The Melbourne International Film Festival is finding the politics of nationalism just a bit tricky right now. That’s a good thing.

It all started with the Festival’s decision to screen the documentary The 10 Conditions of Love, a film which profiles the Uighur separatist Rebiya Kadeer. The Chinese government was already highly sensitive about Kadeer and the World Uighur Congress. But matters took a serious turn after the recent violence in Urumqi, which Chinese media have claimed was “instigated and masterminded” by Kadeer.

In an extraordinary state intervention, MIFF’s Director, Richard Moore, was even rung up for a “please explain” by the Chinese consulate on Friday 10 July — only a few days after the deadly riots in Urumqi — after it spotted The 10 Conditions of Love in the full MIFF program.

Now pressure appears to have been applied to at least three Chinese film-makers to withdraw their works from the festival: Petition: The Court of the Complainants, by Zhao Liang, Cry Me a River by Jia Zhangke and Emily Tang’s Perfect Life. The politically-motivated withdrawals also carry overtones of state control. Concerning Liang, whose work is apparently highly critical of the Chinese justice system, Moore told AAP that he’s “worried for his safety” and that “he’s changing his mobile phone regularly.”

To top it all off, British film-maker Ken Loach has withdrawn his film Looking for Eric because of his support of a Palestinian boycott against Israeli government sponsorship of another film in the festival, $9.99. The left-wing film-maker, who is famous for his gritty, kitchen-sink realism, withdrew because he would not allow Looking for Eric to be shown in a festival which accepts money from the state of Israel. He has taken a similar stand against other festivals, including the Edinburgh Film Festival. The funding in question was desultory — an airfare by the Israeli Embassy to support animator Tatia Rosenthal to fly to Melbourne to present and speak about $9.99.

The withdrawal of the Chinese films and Loach’s Looking for Eric makes MIFF look like a particularly political film festival. But that’s not really the case. In a program of this size and international diversity, there are generally at least a few films that deal with controversial political issues, such as oppressed minorities, state censorship or long-running international conflicts. This year’s MIFF program is no different.

Nor is it tenable to argue that art and politics should never mix. Artists and film-makers are often highly engaged politically, and many documentaries are made to explicitly advance a political stance — even when film-makers insist, as Jeff Daniels does about The 10 Conditions of Love, that they are just “telling a story.”

In fact, the controversy about this year’s MIFF program shows that Richard Moore and his programmers are doing their jobs. Our festivals and cultural institutions need more engagement with the pressing issues of our day, not less. Let’s hope that MIFF’s Board, sponsors, and state government backers realise that, rather than trying to rein in next year’s program to something safer and duller.

Meanwhile, Sol Salbe writes:

It would have to take a particularly dim-witted supporter of the Palestinians to try to ban Israeli films from the Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF) at this time. Ken Loach removed Looking for Eric from MIFF at the very same time well known Israeli film directors like Ari Folman (Waltz with Bashir) and Eytan Fox (Walk on Water) were adding their names to a petition demanding the equivalent of a Royal Commission to examine alleged war crimes during the Israeli attack on Gaza in December and January.

But contrary to many reports in the international media, Ken Loach had never asked to ban any Israeli films. His argument is with the State of Israel’s official sponsorship, not the individual artists, which he welcomes. Because Chinese film makers have also removed their films the two countries have been lumped together in many reports. While Israel’s human rights record is arguably not as bad as China, the point is that Israel is an official sponsor and China isn’t. In fact there are only three other government sponsors: Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea. None of the other three are particularly notorious for their poor human rights record (sponsorship from New Zealand, Denmark, Germany and Japan is ostensibly at arm’s length from their governments).

A close examination of the last 10 MIFF programs suggests that Israeli funding does not seem to have affected the contents of the program with quite a few films critical of Israel being shown over the years.

Loach had probably expected a repeat of his Edinburgh Film Festival success. There, the threat to withdraw his film resulted in the Festival returning the paltry 300 pound payment to the Israeli Embassy. No harm was done to the cinema world or the festival as Israeli director Tali Shalom-Ezer still travelled to the Festival and was greeted warmly. Even Loach wrote to her saying: “To be crystal clear: as a film maker you will receive a warm welcome in Edinburgh. You are not censored or rejected.” (On the other hand, Loach failed to disclose that he was not merely a campaigner for Palestinian human rights but also a leading member of the Respect Party which regards the existence of Israel as a historical mistake).

But when Loach wrote to MIFF Director Richard Moore about the massacre in Gaza he probably wasn’t aware that Moore had a close connection there. Moore has an Israeli son who has recently finished his three-year Israeli Defence Force service during which time the IDF has often fought in Gaza. Moore was probably more scathing than he needed to be with Loach. When he further wrote “we will not participate in a boycott against the state of Israel, just as we would not contemplate boycotting films from China”, his words were taken by some to mean that Loach wanted him to boycott films from Israel.

Chief among those who took it that way was the member for Melbourne Ports, Michael Danby. His assertion that Loach demanded the Melbourne Film Festival withdraw Israeli films was distributed all over the world. Danby’s straw-person argument against an imaginary ban got him lots of publicity. He concluded by saying that like many Melbournians he’ll be attending Israeli films like “Waltzing with Bashir”. Even though he got the name wrong, (it’s Waltz, not Waltzing) this is good news. This year’s Israeli sole feature film entry is Ajami which just won the Wolgin prize in Jerusalem the other day and it deserves any publicity, and audience, it can get.