“Our Commitment Is to the Space Where Difficult Conversations Can Happen, Not to Issuing Verdicts”: Interview With CPH:DOX Artistic Director Niklas Engstrøm

The 23rd edition of CPH:DOX wrapped last month, with record-breaking attendance and satisfied delegates at the festival’s market who also voiced concerns about funding and distribution uncertainties that developed in real-time with the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency. In many ways, the festival reflected how the industry and observers are reacting to current geopolitical developments. 

Individual events at the industry conference revealed ruptures in the front of documentary unity against political threats. One such talk was entitled “Palestine – A view from two perspectives,” which paired Danish-Palestinian filmmaker Omar Shargawi, who had a project at CPH:FORUM, and Canadian-Lebanese director Amber Fares, whose film Coexistence, My Ass! follows Israeli activist-comedian Noam Shuster Eliassi. At the beginning of the talk, Shargawi read out a pre-prepared statement, accusing the festival of failing to support Palestine despite its declared humanist profile. 

A video of Shargawi reading the statement was posted by Filmworkers for Ceasefire (Filmfolk for Våbenhvile) on Instagram. Shargawi’s key criticisms included the historical bent of programming decisions (“It is not enough to show the right films after the catastrophe has happened and when Palestinians have already been displaced, killed, erased”); Danish PM Mette Frederiksen’s participation in a conversation after the opening night film (“To allow a corrupt prime minister, who stubbornly supports Israel’s policies—and thereby a genocide—to open the festival is a political act. It is not neutral—it is acceptance”), and a festival delegation dinner at the Israeli embassy (“Allowing Zionist financiers to host PR dinners at the Israeli embassy in your name is a clear stance, regardless of how you dress it”). He also contrasted the festival’s support of Ukrainian filmmakers to a lack of “solidarity with the Palestinians.”

During the talk, when Shargawi learned from Fares that Eliassi was in the room, he refused to continue and left. The talk was then ended and a festival representative said they would issue a response. In an email, Shargawi told Documentary: “The reason for leaving was a combination of the trailer and the discovery that the Israeli comedian was present. I cannot participate in any form of normalization—political or cultural—while a genocide is ongoing.” 

He was referring to the trailer for Coexistence, My Ass!, and as it’s a film about a comedian, one has to admit that the upbeat, fast-cut, shiny clip felt poorly placed after Shargawi’s very dark, difficult story, and trailer for his project The Last Witnesses, which centers on survivors of the 1947–48 Nakba.

At the closing ceremony, Artistic Director Niklas Engstrøm and Managing Director Katrine Kilgaard addressed how the festival approaches sensitive political issues of our time. The whole speech can be found here. To illustrate their defense of “pluralism” and aim “to make room for a multitude of opinions and ideas, including those that challenge our own perspective as a festival,” Engstrøm chose three conflicts as examples.

In paraphrase, Engstrøm said that the festival will keep showing films both from Ukraine and Russia, even if Russia has been responsible for numerous human rights violations; from Palestine and from Israel, even if Israel has been illegally occupying Palestinian lands for decades and has been responsible for numerous human rights violations. He also added the example of Azerbaijan and Armenia as a conflict that “no one talks about.” 

Documentary reached out to Engstrøm for further comment via email after the festival ended. It predominantly deals with the festival’s political stance, commitment to open discussion, and the benefits of attracting U.S. industry. This interview has been edited. 

DOCUMENTARY: How would you describe CPH:DOX’s position or lack thereof regarding the Palestine issue? 

NIKLAS ENGSTRØM: First of all, let me be clear: all of us at CPH:DOX are horrified by Israel’s ongoing war in Gaza and the many human rights violations and atrocities committed against innocent civilians. We share the sorrow, frustration, and anger that so many artists, activists, and people in general feel about what is happening there. Our fundamental position is that we stand with civilians—everywhere.

That said, CPH:DOX is not in a position to end the war, nor do we have direct influence on the fate of the Palestinians. And we’re not a human rights organization with a mission of speaking out whenever those rights are being breached. What we are—and what we can do—is stay focused on our role as a film festival. Our mission is to create space for critical dialogue, to bring together diverse audiences, and to raise awareness through powerful, important documentary films.

We believe in the unique power of cinema to open minds, challenge assumptions, and spark conversations—especially between people who disagree. That’s the core of what we do: provide a platform for critical discussion, not promote a fixed political agenda. And the truth is, if we took a firm public stance in support of Palestine, we would risk losing the very influence we have by alienating those who might be more sympathetic to the Israeli perspective, but who could still be moved or changed by a Palestinian story. If we did that, we would risk creating an echo chamber of people with the same opinions, and it wouldn’t help the cause of Palestinians—or anyone else.

That’s why we show films that shed light on suffering in Gaza and elsewhere, but let the films and filmmakers speak for themselves—and then create spaces for dialogue where different perspectives can come together. We want the films to reach people who might not otherwise engage—or people who might have the exact opposite perspective before watching the films. The same principle applies to other conflicts—Ukraine and Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and everywhere else—even when it’s clear that these are not equal power dynamics. Our commitment is to the space where difficult conversations can happen, not to issuing verdicts. That’s the responsibility we believe we can carry with integrity.

D: Many people, including Shargawi, are accusing festivals, cultural institutions, and governments of hypocrisy. When Russia attacked Ukraine, the whole Western world immediately supported Ukraine, and this did not happen with Palestine. 

NE: The feeling of hypocrisy is real—and justified. There’s no question that the West has responded very differently to Russia’s war on Ukraine than to Israel’s war on Gaza. That difference is painful, and it exposes longstanding hierarchies in whose suffering gets seen, heard, and supported.

We acknowledged this in our opening speech—that we’re not just entering a more divided, dangerous world, but also confronting the failures of the previous one. Western countries have their own track records of human rights violations and selective solidarity. These contradictions aren’t new, but they’re becoming harder to ignore.

As a festival, we try to navigate that reality not by pretending we’re above it, but by staying consistent. When Ukraine was invaded, we didn’t make public declarations— we programmed films that explored the conflict in depth. We’ve done the same with Palestine. That’s how we respond: through our curatorial work, through the films on screen, and through the conversations we create around their stories.

Of course it can feel insufficient. It is insufficient, in the face of so much suffering. But this is what we can do: amplify voices, create space for reflection, and try to open hearts and minds. It may not save lives—but neither would a statement. What we can offer is a platform where stories can be heard, where blind spots can be challenged, and where change can begin through conversation.

D: What about the dinner in the Israeli embassy? 

NE: First of all, the dinner in question was not organized by CPH:DOX, nor were we involved or invited. It was hosted independently by CoPro, an Israeli non-governmental foundation that participated in our industry program as one of 20 international delegations. These delegations purchase access to a set of services—they are not curated or invited by the festival, and they operate independently.

The dinner took place at the Israeli Embassy, and while the invitation referred to it as happening “on the occasion of CPH:DOX,” there was no formal link to the festival, we were not involved in arranging or “approving” it—we didn’t even know about it. We understand that this wording created confusion, and we would have preferred more clarity in how the event was communicated.

Our focus at CPH:DOX is to provide a platform for independent documentary voices—especially those working under political pressure, censorship, or in highly polarized societies. That includes filmmakers from Palestine, but also from Israel, and from Russia, China, Iran, and many other places where dissent is risky and financing critical docs is more or less impossible. In fact, as global political climates shift, even in democracies like the United States, where freedom of expression is increasingly under threat, the need for independent platforms to foster dialogue and support critical filmmaking has never been more urgent. The role of CPH:DOX in connecting filmmakers, co-producers, and financiers who support such work will continue to be vital in the years ahead.

D: Shargawi also criticized the festival for hosting the Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at the opening. 

NE: This year, as in many previous years, we invited a broad range of political figures to participate in our festival, from all sides of the political spectrum. This year’s opening film, Facing War, focused on NATO and featured Jens Stoltenberg, the recent Secretary General of NATO. Given Denmark's unique position and the current challenges to its territorial integrity posed by the U.S., the strongest member of NATO, we thought it would be valuable to have Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen engage in a conversation with Stoltenberg. The issues discussed were highly relevant to Danish audiences, particularly the evolving dynamics between the U.S. and Europe, and the situation in Greenland.

We understand and respect criticism put forward, especially when it comes from a place of deep concern about the situation in Gaza and the broader implications of political leadership. However, we don’t share the view that the participation of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Denmark is an endorsement of her policies. As I’ve mentioned a few times by now, CPH:DOX is a platform for dialogue, where different perspectives can be voiced and debated. If we start excluding certain political figures from these conversations, we risk silencing the very debates that are necessary for progress.

I firmly believe that cultural institutions like CPH:DOX must provide open spaces where these difficult conversations can happen, not echo chambers where only those with similar views are welcomed. That’s why we invited the Prime Minister and continue to invite diverse political figures—to allow for questioning, challenging, and engaging in open, democratic discourse. We’re not here to endorse any particular leader or policy; we’re here to create a space where people can share their views, challenge one another, and hopefully gain new perspectives. This is, in my view, the essence of a truly democratic and political festival.

D: How has CPH:DOX supported Palestinian films and filmmakers at this year's edition?

NE: Based on our selection criteria—including relevance, aesthetic qualities, originality, and diversity—we once again selected a significant number of films focusing on Palestinian issues for both our main program and our industry program this year. Some of these were made by filmmakers of other nationalities, like our New:Vision Award winner Ramallah, Palestine, December 2018, and the recipient of a Special Mention in our F:ACT Competition, The Encampments, or, in the industry program, projects like Anatomy of a Genocide and a new film on Edward Said, both selected for our pitching forum.

Others were made by Palestinian filmmakers themselves. For instance, 20 Palestinian filmmakers contributed short films to the collective project From Ground Zero – Untold Stories from Gaza. Danish-Palestinian filmmaker Mahdi Fleifel joined us with his latest film To a Land Unknown, and of course, we also selected Omar Shargawi’s The Last Witnesses, which focuses on survivors of the Palestinian Nakba, for the pitching forum. A particularly interesting example from this year is No Other Land, which we screened multiple times as part of our educational program for schools. After winning the Audience Award at last year’s CPH:DOX, we expected it to be picked up for Danish distribution. When that didn’t happen, we made the unusual decision to distribute it ourselves—even though distribution isn’t typically part of our festival’s scope. The film went on to become the second most viewed documentary in Danish cinemas in 2024, and it’s now returning to the festival in 2025, completing its circle. In this way, thousands of people across Denmark have had the opportunity to see a film that exposes the systemic mistreatment of Palestinians in the West Bank.

This is what we aim to do at CPH:DOX—to select powerful, thought-provoking documentaries that open people’s eyes and minds, encouraging reflection on the world we live in. Through curatorial choices like these, we believe we can help create awareness and, ultimately, make a difference.

D: Can you tell us about CPH:DOX’s orientation towards U.S. industry? Out of all the big European documentary festivals, it’s the one that is the most closely connected to it. 

NE: When we decided to move the festival from autumn to spring back in 2017, one of the key questions was: what does this open up for us? The new timing, just after Sundance, created a natural moment for European premieres of films that launch there—and while we couldn’t predict how much we’d grow, it was a conscious decision to strengthen that connection.

That said, I wouldn’t say CPH:DOX is oriented toward one industry over another. It’s more about building a space where different parts of the global documentary ecosystem—U.S., European, and beyond—can actually meet. We see ourselves as a bridge, and I think that role is especially important now, when so many dynamics are pulling us apart.

D: You didn’t have any U.S. films in the main competition this year, though. 

NE: That’s true—and it wasn’t by design, of course. The selection always comes down to the films themselves. We’re looking for bold, original, and politically resonant work, regardless of where it’s from. Some years that will include U.S. films in the main competition, some years it doesn’t.

The important thing is that we remain open - and I think the broader U.S. presence across the program and the industry side shows that the relationship is still strong. But competition is about curation, not quotas.

D: What does your partnership with Netflix mean? Besides the fact that you are able to show Apocalypse in the Tropics, while for many mid-sized European festivals, including ZagrebDox where I work, it was impossible because they blocked it. 

NE: I wasn’t aware of the issues with access to the film at other festivals—I’m sorry to hear that. Apocalypse in the Tropics is an exceptional and urgent political documentary, and I think it’s a powerful example of what can happen when a filmmaker like Petra Costa manages to navigate the system and get meaningful work out there, even within structures that are often seen as risk-averse.

As for our partnership with Netflix, they are a financial sponsor of CPH:FORUM, and importantly, it’s a no-strings-attached arrangement. There’s no editorial influence, no exclusivity—just support for the development space we offer filmmakers. It reflects an interest from U.S.-based platforms in engaging with the European documentary scene in a meaningful way. CPH:DOX has increasingly become a touchpoint for that, which is likely part of why it makes sense for a company like Netflix to have a presence here—not only through industry partnerships but also through sharing their films with our audiences.

Vladan Petković is a film journalist, critic, and festival programmer. He is a correspondent for Screen International, senior writer for Cineuropa, contributing editor for IDFA's website, and head of studies of the GoCritic! training program for emerging film critics. He is a program advisor at IDFA, program director at Rab Film Festival, and a programmer at ZagrebDox, and regularly curates for other festivals and events around Europe.