For IFFI jury head Nadav Lapid it was 'kahin pe nigaahen kahin pe nishaana'

Raju Korti
For the past few days I have been watching with a fair bit of amusement the controversy triggered by Israeli film-maker Nadav Lapid after he unequivocally described "The Kashmir Files" as a propaganda-driven and vulgar film. Lapid said this while being the head jury at the 53rd edition of the International Film Festival of India (IFFI) in Goa.

Lapid pic courtesy Cannes fest 

"The Kashmir Files" written and directed by Vivek Agnihotri centres on the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits in the wake of militancy in Kashmir in the early 1990s. The movie was screened at the IFFI on November 22 under the Indian Panorama section. The issue loaded with political overtones, expectedly snowballed into a controversy. As India's ally, the Israeli government was embarrassed that Lapid described the film a "series of cinematic manipulations". The backlash, coming as it did on the Indian soil, was understandably swift and strong. Among the first to condemn his remarks were Israeli ambassador to India Naor Gilon and its Consul General to Midwest India Kobbi Shoshani. The damage was however done.

The prologue to the unsavoury episode had its own twists with IFFI International jury member Sudipto Sen terming Lapid's comments as the latter's "personal opinion" and the former vehemently denying it. Stung to the quick, Agnihotri said he would quit film-making if intellectuals including Lapid were able to prove that events depicted in the film were false.

Lapid has since offered "total apology" if his remarks had been misinterpreted, claiming he had no intentions to insult the Kashmiri Pandits or those who had suffered. There may be some substance in his conclusion that the film was pushed into the IFFI with a political agenda but assessing a film from cinematic point of view and as a political activist are two different things. The 47-year-old film-maker has a fair reputation that precedes him. Without being prejudicial to his remarks and the rationale that he has given, it is surprising that Lapid, who lives in France, chose to say what he did when by his own admission he had little clue about the situation in the militancy-ridden state.

For the record, Lapid is entitled to his views both as a film-maker and an independent person. Apparently, which part of his psyche prompted him to say that is not clear but that is not the issue of my discourse here. What surprises me is how anyone with such a strong sense of conviction can apologise after making a categorical statement he knew would raise political hackles. It is not as if Lapid could not have judged the sensitivity of the issue that he was addressing from a prestigious global platform like the IFFI. To make matters worse, he also tempered his regrets by asserting that he stood by his view nevertheless.

The film-maker's assessment has to be understood from his own political affiliations. He was among the group of influential film-makers that protested against the launch of the Shomron (Samaria/West Bank) Film Fund. According to them Lapid's competition entry "Ahed's Knee" at the Cannes Film Festival had a singular goal of actively participating in whitewashing the Occupation in exchange for financial support and prizes. The Fund's official mandate is to distribute grants to Jewish settlers residing in the West Bank and to productions by Israeli citizens filmed in the West Bank. In one of his interviews, Lapid had said the Israeli collective soul is a sick soul.

I reproduce a paragraph from that interview. "Something in the deepest essence of the Israeli existence is false, is rotten, It's not just Benjamin Netanyahu (currently angling for the prime minister's chair). I think this Israeli sickness or nature is characterized by young Israeli men muscular, smiling, who don't raise any questions and don't have any doubts. They are extremely proud of being Israeli. They have a totally dichotomist vision of existence -- Us versus all the others."

Given this backdrop and his perception one wonders if Lapid wanted to embarrass his own government by speaking about an issue more than he wanted to rub the Indian political sentiment the wrong way. If that is the case, then clearly, the plot was lost and it backfired badly. I wonder feathers would have been ruffled if he were to express his views on some other platform purely in his capacity as a film-maker. The Kashmir Files was not the target. It was actually the shoulder to fire at the Israeli government.

It is difficult to believe that a person of his conviction would take a somersault and apologise and also when he had some charitable things to say about the other films screened during the festival. Few in India are aware of Lapid's anti-establishment stance (in his native country) and not pulling his punches when it comes to criticism. What has happened in his case is the recoil has been worse than the shot. 

Intended or not, even if one makes an allowance for his views, Lapid has not done justice to his reputation as a dedicated film-maker. More so when one of his own films has propagated and preached similar thought. Politics and propaganda are inseparable whether it is Agnihotri or Lapid. He would have had my thumbs up if he had stuck to his views -- whatever their political flavour -- without apologising. By expressing remorse in a couched manner, he has put his foot in the mouth. Badly enough for even the IFFI to take his name and pic off their website.