The national museum has all reason to profile stories of displaced Palestinians

CMHR has the responsibility to get exhibit of displaced Palestinians correct

As exhibits go, the one set to open this weekend at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is a modest one – about 12 metres long, featuring a total of five artifacts, along with photos, videos, testimonials. But the controversy around “Palestine Uprooted: Nakba Past and Present” has been outsized.

Opposition was simmering even before the exhibit was announced last year, with some Jewish groups concerned a one-sided narrative was in the works at the taxpayer-funded national museum that would not just exclude the Jewish experience of that era, but demonize it.

Then a National Post headline last week indicated “leaked” correspondence revealed a “secret meeting” between the museum and a Palestinian representative, causing further concern. The emails – which were not leaked, but released through an access-to-information request – concern a visit to the museum in December, 2024, by Palestinian Ambassador Mona Abuamara, who is, unsurprisingly, a harsh critic of Israel. But the visit was not secret; Ms. Abuamara had posted about visiting Winnipeg and thanked CMHR CEO Isha Khan. Nor was it unusual: Ms. Khan figures she has played host to nearly 190 diplomatic delegations in the past two years.

This is not “foreign interference,” as some have characterized it. A diplomat visiting a human rights museum and offering their two cents about an exhibition concerning their own community is not off-base, nor is it necessarily nefarious – or consequential.

None of this means there might not be legitimate concerns about the exhibit (which, to state the obvious, I have not seen).

Mark Berlin, on the CMHR board since 2018, has resigned in protest. While he believes the Nakba story should be told – this is the mass displacement of about 750,000 Palestinians around the time of the founding of the State of Israel – he feels the expulsion of some 850,000 Jews from Middle East and North African countries around the same period also deserves the museum’s attention. Ms. Khan says the CMHR is working on something about that. She was unable to offer a timeline, but says they are “just starting the process.” She also emphasizes that the Nakba exhibit does not include historical context, but is a vehicle for storytelling. Which does seem like an odd approach for a museum.

Gail Asper, daughter of the museum’s founder, the philanthropist Israel Asper, is also deeply concerned about the exhibit – the process in putting it together, and the impact it could have on the safety of the already embattled Jewish community.

In a lengthy takedown of the project, University of Manitoba law professor Bryan Schwartz and Winnipeg Jewish Review editor Rhonda Spivak say the exhibit is a biased, partisan exercise that has no place in a publicly funded national museum. They warn the exhibit “will contribute directly to the rising tide of antisemitism that has made Canada an increasingly dangerous place for its Jewish citizens.”

They also note several disturbing comments made by a member of the exhibit’s advisory committee, Ramsey Zeid, who has called Zionism “a disease that must be destroyed.”

Such comments are concerning indeed. Yet Mr. Zeid, who is president of the Canadian Palestinian Association of Manitoba, was not removed. He was, however, spoken to, Ms. Khan says. This does not exactly inspire confidence.

Still, the process should. The museum regularly consults with communities in its exhibition development. Two academic experts acted as independent reviewers. And all curatorial decisions are ultimately made by the museum.

And in terms of foreign interference, what about letters sent to the museum by Shurat Hadin, the Israel Law Center? In a May 14 letter obtained by The Globe, the Bnei Brak, Israel-based group demands the museum “immediately suspend all work on and public promotion of” the exhibit in its current form. And in a follow-up letter dated June 8, it demands a “written undertaking that it will not open, launch, promote, or otherwise present the exhibit pending the completion of a genuine consultation process with us.” It warns the exhibit could cause “irreparable harm” to the Jewish community.

Ms. Khan says she is concerned about antisemitism, as the head of a human rights museum should be – as every Canadian should be. She is also concerned that Palestinian experiences were underrepresented in the museum. As she should be.

Rational people should be able to distinguish between a foreign dignitary’s museum visit and actual foreign interference. Reasonable people should understand that a human rights museum has every reason to profile the stories of displaced Palestinians. Reasonable people should also understand that the museum has a responsibility to present such stories with integrity. The Canadian public is counting on this national museum, this Crown corporation, to tell these stories. And to tell them fairly and responsibly.