David Chapman reviews The Tinderbox (Mosely, 2022) https://thetinderboxfilm.com/
The author and director of The Tinderbox, Gillian Mosely, was brought up in an American Zionist household with simple beliefs about Israel. She was taught that Jews had a right to the Holy Land and understood that modern-day Israel was founded after the second world war in reaction to the holocaust. She was prompted to ask questions by a chance encounter in a nightclub with a Muslim Palestinian gay man, Tamer al’ Ghussein. This led ultimately to The Tinderbox (which is dedicated to the late Tamer) in which she seeks a proper understanding of the history that created the conditions for the conflict, to listen to people on all sides in the region and to look for signs of hope and routes towards peace.
The film traces modern support for a Jewish homeland in the region back to the early 19th century, with at least some of the motivation behind Christian support for Zionism being an antisemitic desire to rid European Christian countries of Jews, while for some Jews, especially in Russia and Eastern Europe, there was a need to escape antisemitism. The pivotal period, though, was during and shortly following the first world war, when, in an attempt to win allies, Britain promised the region first to Arabs and then to Jews. The Balfour Declaration of 2nd November 1917 supported the establishment of a Jewish Homeland in Palestine, while recognising the need to protect the rights of existing non-Jewish communities. However at the time of the declaration, 90% of the population of Palestine was Muslim or Christian and resistance to the creation of Israel was inevitable. And so it was that Britain turned Palestine into a tinderbox which has periodically burst into flames every since.
Alongside the comprehensive history lessons (expertly, even beautifully, presented), much of the film consists of Gillian talking to people in different communities in the region, including Jews, Muslims and Christians in the occupied territories and elsewhere. Unsurprisingly she finds widely contrasting views and asks how in a world where facts are often replace by opinion we can ever reach consensus.
Some people flatly deny facts (one of the Israeli interviewees, Dor, says “there is no such thing as a Palestinian, it’s a big lie”) but mostly the gulf in perception comes from the choice of facts and the framing narratives. With a range of narratives on offer whose narrative gets aired?
Gillian wonders how Israelis square their treatment of Palestinians with the numerous exhortations in their scriptures to welcome the stranger, and it is hardly a surprise to find that the narrative of their religion is only called upon when it suits the political purpose. Zionist Jews are not alone in this and the Christian Right in the USA might be considered paradigmatic. It was particularly telling, though, to hear a Jewish settler, Israel Medad, say: “When that time of the Messiah comes, the Messianic age, when Isaiah says that the lamb will lie down with the lion, my teacher told me, even then I would rather be the lion, rather than the lamb”.
The film was made in 2022, before the attack on Israel by Hamas on 7th October 2023 and the subsequent slaughter of Palestinians by the Israeli Defence Force in Gaza. In the UK, the hegemonic narrative used by most politicians, the mainstream media, and even the Church of England, has been that the conflict is the fault of Hamas. Hamas is dismissed as a terrorist organisation while the actions of Israel are excused as self-defence. When taking account of the history and context established by The Tinderbox, however, the attack by Hamas can be seen as an act of resistance against the Israeli occupation, even if you think the brutality made the act illegitimate.
Gillian resisted the accepted narrative of her family and community to make The Tinderbox. In the aftermath of 7/10/23 it seems to be necessary to resist the hegemonic narrative merely to acknowledge the humanity of the Palestinian people.
