Canadian Heritage Minister Marc Miller apologized for the Canadian Museum for Human Rights not referring to Hamas as a terrorist organization in its new Nakba exhibition.
The plaque, titled “Under Occupation,” reads, “Following the Hamas attack that killed about 1,200 people on October 7, 2023.” It does not use the words “Jews” [to refer to the people killed] or “terrorists” [to refer to Hamas].
In an interview with The Canadian Press on Monday, Miller called the decision an “error.”
“It isn’t up to me to speak to, or insert myself in, the curation of any particular exhibit. But manifestly, you cannot deny the fact that this is an exhibit that is born in controversy – and perhaps some of it could have been avoided,” Miller said.
“There are some words in there that are regrettable. Not identifying Hamas as a terrorist organization is, I think, a failure. And not clearly stating that, for example, Hamas intended to kill Jews is, I think, an unfortunate error in curation and should be rectified,” Miller added.
B’nai Brith Canada decries CMHR's biased exhibit
In response, B’nai Brith Canada said, “Minister Marc Miller cannot divorce his office from the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ Nakba exhibit.”
“What the Federal Government allowed to transpire was not a curatorial error; the available evidence suggests that the CMHR’s leadership failed to govern the museum in accordance with its mandate."
“Now, after the exhibit has opened to the public, the minister has acknowledged some of the deficiencies in the exhibit.”
“The problem is that this is not simply about one missing reference to Hamas. It is about Canada’s national human rights museum being enabled to present a biased account of a deeply contested historical and political subject, even after its leadership and the Federal Government were repeatedly warned of the dangers of presenting an incomplete and misleading narrative.”
Noah Shack, CEO of the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs, visited the exhibition and said it tells a “distorted version of history that whitewashes the October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks, the Second Intifada, and the wars of annihilation against Israel.”
Adam Katz, a political science and history student at the University of Manitoba, wrote in the National Post that he came away thinking the Canadian government “is officially failing Jews and Palestinians.”
“Rather than inviting Canadians to wrestle with one of the world’s most complex conflicts, it teaches visitors to understand the conflict as solely a consequence of Israel’s creation.”
Katz also noted that the Nakba exhibit is physically positioned so that it follows on from the museum’s Holocaust gallery, such that visitors must move directly from one to the other.
Katz said the transition creates a “subtle but unmistakable emotional and interpretive bridge between two entirely different historical contexts.”
He also noted the panel’s reference to the Second Intifada as a “Palestinian uprising” with no mention of the over 1,000 Israelis murdered.
Jewish groups, leaders expressed concerns about exhibit leading up to opening
This comes after months of opposition to the Palestine Uprooted: Nakba Past and Present exhibition from mainstream Jewish groups who expressed concern about the concept and management of the exhibition.
It also comes about a week after the only Jewish board member of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR), Mark Berlin, resigned, citing that he was unwilling to be associated with the exhibit.
“Telling the story with a one-sided perspective chosen by the museum serves to deepen division and contributes to further hostility toward Jews in Canada,” Berlin wrote in his letter.
“Presenting the Palestinian displacement of 1948 without its proper historical and political context offers a narrow, one-sided argument of history that can only deepen the distrust and animosity that currently exists between Jews and Muslims in this country.
“The museum has a statutory and moral obligation to tell the full truth, not to sacrifice it at the altar of politics. By their actions, the museum’s mandate is thereby compromised along with the public’s confidence in its integrity.”