The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

“It is so important that Palestinians tell their own stories in all their rich multiplicity”

Interview with Nicky Böhm, one of the organisers of the Falastin Cinema Week


18/02/2025

This week Falastin Cinema Week, an alternative to the Berlinale, will take place in Refuge Worldwide and the Spore Initiative both in Neukölln. The Berlin International Film Festival (Berlinale) has recently faced numerous calls for a boycott from various artists and cultural workers. These calls are primarily in response to Germany’s political climate concerning the Israel-Gaza conflict and the perceived suppression of pro-Palestinian voices.

The controversy intensified during the 2024 Berlinale awards ceremony, where several filmmakers used their platform to criticize Israel’s military actions in Gaza and called for a ceasefire, including the directors of No Other Land. These statements prompted backlash from German politicians and officials, who labeled the remarks as “antisemitic” and “anti-Israel propaganda”.

We spoke with Nicky Böhm, an organiser of the Falastin Cinema Week

The Falastin cinema week is happening at the same time as the Berlinale which received a lot of criticism last and this year for its treatment of the subject of Palestine. Do you see the cinema week as an alternative to this?

Yes absolutely. ​​Cinema should be bold, radical and unafraid to critique political orthodoxy. It’s one of the few places where you’ve got people’s undivided attention for two hours, so there’s an enormous opportunity to convey something meaningful, to show something that makes a visceral and tangible impact. Cultural activism and boycotts are one way for us to collectively take a stance against Germany’s egregious anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab racism and its attempt to normalize and artwash it via cultural events such as the Berlinale.

What inspired you to create this alternative cinema week, and how does it respond to political censorship regarding Palestine? 

We wanted to have something to unite around and look forward to as an antidote to continually being in opposition to something. We want to showcase the creative excellence, ingenuity and resourcefulness of Palestinian filmmaking that has been overlooked by the Berlinale. It also gives us an additional opportunity to speak out against Germany’s participation in the genocide, complicity in Israel’s human rights abuses and the ongoing military occupation through the medium of the visual arts. 

Berlin is home to Europe’s largest Palestinian diaspora community and they are vilified, criminalized and scapegoated on a daily basis. It’s an incredibly hostile environment – emotionally, physically and mentally. Arabic has been banned at demonstrations, deportations are being ramped up, the political and media classes are still wedded to the xenophobic ‘imported antisemitism’ discourse, the state sanctioned police brutality has reached dystopian levels amidst widespread apathy, including among the ‘Left’. Germany’s certainly not new to practising censorship and propaganda but those not politically aligned with the state’s agenda have always found ways to circumnavigate it. It also encourages us to be intellectually curious and more resourceful when we build alternative structures. 

Can you share any specific incidents of censorship that motivated the event’s creation? 

The ridiculous censorship narrative and ensuing “Antisemitism Resolution” that followed the No Other Land debacle at last year’s Berlinale was a chilling reminder that Germany’s memory culture is selective and can actually endanger the lives of the Jewish people if professes to protect. There was also talk of the state interfering in the selection of jury members after No Other Land won the Berlinale Documentary Award and the Panorama Audience Award, which clearly contravenes the principle that jury members are supposed to be independent and ‘staatsfern’.

How has political censorship impacted filmmakers addressing Palestinian narratives? 

I would say in two central ways. Firstly it’s really hard to get funding for anything Palestine-related, and secondly there’s a certain amount of self-censorship.There can also be a tendency for non-Palestinian filmmakers to descend into savourism or endorsing perfect victims’ narratives, which makes it so important that Palestinians tell their own stories in all their rich multiplicity. 

What reaction have you received so far? 

Overwhelmingly positive. It’s really heartwarming to see the new friendships that are being made, the skills and knowledge that are being shared. It’s also galvanizing to see how our diverse communities and the movement as a whole are drawing renewed strength, energy and courage from radical care and the promise of some joyful moments. Germany will never silence us. 

How did you select the groups curating the cinema week? What’s gonna be shown? 

They are all comrades and friends who we’ve worked with before. The cinema week would not have been possible without our community getting together and pooling resources, expertise, time and energy. It’s a real testament to DIY grassroots organizing. I’m eternally grateful for all the love and dedication that the curators have put into the programme and everyone who has helped to make this happen: Jüdische Stimme, AL.Berlin, Jewish Bund, Irish Bloc Berlin, Rawy Films, Space of Urgency, Diaspora Rising, Spore Initiative, Palinale, Teresa A. Braggs, Amal Abu Hanna, Acidfinky, House of Base, Seeding Resistance, all the filmmakers and Refuge Worldwide. It’s impossible for me to pick out any favourites so I would invite people to explore the full programme on Refuge Worldwide. 

What kind of audience do you hope to reach? How do you see the power of film screening in the counter-cultural context? 

I hope that people outside of our bubble will be inspired to dig deeper into Palestinian histories and join the dots with other decolonial narratives. It’s also important to question why a film festival like the Berlinale that used to have a reputation for being the most political of the major European film festivals has rolled over to become just another obedient arm of Germany’s anti-Palestinian Staaträson. What impact will that have on pluralistic discourse and how does that translate to a functioning democracy and Germany’s soft power on the international stage?

How are the sales going so far? Are there any tickets left?

Hurry while stocks last!

Are you in touch with other alternative politically engaged counter-cultural events in the context of Palestine? Is there anything else you want to say/add?

Yes, I’m in touch with Palinale, On Strike and our friends at Diaspora Rising will be taking part in the Reclaiming the Discourse event with Francesca Albanese. AL.Berlin, who are curating the second evening of Falastin Cinema Week, have brought Al Nather and Shabjeed over to play their first show at Astra next week. I think it’s brilliant that so many people are getting together and showing how strong and united we are as a movement.

Berlin is also home to one of the world’s largest diasporic Israeli communities. Although Germany likes to weaponize the painful histories of the Holocaust and the Nakba and frame Jews and Palestinians as adversaries, our anti-Zionist Jewish siblings are standing shoulder to shoulder with Palestinians resisting the state’s attempt to flatten their identities and advocating for a free Palestine together.

The movement is very vibrant, diverse and strong. Perhaps that’s what makes it so threatening. As my friend Jad Salfiti says “you need many voices in a choir and sometimes they’re not always going to harmonize”. All liberation struggles are interconnected like a mycelium web. We never know if we’ll live to see the mushroom but we are all playing our part in its spiritual creation, so we need to collectively move in the same direction and remember that this is bigger than us as individuals.

Full program and tickets are available here.

Photo Gallery: Rally for Palestine, 15th February 2025 in front of the Bundestag

Photos: Cherry Adam and Guy Smallman http://www.guysmallman.com/

Photo Gallery: Demonstration against the AfD, 16th February 2025 in Berlin

All photos Guy Smallman http://www.guysmallman.com/


17/02/2025

Scholz and Merz Duel Over Hardline Asylum Policies

A closer look at an immigration-critical debate—and where participants got the facts wrong

In a televised debate, Olaf Scholz and Friedrich Merz competed to outdo each other in advocating for stricter asylum policies. Merz, in particular, reinforced his racist stance by referencing crime statistics. But what do these numbers actually reveal?

Crime Statistics as a Tool for Political Manipulation

Citing the incident in Aschaffenburg, Chancellor Olaf Scholz stated, “We can never accept such crimes, and therefore, decisive action must be taken.” Scholz had already outlined what this action would entail back in October 2023, declaring,  “Deportations on a large scale!” were in order. His opponent, Friedrich Merz, followed the same narrative, introducing his “Five-Point Plan for Secure Borders and Ending Illegal Migration” as a response to the Aschaffenburg case. Both employ a misleading narrative, suggesting that Germany is becoming increasingly unsafe due to rising crime rates, which they blame on migrants. But do their claims hold up under scrutiny?

According to the Police Crime Statistics (PKS), the number of knife attacks has risen by five percent. However, this increase is largely due to a recent change in reporting—knife-related incidents have only been separately recorded since 2020. Previously, such offenses were categorized under broader crime types such as murder, manslaughter, or robbery. Meanwhile, severe crimes like murder, robbery, and manslaughter have steadily declined. For example, the number of murder cases has dropped from 1,600 per year to around 200 per year. By isolating knife-related offenses, the statistics create the misleading impression that serious violent crimes are increasing when, in reality, they have significantly decreased.

Crime statistics can be politically instrumentalized by selectively highlighting specific factors or weapons. Unlike firearms, knives are easier and cheaper to obtain. It is therefore likely that individuals from financially disadvantaged backgrounds use knives more frequently in violent incidents.

In the context of the migration debate, right-wing and conservative politicians like Merz exploit crime statistics to create a distorted picture. They selectively highlight specific types of crime that are more common among people living in precarious conditions.

According to the PKS, 45 percent of recorded knife-related offenses were committed by “non-Germans.” While this figure does not precisely match their proportion in the overall population, Merz’s choice to highlight this feature misleadingly suggests that nationality determines criminal behavior. Knife-related crimes are more likely to be committed by people with fewer financial resources and limited access to other means of violence. The statistics do not support the claim that nationality is a defining factor in violent crime such as homicide.

Deportations Do Not Create Safety

By focusing on isolated incidents, Merz diverts attention from the deeper structural causes of violent crime. The assumption that a person’s migration background determines their likelihood of committing a crime is not only statistically incorrect but also echoes racist ideologies from past centuries. In reality, factors such as social inequality, exclusion, poverty, and discrimination play a far greater role in criminal behavior.

There is no causal link between migration and crime. The claim that deportations increase safety is pure propaganda. Statistics actually show that people from war-torn and crisis-stricken countries with better prospects of staying and greater access to societal inclusion commit crimes at significantly lower rates than the general population. Instead, those most affected by political failures are often scapegoated.

The PKS itself reinforces racist narratives by categorizing crimes based on “German” and “non-German” offenders. This falsely implies that “being German” reduces criminal tendencies, which is not supported by data.

In their political rhetoric, Scholz and Merz fail to mention that, in the Aschaffenburg case, not only the alleged perpetrator but also the victim and a bystander who intervened had migration backgrounds. Rather than addressing the social causes of crime, Merz and others construct an enemy image that aligns with the stereotyped image of the enemy the far-right AfD has been promoting for years: the foreign Messermänner (‘‘knife men’’).

While anti-Muslim racism surged by 140 percent in 2023, according to a Claim study, this alarming development receives little attention in political debates. By pushing racist policies and rhetoric, Merz legitimizes far-right ideas and helps make the AfD more politically acceptable.

The Business of Fear

Since its foundation, the AfD has thrived on fear-mongering campaigns— from the 2015 refugee crisis, the surge in energy prices in 2022, to 2023’s economic uncertainty. The party’s success spikes during social and economic crises, which are often exacerbated by the policies of mainstream politicians. When conservative and liberal parties shift to the right in response, they break the so-called firewall against the far-right, ultimately paving the way for the AfD’s rise.

By refusing to address social issues directly, conservative and liberal parties adopt and normalize racist rhetoric. But the real problem remains: growing social inequality. The wealth gap will continue to widen even if asylum seekers were deported more quickly or if Islam were entirely criminalized. The missing money is not in the hands of migrants or Muslims—it is concentrated among millionaire and billionaire capitalists.

Photo Gallery: Demonstration for Congo, 15th February 2025 in Berlin

All photos: Cherry Adam