Imad Muna: “When Cultural Activity Disappears, the Pulse of Daily Life Recedes and the Space for Expression Narrows”

The city of Jerusalem has long been accustomed to resisting through culture as much as through everyday Israeli presence. However, with the outbreak of successive wars and the continuous deterioration of security conditions, the cultural sector in the city has been severely struck. Since the United States and Israel launched an attack on Iran on February 28, 2026, cultural institutions—as well as others—have been closed under the pretext of a state of emergency, accompanied by directives from the Israeli army prohibiting gatherings.

As a result, the halls of 10 cultural institutions in East Jerusalem have been closed, including the Palestinian National Theatre, El-Hakawati. Jerusalem Story visited the theater on April 9, 2026, for a tour of the space and an exclusive interview with Imad Muna, member of the administrative board and treasurer of El-Hakawati Theatre.

The theater corridors appeared submerged in an eerie silence; the walls cloaked in a heavy coldness, and the colors of promotional posters for various plays affixed to the walls seemed faded. Inside the main theater hall, the scene was no better; it was empty, with nothing to be heard but the echo of footsteps and the voices of those few who entered.

During our interview, Imad spoke about the cultural reality in Jerusalem, which he described as fragile and constrained, but he refused to label it “paralyzed,” expressing hope that theatergoers will soon return once the situation improves.

Jerusalem Story (JS): To begin with, please tell us about yourself.

Imad Muna (IM): I am a son of Jerusalem, born on June 3, 1964, and I still spend my days navigating its streets, neighborhoods, and alleys. I studied in its schools and was deeply influenced by its educational and cultural institutions.

I founded the “Scientific Library,” and I consider myself one of the city’s children whose features have been shaped by its daily details and living history.

In my youth, I was engaged in communal activities, joining clubs, scouts, and summer camps, where I learned the meaning of belonging and collective work.

As I grew older, this sense of belonging transformed into a cultural passion. I was keen to attend all events hosted by Jerusalem’s cultural institutions, following performances and activities with enthusiasm and interest.

At the forefront of these institutions was the Palestinian National Theater—known to all of us as El-Hakawati—since its official opening in 1984. For me, this theater was not just a performance venue but a true school that helped shape my personality, refining my love for art and culture and deepening my sense of belonging and identity.

Over the years, I did not remain a mere spectator but became part of this institution. I was a member of its general assembly and later had the honor of joining its administrative board as treasurer. This is an experience in which I take pride and through which I feel a great responsibility toward this place that has played a major role in shaping who I am.

I can say with confidence that El-Hakawati influenced not only me but also served as a real driving force for cultural activity in Jerusalem. It contributed to shaping the awareness of an entire generation and its understanding of homeland, patriotism, loyalty, and belonging. It has been, and continues to be, a guardian of cultural identity, transmitting it from one generation to the next and preserving it.

JS: How do you describe the state of cultural institutions in Jerusalem during periods of war?

IM: It is fragile and constrained, yet still resilient thanks to great efforts. The big picture combines security and political pressures, on the one hand, and attempts to preserve cultural identity, on the other. Within this context, we can map out the following challenges:

• Restricted movement and access due to security tensions leading to road closures or tightened military checkpoints

• Disruption of cultural events, as all activities have been postponed or canceled due to the security situation and the fear surrounding it
• Psychological and emotional pressure on everyone involved in cultural work

Thus, cultural institutions in Jerusalem operate in an extremely difficult environment. Yet they have not stopped; rather, they are trying to redefine their role, not only as providers of culture but also as spaces for resilience, preservation of identity, and expression in times of crisis.

JS: What has changed in their work since the recent political events with Iran began?

IM: Since the escalation between Israel and Iran began, cultural institutions in Jerusalem have undergone clear shifts in their work. They have moved from cultural production to crisis management—that is, redirecting their efforts from organizing events to dealing with an emergency, which involves postponing activities, canceling festivals, and adapting to security restrictions. In such cases, priority shifts from expansion to mere continuity.

Due to the security situation and tension, public participation has stopped. Many institutions were forced to reduce or halt open events, especially those relying on attendance, because of the difficulty of movement faced by both audiences and artists.

Therefore, it can be said that cultural institutions in Jerusalem no longer function solely as producers of culture; they have also become agents of social resilience and managers of a reality in crisis, striving to maintain their presence despite the circumstances.

JS: To what extent can it be said that culture in Jerusalem has become paralyzed?

IM: Describing it as paralyzed would be unjust. I believe the cultural reality in Jerusalem during wartime can be described as one of severe restrictions and forced reshaping. Cultural life inevitably recedes during wars due to the cancellation or postponement of festivals, exhibitions, and artistic performances. Cultural institutions also suffer from a lack of funding, as wartime conditions require redirecting resources toward urgent needs, leading to the reduction or even suspension of programs.

Moreover, cultural institutions in Jerusalem face increasing censorship and restrictions on discourse, which creates a state of self-censorship and caution among artists and institutions and impacts the nature of cultural production.

JS: What are the main challenges that El-Hakawati faces today on both administrative and artistic levels?

IM: The theater faces a complex set of challenges on both fronts, especially under the current political and economic conditions.

On the administrative level:

• A chronic financial crisis, with a sharp decline in funding due to reduced international and local support and difficulty accessing sustainable funding sources
• Political and administrative restrictions related to the status quo in Jerusalem, such as movement restrictions and entry permits issued by Israeli authorities, which hinder the work of artistic and administrative teams and limit the capacity to host external performances
• Weak institutional capacity at times, with a shortage of specialized administrative staff or exhaustion among existing teams due to workload pressures and limited resources
• Declining audience attendance due to security and economic conditions, directly affecting revenue and continuity

On the artistic level, El-Hakawati faces:

• Difficulty in theatrical production due to limited budgets impacting quality, as productions require sets, lighting, costumes, training, and more
• Migration of artistic talent, as some artists are forced to leave Jerusalem in search of better opportunities, creating a gap in local expertise
• Restriction on freedom of expression, which naturally falls within a political context that imposes direct or indirect limits on artistic content, especially critical or political works
• Difficulty in development and experimentation due to limited resources and daily pressures, pushing toward producing “safe” works rather than taking risks with new artistic experiences
• Weak communication with the global cultural scene due to restrictions, making it difficult to participate in international festivals or host artists from abroad, thereby reducing opportunities for cultural exchange

JS: How has the suspension of performances and activities impacted El-Hakawati’s continuity as a cultural institution?

IM: In the specific context of El-Hakawati, the suspension of performances and activities is not merely a temporary operational crisis; it threatens its position as one of the most important cultural pillars in Jerusalem. The theater relies heavily on performances and community activities as a source of income, and with their cancellation, the funding crisis worsens amid limited official support. As such, continuity becomes dependent on unstable external aid, with an accumulation of debts, or a reduction of activities to a minimum. As a result, staff are lost in an environment with limited opportunities, and since alternatives for artists are scarce, this harsh reality pushes them to leave Jerusalem to work in another city or even abandon acting altogether.

Here, it must be emphasized that the loss of talent is extremely dangerous, because rebuilding a Palestinian artistic team in the city is not easy. Thus, the artistic legacy built by the theater over decades is interrupted, and the relationship with a politically and culturally specific audience is severed. El-Hakawati is not just a theater but a space for community gathering. Therefore, its continuity is an existential issue that surpasses the artistic sphere, extending into the national and cultural significance of Jerusalem.

JS: Are there financial or logistical difficulties threatening the theater’s survival?

IM: Financial and logistical data indicate that cultural centers and institutions in Jerusalem—foremost among them El-Hakawati Theatre—face a real existential threat amid successive crises and the current war in the region, which has led to an almost complete paralysis in their work, and sometimes even closure.

For example, with the suspension or sharp decline in performances, these institutions have lost more than 70 percent of their core revenues, which depend on ticket sales, leading to monthly losses estimated in the thousands of shekels (NIS). Meanwhile, operational expenses have not stopped; fixed costs, including salaries, rent, maintenance, and services, range between NIS 70,000 and 90,000 per month (around $20,000 to $30,000), even in the absence of artistic activity.

In addition, grants and external support have declined by around 50 percent, further exacerbating the financial crisis, especially given the difficulty of securing alternative funding sources.

Logistically, movement restrictions have disrupted more than half of artistic activities, alongside a drop in audience attendance to less than half of capacity, even when some performances resumed.

As a result of this accumulation, total losses may exceed $300,000, with an operational deficit that could reach $1 million. This places the theater before difficult choices: reducing activities, laying off staff, or even a temporary or permanent closure. These figures reflect not just a passing financial crisis, but a warning of the erosion of the theater’s role as a vital cultural institution in society.

JS: How has the absence of audiences, both from within and outside Jerusalem, affected the theater’s work?

IM: The absence of audiences—whether from Jerusalem or beyond—has had profound repercussions on the theater’s work. Performances have lost one of their most essential elements: live interactions with audiences.

The impact has not been limited to the artistic dimension but has extended to the economic one, with a noticeable decline in revenues, increasing the difficulty of covering operational costs and ensuring production continuity.

The decline in visitors from outside Jerusalem has also reduced the theater’s role as a platform for cultural exchange, weakening its reach and influence both locally and internationally. At the same time, this absence has negatively affected the morale of artists and staff, for whom audience interaction is key to motivation and creativity.

JS: What does the absence of the El-Hakawati Theatre from Jerusalem mean during this sensitive time?

IM: It means the loss of a vital and important space for expression and dialogue. When a theater transforms from merely an artistic venue into a platform that reflects people’s concerns and offers them a space for collective thought and emotional release, its role becomes even more crucial in times of crisis. It becomes a guardian of cultural identity and a means of resisting isolation and fear.

Therefore, its absence is not just the absence of cultural activities but a decline in society’s ability to endure and communicate, and the loss of an important tool for preserving collective awareness.

JS: How does the suspension of cultural activities impact Jerusalemite society, especially its youth?

IM: The suspension of cultural activities in Jerusalem has a profound impact on society, especially among the youth, who find themselves facing an increasing void in spaces for expression and creativity. Through the artistic and intellectual platforms that they provide, cultural institutions represent a fundamental driver for nurturing talents and embracing youth initiatives. Their absence means a significant decline in these opportunities.

The impact is not limited to creativity but extends to the social sphere. Cultural events help create spaces for meeting and dialogue and strengthen social bonds. With their suspension, these spaces shrink, deepening feelings of isolation and disconnection, especially under the pressures that the city is experiencing.

This suspension also affects the psychological state of the youth, who lose one of the most important means of emotional release and stress relief. In the absence of such outlets, mental health-related challenges increase, and opportunities for positive engagement with reality decline.

At a deeper level, the absence of cultural activities threatens the erosion of connection to cultural identity, as these activities are vital tools for preserving collective memory and strengthening belonging. With their decline, the youth lose one of the most important connections to their history and cultural context.

JS: Do you feel there is an invisible loss accumulating with the absence of cultural activity?

IM: When cultural activity disappears, the light does not go out all at once; it fades gradually, and the city begins to lose its features without noticing. There is a loss that cannot be seen with the eye, but it seeps into small details: in people’s language, in their ability to dream, and in the spaces that were once havens for questions and difference.

When theaters disappear and stages go dark, it is not only art that stops but also the pulse of daily life recedes, the margin of expression narrows, and the voices that once gave meaning to what is happening grow faint, especially among the youth who find themselves without platforms to protect their imagination or reflect their anxieties.

This loss is not immediate but a slow accumulation of an inner void that leaves its mark on awareness and collective memory. Over time, absence becomes familiar, and silence replaces dialogue in a city where culture was once a form of resistance and life.

Thus, absence is not merely a temporary halt but an invisible scar in the body of society, deepening the longer the silence persists.

JS: To what extent can culture endure under these circumstances?

IM: Under these exceptional circumstances, culture faces a harsh test regarding its ability to continue and survive. Despite the clear decline in activities and events, the cultural scene has not stopped entirely; rather, it has taken alternative forms that are less visible publicly and more tied to individual initiatives and limited spaces.

Cultural actors affirm that culture has a relative ability to endure, as it is an essential part of society’s identity and awareness. However, this resilience remains fragile in the absence of support and stability. The closure of institutions, declining funding, and absence of audiences all weaken the continuity and impact of cultural work.

At the same time, observers note that culture, even in times of crisis, does not disappear completely but reinvents itself through youth initiatives, limited activities, or even digital spaces. Nevertheless, this presence remains insufficient to compensate for the broad absence of an organized cultural scene.

Accordingly, culture can endure to some extent, but it faces real challenges that threaten its long-term continuity unless a supportive environment is provided to ensure its survival and development.

JS: Is there coordination or solidarity among cultural institutions in Jerusalem to confront this phase?

IM: At this stage, the relationship between cultural institutions in Jerusalem cannot be reduced to mere technical or administrative coordination; it is closer to a state of existential solidarity imposed by circumstances. Despite differences in specialization and capacity, these institutions find themselves in the same trench, trying to protect what remains of the city’s cultural space.

On the ground, flexible forms of cooperation are emerging, ranging from sharing spaces and resources to organizing joint events and even coordinating the cultural discourse itself to strengthen the cultural narrative in the face of marginalization attempts. However, this coordination often remains informal, relying on individual initiatives and personal relationships among cultural actors.

At the same time, this situation reveals the fragility of the cultural structure, as solidarity remains more of an emergency response to crises rather than the result of a long-term strategy. The absence of stable funding and the restrictions on movement and work make it difficult to transform this solidarity into sustainable partnerships capable of generating cumulative impact.

Nevertheless, what is happening today, despite its limitations, lays the groundwork for a new awareness among cultural institutions of the importance of collective work, not just as a tactical option but as a necessity for survival. In a city like Jerusalem, culture cannot endure unless its institutions unite and transform solidarity from a temporary reaction into a continuous structure of action.

JS: How do you evaluate the role of supporting bodies locally and internationally in sustaining cultural institutions?

IM: In a city burdened by crises, the role of local and international supporting bodies emerges as a decisive factor in keeping cultural institutions alive, not as a luxury that can be dispensed with.

This support, despite its limitations, has helped prevent the complete collapse of the cultural scene and kept the flame of cultural activity alive, even at its minimum level.

Locally, despite the scarcity of initiatives, they have proven to be more grounded and more capable of responding quickly to daily needs, driven by a strong sense of responsibility and belonging.

International support, despite its importance, is often constrained by conditions and procedures that limit its effectiveness. It also tends to be short-term, lacking a strategic vision that ensures sustainability.

Between the two, cultural institutions remain in a gray area: receiving enough to stay alive, but not enough to recover. This raises an urgent question about the need to redefine the roles of supporting bodies, by shifting from temporary assistance to genuine partnership that strengthens cultural resilience and protects its presence in the face of crises.

JS: What are the expected scenarios for the future of the El-Hakawati Theatre if the situation continues as it is?

IM: If current conditions persist without signs of relief, the future of El-Hakawati is surrounded by deep concern and anticipation, as financial challenges intersect with restrictions on cultural work, placing this historic institution before unprecedented tests.

The most likely scenario is that the theater remains in a state of “fragile resilience,” carrying out minimal activity through individual initiatives and intermittent efforts that maintain its symbolic presence without restoring its vital role in production and influence.

Another possibility is gradual decline, where the administration may be forced to reduce programs and activities and possibly reconsider its operational structure, negatively affecting cultural continuity and audience reach.

The darkest scenario is a complete halt, due to the accumulation of financial and logistical pressures. This would represent a severe loss for Jerusalem’s cultural scene and create a gap that is difficult to fill in terms of live arts and collective memory.

Despite these bleak possibilities, hope remains that local and international supporting bodies may intervene to sustain this cultural institution and enable it to regain its vitality and role as one of the most important carriers of cultural identity in the city.

Between these scenarios, the El-Hakawati Theatre stands today at a crossroads, where its future depends not only on its ability to adapt but also on the degree to which culture is recognized as an urgent necessity, not a luxury to be abandoned in times of crisis.

JS: What does the El-Hakawati Theatre need today to be able to resume its activities?

IM: Under the current conditions, resuming theatrical activity is no longer merely an internal decision but depends on a set of interconnected needs affecting the entire cultural structure.

First, the theater needs a minimum level of stability that would allow it to reopen its doors to audiences and artists without the fear of sudden interruptions or emergency restrictions. There is also an urgent need for both immediate and sustainable financial support, which aims not only to cover past losses but to ensure continued production and payment of staff wages amid declining revenues. This support must be flexible and responsive, considering the exceptional nature of the current phase.

In addition, the theater needs to rebuild trust with its audience, which has been disrupted by circumstances beyond control, through interactive programs and performances that reflect the psychological and social transformations experienced by society, especially the youth.

Equally important is providing a safe working environment for artists and staff, in terms of freedom of movement and expression, to ensure the restoration of the creative dynamism that characterizes theatrical work.

Finally, resuming activity also requires a state of cultural solidarity—locally and internationally—that reinstates the theater as a priority within cultural action, as a vital space for dialogue, reflection, and the repair of what has been fractured in collective awareness.

JS: What is your message to the Jerusalem audience given their forced absence?

IM: Considering this imposed absence, the theater addresses its Jerusalem audience with a message that goes beyond nostalgia; it is a clear call for steadfastness and commitment to cultural engagement. Closing the doors does not mean the disappearance of the role, nor the extinguishing of the message that the theater has always carried as a space for expression, encounter, and the creation of hope.

Those in charge of El-Hakawati emphasize that the audience has never been simply a recipient but rather an essential partner in shaping the cultural experience. The presence that has been erased from the seats remains in the memory of the place, and in every detail, from the applause to the live interaction that has formed part of the theater’s identity.

This phase, despite its harshness, is only a passing chapter in a long history of cultural resilience in Jerusalem, where cultural institutions have grown accustomed to facing crises and emerging from them with greater determination. The theater may disappear temporarily, but it does not die.