“When Canada’s External Affairs Department, prompted by complaints from the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), raised concerns about the division’s ties to the Nazis and role in Nazi atrocities, the British government insisted that it had carried out background checks. “While in Italy these men were screened by Soviet and British missions and neither then nor subsequently has any evidence been brought to light which would suggest that any of them fought against the Western Allies or engaged in crimes against humanity,” claimed the British Foreign Office. “‘Their behaviour since they came to this country, added London, ‘has been good and they have never indicated in any way that they are infected with any trace of Nazi ideology.’
“With this letter serving as political cover, Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent and his cabinet declared that Galicia Division members would be permitted to immigrate to Canada unless it could be proved that they had personally committed atrocities against civilian populations based on ‘race, religion or national origins.’ Simply having been a Galicia Division member would not be considered a valid reason to prevent entry, even though after the war all Waffen-SS members had been deemed complicit in war crimes.
“The immigration of Nazi and Nazi-allied war criminals continued for more than a decade after the war and was a significant factor in Canada’s emergence during the Cold War as a political-ideological centre of far-right Ukrainian nationalism.
“Speaking to a CBS “60 Minutes” programme in 1997, Canadian historian Irving Abella, who is currently Professor for Canadian Jewish history at York University, bluntly summed up the political climate of the time. ‘One way of getting into postwar Canada,’ he said ‘was by showing the SS tattoo. This proved that you were an anti-Communist.’
“Ottawa carried out this policy in close collaboration with US authorities, who similarly permitted ex-Nazis to settle in the US and recruited hundreds to act as spies against the Soviet Union and the Soviet-allied regimes in Eastern Europe. According to investigative reporter Eric Lichtblau, up to 1,000 former Nazis were made use of by the CIA in Europe, within the US itself, the Middle East, and in Latin America.
Yet, other historians dispute the notion that Canada became a safe haven for Nazi and Nazi-allied war criminals. In a book titled , written by historian Howard Margolian, and reviewed by Urs Obrist in 2002, Obrist writes the following:
“Even though the debate on the admission of Nazi war criminals to Canada after World War II seemed to have reached its apex in the mid-1980s, with the investigation of the Jules Deschênes Commission and its inquiries on war criminals, the issue has continued to stir historical interest in the 1990s and beyond.[1] This recent publication by Howard Margolian, Unauthorized Entry, revises the widely held view that Canada has been a safe haven for Nazi war criminals. Margolian is a Canadian historian with a special interest in the history of World War II and Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. As the author of Conduct Unbecoming, he has already shed light on the story of the murder of Canadian POWs in Normandy and the trial and fate of the SS-General Kurt Meyer.[2] In Unauthorized Entry, Margolian challenges and refutes accusations stating that the King and St. Laurent governments had been negligent in the admission of Nazi war criminals and collaborators to Canada.
“His study concludes that neither the immigration bureaucracy, nor the immigration lobby in Canada, nor the western intelligence community were as responsible for the influx of about 2000 war criminals and collaborators as has been generally assumed. Instead, he argues, the blame is to be put on the war criminals and collaborators who gained entry to Canada by forged identities or by giving false information about their wartime history. The great majority of Nazi war criminals and collaborators who settled in Canada after the Second World War were admitted not on purpose, but as a result of the absence of, or inaccessibility to, information about their wartime activities. Margolian summarizes that, in view of the benefit drawn from the immigration of the 1.5 million immigrants arriving in Canada between 1945 and 1955, it was worth taking the risk and admitting some 2000 war criminals to Canada.”
However, in his review of Margolin’s book Obrist notes that the Canadian government made exceptions for three categories of immigrants – who were not denied entry even if they might have had Nazi connections: “German scientists, Estonian refugees from Sweden and former members of the Ukrainian SS-Division ‘Galicia’.”
As for how the Speaker of the House of Commons could have completely overlooked Hunka’s past membership in a Nazi-affiliated unit during WWII, Rota released a statement late Sunday afternoon saying he recognized an individual in the gallery on Friday, and that he has “subsequently become aware of more information which causes me to regret my decision to do so.”
“I wish to make clear that no one, including fellow parliamentarians and the Ukraine delegation, was aware of my intention or of my remarks before I delivered them,” he wrote.
“I particularly want to extend my deepest apologies to Jewish communities in Canada and around the world.”
The statement does not make clear what Rota is apologizing for, and it does not name Hunka or give any details about what information Rota learned about him since Friday.
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.