ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

genocide

The Corridors of Power – Upstander or bystander?

by

Why is there still genocide? Supposedly the nations of the world have said ?Never again.? And yet, it continues in so many places while the world stands by and watches?often wringing our hands nervously. Israeli documentarian Dror Moreh?s The Corridors of Power offers us a compelling look at US foreign policy vis ? vis genocide since the end of the Cold War. He does so with compelling interviews with many people within several administrations who were in the rooms where the decisions of action or inaction were being made.

Following the Holocaust, one of the early acts of the United Nations was to adopt The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. It creates an obligation on nations to act when genocide is happening. This film focuses on the US since the fall of the Soviet Union because at that point, America was left as the sole global superpower. Yet only occasionally has the US acted to stop genocide.

The film includes genocides in Iraq and Somalia (under the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations), the Balkans, Bosnia, and Rwanda (under the Clinton administration), and Libya and Syria (under the Obama administration) In a Q&A at AFI Fest, Moreh noted that his beginning point for this film was wondering why the US acted in Libya, but not Syria. While he may seem to have a thesis that the US should act to stop genocides when they are discovered, he also shows that the decisions to act or not are complex.

It was educational to watch the evolution of President Clinton on this question. Early in his administration, he would constantly seek consensus on these questions. It was only after a few years that he took it upon himself to make a clear decision to act.

Moreh has interviewed a who?s who of US political power, including Colin Powell, Henry Kissinger, Hilary Clinton, James Baker, Michael Mullin, Wesley Clark, Leon Panetta, Paul Wolfowitz, Anthony Blinken, John Shattuck and many others who speak about the situations and what went into the decisions that were made.

The real star, however, is Samantha Power. Power won the Pulitzer Prize for her book A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. She recounts her early involvement as a reporter during the Balkan civil wars and how that pointed her to focus on genocide and human rights. She went on to serve on President Obama?s National Security Council, and then as Ambassador to the UN. Power was in many ways the moral conscience in the discussion of responding to genocide. She constantly made the case that people and nations need to be ?upstanders? rather than ?bystanders?. This is seen especially in archival footage of her in the Security Council verbally shaming the Russian and Chinese for vetoing action.

We see in the film that the question to respond is not as simple as we might think. There are questions of morality, of practicality, and of politics, both domestic and geopolitical. The film really focuses on the White House and what happened there. It doesn?t really get into other political questions. For example, he noted that in regard to action in Syria, President Obama felt he needed Congressional authorization. However, we don?t see anything about the resistance he faced in getting that authorization. There were also other nations that were also failing to act in that situation, as well as the power of Russia and China to block action in the UN.

It should be noted that there are brutal scenes in the film. It includes archival footage of horrific scenes from Rwanda and Bosnia. It is not just the dead bodies (of which there are many) but also film of the actual murdering of civilians. It is terrible to watch?but perhaps that is the point: we need to see it; to turn away is a moral failing.

Moreh noted in the Q&A that he felt that those who were interviewed had heavy consciences about the issue and their part in the decisions that were made. It is not so much a matter of guilt as perhaps a feeling of helplessness. There are so many factors involved in the issue that we may feel that the issue is just too hard to deal with. And yet, the words need to continue to be said: Never again! And we need as the people of the world to be upstanders.

Blanco en Blanco: Cold Dark World

by

Blanco en Blanco, Chile?s submission for Best Foreign Film Oscar consideration, takes us into the cold, dark, empty environment of Tierra del Fuego at the turn of the 20th century. Director Th?o Court creates a world in which the land and the people share a soul-numbing desolation.

The film centers on Pedro, a photographer, who has been hired to come to this remote area to take a wedding photo of the landowner?s soon to be child bride, Miss Sara. Strangely, the land owner, Mr. Porter, is absent throughout the movie, always busy on other business. This area, at the southern tip of South America is very much the end of the earth. As Pedro must wait for the wedding to take place, he is caught up in seeing the world around him. He discovers it is filled with people who are just as cold, dark, and empty as the land around them. He also discovers, and in time participates in, the genocide against the indigenous people of the area.

This languidly paced film is more than anything an example of excellence in cinematography. Whether inside the big house, or in the surrounding countryside, earth tones or stark white and grays fill the screen to show us the emptiness that defines the land and the people. This is a world that even in its violence, lacks any sense of passion. Pedro, especially seems to be nearly emotionless. He just exists. His only real concern is how to stage a photo perfectly (not unlike the centrality of cinematography in this film). Some of the most interesting shots are those that we see through his camera.

Of course, the social commentary of the film is about the colonialism that destroys those who have lived in this land for so many generations. When Pedro is asked to document the work being done, he is told that they are making history here by creating a homeland. (Obviously, a homeland for Europeans. It is already a homeland, but by those not recognized as true people.) Just as Pedro poses Miss Sara to make the young girl look sexually appealing, he later poses the corpses of the murdered people and their hunters to make the scene look noble. It reminds us that there is often much more behind the images we see than we know.

Blanco en Blanco is in limited release.

Photos courtesy of Outsider Pictures.

Quo Vadis, Aida? – Helplessness

by

?I?m doing everything within my power.?

Quo Vadis, Aida? is a fictionalized story based on true events during the Bosnian War. Directed by Jasmila ?abani?, it has been nominated for an Oscar in the Best International Feature Category. It was submitted by Bosnia and Herzegovina. It recounts the fall of the town of Srebrenica and the resulting genocide carried out by the Serbian army.

Aida Selmanagi? (Jasna ?uri?i?) is a Srebrenica school teacher who is serving as a translator for UN peacekeeping forces. The colonel leading the Dutch military contingent has been assuring the people of the town that they are protected and that the UN is prepared to attack the Serbs if they try to take the city. But when the Serbs come, the UN fails to carry out the threats of their ultimatums. The people evacuate the city, four or five thousand get inside the Dutch compound, but several thousands more are outside the compound seeking safety within. Aida is safe as an employee of the UN, but her husband and sons are outside the walls.

As an insider to the negotiations, Aida has information that the rest of her community does not have. She manages to find a way to get the family inside, but even then, the situation continues to deteriorate as the impotence of the UN forces becomes more and more obvious.

This is a film about helplessness. We especially see it in Aida as she struggles to save her family, but it is also true for the Dutch military leaders. They have been left out to dry by NATO and UN political decisions. When the colonel in charge tries to call up the command chain, he is told no one is available. Many times throughout the film, military people and Aida are pushed to tell people things they know are not true. The colonel admits early on, ?I?m just a piano player.? (I.e., he?s only a messenger.) That is often the role that Aida finds herself in as well. Bringing messages that have no real force or meaning.

Aida is stuck in the middle?between her job and her family and the wider community. The Dutch are in the middle, delivering flaccid threats, then having to follow orders and regulations rather than saving lives.

When in school and learning to identify themes in literature, one of those overall themes that frequently recur is ?Man?s inhumanity to man?. That phrase seems inadequate to describe genocide. We watch it play out, seeing the faces of so many we know to be doomed, and discovering that even those who care about what is happening are helpless to stop it. The film really doesn?t look at the geopolitical background. That would just be a diversion. The reality is that the world, like Aida, seems to be powerless in the face of the evil of such strife.

Quo Vadis, Aida? is playing in theaters, through virtual cinema, and on Hulu.

Gather – More than Something to Eat

by

?The Red Nation shall rise again and it shall be a blessing or a sick world, a world filled with broken promises, selfishness and separation, a world longing for light again.? (Crazy Horse)

Food is more than just physical sustenance; it is often an important part of a community?s identity and life. Gather, from director Sanjay Rawal, enters into the relationship between Native American?s and their traditional food sources. We learn not only about the food, but also what those foods meant?and still mean?in those cultures.

The film notes early on that seventy percent of all foods consumed around the world were developed by the indigenous peoples of the Americas. These include tomatoes, potatoes, corn, zucchini, and chocolate. There was a great diversity among the various nations that populated North America before European colonization. The film focuses on three very different sets of Native Americans as they seek to reconnect with the food sources of their ancestors.

Among those we meet are Chef Nephi Craig of the White Mountain Apache Nation and Twila Cassadore of the San Carlos Apache Nation. Craig is working to build a restaurant that will serve the traditional foods. Cassadore is a forager who knows the kinds of foods that the people lived off of through the years. We also meet Samuel Gensaw of the Yurok Nation. He and others have fought for native fishing rights in Northern California. Elsie Dubray of the Cheyenne River Sioux Nation comes from a family that raises bison. She has done science fair projects dealing with bison meat and with the high levels of diabetes in Native Americans.

Each of these very different perspectives create a mosaic how food continues to be an important part of the Native American culture. However, often that connection to traditional foods has been lost. Gensaw describes the area he lives in as a ?food desert?. There are no stores for miles around. For many it means shopping at the gas station. But by seeking to restore the people?s connection to the river, with its salmon and eels, there can be better food available.

Throughout the film, we see ways that food is different from just meeting our physical needs. There is a certain spirituality about food and the way we relate to the environment and to one another. These people all find connection between who they are in their communities and the foods they work with and share with others.

The film also makes the point that often food was a part of the genocide against Native Americans. One of the ways Europeans sought to destroy the indigenous peoples was through cutting off their food sources. It led to starvation, dependency, and ultimately being separated from the land that had sustained them. This history leads people in the film to talk about food sovereignty. Their rights to traditional foods are not just about connecting to the past, it is a sign of their independence and separateness form the broader culture.

We often overlook the many ways food is part of our lives. Even when we offer a prayer of thanksgiving over our meals, it may be more of a routine than an actual acknowledgement of meals as part of our spiritual lives. By seeing the many ways food has import in the lives of these Native Americans, we may also want to consider the many ways our body, minds, and spirit are fed by our own eating habits.

Gather is available on iTunes and Amazon.

Photos courtesy of Illumine.

Our Mothers – Fleshing Out the Truth

by

The aftermath of the Guatemalan Civil War and genocide is the background for Our Mothers (Nuestras Madres) from Belgian-Guatemalan writer/director Cesar Diaz. The film received attention at various festivals, including winning the Camera d?Or at Cannes Critics? Week. It was Belgium?s official submission for Best International Feature Oscar consideration.

Ernesto (Armando Espitia) is a young man who works for an agency that identifies the remains taken from mass graves. They assemble the skeletal remains, test DNA, and return the bones to families for proper burials. He has a personal stake in this process: his father was among those who were disappeared during the Civil War. When an indigenous woman from a rural areas asks him to exhume the bodies near her village, she has a picture he thinks might include his father in the group of guerillas. His mother Cristina (Emma Dib) tries to discourage him, but he wants to know the truth. When he arrives at the village, a number of women show up wanting to bear witness to what happened. We don?t hear their testimonies, but we see a series of visual portraits of the women.

When he returns home, and continues his work, he receives word that his father?s remains have been unearthed. It is at this point that the question of truth begins to come to the fore. Cristina is getting ready to testify at a trial of some of those responsible for the genocide. The truth she shares is not the story that Ernesto has heard all his life. There are things she has tried to shield her son from. But now it all becomes known.

The fact that much of this film takes place in the presence of bones provides an excellent metaphor. The opening shot is of bones being placed together to make a complete skeleton. The bones are not the whole person. They are not themselves the story or the truth. They only remind us of what once was. The real story must be built around this framework, and what is missing is as important as what we see. The bones are not the truth, but as we hear the stories told about these people, the truth takes on flesh.

In press notes, Diaz says he had started off to make a documentary about survivors of the genocide, but when he heard the accounts of rural villagers, he wanted a different way to tell those stories. He says that in the Guatemalan Indian tradition, things must be spoken to bring them into existence. The film is not actually about the stories (although we hear a few of them); it is more about the importance of speaking and hearing the stories.

The trial that is going on throughout the film has grabbed the attention of the society. It is on TVs and radios everywhere Ernesto goes. He is captivated by the stories. But oddly, when his mother is in the car with him, she keeps wanting to turn it off. We understand later that she does not need to hear the stories; she lived them. But is does become important for Ernesto to hear those stories?even the ones that Cristina tries to protect him from. The truth is not just what happened in the past. The truth only becomes real when it is spoken and heard.

Our Mothers is available through Virtual Cinema.

On Her Shoulders – Nadia Murad Takes on the World

by

?The world has only one border?the border of humanity.?

At 23 years old, Nadia Murad is doing amazing things?testifying before the Canadian House of Commons and the UN Security Council, addressing the UN General Assembly, meeting refugees, leading a memorial event in Berlin for a genocide. Although this all seems exciting, it is actually a burden she feels compelled to carry. On Her Shoulders is a look into a few months of Murad?s activities and the reason they are so important.

In 2014, ISIS declared that the Yazidis (a religious minority in northern Iraq) should be eliminated. They set out on a genocidal spree in which over 5000 people were killed in a few weeks and over 7000 women and children were captured and forced into sexual slavery and child soldiering. Murad was one of those captured. In all, eighteen members of her family were killed or enslaved. In time, she escaped and began to tell her story. She tells it not because she wants to relive it, but because she sees herself as the voice of all those still enslaved.

Filmmaker Alexandria Bombach followed Murad during the summer of 2016. We see her doing TV and radio interviews, meeting with members of Parliament and with UN officials, visiting refugee camps where many Yazidis live while awaiting countries that will take them in. We see her in the almost normal life that takes place between the public events she is part of. She is indeed a remarkable young woman who has taken on a difficult and demanding role. Part of the difficulty is that the media (and official bodies like the committee in the House of Commons) focus on the sexual slavery that was forced on her. She is willing to talk about it, but she complains at one point in the film that they are always asking the wrong question. Few ever ask ?What can be done for the Yazidis??

Maybe it?s because I see so many films about refugees and genocide, but as I watched this there was a sense of saturation on these topics. Yes, we know there are genocides happening. Yes, we know people have been driven from their homes with little hope of finding a place in the world to accept them. Do we need to see it yet again?

The answer to that is ?Yes.? Yes, we do need to hear Nadia Murad?s story, because it is not just her story, but the story of thousands of others. Yes, we do need to hear the ugly truths of genocide. Yes, we do need to see the hardship of life in a refugee camp. Because we see and hear of so much suffering like this, we may feel overwhelmed. Our hearts can become hard, our souls calloused. That is why we need to see stories like Nadia Murad?s. We need to open our hearts. We need to care.

[Late news: Nadia Murad shares this years Nobel Peace Prize.]

Photos courtesy of Oscilloscope Laboratories

The Story of Us Ep. 2: Why Can’t We Just Get Along?

by

(National Geographic/Maria Bohe)

War is not a topic many of us enjoy discussing, and it?s easy to see why. Tensions around the world are currently at a fever pitch as the US and North Korea play a game of chicken over nuclear weapons.? Drone warfare has made it as easy to kill real people as it is to grab a joystick and press a button.? Nobody wants to deal with the effects dueling groups of people can cause?we?ve seen it over and over throughout the annals of history. In the second episode of The Story of Us (National Geographic, 9 PM/8 CT Wednesdays and on demand), Morgan Freeman took a closer look at this issue and discovered some solutions on how to help make lasting peace a reality.

The episode, entitled ?The Fight for Peace,? is an interesting juxtaposition of words.? Since Cain killed Abel in Genesis, fighting has been a part of society?for better or worse.? But a lasting peace is always desirable in the end.? Freeman made a trip to Ethiopia and watched two tribes conduct a peace ceremony to end fighting over livestock, pasture lands, and simple theft.? It was fascinating to watch and encouraging to see members of the rival tribes go off together as friends.? Later, Freeman visited Rwanda, the site of a ghastly genocide that killed upwards of one million people in a little over three months.? It took a lot to get things back to something resembling order, but reconciliation is finally starting to occur.

(National Geographic/Maria Bohe)

In some places, there is still tension in the air over past events.? One example is in Ireland, where Catholics and Protestants fought for decades and still segregate themselves for the most part (see the picture above of Freeman looking at one of the 30-foot tall Peace Walls).? Being together brings about the possibility of retaliation from either side.? In other cases, some tribes in South America believe the shedding of blood helps to end disputes.? Every year, they get together for a festival and after getting drunk, start fights with fellow tribes intentionally, stopping only when someone bleeds (but not killed).? Violent, yes.? But they seem to think it works.

Yet we know war isn?t the final answer. It?s going to be a worldwide issue until humans breathe their last breath.? So what will it take to keep peace in the meantime?? If we use the takeaways from the second episode of The Story of Us, we?ll have to eschew revenge and focus on communication, reconciliation, and forgiveness.? It might not be the easiest thing to do when we?re wronged, but it?s where God can enter the picture and make a major impression in someone?s life.? The Rwanda story was unique as the two individuals interviewed were from different tribes (and the man had killed the lady?s husband, brother, and two of her kids) and yet with God?s help, there was forgiveness and a peace that simply cannot come as a result of human intervention.

In fact, the apostle Paul told the Roman church the following: ?Never pay back evil for evil to anyone.?Respect what is right in the sight of all men.?If possible,?so far as it depends on you,?be at peace with all men.??Never take your own revenge, beloved, but?leave room for the wrath?of God, for it is written, ?Vengeance is Mine, I?will repay,? says the Lord.??But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.??Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good (Romans 12:17-21 NASB).?

It?s amazing how advice from two millennia ago can still be timely in an age of distrust and uncertainty. May we employ it before it?s too late.

NEXT WEEK: Episode 3: The Power of Love

 

The Promise – Love in a Time of Genocide

by

?Our revenge will be to survive.?

The modern concept of genocide did not begin with the Holocaust; it started with the attempted extermination of the Armenians during the early years of World War I. The Promise tells the horrifying tale through the story of a love triangle (or perhaps quadrangle). It is a story of heroism, but also of flawed people who are face dire circumstances. They must not only seek to save themselves, but to try to save the identity of their community.

In 1914, at the dawn of World War I, Michael Boghosian (Oscar Isaac) leaves his village in Southern Turkey to study medicine in Constantinople. Turks and Armenians live and study side by side. Michael is staying with his well-to-do merchant uncle. There he meets the beautiful Ana (Charlotte Le Bon), who is from a village near his, but she has been traveling the world for many years. She is with an American journalist, Chris Myers (Christian Bale) who has come to cover the Ottoman Empire?s place within the war. Although Ana and Chris have a life together, there are certainly sparks between Ana and Michael. But Michael, too, has someone in his life. In his village awaits his fianc?e Maral (Angela Sarafyan), whose dowry he is using to study medicine.

When the Ottoman Empire allies itself with Germany, they begin trying to destroy the Christian Armenian population. Many are jailed and slaughtered. Whole villages are destroyed. Michael is arrested and used for slave labor, but in time escapes, returns to his village and marries Maral before going into hiding. Meanwhile Chris and Ana are trying to help an American pastor smuggle orphans out of the country. Later Chris runs afoul of the authorities, is imprisoned, and expelled from the country. The dynamics of the Michael/Ana/Chris relationship shift throughout the story.

The love story serves to humanize this story of an atrocity. The promises that are made between them (some spoken, others not) sustain them in difficult times. But sometimes those promises are not kept. And sometimes those promises are ripped away by the circumstances.

Even though the story is set over a century ago, it is extremely timely. There continue to be those who flee persecutions and genocides. Director Terry George has previously dealt with genocide as the writer and director of Hotel Rwanda. Many of the scenes in the current film ominously reflect what we have seen on the news the last few years: swimmers in the Mediterranean seeking to escape to freedom, piles of dead bodies?even a dead baby beside the water.

This film serves to teach us history (because the Armenian Genocide really gets little attention outside the Armenian community. (The US and UK have never officially recognized the genocide because Turkey is such a strategic ally. Turkey refuses to acknowledge it at all.) But it also speaks to events happening in the world today. European and American politics struggle to respond to the refugee crises, especially dealing with people from the Middle East?the same region that this film is set in. This film reminds us that saving others is a courageous act. It may not always be safe, but it demands to be done.

Photos courtesy of Open Road