20.06.24

Editorial Note

Following the model of the American campus encampments, in early May, some 150 pro-Palestinian activist students occupied a courtyard at Berlin’s Free University to protest Israeli military action in Gaza.

The pro-Palestinian student group, named “Student Coalition Berlin,” said in their statement: “In solidarity with the Palestinian people, we the students of Berlin, have set up our camp on the grounds of the Freie Universität (location in previous post). We call our universities and research institutes, our fellow students, faculty and academic partners in Germany and beyond to unite in this urgent call to action. We understand that universities aligned with the politics of this racist state will attempt to downplay the urgency of our demands or deem them unrealistic, but we will not waver, and we will not accept negotiations for half solutions and performative actions. We especially plead with the large and growing number of critical but so far silent lecturers and professors: fulfil [sic] your obligation to protect your integrity as critical researchers. JOIN US. TOGETHER LET US STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE AND WORK TOWARDS A FUTURE FREE FROM COLONIAL OPRESSION.” [sic]

The university administration quickly called in the police, who cleared the area. According to the Police, 79 people were temporarily detained, with 80 criminal investigations and 79 misdemeanor proceedings initiated. 

In response, some 100 scholars from universities in Berlin wrote an open letter affirming the students’ right to protest. “Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand with our students and defend their right to peaceful protest,” they wrote. The lecturers urged “university management to refrain from police operations against their own students as well as from further criminal prosecution.” 

The scholars said in their statement, “Academics in Germany are experiencing an unprecedented attack on their fundamental rights, on the 75th anniversary of the Basic Law… The withdrawal of funding ad personam on the basis of political statements made by researchers is contrary to the Basic Law: teaching and research are free. The internal order to examine such political sanctions is a sign of constitutional ignorance and political abuse of power… It illustrates an increasing rift between decision-makers in the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and those who support the academic system through their research and teaching. Through its intimidating effect alone, the Minister’s actions risk permanently damaging the hard-won right of academic freedom against political and state interference… Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students, and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds.”

The scholars also wrote, “As teachers at Berlin universities, our self-image obliges us to accompany our students as equals, but also to protect them and under no circumstances to hand them over to police violence… Freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are fundamental democratic rights that must be protected, especially at universities. In view of the announced bombing of Rafah and the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the urgency of the protesters’ concerns should be understandable even to those who do not share all of the specific demands or who consider the chosen form of action to be unsuitable. It is not a prerequisite for a protest protected by basic rights that it be based on dialogue. Conversely, we believe it is one of the university management’s duties to strive for a dialogue-based and non-violent solution for as long as possible. The FU Berlin executive board violated this duty by having the police clear the protest camp without a prior offer of dialogue. The constitutionally protected right to assemble peacefully applies regardless of the opinion expressed. According to the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court (“Fraport”), freedom of assembly also restricts house rules for places that, like the FU Berlin university campus, are publicly accessible and serve a variety of purposes, including public ones. We call on the Berlin university administrations to refrain from police operations against their own students as well as from further criminal prosecution. Dialogue with students and the protection of universities as spaces for critical public opinion should be the top priority – both are incompatible with police operations on campus. Only through discussion and debate can we as teachers and universities fulfill our mission.”

German Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger criticized the academics’ letter for not mentioning the October 7 attacks by Palestinian extremist group Hamas. She repeated that Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization. 

Things came to a head when Sabine Döring, a top education ministry official, was fired by Stark-Watzinger over a botched response to the dispute about academic freedom and the right to protest.  A report by German broadcaster ARD uncovered emails showing that the Ministry of Education had requested a legal review into whether funding could be cut to the lecturers who spoke against the removal of a pro-Palestinian protest camp. Döring admitted that she “had apparently expressed herself in a misleading manner when commissioning the legal review.” Döring is the second-highest-ranking official in the Ministry. Stark-Watzinger was interviewed about the incident and said, “I have arranged for the facts of the case to be investigated thoroughly and transparently.” She also confirmed that “an examination of potential consequences according to funding law was indeed requested from the relevant departments.” 

The latest tussle over free speech is interesting both in its own right and as a reflection. There is also a Muslim interest in this issue. Iranian and Turkish intervention in Germany’s affairs is noticeable. Both countries often report on the events on campus.  Germany recently released a report on the widespread Iranian activities and media manipulation. Turkey has used the large expat community to create espionage and influence campaigns, mainly by misrepresenting events. 

Hamas’s attack on Israel and Israel’s response has triggered a lot of anti-Israel activities on German campuses as well.

REFERENCES:

https://amp.dw.com/en/german-education-chief-sacked-over-gaza-protest-response/a-69383703

German education chief sacked over Gaza protest response

June 17, 2024

The top civil servant in Germany’s education ministry has been fired after floating a possible funding cut for academics who spoke in favor of pro-Palestinian students. 

A top education ministry official has been fired after over a botched response to a dispute about academic freedom and the right to protest.

Sabine Döring was found to have explored a scheme to sanction, with financial cuts, university lecturers who spoke against the removal of a pro-Palestinian protest camp at a Berlin university.

What we know so far

German Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger sent a request to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to dismiss Döring, it was revealed on Sunday evening.  

The request followed a report by German broadcaster ARD reporting emails that showed a legal review had been requested inside the ministry into whether the academics’ funding could be cut.  

The review was initiated by Döring, who is responsible for universities. Döring is the second-highest-ranking official in the ministry and, unlike Stark-Watzinger, is not an elected figure.

“I have arranged for the facts of the case to be investigated thoroughly and transparently,” said Stark-Watzinger. She confirmed that “an examination of potential consequences according to funding law was indeed requested from the relevant departments.”

Pro-Palestinian activists had been protesting across the city for several weeks when police moved inImage: Axel Schmidt/Getty Images

Döring admitted that she “had apparently expressed herself in a misleading manner when commissioning the legal review,” Stark-Watzinger said.

“Nonetheless, the impression was created that the Education Ministry was considering examining the consequences under funding law on the basis of an open letter covered by freedom of expression,” the minister added.

Why were the academics targeted?

Some 150 pro-Palestinian activist students, protesting Israel’s military action in the Gaza Strip, occupied a courtyard at Berlin’s Free University in early May. The university quickly called in the police, who cleared the area.

In response, some 100 academics from universities in Berlin wrote an open letter affirming the students’ right to protest.

“Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand with our students and defend their right to peaceful protest,” they wrote.

Police said 79 people were temporarily detained following the protest in May, with 80 criminal investigations and 79 misdemeanor proceedings initiated.

In their statement, the lecturers urged “university management to refrain from police operations against their own students as well as from further criminal prosecution.”

At the time, Stark-Watzinger criticized the academics’ letter for not mentioning the October 7 attacks by Palestinian extremist group Hamas and other militants in southern Israel. She repeated that criticism on Sunday. Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union and others.

rc/ab (dpa, AFP)

===============================================

Google Translate

https://taz.de/Raeumung-eines-Camps-an-der-FU-Berlin/!6006162/

Clearance of a camp at the FU BerlinProtest-free university

Pro-Palestinian students occupy an inner courtyard at the Free University. The area is evacuated shortly afterwards. Teachers express their solidarity with the protests.

Updated: May 8, 3:38 p.m.

BERLIN taz | At around 1:30 p.m. the time has come: the police begin to clear the pro-Palestinian protest camp at the Free University (FU) of Berlin. The demonstrators are sitting on the ground, tightly entangled with one another. Police officers gradually pull people out one by one, sometimes using painful grips, and lead them off the premises – all amid loud protests. Students continue to knock, chant and clap at the windows of the adjacent university rooms in support of the occupiers.

On Tuesday morning, around 150 students set up tents, benches and a small pavilion and hung banners in the theater courtyard of the FU’s “Rost- und Silberlaube” in Dahlem. Almost all of them are wearing keffiyehs; in the middle of the open space stands a woman with a megaphone. “We are the students, let’s stop the bombing now,” she calls out, followed by the controversial chant “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free.” The crowd cheers and applauds.

The protesters put up a list of names of Palestinians killed in Gaza on a wall. A small information stand is set up under the pavilion, with apples, tea and information brochures on the topics of “Occupying Berlin Universities” and “Intifada, resistance everywhere in this country”.

The person at the stand tells taz: “Actually, we have invited speakers for discussion rounds, but the police are not letting them through.” Another protester is upset. She says she did not think “that democracy in Germany is so thin-skinned. Cultural and educational institutions are taking fascist positions.”

Counter-protest quickly forms

But not everyone likes what is happening here: a person is standing within earshot, wearing an Israeli flag. She does not want to be intimidated, but considering what is going on here at the university, she says that as a Jew she is very afraid. “The anti-Semitism that is openly displayed at the university is unbearable.” Someone has also hung an Israeli flag from the window of a room bordering the inner courtyard.

“The situation for Jewish students is becoming increasingly unsafe,” criticizes Noam Petri, Vice President of the Jewish Student Union, to the taz. Petri reports that many Jewish and pro-Israel fellow students are receiving threatening messages. “The situation has not calmed down, we have been warning about this for a long time.”

Group calls for “academic boycott” of Israel

Before the occupation, the pro-Palestinian group “Student Coalition Berlin” (SCB) published a comprehensive list of demands on the social media platform Instagram . Among other things, the university should call for an immediate ceasefire and a halt to German arms exports.

The group also demands a comprehensive cultural and academic boycott of Israel – which would also mean an end to the FU’s scientific cooperation with Israeli universities. SCB announced that it would not accept “any negotiations or compromises”.

A FU spokeswoman told taz that the protesters had also tried to break into rooms and lecture halls on Tuesday morning. After the occupiers refused to negotiate, the university administration had already ordered the camp to be cleared that morning.

“This form of protest is not aimed at dialogue. We are available for an academic dialogue – but not in this way,” said university president Günter Ziegler. Ziegler made it clear that the FU “firmly rejects” an academic boycott of Israel.

Teachers criticize university management

Many teachers, in turn, criticize this attitude. “It is not a prerequisite for protests that are protected by basic rights that they be directed toward dialogue,” says a statement signed by around 100 teachers from Berlin and other universities . “Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes occupying university grounds.”

In view of the worsening situation in Gaza, “the urgency of the protesters’ concerns should also be understandable to those who do not share all of the concrete demands or who do not consider the chosen form of action to be suitable.” The scientists called on the management of Berlin’s universities to refrain from police or criminal prosecution of their students. “Dialogue with students and the protection of universities as spaces for the critical public should be the top priority.” This is not compatible with police operations on campus.

And yet that is exactly what happened: from midday onwards, the police surrounded the theatre courtyard, and officers were also positioned on the adjacent roofs. Just an hour and a half after the evacuation began, the theatre courtyard was empty. Tents, blankets, posters and the protesters’ megaphone were pushed together at the edge of the open space. As the police later announced, 79 people were arrested and released after their identities were established. 80 investigations and 79 administrative offence proceedings were initiated.

In the meantime, pro-Israel demonstrators have gathered in front of the entrance to the building for a counter-demonstration. The approximately 35 people are carrying Israeli flags and signs, for example with the inscription “Jewish Lives Matter”. The remaining pro-Palestinian demonstrators are standing opposite. The police are trying to remove them from the premises.

Tensions have been noticeable for months

The university administration’s quick and repressive action against the occupation comes as little surprise. On Friday, Humboldt University had already cleared a pro-Palestinian sit-in of around 150 people on the lawn in front of the main building in Mitte after just a few hours. The police announced that 37 investigations had been initiated for possible cases of incitement to hatred and resistance against law enforcement officers.

At the Free University, on the other hand, things have remained quiet in recent months, although tensions between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli students were noticeable. In December, pro-Palestinian activists occupied a lecture hall , which was also quickly cleared. At that time, there were physical altercations between pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian students.

Meanwhile, Jewish FU student Lahav Shapira in particular came into focus of pro-Palestinian activists on the social media platform X. In January, a fellow student beat up Shapira and seriously injured him . The police suspect that the motive for the attack was the previous dispute over the Gaza war.

As a result of the attack, the Senate passed an unprecedented tightening of the Higher Education Act in April , which will also allow expulsions for political reasons in the future. Both higher education policy groups and numerous academics criticized this step as a threat to freedom of expression at Berlin universities.

Is the wave of protests from the USA spreading to Germany?

The authorities’ fear that the wave of protests at US universities could spill over into Germany is also behind the tough crackdown on Tuesday. For example, students at New York’s Columbia University occupied a meadow for several weeks to protest against their university’s involvement in the Gaza war. At the beginning of May, the university had the camp cleared with a martial police force.

The form of action was imitated across the country and now also around the world. In addition to Berlin, pro-Palestinian activists also attempted to set up a protest camp at the University of Vienna on Tuesday. At the University of Leipzig, students occupied the main auditorium. In Amsterdam, the police cleared a camp set up on Monday with heavy equipment.

===================================================

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Student Coalition Berlin (@student_coalition_berlin)

student_coalition_Berlin

In solidarity with the Palestinian people, we the students of Berlin, have set up our camp on the grounds of the Freie Universität (location in previous post). We call our universities and research institutes, our fellow students, faculty and academic partners in germany and beyond to unite in this urgent call to action. We understand that universities aligned with the politics of this racist state will attempt to downplay the urgency of our demands or deem them unrealistic, but we will not waver, and we will not accept negotiations for half solutions and performative actions.
We especially plead with the large and growing number of critical but so far silent lecturers and professors: fulfil your obligation to protect your integrity as critical researchers.
JOIN US. TOGETHER LET US STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE AND WORK TOWARDS A FUTURE FREE FROM COLONIAL OPRESSION

Edited · 6w

===================================================

https://taz.de/Besetzungen-von-Hochschulen/!6006389/

9. 5. 2024

DANIEL BAX editor

Occupations of universitiesDispute over Palestine protests

More than 100 university lecturers criticize the clearing of occupations at universities in a letter. The Science Minister reacts indignantly.

BERLIN taz | The pro-Palestinian protests at the Free University in Berlin only lasted a short time: after a few hours they were ended by a massive police presence. But they are causing quite a stir. On Tuesday, around 150 activists tried to occupy a courtyard on the university grounds and set up tents. The university management called the police. 79 people were temporarily arrested. 80 criminal investigations and 79 administrative offense proceedings were initiated.

More than 100 professors and lecturers from several Berlin universities subsequently published a statement : “Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes occupying university grounds,” it says.

They call on Berlin university management to “refrain from police operations against their own students as well as from further criminal prosecution.” Several prominent scientists have signed, including philosophers Rahel Jaeggi, Eva von Redecker and Robin Celikates, historian Michael Wildt, sociologists Naika Foroutan and Sabine Hark and lawyer Maximilian Steinbeis.

“Shocking letter: University professors support Jew-hating mob,” was the headline in the Bild newspaper. Federal Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger told the newspaper that the statement left her “stunned”: Instead of clearly standing up against hatred of Israel and Jews, the university occupiers were being trivialized. Teachers in particular must “stand on the basis of the Basic Law.”

Demand for minister’s resignation

The FDP politician received sharp protests online. Ralf Michaels, director of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law in Hamburg, responded to her on X: “It contradicts your role as Federal Minister of Education to cast doubt on the constitutionality of university lecturers in such a blanket manner.”

The minister is accusing the signatories of anti-Semitism and exposing them to the “hate-mongering of the Bild newspaper,” wrote Matthias Goldmann, professor of international law in Wiesbaden. Critical discourse is no longer possible. The Left Party politician and lawyer Niema Mossavat even called on Stark-Watzinger to resign .

The minister received encouragement from Berlin’s Governing Mayor Kai Wegner. “I have absolutely no understanding for the authors of this pamphlet,” the CDU politician told Bild . Anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel are “not expressions of opinion, but criminal offenses.” Schleswig-Holstein’s Education Minister and CDU Vice-President Karin Prien was “stunned” at how scientists “point to the humanitarian suffering in Gaza without mentioning the Hamas hostages with a single syllable.”

The president of the Central Council of Jews, Josef Schuster, said the activists were driven by hatred of Israel and Jews. “I would have expected university lecturers in particular to at least state this clearly when they advocate this form of protest.”

Call for a boycott

During the protests at the FU, the slogan “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” and the call for an “Intifada” – Arabic for “uprising” – could be heard .

The group “Student Coalition Berlin” (SCB) published a list of demands in advance on Instagram. Among other things, the university should call for an immediate ceasefire and a stop to German arms exports. The group also demands a comprehensive cultural and academic boycott of Israel, which would also mean an end to the FU’s scientific cooperation with Israeli universities.

There have recently been more protest camps in other cities. In Bremen and Leipzig, the universities had them cleared. In Cologne, tents are set up on a meadow, and in Hamburg there is a vigil.

=====================================================

Turkish media 

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/german-education-minister-rules-out-resignation-over-gaza-protest-response/3252355

https://en.haberler.com/german-education-minister-rules-out-resignation-1969613/

German Education Minister Rules Out Resignation Over Gaza Protest Response

18.06.2024 01:12’No reason’ to step down as directive on looking into sanctioning of university professors supporting pro Palestinian students’ right to protest was not hers, says Bettina Stark Watzinger.

German Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger on Monday dismissed calls for her resignation after more than 2,500 academics urged her to step down over her alleged role in considering sanctions against scholars who supported pro-Palestinian students’ right to protest on university campuses. Asked at a press briefing in Berlin whether she would submit her resignation over the affair, Stark-Watzinger said “I see no reason to do so.” The minister’s statement came in the wake of the weekend firing of a top education ministry official over a botched response to a dispute about academic freedom and the right to protest. Sabine Doering, who is responsible for universities, was reportedly found to have looked into a plan to sanction, with financial cuts, university professors who spoke against shutting down a pro-Palestinian protest camp at a Berlin university. “I did not give the relevant order to have the consequences of funding examined, nor did I want to,” said Stark-Watzinger. German public broadcaster ARD reported last week about emails that showed a legal review had been requested inside the ministry into whether the academics’ funding could be cut. Stark-Watzinger had stated that she had “arranged for the facts of the case to be investigated thoroughly and transparently.” She confirmed that “an examination of potential consequences according to funding law was indeed requested from the relevant departments.” On Sunday, more than 2,500 academics signed a letter demanding that Stark-Watzinger resign over her alleged attempt to penalize university teachers who supported pro-Palestinian students’ right to protest. “Academics in Germany are experiencing an unprecedented attack on their fundamental rights, on the 75th anniversary of the Basic Law,” the scholars said in a statement, underlining that recent actions taken by the ministry make Stark-Watzinger’s position as minister untenable. “The withdrawal of funding ad personam on the basis of political statements made by researchers is contrary to the Basic Law (German Constitution): teaching and research are free. The internal order to examine such political sanctions is a sign of constitutional ignorance and political abuse of power,” the scholars said. “It illustrates an increasing rift between decision-makers in the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and those who support the academic system through their research and teaching. Through its intimidating effect alone, the minister’s actions risk permanently damaging the hard-won right of academic freedom against political and state interference,” they added. On May 8, more than 300 academics from Berlin universities expressed their support for pro-Palestine protest camps on the campus of the Free University of Berlin and defended the students’ right to demonstrate. “Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds,” they said. The academics accused the university’s management of subjecting the demonstrators to “police violence.”

ARAB NEWS

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2532351/media

German authorities remove education undersecretary over pro-Palestine sanctions

June 17, 2024
LONDON: German authorities have dismissed Sabine Doring, the undersecretary responsible for higher education, for attempting to impose financial sanctions on academics supporting students protesting against Israel’s attacks on Gaza.

The decision, announced on Sunday, follows days of pressure on Education and Research Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger from thousands of academics.

“In May of this year, a group of university lecturers wrote an open letter regarding the protest camps at universities. This is a legitimate part of debate and freedom of thought. Having a different opinion is equally natural,” Stark-Watzinger said.

She affirmed that academic freedom was protected under constitutional law, adding: “I defend academic freedom in all its aspects. Funding for science is based on scientific criteria, not political ideology. This is a fundamental principle of academic freedom.”

Stark-Watzinger had faced intense criticism and calls for her resignation after media reports revealed that her office launched a legal review to explore sanctions against academics who supported protesting students, including the potential revocation of their funding.

“Academics in Germany are experiencing an unprecedented attack on their fundamental rights, on the 75th anniversary of the Basic Law,” more than 2,000 scholars said in an open letter on Friday.

The letter added: “Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students, and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds.”

=============================================

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/over-2-000-academics-demand-resignation-of-german-education-minister-over-repression/3250351

Over 2,000 academics demand resignation of German education minister over repression

Minister’s attempt to sanction scholars who supported pro-Palestinian students sparks concern over academic freedom in Germany

Anadolu staff  |14.06.2024 – Update : 15.06.2024

BERLIN

More than 2,000 academics have signed a letter demanding the resignation of Germany’s education minister over her attempt to sanction scholars who supported pro-Palestinian students’ right to protest.

Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger has come under growing criticism after media reports revealed that her ministry initiated a legal review last month to examine the open letter released by these scholars, and the possibility of dropping funding for their studies.

“Academics in Germany are experiencing an unprecedented attack on their fundamental rights, on the 75th anniversary of the Basic Law,” the scholars said in a statement on Friday, and underlined that recent actions taken by the ministry make Stark-Watzinger’s position as minister untenable.

“The withdrawal of funding ad personam on the basis of political statements made by researchers is contrary to the Basic Law: teaching and research are free. The internal order to examine such political sanctions is a sign of constitutional ignorance and political abuse of power,” the scholars said.

“It illustrates an increasing rift between decision-makers in the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and those who support the academic system through their research and teaching. Through its intimidating effect alone, the Minister’s actions risk permanently damaging the hard-won right of academic freedom against political and state interference,” they added.

On May 8, more than 300 academics from Berlin universities expressed their support for pro-Palestine protest camps on the campus of the Free University of Berlin, and defended the students’ right to demonstrate.

“Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students, and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds,” they said.

The academics accused the university’s management of subjecting the demonstrators to “police violence.”

Media reports have revealed that a few days after this open letter, Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger’s office initiated a legal review to examine the possibility of sanctions under civil service law and criminal law against these academics, including the option to revoke funding for their studies.==============================================

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240614-over-2000-academics-demand-resignation-of-german-education-minister-over-repression/
Over 2,000 academics demand resignation of German Education Minister over repression

June 14, 2024 at 8:11 pm

More than 2,000 academics have signed a letter demanding the resignation of Germany’s Education Minister over her attempt to sanction scholars who supported pro-Palestinian students’ right to protest, Anadolu Agency reports.

Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger has come under growing criticism after media reports revealed that her Ministry initiated a legal review last month to examine the open letter released by these scholars, and the possibility of dropping funding for their studies.

“Academics in Germany are experiencing an unprecedented attack on their fundamental rights, on the 75th anniversary of the Basic Law,” the scholars said in a statement on Friday, and underlined that recent actions taken by the Ministry make Stark-Watzinger’s position as Minister untenable.

“The withdrawal of funding ad personam on the basis of political statements made by researchers is contrary to the Basic Law: teaching and research are free. The internal order to examine such political sanctions is a sign of constitutional ignorance and political abuse of power,” the scholars said.

“It illustrates an increasing rift between decision-makers in the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and those who support the academic system through their research and teaching. Through its intimidating effect alone, the Minister’s actions risk permanently damaging the hard-won right of academic freedom against political and state interference,” they added.

On 8 May, more than 300 academics from Berlin universities expressed their support for pro-Palestine protest camps on the campus of the Free University of Berlin, and defended the students’ right to demonstrate.

“Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students, and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds,” they said.

The academics accused the university’s management of subjecting the demonstrators to “police violence”.

Media reports have revealed that, a few days after this open letter, Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger’s office initiated a legal review to examine the possibility of sanctions under civil service law and criminal law against these academics, including the option to revoke funding for their studies.

=================================================

  Google Translate

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfVy2D5Xy_DMiaMx2TsE7YediR6qifxoLDP1zIjKzEl9t1LWw/viewform

Statement from teachers at Berlin universities

“As teachers at Berlin universities, our self-image obliges us to accompany our students as equals, but also to protect them and under no circumstances to hand them over to police violence.

Regardless of whether we agree with the specific demands of the protest camp, we stand up for our students and defend their right to peaceful protest, which also includes the occupation of university grounds. Freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are fundamental democratic rights that must be protected, especially at universities. In view of the announced bombing of Rafah and the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the urgency of the protesters’ concerns should be understandable even to those who do not share all of the specific demands or who consider the chosen form of action to be unsuitable.

It is not a prerequisite for a protest protected by basic rights that it be based on dialogue. Conversely, we believe it is one of the university management’s duties to strive for a dialogue-based and non-violent solution for as long as possible. The FU Berlin executive board violated this duty by having the police clear the protest camp without a prior offer of dialogue. The constitutionally protected right to assemble peacefully applies regardless of the opinion expressed. According to the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court (“Fraport”), freedom of assembly also restricts house rules for places that, like the FU Berlin university campus, are publicly accessible and serve a variety of purposes, including public ones.

We call on the Berlin university administrations to refrain from police operations against their own students as well as from further criminal prosecution. Dialogue with students and the protection of universities as spaces for critical public opinion should be the top priority – both are incompatible with police operations on campus. Only through discussion and debate can we as teachers and universities fulfill our mission.”

Refqa Abu-Remaileh, FU Berlin Mihaela Adamović, FU Berlin Moritz Ahlert, TU Berlin Myriam Ahmed, Free University of Berlin Olly Akkerman, FU Berlin Emad Alali, FU Berlin Yvonne Albers, Free University of Berlin Hamed Al Drubi, FU Berlin Rainer Alisch FU Berlin Rabya AlMouslie, HU Berlin Tunay Altay, HU Berlin Moritz Altenried, HU Berlin  Christian Ambrosius, Free University of Berlin Qusay Amer, TU Berlin Ulf Aminde, Weissensee Academy of Art Berlin Schirin Amir-Moazami, FU Berlin Wulf-Holger Arndt, TU Berlin Thomas Arslan, Berlin University of the Arts Daniele Artico, HU Berlin Pelin Asa, TU Berlin Ryszard Auksztulewicz, FU Berlin Eleftherios Avramidis, TU Berlin Juana Awad, W eißensee Academy of Art Berlin Magnus Axelson-Fisk, TU Berlin Thaer Ayoub, FU Berlin Annabella Backes, FU Berlin Fabian Backhaus, TU Berlin Karlotta Jule Bahnsen, FU Berlin Martin C Baier, University of the Arts Berlin  Sadia Bajwa, HU Berlin Michael Barenboim, Barenboim-Said Academy Manuela Barney Seidel, FU Berlin Céline Barry, TU Berlin Denise Barth, Free University of Berlin Jamie Baxter, TU Berlin Sina Becker, Free University of Berlin Theodore Beers, FU Berlin Friederike Beier, Free University of Berlin Uli Beisel, Free University of Berlin Christine Belakhdar, FU Berlin Neil Belakhdar, FU Berlin Richard Bellamy, Hertie School Sarah Bellows-Blakely, FU Berlin Marwan Benyoussef, FU Berlin Sofia-Greta Berna, FU Berlin Elena Bernal Rey, FU Berlin Reinhard Bernbeck, FU Faysal Bibi, Museum of Natural History Berlin & University of Potsdam Selma Bidlingmaier, HU Berlin Beate Binder, HU Benjamin Bisping, TU Berlin Milena Bister, HU Berlin Marion Blacher-Schwake, HWR Berlin Carolin Blauth, HU Berlin Jan Boesten, FU Berlin Jonny-Bix Bongers, HWR Berlin Stefan Born, HU Berlin Manuela Bojadžijev , HU Berlin Erik Bos, FU Berlin Jandra Böttger, FU Berlin Dorothee Brantz, TU Berlin Paolo Brusa, FU Berlin Magdalena Buchczyk, HU Berlin  Dominic Bunnett, TU Berlin Roberta Burghardt, Berlin University of the Arts Maria Burguera, FU Berlin Basak Cali, Hertie School Diego Calderara, Free University of Berlin Juliana Canedo, TU Berlin Alberto Cantera, FU Berlin Maddalena Casarini, HU Berlin Erna Cassarà, FU Berlin Bruno Castanho Silva, FU Berlin Geert Castryck, HU Berlin Sambojang Ceesay, FU Berlin  Robin Celikates, FU Berlin Zülfukar Çetin, Evangelical University Berlin Haci Cevik, HU Berlin Rasha Chatta, FU Berlin Giulia Maria Chesi, HU Berlin Mihnea Chiujdea, FU Berlin Luciana Cingolani, Hertie School Simon Clemens, FU Berlin & HU Berlin Sebastian Conrad, Free University of Berlin Franziska Cooiman, HU Berlin  Vinicius Pedro Correia Zanoli, FU Berlin Hana Curak, HU Berlin Eric CH de Bruyn, FU Berlin Siria De Francesco, FU Berlin Osman Demirbağ, FU Berlin Nathalie De La Cruz Aquino, FU Berlin Mercedes del Campo Garcia, FU Berlin Claudia Derichs, HU Berlin Marion Detjen, Bard College Berlin Aletta Diefenbach, FU Berlin Hansjörg Dilger, FU Berlin Maria do Mar Castro Varela, ASH Berlin  James Dorson, Free University of Berlin Mahmoud Draz, TU Berlin Lindsey Drury, Free University of Berlin Alexander García Düttmann, University of the Arts Berlin Sarah Eaton, HU Berlin Teboho Edkins, dffb Berlin Harry Edwards, FU Berlin/HU Berlin Ulrike Eichinger, ASH Berlin Patrick Eiden-Offe, Leibniz Centre for Literature and Cultural Research Nadia El-Ali, FU Berlin Hassan Elmouelhi, TU Berlin Onur Erdur, HU Berlin Domenico Esposito, Free University of Berlin  Shelley Etkin, HU Berlin Ingrid Evans, Free University of Berlin Farzada Farkhooi, HU Berlin Firoozeh Farvardin, HU Berlin Erika Feldhaus-Plumi, eh Berlin Bernold Fiedler, FU Berlin Norbert Finzsch, Sigmund Freud Private University Berlin Edgardo Flores, Free University of Berlin Ute Florey, Berlin University of the Arts Naika Foroutan, HU Berlin  Julia Franz, ASH Berlin Hannah Franzki, FU Berlin Ulrike Freitag, Free University of Berlin Anke Friedel-Nguyen, HU Berlin Martin Fries, Free University of Berlin Iuliia Furman, FU Berlin Alejandra Garcia, FU Berlin Julian Genten, FU Berlin Nida Ghouse, UdK Berlin Silvia Gioberti, Berlin University of the Arts Aniella Goldinger, TU Berlin Jayme Gomes, FU Berlin Edgar Göll, IZT and FU Berlin Philipp Goll, HU Berlin Kristina Graaff, HU Berlin Till Grallert, HU Berlin Federica Gregoratto, FU Berlin Jannis Julien Grimm, FU Berlin Anke Gründel, HU Berlin Beatrice Gründler, FU Berlin David Grundy, Free University of Berlin Anisha Gupta Müller, Weissensee Academy of Art Marie Guthmüller, HU Berlin Heike Hanhörster, TU Berlin Marianne Hachtmann, TU Berlin Caroline Hambloch, HU Berlin Gada Hammoudah, FU Berlin Cilja Harders, FU Berlin  Sabine Hark, TU Berlin Angela Harutyunyan, Berlin University of the Arts Constantin Hartenstein, University of the Arts Sophie Hartleib, Free University of Berlin Elke Hartmann, Free University of Berlin Maren Hartmann, University of the Arts Berlin Nadine Hartmann, Berlin University of the Arts Elahe Hashemi Yekani, HU Berlin Aseela Haque, FU Berlin Fe Hentschke, FU Berlin Irene Hilden, HU Berlin Jochen Hinkel, HU Berlin Till Hoeppner, FU Berlin Jeannette Hofman, WZB Berlin Lara Hofner, HU Berlin Lukas Benedikt Hoffmann, FU Berlin Sarah Holz, HU Berlin Daniel Horn, Free University of Berlin Daniel Hromada, Berlin University of the Arts Macartan Humphreys, HU Berlin/WZB Waldemar Isak, HU Berlin Tuba Işik, HU Berlin Daisuke Ishida, Berlin University of the Arts Christian Jacobs, Free University of Berlin Rahel Jaeggi, HU Berlin Janez Janša, UdK Berlin Leonie Jegen, University of Amsterdam/ FU Berlin Gesa Jessen, FU Berlin Matilda Jones, Free University of Berlin  Johanna Kaiser ASH Berlin Patricia Acevedo-Kallweit, FU Berlin Juliane Karakayali, eh Berlin Onur Karaköse, HU Berlin Camille Kasavan, FU Berlin Omar Kasmani, FU Berlin Frank Kelleter, Free University of Berlin Natasha A. Kelly, Berlin University of the Arts Gertrud Koch, FU Berlin, retired professor Werner Kogge, Free University of Berlin Markus Kienscherf, FU Berlin Sophie-Jung Kim, FU Berlin Luis Kliche Navas, FU Berlin Kai Koddenbrock, Bard College Berlin Sebastian Kohl, Free University of Berlin Henrike Kohpeiß, FU Berlin Priska Komaromi, HU Berlin Aysuda Kölemen, Bard College Berlin Daniel Kolland, FU Berlin  Anika Koenig, FU Berlin Laura Kotzur, FU Berlin Martin Konvicka, FU Berlin Anja Kretschmer, Free University of Berlin Simone Kreutz, HU Berlin  Manuela Kruehler, FU Berlin Kai Kruger, Free University of Berlin Heike Kuhlmann, ASH Berlin Bouchra Laun, FU Berlin Yann LeGall, TU Berlin Eric Llaveria Caselles, TU Berlin Baz Lecoq, HU Berlin Kristina Lepold, HU Berlin Dörte Lerp, FU Berlin Eckart Leiser, Free University of Berlin Jakob Lesage, HU Berlin Julia Leser, HU Berlin Mischa Leinkauf, KHB Weissensee Academy of Art Berlin Susanne Lettow, FU Berlin Annette Lewerentz, FU Berlin Claudia Liebelt, FU Berlin Stephan Liebscher, Free University of Berlin Riley Linebaugh, HU Berlin Agata Lisiak, Bard College Berlin Roberto Lo Presti, HU Berlin Dorothea Löbbermann, HU Berlin Isabella Löhr, FU Berlin Nicolas Longinotti, Free University of Berlin Carolin Loysa, FU Berlin Elisabeth Luggauer, HU Berlin Martin Lüthe, FU Berlin Kirsten Maar, Free University of Berlin Viviana Macaluso, FU Berlin Paula Maether, ASH Berlin Somar Almir Mahmoud, HU Berlin Mina Mahouti, Weißensee Academy of Art Berlin Ana Makhashvili, Free University of Berlin Jaime Martínez Porro, FU Berlin Alexandre Martins, FU Berlin Alejandro Marquez, FU Berlin Rosa Matera, HU Berlin Ethel Matala de Mazza, HU Berlin Dominik Mattes, FU Berlin Jordane Maurs, FU Berlin Kalika Mehta, HU Berlin Malte Meyer, FU Berlin Nassim Mehran, Charité Hanna Meißner, TU Berlin Christian Meyer, FU Berlin Anja Michaelsen, HU Berlin  Karin Michalski, UdK Berlin Ismay Milford, FU Berlin Laura Moisi, HU Berlin Monika Motylińska, IRS Erkner Deborah Mühlebach, FU Berlin Ernst Müller, HU Berlin Mirjam Müller, HU Berlin Ansgar Münichsdorfer, FU Berlin Maryse Napoleoni, FU Berlin Patty Nash, FU Berlin Tahani Nadim, HU Berlin Klara Nagel, HU Berlin Christfried Naumann, HU Berlin Rima Najdi, UdK Jan Naumann, FU Berlin Ursula Neugebauer, UdK Berlin Esther Neuhann, FU Berlin Johanna Neumann, HU Berlin Valentin Niebler, HU Berlin Sophie Luisa Nientimp-Yakut, FU Berlin Pedro Oliveira, UdK Berlin Aline Oloff, TU Berlin Teresa Orozco, FU Berlin Barbara Orth, FU Berlin Mathieu Ossendrijver, FU Berlin Pamela Owusu, FU Berlin Kübra Özermis, FU Berlin Özgür Özvatan, Berliner Institut für Migrationsforschung, HU Berlin Manuela Peitz, FU Berlin Ivana Perica, ZfL Berlin Margrit Pernau, FU Rodrigo Perujo, FU Berlin Kathrin Peters, UdK Berlin Lucio Piccoli, FU Berlin  Maria Piedad Martin Benito, FU Berlin Michael Plöse, HU Berlin/HWR Berlin Sonja Pyykkö, FU Berlin Thomas Poeser, HTW Berlin Susan Pollock, FU Berlin Anne Potjans, HU Berlin Nivedita Prasad, ASH Berlin Joseph Prestel, FU Berlin Josephine Pryde, UdK Berlin Björn Quiring, FU Berlin Montserrat Rabadan, FU Berlin Francesca Raimondi, FU Berlin Lubna Rashid, TU Berlin Alia Rayyan, HU Berlin Jan Rehmann, FU Berlin und Union Theological Seminary New York Gisela Renner, EHB Berlin Nina Reusch, FU Berlin Mykola Ridnyi, UdK Berlin Alix Ricau, FU Berlin Karina Rocktäschel, FU Berlin Raquel Rojas, FU Berlin Gisela Romain, FU Berlin Regina Römhild, HU Berlin Jonathan Rößler, FU Berlin Georg Roth, FU Berlin Kendrick Rowan, FU Berlin Till Rückwart, FU Berlin Mariam Salehi, FU Berlin Ilyas Saliba, HU Berlin Christin Sander, FU Berlin Fabio Santos, FU Berlin Luis Sanz, HWR Berlin Barbara Schäuble, ASH Berlin Utan Schirmer, ASH Berlin  Linda Schmidt, FU Berlin Antonie Schmiz, FU Berlin Morten Schneider , HU Berlin Nadja-Christina Schneider, HU Berlin Till Schöfer, FU Berlin Peter Schöttler, FU Berlin  Liesbeth Schoonheim, HU Berlin Vanessa Hava Schulmann, FU Berlin Sabine Schülting, FU Berlin Nicolai Schulz, HU Berlin Johannes Schröder, TU Berlin Helga Schwalm, HU Berlin Charlotte Sebes, UdK Berlin Luke Shuttleworth, HU Berlin Jan Slaby, FU Berlin Silvia Steininger, Hertie School Johannes Stephan, FU Berlin Silke Stöber, HU Berlin Hauke Straehler-Pohl, FU Berlin Julia Strutz, HU Berlin Marcela Suarez, FU Berlin Petra Sußner, HU Berlin Kristóf Szombati, HU Berlin Tarik Tabbara, HWR Berlin Niloufar Tajeri, TU Berlin Nader Talebi, HU Berlin Sylvie Tappert, Charité Berlin Farifteh Tavakoli-Birazjani, FU Berlin Heba Tebakhi, FU Berlin  Ayşe Tetik, FU Berlin Lili Theilen, KHB Weißensee Dillwyn Thier, FU Berlin Jan Thoben, UdK Berlin Hanan Toukan, Bard College Berlin Mayıs Tokel, FU Berlin Ertug Tombus, HU Berlin Isabel Toral, FU Berlin Izoke Tubi-Weit, WZB Jule Ulbricht, Free University of Berlin Peter Ullrich, Technical University of Berlin Evrim Uzun, HU Berlin Asli Vatansever, Bard College Berlin Jasper Verlinden, HU Berlin Jasa Veselinovic, FU Berlin Richard Palomar Vidal, FU Berlin Joseph Vogl, HU Berlin Alice von Bieberstein, HU Berlin Jonas von Ciriacy-Wantrup, FU Berlin Ferdinand von Mengden, FU Berlin Margareta von Oswald, HU Berlin Livia von Samson, HU Berlin Stefanie von Schnurbein, HU Berlin Jasper Verlinden, HU Berlin  Dina Wahba, FU Berlin Agnes Wand, ASH Berlin Janis Walter, Free University of Berlin Tina Walther, FU Berlin Caleb Ward, Free University of Berlin Felix Werfel, Free University of Berlin Gabriele Werner, Weißensee Academy of Art Berlin Ana Werkstetter Caravaca, FU Berlin Linus Westheuser, HU Berlin Marina Weiss, FU Berlin Philipp Weitzel, HU Berlin Roman Widder, HU Berlin Adrian Wilding, HU Berlin Michael Wildt, HU Berlin Luise Willer, FU Berlin Eva Wilson, Free University of Berlin Ruth Wishart, FU Berlin Luc Wodzicki, FU Berlin Vera Lucia Wurst, FU Berlin Liza Wyludda, FU Berlin İlkay Yılmaz, FU Berlin Nicola Zambon, FU Berlin Martha Zapata Galindo, FU Berlin Florian Zemmin, FU Berlin Zinka Ziebell, FU Berlin Johanna zum Felde, FU Berlin 

Other supporters 

Nelly Y Pinkrah, TU Dresden Benjamin Braun, MPIfG Cologne Margarita Tsomou, University of Osnabrück Max Müller, University of Halle Isabelle Ihring, EH Freiburg Vanessa Thompson, Queen’s University Michelle Pfeifer, TU Dresden Nanna Heidenreich, University of Applied Arts Vienna Sabine Broeck, University of Bremen Daniel Loick, University of Amsterdam Natascha Sadr Haghighian, Bremen University of the Arts Denise Bergold-Caldwell, University of Innsbruck  Ivo Eichhorn, University of Frankfurt am Main Eva von Redecker, philosopher and freelance author Michi Knecht, University of Bremen Lotte Warnsholdt, German Maritime Museum, Leibniz Institute for Maritime History Charlie Ebert, Free University of Berlin Encarnación Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Goethe University Frankfurt Miriam Schickler, Kassel Art Academy Christopher Weickenmeier, Leuphana University Lüneburg Rainer Mühlhoff, University of Osnabrück Miriam Chorley-Schulz, University of Oregon, FU Alumna Miriam Siemon, FU Berlin Dörthe Engelcke, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law Nina Franz, HBK Braunschweig Aram Ziai, University of Kassel Martin Nonhoff, University of Bremen Roy Karadag, University of Bremen Teresa Koloma Beck, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg Ina Kerner, University of Koblenz Timothy Williams, University of the German Armed Forces Munich Ana Teixeira Pinto, HBK Braunschweig Jesse Darling, Bremen University of the Arts Katrin Köppert, HGB Leipzig Philip Widmann, University of Zurich Evelyn Annuß, University of Music and Performing Arts Vienna Christian Achrainer, Roskilde University Emile Ike, FU Berlin Jacob Blumenfeld, HU Berlin Andrea Behrends, University of Leipzig Ömer Alkin, Niederrhein University of Applied Sciences Dominik Herold, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main Henriette Gunkel, Ruhr University Bochum Juliane Rebentisch, University of Art and Design Offenbach/Main Donatella della Porta, Normal School of Advanced Studies, Florence Andrei Belibou, FU Berlin Katja Diefenbach, European University Viadrina Pinar Tuzcu, Queen’s University Davide Prati, former UdK lecturer Götz Bachmann, University of Siegen Anselm Franke, Zurich University of the Arts Johannes Bruder, Critical Media Lab Basel  Britta Ohm, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Sophia Hoffmann, University of Erfurt Alfred Freeborn, MPI for the History of Science, Berlin  Jesse Olszynko-Gryn, MPIWG Hannah Vögele, FU Berlin/University of Brighton Rita Macedo, HBK Braunschweig Patricia Ward, University of Bielefeld Aki Krishnamurthy, EmpA ASH Berlin Benjamin Meyer-Krahmer, HGB Leipzig Miriam Schröder, Institute for Social Research Frankfurt aM Frieder Vogelmann, Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg Barbara Winckler, University of Münster Aino Korvensyrjä, FU Berlin/University of Helsinki Florence Vienne, FSU Jena Alisha Heinemann, University of Bremen Marc Siegel, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Manuela Boatcă, University of Fribourg Christian Strippel, Weizenbaum Institute Mirjam Brusius, German Historical Institute London Leonhard Riep, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main Sebastian Elsaesser, Kiel University Caroline Adler, University of Hamburg Johannes Frasch, FSU Jena Alke Jenss, ABI Freiburg Daniel James, TU Dresden Fabricio Rodríguez, Arnold Bergstraesser Institute (ABI) Freiburg Ferdiansyah Thajib, FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg Janina Dill, University of Oxford Thomas Stodulka, University of Münster  Andreas Bieler, University of Nottingham/UK Dror Dayan, Liverpool John Moores University, England Helge Jörgens, ISCTE-University Institute of Lisbon Christopher Olk, FU Berlin / HfGG Koblenz Simon Strick, University of Potsdam Johanna Schaffer, Kassel Art Academy Steffen Haag, University of Hamburg Olaf Zenker, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg Carmen Mörsch, Mainz Art Academy, Joannes Gutenberg University Mark U. Stein, University of Münster Maximilian Steinbeis, Constitutional Blog Bea Lundt, European University of Flensburg (em.) Diedrich Diederichsen, Academy of Fine Arts Vienna Jovan Maud, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Dennis Büscher-Ulbrich, Christian-Albrechts University of Kiel Klaus Schlichte, University of Bremen Laurence Cox, National University of Ireland Maynooth Stefanie Ortmann, University of Sussex Max Schneider, HGB Leipzig Pablo Valdivia, European University Frankfurt/Oder Oliver Nachtwey, University of Basel Nina Reiners, University of Oslo Joel Glasman, University of Bayreuth Samuli Schielke, Leibniz Centre for Modern Orient and Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies Viviane Gladow, University of Paderborn Anja Löwe, University of Cologne Franz Knappik, University of Bergen Ralf Rapior, University of Bielefeld Mithu Sanyal, writer and journalist Priyam Goswami Choudhury, University of Potsdam Matthew Stephen, Helmut Schmidt University Hamburg Nora Ragab, IES Abroad Berlin A. Dirk Moses, City College of New York Estefania Bournot Austrian Academy of Sciences Grit Wesser, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Henning Melber, University of Pretoria Rosa Burc, Center for Social Movement Studies (SNS, Florence) Maria-Inti Metzendorf, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf Julia Kaiser, University of Leipzig Niklas Platzer, University of Chicago Idal Damar, Georg-August University of Göttingen Tareq Sydiq, Philips University Marburg Idal Damar, Georg-August University of Göttingen Sheryn El-Alfy, University of Göttingen Heike Breitenbach, Goethe University Frankfurt Islam Dayeh, Ghent University Jumana Jaber, Göttingen University Nur Yasemin Ural, University of Leipzig Michael Thiel, human rights activist, member of Amnesty International Hamburg Marlon Lieber, Goethe University Frankfurt Melanie Richter-Montpetit, University of Sussex Inga Aenne Feldmann, FU Berlin Carna Brkovic, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Isabel Feichtner, University of Würzburg Isabell Lorey, Academy of Media Arts Cologne Vanessa Wintermantel, HU Berlin/Constitutional Blog Torsten Menge, Northwestern University in Qatar Katarzyna Puzon, HU Berlin Wolfram Lacher, German Institute for International and Security Affairs, Berlin Eraldo Souza dos Santos, Panthéon-Sorbonne University Jan Wilkens, University of Hamburg Lukas Schmid, Goethe University Frankfurt Ines Schaber, hgb Leipzig Duygu Örs-Ildiz, Leuphana University Lüneburg Christian Kreuder-Sonnen, Friedrich Schiller University Jena Vanessa Carr, LMU Munich Nils Riecken, Ruhr University Bochum Judith Pieper, Free University of Berlin Anthony Obst, FU Berlin Sassan Gholiagha, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder) Dennis Klinke, Free University of Berlin Eva Hausteiner, FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg Susanne Schultz, Goethe University Frankfurt Katharina Schramm, University of Bayreuth Sami Khatib, OIB Susanne Leeb, Leuphana University Lüneburg Zozan Baran, FU Berlin Jaime Martínez Porro, FU Berlin Dana Abdel Fatah, HU Berlin Naomi Boyce, Free University of Berlin Friedemann Vogel, University of Siegen Deniz Gedik, HU Berlin Azucena Moran, University of Potsdam Janette Helm, HU Berlin Verena Klemm, Saxon Academy of Sciences Leipzig Cengiz Barskanmaz, Fulda University of Applied Sciences Daniel Marwecki, University of Hong Kong Elizabeth Hicks, University of Münster Claudius Naumann, FU Berlin Mikko Toivanen, FU Berlin Kübra Gümüşay, author Benjamin Savill, Free University of Berlin Christine Binzel, FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg Martin Klein, University of Würzburg Anne Storch, University of Cologne Vildan Seçkiner, Dr.phil., Munich Antje Glück, Bournemouth University (UK) Johannes Jude, University of Edinburgh Lucas Scheel, University of Adelaide Moritz Klenk, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences Ehsan Mohagheghi Fard, hfm Weimar Ana Ivasiuc, European Association of Social Anthropologists Madigbé Sylla, University of Osnabrück Sonja Brentjes MPIWG Sué González Hauck, Helmut Schmidt University Hamburg Martins Kohout, UMPRUM Prague Sebastian Eduardo, Leuphana University of Lüneburg Lisa Franke, Ghent University Giorgos Venizelos, Democracy Institute, Central European University Birte de Gruisbourne, University of Paderborn Sarah Naira Herfurth, University of Applied Sciences Erfurt Aleya Marzuki, University of Tübingen Alia Mossallam, EUME/Forum Transregionale Studien, Berlin Tarik Tabbara, HWR Berlin Anne Altvater, Frankfurt Daniela Russ, Universität Leipzig Martin Höpner, Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Stephanie Reiß, CiS Forschungsinstitut, Aninstitut der TU Ilmenau Jan Thiele, Consejero Superior de Investigaciones Científicas Endre Borbáth, Uni Heidelberg / WZB Irene Weipert-Fenner, Leibniz-Institut für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung Christian Basteck, WZB Berlin Robert Schmidt, KU Eichstätt-Ingolstadt Doris Bühler-Niederberger, Bergische Universität Wuppertal Bernd Bösel, Universität Potsdam Karim Zafer, Universität zu Köln Isabel Bredenbröker, HU Berlin Dorothee Bohle, Universität Wien Lara Krause-Alzaidi, Universität Leipzig Mark Porter, Universität Erfurt Franca Kappes, Geneva Graduate Institute Alfred Freeborn, MPIWG André Bank, GIGA German Institute for Global and Area Studies, Hamburg Hannelies Koloska, Hebrew University Pia Berghoff, FU Berlin Annika Haas, Lehrbeauftragte UdK Berlin Severin Penger, FU Berlin Doris Bühler-Niederberger, Bergische Universität Wuppertal Wouter F.M. Henkelman, EPHE (Paris) Holger Pötzsch, UiT The Arctic University of Norway Tim Seitz, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Björn Bentlage, LMU München Amir Theilhaber, Universität Bielefeld Alexander Dunst, TU Dortmund Irina Herb, Friedrich Schiller Universität Jena Liam Cagney, BIMM Berlin Stephan Milich, Universität zu Köln Mark Curran Visiting Professor FU Berlin (2011-2021) Elif Durmuş, Universiteit Antwerpen John Lütten, Universität Hamburg Roswitha Skare, UiT The Arctic University of Norway Jannis Steinke, TU Braunschweig Pablo Santacana López, Fachhochschule Erfurt Nina Lawrenz, ASH Berlin Bettina Schlüter, Universität Bonn Serena Talento, University of Bayreuth Thomas Bierschenk, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Himmat Zoubi, EUME/ Forum Transregionale Studien, Berlin Guneet Kaur, LSI-BGSS, Humboldt University Maximilian Lasa, University of Copenhagen Christian Hawkey, Pratt Institute Melisa Çiçek, Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Katrin M. Kämpf, Kunsthochschule für Medien Köln Mareike Biesel, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen Irene Brunotti, Universität Leipzig Valentin Jeutner, Lund University Martin Zillinger, Universität zu Köln Florian Geisler, CAU Kiel Boris Liebrenz, Sächsische Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig Seb Zürcher, HU Berlin Lana Sirri, Forum Transregionale Studien EUME Yasemin Karakasoglu, Universität Bremen Leire Urricelqui, Uni Graz Lucia Hortal Sanchez, FU Berlin Lars Eckstein, Universität Potsdam Hendrik Süß, Universität Jena Eman Megahed, Ärztin Katia Schwerzmann, Ruhr-Universität Bochum Jana Schäfer, BTU Cottbus Bettina Gräf, LMU München Otmar Venjakob, Universität Heidelberg Cameron Brinitzer, MPIWG Dmitri van den Bersselaar, Universität Leipzig Hauke Dorsch. Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Björn Bentlage, LMU München, Institut für den Nahen und Mittleren Osten Bo Li, FU Berlin Monica DiLeo, Hertie School Nisaar Ulama Andy Le, Sheffield Hallam University Mira Wallis, HU Berlin Lisa Stelzer, TU Berlin Guneet Kaur, LSI-BGSS, HU Berlin Yulia Khalikova, Universität Hamburg Mirko Reul, Universität Lausanne Malte Kayßer, CAU Kiel Kardelen Günaydin, Universität Osnabrück Philipp Köncke, Uni Erfurt Jens Theilen, Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg Friederike Nastold, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg Victoria Sakti, MPI for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity Thea Santangelo, Fachhoschule Potsdam Flora Ghazaryan-Abdin, CEU Wien Ursula Probst, FU Berlin Liina Mustonen, Universität Duisburg-Essen Kfeel Arshad, CAU Kiel Walid Maalej, Universität Hamburg Sylvia Sadzinski, Lehrbeauftragte UdK Berlin Toby Friend, FU Berlin Jan Sändig, Universität Bayreuth Jakob Wunderwald, Universität Potsdam Sarah Etz, HU Berlin Jan van Ginkel, FU Berlin Safia Samimi, Goethe Uni Frankfurt Liverpool John Moores University UCU branch Clara Schmidt, FU Berlin Miriam Friz Trzeciak, BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg Chiara Liso, FU Berlin Imko Meyenburg, ARU Cambridge Thomas Poeser, Lehrbeauftragter HTW Berlin Waseem Ahmed, UCL Agnes Kloocke, SoMi Freie Universität Berlin Boris Michel, MLU Halle Pia Schramm, Uni Tübingen Lara Fricke, University of Exeter (UK) Tobias Banaschewski, Zentralinstitut für Seelische Gesundheit, Universität Heidelberg Ahmed Sayed Julia Hotopp, FU Berlin M. Kamal Nasr, Universitätsmedizin Greifswald Jamie Gorman , Victoria University Melbourne Hannah Müssemann, FU Berlin Lejla Djulancic, FU Berlin Juliane Schicker, Carleton College Lucio Baccaro, MPIfG Liina Mustonen, Universität Duisburg-Essen Angela Anderson, Kunsthochschule Kassel Ned Richardson-Little, ZZF Potsdam Ilse Lenz, Ruhr-Universität Bochum chris zisis, UHH Hatice Gülru Turhan, Freie Universität Lucio Baccaro, MPIfG Oguzkagan Er, TU Berlin Christoph Anderer, FU Berlin Pedro Alexander Bravo Lavin, weißensee kunsthochschule Luisa Stuhr, BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg Maja Wolter, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Övül Ö. Durmusoglu, HBK Braunschweig Martin Middelanis, FU Berlin Tori Sinanan, FU Berlin Yoonha Kim, HU Berlin Thomas Wendler, Universität Augsburg Sophie Rühlich, FU Berlin Mariam Goshadze, Universität Leipzig Tanja Nusser, University of Cincinnati Katrin Bahr, Centre College Beth Muellner, College of Wooster Carl Gelderloos, Binghamton University Valeria Graziano, Justus-Liebig University, Giessen Nathalie Kallas, FU Berlin Alia Mossallam, EUME/Forum Transregionale Studien Stephen Cummins, MPI für Bildungsforschung/FU Berlin Claudia Pinzón, FU Berlin Anna Holian, Arizona State University Francesca Ceola, TU Berlin Lizzie Richardson, Goethe University, Frankfurt Marina Carmona Ruiz, FU Berlin Rick McCormick, Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota Kilian Spandler, Universität Kiel Dirk Wiemann, Universität Potsdam Rónán Riordan, Maastricht University Pietro Matteoni, FU Berlin Christiane Carlsson, Webster University St. Louis USA Léa Perraudin, HU Berlin A. Silvera, FU Berlin Rabea Berfelde, HU Berlin Hanna Janatka, Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies Dana Eichhorst, FU Berlin Kim Lucht, FSU Jena Stefani Engelstein, Duke University Sabine Damir-Geilsdorf, Universität zu Köln Juliana Streva, FU Berlin Susan Bernofsky, Columbia University; FU Berlin SS23 Kate Roy, Franklin University Switzerland Ergün Özgür, FU Berlin Veronica Ferreri, University of Waterloo Hannah Birkenkötter, ITAM Mexiko-Stadt/HU Berlin Sebastian Heiduschke, Oregon State University, USA Dominik Finkelde, Hochschule für Philosophie München Niloufar Vadiati, HafenCity University Hamburg Lorena López Jáuregui, FU Berlin Mina Jawad, Autorin Edward Larkey, University of Maryland, Baltimore County Laura Jung, Universität Graz Claudia Wittig, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Ari Linden, University of Kansas Anna Katharina Mangold, Europa-Universität Flensburg Sabine Mohamed, Johns Hopkins University Imogen Goodman, FU Berlin Cynthia Porter, The Ohio State University Mareike Lisker, HTW Berlin Martin Hamre, FU Berlin Ibrahim Mahfouz Abdou, FU Berlin Paulina Jo Pesch, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Clara-Auguste Süß, GIGA German Institute for Global and Area Studies, Hamburg Lovisa Claesson, Maastricht University Katrin Sieg, Georgetown University Anastasia Kolas, HfK Bremen Christine Okoth, King’s College London Fabio Gasparini, Seminar für Semitistik und Arabistik Paula Gutierrez de Teran Prado, Rutgers University Alumni Leonie Rau, MPIWG Berlin Maurice Stierl, Universität Osnabrück Belén Díaz, FU Berlin Evan Torner, University of Cincinnati Johannes Siegmund, Uni Wien Daniel Moreno, FU Berlin Julia Lange, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Laura Horn, Roskilde Universität Yannick Ecker, MLU Halle-Wittenberg Doreen Muhl, Universität Siegen Christian Weber, FSU Jena Linda Beck, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen Pedro Fernández Michels, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya Ricarda Theobald, Humboldt Universität Berlin Sven Lütticken, VU Amsterdam & Universiteit Leiden Bernhard Scholze, Hochschule München Shanti Suki Osman, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg André Grahle, Universität zu Köln Denis Schulz, CODE University of Applied Sciences Berlin Ida Westphal, HU Berlin Adel Mutahar Mutahar, TU Berlin Stefan Ouma, University of Bayreuth Emilia Klebanowski, Radboud University Nijmegen Nina Paarmann, Europa-Universität Flensburg Emilio Guzmán Schwarz, University of Amsterdam Matthieu Stepec, UdK, Barenboim-Said Akademie Raphaël Grisey, NTNU Trondheim Mary Hennessy, University of Wisconsin-Madison Maike Neufend, FU Berlin Sara Lennox, University of Massachusetts Amherst Halil Ege, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg Terri Ginsberg, City University of New York Maike Neufend, FU Berlin Stas Gutenberg, Touro University Berlin Jens Hanssen, OIB & University of Toronto Oliver Szerkus, FU Berlin Sarah Mühlbacher, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt Max Oliver Schmidt, Uni Potsdam Leyla v. Mende, Universität Hamburg Jens Heibach, German Institute for Global and Area Studies Lilian Haberer, Kunsthochschule für Medien Köln Kyan Pur-Djandaghi, Universität Hamburg Anna Guaita, CAU Kiel Rukeia El-Athman, Robert Koch-Institut Julia Ludewig, Allegheny College Marie Köhler, Universität Köln Ewa Karwowski, King’s College London Ana Cárdenas Tomažič, Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt aM Iken Brockstedt Riegger, FU Berlin Sophie Karbjinski, FU Berlin Juri Kilian, University of Kassel Hannah Knoop, KIT Karlsruhe Sepideh Gherekhloo, TU Ilmenau Heike Becker, University of the Western Cape Candice Breitz, HBK Braunschweig Alba Delgado-Aguilar, University of Leipzig Axel Fair-Schulz, State University of New York at Potsdam/NY Nataša Mišković, Basel Gabriela Manda Seith, guest lecturer UdK Vera Huwe, University of Duisburg-Essen Mar Mañes-Bordes, Saarland University Maria Fosheim-Lund, University of Oslo Faris Mansouri, University of Münster Janina Kehr, University of Vienna André Weissenfels, FU Berlin Jörg Naeve, Reutlingen University Mojisola Adebayo, University of Potsdam / Queen Mary, University of London Kerstin Schrödinger, University of the Arts Helsinki Leila Ullrich, University of Oxford Nicolas Lamp, Queen’s University Samuel Coghe, Ghent University María Antonia Pérez, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main Markus Arnold, University of Art and Design Linz Jakob Hollweck, FSU Jena Florian Muhl, University of Hamburg Sumit Mandal, University of Nottingham Malaysia Ryu Okazaki, Dokkyo University Joanna Ostrowska, University of Warsaw Sebastian Scheerer, University of Hamburg Kathrin Thiele, Utrecht University Claudius Zibrowius, Ruhr University Bochum Tabea Giese, University of Rostock Susanne Koch, University of Southern Denmark Friedemann Gürtler, University of Potsdam Rosa van Dorp, FU Berlin René Kreichauf, FU Berlin/VUB Brussels Sandra Dema Moreno, University of Oviedo Carola Fritsche, MIT Emily Frank, HU Berlin Michael Zander, Magdeburg-Stendal University of Applied Sciences Licia Soldavini, TU Braunschweig Azadeh Ganjeh, Hildesheim University Christine Andrä, University of Groningen Max Oliver Schmidt, University of Potsdam Aydin Demircioglu, University of Duisburg-Essen Maike Messerschmidt, University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich Max Rapp, FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg Sonya El Amouri, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf Anne Cristina de la Vega-Leinert, University of Greifswald Ulrich Thielmann, University of St. Gallen Paulina Block, University of Potsdam Richard Lang, University of Hamburg  Peter Förster, University of Cologne Mara Recklies, Burg Giebichtenstein Art Academy Halle Tom Selje, TU Berlin Julian Daum, journalist, FU Alumni Nastaran Tajeri-Foumani, ASH Berlin Mark Barden, Detmold University of Music Krzysztof Gorny, FU Berlin  Christoph Bode, LMU Munich Sabine Rutar, IOS Regensburg Sina Emde, University of Leipzig Lisa Mohrat, University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich Ralf Tönjes, University of Potsdam Gwendolyn Gilliéron, University of Strasbourg Andreas Guidi, INALCO Paris Sebastian Schneider FernUni Hagen Annette Lewerentz, FU Berlin Manolis Mikrakis, National Technical University of Athens Giacomo Croci, Brandenburg Medical School Jörg Arnold, University of Münster  Jochen Hinkel, Humboldt University, Berlin Florian Hannig, JLU Giessen Hanan Badr, University of Salzburg Felix Anderl, Philipps University Marburg Teresa Kulawik, Södertörn University, Sweden Cristina Samper, Potsdam University René Wildangel, International Hellenic University Thessaloniki Katharina Drasdo, IU International University Salwa Aleryani, UdK Berlin Daniel Hedinger, University of Leipzig Fabian Arntz, University of Potsdam Anja Pichl, University of Potsdam  Birgit Meyer, University of Utrecht Christoph Baumgartner, Utrecht University Mujaheed Shaikh, Hertie School Andreas Best, University of Naples Federico II Paula Maether, ASH Berlin Reinhart Kößler, Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institut Freiburg/University of the Free State, South Africa Nevien Kerk, LMU Munich  Charlotte Rohde, Bauhaus University Weimar Fatos Atali-Timmer, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg Bruno Jacoby, HfG Offenbach  M Lukasiewicz, University of Leipzig  Fatima El-Tayeb, Yale University  Fred Abrahams, Bard College Berlin Meryem Yildiz, ASH Berlin Magdalena Graczyk-Zajac, Technical University of Darmstadt Andreas W. Schäfer, University College London Markus Dreßler,  University of Leipzig Salim Nasereddeen, University of Potsdam Malte Kobel, Guildhall School of Music and Drama London Elena Tripaldi, Free University of Berlin Adrian Schneider, HU Berlin Sahrah Al-Nasrawe-Sözeri, HWR Berlin Ciaran Cross, FU Berlin Christine Preiser,  University Hospital Tübingen Philip Liste, Fulda University of Applied Sciences Sofia Bempeza University of Applied Arts Vienna Nora Shalaby, HU Berlin Jeanne Riou, University College Dublin Nassim Mehran, Charité Xabiero Cayarga, TU Dortmund  Lilli Weiss, University of Basel Claire McQuillan, TU Berlin Mujaheed Shaikh, Hertie School Gregor Schiemann, University of Wuppertal Eleonore Neufeld, University of Massachusetts Amherst Ulrike Bergermann, HBK Braunschweig Benjamin Ruß, INRA Luxembourg Alex Rehding, Harvard University Franck Hofmann, Saarland University Tobias Christ, JGU Mainz  Alexander Konrad, BHT Berlin Noor-Aiman Khan, Colgate University Georg Jostkleigrewe, University of Halle Yannick Frommherz, TU Dresden Lukas Nehlsen, University of Witten/Herdecke, University of Cologne Hamed al Drubi, FU Berlin Ximena Alba, FU Berlin Lukas Nehlsen, University of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke Lianna Mark, LMU Munich Hannes Bajohr, University of Basel Prem Borle, Charité Berlin Raphael Daibert, Leuphana University of Lüneburg Leon Maresch, TU Berlin Georg Jostkleigrewe, University of Halle Wikke Jansen, University of Heidelberg Isabelle Felenda, HTW Berlin Henning Best, RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau Sina Motzek-Öz, Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences  Reinhard Klenke, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg Thomas Kilpper, University of Bergen Antke Engel, iQt Edin Sarcevic, University of Leipzig Camilo Almendrales, TU Berlin Franziska Meyer, University of Nottingham Anne Menzel, IFSH/University of Hamburg Aliyyah I. Abdur-Rahman, Brown University Kathrin Bauer, Free University of Berlin Delio Mugnolo, Distance University in Hagen Karen Adler, University of Nottingham Philippe Roepstorff-Robiano, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf Viktoria Luisa Metschl, University of Applied Arts Vienna Sasha Lange, FU Berlin/University of Manchester Anna Mannert, Charité Clément Lévy, FU Berlin  Salim Cevik, SWP Berlin Eren Yildirim Yetkin, Hochschule Koblenz Eric Eggert, Universität zu Köln Tanja Skambraks, Universität Graz  Andrea Neugebauer, Uni Siegen  Tobias Nikolaus Klass, Bergische Universität Wuppertal  Farid Suleiman, Universität Greifswald Barbara Müller, Radboud University Nijmegen Lena Dreier, Universität Münster Miriam Benteler, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar Wolfgang Seifert, Universität Heidelberg Rosalie Arendt, University of Twente Richard Sorg, (Prof. em.), HAW Hamburg Marjan Smeulders, Radboud University Jan F. Kurth, MH Freiburg  Johannes Feest, Universität Bremen Juliette Alenda, Radboud University Christian G. De Vito, Universität Wien Ahmed Samy Lotf , Scuola Normale SuperioreCatherine Goetze, University of Tasmania, FU/OSI alumna Lars Reuke, Universität zu Köln Frauke Banse, Uni Kassel Anabelle Contreras Castro, Universidad Naciona, Costa Rica (Alumni FU) Emma Wendt, Universität Münster Friedemann Brock, Studienkolleg MLU Halle Birgit M. Kaiser, Utrecht University Stefan Siebers, HHU Düsseldorf Svenja Goltermann, Universität Zürich Jörg Strübing, Universität Tübingen Clemens Knobloch, Uni Siegen Peter Ott, Merz Akademie Rachid Ouaissa, Phillips-Universität Marburg André Schneider, Fraunhofer IIS Dresden Philipp Wagner, ABI Freiburg Sarah Wessel, BUA Elia Sepúlveda Hernández, UST Chile Sandra Moog, University of Essex UK Ingo Schmidt, Athabasca University Philipp Schwendke, HU Berlin Mariel Reiss, Philipps-Universität Marburg Nadjma Yassari, Max Planck Institut, Hamburg Kathrin Bethke, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen Jenny Stupka, Freie Universität Berlin Dirk Collet, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg Manu Kalia, FU Berlin Hajo Funke, Prof, FU Berlin Julian Tiedtke, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies Susanne Buckley-Zistel, Philipps-Universität Marburg Michael Mann, HU Berlin  Eva Svatoňová, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně Alessia Pilloni, FU Berlin Trevor Silverstein, Catalyst – Institute for Creative Arts and Technology Berlin Joana Lilli Hofstetter, Scuola Normale Superiore Florenz, Italien Mete Sefa Uysal, University of Exeter Asuman Kirlangic Lennart Reusch, FU Berlin Lonut-Valentin Cucu, FU Berlin Caroline Pitzen, Hochschule für Gestaltung Offenbach/Main Thomas Guthmann, EH Berlin Burcu Binbuga, Universität Bremen Manuel Schwab, AUC Egypt Ella Lebeau, FU Berlin Joan Font, CSIC Tim Winzler, University of Glasgow Henrike Arnold, Philipps-Universität Marburg Lazaros Karavasilis, University of Bremen Philipp Zehmisch, Universität Heidelberg Patricia Binder, MLU Halle Laurel Braddock, HU Berlin Adam Donald Ferreira – Catalyst Berlin Daniel Koßmann, HU Berlin Nikolai Puhlmann, HU Berlin Mikael Damstuen Brkic, UiO (University of Oslo) Kathrin Kazmaier, Universität Hildesheim Lennart Michaelis, FSU Jena Victor M. Lafuente, Université des Antilles Bernd Gausemeier, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover Mónika Contreras Saiz, FU Berlin Albert Manke, Universität Göttingen Arina Rahma, TU Berlin Júlia Betegh, Hertie School Natacha Quintero González, BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg Willi Pröbrock, TU Berlin Iva Marčetić, University of Kassel Barbora Doležalová, Charles University Prague, Czech Republic Ayça Çubukçu, Associate Professor, LSE Daniel Feldt, Nuremberg Technical University GSO Angela Perez, FAU Erlangen Marco Deseriis, Higher Normal School Franjo Mac Allister, WZB & Kings College London Philipp Kleer, Justus Liebig University Giessen Cristina Moreno Almeida, Queen Mary University of London Magdalen Michlová, Charles University in Prague anna řičář libánská, FF UK, Prague Detlev Quintern, Turkish German University, Istanbul Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan, University of Cambridge Tamara Fleming, UCLA Anna Karakatsouli, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Rana Brentjes, MPIWG (Max Planck Society) André Fischer, Washington University in St. Louis  Michael Rothberg, UCLA Shéhérazade Elyazidi, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law Birtan Tonbul, FSU Jena  Elia Sepúlveda Hernández, UST Chile. Zeynep Türel, University of Applied Arts, Vienna Max Schnepf, Free University of Berlin  Simon Beurel, Free University of Berlin Frank Havemann, Humboldt University of Berlin Chiara Thumiger, Kiel University Dorothea Löbbermann, HU Berlin Kutayba al Kanatri, University of Freiburg/Boğaziçi University Kelly Bescherer, Leuphana University Lüneburg  Gerado de la Fuente Lora, National Autonomous University of Mexico  Georg Jostkleigrewe, University of Halle Rainer Alisch, Free University of Berlin Michael Kämper-van den Boogaart, retired HU George Anastassiou, University of Memphis Marija Pavlovic, PhD researcher at the FU Berlin Yewon Seo, Art Academy Berlin Weissensee Anna Zrenner, FU Berlin Vania Berrios, European University Viadrina Bernhard Gill, LMU Munich Thuc Linh Nguyen Vu, Harvard University/University of Vienna Helîn Öztürk, TU Darmstadt Jennifer Rohl, Trinity College, Dublin Susanne Huber, University of Bremen Thomas Dörfler, University of Jena/University of Bayreuth Fatima El Sayed, Humboldt University of Berlin Felix Xylander Swannell, TU Berlin Robert Heinze, DHI Paris Lucilla Lepratti, University of Leipzig Magda Patyniak, University of Potsdam Sara Samy, TU Berlin Yara Foudah, JLU Giessen Nese Ozgen, University of Osnabrück Stephanie Rudwick, Academy of Sciences, Prague Victoria AE Kratel, Kristiania University College Oslo Mira Hazzaa, University of Osnabrück Mihriban Demir, LMU Ute Koop, ASH Berlin Dirk Martin, Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Lukas Daub , IfZ Susann Ludwig, University of Leipzig Stefan Salomon, University of Amsterdam Paul Zuendorf, RWTH Aachen Katharina Kuhn, London School of Economics/Goethe University Frankfurt Daniel Bendix, Friedensau Theological College Susann Ludig, University of Leipzig Elisa Cuter, Film University Konrad Wolf Babelsberg Pablo Suárez Cortés, Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology Sophie Hinger, University of Osnabrück Francesca Marschall Jones, University of Göttingen Christian Jooß, Georg-August University of Göttingen Rosa Castillo, University of Bremen Johanna Ullmann, University of Osnabrück, Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies  Katja Sirotkin, HTW Berlin Maja Sisnowski, University of Amsterdam Helena Franze, University of Leipzig Daniel Fairfax, Goethe University Frankfurt Ulrich Rössler, FU Berlin Sophia Brown, Free University of Berlin Wolfgang Jonas, HBK Braunschweig Vera Egbers, BTU Cottbus Alexander Harder, HU Berlin Anthony Löwstedt, Webster University Vienna Susanne Klimroth, HU Berlin Benjamin Schuetze, Arnold Bergstraesser Institute (ABI) Freiburg Hyo Yoon Kang, University of Warwick Matilde Baroncini, Free University of Berlin Flora van Uffelen, FU Berlin Eiichi Kido, Osaka University Svenja Schurade, Georg August University of Göttingen Ana Troncoso, Chemnitz University of Technology Heiko Kempa, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg Sebastian Althoff, University of Paderborn Serhat Karakayali, Leuphana University Lüneburg Fynn Steiner, HU Berlin Ian Almond, Georgetown University Qatar Anne Gräfe, Leuphana University of Lüneburg Adnan A. Husain, Queen’s University Paula Achenbach, Philipps University Marburg Christin Bernhold, University of Hamburg Johanna Pink, University of Freiburg Sophia Schroeder, University College London Tobias Schramm, FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg Rainer Brunner, CNRS / LEM, Paris Susanne Lummerding, University of Vienna Mahir Tokatli, RWTH Aachen Ricardo Mata, University of Göttingen Tom Holert, HaFI, Berlin Sandro Mezzadra, University of Bologna Maria-Magdalena Pruß, Leibniz Centre for Modern Orient Berlin Irene Schneider, University of Göttingen Lukas Schmolzi, FU Berlin Sarah Schilliger, University of Bern Nicole Wolf, Goldsmiths, University of London Nils Jansen, University of Münster Annika Strauss, University of Münster Josef Ricar, Charles University Prague Todd Sekuler, ISEK, UZH Anja Schwarz, University of Potsdam Markus Dressler, University of Leipzig Fabius Mayland, FU Berlin Ulla Siebert, Heinrich Böll Foundation Marta Lietti, FU Berlin Laura Amna Stauth, University of Göttingen Georg Cyrus, Leiden University Ulrike Stehli-Werbeck, University of Münster  Philipp Tollkühn, FU Berlin Natascha Zander, Weissensee Academy of Art Berlin Oraib Toukan, EUME Berlin Rebecca Murray, University of Sheffield, UK Peter Birke, University of Göttingen  Nil Mutluer, Leipzig University Lidia Bellido Barea, Georg-August University Göttingen Bernd Heber, Christian-Albrechts University of Kiel Madelaine Moore, Bielefeld University  Rajkamal Kahlon, HFBK Hamburg  Rim Naguib, FU Berlin Flávio Aguiar, University of São Paulo  Sebastian Berg, Ruhr University Bochum Christian Rademacher, University of Passau Martin Moraw, American University in Cairo Eva Gerharz, Fulda University of Applied Sciences Maria Ziegelböck, Vienna University of Applied Arts Karen Genschow, Goethe University Frankfurt  Nadin Heé, University of Leipzig Arash Ghoddousi, Wageningen University/HU Berlin Daniele Artico, HU University Annett Abdel-Rahman, University of Osnabrück Nora Gottlieb, University of Bielefeld  Josef Grassl, KHB Berlin Lindsey Drury, Free University of Berlin Yufeng Guan, FU Berlin Lukas Meisner, HWR Berlin/ FSU Jena Fatma Sagir, University of Freiburg Najat Abdulhaq, Birzeit University  Konstantin Korn, University of Giessen  Anna Luise Schubert, Max Planck Society Cecilia Valenti, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Vanessa Kopplin, University of Zurich Imad Mustafa, freelance scientist Saumya Premchander, Georg August University of Göttingen Seda Gurses, TU Delft Olaf Köndgen, University of Amsterdam Fabian Schaltenberg, OVGU Magdeburg Benjamin Bäumer, University of Siegen María Teresa Laorden, University of Rostock Hilal Alkan, Leibniz Centre for Modern Orient/ASH Hellen Aziz, TU Berlin  Katharina Seibert, University of Tübingen Erica Benner, Hertie School Yasemin Karakasoglu, University of Bremen Tomás Usón, HU Berlin Asha Hedayati, ASH Berlin Pauline Westerbarkey, FU Berlin Shoshana Schwebel, University of British Columbia Lisa Schmidt-Herzog, IMGWF Lübeck  María Teresa Laorden, University of Rostock  Heidemarie Winkel, University of Bielefeld  Anja Weber, Merz Academy Stuttgart Irene Fellmann, FMIK Estelle Ferrarese, University of Amiens Jo Bröse, University of Cologne Holger Lund, DHBW Ravensburg Jamila Mascat, Utrecht University Gerhard Wolf, University of Sussex Anna Steigemann, University of Regensburg/TU Berlin Alex Demirovic, Goethe University Delfina Serrano, CSIC, Soain Derya Buğur, Philipps University Marburg Angela Last, University of Leicester Anas Antifa, University of Osnabrück Michael Hintz, Lecturer HWG Ludwigshafen + EAdA Frankfurt aM Alice Creischer Stephan Janitzky, Academy of Fine Arts Vienna You He, KHM Cologne Malte Albrecht, University of Marburg Mario Novelli , University of Sussex, UK Wolf-Christian Saul, ex FU Berlin Chandrashekar Devchand, University of Potsdam Fatma Sagir, University of Freiburg Christoph Kalter, University of Agder Errol Babacan, University of Münster Tijana Ristic Kern, HU Berlin Gülcan Cetin, Charité University Medicine Berlin Jan Völker, Fellow, Bauhaus University Weimar Philipp Höhn, University of Halle-Wittenberg Julian Rentzsch, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Philipp Höhn, University of Halle-Wittenberg Jason Groves, University of Washington, Seattle Reinhold Bernhardt, University of Basel Veljko Marković, TU Berlin Frey Kalus, FU Berlin / University of Cambridge Richard Gessel, Ruprecht-Karls-University Heidelberg Gabriele vom Bruck, School of Oriental & African Studies Markus Wissen, HWR Berlin Elaine Bonavia, Weißensee Academy of Art Berlin Stefan Bast, Mainz University of Art Guenter Zurhorst, HS Mittweida Josefine Hetterich, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Albrecht Fuess, Philipps University Marburg Sofia Varino, University of Potsdam Hauke Brunkhorst, European University of Flensburg Tobias Wille, Goethe University Frankfurt Stefan Landvogt, ZTG employee Leyla Sophie Gleissner, ENS France Sarah Alfahmawi, TU Berlin Jessica Eichler, Max Planck Institute/FU Berlin  Markus Rohde, University of Siegen Martina Schäfer, TU Berlin Anne Rothermel, University of Bern Hoda Salah, University of Kiel Jamie Burton, HU Berlin Sara Bellezza, FU Berlin Michel Steuwer, TU Berlin Laura Einhorn, Cologne University of Applied Sciences Alison EF Benbow, HU Berlin Angela Koch, University of Art and Design Linz Mark Frömberg, HTW Berlin Alfredo Romero, HU Berlin Ralf Hoffrogge, Ruhr University Bochum / ZZF Potsdam Laura Stielike, University of Osnabrück Mark Frömberg, HTW Berlin Nicole Waller, University of Potsdam Agnes Wall, ASH Ahmad Shehata, University of Leipzig Kien Nghi Ha, University of Tübingen Arshin Adib-Moghaddam, SOAS University of London Peter Jehle, University of Potsdam Henrike Kraul, FU Berlin Thomas Amundrud, Nara University of Education Max Welch Guerra, Bauhaus University Weimar Janina Schabig, Bard College Berlin Rosbeian, Rosbeiani, FU Berlin Jan Kordes, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main Nicoline van Harskamp, Münster Art Academy Eva Paton, TU Berlin Simon Runke, HU Berlin Torsten Bewernitz, Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences Katja Girr, FU Berlin Yitzchak Ben Mocha, University of Konstanz Tobias Schmitt, University of Hamburg Simon Schiller, Goethe University Frankfurt Jonas Klöker, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Francesco Sticchi Oxford Brookes University Hans Rackwitz, University of Jena/Leipzig Michaela Reinhardt, University of Piedmont Orientale, Vercelli Emma Gordon, LMU Munich Ranjini Murali, HU Berlin Ana Buchadas, HU Berlin Christine Lander, Berlin University of the Arts Serdar M. Değirmencioğlu, Goethe University Frankfurt Alexander Auch, Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Manuela García Aldana, Weißensee Academy of Art Berlin Nizar Romdhane, FU Berlin Karmen Tornius, FU Berlin Hadas Emma Kedar, University of Hamburg Camilla Angeli, FU Berlin Sophia Vassilopoulou, FU Berlin Timo Duile, University of Bonn Maja Zwick, FU Berlin Anil Shah, University of Kassel Sarah Speck, Goethe University Frankfurt aM Reltih Floda, TU Braunschweig Helmut Küchenhoff, LMU Munich Henrik Schulz, FH Campus Vienna Jack Naujoks, FU Berlin Franzisca Zanker, ABI Freiburg Huda Zein, University of Cologne Pavel Kolář, University of Konstanz Oliver Pye, University of Kassel Alisa Preusser, University of Potsdam Mahmoud Farag, Technical University of Darmstadt David Stenner, Christopher Newport University Jorge Vega, HU Berlin Amir Moosavi, Rutgers University Marianne Dhenin, University of Basel Michael Friedrich University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart Anna Huber, LMU Munich Lucas Schucht, Institute for Social Work and Social Pedagogy Manfred Rotermund, Ruhr University Bochum (ret.) Monika Bobzien, GGFP Stefan Reichmuth, Ruhr University Bochum Wolfgang Werbeck, University of Münster Nicolas Hoberg, Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences, HBK Essen and SRH Heidelberg Berkan Kaya, Bucerius Law School Miira Hill, University of Bremen Christoph Graf, MLU Halle Alexandra Oeser, Centre Marc Bloch, Berlin and University of Paris Nanterre Mathias Delori, Centre Marc Bloch (HU Berlin) Sarah Kruck, Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt aM Thomas Fernholz, University of Nottingham, UK Kira Kosnick, European University Viadrina Paula Teich, University of Potsdam Charlotte Meier, Leipzig University  Laura Katharina Mücke, JGU Mainz Michael Maria Schiffmann, Ruprecht-Karls-University Heidelberg Anna Zimmer, Northern Michigan University Sophia Hornbacher-Schönleber, Goethe University Frankfurt Jannis Androutsopoulos, University of Hamburg Ingrid Hudabiunigg, University of Pardubice, CZ David Casero, TU Berlin Anita Chikkatur, Carleton College, MN, USA Alexandra Scheele, Uni Biz Rafah Azzouqa, FU Berlin Rahim Waweru, University of Tübingen Marlen Löffler, IU International University Gerhard Dannemann, HU Berlin Jörn Rüffer, University of Hamburg Herbert Derksen, Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences Maria Pfeiffer, University of Jena Werner Schiffauer, European University Viadrina Frankfurt Oder Annette Jünemann, Helmut Schmidt University, University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg Jelena Cupac, WZB Stephan Guth, University of Oslo Ozren Pupovac, University of Rijeka, Croatia Sabine Ritter, University of Bremen Andrea Wetterauer, Goethe University Frankfurt Sabrina Zajak, Ruhr University Bochum Andrew Michel Thomas, ZtG HU Berlin  Jens Wissel, Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Volker Wulf, University of Siegen Daniel Mühlleitner, Kehl University of Applied Sciences Italo Testa, University of Parma Manuel Lautenbacher, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Annette Weisser, Kassel Art Academy Carmen Becker, Leibniz University Hannover Katja Wenger, Technical University of Applied Sciences Wildau Mounira al Solh Kassel Academy of Fine Arts Leoni Keskinkilic, Humboldt University of Berlin Jens Schneider, University of Osnabrück Norman Paech, University of Hamburg Florian König, University of Bremen Till Manderbach, UK Würzburg Lothar Zechlin, University of Duisburg-Essen Nicola Schalkowski, Free University of Berlin Alev Masarwa, University of Münster Rabir Zreig, HU Berlin Elena Longhin, TU Delft Rahaf Gharz Addien, DeZIM Ines Mohnke, Georg-August University of Göttingen Herwig Meyer, h-da Darmstadt Aram Bartholl, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Çağan Varol, University of Kassel Vahid Maghsoodi, HWR Berlin Beverly Weber, University of Colorado Boulder Stephan Guth, Institute for Cultural Studies and Oriental Languages, University of Oslo, Norway Karin Harrasser, University of Art and Design Linz Lothar Zechlin, University of Duisburg-Essen Anja Klein, Technical University of Munich and Humboldt University of Berlin Miguel A. Martínez, Uppsala University, Sweden Stefan Münker, HU Berlin Fabian Krengel, University of Regensburg  Benedikt Sauer,  University of Göttingen Fatemeh Masjedi, University of Göttingen Amanda Muñoz Hüttl, University of Salamanca, Spain Sowmya Maheswaran, HU Berlin Evrim Kutlu, University of Cologne Andrea Muehlebach, University of Bremen Juli Saragosa, Catalyst Institute of Arts and Technology Roberto Risch, Autonomous University of Barcelona Nandita Badami, MPIWG Bernadett Settele, Zurich University of the Arts Syrinx Hees, University of Münster Eva Hartmann, University of Cambridge Morteza Lichtenstern, freelance scientist Tuba Cekic, Utrecht University Michael Eber, Georg-August University of Göttingen  Vasily Moshnyaga, University of Göttingen Ulrich Dolata, University of Stuttgart Jaime Cárdenas Isasi, University of Göttingen Hannah Bechara, Hertie School Russell West-Pavlov, University of Tübingen Daniel Warmuth, HU Berlin  Ernst Wolff, KU Leuven, Belgium Marija Vulesica, HU Berlin Daniel Rösler, LMU Munich Stephan Packard, University of Cologne Marija Vulesica, HU Berlin 

13.06.24

Editorial Note

Last week, MK Ofir Katz, the coalition whip, introduced an expedited bill intending to remove professors who speak against the State of Israel or express support for terrorism. The bill aims to terminate their job without a severance package. The proposed legislation was crafted with the Israeli National Union of Students and endorsed by coalition and opposition members. 

According to the bill, “Any institution that fails to dismiss a lecturer under this law will lose its funding from the Council for Higher Education” (CHE).  

Katz explained that the proposal aims to “eradicate terrorism from academia” after hearing some provocative statements by professors that have escalated since the events of October 7 and the outbreak of the war.  Katz claims that these inflammatory remarks often received institutional support.

Two cases drove the initiative. First, Dr. Anat Matar, a senior lecturer from the Department of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University, eulogized Palestinian terrorist Walid Daqqa as “beloved and a source of inspiration” after he died in prison. Daqa was involved in the kidnapping and murdering of soldier Moshe Tamam in 1984 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Second, Prof. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian from the Hebrew University Law Faculty called for the abolition of Zionism and, despite overwhelming evidence, doubted that rapes were committed on October 7. She was accused of incitement for labeling the war in Gaza as “genocide” and was briefly detained by police.   

Despite student protests, the university presidents refused to dismiss the provocative professors, citing “freedom of speech, even for painful statements.” 

The Ministerial Committee will review the bill for legislation. If passed, institutions would have to dismiss a member of staff who denies Israel’s existence as a Jewish state, incites terrorism, or supports terrorist organizations, including an endorsement of armed struggle against Israel or terrorist acts by enemy states, terrorist groups, or individuals who fight against Israel.

MK Katz stated, “We will not let terrorism infiltrate Israeli academia under the pretense of ‘freedom of expression,.. We will not tolerate statements that endorse terrorism or facilitate anti-Israel activities. It is time to fight terrorism in academia, and I am dedicated to this cause.”

The proposed legislation created a firestorm in Israel’s academic circles. The Committee of University Heads (VERA) announced it opposes the bill and stated that the bill not only harms the independence of higher education institutions but also helps the enemies of Israel and the academic boycott movement against Israel and provides them with proof of silencing and limiting freedom of expression in academia.

In a similar vein, Israel’s radical academics organized an anti-Israel webinar. Dr. Matan Kaminer, a Buber Fellow at the Hebrew University Jerusalem, posted a message on the CRIT-GEOG-FORUM list, a forum to discuss critical and radical perspectives in geography. He wrote, “As Israel’s criminal war in Gaza continues, with death, destruction, and starvation reaching disastrous dimensions, Palestinian and critical Jewish faculty and students in Israeli academia are facing unprecedented repression – including suspensions, dismissals and even arrest. Join colleagues from the grassroots organization Academia for Equality for a conversation on the situation in Israeli universities and colleges and the state of the struggle for academic freedom.”

Kaminer currently holds a position at Queen Mary University of London, where, not coincidentally, Profs. Neve Gordon and Shalhoub-Kevorkian also work.

Kaminer invited his readers to a webinar titled  “Academic Repression in Israel” held on June 6, 2024. The speakers were Anat Matar (Philosopher and author of The Poverty of Ethics); Sawsan Zaher (Human rights lawyer and legal adviser, Emergency Coalition in Arab Society); Avi-ram Tzoreff (Historian, Academia for Equality’s Solidarity Team); Khaled Furani (Anthropologist and co-editor, Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Students in Israeli Universities). Chair: Nadia Abu El-Haj (Anthropologist and co-director, Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University).

Academia for Equality organized the event and the co-sponsors were the BRISMES Committee on Academic Freedom; The Middle East Studies Association (MESA); and the Center for Palestine Studies at Columbia University.

Shalhoub-Kevorkin was the subject of coverage abroad.  The New York Times wrote a sympathetic article, repeating portraying Israel as lacking in academic freedom. Times Higher Education reported on the event, stating there is a “repression” against pro-Palestinian academics and students in Israel during the war, which is, according to scholars, like “being in the belly of the beast.” That there is an increased “crackdown” on those who criticize Israel reaching an “alarming state,” according to Prof. Nadia Abu El-Haj, an anthropologist at Columbia University. She said, “The entanglement of Israeli higher education institutions with the state project is not new… Nevertheless, the extent and character of that cooperation, and the associated increase in repression, is today on steroids.” 

Scholars have expressed concern about the “attack” on academic freedom taking place in Israel, with many academics and students being targeted for expressing pro-Palestinian views. Khaled Furani, associate professor of sociology and anthropology at Tel Aviv University, referred to the experience of Palestinian academics living in Israel as “being in the belly of the beast… We inhabit Leviathan now, but we didn’t need October 2023 to see this state of affairs,” he said. Furani is the co-editor of Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Experiences in Israeli Universities. Furani said their plight dates back to the 1948 Palestine War, when the British withdrew, and even to the 1936 Arab Revolt, but continues to the present, where academics are often treated as “criminals” for their social media posts. “It’s as if the founding moment of 1948 never ended for us,” he said. “The violence that is constitutional to the state has never ended.” Furani said Israeli universities have been “bewitched” by the state and have abdicated their responsibility as places for critical learning. stands?” 

Another speaker at the event was Sawsan Zaher, a human rights lawyer based in Israel, who said that since October 7, Palestinian students and teachers, as well as Jewish faculty, have been subjected to a “huge wave” of complaints and a targeted incitement campaign on social media. “There was an intense, aggressive, deliberate start of political persecution that… did not end and continues to this day in higher education institutions,” she said. She also said that “racism and discrimination are nothing new for Palestinian citizens” of Israel. “It is not only about the background of racism that already existed before October 7, but also about the persecution from a political perspective,” she said. “They have been persecuting professors for at least a decade – left-wing Jewish professors, including Palestinians, of course – by issuing and publishing documents against them and lobbying against them, trying to promote bills… that target them.”

Those who oppose the new legislation argue that Matar and Shalhoub-Kevorkian do not endorse terrorism. Matar explained that Walid Daqa regretted his murderous past and repented. Shalhoub-Kevorkian later apologized for her words.

Worth noting that Israel has the Combating Terrorism Law, 2016, a law that enables severe punishment for terrorists and people who are members of terrorist organizations. The law also calls for punishment for people who express support for terrorism or identify with a terrorist organization. The law regulates the issue of declaring an organization a terrorist organization and the use of administrative detention.

As IAM repeatedly reported, Israeli scholars enjoy extremely broad academic freedom, given that most universities are public.  So much so that the state never enforced the 2011 Boycott Law that made advocating for BDS illegal.  Not incidentally, both Matar and Shalhoub Kevorkian breached the Boycott Law with no repercussions. 

As for the proposed new law, things are much more complicated. To recall, the Knesset passed the Higher Education Law in 1958, where the CHE is a statutory corporation. It is the State institution responsible for higher education in Israel. The CHE draws up its policy as an independent and autonomous body. A recognized institution is “free to manage its academic and administrative affairs, within its budget, as it sees fit… In addition to the requirement of an adequate scientific level (hereinafter – a recognized institution), provided that these rules do not limit freedom of opinion and conscience.”  

IAM will report on this issue in due course.

REFERENCES:

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/sjgfwuov0
Coalition proposes bill to halt university funds over antisemitic professorsCoalition whip Ofir Katz’s bill would mandate the dismissal of any teacher or lecturer who speaks against Israel or tacitly supports or condones terrorism

Tamar Trabelsi-Hadad, Moran Azulay|06.04.24 | 07:32

Coalition whip Ofir Katz introduced an expedited bill on Monday aimed at removing professors who speak against the State of Israel or express support for terrorism, terminating them without severance pay.
The proposal, crafted in collaboration with the National Union of Israeli Students and endorsed by both coalition and opposition members, is expected to trigger significant backlash in academic circles.

“Any institution that fails to dismiss a lecturer under this law will lose its funding from the Council for Higher Education,” the bill stipulates.
Katz explained that the proposal to “eradicate terrorism from academia” was a reaction to provocative statements made by professors at various institutions, which have escalated since the events of October 7 and the outbreak of the war. These inflammatory remarks often receive institutional support, according to Katz.
He highlighted the case of Dr. Anat Matar, senior lecturer from the Department of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University, who eulogized terrorist Walid Daqqa as “beloved and a source of inspiration” after his death in prison. Despite student protests, the university president refused to dismiss Matar, citing “freedom of speech, even for painful statements.”

Prof. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian from the Hebrew University was also mentioned in the bill. She was detained and later released after being accused of incitement for labeling Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide and calling for the abolition of Zionism, on top of questioning reports of rapes by Hamas on October 7.
According to the bill, set to be reviewed by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation, institutions must dismiss any lecturer (including teaching and research staff) who denies Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state, incites terrorism, or supports terrorist organizations. Support for terrorist organizations includes endorsing armed struggle or terrorist acts by enemy states, terrorist groups, or individuals against Israel.
“We will not let terrorism infiltrate Israeli academia under the pretense of ‘freedom of expression,” Katz said. “We will not tolerate statements that endorse terrorism or facilitate anti-Israel activities. It is time to fight terrorism in academia, and I am dedicated to this cause.”

National Union of Israeli Students Chairman Elchanan Pelheimer added, “It is time to eliminate terrorism from academia. We cannot allow this to continue. We urge all Knesset members, regardless of political affiliation, to support this bill. Freedom of expression is essential, but incitement to terrorism is unacceptable.”

==============================================================

https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa-jisc.exe?A2=CRIT-GEOG-FORUM;2259eaaf.2405

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM list

Subject:		Academic repression in Israel: A conversation with colleagues from Academia from Equality
From:		Matan Kaminer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:		Matan Kaminer <[log in to unmask]>
Date:		Thu, 30 May 2024 10:34:16 -0400
Content-Type:		multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:		text/plain (37 lines) , text/html (24 lines)

As Israel’s criminal war in Gaza continues, with death, destruction, and starvation reaching disastrous dimensions, Palestinian and critical Jewish faculty and students in Israeli academia are facing unprecedented repression – including suspensions, dismissals and even arrest. Join colleagues from the grassroots organization Academia for Equality for a conversation on the situation in Israeli universities and colleges and the state of the struggle for academic freedom.

Speakers:

Anat Matar (Philosopher and author, The Poverty of Ethics) 
Sawsan Zaher (Human rights lawyer and legal adviser, Emergency Coalition in Arab Society)
Avi-ram Tzoreff (Historian, Academia for Equality’s Solidarity Team) 
Khaled Furani (Anthropologist and co-editor, Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Students in Israeli Universities)
Chair:
Nadia Abu El-Haj (Anthropologist and co-director, Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University)

Free to attend and open to all, but registration is essential.
Thursday, 6 June 2024 19:00-20:30 BST Online

More information & registration:

www.brismes.ac.uk/events/academic-repression-in-israel

========================================================

https://www.brismes.ac.uk/news/joint-event-academic-repression-in-israel

Joint Event | Academic Repression in Israel

• Posted: 30/05/2024

Date: Thursday, 6 June 2024

Time: 19:00-20:30 UK time

Location: Online via Zoom

Free to attend and open to all, but registration is essential.

Register

About the Event

As Israel’s criminal war in Gaza continues, with death, destruction, and starvation reaching disastrous dimensions, Palestinian and critical Jewish faculty and students in Israeli academia are facing unprecedented repression – including suspensions, dismissals and even arrest. Join colleagues from the grassroots organization Academia for Equality for a conversation on the situation in Israeli universities and colleges and the state of the struggle for academic freedom.

Speakers

• Anat Matar (Philosopher and author, The Poverty of Ethics)
• Sawsan Zaher (Human rights lawyer and legal adviser, Emergency Coalition in Arab Society)
• Avi-ram Tzoreff (Historian, Academia for Equality’s Solidarity Team)
• Khaled Furani (Anthropologist and co-editor, Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Experiences in Israeli Universities)

Chair

• Nadia Abu El-Haj (Anthropologist and co-director, Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University)

---

Event organised by Academia for Equality. Co-Sponsors: BRISMES; Committee on Academic Freedom, MESA; Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University.

===============================================================

Academic repression in Israel ‘on steroids’

ELRA

Academic repression in Israel ‘on steroids’

POSTED ON JUNE 7, 2024 BY VASELINE

The repression that pro-Palestinian academics and students in Israel faced during the war is, according to scholars, like “being in the belly of the beast.”

Since October 7, the crackdown on those who criticize the Israeli state, including at its universities, has increased to an “alarming state,” said Nadia Abu El-Haj, professor of anthropology at Columbia University.

“The entanglement of Israeli higher education institutions with the state project is not new,” Professor El-Haj told an event organized by the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies.

“Nevertheless, the extent and character of that cooperation, and the associated increase in repression, is today on steroids.”

Scholars have expressed concern about the “attack” on academic freedom taking place in Israel, with many academics and students being targeted for expressing pro-Palestinian views. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, a leading Palestinian feminist scholar, was arrested and detained by Israeli police in April after signing a petition describing Israel’s attack on Gaza as genocide.

Khaled Furani, associate professor of sociology and anthropology at Tel Aviv University, referred to the experience of Palestinian academics living in Israel as “being in the belly of the beast.”

“We inhabit Leviathan now, but we didn’t need October 2023 to see this state of affairs,” says Dr. Furani, co-editor of Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Experiences in Israeli Universities.

He said their plight dates back to the 1948 Palestine War, when the British withdrew, and even to the 1936 Arab Revolt, but continues to the present, where academics are often treated as “criminals” for their social media posts .

“It’s as if the founding moment of 1948 never ended for us,” he said. “The violence that is constitutional to the state has never ended.”

Dr. Furani said Israeli universities have been “bewitched” by the state and have abdicated their responsibility as places for critical learning. stands?”

Also speaking at the event, Sawsan Zaher, a human rights lawyer and legal advisor based in Israel, said that since October 7, Palestinian students and teachers, as well as Jewish faculty, have been subjected to a “huge wave” of complaints, and a targeted incitement campaign on social media.

“There was an intense, aggressive, deliberate start of political persecution that… did not end and continues to this day in higher education institutions,” she said.

However, she also said that racism and discrimination are nothing new for Palestinian citizens within Israel.

“It is not only about the background of racism that already existed before October 7, but also about the persecution from a political perspective.

“They have been persecuting professors for at least a decade – left-wing Jewish professors, including Palestinians, of course – by issuing and publishing documents against them and lobbying against them, trying to promote bills… that target them. ”

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com

==============================================

https://www.msn.com/he-il/news/other/%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%93-%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%98%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%90%D7%97%D7%93%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%95%D7%93%D7%A0%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%A7%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%AA-%D7%A1%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%AA-%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%A9%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%9D/ar-BB1nBcmc

The Markerועד ראשי האוניברסיטאות: התאחדות הסטודנטים מקדמת “סתימת פיות של מרצים”באוניברסיטאות המחקר יוצאים נגד הצעת חוק שיזמה התאחדות הסטודנטים, המחייבת מוסדות אקדמיים לפטר מרצים שמתבטאים באופן שנתפס כפגיעה במדינה ■ “הצעה שתפגע אנושות בעצמאות האקדמיה ובחופש הביטוי, ותסייע לאויבנו להרחיב את החרם האקדמי על ישראל באופן שלא תהיה ממנו דרך חזרה”

June 04th, 13 PM  ליאור דטל

אוניברסיטאות המחקר מגנות בחריפות את הצעת החוק שהגיש אתמול (ב’) יו”ר הקואליציה אופיר כץ (הליכוד) – המסיתה נגד מרצים במוסדות האקדמיים. לפי ההצעה, שיזמה התאחדות הסטודנטים, המוסדות האקדמיים יחויבו לפטר באופן מיידי, בהליך מזורז ובלי לשלם פיצויים, מרצים שיתבטאו באופן שמתפרש כשלילת קיומה של מדינת ישראל כמדינה יהודית ודמוקרטית, כהסתה לטרור וכתמיכה בארגוני טרור ובמעשי טרור נגד ישראל. לפי הצעת החוק, המל”ג תטיל סנקציות תקציביות על כל מוסד שלא יפעל כך.

לדברי ועד ראשי האוניברסיטאות וארגון סגל המרצים באוניברסיטאות, הצעת החוק לא רק פוגעת בעצמאות מוסדות ההשכלה הגבוהה, אלא גם מסייעת לאויבי ישראל ולתנועת החרם האקדמי נגד ישראל, ומספקת להם הוכחה לסתימת פיות ולהגבלת חופש הביטוי באקדמיה על ידי הכנסת והסטודנטים. בוועד מאשימים את התאחדות הסטודנטים, שאמורה לייצג את כלל הסטודנטים בישראל, בחבירה לגורמים בימין הקיצוני.

“לצערנו הצעת החוק היא חלק מקמפיין הסתה ושיסוי מתמשך בעל אופי מקארתיסטי נגד האקדמיה הישראלית”, נמסר מוועד ראשי האוניברסיטאות. “שיאו של הקמפיין בקידום הצעת חוק שמהותה סתימת פיות, יצירת אווירת הלשנות ופחד בקמפוסים. הצעת חוק זו תפגע אנושות בעצמאותה של האקדמיה ובחופש הביטוי, ותסייע לאויבנו, באמצעות ארגוני ה-BDS להרחיב את החרם האקדמי על ישראל באופן שלא תהיה ממנו דרך חזרה. אנו קוראים לכל חברי הכנסת לדחות את יוזמת החקיקה לאלתר ולמנוע את הפגיעה הקשה באקדמיה ובדמוקרטיה הישראלית”, הוסיפו.

שר האוצר בצלאל סמוטריץ’ ושר החינוך יואב קיש. בהתאחדות הסטודנטים ביקשו מהם לתמוך בהצעה צילום: אמיל סלמן© סופק על ידי TheMarker

מהמועצה המתאמת של חברי הסגל הבכיר באוניברסיאות נמסר כי גם היא “מתנגדת באופן נחרץ להצעת חוק ההשכלה הגבוהה, שתאפשר פיטורים של חברות וחברי סגל בנוהל מזורז שעוקף את נהלי המשמעת והתקנונים של המוסדות. המועצה רואה בהצעת חוק זה איום על עצמאותן של האוניברסיטאות בישראל ופגיעה בשמה הטוב של מערכת ההשכלה הגבוהה שלנו בארץ ובעולם. ההצעה היא ניסיון גלוי להלך אימים על מרצות ועל מרצים. היא עלולה להיתפס בעולם כפגיעה בחופש הביטוי בקמפוסים ולגרום לניתוק קשרי מדע עם ישראל ולנזקים ארוכי טווח”.

התאחדות הסטודנטים אף השיקה קמפיין חוצות היוצא באופן ישיר נגד מרצים באוניברסיטאות שהוגדרו כ”תומכי טרור”. בוועד ראשי האוניברסיטאות אמרו בתגובה כי “מדובר בקמפיין רדיפה והסתה נגד חברות סגל אשר עלול להתיר את דמן. לא מתקבל על הדעת שקמפיין הממומן מכספי הסטודנטים יעודד שיסוי ואלימות”.

“מקפצה לקידום פוליטי”

הצעת החוק נולדה במכתב ששלחה התאחדות הסטודנטים בשבוע שעבר לשר החינוך יואב קיש, ולשר האוצר בצלאל סמוטריץ’, שבה ביקשה שיתמכו בהצעה. חלק מראשי אגודות הסטודנטים משכו מאז את חתימותיהם מהמכתב.

“בתקופה שבה גוברות המתקפות על האקדמיה הישראלית וקולות החרם על ישראל, בוחר יו”ר התאחדות הסטודנטים לחבור לחברי כנסת מהקואליציה במסעם להחליש ולפגוע באקדמיה מבפנים”, נמסר ממטה המאבק נגד ההפיכה המשטרית באקדמיה. “מדובר ביוזמה של יו”ר התאחדות הסטודנטים, שמנסה להשתמש בה כמקפצה לקידום פוליטי על ידי חבירה לגורמי ימין קיצוני”.

06.06.24

Editorial Note 

The Turkish Labor Party (EMEP) hosted a Middle East Conference on May 25-26, 2024.

The conference discussed the developments in the Middle East, particularly “Israel’s attacks on Palestine.” The EMEP statement emphasized that “Israel’s attacks on the Palestinian people have caused tens of thousands of deaths and forced many to migrate.” The conference was “an important step to draw attention to such humanitarian crises and to show solidarity with the Palestinian people.” 

The conference discussed “The inaction of regional states in response to Israel’s attacks on Palestine.” It was also noted that the continuous actions of the world’s workers have not been enough to “stop Israel’s aggressiveness,” and that states “responded to these protests with violence, giving Israel a green light.” The conference agreed that the “massacre of the Palestinian people must stop immediately and that their right to self-determination must be recognized.”  

On the last day, the EMEP released a final declaration, stating “Peoples should determine their own destiny. We stand with the Palestinian people against Israeli genocide.” 

One of the speakers was “Israeli anti-Zionist Prof. Moshe Zuckermann” who “criticized Israel’s attacks on Palestine and the Netanyahu regime.” Prof. Zuckermann addressed the Israeli government in his video message. He stated: “Since January 2023, we have had the most right-wing, one could even say fascist coalition in the entire history of the Israeli parliament. This coalition consists of the right-wing Likud party, two religious – Orthodox parties that are anti-Zionist or non-Zionist, and a third Orthodox party that is mainly elected by Orthodox Jews from the East. There are two parties that are relevant to our topic today: Two religious parties led by Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, which we can also call messianic-religious parties.” 

Another speaker was Udi Raz, a doctoral fellow at the Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies at the Free University Berlin. Raz, from the German-based Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East “described the German state’s efforts to silence dissenting Jews by labeling all criticism of Zionism as anti-Semitism.” Raz said, “In many ways they are racist and fascist, undemocratic, even though they were democratically elected.” He spoke about the criminalization of anti-Zionist Jews in today’s Germany. Raz noted that anti-Zionist Jews in Germany are accused of being anti-Semites: “We, as anti-Zionist Jews, issued a statement saying, ‘Together with the Jews of Europe and the world, we declare that Israeli colonialism, the occupation of Palestine, the persecution and oppression of the Palestinian people are not carried out in the name of the Jews of the world,’ and then we in the Middle East were branded as anti-Semites. We were boycotted and sanctioned, we were isolated, our bank accounts were frozen.”

The highlights of the conference were “the immediate cessation of the massacre of the Palestinian people, the declaration of a ceasefire, the reconstruction of Gaza and the facilitation of the return of the Palestinian people to their homes. It called for the recognition of the Palestinian state and the release of Palestinians in prison. It was stated that the right to self-determination belongs to the Palestinian people.” 

Not surprisingly, the EMEP is a member of the International Conference of Marxist–Leninist Parties and Organizations (CIPOML). 

Both Zuckermann and Raz espouse anti-Israel ideas disguised as scholarship.  Zuckermann has had a long career in this respect, as IAM repeatedly noticed. For example, in 2001, he published a Hebrew book, The Israel Foundry: Myths and Ideology in a Conflictual Society, which the Journal of Palestinian Studies reviewed in Arabic in 2002. Similarly, Raz is signaling to the anti-Israel cohorts he is happy to provide anti-Israel perception upon request. 

Using the neo-Marxist, critical jargon, pro-Palestinian activists all over the globe use the democratic systems of the West to promote a non-democratic society. They recruit Israeli academics to do the job. 

REFERENCES

https://www.evrensel.net/daily/520039/emep-middle-east-conference-final-declaration-we-stand-with-the-palestinian-people-against-israeli-genocide

EMEP Middle East Conference Final Declaration: We stand with the Palestinian people against Israeli genocide

EMEP has released the final declaration of the Middle East Conference held on 25-26 May: “Peoples should determine their own destiny. We stand with the Palestinian people against Israeli genocide”.

The Labour Party (EMEP) has issued a final declaration following the International Conference on the Middle East, held at the United Metal Workers’ Union headquarters on 25-26 May. The conference was organised to discuss major developments in the Middle East, particularly Israel’s attacks on Palestine.

The statement emphasised that Israel’s attacks on the Palestinian people have caused tens of thousands of deaths and forced many to migrate. The conference was highlighted as an important step to draw attention to such humanitarian crises and to show solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The first day of the two-day conference focused on hegemonic struggles and the economic and political dimensions of inter-state relations in the region. On the second day, solutions were discussed with a focus on public dynamics. Local and international academics, politicians and journalists examined the intense and bloody agenda centred on Palestine from historical and regional perspectives.

IMPERIALIST COMPETITION AND CONFLICTS

It has been noted that the Middle East has been one of the regions with the most intense competition among the imperialist states throughout the twentieth century and today. This competition has become more and more intense because of oil, natural gas and strategic routes. The escalation of conflicts in the region has been linked to the rise of China and Russia as “superpowers”. It was noted that states and local authorities serving the interests of global monopolies have created and exploited unresolved issues in the region by provoking religious and sectarian conflicts.

SYRIA AND TWO HEGEMONIC POWERS

The ongoing proxy wars in Syria and the direct interventions of the USA and Russia were discussed in terms of their destructive impact on the region. The conflicts between these two powers were seen as ongoing efforts to expand their influence and control over regional resources.

TURKEY’S REGIONAL POLICY

It was mentioned that the Turkish government takes every opportunity to assert its initiatives both in the region and globally. This includes operations in neighbouring countries to expand the National Pact (Misak-ı Milli), the sale of drones to Middle Eastern countries, the sale of public institutions and land, the search for partners for projects, and the evaluation of investment opportunities for capital.

ISRAELI ATTACKS AND GLOBAL RESPONSES

The inaction of regional states in response to Israel’s attacks on Palestine was criticised. It was noted that the continuous actions of the world’s workers have not been enough to stop Israel’s aggressiveness, and that states have responded to these protests with violence, giving Israel a green light. It was noted that the power and influence of the states that recognise Palestine has not been enough to make Netanyahu back down.

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS AND HIGHLIGHTS

The conference agreed that the massacre of the Palestinian people must stop immediately and that their right to self-determination must be recognised. Key issues included Turkey’s refugee and immigration policy, which turns the country into a depot, and the internal and external political instrumentalisation of the policy towards the Kurdish people spread across four countries.

NOTABLE VIEWS OF PARTICIPANTS

Israeli anti-Zionist Prof. Moshe Zuckermann criticised Israel’s attacks on Palestine and the Netanyahu regime. Udi Raz of the German-based Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East described the German state’s efforts to silence dissenting Jews by labelling all criticism of Zionism as anti-Semitism. Al-Taher, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, stressed the importance of democratic popular unity and united struggle against the militant and massacring alliance of Israel and the USA.

KEY HIGHLIGHTS AND THANKS

The main highlights of the conference were the immediate cessation of the massacre of the Palestinian people, the declaration of a ceasefire, the reconstruction of Gaza and the facilitation of the return of the Palestinian people to their homes. It called for the recognition of the Palestinian state and the release of Palestinians in prison. It was stated that the right to self-determination belongs to the Palestinian people.

Thanks were expressed to the speakers from home and abroad, to the participants who were present in the hall for two days, to those who watched the live broadcast and to everyone who shared their feelings and thoughts.

CONFERENCE PROGRAM

May 25, 2024

10:30 Opening Speech: Seyit Aslan (Labor Party Chair)

11:00-13:30 FIRST SESSION POWER STRUGGLES AND HEGEMONY IN THE MIDDLE EAST 

Moderator: Fulya Alikoç

• Musa Özuğurlu (Journalist)
• Gilbert Achcar (UK, Academic)
• Maher Arafat Al-Taher (Palestine)

14:00-17:00 SECOND SESSION TURKEY-MIDDLE EAST RELATIONS AND ECONOMIC POLITICS 

Moderator: Nuray Sancar

• Arzu Yılmaz (KRG – Iraq)
• Bahadır Özgür (Journalist)
• Mühdan Sağlam (Academic)
• Erhan Keleşoğlu (Academic)

May 26, 2024

11:00-13:00 FIRST SESSION PEOPLES AND STRUGGLES IN THE MIDDLE EAST 

Moderator: Hediye Levent

• Sibel Karadağ (Academic)
• Doğan Çetinkaya (Academic)
• Mira Assadi (Iran, Academic)
• Kıvanç Eliaçık (Union Expert)

14:00-17:00 SECOND SESSION POSSIBILITIES AND CONDITIONS FOR PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 

Moderator: Hakkı Özdal

• Moshe Zuckermann (Israel, Academic)
• Udi Raz (Germany, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East)
• Lindsey German (UK, Stop The War Coalition)
• Cengiz Çiçek (DEM Party MP)
• İskender Bayhan (EMEP MP

=============================================================

Google Translate from Turkish

Ortadoğu Konferansı: Halklar Kendi Kaderlerini Kendileri Tayin Etmeli. İsrail’in Soykırımına Karşı Filistin Halkının Yanındayız

JUNE 1, 2024
Middle East Conference: People Should Determine Their Own Destiny. We Stand with the Palestinian People Against Israel’s Genocide

The International Middle East Conference, which we organized to discuss the developments in the Middle East and to express solidarity with the Palestinian people, especially the deaths of tens of thousands of people, mostly children and women, and their forced migration due to Israel’s massacre attacks against the Palestinian people, has filled an important gap.

On the first day, the political economy and political dimensions of hegemony struggles in the region and inter-state relations; On the second Middle East day, local and foreign academics, politicians and journalists who made presentations at our conference, where public dynamics and solution proposals were discussed, placed the intense and bloody agenda that Palestine focused on in its historical and regional dimensions. First of all, we would like to thank them for this solidarity.

Throughout the twentieth century and now, the Middle East has been a region where the fault lines have been most activated by competition and contradictions between imperialist states whose power and influence have changed. Oil, natural gas, open sea and land routes reaching from distant Asia to Europe and Africa have always been at a critical point in terms of being a source of cheap labor. Today, this competition has jumped to the next level. With the rise of China and Russia to the league of ‘superpowers’, conflicts that have emerged in the form of local wars and are gradually increasing in intensity continue.

States serving the interests of world monopolies and local governments in cooperation with them are in a constant state of intervention to re-share an already shared world and to consolidate hegemony by provoking religious and sectarian conflicts, creating unresolvable problems in the region and taking advantage of this deadlock.

After years of proxy war in Syria, two hegemonic powers; The powers that openly confront Russia and the United States with their arrival on the field continue to expand their spheres of influence through the debris they left behind and negotiate over regional resources.

The Turkish administration shares with each other the areas of initiative in the region and the world; They do not shy away from making moves at every opportunity to make the most of the results of their fight, which they wage in some low places, sometimes by going around each other, and in some areas with hot contact. This process is used to expand the National Pact on land and waterways from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea, with operations carried out on the borders of neighboring countries. The government markets unmanned aerial vehicles through crowded visits to Middle Eastern countries, sells remaining lands with public institutions, looks for partners for projects, tries to provide swaps to the treasury, and personally evaluates investment opportunities for capital.

The fact that most of the regional states did not react or impose sanctions during Israel’s attack on Palestine was an indication of how the Palestinian people gave way to Israeli politics, which has long been the battering ram of US imperialism.

The uninterrupted actions of the world’s workers against Israel’s attacks have not yet been enough to stop Israeli aggression. Moreover, states responded to these protests with violence, giving Israel an undying green light. The power and influence of the states that recognize Palestine could not make Netanyahu step back.

***

Our conference tried to follow the line in detailing the dimensions of this general situation in the Middle East and connecting the parts to the whole.

Different ideas on this platform; Solution suggestions and wishes were expressed within the scope of international solidarity on the Middle East and Palestine. The common opinion is that the massacre of the Palestinian people should be stopped immediately and the people’s right to self-determination should be recognized.

Among the prominent topics were the refugee and immigrant policy that caused Turkey to become a warehouse country and the international dimensions of this situation. On the other hand, the instrumentalization of political action against the Kurdish people scattered across four countries in the Middle East in terms of domestic and foreign policy is also among the agenda items.

Israeli anti-Zionist Prof., who could not attend the conference in person for predictable reasons, but delivered his speech via video recording. Moshe Zuckermann criticized Israel’s attacks on Palestine and the Netanyahu regime. Udi Raz, from the ‘Jewish Voice Association for a Just Peace in the Middle East’ based in Germany, also talked about the German state’s attempt to silence opposing Jews in order to create ‘its own Jew’ by accusing all criticism of Zionism and the state of Israel as anti-Semitism, and talked about these experiences added to the conference record.

Maher Arafat Al-Taher from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine attended our conference. This picture once again points out that the common struggle of the people against the warlike and murderous union established on the Israel-USA axis is possible and important.

Israel’s aggression, the world in bloodshed 

It is a necessity to strengthen the democracy and peace front in the region and in the country against the wars waged by the regional states and imperialist monopolies, which do not hesitate to fight, to restructure the Middle East.

The important emphasis of our conference is this: The massacre against the Palestinian people must be stopped immediately, a ceasefire must be declared, Gaza must be rebuilt and the people of Gaza must be allowed to return to their homes. In addition, the Palestinian state should be recognized and Palestinians in prisons should be released.

The fate of the Palestinian people will be determined by the Palestinian people themselves.

We would like to thank the speakers who attended our conference from home and abroad, the participants who were in the hall for two days, and everyone who watched from the live broadcast, used the podium in the hall or returned and expressed their feelings and thoughts.

LABOR PARTY

Headquarters

========================================================

Internationale Nahost-Konferenz in der Türkei

Google Translate from German

May 29, 2024

International Middle East Conference in Turkey

The Labour Party (EMEP) organised a two-day “International Middle East Conference” on 25 and 26 May. Many speakers from Turkey , Iraq, Iran, Palestine , Israel, Lebanon, Germany and England attended the conference or were connected via video message.

The opening speech was given by EMEP Chairman Seyit Aslan. Aslan recalled that Israel is openly supported by the world ‘s major imperialist states, especially the USA, and pointed out that the states in the region, including Turkey with the AKP government of President Erdogan , are also largely silent about the massacre of the Palestinian people .

Pointing out that Turkey , which wants to benefit from the contradictions of the imperialist forces and is therefore looking for opportunities for expansionism in the region, Aslan said: “All imperialist military bases in the region, especially in Turkey , must be closed , the imperialist states must withdraw from the region , Netanyahu must be convicted as a war criminal in an independent court , the Palestinian problem must be solved with a two-state solution ! “

“Biden continues to expand Trump’s pro-Israel policy”

Lebanese academic Gilbert Achcar said the Israeli government was rapidly moving toward the extreme right: “The program of Zionism already has such a dynamic. It is a tangent entirely focused on racism, militarism and the extreme right. In the current situation , it coincides with the global trend of the shift to the right.” Achcar pointed out that at the same time, a major pro-Israel shift was taking place in the United States : “Trump was called the most pro-Israel US president in the country’s history at that time . Biden completely followed Trump in this area and even developed it further. Biden even openly and proudly declared himself a Zionist.”

“This is a historic war against imperialism.”

Journalist Musa Ö zu ğ urlu recalled the period of imperialist division that began after the Industrial Revolution and pointed out that Western imperialists are trying to gain influence in the region by supporting religiously oriented governments.

In this sense, Özuğurlu stressed that the war being waged in this region today is a historic war and said: “The resistance that the Palestinian people are putting up today is not only against Israel. The Palestinians are also fighting against the United States, which is the stronghold and executive organ of Western imperialism.”

“Erdoğan would not make harsh statements if he didn’t have to ”

Commenting on the AKP government’s stance on the war, Ö zu ğ urlu said: “If we look at the past, it cannot be said that the AKP government has been very supportive of the Palestinian issue. I do not think that President Erdo ğ an would have used such harsh rhetoric on this issue recently if he had not been forced to . They had to do it because support for the Palestinian people began to grow all over the world.” Ö zu ğ urlu recalled that the left in Turkey has always supported the Palestinian cause and should not leave the field to Islamists . Ö zu ğurlu stressed that the Palestinian issue was indeed one of the important issues used by political Islamists to consolidate and establish their power.

The most right-wing, fascist coalition in Israel

Prof. Dr. Moshe Zuckermann from Israel addressed the Israeli government in his video message. He stated : “Since January 2023, we have had the most right-wing, one could even say fascist coalition in the entire history of the Israeli parliament. This coalition consists of the right-wing Likud party, two religious – Orthodox parties that are anti-Zionist or non-Zionist, and a third Orthodox party that is mainly elected by Orthodox Jews from the East . There are two parties that are relevant to our topic today: Two religious parties led by Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, which we can also call messianic-religious parties .” Udi  Raz, doctoral student at the Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies  In many ways they are racist and fascist, undemocratic, even though they were democratically elected . “

“Anti-Zionist Jews are being criminalized”

Udi Raz, a doctoral student at the Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies and a member of the board of the German- based Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, spoke about the criminalization of anti-Zionist Jews in today’s Germany. Raz noted that anti-Zionist Jews in Germany are accused of being anti-Semites: “We, as anti-Zionist Jews, issued a statement saying , ‘Together with the Jews of Europe and the world, we declare that Israeli colonialism, the occupation of Palestine , the persecution and oppression of the Palestinian people are not carried out in the name of the Jews of the world ,’ and then we  in the Middle East  were branded as anti-Semites. We were boycotted and sanctioned, we were isolated, our bank accounts were frozen.”

Being a Woman in the Middle East

Academic Mira Assadi spoke about the experiences of women in the Middle East using Iran as an example. Assadi explained that women in the Middle East live in a triangle of oppression : “I define these as religion, politics and the patriarchal system. In Iran, there is a difference between women’s domestic life and public life . We have always thought secretly and rebelled secretly. This rebellion broke out every ten years. There were riots and protests, but there was a state that was stronger than us and we had to return home .” In September 2022, after Jina Mahsa Amini was killed by the morality police , women began their resistance again.
Assadi said: “Women’s resistance continues today. If Iran will be a free country one day, it will be under the leadership of women.”

“An international movement is necessary ”

In her video presentation at the conference, Lindsey German of the UK’s Stop the War Coalition also referred to the ongoing arms buildup and increasing likelihood of war around the world, saying: “There is an ongoing war in Ukraine, a proxy war between NATO and Russia. There is an ongoing war in Gaza and an ongoing crisis throughout the Middle East. There is also the possibility of war in the Pacific. There is already an economic war going on. The arms race is continuing. And we have to fear that this will escalate into a larger conflict . In other words, we are discussing these issues at a time of great crisis and great danger to the future of humanity.” German stated : “I believe that we need to build an international movement . We talk about the resistance and resilience of the Palestinian people. This is at the heart of our actions. But we also need our resistance and our international resilience.”

=================================================

Portal Novosti, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

https://www.portalnovosti.com/udi-raz

Google Translate from Bosnian

Udi Raz

I think that my participation in public protests and advocacy for the equality of Palestinians and Jews in the state of Israel was more decisive for my dismissal than the word apartheid. I go to these protests as a man, out of my conviction that I must rebel against the situation in which the Palestinians live in Gaza and the occupied territories

Large son
Udi Raz speaks at a protest for a free Palestine at the FU Berlin on November 3, 2023 (photo by Mariam Aboughazi)

So, I am Udi Raz, Jewish and Israeli, born in 1987 in Haifa, living in Berlin. On October 25, 2023, I was fired from my position as a guide at the Jewish Museum. Haifa is in Palestine and Israel, that’s what I say, it’s self-evident to me, as I sometimes say as a woman, which is self-evident to me. Since 2012, I live in Berlin. I came here so that I would not live in a constant state of war. In Berlin, at the Freie Universität, I studied oriental cultures, and now I am writing my doctorate. My parents were born in Israel, in a kibbutz, they grew up in Zionist indoctrination. My father’s father, my grandfather, was born in Lithuania, and my father’s mother, my grandmother, was born in Argentina. Grandfather spoke Lithuanian, Yiddish and Russian, and grandmother Spanish and Yiddish. They came to Palestine after the end of the Second World War, and after the establishment of Israel, they left the kibbutz and moved to Haifa.

I met more Palestinians in Berlin than in Haifa. Of course, more Arabs. In Haifa I had only one Palestinian in my class, I wasn’t allowed to meet any more. I say it wasn’t “allowed”, it wasn’t expressly forbidden, it’s not written in any law or provision (at least I haven’t seen it written), but that’s how it is in life. It was arranged systematically, and systematically: in 12 years of schooling in Haifa, I had only one Palestinian schoolmate, and that only for three years, in nine years, none. And that in a city where many Palestinians live, and without whom its history cannot be written.

In Berlin, until October 25, I worked as a guide for a department of the Jewish Museum. That department is dedicated to the post-war triangle “Judaism – Israel – Germany”. As a guide, I attended and completed a course, and I led mainly school groups, but also groups of adult visitors. Often, as someone who is Jewish and was still born and raised in Israel, I also shared my experiences from Haifa. Once, while on a video device playing Angela Merkel’s Staatsräson speech for her visits to the Israeli Knesset, I mentioned that Palestinians in Israel are not equal citizens with Jews, but that, according to authoritative independent reports by independent organizations (such as Amnesty International , Human Rights Watch and the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem) Palestinians live under the apartheid state of Israel. There I also explained what apartheid is, the origin of the word, its meaning and other aspects. Of course, all this as a man who was born and grew up in Israel and who is familiar with the reality of what he is saying, so, all in all, I can say about myself, I am an authoritative witness.

I said what is true: that the Palestinians in the land west of the Jordan River do not have the right to vote in the Israeli parliament, but the Jews do. It is apartheid, on the fascist model. Someone heard about it, so they reported me, and I was fired by the boss, that is, by the head of the Museum’s educational department, her name is dr. Diana Dressel. My signed contract was canceled verbally. Well, the Museum has no obligation to fire me as a freelancer with an explanation. The problem is not my boss, the one who fired me, the problem is the Jüdisches Museum Berlin, which is no longer independent, but in the service of the politics of the current government of Israel. I think that more than the word apartheid (by the way, reports of humanitarian organizations around the world are regularly full of it), my participation in public protests and advocacy for the equality of Palestinians and Jews in the state of Israel was decisive for my dismissal. I go to these protests as a human being, out of my conviction that I must rebel against the situation in which Palestinians live in Gaza and the occupied territories. I also go to the protests as a member of the Berlin group “Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East”. Here is this photo where I have a Palestinian headscarf around my neck, it was taken the other day at a protest to end the genocide in Gaza, in front of the large canteen that belongs to the complex where I studied, which is called Freie Universität Berlin. Antisemitism sometimes occurs to me, these are the times now.

That I pronounce and repeat the name racist and apartheid for the regime of today’s state of Israel, did not come from any whim or eclipse of mine, but from experience and conviction. I was in Haifa when there were many terrorist attacks at the beginning of the third millennium. A lot of my peers, whom I knew, my schoolmates also died in those attacks. There is a constant state of war there. All this made me want to leave Haifa and Israel. I decided to go to Germany, because I heard that it is a good country to live and study. And I came, first to Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. I was there for a year, then I came to Berlin. But my heart remained in Haifa. My parents live there, many friends live there, I was born there and spent my young years there. And I know from there, I know too well, how the Palestinians live and how they feel. I know that they consider the year 1948, when the state of Israel was proclaimed, to be the beginning of their catastrophe. I know, because I listened to it, it is still heard from them today. I understand their pain when they say that, it is justified.

This problem of creating only Israel and not creating Palestine, and otherwise any problematization of the issue of the Palestinian state, has been under a tacit ban in Germany since two years ago. Everything else can be a topic of conversation, but the Palestinian issue, not really. Germany is known to be in a permanent process of dealing with its past. In this confrontation regarding Jews and Israel, there are various ways and paths: compensation is paid to the descendants of Holocaust victims, Jews from the former Soviet Union are allowed to immigrate to Germany, but Israel is also given unquestioning support for anything Israel does. Thus, for the Palestinians, the hell in which they live in Gaza, apartheid in the West Bank of Jordan, and for God’s sake also for those in Israel, is slowly moving to Germany. They are less and less given the right to speak about their position. This situation has no basis in any German law, statute or legal act, it’s all tacit, it’s what the police do, it’s how it’s done and implemented, it’s clear, everything according to permission “from above”.

Before leaving Israel, I wanted to learn Arabic, to enroll in an Arabic language course. At that time, and that was the year 2009, there was only one place in all of Israel where this was possible. This was in a center called Giv’at Haviva, which is located halfway between Haifa and Tel Aviv towards the West Bank area of Jordan. So, after completing my military service, I enrolled, of my own volition and desire, in an Arabic language course. I also attended that course for half a year, it was Arabic, actually a Palestinian spoken language, and it is interesting that a lot of young men attended it before going to the army, probably those who later in the army took on tasks to work for example for the intelligence services.

In Berlin, I studied culture and history of the Middle East for three years, then Islamic culture and society, and after finishing my studies, four years ago, I enrolled in doctoral studies at the Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies, at the Freie Universität. In research for my doctorate, I deal with “Semitic” negotiations and agreements, that is, the phenomenon of redefining the Other between Muslims and Jews in today’s Germany. The title of my doctoral dissertation is in English: Negotiating “Semites”: Muslims and Jews redefine Otherness in today’s Germany. So, my Jewish and Israeli origin and experience, and the experience of living in a city with a Palestinian ethnic community, is not the only thing that makes me equipped to speak about Israelis and Palestinians, but this also includes my research in the field of Muslim culture and religion, I am not immodest when I say that it doesn’t make me less competent but makes me even more competent. But in the Museum, where I worked honorably, censorship was imposed on the use of words that the museum guide uses, even when they are not his own, but when he cites them from the reports of independent organizations that protect human dignity and rights.

========================================

https://www.palestine-studies.org/en/node/432198

Zuckermann, The Israel Foundry: Myths and Ideology in a Conflictual Society

AUTHOR: Samir Sarras 

REVIEWED BOOK

Foundry: Myths and Ideology in a Conflictual Society

ORIGINAL TITLE: חרושת הישראליות: מיתוסים ואדאולוגיה בחברה מסוכסכת

BOOK AUTHOR: Moshe Zuckermann

BOOK LANGUAGE: Hebrew YEAR OF PUBLICATION: 2001

===========================================================

Google Translate from Arabic 

https://www.palestine-studies.org/sites/default/files/mdf-articles/%D9%82%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A1%D8%A7%D8%AA_-_%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%88%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86.pdf

176, pp. (2002, Spring) 50, Issue 13, Al Majal, Journal of Palestinian Studies

http://www.palestine‐studies.org

 Conflict prevails in society in mythology and ideology.
 Zuckermann Moshe. 261 Pages, 2001. Resling Publications: Tel Aviv.
 Comprehensive definition presenting with the aim of “Israeli identity” is the subject of this book.
 It is a matter of itself, making multiple agents or sides on the light, which is a goal, but it has continuous, the practical process of the work of all aspect , In congregation full
 and the end of the formation of its Zionist formal formation, the Tel Aviv University in the History philosophy, a professor and the writer. A prominent problem of the goals was one of the “normal nature” with a claim between the prevailing the contradiction that this is Israeli; The community is characterized by the actual contradictions and between the legalism, the contexts, due to the investigation, the non-establishment of some of the parties that are in the vicinity is possible.

30.05.24

Editorial Note

Pro-Palestinian academic activists work hard to delegitimize Israel. In recent years, the pro-Palestinian activists hijacked the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES). 

Next week, BRISMES is holding a webinar discussing “‏As Israel’s criminal war in Gaza continues, with death, destruction, and starvation reaching disastrous dimensions, Palestinian and critical Jewish faculty and students in Israeli academia are facing unprecedented repression – including suspensions, dismissals and even arrest. Join colleagues from the grassroots organization Academia for Equality for a conversation on the situation in Israeli universities and colleges and the state of the struggle for academic freedom.” Longtime activist Dr. Anat Matar will speak among other Palestinian and pro-Palestinian academics.

These days, BRISMES doubles its efforts in attacks against Israeli institutions. For this goal, BRISMES established in 2020 a company called BRISMES Campaigns Ltd, with one mission to “support the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against the unjust regime of occupation and apartheid imposed by Israel. We will campaign on and off campus on this and other issues through organizational and cultural struggle in civil and political society.” The BRISMES Campaigns “promotes the grassroots, anti-racist, democratic, transnational and non-violent Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement in solidarity with the liberation struggle in Palestine. We promote the academic boycott of Israeli academic institutions, which are complicit in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. We also campaign for divestment from companies (whether financial, industrial, service-oriented) which aid and abet settler colonialism. We also campaign for sanctions to be imposed on Israel until it ceases to violate international law.” 

The BRISMES Campaigns “undertakes solidarity actions to defend Palestinian voices, histories, activists, educators, and educational activities which have come under increasing attack by pro-Israeli groups and individuals in recent years.”

The next level of the delegitimization of Israel is for BRISMES to argue that Israel is a settler-colonial state. According to BRISMES, “in the wake of Hamas’s October 7th violent assault and Israel’s horrific war on Gaza, BRISMES has been witnessing a worrying trend of attacks on decolonial and anticolonial scholarship and perspectives in relation to analyses of the situation in Israel-Palestine. In particular, accusations have increasingly conflated the use of ‘settler colonialism’ – as a descriptor of the policies of dispossession and displacement implemented by the Israeli state against Palestinians – with support of terrorism and/or antisemitism. This has worsened an already challenging environment for speaking about Palestinian human rights on university campuses.” 

To downplay the need to fight antisemitism, as IAM reported in September 2023, BRISMES joined the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC), a group that defends and empowers advocates for Palestine in Europe through legal means, to produce a report that demonstrates how academic freedom and freedom of speech on Israel-Palestine have been subject to significant and “unfounded” restrictions due to universities’ widespread adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism.

BRISMES stated that as scholars of the Middle East, “we seek to clarify that the settler-colonial framework, including concrete calls for the decolonization of Palestine, are neither antisemitic, nor supportive of terrorism.” 

BRISMES fully supports the arguments that “Israel-Palestine should be understood as a context of settler colonialism.” It states, “Settler colonial studies form part of an established and well-respected body of knowledge in several disciplines and provide analytical tools for understanding the historical development and/or contemporary policies of numerous countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, Argentina, and South Africa, yet has been portrayed as illegitimate when applied to the context of Israel-Palestine. Critics of settler colonialism in relation to Israel-Palestine claim that the absence of a colonial metropole means that Israel cannot be a settler colony, and that the presence of indigenous Jewish communities in historic Palestine prior to the establishment of the State of Israel mean that Jewish Israelis cannot be settlers, both of which are misunderstandings or mischaracterizations of the claims of settler colonial scholarship.”

BRISMES argues that “The efforts to cast settler colonial claims as antisemitic have emerged at a time when antisemitism, Islamophobia, and anti-Palestinian racism are on the rise across the UK, Europe, North America, and elsewhere. Manifestations of hate towards Jews, Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians must be challenged wherever they appear, not least in higher education institutions. However, the labelling of certain ideas and concepts, including but not limited to, settler colonialism, decolonization, and anti-colonialism, as antisemitic or support for terrorism, constitutes a very dangerous narrowing of the parameters of what constitutes politically-acceptable speech, and repeatedly morphs into Islamophobia.” 

Furthermore, BRISMES “warns against the assumption that scholars of the MENA region or students and activists who voice their opposition to the Israeli regime in terms of settler-colonialism, decolonization and anticolonialism are motivated by antisemitism rather than an understanding of historical developments in the region.” 

To support its claims, BRISMES cites a report by the Rutgers Center for Security, Race and Rights (RCSRR), rejecting the claims that “when Muslims and Arabs in America defend the rights of Palestinians or criticize Israeli state policy, they are often baselessly presumed to be motivated by a hatred for Jews.” For RCSRR, “such presumptions are informed by Islamophobia.” 

BRISMES has become a pro-Palestine activist group. Moreover, their anti-Israel activist academics reject efforts to fight antisemitism. They portray such efforts as Islamophobic. To diffuse the severity of the global wave of antisemitic attacks, these campaigners merge Islamophobia with antisemitism into one category. Britain should also be worried as they harm British higher education as well.

REFERENCES

https://www.brismes.ac.uk/news/joint-event-academic-repression-in-israel

Joint Event | Academic Repression in Israel

• Posted: 30/05/2024

Date: Thursday, 6 June 2024

Time: 19:00-20:30 UK time

Location: Online via Zoom

Free to attend and open to all, but registration is essential.

About the Event

As Israel’s criminal war in Gaza continues, with death, destruction, and starvation reaching disastrous dimensions, Palestinian and critical Jewish faculty and students in Israeli academia are facing unprecedented repression – including suspensions, dismissals and even arrest. Join colleagues from the grassroots organization Academia for Equality for a conversation on the situation in Israeli universities and colleges and the state of the struggle for academic freedom.

Speakers

• Anat Matar (Philosopher and author, The Poverty of Ethics)
• Sawsan Zaher (Human rights lawyer and legal adviser, Emergency Coalition in Arab Society)
• Avi-ram Tzoreff (Historian, Academia for Equality’s Solidarity Team)
• Khaled Furani (Anthropologist and co-editor, Inside the Leviathan: Palestinian Students in Israeli Universities)

Chair

• Nadia Abu El-Haj (Anthropologist and co-director, Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University)

---

Event organised by Academia for Equality. Co-Sponsors: BRISMES; Committee on Academic Freedom, MESA; Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia University.

==========================================================================

https://brismescampaigns.org/mission-statement/
BRISMES Campaigns stands for equality in Middle East Studies.Our Mission

We seek a more liberated Middle East Studies, a popular pedagogy that links research and theory to democratic practice, wider public and private understandings, and egalitarian politics across borders. We oppose the many ways in which Middle East Studies, on and off campus, is implicated in injustice and domination – racism, colonialism, Orientalism, misogyny, homophobia, ableism, authoritarianism, (neo)liberalism, and elitism. We believe in transnational solidarity and global justice, and support the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against the unjust regime of occupation and apartheid imposed by Israel. We will campaign on and off campus on this and other issues through organizational and cultural struggle in civil and political society.

Campaigns

Campaigns

BRISMES Campaigns promotes the grassroots, anti-racist, democratic, transnational and non-violent Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement in solidarity with the liberation struggle in Palestine. We promote the academic boycott of Israeli academic institutions, which are complicit in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. We also campaign for divestment from companies (whether financial, industrial, service-oriented) which aid and abet settler colonialism. We also campaign for sanctions to be imposed on Israel until it ceases to violate international law. More generally, BRISMES Campaigns undertakes solidarity actions to defend Palestinian voices, histories, activists, educators, and educational activities which have come under increasing attack by pro-Israeli groups and individuals in recent years.

https://www.brismes.ac.uk/news/brismes-statement-on-settler-colonialism-decolonisation-and-antisemitism

BRISMES Statement on Settler Colonialism, Decolonisation and Antisemitism

• Posted: 19/02/2024

In recent years, there have been growing movements on university campuses calling for the decolonisation of higher education institutions, through which students would be exposed to a wider range of perspectives, particularly those from and rooted in the lived experiences of people in the Global South. In many cases, universities have declared their support for such calls, incorporating “decolonising the curriculum” into university structures, learning experiences, and anti-racist vision documents and action plans.

Despite this ostensible commitment to the decolonisation of higher education, in the wake of Hamas’s October 7th violent assault and Israel’s horrific war on Gaza, BRISMES has been witnessing a worrying trend of attacks on decolonial and anticolonial scholarship and perspectives in relation to analyses of the situation in Israel-Palestine. In particular, accusations have increasingly conflated the use of ‘settler colonialism’ – as a descriptor of the policies of dispossession and displacement implemented by the Israeli state against Palestinians – with support of terrorism and/or antisemitism (for example, see here, here, and here). This has worsened an already challenging environment for speaking about Palestinian human rights on university campuses. In particular, academic freedom and freedom of speech on Israel-Palestine have been subject to significant and unfounded restrictions due to universities’ widespread adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, as demonstrated in a recent report by BRISMES and the European Legal Support Centre.

BRISMES is deeply concerned that these attacks on settler colonial, anti-colonial, and decolonial frameworks could lead to a rolling back of the progress that has been made in introducing evidence-based historical analyses emanating originally from Global South scholars, and believes that efforts to stigmatise the findings of these scholars constitute a serious threat to academic freedom and freedom of speech. Building on our extensive collective expertise as scholars of the Middle East, we seek to clarify that the settler-colonial framework, including concrete calls for the decolonisation of Palestine, are neither antisemitic, nor supportive of terrorism. In order to demonstrate that such work is in fact a well-established and respected scholarly field, an appendix accompanying this document describes in detail the arguments made by scholars who argue that Israel-Palestine should be understood as a context of settler colonialism.

Settler colonial studies form part of an established and well-respected body of knowledge in several disciplines and provide analytical tools for understanding the historical development and/or contemporary policies of numerous countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, Argentina, and South Africa, yet has been portrayed as illegitimate when applied to the context of Israel-Palestine. Critics of settler colonialism in relation to Israel-Palestine claim that the absence of a colonial metropole means that Israel cannot be a settler colony, and that the presence of indigenous Jewish communities in historic Palestine prior to the establishment of the State of Israel mean that Jewish Israelis cannot be settlers, both of which are misunderstandings or mischaracterisations of the claims of settler colonial scholarship.

In particular, in efforts to invalidate scholarship on settler colonialism, its opponents present the calls for decolonisation and anticolonialism outside of their historical context and cast them as calls to displace and/or eliminate all Jews living in Israel. This is in spite of the total absence of these racist elements in settler colonial scholarship, which is driven by a horizon of liberation, antiracism, and justice. If this misleading interpretation were to prevail, then by analogy the decades-long demand to dismantle apartheid in South Africa would have been construed as a demand to destroy South Africa and/or kill or displace all white South Africans. In contrast, a historically-informed understanding of decolonisation advocates for Palestinian rights and self-determination, and argues that this should be carried out not through processes of elimination of the settlers but through a process that revokes the privileges of the settler polity and creates a form of governance based on equality and freedom for all inhabitants.

The efforts to cast settler colonial claims as antisemitic have emerged at a time when antisemitism, Islamophobia, and anti-Palestinian racism are on the rise across the UK, Europe, North America, and elsewhere. Manifestations of hate towards Jews, Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians must be challenged wherever they appear, not least in higher education institutions. However, the labelling of certain ideas and concepts, including but not limited to, settler colonialism, decolonisation, and anti-colonialism, as antisemitic or support for terrorism, constitutes a very dangerous narrowing of the parameters of what constitutes politically-acceptable speech, and repeatedly morphs into Islamophobia. 1

BRISMES strongly warns against the assumption that scholars of the MENA region or students and activists who voice their opposition to the Israeli regime in terms of settler-colonialism, decolonisation and anticolonialism are motivated by antisemitism rather than an understanding of historical developments in the region. We see the attacks on settler colonial studies, and on decolonial and anticolonial perspectives, as part of the wider attacks on critical scholarship that we have witnessed in recent years, in particular regarding critical race theory and trans-inclusive scholarship.

In all cases, it is imperative to uphold the rights of staff and students to use concepts and theoretical frameworks rooted in the historical and lived experiences of colonised peoples and to allow the voices of those living under colonialism to be heard. Universities have a legal obligation to uphold freedom of expression for staff and students, which is paramount for academic freedom and the pursuit of knowledge. 

1 In a recent report, the Rutgers Center for Security, Race and Rights, following an analysis of US public debate on Israel-Palestine, finds that, “when Muslims and Arabs in America defend the rights of Palestinians or criticize Israeli state policy, they are often baselessly presumed to be motivated by a hatred for Jews rather than support for human rights, freedom, and consistent enforcement of international law”, arguing that such presumptions are informed by Islamophobia. Rutgers Center for Security, Race and Rights, ‘Presumptively antisemitic: Islamophobic tropes in the Israel-Palestine discourse’, November 2023

Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine–Israel Discourse

Appendix: Academic Arguments for Settler-Colonialism in Israel-Palestine 

These maps depict the growing number and geographic expansion of Jewish settlements in the area that had been Mandatory Palestine, from 67 settlements in 1917 to 1,178 settlements in 2020. It does not show Palestinian villages, of which about 500 were destroyed in the aftermath of the 1948 war. 

©Oren Yiftachel

A well-established field of scholarship has shown how colonialism operates as a mode of domination, via the extraction of material resources, exploitation and dispossession, enforced by violence and justified by racist ideologies. Settler colonialism is structured more directly by territorial conquest via mass settlement: whereby a settler population seeks to replace native peoples, ecologies and modes of relations through a combination of killing, ethnic cleansing, land dispossession, partition, transfer and cultural assimilation (see amongst others, Estes 2019, Karuka 2019, Kauanui 2008 and Wolfe 2006). In order to help educate scholars and the wider public on the framework of settler colonialism as it applies to Israel-Palestine, BRISMES has created this appendix, which lays out some of the main arguments that scholars make as to why and how Israel-Palestine should be understood as a settler colonial context.

Before Israel’s establishment in 1948, the Zionist movement described itself as a settler colonial enterprise. Theodor Herzl promised European leaders that the ‘State of the Jews’ would “form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism” (Herzl 1997). Vladimir Jabotinsky described Jewish colonists in Palestine as “alien settlers” intent on thwarting the indigenous population’s aspiration to rule themselves and their country (Jabotinsky 1923). Palestinian, Israeli and international scholars have since shown how the Zionist movement, with the support of imperial Great Britain and, later, the Israeli state, has sought to maximise the land it controls while minimising the number of Indigenous Palestinians under its sovereign authority (Abu-Lughod and Abu-Laban, 1974; Khalidi 2021; Pappe 2008; Rodinson 1973; Said 1979; Sayegh 1965; Sayigh 1979; Veracini 2013; Wolfe 2006; Zreik 2023; Zureik 1979). Settler-colonial and decolonial analyses have highlighted how the space of Mandatory Palestine has been both conceptually and physically de-Palestinianised and ‘Judaised’ (Falah, 1991; Dana and Jarbawi, 2017; Blatman 2017).

Scholars of Israel-Palestine who draw on settler colonialism as a framework have demonstrated how racial dimensions of Israeli power structures manifest themselves in basic laws, citizenship categories and modes of governance (e.g. Lentin, 2018; Rouhana and Sabbagh-Khoury, 2015; Tatour, 2019), as well as the processes through which Palestinians have been dispossessed (Amara 2013; Cohen and Gordon 2018) and the ideological formations and discourses used to justify and normalise Palestinian displacement (Perugini 2019; Shalhoub-Kevorkian 2015). Scholars have shown how Zionist settlers who immigrated first to Palestine and, after 1948, to Israel, displaced and then replaced the majority of the indigenous Palestinian population. Indeed, approximately 750,000 Arab Palestinians either fled or were expelled during the war of 1947-48 and despite UN Resolution 194 underscoring their right to return to their homes, Israel prevented them from doing so.

After 1948, the newly-created Israeli state enacted the massive confiscation of Palestinian lands (Sa’di 2013; Khamaisi 2003). By 1951, the Israeli state effectively owned 92 percent of the land within its territory, up from 13.5 percent in 1948 (Forman and Kedar 2004). Of the 370 new Jewish settlements established soon after 1948, 350 were built on or in proximity to Palestinian villages that had been destroyed (Kedar and Yiftachel 2006). Also by 1951, the 750,000 Palestinians who had become refugees in 1948 were “replaced” by a similar number of Jewish immigrants, both Holocaust survivors from Europe and Mizrahi Jews from Arab-majority countries, thus transforming the nascent state’s ethnic composition without altering its overall population size (Cohen 2002). These and other studies have argued that settler colonial elimination and replacement have constituted the foundational logics of the constitution of the State of Israel, which persist into the present (Jabary Salamanca et al. 2012).

In line with Patrick Wolfe’s (1998) argument that settler colonialism is not an event but a structure, scholars of settler colonialism have argued that the separation of the Palestinian people from their land was embedded in Israel’s laws, policies, and practices after 1948 and swiftly became part of the overarching logic of the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip and the West Bank following the 1967 war (Said 1980; see also B’Tselem 2002). They have furthermore argued that these same logics are structuring Israel’s 2023-2024 war on the Gaza Strip, which is characterised not only by the immense numbers of civilians killed but also the forced displacement of over 2 million Palestinians, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, residential homes and agricultural land. This level of violence has the explicit aim of making Gaza uninhabitable, further disconnecting its population–largely constituted of 1948 refugees–from their land, ecology and space of life. Indeed, it could be argued that the events of the recent months represent some of the most intense moments of settler colonialism and its attempt to eliminate the indigenous Palestinian population in the history of Israel-Palestine. 

Indicative Bibliography of Scholarship on Israel-Palestine and Settler-Colonialism

Abu-Lughod, Ibrahim and Baha Abu-Laban (eds) (1974) Settler Regimes in Africa and the Arab World: The Illusion of Endurance. Wilmette, IL: Medina University Press International.

Amara, Ahmad (2013) “The Negev land question: Between denial and recognition.” Journal of Palestine Studies 42(4): 27-47.

Blatman, Naama (2017) “Commuting for rights: Circular mobilities and regional identities of Palestinians in a Jewish-Israeli town.” Geoforum 78: 22-32.

Cohen, Yinon (2002) “From Haven to Heaven: Changes in Immigration Patterns to Israel,” in Levy D. and Y. Weiss (eds), Challenging Ethnic Citizenship: German and Israeli Perspectives on Immigration. New York: Berghahn Books: 36-56.

Cohen, Yinon and Neve Gordon (2018) “Israel’s biospatial politics: Territory, demography, and effective control.” Public Culture 30(2): 199-220.

Dana, Tariq and Ali Jarbawi (2017) ‘A Century of Settler Colonialism in Palestine: Zionism’s Entangled Project.’ The Brown Journal of World Affairs 24(1): 197-220.

Estes, Nick (2019) Our History is the Future: Standing Rock versus the Dakota Access Pipeline, and the Long Tradition of Indigenous Resistance. London: Verso Books.

Evri, Yuval, and Hagar Kotef (2022) ‘When Does a Native Become a Settler? (With Apologies to Zreik and Mamdani)’. Constellations 29(1): 3–18.

Falah, Ghazi (1991) ‘Israeli “Judaization” Policy in Galilee.’ Journal of Palestine Studies 20(4): 69-85.

Forman, Geremy, and Alexandre (Sandy) Kedar (2004) ‘From Arab Land to “Israel Lands”: The Legal Dispossession of the Palestinians Displaced by Israel in the Wake of 1948.’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 22(6): 809–30.

Herzl, Theodor. (1997) The Jews’ state: A critical English translation. Jason Aronson, Incorporated.

Jabary Salamanca, Omar and Mezna Qato, Kareem Rabie, Sobhi Samour (2012) “Past is Present: Settler Colonialism in Palestine,” Settler Colonial Studies 2(1): 1-8

Jabotisnky, Vladimir Ze’ev. (1923) ” The Iron Wall.”

Karuka, Manu (2019) Empire’s Tracks: Indigenous Nations, Chinese Workers and the Transcontinental Railroad. Oakland: University of California.

Kauanui, J. Kehaulani (2008) Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity. Durham: Duke University Press.

Kedar, Alexandre and Oren Yiftachel (2006) ‘Land Regime and Social Relations in Israel,’ in de Soto H. and Cheneval F. (eds), Swiss Human Rights Book, Vol. 1, Zurich: Ruffer and Rub, 2006, 129-146.

Khalidi, Rashid (2021) The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917-2017. New York: Picador.

Khamaisi, Rassem (2003) “Mechanism of land control and territorial Judaization of Israel,” in Al-Haj, Majed and Uri Ben-Eliezer (eds) In the Name of Security. Haifa: Haifa University Press: 421-449.

Lentin, Ronit (2018) Traces of Racial Exception: Racializing Israeli Settler Colonialism. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Murphy, Shannonbrooke (2012) ‘The Right to Resist Reconsidered,’ in Keane, David and Yvonne McDermott (eds) The Challenge of Human Rights: Past, Present and Future. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Pappé, Ilan (2008) ‘Zionism as Colonialism: A Comparative View of Diluted Colonialism in Asia and Africa.’ South Atlantic Quarterly 107(4): 611–33.

Perugini, Nicola (2019) ‘Settler colonial inversions: Israel’s ‘disengagement’ and the Gush Katif ‘Museum of Expulsion’ in Jerusalem,’ Settler Colonial Studies, 9(1): 41-58

Rodinson, Maxime (1973) Israel – A Colonial-Settler State, Anchor Foundation.

Rouhana, Nadim N., and Areej Sabbagh-Khoury (2015) ‘Settler-colonial citizenship: Conceptualizing the relationship between Israel and its Palestinian citizens.’ Settler Colonial Studies 5(3): 205-225.

Sa’di, Ahmad H (2013) Thorough Surveillance: The Genesis of Israeli Policies of Population Management, Surveillance and Political Control Towards the Palestinian Minority. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Said, Edward (1979) ‘Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims’. Social Text 1: 7–58.

Sayegh, Fayez (1965) Zionist Colonialism in Palestine. Beirut: Palestine Liberation Organization Research Center.

Sayigh, Rosemary (1979) Palestinians: From Peasants to Revolutionaries: A People’s History. London: Zed Books.

Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Nadera (2015) Security Theology, Surveillance and the Politics of Fear. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tatour, Lana (2019) ‘Citizenship as Domination: Settler Colonialism and the Making of Palestinian Citizenship in Israel.’ The Arab Studies Journal 27(2): 8–39.

Veracini, Lorenzo (2013) ‘The Other Shift: Settler Colonialism, Israel, and the Occupation.’ Journal of Palestine Studies 42(2): 26–42.

Wolfe, Patrick (1999) Settler Colonialism and the Transformation of Anthropology: The Politics and Poetics of an Ethnographic Event. London: Cassell.

Wolfe, Patrick (2006) ‘Settler Colonialism and the Elimination of the Native.’ Journal of Genocide Research 8(4): 387–409.

Zreik, Raef (2016) ‘When Does a Settler Become a Native?’ Constellations 23(3): 351–64.

Zreik, Raef (2023) “What’s the Problem with the Jewish State?” in Sa’di, Ahmad H and Nur Masalha (eds) Decolonizing the Study of Palestine: Indigenous Perspectives and Settler Colonialism after Elia Zureik: 73.

Zureik, Elia T (1979) The Palestinians in Israel: A Study in Internal Colonialism. London: Routledge.

============================================

The Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR)

Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine–Israel Discourse

Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine–Israel Discourse

The struggle for Palestinian rights has never been more important – or more dire.

The conflict has reached a turning point, as the year 2023 became the deadliest for Palestinians on record. In the Gaza Strip, Palestinians face an existential crisis. Leading genocide scholars, experts in international law, and respected human rights organizations have warned that the world is witnessing a genocide, unchecked war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity by the state of Israel.

Simultaneously, the demonization of pro-Palestinian voices in the United States has risen to a fever pitch – particularly when those voices are Muslim and Arab. Zionists and Islamophobes attack critics of Israel’s policies and practices by conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism and seek to censor discussions within the context of the 56-year-long illegal Israeli occupation and the Nakba. Instead, antisemitism is weaponized to silence and discredit advocates of Palestinian human rights.

Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine-Israel Discourse examines an understudied and little-understood aspect of Palestine-Israel discourse: how Islamophobia works to fuel and sustain spurious allegations of antisemitism used by the Israel Lobby and its Zionist supporters to shame and silence critics of Israeli ethnic cleansing and apartheid.

While people of all faiths and ethnicities understand and empathize with the historic plight of the Palestinians, nowhere is pro-Israel bias more obvious than when directed against Muslim and Arab defenders of Palestinian human rights. And mainstream media often uncritically repeats such harmful, unsubstantiated claims against Arabs and Muslims.

Three recommendations for U.S. civil society, universities, and elected officials would help all those interested in confronting and countering both Islamophobia and genuine antisemitism – while maintaining necessary support for the human rights of Palestinians:

1. Congress and the President must include the experiences and perspectives of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim American communities in foreign policy development. U.S. foreign policy on Palestine and Israel currently excludes the lived experiences, analysis, and perspectives of Arabs (especially Palestinians) and Muslims. One-sided, biased input by pro-Israeli nonprofit organizations, elected officials, and analysts predictably dehumanizes Palestinians and exempts Israel from human rights norms.
2. Universities must preserve academic freedom and free speech rights. When it comes to the topic of Palestine, students and faculty face overt hostility when they host events, conduct research, publish articles, or engage in campus activism. University administrators enable, or participate in, harassment of faculty and students. Specious administrative complaints of antisemitism coupled with malicious blacklisting by a nationwide Islamophobic network work to quash criticism of Israel.
3. The U.S. government must hold Israel accountable for violations of Palestinians’ human rights. Ongoing violations of international law by Israel – such as settlement expansion, indefinite detention, extrajudicial killings, house demolitions, and collective punishment of the population of Gaza occur unchecked because the United States consistently looks the other way. Even U.S. domestic laws are flouted in order to craft human rights exceptions for the apartheid Israeli regime.

To read Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine-Israel Discourse, click here.

22.05.24

Editorial Note

Recently, the Islamic Republic of Iran announced the Persian translation of the 2016 book The Biggest Prison on Earth by the Israeli historian Prof. Ilan Pappe.

This should come as no surprise because the Iranian regime regards Pappe, a former professor at Haifa University, as one of its legitimizers, along with Shlomo Sand, Noam Chomsky, and other bashers of Israel.  

The regime is interested in Pappe because of his “critically acclaimed investigation of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in the 1940s.” According to Iran, Pappe is a “renowned historian” who turned attention to the “annexation and occupation of Gaza and the West Bank… bringing the readers the first comprehensive critique of the Occupied Territories.” Pappe investigated the “bureaucracy of evil” and explored the “brutalizing effects of occupation, from the systematic abuse of human and civil rights, the IDF roadblocks, mass arrests, and house searches to the forced population transfer, the settlers, and the infamous wall that is rapidly turning the West Bank into an open prison.”

Pappe is a huge asset to the regime because he is “a professor with the College of Social Sciences and International Studies at the University of Exeter in the UK, director of the university’s European Centre for Palestine Studies, co-director of the Exeter Centre for Ethno-Political Studies, and political activist. He was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa (1984–2007) and chair of the Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian and Israeli Studies in Haifa (2000–2008),” as they wrote.

For the regime, the book “exposes Israeli violations in Palestine against its indigenous people.” The Israeli historian “reveals” Israel’s “ugly crimes against humanity over the years, using clear-cut evidence that indicts the settler colonial entity.” Pappe analyzed “Zionist objectives in occupied Palestine and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians” in different historical epochs. He “begins by describing Israeli preparations made several years before 1967’s Six-Day War to control large portions of Palestine without formally annexing them and thereby granting civil rights to the Palestinians living there” Instead, according to Pappe, with the imposition of Israeli rule, “the Palestinians living there were incarcerated for crimes they never committed and for offenses that were never committed, confessed, or defined.” Pappe showed that the Israelis offered an “open-air prison when the Palestinians were compliant and a maximum security prison.” 

As the Iranians stated, Pappe is one of Israel’s New Historians who “has been rewriting the history of Israel’s creation in 1948, and the corresponding expulsion or flight of 700,000 Palestinians in the same year. He has written that the expulsions were not decided on an ad hoc basis, as other historians have argued, but constituted the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, in accordance with Plan Dalet, drawn up in 1947 by Israel’s future leaders. He blames the creation of Israel for the lack of peace in the Middle East, arguing that Zionism is more dangerous than Islamic militancy, and has called for an international boycott of Israeli academics.”

Prof. Benny Morris, one the original New Historians who became disillusioned with his colleagues, devoted time to exposing their “lie industry.” He wrote “The Liar as Hero” in the New Republic in 2011 that Ilan Pappe is a sloppy and dishonest historian. Morris reviewed Pappe’s two books, The Rise and Fall of a Palestinian Dynasty: The Husaynis, 1700-1948, and The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Morris noted that, “At best, Ilan Pappe must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians; at worst, one of the most dishonest. In truth, he probably merits a place somewhere between the two.” According to Morris, Pappe’s “distortions, large and small, characterize almost every page of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.” Morris wrote that “Pappe introduced the subject, and perverted the text, for one purpose only: to blacken the image of Israel and its leaders in 1948. This is also among the purposes of The Rise and Fall of a Palestinian Dynasty and Out of the Frame.” Morris says that Pappe “often omits and ignores significant evidence, and he, too, alleges that a source tells us the opposite of what it in fact says, but he will also simply and straightforwardly falsify evidence.” And that “To the deliberate slanting of history Pappe adds a profound ignorance of basic facts. Together these sins and deficiencies render his ‘histories’ worthless as representations of the past.” Or that, “Some of Pappe’s ‘historical’ assertions are, quite obviously, politically motivated, but they are mistakes nonetheless… Suffice it to say that Pappe’s contempt for historical truth and factual accuracy is almost boundless.”

Morris stated: “In sum, Pappeis a retroactive poseur. But by the middle or late 1990s, after getting tenure, Pappe did shift gears into a full-blown radicalism, political and historiographical. By then he was advocating Israel’s elimination and the establishment in the territory of Mandatory Palestine of one state, consisting of Jews and Arabs. That it would have an Arab majority and, if democratic, be ruled by Arabs was to be assured by a mass return of Arab refugees, which Pappe also advocated, and still advocates. One of his books is dedicated to his two children, whom he hopes will live in a better ‘Palestine.’ In Out of the Frame, Pappe defines Zionism as ‘a racist and quite evil philosophy of morality and life.’ The language is fully as virulent as Hamas’s, or worse.”

Morris even mentioned how “Pappe, in the course of the second intifada in 2000-2004—when Israel was virtually at war with the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, while buses and restaurants in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa almost daily were being demolished by suicide bombers—publicly promoted an international boycott of Israel’s universities, including his own. In the name of the embattled Palestinians, Pappe called on Western academic institutions to stop joint projects and cut off research funds (‘divestment’).”

While Pappe was a pioneer of radical anti-Zionism, over time, the ranks of this group grew exponentially, as IAM frequently documented. Morris makes the same point when speaking about the integration of Israeli academics into university life in the West. “By the early 2000s, departments of political science, sociology, Hebrew literature, and cultural studies in some Israeli universities had become bulwarks of anti-Zionism, in which professing Zionists can barely achieve a toehold, let alone tenure. And the history departments and the Middle East studies departments are also far from being redoubts of Zionism. In Israeli academia today, one will find the whole political gamut, running from avowed Zionists to critics of Israeli policies to critics of Israel’s Jewishness and Israel’s existence to (a handful of) advocates of anti-Israel boycotts and divestments.”

Morris ended his piece by discussing how “In Out of the Frame, Pappe complains that Yoav Gelber had referred to him, during the University of Haifa troubles, as Israel’s “Lord Haw-Haw.” That was the name given by the British media to William Joyce, an American-born Englishman of Irish extraction who broadcast Nazi propaganda from Berlin during World War II. He was tried and hanged by the British as a traitor in 1946.” Pappe had fared much better in Great Britain. He got a plush job at the University of Exeter, which he turned into a platform of Israel bushing on steroids. 

Indeed, critics attributed the current wave of pro-Palestinian protest on campuses in the United States and Western Europe to the dominance of the “narrative” that considers Israel to be a colonial usurper in the Middle East subjugating the Palestinians. Worse, the “narrative” portrays the brutal Hamas murders as “resistance fighters.” 

Interestingly, shortly after the announcement of Pappe’s book published in Iran, Pappe, in a Facebook post on May 16, wrote that he was detained for questioning upon entering the U.S. After describing in great detail his “ordeal” at the hands of the FBI, he managed to find a silver lining in the episode: “The good news is – actions like this by the USA or European countries taken under pressure from the pro-Israeli lobby or Israel itself smell of sheer panic and desperation in reaction to Israel’s becoming very soon a pariah state with all the implications of such a status.” 

Pappe is lucky that he landed in the United States. Iran, a country where he is a literary hero, would have dealt with anyone threatening its perceived security very differently. Many academics and others have ended up kept for years in the brutal regime’s prisons. But then again, Pappe has never raised any objection to the horrific violation of humanitarian laws that Iran has committed.

REFERENCES:

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/498414/Book-by-Israeli-historian-on-occupied-territories-published-in

Book by Israeli historian on occupied territories published in Persian

May 13, 2024

TEHRAN-The Persian translation of the book “The Biggest Prison on Earth” written by the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe has hit the Iranian bookstores.

Maryam Gharagozlou and Mehdi Khanalizadeh have translated the book, which is published by Ketabestan Publications, Mehr reported.

Following his critically acclaimed investigation of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in the 1940s, renowned historian Pappe turns his attention to the annexation and occupation of Gaza and the West Bank in this book, bringing the readers the first comprehensive critique of the Occupied Territories.

Based on groundbreaking archival research, NGO records, and eyewitness accounts, Pappe’s investigation of the “bureaucracy of evil” explores the brutalizing effects of occupation, from the systematic abuse of human and civil rights, the IDF roadblocks, mass arrests, and house searches to the forced population transfer, the settlers, and the infamous wall that is rapidly turning the West Bank into an open prison. Providing a sharp contrast with life in Israel, this is a brilliantly incisive and moving portrait of daily life in the Occupied Territories.

First published in 2016, “The Biggest Prison on Earth” exposes Israeli violations in Palestine against its indigenous people. The Israeli historian reveals Israel’s ugly crimes against humanity over the years, using clear-cut evidence that indicts the settler colonial entity. Pappe comprehensively analyzes Zionist objectives in occupied Palestine and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in different historical epochs.

He begins by describing Israeli preparations made several years before 1967’s Six-Day War to control large portions of Palestine without formally annexing them and thereby granting civil rights to the Palestinians living there. Instead, with the imposition of Israeli rule, “the Palestinians living there were incarcerated for crimes they never committed and for offenses that were never committed, confessed, or defined.”

Pappe shows that the Israelis offered an “open-air prison” when the Palestinians were compliant and a “maximum security prison” when they offered any resistance. Both left them shorn of basic human rights but the latter also featured harsh punishments up to and including military attacks on civilians. 

The author cites numerous violations of international law as well as generally duplicitous behavior by Israeli leaders toward other nations and international bodies, particularly during the Oslo Accord negotiations. Moreover, according to a 2016 U.N. report, Israel’s actions toward the Gaza Strip will render life there “unsustainable” by 2020. Pappe’s conclusions won’t be welcome in all quarters but this detailed history is rigorously supported by primary sources.

The Israeli historian’s work earned the 2017 Book of Palestine Award, and it was recently translated into Arabic.

He has dedicated his book to the children of Palestine who endured killing, injury, and bullying because they live in the biggest prison on earth.

Pappé, 69, is a professor with the College of Social Sciences and International Studies at the University of Exeter in the UK, director of the university’s European Centre for Palestine Studies, co-director of the Exeter Centre for Ethno-Political Studies, and political activist. He was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa (1984–2007) and chair of the Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian and Israeli Studies in Haifa (2000–2008).

Pappé is one of Israel’s new historians who, since the release of pertinent British and Israeli government documents in the early 1980s, have been rewriting the history of Israel’s creation in 1948, and the corresponding expulsion or flight of 700,000 Palestinians in the same year. 

He has written that the expulsions were not decided on an ad hoc basis, as other historians have argued, but constituted the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, in accordance with Plan Dalet, drawn up in 1947 by Israel’s future leaders. He blames the creation of Israel for the lack of peace in the Middle East, arguing that Zionism is more dangerous than Islamic militancy, and has called for an international boycott of Israeli academics.

His work has been both supported and criticized by other historians. Before he left Israel in 2008, he had been condemned in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament; a minister of education had called for him to be sacked; his photograph had appeared in a newspaper at the center of a target; and he had received several death threats.

================================================

Ilan Pappe

16 May at 01:01

Did you know that 70 years old professors of history are threatening America’ national security?

I arrived on Monday at Detroit airport and was taken for a two hours investigation by the FBI, and my phone was taken as well.

The two men team were not abusive or rude, I should say, but their questions were really out of the world!

am I a Hamas supporter? do I regard the Israeli actions in Gaza a genocide? what is the solution to the “conflict” (seriously this what they asked!)

who are my Arab and Muslim friends in America…how long do I know them, what kind of relationship I have with them.

Is some cases I sent them to my books, and is some cases I answered laconically yes or no…(I was quite exhausted after an 8 hours flight, but this is part of the idea).

They had long phone conversation with someone, the Israelis?,

and after copying everything on my phone allowed me to enter.

I know many of you have fared far worse experience, but after France and Germany denied entry to the Rector of Glasgow university for being a Palestinian…God know what will happen next.

The good news is – actions like this by the USA or European countries taken under pressure from the pro-Israeli lobby or Israel itself smell of sheer panic and desperation in reaction to Israel’s becoming very soon a pariah state with all the implications of such a status.

=============================================

Questioned by FBI – Renowned Historian Ilan Pappé Detained in Detroit

Questioned by FBI – Renowned Historian Ilan Pappé Detained in Detroit

May 16, 2024

Professor Ilan Pappé was detained and interrogated at Detroit airport. (Design: Palestine Chronicle)

By Palestine Chronicle Staff  

Renowned Israeli historian, Professor Ilan Pappé, was detained and interrogated on Monday at Detroit airport, in the US state of Michigan. 

In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Pappé said that he was “taken for a two hours investigation by the FBI” and that his “phone was taken as well.”

“Am I a Hamas supporter? do I regard the Israeli actions in Gaza a genocide? what is the solution to the ‘conflict’ (seriously this what they asked!),” the post continued.

Pappé was also asked who were his “Arab and Muslim friends in America… how long do I know them, what kind of relationship I have with them.”

“They had long phone conversation with someone, the Israelis?, and after copying everything on my phone allowed me to enter,” the post added.

According to the anti-Zionist author and professor, this is a reflection “of sheer panic and desperation in reaction to Israel’s becoming very soon a pariah state with all the implications of such a status.”

Pappé is a professor at the University of Exeter. He was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa. 

He is the author of many books, including The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, The Modern Middle East, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples, and Ten Myths about Israel. 

Pappé is the co-editor, with Palestinian historian, Dr. Ramzy Baroud of ‘Our Vision for Liberation’. 

Pappé is also a regular contributor to the Palestine Chronicle. In one of his latest articles, entitled ‘A Wall and a Watchtower: Why is Israel Failing?’, he wrote:

“Why do so many supporters of Israel and the Israeli Jews themselves believe that this is a sustainable project in the 21st century?

“The truth is, it is not sustainable.

“The problem is that its disintegration could be a long process and a very bloody one, whose principal victims would be the Palestinians.”

For more of Pappé’s writing in the Palestine Chronicle, click here. 

==============================================

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/05/17/jwqd-m17.html

International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)

Anti-Zionist Israeli historian Ilan Pappé stopped and interrogated at Detroit airport

16 May 2024

By Patrick Martin

Internationally renowned Israeli historian Ilan Pappé was stopped by federal agents and interrogated for two hours Monday as he entered US territory at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. Pappé was visiting southeast Michigan to speak at public meetings in Detroit and two suburbs, Dearborn and Ferndale.

Agents from the Department of Homeland Security confiscated and copied the contents of his cellphone before returning it to him. They asked him detailed questions about his anti-Zionist political views and who he was in contact with in the United States, before finally admitting him to the country.

In a posting on his Facebook page, Pappé recounted some of the details of this outrageous attack on democratic rights, which gives a glimpse of the police-state methods of the US government towards those it suspects of opposition to American foreign policy. 

“The two men team were not abusive or rude, I should say, but their questions were really out of the world!” Pappé wrote.

Am I a Hamas supporter? Do I regard the Israeli actions in Gaza a genocide? What is the solution to the “conflict” (seriously this what they asked!) Who are my Arab and Muslim friends in America… how long do I know them, what kind of relationship I have with them.

In some cases I sent them to my books, and is some cases I answered laconically yes or no… (I was quite exhausted after an 8 hours flight, but this is part of the idea). They had long phone conversation with someone, the Israelis?, and after copying everything on my phone allowed me to enter. 

I know many of you have fared far worse experience, but after France and Germany denied entry to the Rector of Glasgow university for being a Palestinian… God know what will happen next.

The good news is – actions like this by the USA or European countries taken under pressure from the pro-Israeli lobby or Israel itself smell of sheer panic and desperation in reaction to Israel’s becoming very soon a pariah state with all the implications of such a status.

Pappé was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa, before moving to Britain, where he was a lecturer at Leeds University. He is now professor of Middle Eastern studies at the University of Exeter.

He has written more than 20 books on the history of Israel-Palestine, including The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, which provides a thorough examination of the Nakba, the driving out  of 700,000 Palestinians and the seizure of their land in the course of the founding of Israel in 1947-48. 

Other works include The Modern Middle East, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoplesand Ten Myths about Israel. 

Pappé gave an interview to Al Jazeera May 15 marking the 76th anniversary of the Nakba (although he prefers to refer to it, not as a catastrophe—Nakba in Arabic—but as a crime, since a catastrophe could be a natural one, but this was a crime with a perpetrator, the Zionists, and a victim, the Palestinians).

Based on his great familiarity with the events of 1948, he observed that the current attack on Gaza is “even worse” than those terrible events. “What we see now are massacres which are part of the genocidal impulse, namely to kill people in order to downsize the number of people living in Gaza,” he said. “Ethnic cleansing is a terrible crime against humanity but genocide is even worse.”

After his interrogation by the DHS, Pappé went on to address the three scheduled public meetings on the topic “Gaza in Context: Past, Present, & Future.” He spoke before large audiences which included many Arab Americans. The Detroit area has the largest population of Arab Americans in the US.

One of his many insights was a detailed explanation of the history of the Gaza Strip, established as a giant refugee camp for Palestinians pushed south by Zionist terrorism in 1948. 

The territory was originally a third larger than the present Gaza, but additional land, about 110 square kilometers, was subsequently seized by the state of Israel and handed over for settlement after a campaign by the “left” Zionist party Mapam, which wanted the land to build kibbutzes, because of its fertility.

The kibbutzes attacked on October 7 were among those built on land directly adjacent to Gaza which had been confiscated and its Palestinian population driven into Gaza. Two generations of Palestinian youth learned of the dispossession of its original inhabitants from land which remained within view.

================================================

פרופסור אילן פפה נעצר עם הגעתו לארה"ב ונחקר על עמדותיו הפוליטיות

פרופסור אילן פפה נעצר עם הגעתו לארה”ב ונחקר על עמדותיו הפוליטיות

ע״פ פפה, סוכני המחלקה לביטחון המולדת, חקרו אותו על עמדותיו לגבי החמאס והעתיקו את כל תכולת הטלפון שלו

מערכת “זו הדרך”17.05.2024

החוקר והיסטוריון פרופ’ אילן פפה נעצר ביום רביעי האחרון עם הגעתו לארה”ב ונחקר על עמדותיו הפוליטיות. כך מסר פפה ברשומה שפרסם אתמול בפייסבוק. הוא הגיע לשיקגו על מנת להשתתף בדיון אקדמי ובשדה התעופה המתינו לו שני סוכנים של המחלקה לביטחון המולדת של ארה”ב, שמנוע ממנו להמשיך בדרכו וחקרו אותו במשך שעתיים. כמו כן, העתיקו את כל תכולת הטלפון הנייד שהחזיק. 

“האם מרצה להיסטוריה בן 70 מהווה איום על הביטחון הלאומי של ארה”ב?”, כתב פפה והוסיף שבין השאלות שנשאל: “האם אתה תומך בחמאס?”, “האם אתה סבור שישראל מבצעת רצח עם ברצועת עזה?”, “מהו לדעתך הפתרון לסכסוך הישראלי-פלסטיני?”. ועוד נשאל “האם יש לך חברים ערבים או מוסלמים בארה”ב – כמה זמן אתה מכיר אותם?”. פפה סירב להשיב לחקירה הפוליטיות ורק ענה ב”כן” ו”לא”. יצוין שבשנה האחרונה נאסר כניסתו של פפה ל-29 מדינות אירופיות. 

פרופ’ פפה (יליד חיפה, 1954) לימד באוניברסיטת חיפה משנת 1984, תחילה בחוג להיסטוריה של המזרח התיכון ולאחר מכן בחוג למדע המדינה. כמו כן, הוא ייסד את המכון לחקר השלום בגבעת חביבה ועמד בראשו במשך עשור, והיה יו”ר מכון אמיל תומא לעיונים פלסטינים וישראלים בחיפה. במשך שנים רבות פעל נגד כיבוש השטחים הפלסטינים. הוצאת “ספרי נובמבר” פרסמה לפני שלוש שנים את התרגום העברי לספרו “הטיהור האתני של פלסטין”. הספר ראה אור לראשונה באנגלית בשנת 2006, ומאז תורגם ל-15 שפות.

בשנת 2007 עזב פפה את ישראל ועבר לבריטניה, שם הוא מרצה וחוקר בפקולטה להיסטוריה באוניברסיטת אקסטר ומנהל את המרכז האירופי ללימוד פלסטין. בטרם עזב את ישראל קיבל איומי רצח בטלפון ובדואר, בכנסת גינו אותו, שר החינוך קרא לפיטוריו, ותמונתו הופיעה בעיתון “ידיעות אחרונות” במרכזה של כוונת רובה. לצד התמונה פורסם טור בו נכתב: “אני לא אומר שצריך להרוג את האיש הזה, אבל אני לא אהיה מופתע אם מישהו יעשה את זה”.

עוד בנושא: https://zoha.org.il/102882

================================

https://newrepublic.com/article/85344/ilan-pappe-sloppy-dishonest-historian

Benny Morris/March 17, 2011

The Liar as Hero

The Rise and Fall of a Palestinian Dynasty: The Husaynis, 1700-1948
By Ilan Pappe
(University of California Press, 399 pp., $29.95)

The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

By Ilan Pappe
(Oneworld, 313 pp., $14.95)

I.

At best, Ilan Pappe must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians; at worst, one of the most dishonest. In truth, he probably merits a place somewhere between the two.

Here is a clear and typical example—in detail, which is where the devil resides—of Pappe’s handiwork. I take this example from The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. On February 2, 1948, a young Jewish scientist named Aharon Katzir came to see David Ben-Gurion, the chairman of the Jewish Agency Executive and the leader of the Jewish community in Palestine. Two months earlier, the General Assembly of the United Nations had recommended the partition of the country into two states. The Zionist establishment had accepted Resolution 181, but the Palestinian Arab leadership, and the surrounding Arab states, had rejected it—and Palestinian militiamen began to shoot at Jewish traffic, pedestrians, and settlements. The first Arab-Israeli war had begun.

Katzir had come to report to the man managing the Jewish war effort (Ben-Gurion also held the defense portfolio in the Jewish Agency Executive) about an experiment that he and his team in the Haganah’s “science branch” had been conducting. As was his wont, Ben-Gurion jotted down in his diary what his visitor told him. (Ben-Gurion’s diary, a major source on Israeli and Middle East history, consists almost entirely of his summaries of reports by people coming to see him; very few entries actually enlighten the reader about what Ben-Gurion thought or said.) The entry reads:

Aharon: ‘Shimshon’ [the operation’s codename], an experiment was conducted on animals. The researchers were clothed in gas masks and suit. The suit costs 20 grush, the mask about 20 grush (all must be bought immediately). The operation [or experiment] went well. No animal died, the [animals] remained dazzled [as when a car’s headlights dazzle an oncoming driver] for 24 hours. There are some 50 kilos [of the gas]. [They] were moved to Tel Aviv. The [production] equipment is being moved here. On the laboratory level, some 20 kilos can be produced per day.

This is the only accessible source that exists, to the best of my knowledge, about the meeting and the gas experiment, and it is the sole source cited by Pappe for his description of the meeting and the “Shimshon” project. But this is how Pappe gives the passage in English:

Katzir reported to Ben-Gurion: “We are experimenting with animals. Our researchers were wearing gas masks and adequate outfit. Good results. The animals did not die (they were just blinded). We can produce 20 kilos a day of this stuff.”

The translation is flecked with inaccuracies, but the outrage is in Pappe’s perversion of “dazzled,” or sunveru, to “blinded”—in Hebrew “blinded” would be uvru, the verb not used by Ben-Gurion—coupled with the willful omission of the qualifier “for 24 hours.” Pappe’s version of this text is driven by something other than linguistic and historiographical accuracy. Published in English for the English-speaking world, where animal-lovers are legion and deliberately blinding animals would be regarded as a barbaric act, the passage, as published by Pappe, cannot fail to provoke a strong aversion to Ben-Gurion and to Israel.

Such distortions, large and small, characterize almost every page of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. So I should add, to make the historical context perfectly clear, that no gas was ever used in the war of 1948 by any of the participants. Pappe never tells the reader this. Raising the subject of gas is historical irrelevance. But the paragraph will dangle in the reader’s imagination as a dark possibility, or worse, a dark reality: the Jews, gassed by the Nazis three years before, were about to gas, or were gassing, Arabs. I note also, for accuracy’s sake, that, apart from the 1917 battle for Gaza in World War I, the only people in the Middle East who have used poison gas against their enemies in the past century have been Arabs—the Egyptians in Yemen in the 1960s, the Iraqis in Kurdistan in the 1980s. So there can be no escaping the conclusion that Pappe introduced the subject, and perverted the text, for one purpose only: to blacken the image of Israel and its leaders in 1948. This is also among the purposes of The Rise and Fall of a Palestinian Dynasty and Out of the Frame.

II.
Palestinian Dynasty was a good idea. It attempts to describe the evolution and the activities of one of Palestine’s leading notable families, the Husaynis of Jerusalem, from their rise around 1700 to local and then “national” prominence, until their fall from grace and power in 1947-1948. The Husaynis over the generations were religious leaders and mayors of the holy city, and filled other posts as well, including representing the area in the Ottoman parliament. The most famous Husayni was Muhammad Hajj Amin al-Husayni, the grand mufti of Jerusalem from 1921 and the leader of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), the Palestinians’ executive political body, and thus of the Palestine Arab national movement during the crucial years between 1936 and 1948. Thereafter only one member of the clan, Faysal, the son of Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni, was to achieve real prominence and a measure of power, as the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Jerusalem affairs supremo in the 1990s. Pappe calls Faysal “the most renowned Palestinian of the end of the twentieth century.” I always thought that was Yasir Arafat.

Pappe uses the Husayni story as a vehicle to describe Palestine’s history during those two and a half centuries, spanning Ottoman and British rule and the clash with Zionism, and ending with the first Arab-Israeli war, the establishment of the state of Israel and the collapse of Palestinian society and politics. The book’s treatment of the successive periods is chronologically disproportionate: pages 23 to 91 cover the Ottoman years, from 1700 to 1875, almost two centuries; and pages 92 to 342 cover the seventy-two years of waning Ottoman rule and the British and “Zionist” years, from 1876 to 1948. In fact, there is far more source material for the later years and a relative paucity of material on the earlier period. But Pappe’s real interest lies in politics, specifically anti-British-imperial politics and anti-Zionist politics, and not in distant Ottoman-era history.

The disproportion also reflects Pappe’s worth as a historian. Let me explain. To cover the history of Palestine—a geographically small backwater in the giant Ottoman domain—and the activities of its aristocracy and their interaction with the authorities in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, one would have to spend many months in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul. There one would need to locate and pore over reports and correspondence from and about the relevant vilayets (provinces), Syria/Damascus and Beirut, and the relevant sanjaks and mutasarafliks (districts), Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre, in addition to the central government’s deliberations and decision-making about Jerusalem and its environs. Pappe, who lacks Turkish, has not consulted any Ottoman archives. There is not a single reference to any Ottoman archive, or any Turkish source, in his endnotes.

Another source for the history-especially social and economic history—of Ottoman Palestine is the archives of the local sharia courts in Jaffa and Jerusalem. These archives, to judge from the endnotes, Pappe tapped only briefly, if at all, as if ticking a box. In one endnote he thanks Dr. Mahmoud Yazbak of Haifa University, “who guided me in working on these documents in the Haram [the Temple Mount in Jerusalem].” To judge from the endnotes, Pappe was for some reason deterred from spending time in these repositories.

Indeed, almost all of Pappe’s references direct the reader to books and articles in English, Hebrew, and Arabic by other scholars, or to the memoirs of various Arab politicians, which are not the most reliable of sources. Occasionally there is a reference to an Arab or Western travelogue or genealogy, or to a diplomat’s memoir; but there is barely an allusion to documents in the relevant British, American, and Zionist/Israeli archives. When referring to the content of American consular reports about Arab riots in the 1920s, for example, Pappe invariably directs the reader to an article in Hebrew by Gideon Biger—“The American Consulate in Jerusalem and the Events of 1920-1921,” in Cathedra, September 1988—and not to the documents themselves, which are easily accessible in the United States National Archive.

Those who falsify history routinely take the path of omission. They ignore crucial facts and important pieces of evidence while cherry-picking from the documentation to prove a case. An apt illustration of this delinquency is Efraim Karsh, in Palestine Betrayed. At one point he tells us, quoting a news report from the Palestine Post, that the Palestinian Arab masses actually welcomed the UN partition resolution of November 1947, which posited the establishment of a Jewish state side by side with a Palestine Arab state, when a thousand other pieces of evidence—Haganah intelligence reports, newspapers, monitored Arab radio broadcasts, and the simple fact that Palestine’s Arabs went to war to stymie that resolution—tell us, with overwhelming persuasiveness, the exact opposite.

But Pappe is more brazen. He, too, often omits and ignores significant evidence, and he, too, alleges that a source tells us the opposite of what it in fact says, but he will also simply and straightforwardly falsify evidence. Consider his handling of the Arab anti-Jewish riots of the 1920s. Pappe writes of the “Nabi Musa” riots in April 1920: “The [British] Palin Commission … reported that the Jewish presence in the country was provoking the Arab population and was the cause of the riots.” He also quotes at length Musa Kazim al-Husayni, the clan’s leading notable at the time, to the effect that “it was not the [Arab] Hebronites who had started the riots but the Jews.” But the (never published) “Report of the Court of Inquiry [it was not a “Commission”] Convened by Order of H.E. the High Commissioner and Commander-in-Chief, Dated the 12th Day of April, 1920,” while forthrightly anti-Zionist, thereby accurately reflecting the prevailing views in the British military government that ruled Palestine until mid-1920, flatly and strikingly charged the Arabs with responsibility for the bloodshed. The team chaired by Major-General P.C. Palin wrote that “it is perfectly clear that with … few exceptions the Jews were the sufferers, and were, moreover, the victims of a peculiarly brutal and cowardly attack, the majority of the casualties being old men, women and children.” The inquiry pointed out that whereas 216 Jews were killed or injured, the British security forces and the Jews, in defending themselves or in retaliatory attacks, caused only twenty-five Arab casualties.

The bottom line of the Palin report of July 1, 1920, was that the Arabs “not entirely” unreasonably feared Jewish immigration and eventual political and economic domination, and that the Zionists had occasionally acted with “indiscretion” and political aggressiveness. At the same time, the report continued, in its complex account of the causes of the crisis, the British, too, through their “nonfulfillment” of promises, had contributed to Arab “alienation and exasperation,” as had deliberate incitement by various Arab leaders and journalists. Taken together, these were the wellsprings of the Arabs’ “panic” and rage. But it was the Arabs—the report concluded—who had resorted to murderous violence and attacked the Jews in “treacherous and cowardly” fashion. The picture painted by the Palin inquiry, despite its clear anti-Zionist bias, was far more complicated, nuanced, and balanced than that conveyed in Pappe’s “history.”

About the 1929 “Temple Mount” riots, which included two large-scale massacres of Jews, in Hebron and in Safed, Pappe writes: “The opposite camp, Zionist and British, was no less ruthless [than the Arabs]. In Jaffa a Jewish mob murdered seven Palestinians.” Actually, there were no massacres of Arabs by Jews, though a number of Arabs were killed when Jews defended themselves or retaliated after Arab violence. Pappe adds that the British “Shaw Commission,” so-called because it was chaired by Sir Walter Shaw (a former chief justice of the Straits Settlements), which investigated the riots, “upheld the basic Arab claim that Jewish provocations had caused the violent outbreak. ‘The principal cause … was twelve years of pro-Zionist [British] policy.’”

It is unclear what Pappe is quoting from. I did not find this sentence in the commission’s report. Pappe’s bibliography refers, under “Primary Sources,” simply to “The Shaw Commission.” The report? The deliberations? Memoranda by or about? Who can tell? The footnote attached to the quote, presumably to give its source, says, simply, “Ibid.” The one before it says, “Ibid., p. 103.” The one before that says, “The Shaw Commission, session 46, p. 92.” But the quoted passage does not appear on page 103 of the report. In the text of Palestinian Dynasty, Pappe states that “Shaw wrote [this] after leaving the country [Palestine].” But if it is not in the report, where did Shaw “write” it?

Actually, the thrust of the “Report of the Commission on the Palestine Disturbances of August, 1929,” which appeared in 1930, is completely contrary to what Pappe asserts (though it does list some non-lethal Jewish provocations—peaceful demonstrations, a newspaper article—as among the immediate triggers of the eruption of the Arab violence). The report states: “The fundamental cause, without which in our opinion disturbances either would not have occurred or would have been little more than a local riot, is the Arab feeling of animosity and hostility towards the Jews consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future.” As to the riots themselves, the report states: “The outbreak in Jerusalem on the 23rd of August [the start of the riots] was from the beginning an attack by Arabs on Jews for which no excuse in the form of earlier murders by Jews has been established.” The disturbances “took the form, for the most part, of a vicious attack by Arabs on Jews accompanied by wanton destruction of Jewish property…. In a few instances, Jews attacked Arabs and destroyed Arab property. These attacks, though inexcusable, were in most cases in retaliation for wrongs already committed by Arabs in the neighborhood in which the Jewish attacks occurred.”

Pappe repeatedly asserts, in order to demonstrate an Arab readiness for conciliation, that the Palestinian leadership in 1920-1922, including Hajj Amin, was “ambiguous” about Zionism and “was willing to compromise.” This is nonsense. Indeed, Hajj Amin was tried and convicted in absentia by a British court for helping to incite the murderous riots of April 1920.

To the deliberate slanting of history Pappe adds a profound ignorance of basic facts. Together these sins and deficiencies render his “histories” worthless as representations of the past, though they are important as documents in the current political and historiographic disputations about the Arab-Israeli conflict. Pappe’s grasp of the facts of World War I, for example, is weak in the extreme. He writes that the “Ottoman entry into the war was triggered by an incident in the Black Sea in December 1914.” In fact, the Ottoman Empire joined World War I with Russia’s declaration of war on Constantinople on November 1, following the bombardment of Sevastopol on October 29 by the Turkish cruiser “Yavuz Sultan Selim,” which was really the German cruiser Goeben manned by fez-wearing German sailors. Pappe tells us that Hajj Amin was commissioned as an officer in the Ottoman 46th division, at first serving as “assistant division commander to the governor of Smyrna,” thereby betraying his ignorance of the relevant Ottoman administrative and military structures (lieutenants are not “assistant division commanders”). Pappe maintains that Jamal Pasha’s Fourth Army “had failed to cross the Sinai Peninsula” in World War I—but the Turks crossed the peninsula and fought the British on the banks of the Suez Canal on February 2-4, 1915, and in their second invasion of Egypt, in August 1916, they reached Romani, just short of the canal. Pappe maintains that Allenby’s conquest of Jerusalem in December 1917 “concluded the [British] campaign in the Levant,” but of course it didn’t: Allenby’s army went on, in 1918, to conquer the rest of Palestine and Syria. Pappe notes that “the text of the Balfour Declaration remained unpublished” until February 1920, but it was published already in 1917. He refers to Raghib Nashashibi in 1923 as “a member of parliament”—what parliament?

Some of Pappe’s “historical” assertions are, quite obviously, politically motivated, but they are mistakes nonetheless. He refers to “statements made by Jewish and Zionist leaders about the need to build the ‘Third Temple.’” Husaynis often leveled that charge against the Jews, in order to incite the Muslim masses. But which important Zionist leader in the 1920s advocated the construction of a Third Temple? None whom I can name. Later Pappe reinforces this lie by remarking that “Palestinian historiography, including recent work that draws on newly revealed materials, suggests that the mufti’s concern was not baseless, and that there really was a Jewish plan to seize the entire Haram [Temple Mount].” Pappe offers no evidence for this extraordinary assertion.

Pappe repeatedly refers to “Harry Lock” of the British Mandate government secretariat in the 1920s—but the chief secretary’s name was Harry Luke. Pappe obviously encountered the name in Hebrew or Arabic and transliterated it, with no prior knowledge of Luke against which to check it: if he had consulted British documents, he would have known the correct spelling. Pappe refers to “the Hope Simpson Commission”—there was no such commission, only an investigation by an official named John HopeSimpson. He refers to “twenty-two Muslim … states” in the world in 1931, but by my count there were only about half a dozen. He refers to “the Jewish Intelligence Service”—presumably the Haganah Intelligence Service—and then adds, “whose archive has been opened to Israeli historians but not to Palestinians.” To the best of my knowledge, this is an outright lie. All public archives in Israel, including the Haganah Archive in Tel Aviv, which contains the papers of its intelligence service, are open to all researchers.

Pappe writes, regarding 1939, of “Colonial Secretary Ramsay MacDonald” when it should be Malcolm MacDonald, the official responsible for the famous White Paper of May 1939. (Ramsay MacDonald died two years earlier.) He speaks of “Rommel’s advance towards Alexandria” in “the summer of 1940,” but Rommel reached Africa only the following year. He writes that in 1947 the Haganah immigration ship Exodus “was refused entry [into Palestine] and made its way back to Germany.” Actually, the ramshackle Exodus from Europe-1947 was intercepted by British naval craft and forcibly boarded. The disabled ship was towed into Haifa harbor, where most of its passengers were transferred to a seaworthy ship and sent back to Europe, most disembarking in Hamburg. I could go on. Suffice it to say that Pappe’s contempt for historical truth and factual accuracy is almost boundless.

III.
Ilan Pappe has opted out of the Zionist dream—or as he would have it, the Zionist nightmare. About three years ago he moved from the University of Haifa, where he was a senior lecturer in the department of political science, to the University of Exeter in Britain. Out of the Frame gives us Pappe’s explanation of why he chose exile. The title apparently derives from Out of Place, his late friend Edward Said’s autobiography. But Pappe’s book, while offering some autobiographical tidbits, is really a political charge-sheet against Zionism—a polemic, not a memoir.

He tells us that he grew up in a German Jewish family transplanted to the Israeli port city of Haifa, where he was born in 1954. As a youngster he was a Zionist, passing through the routine stations of high school, army, and undergraduate studies in Israel. (He even mentions his service in the Golan Heights during the 1973 war, apparently still a source of pride.) His glissement into militant anti-Zionism began, he recalls, in 1982, at St. Antony’s College, Oxford, where he was supervised in his doctoral studies by Albert Hourani, an Anglo-Lebanese historian who in an earlier life (1945-1947) had served as a spokesman for Hajj Amin al-Husayni and the Palestinian cause.* Hourani went on to become a major historian of the Middle East, and the author of the elegant and acclaimed book A History of the Arab Peoples.

Whatever Hourani’s influence upon him, Pappe proffers another explanation for his disenchantment. He has a personal grievance. In 1982, he was chucked out of Peace Now, whose representative in Britain he says he was, because he had debated with a PLO representative in the House of Commons. (He doesn’t tell us on which side he appeared.) He was also asked by the Israeli embassy to speak at a pro-Israeli rally in northern Britain just after the Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon. He declined the invitation, he tells us, not just because of anti-Israeli sentiment but also because a few days earlier Israel’s ambassador in London, Shlomo Argov, had been shot by Arab gunmen, and Pappe was miffed that the embassy had displayed a “willingness to sacrifice me”—perhaps Arab “terrorists” would gun him down, too. The assumption that it was dangerous in those days to speak publicly on behalf of Israel, as if Arabs were regularly gunning down such speakers, is nonsense.

Armed with a Ph.D. in modern Middle East history, Pappe returned to Israel, immediately landing an academic position. His prose, at this point in Out of the Frame, becomes more opaque and convoluted, and for good reason: he wishes to project an image of himself in the 1980s as a young crusading rebel sharply critical of Israel and Zionism, valiantly battling a rock-hard Israeli establishment, including its academic establishment. Israel’s universities, he claims, were then (and are today) governed by an unremitting Zionist orthodoxy and dogmatism.

Yet Haifa University in 1984 accorded him a coveted position, and in fairly short order gave him tenure. Of this, Pappe writes: “Attaining tenure is a painful process for most young academics in Israel; it was doubly difficult for me given my views, which were already quite well known. And yet, as I noted, my positions were not yet crystallized in such a way as constituted a threat to the system, and I passed over the hurdles successfully.” He adds, somewhat contradictorily, that his “radicalism” “enhanced the university’s claim to pluralism and allowed it to boast of its openness to the world at large.” So he kept his radicalism under wraps in order to obtain tenure and he brandished it brazenly, also in order to obtain tenure. Take your pick.

The truth is more prosaic. While Pappe, as a citizen, was a clear dabbler in radical politics, he still operated within the Zionist camp to the extent that the Israeli Communist Party, to which he belonged, posited the existence of the Jewish state within the framework of a two-state solution—in line with Moscow’s position. At the same time, Pappe’s academic output was inoffensive in the extreme. He claims that his first book, Britain and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1948-51, which appeared in1988, asserts that “Britain played a major role in allowing the Zionist movement to found a state in Palestine through the ethnic cleansing of its indigenous people.” This is a misrepresentation. The book deals with British policy and, more specifically, with British-Jordanian relations—a subject that was covered much more thoroughly and insightfully, and in elegant English, by Avi Shlaim in his Collusion Across the Jordan: King Abdullah, the Zionist Movement, and the Partition of Palestine—and it says nothing at all about what Pappe today calls the “ethnic cleansing of Palestine.”

In this passage Pappe is laying claim to what he regards as early anti-Zionist laurels, to which he has no right. Nowhere in his first book is there a mention of “ethnic cleansing” or any of its equivalents. Indeed, Pappe curiously devotes less than one page of Britain and the Arab-Israeli Conflict to a sub-section titled “The Responsibility for the Creation of the Refugee Problem,” where he asserts, rather feebly and neutrally, that the British had two views on the matter: that the Jews alone were to blame, and that it was “the AHC [that was responsible] for encouraging the exodus in the cases of Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem.” Nowhere did the younger, more honest Pappe of the 1980s charge the Jews with expelling “the” Arabs of Palestine. Rather, he tellingly asserted that “the Israelis were prepared [in 1949] to admit joint responsibility with the Arab countries for the refugee problem by making a gesture and offering to repatriate some of the refugees.” Two decades later, moreover, both sides appeared to accept the refugee status quo: “The Israelis … hoped that the Arab states would resettle the refugees [in their territory], and … the Arab states … decided to exploit the conditions in the refugee camps as a political card against Israel.” Today’s Pappe would not let such outrageous truths pass his lips.

Britain and the Arab-Israeli Conflict was bland and hesitant enough (though, like Shlaim’s Collusion, it did postulate a measure of Jordanian-British-Israeli collusion in 1948) to enable Pappe to get a position in an Israeli university, where Zionist orthodoxy was still the rule and a sine qua non for obtaining a lectureship. The book made no waves, it was read by almost no one, it annoyed nobody. Pappe more or less admits as much when he observes, in his less-than-honest fashion, that the book “was written in the style of a doctoral thesis, which has a way of muting even the strongest critiques” and then claims that its publication elicited “hate letters and death threats”—another claim designed to enhance his selfportrait as a young rebel, which I find extremely difficult to believe.

In sum, Pappe is a retroactive poseur. But by the middle or late 1990s, after getting tenure, Pappe did shift gears into a full-blown radicalism, political and historiographical. By then he was advocating Israel’s elimination and the establishment in the territory of Mandatory Palestine of one state, consisting of Jews and Arabs. That it would have an Arab majority and, if democratic, be ruled by Arabs was to be assured by a mass return of Arab refugees, which Pappe also advocated, and still advocates. One of his books is dedicated to his two children, whom he hopes will live in a better “Palestine.” In Out of the Frame, Pappe defines Zionism as “a racist and quite evil philosophy of morality and life.” The language is fully as virulent as Hamas’s, or worse.

During the 1990s and early 2000s, despite his charm and his charisma as a teacher, Pappe managed to alienate the bulk of the University of Haifa’s establishment, and was for years denied promotion to associate (or full) professorship, despite a fulsome list of publications. His work may be shoddy, and it has grown shoddier with the years, and overtly propagandistic, but the denial of promotion was probably the result of political alienation and an unusual form, on his part, of uncollegiality. I have mentioned Pappe’s “one-statism.” But if truth be told, this is not what pushed the anti-Pappists to accuse him of “uncollegiality.” What drove his Haifa colleagues to distraction was that Pappe, in the course of the second intifada in 2000-2004—when Israel was virtually at war with the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, while buses and restaurants in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa almost daily were being demolished by suicide bombers—publicly promoted an international boycott of Israel’s universities, including his own. In the name of the embattled Palestinians, Pappe called on Western academic institutions to stop joint projects and cut off research funds (“divestment”), to cease contact and cooperation with Israeli academics, to reject Israelis’ submissions to journals and university presses, and so on. (The paradox in all this is blatant: Israel’s academics have for decades been at the forefront of criticism of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories and toward Israeli Arabs. Those are the people Pappe set out to hurt.)

Pappe prefers to explain somewhat differently why many of his colleagues came to loathe him. He alleges that it was the “Tantura Affair,” about which more in a moment, and not his boycott advocacy, that made him his enemies. Pappe’s aim is to paint Israel’s universities as bastions of ideological rigidity and Zionist McCarthyism, and to configure himself as their victim: a crusader for academic freedom crucified on the cross of ideological and historiographical doctrine. This is a stark misrepresentation of reality. True, from the 1950s through the 1970s, and perhaps even in the 1980s, Israel’s universities were, in the humanities and social sciences, in all that concerned the history of Israel and of Zionism, bastions of dogmatism and conformism. But such a characterization is wildly wrong about Israeli universities since the 1990s.

From the 1950s to the 1970s, the universities’ humanities faculties—and, to a lesser degree, their social science faculties—kept out or marginalized anti-Zionist sentiment and dissent. Zionism, as represented by the Labor Zionist mainstream, ruled as the necessary framework for the understanding of Middle Eastern realities, especially the conflict with the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab world. Indeed, the conflict was simply omitted from the curriculum. (This was partly driven by something non-political: the prevalent Germanic view that “current affairs” were not worthy of scholarly treatment.) And the ideological pressure was such that in the 1950s and the 1960s even Zionist historians—but of the wrong persuasion, such as Benzion Netanyahu—were denied positions. (Netanyahu ended up at Cornell, where he became a prominent historian of the Spanish Inquisition.)

But things changed by the 1990s, partly due to the impact of the works of the “New Historians” (and the “Critical Sociologists,” who gained a foothold, or more than a foothold, in Israel’s social science faculties even earlier). Even more important, probably, was the integration of Israeli academia into the intellectually open university life of the West. By the early 2000s, departments of political science, sociology, Hebrew literature, and cultural studies in some Israeli universities had become bulwarks of anti-Zionism, in which professing Zionists can barely achieve a toehold, let alone tenure. And the history departments and the Middle East studies departments are also far from being redoubts of Zionism. In Israeli academia today, one will find the whole political gamut, running from avowed Zionists to critics of Israeli policies to critics of Israel’s Jewishness and Israel’s existence to (a handful of) advocates of anti-Israel boycotts and divestments.

But Pappe prefers to portray his alienation from Haifa as rooted in his own courageous dissidence, his fight against Zionism and McCarthyism. In Out of the Frame, these are portrayed as coming to a head in the Tantura affair. In March 1998, a Haifa University student named Teddy Katz submitted a 211-page master’s thesis titled “The Exodus of Arabs from Villages at the Foot of Southern Mount Carmel in 1948.” It dealt specifically with the fate of two villages, Umm al-Zinat, on the Carmel, and Tantura, on the Mediterranean coast south of Haifa. The main focus was on Tantura. There, argued Katz, a middle-aged kibbutznik and a peace activist, the 33rd Battalion of the Alexandroni Brigade of the Haganah, the main Jewish militia that in the spring of 1948 was transformed into the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), on the morning of May 23 massacred about 250 unarmed villagers after conquering the village the night before. Katz described a systematic Nazi-style slaughter of groups of young men shot and dumped into trenches dug by other Arabs who were themselves subsequently shot, while the village’s women and children sat on a beach a few yards away.

Katz had been supervised by a Haifa University historian named Kais Firro, and had been encouraged in his research by Pappe, who served as his spiritual guide. The student had based his thesis on extensive interviews with refugees from Tantura who lived in the West Bank and in Israel, and with veterans of the Alexandroni Brigade. He had not worked in the Haganah or IDF archives, and his massacre story was based on no documentation, Israeli, British, or Arab.

The thesis was awarded a 97 by Firro, a Druze historian, and by two other professors, an Ottomanist and a social scientist—none of them experts on the 1948 war; and in June 2000, Katz was awarded an M.A. “with distinction.” But by then the trouble had already started. In January 2000, the Israeli daily Maariv published a long magazine piece based on the Katz thesis, and on fresh interviews with some of Katz’s interviewees, that in effect supported the massacre allegation. Alexandroni veterans complained, and the following month Maariv published a second piece quoting the veterans at length, in effect denying the massacre allegation. In both pieces, the veterans had denied that a massacre had occurred of the type Katz and some of his Arab interviewees alleged (though some had hinted at “dark deeds” having taken place).

Meanwhile the Alexandroni veterans hired a lawyer (a left-winger who had represented Peace Now in several cases) and sued Katz for libel. Going through Katz’s taped interviews and his thesis, the lawyer, Giora Erdinast, discovered a series of distortions, discrepancies, and outright inventions. When the court was presented with these findings, Katz broke down—some said he suffered a nervous breakdown or a minor stroke—and agreed to recant: “I did not mean to say that there had been a massacre in Tantura…. Today I say there was no massacre at Tantura.” This was in effect accepted by the court as its ruling, and Katz was ordered to publish his recantation. He never did (it was eventually published by the Alexandroni veterans). Instead he recanted his recantation and appealed to Israel’s Supreme Court. But the high court upheld the lower court’s decision.

Parallel to this process, under pressure from several professors, the University of Haifa established a committee to review Katz’s thesis and evidence. It, too, discovered distortions and discrepancies. In his thesis Katz had “quoted” passages that did not appear in his interview tapes. The university annulled the thesis, but allowed Katz to submit a revised version. In September 2002, Katz resubmitted his thesis, now expanded to 568 pages. Again, inexplicably, he was supervised by Firro. He corrected the misquotations but he remained unrepentant: the Alexandroni troops, he still claimed, had massacred dozens, perhaps hundreds, at Tantura on May 23, 1948.

The university appointed a committee of five examiners. But again it bungled the matter. Two of them were clearly not experts on 1948, and two of the others had a few years earlier published (along with a third historian) an apologetic book effectively clearing the IDF of a massacre in Lydda during the 1948 war. Three of the examiners gave the thesis less than a 75, effectively failing it. The university authorities then compromised again and awarded Katz an M.A.—but of the “non-research” variety, preventing him from pushing on to a Ph.D. within its precincts.

Both times around, Katz had produced a poor piece of work. But this did not mean that there had been no massacre in Tantura. I decided to look into the matter myself, starting with the archives. I found that there is no evidence in the available documentation to show that there was a large-scale or systematic massacre in Tantura. And this is strange, indeed unique, if such a massacre had occurred, because in the case of all the other known massacres of Arabs that occurred in 1948, there is some sort of written corroborative evidence—an IDF report; a British, American, or United Nations cable; a monitored Arab radio transmission. About some of the Israeli massacres—Deir Yassin in April 1948, Dawayima and Eilaboun in October 1948—there are multiple and detailed reports in available Israeli, British, and United Nations documentation. (In recent months the IDF archive has inexplicably and illogically re-classified much of the Deir Yassin material that was open to researchers in the early 2000s.)

Regarding Tantura, there is written evidence that there were small-scale atrocities during and perhaps after the conquest of the village, including the shooting of a handful of captured Arab snipers. And one IDF document, from June 1948, obliquely speaks about an act of “sabotage” in the village, without further explication. But no document even obliquely mentions a “massacre.” There is not a single piece of written evidence from 1948 asserting a large-scale massacre (and 250 dead would have constituted the largest massacre to have occurred in the 1948 war). There are Israeli intelligence reports about Arab radio transmissions, from June 1948, alleging that women refugees from Tantura who had reached the West Bank had reported cases of rape, robbery, and arson. But none mentioned a massacre. Moreover, oral testimony, elicited forty to fifty years after the event, about a massacre—or a denial of a massacre—during a conflict that is still ongoing and in which propaganda continues to play a large role, is not necessarily credible or dispositive, and cannot form the basis of a reliable reconstruction of events. In my view, then, a large question mark hangs over what happened in Tantura.

(In Out of the Frame, Pappe alleges about the massacre at Dawayima, in order to buttress his advocacy of the value of oral history, that “Benny Morris, an ardent positivist and empiricist … reluctantly had to rely on interviews [for lack of documentation].” This is a lie. I interviewed no one about Dawayima. Had Pappe looked at the footnotes in my The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem 1947-1949 (1988) and The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited (2004), he would have discovered that there are a fistful of documents—Israeli, British, and United Nations—giving details about the massacre at Dawayima, or at least alleging that one had taken place there. I made no mention of any interviews. But Pappe is not one to look at footnotes, documents, or archives. He already knows what happened.)

In my own inquiry into what happened at Tantura, I, too, interviewed participants from both sides—and I found all equally persuasive and credible. None alleged a large-scale massacre, but some reinforced the smattering of documentary evidence about smaller atrocities. Pappe implicitly concedes the ineluctable weakness of oral testimony about something controversial that occurred decades earlier in the course of an ongoing conflict, and so he asserts at one point in Out of the Frame that “there is also a Palestinian document, the language of which is far from vague or ambivalent. It appears in the memoirs of a Haifa notable, Muhammad Nimr al-Khatib. A few days after the battle he recorded the testimony of a Palestinian who told of summary executions of dozens of Palestinians [in Tantura].”

The problem with this passage is that it contains a number of falsehoods. No document “appears” or is quoted in the al-Khatib memoir. One may consider the memoir itself—Consequences of the Naqbah—a document, but that is not what Pappe says. In any event, the memoir was published in Damascus apparently in the early 1950s (it is undated), and was written by a Muslim Brotherhood cleric and politician from Haifa who was living in Beirut, to which he was rushed for medical treatment and convalescence after being seriously wounded in Haifa in January 1948, four months before Tantura. Thereafter he lived as an exile in Lebanon. There is no evidence that he ever returned to Palestine, and it is highly unlikely that he ever went back. It is unclear whether he invented his Tantura story, or recorded it on the basis of rumors or things he heard from a Tantura refugee (who may or may not have invented his story—in 1948 the Arab world was rife with rumors and inventions about Jewish massacres that had never occurred). The memoir does not tell us when, if at all, he met the witness from Tantura. Al-Khatib’s memoir, which is full of untruths on a variety of subjects, cannot be regarded as a reliable “document” about anything (though it contains colorful, and in part accurate, descriptions of the mass flight of Arabs from Haifa in April 1948, which al-Khatib probably heard from friends and relatives who reached Beirut). It may well have served as the origin of the tale of the Tantura massacre that re-surfaced in Damascus in the 1990s.

Since 2000, Pappe has emerged as the chief proponent of the Tantura massacre story and the main defender of Teddy Katz. In 2002, in Al-Ahram (in English, online), Pappe alleged that the University of Haifa had expelled Katz. Like much of what Pappe has written on the affair, this, too, is a lie. Now, in Out of the Frame, Pappe uses the affair to explain, and to justify, his move to England. He argues that his defense of Katz and of the massacre allegation so alienated his colleagues that they proposed his expulsion from the university.

He describes what he calls a “disciplinary hearing” in May 2002, a month after he had signed an international call for a boycott of Israel’s universities, in which Professor Yossi Ben-Artzi, a historical geographer at Haifa and one of the founders and leaders of Peace Now, accused Pappe of slandering university departments and members of the faculty and generally behaving in a “non-collegial, unethical and immoral” way, deploying “lies, bad-mouthing and impudence.” Pappe, for his part, says that he had violated “not a code of honor, but the precepts of a very inflexible ideology. I was prosecuted by those who saw themselves as the guardians of national history.” Quite characteristically, Pappe fails to tell his readers that one of his University of Haifa critics, the historian Yoav Gelber, in his 2004 book Komemiyut VeNakba, or Independence and the Naqbah, himself revealed quite a bit about Israeli atrocities in 1948-indeed, Gelber uncovered, from documents, far more than Pappe has ever done, including information about what transpired at Dawayima.

In fact, there was no “disciplinary hearing” at the University of Haifa. What happened was that Ben-Artzi lodged a complaint with the university’s disciplinary board and submitted a charge sheet against Pappe. But the board’s chairman, Professor Jacob Barnai, refused to initiate proceedings, and the matter was simply dropped. In Out of the Frame, Pappe devotes five pages to a “disciplinary hearing” that never was. It seems that the university got cold feet because Pappe, as soon as the indictment against him began to materialize, dashed off a batch of e-mails to academics abroad, who promptly wrote the university condemning the “McCarthyite persecution” of Pappe (and Katz) and “the assault on academic freedom.” Pappe relates that he received “2,100 letters of support.” He quotes at length from these letters, mostly by academics who know nothing about 1948 or about Pappe’s falsifications of history. One of the exceptions, Avi Shlaim of Oxford University (who opposes the academic boycott that Pappe advocates but is solidly in Pappe’s camp when it comes to describing current Middle Eastern realities), is quoted as writing that the charges against Pappe were “politically motivated,” and “evoked shock and horror.” In any event, what happened to Pappe in Haifa was caused not by the Katz controversy or the Tantura affair, but by his defamation of the university and of his colleagues, and by his calls for an international boycott against the backdrop of the exploding bombs of the second intifada. An offer eventually arrived from Exeter, and Pappe left for England.

IV.      
Last semester I taught at Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich. The seminar, attended by M.A. students and advanced B.A. students, focused on the 1948 war. About half the students were German, the rest from elsewhere in Europe. This past week I received one student’s end-of-semester paper, titled “Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine May 1948-January 1949.” One of the introductory paragraphs reads: “Ethnic cleansing is inhuman, brutal, and absolutely terrible. Often, a link between the Jewish Shoa [sic] and the Ethnic [sic] cleansing of Palestine is made. While the Nazis expelled and tortured the Jews during World War II, the Jews did nearly the same with the Arab [sic]. The brutality between the two situations is visible [sic].” But the student was apparently troubled by the “nearly,” because in her “Conclusion” she added: “The ethnic cleansing operations from 1948 are often compared to the happenings during the 2nd world War [sic]. In this case, the Jews were on the same Level [sic] as the Nazis.”

The paper, while also listing other works in its bibliography, was based almost exclusively on Ilan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. It is a fine indication of the measure of Pappe’s success, of his reach in polluting Middle Eastern historiography and in poisoning the minds of those who superficially dabble in it. This is unfortunate, even tragic.

In Out of the Frame, Pappe complains that Yoav Gelber had referred to him, during the University of Haifa troubles, as Israel’s “Lord Haw-Haw.” That was the name given by the British media to William Joyce, an American-born Englishman of Irish extraction who broadcast Nazi propaganda from Berlin during World War II. He was tried and hanged by the British as a traitor in 1946. I do not think Pappe has any grounds for complaint. Lord Haw-Haw would have understood and sympathized with what he is doing, and the British are treating him rather well.

*CORRECTION: 

Hourani at the time appeared to share in the racist prejudices of his age and society of origin. He wrote (a year after the Holocaust): “The abnormal position and history of the Jews has bred in them certain characteristics—suspicion, clannishness, a sense of insecurity and inferiority—which themselves in turn have become contributory causes of persecution.” Hourani seemed to be suggesting that the Jews were at least partially responsible for what the Nazis had done to them (and perhaps for what Christians and Muslims had done to Jews during the previous 1900 years)—a passage more or less echoed in Husseini’s writings a few years later.

Benny Morris is a professor of Middle Eastern history at Ben-Gurion University and the author of 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War (Yale University Press). This article originally ran in the April 7, 2011, issue of the magazine.

16.05.24

Editorial Note

Dr. Maya Wind, a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia, Canada, published her new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom.  

Wind discussed her new book with the anti-Israel media outlet Democracy Now. Wind said, “University education in the Occupied Palestinian Territories has been under siege, by the Israeli state, by the Israeli military, for decades, including in Gaza. Gazan universities have been subject to a debilitating illegal siege for over 17 years, subject to repeated aerial bombardment. And now, most recently, every single one, as you said, has been destroyed by either controlled detonation or aerial bombardment. This is very intentional. This is part of a broader project by the Israeli state to destroy Palestinian education as a means to destroy the Palestinian liberation movement.” 

She said, “What we are seeing now, especially over the last two decades, is a coalescing of Israeli university administrations with the Israeli far right, with other forces to continually foreclose and limit what is permissible to research, to debate, to speak to, to protest on Israeli campuses. And we’re seeing that really manifest for some time. But in particular, over the last five months, this repression has grown. Palestinian students were asked to evacuate their dorm rooms, given 24-hour notice. Palestinian and critical Jewish Israeli students and scholars have been summoned to disciplinary committees and have been suspended for speaking out against this genocide, for conducting research about the Nakba, which is the mass expulsion of over two-thirds of the Palestinian population that enabled the founding of the Israeli state. And so, we are seeing this is a broad project of repressing critical research and debate, which is really the bedrock of higher education. But this is disallowed in the Israeli university system.”

Wind said, “it is important to speak to how imprisonment and incarceration and detention is really a tool, a central tool, of the Israeli state to destroy the Palestinian liberation movement. And we see this particularly play out on Palestinian campuses across the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian universities are routinely raided by the Israeli military. Student activists and organizers in over 411 Palestinian student groups and associations that have been declared unlawful by the Israeli state are routinely abducted from their campus, from their homes in the middle of the night. They are subjected to torture. They are held in administrative detention without charge or trial for months. And so, what we’re really seeing is a systemic attack of the Israeli military and the Israeli military government on Palestinian higher education, and particularly on Palestinian campuses as sites of organizing for Palestinian liberation.”

She claimed, “it sort of speaks to the misconception in the Western academic community about Israeli universities. For too long, Jewish Israeli scholars have been allowed to gatekeep and to narrate to the West what their universities are, and this despite, again, over two decades of mobilization and critical research by Palestinian scholars and civil society organizations about the nature of Israeli universities and their deep embeddedness in the apparatuses of violence of the Israeli state. And so, in my book, I really take this critique seriously and did an in-depth investigation, using archival materials, observing campus protests and classrooms across Israel’s eight major public universities, speaking with Palestinian student organizers, Palestinian and Jewish Israeli faculty and students. And what I really saw and learned in the course of this research is the vast and multifaceted nature of this embeddedness with the project of the oppression of Palestinians.”

She added: “There is an important move, certainly, to resist and to conduct critical research, to protest, to insist on academic freedom on Israeli university campuses by primarily, really led by, Palestinian students and faculty, and sometimes joined by a small contingent of Jewish Israelis. But what this book speaks to is really the structure. This is a structural problem. This is about the very nature of the institutions of Israeli universities, from where they are built — they are built as land grab institutions to further Palestinian dispossession and expand Judaization, which is the continual shrinking of Palestinian land ownership and Palestinian land contiguity and the expansion of Jewish Israeli settlement and population distribution — to the ways in which these universities produce knowledge, expertise and help in the development of weapons, used against Palestinians and then sold abroad as battle-tested. And so, we’re really seeing this vast apparatus and a structural problem of universities subordinating themselves to the requirements and the needs of the Israeli state and Israeli apartheid. And that is what is at stake here… in one of the chapters of the book, I really trace the ways that knowledge production and dominant paradigms in entire disciplines of the Israeli academy have subordinated their research agendas to the requirements of the Israeli state to aid the Israeli state in differentially ruling not only Palestinian and Jewish citizens, but also Palestinian subjects under military governance. “

She continued, “And we’re seeing that play out in multiple disciplines… in archaeology, for instance, Israeli archaeology, institutes and departments are producing knowledge to aid in the dispossession of Palestinians and the expansion of Jewish settlement, using archeological research as a pretext and creating narratives that justify the Jewish — not only Jewish presence, but Jewish exclusive claims to the entirety of the land… Israeli archaeological research has been repeatedly critiqued by Palestinian scholars and others for not only violating the Fourth Geneva Convention, but also conducting unsound and unscientific research by explicitly and intentionally removing Palestinian artifacts and artifacts of the Islamic periods in order to substantiate Israeli state narratives.”

In another recent interview about her book, Wind was described as a “scholar-activist” and she stressed the importance of holding universities accountable. “What we’re witnessing today is not only a genocide, not only an attempt by Israel to erase the Palestinian people, but also [to erase] centuries of knowledge, culture [and] history central to who they are as a people,” Wind said. “Israel has always understood Palestinian education as a threat to its rule and it has targeted it at every turn.. Israeli institutions of higher education are deeply implicated in Israeli colonialism and apartheid and must be understood as settler universities… They are embedded in the infrastructure that sustains Israeli society as a settler society… Before the ’80s, in Israeli universities, Palestinian and some Jewish Israeli scholars really began to explore the histories and structures of Israeli state violence… Following government control, researchers faced harassment and violence that drove many Palestinian scholars and some of the most critical Jewish Israelis out of these Israeli academies.”

The amount of lies and fabrications that Wind is spreading is unbelievable. Wind has been a professional anti-Israel activist for many years.

In her interview, she told Democracy Now, “I myself was an active member of Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine over a decade ago. And it was really hard to organize on that campus then, and it is impossible now, with Columbia University suspending both Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. 

Indeed, she has a long history of anti-Israel activism. In 2009, the Israeli Communist Party (MAKI) published an invitation to a “Demonstration of support for conscientious objectors Maya Yechiali-Wind and Raz Bar David Varon.”  MAKI urged its followers to register and attend a demonstration to show support for the two conscientious objectors. The demonstration was held at the entrance of the Army Recruiting Office in Tel Hashomer. MAKI informed its followers that Yechiali-Wind was one of the signatories of the 2008 High school refusal to enlist (Shministim) letter.

Later in 2009, the media reported how “IDF draft dodgers speak at US colleges,” detailing how Maya Wind was one of two Israeli women who refused mandatory army service and kicked off a North American speaking tour to more than a dozen college campuses. Their tour was organized by the anti-war groups CODEPINK and Jewish Voice for Peace. Starting with the University of California, Hastings, University of Maryland, they stopped at Cornell, Columbia, New York University, Brown, Brandeis, and other schools.

In 2010, Wind was part of a group of activists in Sheikh Jarrah, media reported of a small group of young people “with no legal experience who managed to embarrass the Jerusalem police and force them to agree to a large demonstration.” The report said. “This is just another case of fighting occupation, racism and discrimination,” the group said. 

In 2010, Wind was the winner of the Palestine-Israel Journal (PIJ) essay writing contest. In her essay “The Necessity of Doubt,” she urged young people to ignore “facts.” She wrote, “Young people have a great capacity to initiate processes of change. Yet in observing my society during and after the last operation in Gaza, I felt that this capacity was not employed at all. Despite our vast potential to create change, with our energy level and tendency to question the previous generation’s values, opinions among Israeli youth regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remain sadly static. We need to channel our natural tendency in constructive directions, by questioning our perception of the conflict and nurturing the notion of doubt. Developing doubt will increase young people’s capacity to think originally and to translate our ideas into innovative actions that may change the political reality of the region. One way of nurturing constructive questioning would be to create an online ‘Israeli-Palestinian Doubt Forum.’ Doubt should be developed particularly in relation to three concepts: facts, collective identity and personal responsibility. First, it is important for my generation to question the official historical ‘facts’ that generally serve as a framework for discussion of the conflict. These ‘facts’ have been internalized and are now considered to provide the background to the debate instead of being subject to debate themselves. We don’t realize that what we assume to be ‘facts’ are frequently only our own narrative, and this greatly restricts our ability to think about the conflict openly and critically.”

In 2011 Wind organized “Israeli Apartheid Week” in New York.  At the time, she was an Israeli student at Columbia University. Israeli TV covered this event. Wind was interviewed and explained, “As soon as the occupation ends and we start respecting human rights and international law, I will stop my performances.” 

Wind is one of the scores of Israeli “peace activists” becoming academics who adopted the dominant neo-Marxist, critical theory paradigm.  As well known, the new approach disregards empirical facts to fit another paradigmatic assumption that the Palestinians are the eternal victims of Israeli aggression and brutality.  Palestinian and pro-Palestinian scholars recruit them to demonize Israel. The consequences of the hijacking of Western academia have been clear. 

REFERENCES:

https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/03/27/722608/how-israeli-universities-aid-advance-zionist-entity-settler-colonial-project

How Israeli universities aid and advance Zionist entity’s settler-colonial project

Wednesday, 27 March 2024 1:08 PM  [ Last Update: Wednesday, 27 March 2024 1:08 PM ]

By Humaira Ahad

Jabir Abu Hatim, a third-year student in agricultural sciences at the Hebrew University, has been taking anti-depressants for the last few years.

The 20-year-old was one of the very few Arabs who got admission to an Israeli university.  The university acceptance, however, proved a nightmare for him as he was not allowed to study courses of his choice.

Abu Hatim was forced to opt for subjects he had no interest in. His hardship didn’t end there.

The young Palestinian became a victim of discrimination on the campus. Shoddy and prejudiced treatment from his professors and university administration greatly impacted his psychological health, forcing him to confine himself to his room and avoid social circles.

According to a 2017 report, about half of the Arab university students accepted into Israeli universities reported racism and discrimination, and some 40 percent said racist comments came from the faculty.

Israeli universities “are a central pillar of Israel’s regime of oppression against Palestinians,” Maya Wind writes in her book Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom.

The Israeli regime was created through massacres and violent expulsion of Palestinians from their native land. The institutions created by the Zionist entity have worked to push the settler-colonial project of depopulating the land of Palestinians and bringing in outsiders.

Wind, a Jewish Israeli scholar says Israeli universities directly constrain Palestinian rights by supporting and even developing the policies of occupation and apartheid used by the Israeli regime.

According to Wind, these universities train soldiers to create target banks in Gaza.

“And they are, in fact, actually granting university course credit to reserve soldiers returning from Gaza to their classrooms,” she noted, making these universities deeply complicit in the genocide in Gaza.

Israeli universities- tools of settler colonialism 

Hebrew University, which was founded in 1918, played a significant role in establishing and promoting the Zionist identity. Built at Mount Scopus in the northeast of the occupied Jerusalem al-Quds, the university worked as a strategic outpost to occupy the historic city.

Frank Mears, one of the master designers of the Hebrew University wrote in a letter that it is the responsibility of the Zionists and the Hebrew University to build a campus atop Mount Scopus that would symbolize the “New Jerusalem upon the hill”.

“After visiting several universities in Israel (occupied territories), I found the history and campus of Hebrew University on Mount Scopus in occupied Jerusalem to be a great example of how higher education institutions became complicit in the Israeli settler-colonial project,” writes Somdeep Sen, associate professor of international development studies at Roskilde University, Denmark.

The Technion (1925) in Haifa and the Weizmann Institute (1934) in Rehovot were used to advance the Zionist plans of drawing Palestinians out of their land.

Weizmann Institute, built on the ruins of the Palestinian village Zarnuqa, was depopulated by the Givati Brigade, a Zionist militia group. The regime later rechristened the village as Rehovot.

In the lead-up to Nakbathese, “scientific and technological institutes” played a significant role in the mass exodus of Palestinians in 1948.

Haganah, the terror militia, established the ‘Science Corps” in all three universities, opening bases on all three campuses to research and refine the military capabilities” of Zionist militias.

The teaching staff and students helped in the production of arms and biological weapons. These weapons were used by the Zionist groups to massacre Palestinians.

Science Corps later merged into Israel’s ministry of war and also led to the creation of the regime’s leading weapons manufacturers, including Rafael and Israeli Aerospace Industries.

As per reports, Technion University, in cooperation with Elbit, one of Israel’s largest arms companies, implemented the apartheid wall and surveillance technology on Palestinians.

Universities as strategic Zionist outposts

By design, Israeli universities were built as strategic regional outposts for pushing Palestinians out of their ancestral homes and expanding Zionist settlements.

In the guise of expanding its campus, Hebrew University occupied Palestinian lands in Sheikh Badr or Issawiyeh and East Jerusalem.

During the Nakba, the Palestinian population of al-Khureiba was forcibly displaced by Zionist forces and the sub-district was occupied by the University of Haifa.

Ben-Gurion University (1969) was established with the sole purpose of occupying the Negev desert. The desert that stretches over an area of 14,000 kilometers in the southern regions of the occupied Palestinian territories borders Jordan in the east and the Sinai Desert in the west.

Falsely promoting the idea of development of the Negev desert through the university, the regime has been targeting the Palestinian Bedouins of the region shrinking their access to the ancestral land and extending its Zionist occupation in the area.

Ariel University, which started as a college related to Bar Ilan University, became an Israeli regime-affiliated official university in 2012. The university was formed in the occupied Palestinian villages of KIfl Hares and Marda, providing way for the establishment of settler colonies in the occupied West Bank.

The university dates back to 1978 when a colony was established in the aftermath of the Camp David agreement between Egypt and the Israeli regime.

The colony started on 1000 square meters which was grabbed from the Palestinians from Salfit City and Marda village to later seize 13.7 km. The university now comprises a college, a number of factories, hotels and residential blocs.

The borders of the colony are four times the size of its built-up area, paving the way for future settlement expansions. Ariel is the third biggest colony in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem in terms of size and number of colonists.

Aerial “transformed…Israeli public perception from an illegal and heavily militarized settlement to a suburb of Tel Aviv. The institution confers degrees as a means of expanding Israeli sovereignty and advancing the annexation of the OPT (occupied Palestinian territories),” writes Wind in her book.

Israel’s Scholasticide

The regime has not stopped using its universities for forwarding the settler colonial agenda but has been working systematically to destroy the Palestinian education system, considering it as a threat to its illegitimate existence.

Palestine’s commitment to education is a significant part of its identity. The resilience of Palestinians is showcased by the country’s incredibly high literacy rate, which stands at 97.7 percent.

“The role and power of education in an occupied society is enormous. Education posits possibilities and opens horizons. Freedom of thought contrasts sharply with the apartheid wall, the shackling checkpoints, the choking prisons,” says Dr Karma Nabulsi, a professor who coined the term “scholasticide” in 2009.

The term denotes the systematic destruction of centers of education precious to Palestinian society by the apartheid Israeli regime forces.

According to the Scholars Against the War on Palestine (SAWP) findings, Israel has bombed all of Gaza’s 11 universities since it launched its genocidal war on the besieged strip on October 7.

At least twelve libraries were also razed to the ground by Israeli airstrikes. SAWP says that this eradication fits the description of scholasticide.

On Tuesday, in a new report, Gaza’s Ministry of Education said around 5,881 Palestinian students have been killed and 9,899 others have been injured since October 7.

According to the ministry, over 5,826 students have been killed and 9,570 others injured in Gaza, while in the occupied West Bank, at least 55 students have been killed and 329 others injured.

A total of 264 teachers and school administrators are also among those killed in Gaza, while 286 government schools and 65 UN schools have also been partially or destroyed in Israeli airstrikes.

Targeting educational infrastructure

Israel’s policy of scholasticide has continued over the years. In 2009, Israel bombed Gaza’s ministry of education, destroyed the infrastructure, and demolished many schools across the besieged strip.

As per a report by the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Israeli forces and Zionist settlers launched an average of 10 attacks per month on the occupied West Bank kindergartens and school students, staff and facilities between January 2018 and June 2020.

“Over the span of 30 months, 296 attacks against education by Israeli forces or settlers and settlement private security guards took place during 235 separate incidents.”

The regime has also been targeting Palestinian intellectuals and academics in an attempt to muzzle the voice of resistance. The Israeli army has killed 94 academics, along with hundreds of teachers and thousands of students, since October 7, according to reports.

According to Euro-Med Monitor, a Geneva-based human rights group, the Israeli army has been intentionally targeting academic, scientific, and intellectual figures in the coastal territory.

One of them was Refaat al Araeer, a Palestinian poet, writer, professor, and activist, who was killed on December 7 in an Israeli airstrike in Al Shujaiya, a district in southern Gaza.

Al Araeer was a distinguished professor of world and comparative literature and also taught creative writing at the Islamic University of Gaza.

Just two days before his brutal murder, Al Araeer penned a tribute to the Palestinian resistance.

“More horrific Israeli bombardments…We could die this dawn. I wish I were a freedom fighter so I die fighting back against those invading Israeli genocidal maniacs invading my neighborhood and my city.”

Over the years, Israeli universities have been directly complicit in implementing the racist and genocidal policies of the Tel Aviv regime, which assumed the ugliest form after October 7.

Wind believes that Israeli universities are complicit in the ongoing war, marking a new stage of scholasticide. The universities are enlisting their institutes, resources, and courses for the regime’s obnoxious propaganda.

“They are crafting legal scholarship to shield Israel from accountability for its war crimes. They are training soldiers and developing weapons for the Israeli military. Every day, Israeli universities make this genocide possible,” she asserted.

==================================================

How Israeli universities are an arm of settler colonialism

How Israeli universities are an arm of settler colonialism

Maya Wind’s new book meticulously demonstrates how Israeli academic institutions were created to serve the Zionist colonization of Palestine. They continue to do so to this day while fueling Israel’s university-military-industrial complex.

BY MARCY NEWMANMARCH 2, 20241

AERIAL VIEW OF THE ROAD FROM JERUSALEM TO THE SETTLEMENT OF MA’ALE ADUMIM, WITH THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY CAMPUS ON THE LEFT, 2007. (PHOTO: ISRAEL NATIONAL PHOTO COLLECTION)

TOWERS OF IVORY AND STEEL
How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom
by Maya Wind
288 pp. Verso Press, $29.95

Little by little, state legislatures across the United States are intervening in university practices like tenure and DEI. Recently, Indiana’s House of Representatives has been trying to legislate “intellectual diversity” by mandating that scholars share a variety of perspectives that can be evaluated when they are up for review. On a national level, elite institutions have come under fire if their administration isn’t sufficiently Zionist.

Government encroaching on the sacred cow of academic freedom is precisely the way the Israeli government intervenes in the lives of faculty and students. The difference is that, in Israel, such interference is baked into the system. That’s why Maya Wind’s Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom is a critical tool for anyone affiliated with academic life — students, faculty, or staff. It is also a text that people involved in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement will find essential: its systematic analysis, history, and solid data are the ammunition we need to combat those who mistakenly assume that boycotting Israeli academic institutions undermines academic freedom.

Wind’s book is structured in two parts — complicity and repression. It opens and concludes with two brilliant essays by Nadia Abu El-Haj and Robin D. G. Kelley. Wind’s first section lays out the creation of Israeli academic institutions as foundations for the militarized settler colonial state while the second half covers how those institutions implement apartheid and suppress Palestinian students and faculty. From the outset, Wind is refreshingly unequivocal: “Israeli universities are not independent of the Israeli security state but, rather, serve as an extension of its violence” (p. 13). Throughout her book, readers glean insight into how Israeli universities create the knowledge necessary to rationalize and legalize Israel’s apartheid regime.

The compiled evidence in Wind’s powerful book includes a variety of materials that are accessible to an Ashkenazi Israeli like Wind, albeit one whose struggle against Zionism began when she was a teenager, including her refusal to serve in Israel’s army. Relying upon research produced by Palestinian scholars and activists, coupled with documents from Israeli state and military archives, Wind reveals precisely how Israeli universities are complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights inside and outside academia.

The university and the colony

Grounding the role of Israeli universities in settler colonialism, Wind illustrates that “before even the founding of Israel, the Zionist movement founded three universities, which were explicitly to serve the movement’s territorial objectives in Palestine.” (p. 23) 

The Hebrew University (1918) was designed to be a “strategic outpost for the Zionist movement and to stake a symbolic political claim to Jerusalem,” while the Technion (1925) and the Weizmann Institute (1934) were “established to advance the scientific and technological development of Israel” (p. 23). 

Each institution participated in the Nakba by hosting the Haganah’s “Science Corps, which opened bases on all three campuses to research and refine military capabilities” (p. 23). Faculty and students participated in the production of arms and biological weapons on their campuses, serving Zionist militias that would expel and massacre Palestinians. Science Corps was later incorporated into the Ministry of Defense and led to the creation of Israel’s leading weapons manufacturers, such as Rafael and Israeli Aerospace Industries — a consequence of the commingling of academia and the state. As Wind explains, “The Israeli state’s military industries and its universities have always been co-constituted. Universities have birthed, funded, and advanced their scientific research through the Israeli security state and Israeli weapons corporations.” (p. 105)

While one arm of Israeli academia has certainly been fixated on building its arsenal, its other arm has centered on advancing its demographic and territorial expansionist project: “Their campuses, research, and architectural and planning expertise have been committed toward the state’s territorial and demographic project.” (p. 60) In other words, Israeli universities are part and parcel of the Judaization process. Whether it’s occupying lands in Sheikh Badr or Issawiyeh for Hebrew University’s West and East Jerusalem campuses, all universities in Israel have annexed Palestinian land. Police outposts in university neighborhoods coordinate with campus security, “made up of former Israeli combat soldiers, many of whom still serve in combat reserve units” and police Palestinians on and off campus. (p. 148) It’s not too far-fetched to see the parallels between urban American universities and their role in the gentrification and policing of inner-city communities. 

But Israeli universities are not only fixated on annexation near the Green Line. The University of Haifa “was designed to further Israel’s regional demographic project” (p. 71) on the land of al-Khureiba. Its “departments of urban planning and geography have contributed their expertise to assess, improve, and design ‘Judaization’ policies.” (p. 72) The scholarly output of its faculty has contributed to policies supporting the Ministry of Defense that “construct scholarly justifications for the expulsion, containment, and discrimination of Palestinian citizens, alongside exclusive and increased investment in Jewish settlements in the Galilee.” (p. 73) 

Similarly, “Ben-Gurion University was established in 1969 with the explicit goal to ‘develop the Negev’ and, as the Zionist adage puts it, ‘make the desert bloom.’” (p. 76) As in the Galilee, Israel worked to contain the Palestinian Bedouin population by shrinking access to their land and re-settling it with its lesser desired Jewish people — initially, Arab and Indian — to the Naqab desert.

Israel’s most recent university came into existence in exactly the same manner as those that came before it — on stolen land from Palestinian villages like Kifl Hares and Marda. As Wind highlights, Ariel University’s foundation has the exact same agenda as its counterparts. Indeed, Ariel is seen as a progenitor for solidifying the annexation of much of the West Bank. It “transformed…Israeli public perception from an illegal and heavily militarized settlement into a suburb of Tel Aviv.” (p. 81) The university and the settlement are mutually reinforcing: “The institution confers degrees as a means of expanding Israeli sovereignty and advancing the annexation of the OPT.” (p. 84)

The university-military-industrial complex

Wind does an excellent job of demonstrating how institutions were created to serve Zionist aims, but it’s especially intriguing to read about the ways in which a wide variety of academic disciplines participate in the creation of facts on the ground for the Israeli state: archaeology, law, philosophy, Middle East studies, history, sociology, architecture, anthropology, politics and government, cultural studies, and specialty programs that fuse military and academic work with the high tech sector. Using evidence from each discipline, Wind illustrates the historical and ongoing use of how academia works to displace and disrupt Palestinian lives. 

In some fields, like Middle East studies, the revolving door for employees between the state, the corporation, and the university enables the development of its university-military-industrial complex: “This entanglement of university, military, and state expertise shaped the discipline in its early years. Many of the founding Israeli Middle East studies scholars moved between or held parallel roles in academia and the security establishment or were otherwise bound by loyalty and secrecy commitments to state apparatuses.” (p. 49) Of the various contributions such intermixing facilitated was Tel Aviv University’s faculty preventing the return of Palestinian refugees after the passage of UN Resolution 194.

Collusion between the state and academia plays out today in the creation of programs such as Hebrew University’s Havatzalot intelligence program. The university was required to make concessions to host the program, including “far-reaching Israeli military intervention in the program’s content, structure, employees, and infrastructure on campus.” (p. 53) Palestinian students protested this program, including screening a film documenting what it felt like to encounter Havatzalot students in their classrooms; their actions garnered reprimands — including calls for criminal investigations from the Knesset. These actions ring true as we witness Congress’s overstepping by investigating university campus responses to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. 

Repressing Palestinian students

Importantly, the treatment of Palestinian students takes up a critical portion of Wind’s book, especially the education sector more broadly, as it affects Palestinian citizens of Israel and their teachers, both of whom have undergone decades of surveillance and discrimination. Even secondary education in Israel has largely been the purview of the security state. Wind shares that “as recently as 2020, the director general of the Ministry of Education met with the Shin Bet to discuss screening Palestinian citizen teachers for ‘radicalism.’” (p. 137) 

Acceptance into Israeli universities requires surmounting various hurdles, including having matriculated at underfunded schools, passing psychometric exams in addition to quotas for programs like medicine, and the rote racism applied to citizens who aren’t Jewish. For those who make it through these hoops and enroll in an Israeli university, there are daily barriers to contend with, from being accepted into student housing to facing harassment on campus. When they attempt to challenge these policies, Israeli universities never side with their Palestinian students: “What remains unaddressed and unspeakable for university administrations is their alignment and collaboration with the Israeli regime of discriminatory policies.” In fact, on an Israeli campus, Wind tells us, “Palestinian identity itself has always been conceived of as a ‘security threat.’” (p. 146)

Enabling suppression of Palestinian student expression, especially those who engage in campus activism, is Im Tirtzu, an organization affiliated with the Likud that seeks to “monitor ‘leftist’ Jewish faculty and intimidate Palestinian student groups,” maintaining branches on all Israeli university campuses. (p. 117) Faculty are not immune to such surveillance if their research and teaching threaten the state; Im Tirtzu’s informing led to the expulsion of political scientists Haim Yacobi and Neve Gordon from Ben-Gurion University. Of course, the work of Ilan Pappé and his student, Theodore Katz, at the University of Haifa are two additional notorious examples discussed by Wind.

Wind also covers Palestinian university education more broadly, including Israeli interference with the creation and running of universities in the West Bank and Gaza. Monitoring student activism on campuses in the West Bank has often led to violent military repression — monitoring that is enabled by the knowledge and weapons produced by Israel’s university-military-industrial complex. Such oppression is directly tied to the university-to-prison pipeline that many Palestinians endure at the hands of Israel’s apartheid regime. 

According to Wind’s research, “no Israeli university president or senior administrator has offered to intervene” on behalf of Palestinian faculty or students facing Israeli military invasions of their campuses. Indeed, “Tel Aviv University president even called in 1986 for Birzeit [University] to be closed by the Israeli military government.” (p. 166) As Wind meticulously chronicles, there is a deafening silence within the halls of Israeli academia to any violation of a Palestinian’s right to education. That alone should be a call to arms for joining the academic boycott.

These instances and histories, which are also very much in the present reality of Israeli academia, should be reason enough for academics to join the boycott movement as individuals and as members of professional organizations. Wind’s book is crystal clear: “Israeli universities continue not only to actively participate in the violence of the Israeli state against Palestinians but also to contribute their resources, research, and scholarship to maintain, defend, and justify this oppression.” (p. 178)

======================================================

https://www.newarab.com/features/how-israeli-universities-undermine-palestinian-freedom

Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli universities undermine Palestinian freedom

Book Club

Rebecca Ruth Gould

24 January, 2024

Book Club: Drawing on Hebrew sources, Maya Wind shatters the myth of liberal expression in Israeli universities, revealing instead how they prop up apartheid.

Maya Wind show how the Israeli academy acts as a pillar for Israeli occupation and apartheid, whilst also cracking down on pro-Palestinian voices [Verso Books]

Often it is claimed that Israeli universities are the last bastions of academic freedom in an increasingly oppressive state.

Yet a growing number of critical scholars — Maya Wind first among them — have shown us that the freedom that is claimed to flourish in Israeli universities is only available for supporters of the Israeli state.

Wind’s new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom, entered production shortly before Israel’s latest onslaught in Gaza began in October 2023.

“Wind shows us how the university has advanced Israel’s demographic project of appropriating Palestinian land and replacing Palestinian inhabitants between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea with Israeli settlers”

Drawing heavily on Hebrew sources that have not been discussed in the English-language debate around Israel and Palestine, Wind documents a long history of collaboration by Israeli academic institutions in the occupation of Palestine and denial of Palestinian rights.

Wind documents, in painstaking detail how, from the beginning of the founding of the state of Israel in 1948 — if not earlier — Israeli universities have been designed as “regionally strategic outposts for the Israeli state’s territorial and demographic project.”

The locations, research focus, and academic hierarchies of Israeli universities all reflect this broader aim.

The occupation of knowledge

First and foremost among Israeli academia’s “regionally strategic outposts” is the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which was deliberately located in 1925 in “a remote enclave among Palestinian villages.”

As the Zionist expansion project grew, so too did the campus of Hebrew University. In more recent years, the university has been heavily involved in consolidating Israel’s illegal hold over East Jerusalem.

Wind documents how the administrators and staff of Hebrew University profited from the Nakba and later displacements of Palestinians from East Jerusalem throughout the 1960s and into the present.

As soon as Palestinians were expelled from Jerusalem in 1948, Israel’s National Library and Hebrew University embarked on a project to loot books from Palestinian homes and libraries.

As part of the Oriental Division of the National Library, these looted books currently form the core of the Middle Eastern studies collection at Hebrew University. The story of this criminal appropriation is also told by Benny Brunner and Arjan El Fassed, in their documentary The Great Book Robbery, which aired on Al Jazeera in 2012.

No Israeli university has managed to evade complicity in the occupation. Wind takes us through the history of Israel’s major public universities, including the University of Haifa, Tel Aviv University, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, the Technion in Haifa, the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot, Bar-Ilan University, Ariel University, and Hebrew University.

The only universities she does not mention are Reichman University, Israel’s only private university, and the Open University of Israel.

In each case, Wind shows us how the university has advanced Israel’s demographic project of appropriating Palestinian land and replacing Palestinian inhabitants between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea with Israeli settlers.

As Wind explains, drawing on the scholarship of Nadia Abu El-Haj, the aim has consistently been to “create facts on the ground” that make Israel’s demographic engineering and violations of international law much more difficult to reverse.

The incorporation of Ariel University into mainstream Israeli academia illustrates how effectively Israel has created irreversible “facts on the ground.”

Originally established as a college in 1982 under the auspices of Bar-Ilan University of the Negev, Ariel was named after an existing Israeli settlement that was strategically located to disrupt Palestinian territorial contiguity.

Wind documents the process through which Ariel University came to be officially recognised and treated as a legitimate university within Israel, notwithstanding its location in the occupied West Bank.

There was a brief campaign within Israel to prevent Ariel University from becoming accredited but, as Wind notes, this initiative lost its momentum once it became evident that the groundswell of international opposition that Israeli academics feared would result from Ariel’s accreditation never materialised.

“Wind’s timely expose of the struggle for power over Palestinian rights, Palestinian land, and ultimately over Palestinian lives that is currently taking place in Israeli universities will serve as a guide to everyone responding to the call for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel”

In March 2021, over 500 academics signed an open letter calling on the European Commission to ensure that EU funds were not used to support Israeli research activities in the occupied West Bank.

And yet, only seven months later, the European Commission concluded formal negotiations with Israel that resulted in it becoming an associated country, a status that gives researchers based in Israeli universities access to prestigious and lucrative funding from the European Research Council.

Unfortunately, there is no sign that during these negotiations the European Commission raised the concerns voiced by the international scholarly community about Ariel University, whose very location is in violation of international law, or that the illegal activities of any other Israeli university were mentioned as a potential barrier to Israeli participation in EU funding schemes.

Exporting the Israeli psyche

Meanwhile, in the US, a ban that prohibited US taxpayer funding of academic research conducted in Israel’s illegal West Bank settlements, including Ariel University, was lifted in 2020.

The Biden administration gradually reinstated the ban but decided not to adopt the pre-Trump era policy of describing Israeli settlements in the West Bank as illegal under international law.

A few months before the ban was lifted, Ariel University conferred an honorary fellowship on the Republican governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, a politician who has led the way in banning books promoting awareness of the US’s racist past, as well as in banning chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine across Florida university campuses.

The role that DeSantis has played in undermining academic freedom in Florida universities demonstrates that the tendency to look the other way while Israel violates its international obligations and oppresses Palestinians also affects academic freedom in North American and European universities.

The special status accorded by Western powers to Israeli universities makes Wind’s documentation of Israeli academia’s complicity in the denial of Palestinian freedom all the more urgent. 

The book includes a preface from Nadia Abu El-Haj and an afterword from Robin D.G. Kelley that situates Wind’s project in mid-2023, just before the Gaza genocide.

In his caustic remarks, Kelley reminds us, not only why we must boycott Israeli universities and other academic institutions, but also why the struggle against Israeli apartheid in academic spaces matters for everyone.

As Kelley points out, although “universities are not necessarily bastions of democracy, equity, or inclusion,” they are “sites of power.”

Even those of us who doubt that universities matter in the broader struggle for collective liberation would do well to remember that “what appears to be a fight to secure intellectual freedom within the academy is fundamentally a struggle for power.”

Wind’s timely expose of the struggle for power over Palestinian rights, Palestinian land, and ultimately over Palestinian lives that is currently taking place in Israeli universities will serve as a guide to everyone responding to the call for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel.

Initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2004, two decades of Israeli apartheid and an ongoing genocide have shown us that boycotting Israeli universities is an ethical as well as a strategic imperative.

Rebecca Ruth Gould is a Distinguished Professor of Comparative Poetics and Global Politics, at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. She is the author of numerous works at the intersection of aesthetics and politics, including Erasing Palestine (2023), Writers and Rebels (2016) and The Persian Prison Poem (2021). With Malaka Shwaikh, she is the author of Prison Hunger Strikes in Palestine (2023). Her articles have appeared in the London Review of Books, Middle East Eye, and World Policy Journal and her writing has been translated into eleven languages

=========================================

https://www.democracynow.org/2024/3/15/maya_wind_towers_of_ivory_and

“Towers of Ivory and Steel”: Jewish Scholar Says Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom

MARCH 15, 2024Watch Full Show

Israeli scholar Maya Wind’s new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom, documents how Israeli universities directly constrain Palestinian rights by supporting and even developing the policies of occupation and apartheid used by the Israeli state. “In the West, Israeli universities are considered bastions of pluralism and democracy. But in fact … they are a central pillar of Israel’s regime of oppression against Palestinians,” says Wind, who also discusses Israel’s “scholasticide, [or] the intentional destruction of Palestinian education,” and the movement of conscientious objectors to Israel’s mandatory conscription, in which she took part when she refused to enlist in the army at age 18 and served 40 days in a military prison.

GUESTS

• Maya Windpostdoctoral fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia.
• Nadera Shalhoub-KevorkianPalestinian author and academic.

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! I’m Amy Goodman.

We are looking now at how the attack on Palestinian rights comes not just from the Israeli military, but, our guest says, an Israeli author — but from Israeli universities, as well. That’s according to a new book called Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom. It documents how, quote, “Academic disciplines, degree programs, campus infrastructure, and research laboratories all service Israeli occupation and apartheid,” it says, “while universities violate the rights of Palestinians to education, stifle critical scholarship, and violently repress student dissent,” unquote.

The book’s author is joining us now. She is Maya Wind, postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia. Maya Wind is a Jewish Israeli scholar who grew up in Jerusalem. When she was 18, she refused to enlist in the army, served 40 days in a military prison.

We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Maya Wind. If you can respond to what’s happening right now to professor Shalhoub-Kevorkian, her suspension by Hebrew University, and how you see it in a larger context?

MAYA WIND: Yeah. Thank you for having me, Amy.

And let me really start by saying that I’m one of the countless young scholars who have learned so much from professor Shalhoub-Kevorkian’s uncompromising research and analysis. And it is truly a travesty that Hebrew University has not only been attempting to silence her for years, but is now effectively expelling her for exposing Jewish Israelis to uncomfortable truths.

And I think this really speaks to the larger problem, which is that in the West, Israeli universities are considered bastions of pluralism and democracy, but, in fact, Palestinian faculty, scholars, students, activists have for over two decades contended that they are a central pillar of Israel’s regime of oppression against Palestinians. So, PACBI, which is the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, issued a call back in 2004 to boycott Israeli universities on the basis of this complicity. And as my new book shows, Israeli universities are indeed deeply, deeply implicated in the violation of Palestinian rights.

And as you began in the opening segment, it is important to note that Israel has destroyed every single Palestinian university in the Gaza Strip. So it is not only committing genocide, but also what Karma Nabulsi and other Palestinian intellectuals have long called scholasticide, the intentional destruction of Palestinian education. And this genocide is not only enabled by the rise of the far right or overzealous military leaders, it is, in fact, central — it is part of a project, of an over 75-year project, of the Zionist movement and the Israeli state to eliminate and replace Palestinians with Jewish Israelis. So, genocide is structural to the Israeli state and is sustained by its most liberal institutions, including its universities.

And just now, it is not only that Israeli universities sustain apartheid and violence against Palestinians for decades, but they are currently participating in this genocide. Hebrew University, among others, are training intelligence soldiers to create target banks in Gaza. They are producing knowledge for the state, whether it’s Hezbollah, which is state propaganda, or legal scholarship to help thwart attempts to hold Israel accountable for its war crimes, such as the case brought to the ICJ by South Africa. And they are, in fact, actually granting university course credit to reserve soldiers returning from Gaza to their classrooms. So, Israeli universities are deeply complicit in this genocide.

AMY GOODMAN: Maya Wind, you refused to serve in the Israeli military back 15 years ago, and you were imprisoned for that. Why then? And how does that inform what you do today?

MAYA WIND: So, yes, I was part of a small movement resisting the draft, a movement that unfortunately has not grown in the 15 years since. And this is one of the reasons, one of the many reasons, that it is absolutely essential for people, especially in the United States, which is fully enabling this genocide, to join the movement to Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, and particularly to participate in the academic boycott and sever ties from — of our own universities and our own institutions from Israeli universities, which are implicated in the violation of Palestinian rights and now in genocide, precisely because we need the intervention of international civil society to hold Israelis accountable for these crimes.

AMY GOODMAN: Let me bring back in professor Shalhoub-Kevorkian. What does it mean to have Jewish scholars and students like Maya Wind to be joining with you, speaking up in your behalf to challenge your suspension?

NADERA SHALHOUB-KEVORKIAN: Yeah, well, I think that Maya’s book is a very important book, and those voices are extremely important to really challenge the system and that system of oppression and of the genocidal process. Amy, you know, in class, I do have students, Jewish — mostly Jewish, actually — and Palestinians. I am teaching for years in the Department of Criminology, where lots of our students are serving in different places — the army, the police and so on. The fact that the whole academic space is being turned — and I think teaching and talking and discussing and working and agreeing and disagreeing is very important, is very healthy, is a space to discuss. And this is why it’s not anti-Jewish behavior, saying no to the genocide. It’s not antisemitism to say no to genocide, because my Jewish students are — like Maya and like many others, are really with me in the same path.

What we’re saying here is that — and it’s very important, because it’s with the voices of dissent from around the world, from different — from South Africa, my colleagues to the U.S. and to the U.K. These voices are helping us really explain, number one, that this situation, that the fact that people can be threatened because of their — they can’t speak up, and they can’t talk about abuses and atrocities, should not continue, that the ongoing genocide — and we should call to stop this ongoing genocide, against any people, not only my people. But I’m saying it, that I would — as I was talking about the Rohingya and in Sudan and in other places, against apartheid, against ethnic cleansing. And I think that working together as an anti-oppressive scholars and groups, Jews, Palestinians, Blacks, Native scholars and so on, is the right way. Choosing to punish me and to punish the students is really very problematic, dangerous, and really threatens [inaudible] —

AMY GOODMAN: Professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, I want to thank you for being with us, as well as Maya Wind, author of Towers of Ivory and Steel. I’m Amy Goodman. Thanks so much for joining us.

========================================================

https://www.democracynow.org/2024/3/15/maya_wind_part_2

Maya Wind: Destruction of Gaza’s Universities Part of Broader Israeli Project to Destroy Palestinian Liberation

Web ExclusiveMARCH 15, 2024

Israeli scholar Maya Wind joins us for Part 2 of her interview about her new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom. She discusses Israel’s destruction of Gaza’s universities; the coalescing of Israeli university administrations with the Israeli far right; the move to repress Palestinian organizing on U.S. campuses, including of groups like Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace; and how archaeology, law, Middle East studies and other forms of knowledge production have subordinated their research agendas to the requirements of the Israeli state.

More from this Interview

• Part 1: “Anti-Zionism Is Not Antisemitism”: Palestinian Prof. Shalhoub-Kevorkian on Hebrew Univ. Suspension
• Part 2: “Towers of Ivory and Steel”: Jewish Scholar Says Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom
• Part 3: Maya Wind: Destruction of Gaza’s Universities Part of Broader Israeli Project to Destroy Palestinian Liberation

GUESTS

Maya Windpostdoctoral fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia.

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

We continue now with Part 2 of our conversation with Maya Wind, author of the new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom. Maya is a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia.

This week, around a hundred leading European academics signed a petition titled “Annihilation of Gaza Education: Israel is systematically erasing the entire educational system,” they wrote. They protested the Israeli military’s destruction of six universities in the Gaza Strip since October 7th: Islamic University, Al-Israa University, Rabat University, Al-Azhar University, Al-Aqsa University and Al-Quds Open University.

The Intercept recently reported that within the first 100 days of Israel’s assault on Gaza, the Israeli military destroyed every single university in the Gaza Strip. Nearly a hundred university deans and professors and three university presidents in Gaza have been killed in the Israeli assault. Over 4,300 students, more than 230 professors, teachers, administrators have been killed.

Maya Wind, we thank you for staying with us to talk about the significance of what has taken place right now in the Gaza Strip to academia, to the students.

MAYA WIND: Yeah. University education in the Occupied Palestinian Territories has been under siege, by the Israeli state, by the Israeli military, for decades, including in Gaza. Gazan universities have been subject to a debilitating illegal siege for over 17 years, subject to repeated aerial bombardment. And now, most recently, every single one, as you said, has been destroyed by either controlled detonation or aerial bombardment. This is very intentional. This is part of a broader project by the Israeli state to destroy Palestinian education as a means to destroy the Palestinian liberation movement.

AMY GOODMAN: When you raise these issues as a Jewish scholar, as an Israeli student and academic, how are you responded to?

MAYA WIND: What we are seeing now, especially over the last two decades, is a coalescing of Israeli university administrations with the Israeli far right, with other forces to continually foreclose and limit what is permissible to research, to debate, to speak to, to protest on Israeli campuses. And we’re seeing that really manifest for some time. But in particular, over the last five months, this repression has grown. Palestinian students were asked to evacuate their dorm rooms, given 24-hour notice. Palestinian and critical Jewish Israeli students and scholars have been summoned to disciplinary committees and have been suspended for speaking out against this genocide, for conducting research about the Nakba, which is the mass expulsion of over two-thirds of the Palestinian population that enabled the founding of the Israeli state. And so, we are seeing this is a broad project of repressing critical research and debate, which is really the bedrock of higher education. But this is disallowed in the Israeli university system.

AMY GOODMAN: You know, we interviewed Tal Mitnick, who I think was the first refusenik, young person to refuse, in this latest assault to serve in the Israeli military and was repeatedly jailed. You did this 15 years ago. What was it like to be in an Israeli jail then for you, and then also the difference between what happened to you and the thousands of Palestinians who’ve been imprisoned?

MAYA WIND: Yeah, so, it is important to speak to how imprisonment and incarceration and detention is really a tool, a central tool, of the Israeli state to destroy the Palestinian liberation movement. And we see this particularly play out on Palestinian campuses across the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian universities are routinely raided by the Israeli military. Student activists and organizers in over 411 Palestinian student groups and associations that have been declared unlawful by the Israeli state are routinely abducted from their campus, from their homes in the middle of the night. They are subjected to torture. They are held in administrative detention without charge or trial for months. And so, what we’re really seeing is a systemic attack of the Israeli military and the Israeli military government on Palestinian higher education, and particularly on Palestinian campuses as sites of organizing for Palestinian liberation.

AMY GOODMAN: Maya, you are here in New York right now, and you’re going to be speaking in different areas, including at Columbia University. I wanted to turn to a lawsuit that has just been filed by New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal against Columbia University for suspending two pro-Palestine student groups. That’s Students for Justice in Palestine, SJP, and Jewish Voice for Peace, suspended last November after organizing peaceful protests against the Israeli occupation and the assault on Gaza. Can you talk about the significance of these kinds of suspensions? And it’s not only happening at Columbia and Barnard.

MAYA WIND: Yes, absolutely. So, I myself was an active member of Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine over a decade ago. And it was really hard to organize on that campus then, and it is impossible now, with Columbia University suspending both Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. And students who are mobilizing for Palestinian liberation on campus are facing all forms of harassment, including by Columbia faculty and the administration.

And this move to repress Palestinian organizing on U.S. campuses is very clearly a response to a generational gap. What we are seeing is that young people across the United States recognize Israel for what it is. They know apartheid when they see it. They know genocide when they see it. And in response, they are not only being repressed by university campus administrations, but the state is increasingly moving in to criminalize the BDS movement, because it is gaining such wide traction, especially among young people and students in this country.

AMY GOODMAN: As you go around the country to talk about Towers of Ivory and Steel, your new book, talk about why you called it that.

MAYA WIND: Again, it sort of speaks to the misconception in the Western academic community about Israeli universities. For too long, Jewish Israeli scholars have been allowed to gatekeep and to narrate to the West what their universities are, and this despite, again, over two decades of mobilization and critical research by Palestinian scholars and civil society organizations about the nature of Israeli universities and their deep embeddedness in the apparatuses of violence of the Israeli state.

And so, in my book, I really take this critique seriously and did an in-depth investigation, using archival materials, observing campus protests and classrooms across Israel’s eight major public universities, speaking with Palestinian student organizers, Palestinian and Jewish Israeli faculty and students. And what I really saw and learned in the course of this research is the vast and multifaceted nature of this embeddedness with the project of the oppression of Palestinians.

AMY GOODMAN: And what about the Israeli Jewish professors, scholars, students who resist, like yourself — I mean, you, yourself, of course, you were jailed for your refusing to serve in the Israeli military, but then have gone on to be deeply critical — and those that express solidarity, for example, with professor Shalhoub-Kevorkian, who has been suspended by Hebrew University? Those protests out there, as she pointed out, were Jewish and Palestinian students, Jewish and Palestinian professors.

MAYA WIND: There is an important move, certainly, to resist and to conduct critical research, to protest, to insist on academic freedom on Israeli university campuses by primarily, really led by, Palestinian students and faculty, and sometimes joined by a small contingent of Jewish Israelis. But what this book speaks to is really the structure. This is a structural problem. This is about the very nature of the institutions of Israeli universities, from where they are built — they are built as land grab institutions to further Palestinian dispossession and expand Judaization, which is the continual shrinking of Palestinian land ownership and Palestinian land contiguity and the expansion of Jewish Israeli settlement and population distribution — to the ways in which these universities produce knowledge, expertise and help in the development of weapons, used against Palestinians and then sold abroad as battle-tested. And so, we’re really seeing this vast apparatus and a structural problem of universities subordinating themselves to the requirements and the needs of the Israeli state and Israeli apartheid. And that is what is at stake here.

AMY GOODMAN: Maya Wind, you’re a postdoctoral fellow in anthropology at the University of British Columbia. In your book, Towers of Ivory and Steel, you examine the role of archaeology, law and Middle East studies. Can you talk about this?

MAYA WIND: Certainly. So, in one of the chapters of the book, I really trace the ways that knowledge production and dominant paradigms in entire disciplines of the Israeli academy have subordinated their research agendas to the requirements of the Israeli state to aid the Israeli state in differentially ruling not only Palestinian and Jewish citizens, but also Palestinian subjects under military governance.

And we’re seeing that play out in multiple disciplines, as you mentioned. So, in archaeology, for instance, Israeli archaeology, institutes and departments are producing knowledge to aid in the dispossession of Palestinians and the expansion of Jewish settlement, using archeological research as a pretext and creating narratives that justify the Jewish — not only Jewish presence, but Jewish exclusive claims to the entirety of the land.

AMY GOODMAN: What about the other way around —

MAYA WIND: This is true in Middle East studies —

AMY GOODMAN: — in archaeology? Is finding whole Palestinian communities, evidence of, artifacts of?

MAYA WIND: Yes. So, absolutely, there is. Israeli archaeological research has been repeatedly critiqued by Palestinian scholars and others for not only violating the Fourth Geneva Convention, but also conducting unsound and unscientific research by explicitly and intentionally removing Palestinian artifacts and artifacts of the Islamic periods in order to substantiate Israeli state narratives.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to this questioning in January at the U.S. State Department, the Associated Press, Matt Lee, questioning State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller about Israel’s demolition of Al-Israa University in Gaza.

MATT LEE: I mean, it looks like a controlled demolition. It looks like what we do here in this country when we’re taking down an old hotel or a stadium. And you have nothing to say? You have nothing to say about this?

MATTHEW MILLER: I — I have —

MATT LEE: I mean, to do that kind of an explosion, you need to be in there. You have to put the explosives down, and it takes a lot of planning and preparation to do. And if there was a threat from this particular facility, they wouldn’t have been able to do it.

MATTHEW MILLER: So, I have seen the video. I can tell you that it is something we are raising with the government of Israel, as we do — often do, when we see —

MATT LEE: Well, “raising” is what? Like —

MATTHEW MILLER: When we see — to ask questions and find out what the underlying situation is, as we often do when we see reports of this nature. But I’m not able to characterize the actual facts on the ground before hearing that response.

MATT LEE: Yeah, but you saw the video.

MATTHEW MILLER: I did see the video. I don’t — I don’t know — I don’t know —

MATT LEE: I mean, it looks like people —

MATTHEW MILLER: I don’t know what was —

MATT LEE: It looks like, you know, a bridge being imploded or something.

MATTHEW MILLER: I don’t know what was under that — I don’t know what was under that building. I don’t know what was inside —

MATT LEE: Well, yeah, but —

MATTHEW MILLER: — inside that building.

MATT LEE: But it doesn’t matter what was under the building, because they obviously got in there to put the explosives down to do it in the way that they did.

MATTHEW MILLER: So, again, I’m glad you have factual certainty, but I just — I just don’t.

MATT LEE: I don’t.

MATTHEW MILLER: I just don’t.

MATT LEE: All have is what I saw on the video, right?

MATTHEW MILLER: I — I just don’t. But I can say say —

MATT LEE: And I think you guys saw it, too.

MATTHEW MILLER: We did see it. I can say that we have raised it with the government of Israel.

MATT LEE: And it’s not troubling to you?

MATTHEW MILLER: We are always troubled by the — by any degradation of civilian infrastructure in Gaza.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s Matthew Miller, the State Department spokesperson, responding to a question by the AP reporter Matt Lee. Maya Wind, he’s talking about the demolition of Al-Israa University in Gaza City, one of a number of universities that were blown up by the Israeli military. Why don’t we end with that point and your response to it?

MAYA WIND: What is really devastating is not only the destruction of Palestinian universities, all of them in Gaza, but also the absolute failure of any of the Israeli universities, that are in fact directly facilitating this destruction, to speak out against it. Where is the defense of Palestinian academic freedom?

AMY GOODMAN: Maya Wind, I want to thank you for being with us, author of the new book, Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom. To see Part 1 of our conversation, you can go to democracynow.org. Maya Wind grew up in Israel, was a refusenik 15 years ago, served time in Israeli military jail for refusing to serve in the Israeli military. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. She’s currently a postdoctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia in anthropology. I’m Amy Goodman. Thanks for joining us.

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Up Next

60+ Journalism Profs Demand Investigation into Controversial NYT Article Alleging Mass Rape on Oct. 7

=========================================

‘How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom’: Maya Wind and Robin Kelley explore the role of higher education in occupied Palestine

February 9, 2024 12:01 am

‘How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom’: Maya Wind and Robin Kelley explore the role of higher education in occupied Palestine

By Nitya Gupta

On Tuesday, Feb. 6, Maya Wind and Robin D.G. Kelley led a discussion titled “Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom.” The event, located at Pitzer College’s Benson Auditorium, centered around what speakers described as the complicity of higher education institutions in Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestine.

According to event organizer Professor Emeritus of Anthropology and History Daniel Segal at Pitzer, Wind and Kelley were invited to speak at Tuesday’s talk because of their existence as “scholar-activists.”

Wind is the Killiam Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia and the author of the book “Towers of Ivory and Steel: How Israeli Universities Deny Palestinian Freedom.” Kelley is the Gary B. Nash Professor of History at UCLA and the author of numerous books of his own.

For Segal, Wind and Kelley’s scholarly work, combined with their attention to social justice and activism, distinguishes them from many other faculty members.

“Maya Wind and Robin D.G. Kelley define what we mean by scholar-activists as distinct from many faculty who can be recognized as excellent scholars but do not extend their work into activism, during this moment of global-local peril and scare,” Segal said in an email to TSL.

Segal’s emphasis on Wind and Kelley’s existence as “scholar-activists” was highly reflective of the event’s focus on the intersection between scholarship and activism. At the talk, the speakers stressed the importance of holding universities accountable.

“What we’re witnessing today is not only a genocide, not only an attempt by Israel to erase the Palestinian people, but also [to erase] centuries of knowledge, culture [and] history central to who they are as a people,” Wind said. “Israel has always understood Palestinian education as a threat to its rule and it has targeted it at every turn.”

Wind explained her own discoveries about the relationship between Israeli and Palestinian education, which she made while visiting Israel and researching for her book.

“Israeli institutions of higher education are deeply implicated in Israeli colonialism and apartheid and must be understood as settler universities,” Wind said. “They are embedded in the infrastructure that sustains Israeli society as a settler society.”

She said that Israeli universities deny Palestinian freedom by suppressing critical research pedagogy, debate and student mobilization, especially following increased government restrictions in the ’80s and ’90s.

“Before the ’80s, in Israeli universities, Palestinian and some Jewish Israeli scholars really began to explore the histories and structures of Israeli state violence,” Wind said, reflecting particularly on events like the Nakba. “Following government control, researchers faced harassment and violence that drove many Palestinian scholars and some of the most critical Jewish Israelis out of these Israeli academies.”  

Wind then went on to describe the current state of Palestinian universities, which she says are facing the full force of Israeli state violence. According to her, Palestinian universities in the occupied West Bank have always been governed by the Israeli military and subjected to bureaucratic restrictions that isolate and obstruct them.

“Now, all 11 of the universities in Gaza have been targeted and either partially or entirely destroyed by Israeli bombardment,” Wind said. “Israel has killed over 240 Palestinian faculty members in Gaza — including deans and university presidents — killed over 4,800 students, injured over 8,400 and has left over 90,000 students with no university to attend.” 

Kelley also commented on the silencing of Palestinians in academia, citing professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, a Palestinian professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, as an example. According to Kelley, Shalhoub-Kevorkian is currently receiving death threats and dismissal because she drafted and signed an open letter calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

“The letter described the mass killing, maiming and enforced starvation of children in Gaza as genocide and for this, she received death threats and threats of dismissal coming from the administration,” Kelley said. “They’re saying that she should be fired because she used the word genocide to talk about killing children; her research is on children — so much for free speech in enlightened Israeli universities.”

Kelley emphasized the responsibility of intellectuals in the face of genocide, which he explained is to speak truth to power and to unwaveringly advocate for principles of justice and critical thought.

“As long as we don’t stand up, we lose the possibility of thought, so we are complicit in the loss of academic freedom,” Kelley said. “We have to stand up for thought, stand up for thinking and stand up for justice. And that’s it.”

=============================================

https://pij.org/blogs/78

Vol. 16 No. 2   2010

The necessity of doubt

By Maya Wind

Winner of PIJ’s Simcha Bahiri Essay Writing Contest

Young people have a great capacity to initiate processes of change. Yet in observing my society during and after the last operation in Gaza, I felt that this capacity was not employed at all. Despite our vast potential to create change, with our energy level and tendency to question the previous generation’s values, opinions among Israeli youth regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remain sadly static. We need to channel our natural tendency in constructive directions, by questioning our perception of the conflict and nurturing the notion of doubt. Developing doubt will increase young people’s capacity to think originally and to translate our ideas into innovative actions that may change the political reality of the region. One way of nurturing constructive questioning would be to create an online “Israeli-Palestinian Doubt Forum.” Doubt should be developed particularly in relation to three concepts: facts, collective identity and personal responsibility. First, it is important for my generation to question the official historical “facts” that generally serve as a framework for discussion of the conflict. These “facts” have been internalized and are now considered to provide the background to the debate instead of being subject to debate themselves. We don’t realize that what we assume to be “facts” are frequently only our own narrative, and this greatly restricts our ability to think about the conflict openly and critically. Advertisement In a Doubt Forum, Israeli and Palestinian youth could post articles, pictures and their own opinions and feelings, as well as ask others questions about the way they experience the conflict. Exposure to a diversity of information would encourage greater skepticism of the way their respective societies represent the conflict. This new kind of online interaction would challenge the notion of “fact,” leading to a more open-minded and less self-righteous approach to the political debate. It will also lead people to challenge what they “know” about those on the other side, including the reasons for their actions, and the compromises they would be willing to make for peace. In this way, the Doubt Forum would allow for a deeper and more original discussion. Second, the concept of collective identity should be questioned. The conflict is deeply personal to many people, yet the emotions regarding it are often experienced communally. In both societies there is a sense of insecurity, which leads to a feeling that nationalism is necessary to keep the state – or the struggle for one – alive. When collective identity plays such a central role, distinguishing between individuals and their actions or communities becomes difficult. Furthermore, over-identification with one’s society or government does not enable one to examine critically that society’s actions, as the subject becomes emotionally loaded. The Doubt Forum would help undermine collective identity and reveal the individual voices within the two societies. Breaking down collective identity would highlight the common denominator of human experience shared by Israelis and Palestinians. Finding this common denominator would promote understanding of the “other” and create a platform from which to debate the conflict effectively. Finally, perceptions of personal responsibility and of the individual’s ability to make a difference ought to be examined. Although the conflict feels very personal to most Israelis and Palestinians, many still consider their individual actions to be removed from it. People perceive it as affecting them but not the opposite. Therefore, they do not pause to doubt before acting and, as a result, do not feel personally responsible for the course of the conflict. Reading conflict-related personal stories from the other side would force individuals to consider the effects of their actions and recognize that not doing so only helps perpetuate the conflict. The Doubt Forum will promote self-examination and allow us to challenge the intractability of the conflict by doubting before acting. A joint Israeli-Palestinian Doubt Forum that questions the notions of fact, collective identity and personal responsibility would provide a way for Palestinians and Israelis to interact and recognize each other’s humanity – allowing them to meet somewhere other than on opposite sides of a checkpoint. This, in turn, would allow us the freedom to think as individuals – not as nations – and come up with original solutions to the conflict. Interaction in the Doubt Forum would help us question the “facts” and demonstrate the plurality of voices present in both societies. The Forum would strengthen individual identity and empower young people to effect change. With the heightened consciousness, new perspectives, and confidence that the Doubt Forum would give them, young people could make peace possible. Maya Yechieli Wind, 19, of Jerusalem, was the Israeli winner of the Simcha Bahiri Youth Essay Contest organized by the Palestine-Israel Journal. A conscientious objector, she is doing her national service with Rabbis for Human Rights and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions.

==========================================

https://www.mako.co.il/news-world/international/Article-3c706c5ce427c21004.htm

צפו: סטודנטית ישראלית מפגינה נגד צה”ל בניו יורק

מאיה יחיאלי-ווינד בת ה-19 העדיפה לשבת בכלא מאשר להתגייס לצה”ל, אבל בקמפוס של אוניברסיטת “קולומביה”, ניו יורק, היא דווקא לבשה בשבוע האחרון מדים. יחיאלי-ווינד וסטודנטים פרו-פלסטינים קיימו מיצג במסגרתו “חיקו” את מחסומי צה”ל בשטחים. הם עצרו סטודנטים עוברי אורח, כפתו אותם וכיסו את עיניהם. כך זה נראה

חדשות| פורסם 22/11/10 09:49 

•  8,483
•  הדפסה
•  128

אוניברסיטת קולומביה היוקרתית, ניו יורק, ארה”ב, השבוע. סטודנטים פרו-פלסטינים משתתפים ב”מיצג נגד הכיבוש”, בו חלקם מגלמים חיילים וחלקם מגלמים פלסטינים במחסומים. בראש המפגינים: סטודנטית ישראלית בת 19.

מאיה יחיאלי-ווינד, במקור מירושלים, סירבה להתגייס, ישבה בכלא צבאי וכיום כאמור לומדת בקולומביה. בנוסף ללימודיה, היא הצטרפה לארגון “סטודנטים מקולומביה בעד צדק לפלסטינים”, שארגן את המיצגים השנויים במחלוקת.

יחיאלי-ווינד ועוד סטודנטים לבשו מדי ב’ של צה”ל, הצטיידו ברובים מקרטון, ועצרו סטודנטים ברחבי הקמפוס. בסרטון הם נראים מורים להם לכרוע על הרצפה, מכסים את עיניהם ואוזקים את ידיהם.

המיצג, שאמור לדמות את ה”זוועות”, כך לפי הסטודנטים, נמשך מספר שעות, ומשך עוברי אורח והפגנות נגד. ווינד עצמה אמרה לעיתון האוניברסיטה שסיקר את המהומה, כי “הרבה אנשים מופתעים שאני ישראלית, ושאני בעד זכויות אדם ובעד חוק בינלאומי. זה שילוב נדיר בימים אלה”.

“רצינו לבוא עם חגורות נפץ”מאיה מפגינה “נגד הכיבוש”, השבוע בניו יורק | צילום: חדשות 2

איגוד-העל שמאחד את ארגוני הסטודנטים היהודיים בקמפוס, ארגן במהירות הפגנה כנגד המיצג. “התגובה הראשונית שלנו הייתה לבוא עם חגורות נפץ ולומר ‘רואים, בגלל זה אנחנו צריכים את המחסומים'”, אמר ג’ונה לייבן, חבר האיגוד. “אבל לא רצינו לרדת לרמה הזו”.

במקום, עמדו הסטודנטים הישראלים והפרו-ישראלים ליד המיצג והסבירו לעוברי האורח שנקלעו למקום כי המחסומים הם “רע הכרחי” ושהם מונעים פיגועים בשטח ישראל. “אני חושב שזה הוגן לערוך הפגנות, זה חשוב, אבל לרוב זה חד צדדי”, אמר ליאור חמי, סטודנט ישראלי. “איך זה ישרת את המטרה שלי לראות את הצד השטני של הצד השני? זה באמת יגרום לי להיראות יותר טוב? לא נראה לי”.

אחת המפגינות הפלסטיניות ממזרח ירושלים, דינה זביידי, סיפרה לעיתון כי “הייתי צריכה לעבור מחסום בכל יום במשך שנתיים, אז אני יודעת איך הם מתנהגים”.

============================================================================

https://www.mako.co.il/news-channel2/Six-Newscast/Article-dad08121c9c7e21004.htm

• התכניות 
• שש

צפו: “שבוע האפרטהייד” בניו יורק

מעמדה של ישראל בעולם, לא משהו. העולם לא אוהב את מדיניות הממשלה, ראשי מדינות כועסים על ראש הממשלה, אבל אין ספק שהדבר הכי מתסכל הוא כאשר את הביקורת יוזמים ומזינים ישראלים בעולם. למשל מאיה יחיאלי ווינד, סטודנטית ישראלית באוניברסיטת קולומביה, שיזמה אתמול, ולא בפעם הראשונה, את המיזם הזה בניו יורק

עודד בן עמי|שש, חדשות 2| פורסם 03/03/11 18:59 

•  164
•  הדפסה
•  1

00:07פרסומת

–:–/–:–

=====================================================================================

https://www.mako.co.il/news-world/international/Article-d75dcd0f1cc7e21004.htm

המפגינה נגד צה”ל בניו יורק: “אוהבת את ישראל”

מאיה יחיאלי ווינד, סטודנטית ישראלית באוניברסיטת קולומביה, שתועדה על ידי מצלמות חדשות 2 בהפגנה אנטי-ישראלית בארצות הברית, מסבירה בראיון מיוחד כי היא דווקא כן אוהבת את ישראל. “ברגע שהכיבוש ייפסק ונתחיל לכבד זכויות אדם וחוק בינלאומי, אני אפסיק את המיצגים שלי”, היא טוענת. “אני רק עוזרת להפיץ מידע”

עודד בן עמי|חדשות| פורסם 03/03/11 19:48 

במהלך “שבוע האפרטהייד” המתקיים באוניברסיטאות ומכללות ברחבי העולם, נערכים מייצגים התוקפים את מדיניות צה”ל וישראל. באוניברסיטת קולומביה בניו יורק, ניסתה סטודנטית ישראלית להראות לעוברים ושבים כיצד לכאורה, נוהגים החיילים באלימות כלפי פלסטינים.

במהלך המיצג שנערך אתמול שיחקו שתי סטודנטיות חיילים במחסום שמתעללים וכופתים עובר אורח פלסטיני. הסטודנטית הישראלית שעמדה מאחורי היוזמה מאיה יחיאלי ווינד, מסבירה כי למרות היוזמה שלה היא דווקא אוהבת את ישראל.

“אני כלל לא שונאת את ישראל על אף ששבוע האפרטהייד הזה מוצג כאנטי-ישראלי, הוא אנטי מדיניות ישראל בפלסטין”, מסבירה ווינד בראיון מיוחד לתכנית “שש עם”. “ברגע שהכיבוש ייפסק ונתחיל לכבד זכויות אדם וחוק בינלאומי, אני אפסיק את המיצגים שלי”.

לדברי הסטודנטית הישראלית, היא בעד חוק בינלאומי וזכויות אדם וכי דווקא מתוך אהבה למדינה היא רוצה לראות את המדיניות משתנה. “אני חושבת שקודם כל, אני לא מייצרת שנאה, אני בסך הכל עוזרת להפיץ מידע שהוא אמיתי ונכון. מה שאני מייצגת זה מה שבאמת קורה בשטחים והציבור האמריקני מממן את הכיבוש הישראלי, ולכן יש לו גם זכות לדעת מה קורה שם”.

ווינד מוסיפה: “אני רואה את חיי בארץ. אני רק כאן ללימודים. אני מאוד אוהבת את המדינה, מאוד חשוב לי העתיד שלה, ולכן אני רוצה לראות את המדיניות בשטחים משתנה. אם נשקיע את כמות האנרגיה והמשאבים שאנחנו משקיעים בהסברה בשינוי המדיניות אז לא תהיה לנו בעיה”.

==================================================

https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3858178,00.html
הפעילים משייח ג’ראח: “דרך חדשה לשמאל”חבורה קטנה של כמה צעירים ללא ניסיון משפטי הצליחה להביך את משטרת ירושלים ולאלצה להסכים להפגנה גדולה. “זה רק עוד מקרה של מאבק בכיבוש, בגזענות ובאפליה”, הם אומרים. בשמאל כבר מדברים עליהם כתקווה החדשה

רונן מדזיני פורסם:  05.03.10 , 00:38

מה שהחל בצעדה של כ-20 צעירים במחאה על כניסת מתיישבים יהודים לשכונה הערבית במזרח ירושלים, הפך בחודשים האחרונים לתופעה פוליטית שלא ניתן להתעלם ממנה. כמה מאות פעילים, אנשי רוח ופוליטיקאים מתאספים מדי יום שישי בצהריים כדי להפגין נגד מה שהם מגדירים “עוולת המדינה”. היד הקשה שהפגינה המשטרה רק חיזקה את המאבק, והפכה אותו ממאבק שולי, לסמל ולמוקד עלייה לרגל של אנשי שמאל רבים ברחבי הארץ. הם אפילו גררו את המדינה לבג”ץ – ורשמו הישג כאשר השופטים אישרו הפגנה במוצאי שבת של מאות משתתפים. 

ההישג המשפטי הזה נזקף לזכותם של שלושה סטודנטים, חסרי כל רקע בתחום המשפט. אחד מהם הוא אבנר ענבר (29), דוקטורנט לפילוסופיה באוניברסיטת שיקגו, שסיפר ל-ynet על התנהלות העתירה. “הבנו שאין לנו יכולת לממן שירותים של עורך דין, ולכן החלטנו לכתוב את העתירה בעצמנו. ישבנו על זה יומיים-שלושה באופן מאוד אינטנסיבי – לילות כימים. למדנו את הנושא, קראנו פסקי דין באינטרנט בנושא החופש להפגין, ירדנו לשטח לצלם את האתרים הרלוונטיים, גבינו תצהירים ממפגינים ומתושבי השכונה וכתבנו את העתירה”

נפגשים אחת לשבוע לסיעור מוחין, תכנון הפגנות וחשיבה (צילום: נועם מושקוביץ)

כשהתברר שהמשטרה לא מתכוונת לאשר את ההפגנה, המאבק החריף. “תכננו אירוע גדול למוצאי שבת”, סיפר אבנר ענבר, “והסירוב של המשטרה היה מיידי ולא לווה בהסברים ונימוקים – למרות שעל-פי החוק הם מחויבים לכך. הבנו שמדובר בקמפיין של המשטרה נגד המחאה במקום. הגשנו את העתירה ביום ראשון, וביום חמישי כבר ייצגנו את עצמנו”. הייצוג העצמי, לדבריו, הוא סמל לאופיו של המאבק בשייח ג’ראח – לא-מאורגן, עצמאי ולא ממוסד.

“המאבק יימשך, עד שיסתיים הכיבוש”

מאחורי המאבק החתרני, שמצליח להביך שוב ושוב את משטרת מחוז ירושלים, עומדת קבוצה של צעירים בשנות ה-20 לחייהם. מזה כשנה וחצי הם פועלים ללא תקציב, ללא ידע או ניסיון, ללא עורכי דין או מפלגות העומדות מאחוריהן. כעת, מעודדים מהניצחון במערכה בבג”ץ, הם מבטיחים להמשיך את המאבק. “המאבק יימשך כל עוד המטרה, שהיא הפסקת הכיבוש, טרם הושגה”.

סהר ורדי, מיוזמות המאבק, צעירה בת 19 מירושלים: “זה התחיל לפני שנה וחצי בערך, כשמשפחת אל-כורד פונתה מביתה. זה היה מאבק קטן, בתוך אוהל מחאה”, היא נזכרת. באוגוסט האחרון, עם פינוין של שתי משפחות נוספות שלבתיהן נכנסו מתיישבים יהודים, התחדשה המחאה. “היינו קבוצה של פעילים שהגיעו לשייח ג’ראח די הרבה, והפכנו לפעילים המעורבים יותר סביב הנושא”. 

מאבק עצמאי – לא מאורגן ולא ממוסד (צילום: נועם מושקוביץ)

“אחרי הפינוי האחרון בנובמבר עשינו ישיבה והעלינו רעיונות למה אפשר לעשות – אחד מהם היה לערוך צעדה. תוך שבוע וחצי התחלנו – היינו בערך 20 איש, וצעדנו מכיכר ציון לשכונה. שבוע אחרי זה הצטרפו מתופפים, והיינו בערך 40. אז התחלנו להזמין בתפוצה יותר רחבה”, היא מספרת.

להפגנה הבאה כבר הגיעו יותר מ-100 מפגינים – ואז גם נכנסה המשטרה לפעולה וביצעה לראשונה מעצרים. “זה פורסם באיזה מקום, מה שהקפיץ עוד יותר את המאבק – קיבלנו כותרות, וכך הנושא עלה וקיבל מודעות”. מאז, מגיעים לכל הפגנה כמה מאות אנשי שמאל, ובהם אנשי רוח ופוליטיקאים. בין המפגינים ניתן למצוא גם את הסופר דויד גרוסמן, חברי הכנסת לשעבר אברהם בורג ויוסי שריד, “אבל הרוב דומיננטי הוא סטודנטים ירושלמים”, אומרים הפעילים.

“זה רק מקרה אחד של מאבק בכיבוש”

יוזמי המאבק באים מרקע שונה. ורדי היא מיוזמי מכתב השמיניסטים שסירבו להתגייס לצה”ל, ופעילה כבר כמה שנים למען זכויות הפלסטינים. מאיה וינד (20), גם היא ממובילות המאבק, הגיעה מתחום הפעילות למען זכויות האדם.

בשיחה עם ynet מספרת וינד כי לא שיערה בנפשה שהמחאה תזכה לתנופה כה גדולה. “אם היית אומר לי לפני שישה חודשים שחצי מדינה ישמעו על שייח ג’ראח, הייתי צוחקת”, סיפרה. “התחלנו כקבוצה של חמישה-שישה אקטיביסטים בשכונה – ממש עברנו לגור בשכונה לתקופה מסוימת. המאבק שלנו מאוד עממי, דינמי וספונטני, וכל הזמן מצטרפים עוד תומכים. יש לנו מין ועדה קבועה כזו עם תושבי השכונה – אנחנו נפגשים אחת לשבוע לסיעור מוחין, תכנון הפגנות וחשיבה משותפת. זה מקסים בעיני שהצלחנו ליצור מאבק כזה משותף”, הוסיפה.

לטענת וינד, המאבק טומן בחובו כמה מטרות, שאינן מתחילות ומסתכמות בשכונה הטעונה. “המטרה הראשונה והבסיסית היא להביא לצדק בשכונה עצמה, למנוע פינויים נוספים, להחזיר משפחות שפונו לבתיהם ולהקפיא את מפעל ההתנחלות שם. אבל זה לא רק שייח ג’ראח, זה גם מאבק אחד מני רבים למען שחרור מזרח ירושלים ופלסטין. שייח ג’ראח היא רק עוד מקרה של מאבק בכיבוש, בגזענות ובאפליה, ואנו מעלים הרבה שאלות למערכת המשפט הישראלית באשר לאופן שבו צריך להתייחס ליהודים ולפלסטינים”, הסבירה.

הוואקום בשמאל מתמלא

הצעירים המעורבים במאבק מספרים כי עיקר הסיפוק נובע מתחושה שהצליחו לשבור את

 המעגל הקטן והמסורתי של השמאל בישראל. ואכן, בחלוף כמה חודשים, עושה רושם שהוואקום שנוצר בשמאל מתמלא לאיטו. “זה הדבר הכי טוב שקרה לשמאל הישראלי בשנים האחרונות”, אמר ל-ynet מוסי רז, ח”כ לשעבר מטעם מפלגת מרצ ומפגין קבוע בשייח ג’ראח. “הם בלי שום ספק התקווה הגדולה ביותר כיום במאבק נגד הכיבוש ולמען חברה צודקת יותר”.

“שייח ג’ראח הוא כבר התחלה של דרך חדשה לשמאל. קבוצה צעירה ונחושה כזו לא ראינו כבר המון שנים”, מוסיף רז. “הם לא מקבלים משכורת, לא שייכים לשום ארגון או מפלגה. הם פשוט אנשים ערכיים שגילו עמידה איתנה מול העוול המוסרי העצום של השלכת אנשים לרחובות – והטמטום הישראלי שמכניס מתנחלים לשכונה ערבית. המאבק יצליח, נקודה. גם אם ייקח שנים ויכנסו עוד משפחות ויהיו עוד עוולות. אי אפשר אחרת, מדינת ישראל לא תתקיים אם לא תפסיק את הכיבוש. לחבר’ה האלה מגיע פרס”, קובע הח”כ לשעבר.  

=======================

==================================================

https://www.jpost.com/international/idf-draft-dodgers-speak-at-us-colleges

IDF draft dodgers speak at US colleges

Sep. 15, 2009
E.B. SOLOMONT, Jerusalem Post Correspondent in New York , THE JERUSALEM POST

Two Israeli women who are refusing mandatory army duty have kicked off a North American speaking tour and plan to take their story to more than a dozen college campuses in the next month.

Hoping to highlight their opposition to Israel’s policies toward Palestinians, Maya Wind and Netta Mishly, both 19, will appeal to their American counterparts during their “Why We Refuse” tour from September 12 to October 10. Both women describe themselves as Shministim, a group of high school seniors who refuse to serve in the IDF.

“We believe it is important to spread information about the Israeli occupation and about the movements that work against it,” stated Wind, who said that she was detained for 40 days because of her refusal to serve in the IDF. She was released in March. “We hope to empower people our age to take responsibility by taking a more active role in the resistance movements,” she said.

Their month long tour is being organized by the anti-war groups CODEPINK and Jewish Voice for Peace. According to their itinerary, the young women will visit more than a dozen schools in California, New York and Washington DC, starting with the University of California, Hastings on Monday and finishing with the University of Maryland on October 8. They will make stops at Cornell, Columbia, New York University, Brown, Brandeis and other schools on the way.

“There’s a lot of interest outside of Israel to understand what’s happening inside, how different people express their opposition to what’s happening,” said Sydney Levy, the campaigns director of Jewish Voice for Peace. Last year, the organization collected tens of thousands of letters from North American Jews who supported the Shministim, calling their detention a violation of human rights and international law.

“When you speak with them, you get a sense of what is going on there from an Israeli point of view,” Levy said.

But others said the women’s perceived credibility was precisely why their campaign could have dangerous ramifications.

“I definitely do not agree with what they’re trying to do because I think they’re misguided,” said Dani Klein, the North America campus director for StandWithUs, which advocates for Israel on campuses. Klein said if the campaign gains traction, it could backfire by further empowering anti-Israel students.

“When they see Israelis come out against their own country or their own army, in this instance, it gives those who want to be anti-Israel the fodder to do it,” he said.

The two young women, he said, could inadvertently educate people to hate Israel.

He compared their campaign to Breaking the Silence, a group of former Israeli soldiers who openly criticized Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. “I definitely understand that Israelis have the right not to agree with their government. That’s fine,” Klein said. “Every citizen in a democracy has that right. But you take that up in your country. Once you take that abroad, what does that gain you?”

So far, it is unclear what kind of reception Wind and Mishly will receive during their tour. Levy said demand to hear them speak was high and that time constraints forced him to turn down several speaking engagements on their behalf.

Indeed, campus observers said that political events of the past year – including Operation Cast Lead and the second Durban conference – fueled anti-Israel rhetoric that they expect to continue.

“Last year sort of motivated Israel’s detractors to be more vocal and do more programs,” said Lawrence Muscant, deputy director of The David Project. “My feeling is we’re going to see the same thing carry over into this semester.”

Like Klein, Muscant expressed concern about the campaign, based on knowledge of similar ones in recent years.

“On the one hand, if it were inside Israel, they’re talking about internal Israeli policies. When they speak to the outside world, it often gets lost in translation and it plays into the hands of those who delegitimize the State of Israel and question its right to exist, even if that’s not their goal,” he said.

“Whether this group prescribes to this idea or not, I believe there will be people who use their message to further their own agenda.”

===========================================================================

https://maki.org.il/%d7%94%d7%a4%d7%92%d7%a0%d7%aa-%d7%aa%d7%9e%d7%99%d7%9b%d7%94-%d7%91%d7%a1%d7%a8%d7%91%d7%a0%d7%99%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%94%d7%9e%d7%a6%d7%a4%d7%95%d7%9f-%d7%9e%d7%90%d7%99%d7%94-%d7%99%d7%97%d7%99%d7%90/

הפגנת תמיכה בסרבניות המצפון מאיה יחיאלי-וינד ורז בר דוד ורון

12 בינואר 2009

הפגנת תמיכה בסרבניות המצפון מאיה יחיאלי-וינד ורז בר דוד ורון תתקיים ביום רביעי הקרוב (14 בינואר) בשעה 9:00 בבוקר בפתח לשכת הגיוס שבתל השומר. מאיה יחיאלי-וינד, מחותמות מכתב השמיניסטים 2008, תגיע ביום רביעי הקרוב ללשכת הגיוס בתל השומר בפעם הראשונה ותצהיר על סירובה לשרת בצבא הכובש ומדכא עם אחר – בצבא המפציץ והורג עשרות אנשים ביום בשבועיים האחרונים.אליה תצטרף הסרבנית רז בר דוד ורון הצפויה להישפט זו הפעם החמישית על סירובה לשרת בצבא הכיבוש. דובר מכתב שמיניסטים מסר עוד “עכשיו יותר מתמיד חשוב להפגין נוכחות ולהראות שיש ישראלים שממאמינים בדרך אחרת ושמסרבים לקחת חלק בפשעים שנעשים בשמם”. הסעות ייצאו בשעה 8:00 ממסוף 2000 שליד תחנת רכבת ת”א מרכז. לפרטים והרשמה: עומר – 0546612101

09.05.24

Editorial Note

In the past few weeks, campuses across America have witnessed an unprecedented wave of protest, with Columbia University attracting the most attention.  Student protesters built tent encampments, calling on the University to divest from companies doing business with Israel.  The police broke up the Columbia encampment last week and arrested more than 100 people.  A similar situation has occurred in other universities. Since the protest began, 2,400 arrests have been made on 50 campuses.  

Although ostensibly called in support of the Palestinians in Gaza, many of the protests developed into antisemitic hate fests.  The antisemitic language, the harassment of Jewish students, and violent threats to the State of Israel, such as “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free” and “Tel Aviv will burn,” was particularly saddening. Ironically, Israel just commemorated the anniversary of the murder of six million Jews who died in the Holocaust. 

While the police cleared out many of the encampments, the administration of some universities struck deals with the protesters. In exchange for an agreement to divest, the protesters at Brown, Northwestern, and Rutgers, among others, the students suspended their campaign. 

The deals included commitments to review their investments in Israel while urging them to stop doing business with Israel. The colleges have also made some concessions around amnesty for protesters and funding for Middle Eastern studies. 

An encampment on Rutgers’ Newark campus is still active. A peaceful resolution was reached at the Rutgers-New Brunswick campus. University leaders agreed to several of a 10-point list of demands from the protesters, including a commitment to explore creating an Arab cultural center, to implement support for ten displaced Palestinian students to finish their education at Rutgers, and to follow university policy and review the student movement’s main demand that universities divest from companies with business interests in Israel. University President Jonathan Holloway and the Joint Committee on Investments chairman agreed to meet with up to five student representatives to discuss the protesters’ divestment request. As part of the agreement, Rutgers said it will “revisit and follow up on the relationship established in 2022 with Birzeit University to explore avenues of research collaboration and scholarly exchange and the feasibility of student exchange and/or study abroad through RU Global Studies.” Birzeit is in the Palestinian West Bank. In a statement, Chancellor Francine Conway referred to the protesters’ request for divestment from companies doing business with Israel and for Rutgers to cut ties with Tel Aviv University and said this request is under review, but “such decisions fall outside of our administrative scope.” 

Protesters at Brown University in Rhode Island agreed to dismantle their encampment if students could present arguments for divesting Brown’s endowment from companies contributing to and profiting from the war in Gaza.

Brian E. Clark, from the Spokesperson Office at Brown University wrote IAM and stated, President Christina Paxson “is asking the [advisory] committee to provide a recommendation on the matter of divestment — that recommendation may be for or against divestment, and either way, the matter will then go to Brown’s governing board for a formal vote.”

Northwestern’s Deering Meadow in Chicago made an agreement, promising the re-establishment of an advisory committee on university investments. Seven of 18 members subsequently resigned from a university committee that advises the administration on addressing antisemitism, Islamophobia, and expressions of hatred on campus, saying they couldn’t continue to serve “with antisemitism so present at Northwestern in public view for the past week.” Michael Simon, the executive director of an organization for Jewish students, Northwestern Hillel, said he resigned after concluding that the committee could not achieve its goals. 

At Pomona College in California, faculty voted in favor of divesting from companies that they said are funding Israel’s war in Gaza. The vote is not binding, but supporters said they hope it would encourage the board to stop investing in these companies and start disclosing where it makes its investments. The school responded, “This nonbinding faculty statement does not represent any official position of Pomona College… We will continue to encourage further dialogue within our community, including consideration of counterarguments.” 

At the University of California, Riverside, administrators announced an agreement with protesters to close their campus encampment. The deal included the formation of a task force to explore removing Riverside’s endowment from the broader UC system’s management. The announcement marked an apparent split with the policy of the 10-campus UC system, which last week said it opposes “calls for boycott against and divestment from Israel.” Adding, “While the University affirms the right of our community members to express diverse viewpoints, a boycott of this sort impinges on the academic freedom of our students and faculty and the unfettered exchange of ideas on our campuses.” Since “UC tuition and fees are the primary funding sources for the University’s core operations. None of these funds are used for investment purposes.” The final agreement included the following demands, which both parties signed. “The School of Business has discontinued Global Programs in Oxford, USA, Cuba, Vietnam, Brazil, China, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel.” The UCR Administration “agrees to form a task force that includes students… to explore the removal of UCR’s endowment from the management of the UC Investments Office… with consideration to the companies involved in arms manufacturing and delivery.” Demanding the “full disclosure of the list of companies in the portfolio and the size of the investments.” And demanding “an ongoing review of Sabra Hummus consistent with existing product review processes until we can find a resolution.”

For Jewish and other critics, the agreements amount to a shameful surrender.  They note that, unlike the Vietnam war protests, the current demonstration was suffused with vulgar antisemitism, harassment and violence against Jewish students, genocidal threats against Israel, and celebration of Hamas terrorists who slaughtered innocent civilians, engaged in horrendous sexual violence, and kidnappings.  Succumbing to the violent mob that considers Hamas’s action an act of resistance is a dangerous precedent. 

REFERENCES:

https://www.msn.com/he-il/news/other/striking-deals-to-end-campus-protests-some-colleges-invite-discussion-of-their-investments/ar-AA1o77SVStriking Deals to End Campus Protests, Some Colleges Invite Discussion of Their Investments

May 04th, 02AM May 04th, 02AM

NEW YORK (AP) — Anti-war demonstrations ceased this week at a small number of U.S. universities after school leaders struck deals with pro-Palestinian protesters, fending off possible disruptions of final exams and graduation ceremonies.

The agreements at schools including Brown, Northwesternand Rutgers stand out amidst the chaotic scenes and 2,400-plus arrests on 46 campusesnationwide since April 17. Tent encampments and building takeovers have disrupted classes at some schools, including Columbia and UCLA.

Deals included commitments by universities to review their investments in Israelor hear calls to stop doing business with the longtime U.S. ally. Many protester demands have zeroed in on links to the Israeli military as the war grinds on in Gaza.

The agreements to even discuss divestment mark a major shift on an issue that has been controversial for years, with opponents of a long-running campaign to boycott Israel saying it veers into antisemitism. But while the colleges have made concessions around amnesty for protesters and funding for Middle Eastern studies, they have made no promises about changing their investments.

“I think for some universities, it might be just a delaying tactic to diffuse the protests,” said Ralph Young, a history professor who studies American dissent at Temple University in Philadelphia. “The end of the semester is happening now. And maybe by the time the next semester begins, there is a cease-fire in Gaza.”

Some university boards may never even vote on divesting from Israel, which can be a complicated process, Young said. And some state schools have said they lack the authority to do so.

But Young said dialogue is a better tactic than arrests, which can inflame protesters.

Talking “at least gives the protesters the feeling that they’re getting somewhere,” he said. “Whether they are getting somewhere or not is another question.”

Israel has called the protests antisemitic; its critics say the country uses such allegations to silence opposition. Although some protesters were caught on camera making antisemitic remarks or violent threats, protest organizers — some of whom are Jewish — have called it a peaceful movement to defend Palestinian rights and protest the war.

Administrators at the University of California, Riverside, announced an agreement Friday with protesters to close their campus encampment. The deal included the formation of a task force to explore removing Riverside’s endowment from the broader UC system’s management and investing those funds “in a manner that will be financially and ethically sound for the university with consideration to the companies involved in arms manufacturing and delivery.”

The announcement marked an apparent split with the policy of the 10-campus UC system, which last week said it opposes “calls for boycott against and divestment from Israel.”

“While the University affirms the right of our community members to express diverse viewpoints, a boycott of this sort impinges on the academic freedom of our students and faculty and the unfettered exchange of ideas on our campuses,” the system said in a statement. “UC tuition and fees are the primary funding sources for the University’s core operations. None of these funds are used for investment purposes.”

Demonstrators at Rutgers University — where finals were paused due to the protests on its New Brunswick campus — similarly packed up their tents Thursday afternoon. The state university agreed to establish an Arab Cultural Center and to not retaliate against any students involved in the camp.

In a statement, Chancellor Francine Conway noted protesters’ request for divestment from companies doing business with Israel and for Rutgers to cut ties with Tel Aviv University. She said the the request is under review, but “such decisions fall outside of our administrative scope.”

Protesters at Brown University in Rhode Island agreed to dismantle their encampment Tuesday. School officials said students could present arguments for divesting Brown’s endowment from companies contributing to and profiting from the war in Gaza.

In addition, Brown President Christina Paxson will ask an advisory committee to make a recommendation on divestment by Sept. 30, which will be put before the school’s governing corporation for a vote in October.

Northwestern’s Deering Meadow in suburban Chicago also fell silent after an agreement Monday. The deal curbed protest activity in return for the reestablishment of an advisory committee on university investments and other commitments.

The arrangement drew dissent from both sides. Some pro-Palestinian protesters condemned it as a failure to stick to their original demands, while some supporters of Israel said it represented “cowardly” capitulation.

Seven of 18 members subsequently resigned from a university committee that advises the administration on addressing antisemitism, Islamophobia and expressions of hatred on campus, saying they couldn’t continue to serve “with antisemitism so present at Northwestern in public view for the past week.”

Michael Simon, the executive director of an organization for Jewish students, Northwestern Hillel, said he resigned after concluding that the committee could not achieve its goals.

Faculty at Pomona College in California voted in favor of divesting from companies they said are funding Israel’s war in Gaza, a group of faculty and students said Friday.

The vote Thursday is not binding on the liberal arts school of nearly 1,800 students east of Los Angeles. But supporters said they hope it would encourage the board to stop investing in these companies and start disclosing where it makes its investments.

“This nonbinding faculty statement does not represent any official position of Pomona College,” the school said in a statement. “We will continue to encourage further dialogue within in our community, including consideration of counterarguments.”

Meanwhile, arrests of demonstrators continued elsewhere.

About a dozen protesters who refused police orders to leave an encampment at New York University were arrested early Friday, and about 30 more left voluntarily, NYU spokesperson John Beckman said. The school asked city police to intervene, he added.

NYPD officers also cleared an encampment at The New School in Greenwich Village on the request of school administrators. No arrests were announced.

Another 132 protesters were arrested when police broke up an encampment at the State University of New York at New Paltz starting late Thursday, authorities said.

And nine were arrested at the University of Tennessee, including seven students who Chancellor Donde Plowman said would also be sanctioned under the school’s code of conduct.

The movement began April 17 at Columbia, where student protesters built an encampment to call for an end to the Israel-Hamas war.

More than 100 people were arrested late Tuesday when police broke up the Columbia encampment. One officer accidentally discharged his gun inside Hamilton Hall during that operation, but no one was injured, the NYPD said late Thursday.

Over 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in the conflict in the Gaza Strip, according to the Health Ministry there. Israel launched its offensive after Oct. 7, when Hamas militants killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took roughly 250 hostages in an attack on southern Israel.

___

This story has been corrected to show that 132 protesters were arrested at the State University of New York at New Paltz, not 133.

=================================================

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/education/2024/05/03/rutgers-new-brunswick-and-gaza-student-protesters-reach-agreement-end-encampment/73557444007/

Rutgers student encampment ends peacefully with agreement. Here are the details

Mary Ann Koruth

NorthJersey.com

                 2024/05/03

A peaceful resolution to a four day standoff at a student encampment at the Rutgers-New Brunswick campus protesting Israel’s attacks on Gaza cooled tensions and put to rest fears of violent escalation on a hot Thursday afternoon.

University leaders agreed to several of a 10-point list of demands from the protesters, including a commitment to explore creating an Arab cultural center, to implement support for 10 displaced Palestinian students to finish their education at Rutgers, and to follow university policy and review the student movement’s main demand that universities divest from companies with business interests in Israel.

University President Jonathan Holloway and the chairman of the Joint Committee on Investments agreed to meet with up to five student representatives to discuss the protesters’ divestment request, provided they cleared the encampment.

The students also demanded amnesty for all protest participants. The university said it would not retaliate by terminating jobs or reducing pay, but said individual students “were subject” to the university’s code of conduct.

The demands and final agreement were laid out in a message from Rutgers-New Brunswick chancellor Francine Conway, sent out after students in the encampment began rolling up tents and blankets and walking away late Thursday.

As part of the agreement, Rutgers said it will “revisit and follow up on the relationship established in 2022 with Birzeit University to explore avenues of research collaboration and scholarly exchange, and the feasibility of student exchange and/or study abroad through RU Global Studies.” Birzeit is in the Palestinian West Bank.

Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois became the first U.S. school to publicly announce a deal with protesters on Monday, which was followed by Brown University’s announcement on Tuesday of an agreement with student organizers to curb protest activity on the Ivy league campus in Providence, Rhode Island, on Tuesday in exchange for the Brown Corporation voting on a divestment measure in October.

The afternoon’s events came hours after police broke up protests at UCLA and Columbia University, arresting hundreds of students. At nearby Princeton University, 13 students were arrested Monday night, and some protesters announced a hunger strike and fast Friday until the university engages with their demands, organizers said.

An encampment on Rutgers’ Newark campus is still active. At Rutgers-New Brunswick, the protesting students and Holloway welcomed reaching an agreement before a 4 p.m. Thursday deadline issued by Holloway for students to vacate the greens on College Avenue after morning exams were postponed.

The agreement signals a peaceful finals week and end of semester in New Brunswick after a contentious 12 months for Holloway, who last year at this time was navigating an unprecedented faculty strike.Several faculty members and adjunct professors in the AAUP union’s black, white and red T-shirts showed up at the tents on College Avenue to support the students’ right to protest peacefully. Union leaders said that in addition to supporting free speech, many felt they owed support to students, which included many pro-Palestinian protesters who had supported them during last years’ walkout that halted classes for a week.  Some exams scheduled for the afternoon Thursday were moved, and students were told to check for updates with their departments.  Students cheered and chanted, “Free, Free Palestine,” after an organizer read out a draft of the agreement. A smaller group called out a Muslim religious chant. Hours before, with the deadline to vacate looming and several police cars parked around the green, the group had chanted “Holloway is a tyrant.”  Students in the encampment debated what to do if they could not

arrive on an agreement with university leaders. The consensus at one point was to stay within the encampment and protect it. “I am in full support of protecting the encampment but I do not support mass arrests,” said one student. He said he did not want a “military response” like Columbia. The crowd listened. He was referring to the fact that earlier in the week Columbia University sent NYPD officers onto its Ivy League campus to arrest more than 100 pro-Palestinian demonstrators, some of whom had barricaded themselves into a building on the campus.

‘A note of appreciation’

Negotiations between student organizers and Rutgers administrators ended sometime before 4 p.m., the deadline the university had given students to clear out. A cheer went through the crowd when a student addressed them, saying that progress had been made.

She was followed by a man who said he was Palestinian and a Rutgers alumnus who had lost generations of family members in Gaza during the Israeli attacks after Oct. 7, which occurred in retaliation to Hamas’ attacks in Israel on Oct. 7 last year. He cautioned the students to “fight hard” and continue to ensure their demands were met, but not to escalate or make a spectacle of themselves.

Later that evening, Holloway sent out a message titled ” A Note of Appreciation” thanking everyone “who worked to bring a peaceful end to the protest.”

“At the beginning of the semester, I asked the community to reflect on ways that we can preserve our freedoms in the face of forces that will seek to divide us, how we can embrace them with the awesome responsibility they require — to be respectful and open-minded, to be intellectually honest and curious, and to be civil, decent, and understanding of one another,” he said.

“We still have a great deal of work ahead and will continue to be tested. I ask everyone to be civil to one another, to be respectful of one another, and to embrace our shared humanity,” the message said.

==================================================

https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/uc-riverside-reaches-peaceful-agreement-with-student-encampment-leaders/

UC Riverside reaches peaceful agreement with student encampment leaders

By Julie Sharp May 3, 2024 / 3:08 PM PDT / KCAL News 

University of California, Riverside administration reached an agreement with leaders of the student encampment Friday, leading to a clearing of the occupied campus area by no later than midnight.

Administration said meetings had been productive and civil, with the focal point of the agreement being transparency of UC’s investments and the forming of a task force to explore the possibility of UCR’s endowment to be removed from the management of the UC Investments Office.

The sit-in at UCR began Monday, April 29, with demands that the university disclose its investments and funding and that it divest from companies and institutions “complicit in the Israeli occupation, apartheid, and genocide” of Palestinians.

The same message went out at other college campus protests and rallies in the state and across the Country.

In Southern California, pro-palestinian protestors took to UC Irvine, UCLA, UC San Diego, USC, Pitzer College and at Cal State Long Beach.

Other campuses have not had such peaceful negotiations, as violence broke out at the UCLA encampment, where over 200 people were arrested on Thursday. At USC, 93 people were arrested Wednesday as police ordered the dismantling of the encampment.

In UCR’s Friday’s agreement letter, Chancellor Kim Wilcox thanked the campus community for navigating ” the complexities of this week’s events with patience, grace, and civility.”

“This agreement does not change the realities of the war in Gaza, or the need to address antisemitism, Islamophobia, and other forms of bias and discrimination; however, I am grateful that we can have constructive and peaceful conversations on how to address these complex issues,” Wilcox wrote.

UCR’s full agreement terms are as follows:

• All currently public information on UC’s investments will be posted to the UCR campus website. It will continue to be updated as the UC releases more information. The goal is to get full disclosure of the list of companies in the portfolio and the size of the investments.
• The UCR Administration agrees to form a task force that includes students appointed by ASUCR’s Diversity Council and faculty appointed by the Academic Senate to explore the removal of UCR’s endowment from the management of the UC Investments Office, and the investment of said endowment in a manner that will be financially and ethically sound for the university with consideration to the companies involved in arms manufacturing and delivery. The goal of this task force is to produce a report to present to the UCR Foundation Board of Trustees by the end of Winter Quarter 2025. The task force will be formed by the end of the Spring 2024 quarter.
• Commitment to bimonthly meetings with the AVC of Auxiliary Services and an ongoing review of Sabra Hummus consistent with existing product review processes until we can find a resolution.
• The School of Business has discontinued Global Programs in Oxford, USA, Cuba, Vietnam, Brazil, China, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel.
• UCR will modify its approval process for all study abroad programs to ensure compliance with UC’s Anti-Discriminatory Policies.

===============================================

UC Riverside

Agreement to peacefully end encampment on campus

KIM A. WILCOX 

Chancellor 

May 3, 2024

Dear Campus Community,

Since Wednesday, several UC Riverside campus leaders have been meeting with the leaders of the student encampment on campus. These meetings have been productive, civil, and representative of multiple points of view on how to reach a resolution.

I am pleased to share that we have reached an agreement that will result in the peaceful conclusion of the encampment by no later than midnight tonight. Please click here to view the full agreement, which will be carried out consistent with state and federal law.

It has been my goal to resolve this matter peacefully and I am encouraged by this outcome – which was generated through constructive dialogue.

UCR values students’ right to practice peaceful free speech, as well as our Principles of Community and the safety of our students, staff, faculty, and visitors.

This agreement does not change the realities of the war in Gaza, or the need to address antisemitism, Islamophobia, and other forms of bias and discrimination; however, I am grateful that we can have constructive and peaceful conversations on how to address these complex issues.

Thank you to every member of our campus community who has navigated the complexities of this week’s events with patience, grace, and civility. 

Update: FAQs on the agreement are available here.

======================================================

https://insideucr.ucr.edu/announcements/2024/05/03/faqs-encampment-agreement

FAQs on encampment agreement

OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR 

May 3, 2024

Why are the School of Business Global Programs in Oxford, USA, Cuba, Vietnam, Brazil, China, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel being discontinued as part of the agreement?

Through our dialogue, we learned that these study-abroad programs were not offered under the auspices of the UC Riverside Office of International Affairs, nor are they consistent with university policies. So they are being discontinued.  

Why is Sabra Hummus being singled out for review? 

Sabra’s name was included in the agreement because it was mentioned in the protestors’ list of demands. Sabra’s availability on campus will be reviewed in the same manner as other vendors. All campus vendors are subjected to the same standards. 

What is the status of the encampment? 

Removal of the tents is already underway and will come down by midnight tonight. 

=============================================================

Click to access response_05022024_2.pdf

 Rutgers University and protestors on Voorhees Mall have agreed that by Thursday, May 2, 2024 at 4:00 PM ET, the protest taking place on Voorhees Mall will be ended. All students involved will leave the encampment, remove all tents and personal belongings, and clear the mall of all trash. This agreement is contingent upon no further disruptions and adherence to University policies. 

Regarding the requests presented by protestors of the Gaza Liberation Zone, the Advisory Council for Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian Life will serve as a taskforce in leading ongoing conversations and convening faculty taskforces on academic matters in collaboration with the Office of the Chancellor: 

1. Divest from any firm or corporation materially participating in, benefitting from, or otherwise supporting the state of Israel’s settler colonialism, apartheid, and genocide of Palestine and the Palestinian people, in accordance with the principles for divestment listed in University policy 40.2.14.  A request from the Endowment Justice Collective to divest from companies doing business in Israel was received on April 2, 2024, and is undergoing the review process that is outlined in the university’s investment policy. The University President and the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Investments will meet with no more than five student representatives to discuss the divestment request provided the end of encampment. 

2. Terminate its partnership with Tel Aviv University including in the HELIX Innovation Hub. Agreements with global partners are a matter of scholarly inquiry. 

3. Accept at least 10 displaced Gazan students to study at Rutgers University on scholarship. Rutgers University has a close partnership with Scholar Connections and will work with a committee of students, faculty, and staff to implement support for 10 displaced Palestinian students to finish their education at Rutgers. 

4. Provide resources for Palestinian and Arab students in the form of an Arab Cultural Center on each Rutgers campus. We will develop a plan for the creation of an Arab Cultural Center with designated physical space and a hiring plan for administrators and staff by the start of Fall 2024 semester at New Brunswick. 

5. Establish a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a long-term educational and collaboration partnership with Birzeit University, Ramallah, Palestine — in accordance with precedent set by William Paterson University Rutgers-New Brunswick will revisit and follow up on the relationship established in 2022 with Birzeit University to explore avenues of research collaboration and scholarly exchange, and the feasibility of student exchange and/or study abroad through RU Global Studies. 

6. Name “Palestine” and “Palestinians” in all future communications related to Israeli aggressions in Palestine (as opposed to “Middle East” “Gaza region” etc.), and release a statement from the Office of the President acknowledging the ongoing genocide against Palestinians, its impact on the Palestinian community at our university, and advocating for a ceasefire. The Chancellor will continue to name Palestine, Palestinians, and Gaza in future communications. 

7. Hire senior administrators with cultural competency and knowledge about Arabs, Palestinians, Muslims, anti-Palestinian racism, and Islamophobia. Rutgers–New Brunswick will work to develop training sessions on anti-Palestinian, antiArab, and anti-Muslim racism for all RU administrators & staff. We also commit to the hiring of a senior administrator who has cultural competency in and with Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian communities in the Division of Diversity, Inclusion, and Community. 

8. Hire additional professors specializing in Palestine studies and Middle East studies, institute a center for Palestine studies, and establish a path to departmentalization for Middle East studies. The Office of the Chancellor will convene a working group to conduct a feasibility study for the creation of a Department of Middle East Studies and hire faculty. The first task of the committee is to identify gaps in the current faculty and make recommendations. 

9. Display the flags of occupied peoples – including but not limited to Palestinians, Kurds, and Kashmiris – in all areas displaying international flags across the Rutgers campuses. The Office of the Chancellor will take stock of flags that are displayed across RutgersNew Brunswick campus, and ensure appropriate representation of students enrolled in academic and other spaces. 

10. Provide full amnesty for all students, student groups, faculty, and staff penalized for exercising their First Amendment right to protest Rutgers University’s support for Israeli human rights violations, and voice support for faculty and staff who have been publicly targeted for exercising their academic freedom. No member of the Rutgers–New Brunswick community-including faculty, staff, graduate students, undergraduate students, or alumni-found to have been involved in the encampment or related activity will face retaliation from the University, including termination of employment or reduction in compensation. Retaliation shall be defined as any adverse action outside of normal business practices taken for the sole reason that the individual was involved in the encampment activities. Individual students who have been involved in any activities related to the encampment or support of the encampment, including presence in the encampment area, remain subject to the procedures of the Code of Student Conduct as communicated by the Office of Student Conduct. 

The commitment to end the encampment through this agreement will be considered a favorable mitigating factor in the resolution of those matters. This agreement further recognizes that reports of bias, harassment or discrimination must continue to be investigated by the appropriate offices. This agreement does not pertain to Code of Student Conduct violations that occur or come to be known after this agreement, nor shall the review and resolution of any such individual conduct matters alter or invalidate this agreement.  

==============================================================

https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/nyu-prof-here-these-are-our-demands

NYU prof here. These are our demands.

1. We demand amnesty for all students, faculty, and graduate workers involved in the encampment and for all those previously fired or disciplined for political speech and action
2. We demand cops off our campus. This means adhering to the legally-binding 2020 Memorandum of Understanding NYU already has with the NYPD, which only allows them to enter NYU in response to a violent felony or missing student.
3. We demand that NYU administration substantively negotiate with students over their demands for disclosure, divestment, and an academic boycott of Israel.
4. FACULTY: (1) Cancel final exams and projects and bring your students to our teach- in programming next week instead. (2) Let your TAs/CAs know you respect their decision to engage in a grade refusal, do not enter grades except in extenuating circumstances for particular students. (3) Sign up below for action alerts and follow
5. STUDENTS: Join the call for an assignment and exam refusal and request your professors to cancel exams and finals and join our teach-in programming instead. Follow @nyu.psc for updates.
6. EVERYONE: Write President Linda Mills l to express that you support our demands.

02.05.24

Editorial Note

The State of Qatar, known for being the largest financier of Hamas, has also invested millions of dollars in American campuses to promote Islam and anti-Israel themes. It has been doing so for four decades. 

Starting in the 1990s, the Qatari government has sponsored groups that could impact the anti-Israel discourse on campus and beyond. Omar Barghouti, one of the pioneers of BDS and the co-founder of The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) is a Qatari-born Palestinian.    

Qatar, with its Al-Jazeera media outlet, has trumpeted the current upheaval on American campuses. Qatar responds to the riots on campus by convincing readers that the riots are part of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which “guarantees freedom of assembly and speech.” It quotes the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) open letter to public and private universities, “warning them against violating the rights of protesters.”  

Al-Jazeera claimed that: “Dozens of faith, civil rights and progressive groups in the United States have expressed solidarity with university students protesting against US support for Israel amid the war on Gaza. The groups – which include the Working Families Party, IfNotNow Movement, Sunrise Movement, Movement for Black Lives, and Gen-Z for Change – lauded the student protesters in a joint statement… The signatories also included the Arab American Institute, MPower Change Action Fund, Greenpeace USA and Justice Democrats.”  

An online perusal of MPower Change shows its purpose is to “empower American Muslims to realize their faith values and translate it into local, state and national policies that safeguard the freedom to move, work, and be Muslim. We achieve this through grassroots organizing, political education and training, mobilizing Muslim voters, and leading campaigns that impact Muslims.”

The various groups that Qatar promotes wrote an open letter, “We commend the students who are exercising their right to protest peacefully despite an overwhelming atmosphere of pressure, intimidation and retaliation, to raise awareness about Israel’s assault on Gaza – with US weapons and funding. These students have come forth with clear demands that their universities divest from corporations profiting from Israeli occupation, and demanding safe environments for Palestinians across their campuses.” 

Qatar urges American universities to divest from Israel. Columbia University President Minouche Shafik released a statement saying, “While the University will not divest from Israel, the University offered to develop an expedited timeline for review of new proposals from the students by the Advisory Committee for Socially Responsible Investing, the body that considers divestment matters.” 

Qatar tried to blame pro-Israel groups for escalating the riots. It accused President Shafik, “Her statement failed to mention Palestinians or the anti-Arab and Islamophobic bigotry that demonstrators have reported receiving from counterprotesters.” 

Qatar’s goals are not new, in July 2019, as IAM reported “The Campus War Against Israel“ that, over the years, the academy has become a prominent venue for anti-Israel activity. Arab oil-wealthy states invested large sums of money in Western Universities to buy influence. With the Middle East Centers or Islamic Centers, it allowed them to teach a revision of history, tainting Israel in a negative light and influencing who would be invited to teach and research in the social sciences. Staunch enemies of Israel were recruited, as well as Israelis who are critics of Israel.

As IAM reported, in addition to the Qatari direct involvement, some Jewish American scholars have also been involved in the indirect anti-Israel Qatari campaign on campus. Using Jewish academics is known as “tokenism” to deflect accusations of anti-Semitism. As can be expected, the “tokenists” ignore human rights abuses in Iran and the Arab States but highlight the alleged misconduct of Israel. For example, a Jewish anti-Israel scholar named Rebecca L. Stein, an associate professor of Cultural Anthropology at Duke University, who signed a “call for divestment and pressure against Israeli apartheid,” has also been engaged in a program intending to defame Israel through scholarships. The program is a collaboration between the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (known as the Doha Institute) in Qatar and Birzeit University (BZU). The Arab Center is headed by former MK Azmi Bishara, who sought refuge in Qatar after escaping allegations of spying for Hezbollah. The program created a Master’s degree in Israel Studies, which began operating in 2015.

The program’s purpose was to “produce Palestinian knowledge of Israeli society” aimed at “fundamentally remaking the dominant paradigm of Israel Studies as it has been configured in the United States and increasingly in Great Britain, with its proud ‘advocacy’ mandate on behalf of the Israeli state. Birzeit’s program turns this paradigm inside out, providing students with a radical alternative.” The idea began informally in 2010 in conversations between the President and the faculty of Birzeit with the Ramallah-based Institute for Palestine Studies. The faculty disagreed on the new program’s name – with some wanting to call it “settler-colonial studies “and others preferring “Israel Studies,” The Palestinian Ministry of Education approved the latter title, and the funding was secured from Qatar.

The program encouraged students to pursue Ph.D. at Western universities to produce anti-Israel scholarships. One such student was Izz Al-Deen Araj. During his MA studies, he “started to think about Israel as a settler-colonial society, not [merely] as soldiers…We understand the conflict through one model: settler-colonialism or apartheid.” When another student, Marah Khalifeh, began the program, “Israel was something abstract: the enemy, the colonizer.” Now, with the “in-depth knowledge about Israeli society…It’s part of knowing your enemy, part of the knowledge of resistance.” According to Khalife, “It’s all about the type of knowledge we are trying to produce. We are trying to produce a Palestinian knowledge of Israeli society… to create our own tools.”

In 2019, IAM ended its post by asking: When will the West take notice of the war against Israel on its campuses? 

The wave of protest following the Hamas attack on Israel shows clearly that the West did not take notice of the highly antisemitic and radically biased anti-Israel education that generations of students have received. To avoid repeating the chaos, the universities have to take a closer look at what their students are being taught.

REFERENCES:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/29/us-advocacy-groups-back-palestine-solidarity-campus-protests-amid-gaza-war

US advocacy groups back Palestine solidarity campus protests amid Gaza war

Nearly 190 advocacy organisations laud students’ ‘courage’ amid ongoing crackdown on encampments across US universities.

By Ali Harb

Published On 29 Apr 202429 Apr 2024

Washington, DC – Dozens of faith, civil rights and progressive groups in the United States have expressed solidarity with university students protesting against US support for Israel amid the war on Gaza.

The groups – which include the Working Families Party, IfNotNow Movement, Sunrise Movement, Movement for Black Lives, and Gen-Z for Change – lauded the student protesters in a joint statement on Monday.

“We commend the students who are exercising their right to protest peacefully despite an overwhelming atmosphere of pressure, intimidation and retaliation, to raise awareness about Israel’s assault on Gaza – with US weapons and funding,” the organisations said.

“These students have come forth with clear demands that their universities divest from corporations profiting from Israeli occupation, and demanding safe environments for Palestinians across their campuses.”

The signatories also included the Arab American Institute, MPower Change Action Fund, Greenpeace USA and Justice Democrats.

The statement, backed by nearly 190 groups, highlights the growing progressive support for the campus protest movement as it enters its third week, despite crackdowns by university administrators and law enforcement agencies.

While students have been protesting the war on Gaza since its outbreak on October 7, the new wave of demonstrations – marked by protesters setting up encampments on their campuses – has gripped the country and made international headlines.

The students are calling for their universities to disclose their investments and end ties with firms involved with the Israeli military.

‘Violent response’

The protests started to gain momentum earlier in April at Columbia University in New York, where students continue to face arrests after the college administration called on police to clear their encampments.

Still, similar protests have sprung up across the US, as well as in other countries.

Hundreds of students have been arrested in the US so far with footage emerging of students, professors and journalists being violently detained by officers on various campuses.

“As we stand in solidarity with the students protesting in encampments across the country, we reaffirm our commitment to amplifying their voices, condemn the university administration officials’ violent response to their activism, and demand that universities remove the presence of police and other militarized forces from their campuses,” the advocacy groups said on Monday.

Earlier in the day, Columbia University President Minouche Shafik released a statement calling on the student protesters to “voluntarily disperse”.

“We are consulting with a broader group in our community to explore alternative internal options to end this crisis as soon as possible,” Shafik said.

She accused the encampment of creating an “unwelcoming environment” for Jewish students and faculty. But student protesters have rejected accusations of anti-Semitism, underscoring that many of the organisers engaged in the demonstrations are themselves Jewish.

“While the University will not divest from Israel, the University offered to develop an expedited timeline for review of new proposals from the students by the Advisory Committee for Socially Responsible Investing, the body that considers divestment matters,” Shafik added.

Her statement failed to mention Palestinians or the anti-Arab and Islamophobic bigotry that demonstrators have reported receiving from counterprotesters.

Columbia later issued a threat to suspend and take disciplinary actions against students if they do not clear the encampment by Monday afternoon. The university had set previous deadlines to end the protests, which the students appeared to ignore.

Political backlash

The crackdown on protesters and faculty members who support them has raised concerns about academic freedom and free speech on US campuses.

On Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) issued an open letter to public and private universities, warning them against violating the rights of protesters. The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees freedom of assembly and speech.

“As you fashion responses to the activism of your students (and faculty and staff), it is essential that you not sacrifice principles of academic freedom and free speech that are core to the educational mission of your respected institution,” it read.

The ACLU also urged campus leaders to resist “pressures placed on them by politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions to advance their own notoriety or partisan agendas”.

Politicians from both major parties have condemned student demonstrators and accused them of anti-Semitism.

“I don’t care what your demands are. Get the hell out of our community and never come back. Those are my demands,” Republican Congressman Brandon Williams wrote in a social media post on Monday in response to protesters at Syracuse University in central New York state.  “And the clock is ticking.”

Last month, Williams introduced a bill titled “Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act”.

‘They risk everything’

Amid this backlash, the dozens of progressive groups who voiced support for the students on Monday said the students’ “courage and determination in the face of adversity inspire us all to take action and speak out against injustice wherever it occurs”.

“As they risk everything right now, it is critical that all of us do everything we can to support them.”

Student organisers have stressed that their protests aim to spread awareness about the abuses in Gaza, where Israel has killed more than 34,400 people and imposed a severe blockade on the territory, bringing it to the verge of starvation.

They have warned that the politicians’ focus on them aims to distract from Israeli atrocities and US support for the war.

“Part of the reactionary response to this is to treat the campus protest itself as the problem, as the crisis – as opposed to as a response to a crisis that we should be paying attention to,” Eman Abdelhadi, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, told Al Jazeera last week.

“But I don’t think the movement itself is a distraction in the sense that the students themselves have been steadfast in turning the camera back towards Gaza.”

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA

============================================================

https://www.mpowerchange.org/gazastudentprotestsStatement in solidarity with student protests for Gaza

We, the undersigned organizations, stand in solidarity with the students nationwide and globally who are bravely protesting in encampments and otherwise to condemn Israel’s ongoing bombardment of Gaza–actions which human rights organizations, a federal U.S. court, and the International Court of Justice have said “plausibly” constitute genocide.

We commend the students who are exercising their right to protest peacefully despite an overwhelming atmosphere of pressure, intimidation and retaliation, to raise awareness about Israel’s assault on Gaza – with U.S. weapons and funding. These students have come forth with clear demands that their universities divest from corporations profiting from Israeli occupation, and demanding safe environments for Palestinians across their campuses. The students’ courage and determination in the face of adversity inspire us all to take action and speak out against injustice wherever it occurs. As they risk everything right now, it is critical that all of us do everything we can to support them.

We join them in calling for an immediate and lasting ceasefire and an end to the U.S. government’s and institutions’ role in the ongoing genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

As we stand in solidarity with the students protesting in encampments across the country, we reaffirm our commitment to amplifying their voices, condemn the university administration officials’ violent response to their activism, and demand that universities remove the presence of police and other militarized forces from their campuses.

In solidarity,

350.org US 18 Million Rising 198 methods Adalah Justice Project Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association AF3IRM Afghans For A Better Tomorrow Al-Haq Alliance of Baptists American Baptist Churches USA American Baptist Churches Palestine Israel Network American Friends Service Committee American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) American Muslim Bar Association American Muslim Community Foundation American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) Americans for Justice in Palestine Action (AJP Action) Arab American Civic Council Arab American Institute Asian American Advocacy Fund Better to Speak Beyt Tikkun: A Synagogue without Walls Black Lives of Unitarian Universalism (BLUU) Blue Future Borderlands for Equity Borderlands Resource Initiative Breach Collective Brooklyn For Peace CAIR Action CAIR California CAIR Minnesota CAIR Oklahoma CAIR-WA California Coalition for Women Prisoners Cameroon American Council Carceral Tech Resistance Network Ceasefire Democrats Ceasefire Now NJ Center for Constitutional Rights Center for Popular Democracy Action Center for Protest Law & Litigation @ Partnership for Civil Justice Fund Chicago Area Peace Action Chicago Faith Coalition on Middle East Policy Christians for a Free Palestine Civic Ark Civil Liberties Defense Center Clockshop CommonDefense.us Communities United for Status & Protection (CUSP) Council on American-Islamic Relations CWA-News Guild Local 38010 Defending Rights & Dissent Delaware Democratic Socialists of America Delawareans for Palestinian Human Rights Detention Watch Network Disciples Palestine Israel Network Diverse & Revolutionary Unitarian Universalist Multicultural Ministries (DRUUMM) Doctors Against Genocide Dream Defenders Dutch Scholars for Palestine Eindhoven Students 4 Palestine Emgage Action En Conjunto Episcopal Peace Fellowship-Palestine Israel Network Faith for Black Lives Faith in Texas Fellowship of Reconciliation Fight for the Future For All Freedom Farm Community Freedom Oklahoma Freedom To Thrive Friends of Sabeel North America (FOSNA) Future Coalition Gen-Z for Change Gender Justice Action and Gender Justice Get Free Global Campaign to Reclaim People's Sovereignty, Dismantle Corporate Power & Stop Impunity Green Mountain Solidarity With Palestine Green New Deal Network Greenpeace USA Hawai'i for Palestine Health Justice Commons Helena (Montana) Service for Peace and Justice Highlander Research and Education Center Hindus for Human Rights Historians for Peace and Democracy Human Dignity Project (THDP) IfNotNow Movement IfNotNow New Jersey Immigrant Defense Project Immigrant Justice Network Immigrants Act Now Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC) Indiana Center for Middle East Peace Institute for Policy Studies New Internationalism Project Interfaith Ceasefire International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network International Mayan League InterReligious Task Force on Central America Iowans For Palestine Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) Islamophobia Studies Center Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Jewish Voice for Peace Jewish Voice for Peace-Hawai’i Jews For Racial & Economic Justice (JFREJ) Just Foreign Policy Justice Democrats Just Futures Law Justice for All Kairos USA Libyan American Alliance LittleSis / Public Accountability Initiative Living Water Inclusive Catholic Community Long Island Progressive Coalition Make the Road Nevada Malaya Georgia Massachusetts Peace Action Mennonite Action Mennonite Action WA Migrant Roots Media Minnesota Peace Project Mondoweiss Movement for Black Lives MPower Change Action Fund MSA West Muslim Advocates Muslim Community Network Muslim Counterpublics Lab Muslim Power Building Project Muslims for Just Futures Muslims for Progressive Values National Arab American Women’s Association (NAAWA) National Iranian American Council National Lawyers Guild National Lawyers Guild – St. Louis Chapter National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR) National Partnership for New Americans New Hampshire Veterans for Peace New York City Veterans For Peace The New Justice Project Minnesota NH Peace Action North American Students of Cooperation No Separate Justice North Carolina Peace Action The Oakland Institute Office of Peace, Justice, and Ecological Integrity/Sisters of Charity of Saint Elizabeth Our Revolution Palestine American League Palestine Legal Palestinian American Community Center Palestinian American Organizations Network (PAON) Palestinian Feminist Collective Partners for Palestine Pax Christi New Jersey Pax Christi New York State Pax Christi Pacific Northwest Pax Christi USA Peace Action Peace Action New York State Peace, Justice, Sustainability NOW! Pediatricians for Palestine People’s Action PeoplesHub Poverty Project at the Institute for Policy Studies Presbyterian Church (USA), Office of Public Witness Presbyterian Peace Fellowship Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) Project ANAR Project South Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice Reparation Education Project Reviving the Islamic Sisterhood for Empowerment Rise for Palestine Rising Majority Rising Tide North America Rochester Committee on Latin America RootsAction Education Fund Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Centre Sacramento Regional Coalition for Palestinian Rights Sound Vision Starr King School for the Ministry Students and Faculty for Justice in Palestine at the University of Hawai’i (SFJP) Sunrise Movement Sur Legal Collaborative TakeAction Minnesota Tech Justice Law Project The Gathering for Justice The Hague Peace Projects The Social Justice Center The Uncommitted National Movement The Whatcom Peace and Justice Center Transnational Institute UndocuBlack Network Unitarian Universalist Association Unitarian Universalist Church of the Larger Fellowship Unitarian Universalist College of Social Justice Unitarian Universalist Justice Ministry of North Carolina Unitarian Universalist Mass Action Unitarian Universalist Peace Ministry Network Unitarian Universalist Service Committee Unitarian Universalist Young Adults for Climate Justice (UUYACJ) Unitarian Universalists for Justice in the Middle East United Church of Christ Palestine Israel Network United Methodists for Kairos Response (UMKR) United Voices for America Until Freedom US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Veterans For Peace We Are All America Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club Wind of the Spirit Immigrant Resource Center Women’s Institute for Freedom of the Press Working Families Party World BEYOND War Young Democrats of America Black Caucus Young Democrats of America Environmental Caucus Youth Leadership Institute

============================================

Open Letter to College and University Presidents on Student Protests

Open Letter to College and University Presidents on Student Protests

Academic freedom and free speech are essential. Universities must protect them.

By Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director 

David Cole, ACLU Legal Director 

April 26, 2024

Dear College and University Presidents:

We write in response to the recent protests that have spread across our nation’s university and college campuses, and the disturbing arrests that have followed. We understand that as leaders of your campus communities, it can be extraordinarily difficult to navigate the pressures you face from politicians, donors, and faculty and students alike. You also have legal obligations to combat discrimination and a responsibility to maintain order. But as you fashion responses to the activism of your students (and faculty and staff), it is essential that you not sacrifice principles of academic freedom and free speech that are core to the educational mission of your respected institution.

The ACLU helped establish the right to protest as a central pillar of the First Amendment. We have defended those principles for more than a century. The First Amendment compels public universities and colleges to respect free speech rights. And while the Constitution does not apply directly to private institutions, academic freedom and free inquiry require that similar principles guide private universities. We approach this moment with appreciation for the challenges you confront. In the spirit of offering constructive solutions for a way forward, we offer five basic guardrails to ensure freedom of speech and academic freedom while protecting against discriminatory harassment and disruptive conduct.

Schools must not single out particular viewpoints for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment

First, university administrators must not single out particular viewpoints — however offensive they may be to some members of the community — for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment. Viewpoint neutrality is essential. Harassment directed at individuals because of their race, ethnicity, or religion is not, of course, permissible. But general calls for a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” or defenses of Israel’s assault on Gaza, even if many listeners find these messages deeply offensive, cannot be prohibited or punished by a university that respects free speech principles.

These protections extend to both students and faculty, and to speech that supports either side of the conflict. Outside the classroom, including on social media, students and professors must be free to express even the most controversial political opinions without fear of discipline or censure. Inside the classroom, speech can be and always has been subject to more restrictive rules to ensure civil dialogue and a robust learning environment. But such rules have no place in a public forum like a campus green. Preserving physical safety on campuses is paramount; but “safety” from ideas or views that one finds offensive is anathema to the very enterprise of the university.

Schools must protect students from discriminatory harassment and violence

Second, both public and private universities are bound by civil rights laws that guarantee all students equal access to education, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. This means that schools can, and indeed must, protect students from discriminatory harassment on the basis of race or national origin, which has been interpreted to include discrimination on the basis of “shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics,” or “citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.”

So, while offensive and even racist speech is constitutionally protected, shouting an epithet at a particular student or pinning an offensive sign to their dorm room door can constitute impermissible harassment, not free speech. Antisemitic or anti-Palestinian speech targeted at individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin constitutes invidious discrimination, and cannot be tolerated. Physically intimidating students by blocking their movements or pursuing them aggressively is unprotected conduct, not protected speech. It should go without saying that violence is never an acceptable protest tactic.

Speech that is not targeted at an individual or individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin but merely expresses impassioned views about Israel or Palestine is not discrimination and should be protected. The only exception for such untargeted speech is where it is so severe or pervasive that it denies students equal access to an education — an extremely demanding standard that has almost never been met by pure speech. One can criticize Israel’s actions, even in vituperative terms, without being antisemitic. And by the same token, one can support Israel’s actions in Gaza and condemn Hamas without being anti-Muslim. Administrators must resist the tendency to equate criticism with discrimination. Speech condoning violence can be condemned, to be sure. But it cannot be the basis for punishment, without more.

Schools can announce and enforce reasonable content-neutral protest policies but they must leave ample room for students to express themselves

Third, universities can announce and enforce reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on protest activity to ensure that essential college functions can continue. Such restrictions must be content neutral, meaning that they do not depend on the substance of what is being communicated, but rather where, when, or how it is being communicated. Protests can be limited to certain areas of campus and certain times of the day, for example. These policies must, however, leave ample room for students to speak to and to be heard by other members of the community. And the rules must not only be content neutral on their face; they must also be applied in a content-neutral manner. If a university has routinely tolerated violations of its rules, and suddenly enforces them harshly in a specific context, singling out particular views for punishment, the fact that the policy is formally neutral on its face does not make viewpoint-based enforcement permissible.

Schools must recognize that armed police on campus can endanger students and are a measure of last resort

Fourth, when enforcement of content-neutral rules may be warranted, college administrators should involve police only as a last resort, after all other efforts have been exhausted. Inviting armed police into a campus protest environment, even a volatile one, can create unacceptable risks for all students and staff. University officials must also be cognizant of the history of law enforcement using inappropriate and excessive force on communities of color, including Black, Brown, and immigrant students. Moreover, arresting peaceful protestors is also likely to escalate, not calm, the tensions on campus — as events of the past week have made abundantly clear.

Schools must resist the pressures placed on them by politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions

Finally, campus leaders must resist the pressures placed on them by politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions to advance their own notoriety or partisan agendas. Recent congressional hearings have featured disgraceful attacks by members of Congress on academic freedom and freedom of speech. Universities must stand up to such intimidation, and defend the principles of academic freedom so essential to their integrity and mission.

The Supreme Court has forcefully rejected the premise that, “because of the acknowledged need for order, First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large.”

“Quite to the contrary,” the court stated, “the vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.” In keeping with these values, we urge you to resist the temptation to silence students or faculty members because powerful voices deem their views offensive. Instead, we urge you to defend the university’s core mission of encouraging debate, fostering dissent, and preparing the future leaders of our pluralistic society to tolerate even profound differences of opinion.

25.04.24

Editorial Note

The ongoing war in Gaza has impacted the campuses, especially the United States, where pro-Palestinian protesters have been occupying buildings and setting up tent encampments. A less noticeable but deeply troubling development pertains to the unofficial boycott of Israeli scholars. 

In January, the Israel Young Academy, founded by the Israel Academy of Science and Humanities, surveyed 1,000 senior faculty members at all Israeli institutions. Accordingly, one-third of the scholars reported a significant slump in ties with counterparts abroad. Similarly, Or Kashti reported on the same topic in a Haaretz article titled “‘I Won’t Work With You. You’re Committing Genocide’: Israeli Academia Faces an Unprecedented Boycott.” Kashti talked to some 60 Israeli scholars who painted a painful picture of the boycott they have experienced since the Gaza war broke out. Detailing many cases of canceled invitations to academic conferences, a freeze on hiring Israeli academics at overseas universities, rejection of scientific articles, and disruption of lectures abroad.

As Kashti reports, the academics spoke about their “experiences with colleagues abroad since October 7. They recounted dozens of incidents: cancellation of invitations to conferences, a freeze on their appointments in foreign institutions, rejection of scientific articles on political grounds, disruption of lectures abroad, cessation of collaborative efforts with colleagues abroad, refusal by such colleagues to take part in the promotion process their Israeli counterparts must undergo at local institutions, and even a sweeping boycott of local colleges and universities. The following examples, all from recent months and backed up by documents and emails, are being made public here for the first time. The plethora of events leaves no room for doubt: Israel is feeling the brunt of an unprecedented academic boycott, which is only gathering momentum.”

Haaretz provided many more examples, but IAM includes only the following. 

 In February, Gilad Hirschberger, a social psychologist at Reichman University, was invited to be the keynote speaker at a conference by a Norwegian organization that deals with collective trauma. Hirschberger intended to present “the effects of collective trauma in our region on both Israelis and Palestinians.” However, the next day, he received a message, “I regret to inform you that we have to withdraw our invitation. This decision has been taken by the organizing committee for the conference. The argument is to avoid collaboration with representatives of countries involved in ongoing warfare,” the Norwegian wrote. Hirschberger knew, “I was rejected because I am an Israeli.” 

Nir Davidson, a Weizmann Institute of Science physics professor, suggested to an Italian colleague that they try to request a grant together from a competitive research foundation. The Italian colleague responded, “Because of the atrocities your country is perpetrating against innocent civilians, thousands of professors and researchers have signed a petition calling for all research collaboration to be blocked… I’m afraid that what your country has done and is continuing to do will never be forgotten or forgiven.” 

Dr. Ravit Alfandari, from the University of Haifa’s School of Social Work, worked with a researcher from Northern Ireland for over a year on a study about domestic violence, which continued after the war in Gaza broke out. The Irish colleague wrote, “I understand you… I too know what it’s like to live under a threat.” But then he informed her that he had signed a petition calling for an academic boycott of Israel. “He said, ‘I hold you in great esteem, but I don’t intend to work with you ever again. It’s not a temporary thing. You are committing genocide in Gaza.”

Prof. Einat Metzl, head of the arts therapy program at Bar-Ilan University, was slated to visit a university in Los Angeles to lead a joint training program in her field. Her visit was canceled when three students objected to inviting a lecturer from Israel. 

Dr. Dan Mamlok, from the School of Education at Tel Aviv University, arrived in Montreal in March to deliver a lecture at a research center. He was confronted by dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators who blocked the entry of the attendees. “It was surprising and ironic to discover demonstrators against a lecture that dealt with education for tolerance in a polarized society… I came as a researcher of education – not as a representative of the Israeli government.” Mamlok managed to get into the building and deliver the talk before a small audience. 

Prof. Netta Barak-Koren, from Hebrew University’s law school, currently on a sabbatical in the United States who a few weeks ago organized a conference at a leading U.S. university. She said, “Suddenly universities are discussing the possibility of holding a conference in less prominent venues, or even after the end of the academic year, in order to avoid demonstrations.” 

Prof. Yuval Feldman from Bar-Ilan tweeted on X, on March 25, “The process of a quite prestigious appointment abroad for myself was suspended this week because ‘this is not the most appropriate time.'” Feldman wrote, “I wonder whether we are encountering a new reality abroad that will not end even if the situation in Israel improves – a kind of genie that we won’t be able to put back into the bottle.”

Dr. Liat Ayalon, from Bar-Ilan’s School of Social Work, submitted in November a short article to an academic journal. The article dealt with the war’s impact on the situation of Israel’s elderly community. Shortly afterward, the editor called and asked her to withdraw the article. “He said that he could not send it out for peer review,” Prof. Ayalon relates. “He explained that the feelings in the United States against Israel were so strong that he was afraid that publishing the article would be detrimental to the journal.” The editor eventually backed down but Ayalon had already submitted the article elsewhere. 

Philip Cohen, a professor of sociology and demography at the University of Maryland, explained in his blog why he had refused a request from the Israel Science Foundation to review a research proposal. “I believe the international community cannot permit the normalization of relations with the State of Israel in light of its actions in Gaza and the West Bank since October 7… In the absence of responsible state action by your government (or ours), I must instead do what I can to contribute to the diplomatic, political, and even scientific isolation of the state… I don’t know if my peers in Israel understand the extent of their global isolation.” 

Haaretz noted that “A number of universities and academic organizations in Belgium, Spain, Italy and Norway recently announced full boycotts or a suspension of ties with Israeli institutions until they receive clarifications with regard to topics ranging from the state of academic freedom on their campuses, to their moral, financial and material support for Israel’s defense forces.” For one, Ghent University recently requested such information from its counterpart in Haifa. 

American studies Professor Milette Shamir, the vice president of Tel Aviv University, was in Australia recently to attend an academic fair at the University of Sydney. When she arrived, pro-Palestinian demonstrators shouted that Tel Aviv University shares in crimes against the Palestinians and that all collaborations with Israel should end. She told Haaretz that boycotts “keep mounting to the point of paralyzing the system. The result will be a mortal blow to Israeli academia. It will take on a provincial character and we will not be able to integrate into the forefront of the world’s research.”

Dr. Moran Benhar of the Technion’s Faculty of Medicine was scheduled to participate in a scientific conference of the Society for Free Radical Research International in Istanbul in June. In February, she was notified that due to the war in Gaza, the government of Turkey had decided to bar Israeli scientists from taking part in the event. Benhar contacted a leading Jewish scientist at Harvard, who was due to receive a research prize at the Istanbul event. Within a short time, the scientist informed the organizers that he would not attend a conference that boycotted Israeli researchers. A few days later, the society’s directors announced that all restrictions had been lifted.

The rejection and isolation of Israeli scholars is highly alarming, not to mention bitterly ironic. When the BDS movement initiated calls to boycott Israeli academic institutions and various associations adopted this call, they were careful to emphasize that individual scholars, as opposed to institutions, were not targeted. In reality, as noted, individual academics are being boycotted because they are Israelis and “engage in genocide,” no matter if they support peace. To the historians of antisemitism, this equation sounds familiar. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, they dropped all distinction between the individual and the group, blaming all Jews for whatever “sins” the Jewish collective was accused of. 

Second, this classic antisemitic equivalence should be especially irritating to the radical Israeli scholars often profiled by IAM. By joining the various BDS initiatives and trashing Israel in whatever way they could, they hoped to pass as the “good Israelis,” not to be confused with their bad compatriots who “support genocide” in Gaza. But, as noted, the rejections do not distinguish between the “good academics” and the “bad academics.” Studying the history of antisemitism would have told them so.

Academic institutions should implement the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism to fight BDS.

REFERENCES:

https://www.msn.com/he-il/news/other/i-won-t-work-with-you-you-re-committing-genocide-israeli-academia-faces-an-unprecedented-boycott/ar-BB1ltF3S
Haaretz.com 
‘I Won’t Work With You. You’re Committing Genocide’: Israeli Academia Faces an Unprecedented Boycott

By Or Kashti 

Canceled invitations to conferences, a freeze on hiring Israelis at overseas institutions, rejection of scientific articles on political grounds, disruption of lectures abroad – Israeli scholars from various disciplines paint a painful picture of the foreign boycott that has afflicted them since the war broke out in Gaza

April 12th, 01AM April 12th, 02AM 

In February, Gilad Hirschberger received an invitation to be the keynote speaker at a conference to be held this October by a Norwegian organization that deals with collective trauma. The invitation, from an Oslo-based research center, came in the wake of studies conducted by Prof. Hirschberger – a social psychologist at Reichman University, in Herzliya – including one on the long-term effects of the Holocaust.

“Victim and perpetrator perspectives on a group level seem very relevant to our work,” one of the organizers wrote. “We are of course aware of the tragedies and the ongoing conflict in your part of the world, which also has global impact. We would of course be interested to hear your thoughts on how this might influence your views on collective trauma today.”

In the days that followed, a series of messages was exchanged between the Norwegian psychologist and Hirschberger, who also serves as vice dean of Reichman’s Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, about his lecture. “Polarization between extremes is among the consequences of terror and war,” wrote his Norwegian contact person. “We would be grateful if you would be willing to discuss shortly this aspect of our conference.” Hirschberger replied that he intended to present “the effects of collective trauma in our region on both Israelis and Palestinians.”

However, the next day a very different message arrived. “I regret to inform you that we have to withdraw our invitation. This decision has been taken by the organizing committee for the conference. The argument is to avoid collaboration with representatives of countries involved in ongoing warfare,” the Norwegian wrote, not concealing his own criticism of the decision.

Hirschberger was taken aback. “I have been active in the contentious field of political psychology for many years, but never have I encountered such a direct, blunt response,” he says. “I was rejected because I am an Israeli.” His response: “To treat an individual negatively because of their group membership is the essence of prejudice. If psychologists can’t contain their prejudice, and if even clinical psychologists express such intolerance, what hope does the rest of the world have?”

Even ignoring, for a moment, the response of his Norwegian counterparts, it’s clear to him who is going to pay the price. “Israeli academia is liable to find itself in a new situation regarding participation in conferences, fundraising for research or publication of articles,” he says. “We are totally dependent on international connections. Collaboration with us will become increasingly difficult, it will be considered something beyond the pale.”

Is Israeli academia about to enter a whole new phase? All signs are that it already has. In the past few weeks, Haaretz spoke with more than 60 Israeli scholars – from a wide range of disciplines and academic institutions, including both young scientists and university presidents – about their experiences with colleagues abroad since the war broke out in the Gaza Strip after Hamas’ massacre on October 7. They recounted dozens of incidents: cancellation of invitations to conferences, a freeze on their appointments in foreign institutions, rejection of scientific articles on political grounds, disruption of lectures abroad, cessation of collaborative efforts with colleagues abroad, refusal by such colleagues to take part in the promotion process their Israeli counterparts must undergo at local institutions, and even a sweeping boycott of local colleges and universities. The following examples, all from recent months and backed up by documents and emails, are being made public here for the first time. The plethora of events leaves no room for doubt: Israel is feeling the brunt of an unprecedented academic boycott, which is only gathering momentum.

Similar conclusions were evident in a survey conducted in January by the Israel Young Academy, an organization of young scholars that serves as an incubator for ideas and projects, which was founded in 2012 by the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. In that survey – of 1,000 senior faculty members at all of Israel’s institutions of higher learning – one-third of the respondents reported a significant slump in their ties with counterparts abroad. Some provided details. “A colleague in Europe informed me that she needs to remove the name of one of my former students from an article they co-authored, because her university is against any collaboration with Israel”; “My research partner requested that we not submit joint requests for grants to research foundations”; “A lab director with whom I have worked for many years said he finds it difficult to work with Israelis”; “A colleague in a European country received threats because he was collaborating with Israel,” and so on and so forth.

These comments were provided anonymously by the respondents and are in keeping with dozens of testimonies obtained by Haaretz. Together they create a picture of a frightening blow being dealt to Israeli academia, which is already being felt on the ground and is likely, primarily, to affect young scholars setting out on their careers. “People have severed ties with us – they have stopped responding to emails and have simply disappeared,” says Prof. Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi, a sociologist from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Similar impressions have been expressed by many academic staff members.

“A discourse of fear around maintaining contacts with Israelis is emerging,” relates R., a young Israeli who works in a lab in the field of the exact sciences at an elite university in England. His story is especially enlightening for understanding how Israeli academics like him are currently being received abroad.

In recent months, R. had suggested to the directors of his lab that they collaborate with universities in Israel. His proposal was rejected on the grounds that it is difficult to work with an institution located in a war zone if doing so essentially “benefits” only one side of the conflict. R. did not back down. He suggested allowing Israeli students to participate in a project involving remote learning. That attempt failed, as well. “The war is complicating things,” he was told, and “no one wants to take a risk.” The lab had already been “burned” in a similar case not so long beforehand, the directors explained, when sanctions were imposed on continuing associations with Russian researchers with whom they had been working.

“The lab’s directors even asked me to remove the fact that I am from Israel from my profile on the university’s website,” R. says. “I consented. Not because I was asked to, but because I realized that it was in fact to my benefit.”

Back in Israel,” he adds, “people find it hard to understand this, but we are two minutes away from getting the same treatment as Putin’s Russia.

Israeli academia is liable to find itself in a new situation regarding participation in conferences, fundraising for research or publication of articles. We are totally dependent on international connections. Collaboration with us will become increasingly difficult. 

* * *

D. fights back tears. A young lecturer in the social sciences, she sees her career about to go down the drain. Like other academics, she chose to be interviewed anonymously here for fear that having her name published would burn her few remaining professional bridges. Some interviewees were concerned that using their names would hurt colleagues abroad or encourage the boycotters. Others were simply afraid.

“I invested almost 20 years in studies and in gradually progressing in my field. But now the ability to continue with my work is very limited,” she says, adding that she feels pressure from multiple directions. “I am taking part in a large international project in Europe, together with other researchers from a number of countries,” she relates. “A few weeks ago, they asked me not to publish our joint studies on my website: The ties between us are harmful to them.” When she suggested joining a research workshop with her colleagues, the response was an unequivocal refusal. “Ethical considerations” do not permit any connection with an academic in Israel, she was told. “Ties with an Israeli researcher have become something considered to be illegitimate,” she sums up. “My future is limited.”

It once seemed as if the social sciences and humanities are more vulnerable to political struggles. Indeed, such departments in Israel were familiar with the impact of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement long before October 7. However, the cessation of collaboration – whether in conducting research, co-authoring articles or in other areas – is now being seen as a widespread phenomenon in all fields.

A few months ago, Nir Davidson, a physics professor at the Weizmann Institute of Science, suggested to an Italian colleague that they try together to request a grant from a competitive research foundation. “Because of the atrocities your country is perpetrating against innocent civilians, thousands of professors and researchers have signed a petition calling for all research collaboration to be blocked,” the colleague replied, noting that he “fondly recalls” a visit he made to Israel in 2020, but adding, “I’m afraid that what your country has done and is continuing to do will never be forgotten or forgiven.”

About a month ago, a scientist from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev was ejected from an international group that submits research proposals to the European Union in the realm of environmental studies. The explanation he was given by one of his colleagues was, “I’m really sorry, but I’m going to have to not select Israel as a partner for the project. In fact, some partners do not wish to be involved in the project if Israel is a partner, particularly given the current political context. I am truly sorry, and I hope that we will have the opportunity to work together on another research project. Thank you for your understanding and I wish you all the best for the future.”

Another incident was cited by Ravit Alfandari, from the University of Haifa’s School of Social Work. She worked for over a year with a researcher from Northern Ireland on a large-scale study about domestic violence, and initially their collaborative effort continued after the war in Gaza broke out. “I understand you,” the Irish colleague told her, in one of their conversations. “I too know what it’s like to live under a threat.” But then, in November, just before they submitted a jointly written article to a highly regarded journal, he informed her that he had signed a petition calling for an academic boycott of Israel.

“He was decisive,” Dr. Alfandari recalls. “He said, ‘I hold you in great esteem, but I don’t intend to work with you ever again. It’s not a temporary thing. You are committing genocide in Gaza.'”

In December, a literary scholar at Belgium’s KU Leuven University terminated a joint project with a scholar from the Hebrew University. “Our students are ‘very vocal’ on this subject,” the scholar wrote, explaining that someone had written on exam forms that were distributed in class, ‘Leuven – stop supporting genocide.'” In another case, an attempt by a Hebrew University professor in the social sciences to find an academic institution in Italy that would take part in teaching a joint course ended in disappointment.

“I got a punch in the stomach from my longtime colleagues,” the Israeli scholar says. “There was a lot of squirming. On the one hand, they didn’t say ‘no’ to my face; on the other hand, it was actually ‘no’ with an exclamation mark.”

Similarly, Prof. Einat Metzl, head of the arts therapy program at Bar-Ilan University, was slated to visit a university in Los Angeles within the framework of leading a joint training program in her field, but the visit was canceled when three students objected to inviting a lecturer from Israel.

A professor at the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology told Haaretz about a student exchange program with a university in Denmark that was called off. Discussions about the program, which had reached an advanced stage in the months preceding the war, came to a halt in November. “The atmosphere changed, and was against us,” the professor says. “My counterpart said that it would be best to suspend the project. My impression was that he was afraid of his colleagues.”

The boycott of Israeli academia has also seeped into the field of business administration. A joint program in that field with an elite university in a large Western country was canceled a few weeks ago. Concern over anticipated anti-Israel demonstrations at the school was the off-the-record explanation.

Yet there are also cases of a reverse trend – of Israeli academics who have themselves decided to break their ties. “I had good relations for many years with the editor of a journal,” notes Prof. Michal Frenkel, from Hebrew University’s Department of Sociology and Anthropology. “Already on October 7 he complained about ‘unbalanced’ coverage in the world media. A few days later, he signed a letter calling for a boycott of Israel. He didn’t even wait until we entered Gaza. I resigned from the journal’s academic council. I couldn’t work with a person like that.”

* * *

About a month ago, Dan Mamlok, from the School of Education at Tel Aviv University, arrived in Montreal to deliver a lecture at a research center there. He was confronted by dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators, most of them from the city’s McGill University, who blocked the entry of the attendees. “It was surprising and ironic to discover demonstrators against a lecture that dealt with education for tolerance in a polarized society,” he relates. “I came as a researcher of education – not as a representative of the Israeli government.

“After a certain amount of effort,” notes Dr. Mamlok, who managed to get into the building and deliver the talk before a small audience, “the security guards succeeded in getting a few people in through the building’s cellar. Outside a demonstration took place, which was very audible in the room. In the end, three security men escorted me, and then I was driven to the hotel in a police car.” In light of stories like these, he says, he knows of many academics “who are considering canceling lectures [abroad], and some who have already done so.”

Last week, Prof. Adam Lefstein, who heads the Seymour Fox School of Education at Hebrew University, organized a meeting for colleagues in his department in advance of their trips to conferences overseas. About 15 people attended the event, at which proposals for coping with possible disruptions were discussed.

D. fights back tears. A young lecturer in the social sciences, she sees her career about to go down the drain. “Ties with an Israeli researcher have become something considered to be illegitimate,” she sums up. “My future is limited.”

One suggestion was to begin by talking about the war, including about criticism of it, “but also to say that we are here to talk about research,” Lefstein says. Another idea was “to display a presence” by attending one another’s sessions. “I don’t think one should be dragged into a shouting match,” Lefstein avers, “but sometimes it’s necessary to give lecturers the feeling that they are not alone.”

Indeed, the specter of possible demonstrations against Israeli academics overseas has had a chilling effect. Prof. Netta Barak-Koren, from Hebrew University’s law school, currently on a sabbatical in the United States, was appointed to help colleagues in Jerusalem prepare for boycott-related scenarios. A few weeks ago, she says she organized a conference at a leading U.S. university that was only authorized following consultations with a long and unusual series of people – something she had already experienced elsewhere in recent months.

“Suddenly universities are discussing the possibility of holding a conference in less prominent venues, or even after the end of the academic year, in order to avoid demonstrations. Our partners were very committed to organizing the [recent] event and holding it,” she says, but she says she is not sure that has been true in other cases.

To avert debacles, organizers of conferences abroad are canceling the participation of Israeli scholars in advance, but not the events themselves. A., who is in the field of the social sciences, was invited last summer by a European colleague to deliver a lecture at a local university later this year. “After October 7, she immediately took an interest in my well-being and expressed concern and sympathy,” she explains. About a month ago, the two started to plan the subject of the lecture – but then she was notified it had been canceled. It’s better to postpone the event indefinitely, because of the war in Gaza and the criticism it’s provoking among students, A. was told.

Many academics note a significant decline in the number of scientific conferences they’ve attended in the last half year. There are a number of reasons for this, ranging from the problem of finding flights after the war broke out, to changes related to the timing and duration of the semesters, to difficulties in integrating socially in gatherings abroad at a time like this. At a conference of a social sciences association last November in North America, for example, most of the participants attached a sticker stating “Stop the Genocide in Gaza” to their name tags. At an international education gathering in Miami, in early March, a session focusing on “Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza” was held under the aegis of the organization’s president.

Among all these examples, one that stands out is a scientific conference of the Society for Free Radical Research International, scheduled to be held in Istanbul in June. But already in early February, the heads of the European branch of the society informed Moran Benhar, of the Technion’s Faculty of Medicine, that due to the war in Gaza, the government of Turkey had decided to bar Israeli scientists from taking part in the event, and nothing could be done about it.

Prof. Benhar: “They said that it was really unpleasant, but that the situation had been forced on them. I said that I didn’t think it was reasonable. Just as it was untenable for a country that had undertaken to host the Olympic Games to boycott another country, it was unacceptable for Turkey to decide who would attend an international conference being held on its soil.” In their conversation, the European heads of the organization repeated that they didn’t want to get into “political issues,” as that would create “a problematic precedent.” Benhar’s response was that their consent to bow to Turkey’s boycott policy was a far more dangerous precedent.

After consulting with various colleagues, Benhar contacted a leading Jewish scientist at Harvard, who was due to receive a research prize at the Istanbul event. Within a short time, the scientist informed the organizers that he would not attend a conference that boycotted Israeli researchers. A few days later, the society’s directors announced that all the restrictions had been lifted.

“I’m certain that the disconnect between Israel and other countries will happen in many areas,” says A., the researcher whose lecture was canceled in Europe. “We are only at the beginning of the road. I think people aren’t aware of the price we are paying and will continue to pay. Maybe we’ll wake up when we aren’t invited to the Olympic Games.”

Similar concerns are voiced by Prof. Yuval Feldman from Bar-Ilan’s school. “The process of a quite prestigious appointment abroad for myself was suspended this week because ‘this is not the most appropriate time,'” Feldman, who preferred not to be interviewed here, tweeted on X, on March 25. “I wonder whether we are encountering a new reality abroad that will not end even if the situation in Israel improves – a kind of genie that we won’t be able to put back into the bottle.”

“I think we are a little like the canary in the mine,” Eran Toch, from Tel Aviv University’s Faculty of Engineering, tweeted back. “The connection with the world is critical for Israel. We are not Russia. And academia stands on that front lines against the world.” Prof. Toch added that the process “will lead to a [wider] boycott of Israeli products, and that’s something everyone must take into account.”

* * *

Israeli academics could perhaps have anticipated the problems they’re having during the war with collaborations with colleagues abroad and with conferences and lectures overseas. But what they did not expect was that publication of articles in academic journals – effectively, the bread and butter of the world of research – would also be affected. The processes of initial acceptance, peer review and publication of such articles are supposed to be neutral, professional and unbiased. But this is no longer always the case, as Israeli researchers are realizing.

In November, Liat Ayalon, from Bar-Ilan’s School of Social Work, submitted a short article to an academic journal where she had published in the past. The article dealt with the war’s impact on the situation of Israel’s elderly community. Shortly afterward, the editor, with whom she had worked for some two decades, called and asked her to withdraw the article. “He said that he could not send it out for peer review,” Prof. Ayalon relates. “He explained that the feelings in the United States against Israel were so strong that he was afraid that publishing the article would be detrimental to the journal.”

It was not a pleasant conversation: “He told me, ‘You know that I support you [Israel] and I’ve been to Israel four times, but I can’t publish it at this time.'” She was so astounded that she didn’t even argue with him at first. “I said, ‘Fine, if that’s what you want. I accept your opinion.'”

A few days later, however, she had a change of heart and decided to write him.

“I do think this is a slippery slope,” Ayalon wrote. “Right now the political sentiment does not allow to publish papers on older Israelis, but soon enough, it will be against having Israel as an affiliation (I am sure this is the case in some places already) and thereafter, it will be having a Jewish last name. I can’t imagine an American journal not publishing a paper on the effects of 9/11 on older people because of public sentiment, and although I don’t think that we should or could be comparing levels of suffering, the magnitude of Oct. 7 was 10 times greater given the size of the population.

“Hence, I am just concluding by a) thanking you once again for being honest about this and b) saying that we should be careful because we (Israelis) are at the front, but unfortunately hatred and bigotry affect and will affect everyone.”

The editor ultimately backed down – but Ayalon had already submitted the article elsewhere. It was accepted within 24 hours, perhaps because the second editor was an even warmer supporter of Israel. “It looks as though at the moment everything is political,” she says.

“Because of the atrocities your country is perpetrating against innocent civilians, thousands of professors and researchers have signed a petition calling for all research collaboration to be blocked,” an Italian colleague told Prof. Nir Davidson, “I’m afraid that what your country is doing will never be forgiven.”

Something similar happened to Prof. Rael Strous, director of the Mental Health Wing of Mayanei Hayeshua Medical Center, in Bnei Brak. Strous, a professor of psychiatry at Tel Aviv University’s Sackler Faculty of Medicine, volunteered early on in the war to treat members of internally displaced families from the communities abutting Gaza who had been evacuated to Eilat. He wrote an article dealing with various aspects of his work there, from administering treatment in a hotel lobby packed with people, to coping with requests of patients to tell the world about the trauma they had undergone. “I didn’t think that was my task as a psychiatrist,” he says. “I treat people.”

Strous submitted his article in November to a prestigious European journal and received positive feedback from one of the editors. Three weeks later, however, he was informed that the article had been rejected.

“The author does not mention the larger context of the crisis they are discussing. By this I mean, they do not discuss the tens of thousands of Palestinians who continue to be killed, injured and psychologically traumatized in the current conflict,” an anonymous referee wrote. “The silence on this matter … is a form of epistemic injustice. That is, the author uses their position of privilege as a person with high-level academic training to erase the reality of Palestinian suffering from the narrative.”

One example cited by the reviewer was that “the author does not consider the danger posed to Palestinians” by the people he treated, “in the context of considerable evidence that Israeli settlers often undertake vigilante attacks against Palestinians.”

Strous responded to the reviewer: “My paper had absolutely nothing to do with ‘Israeli settlers.’ The hotels where we practiced were on the opposite side of the country. The evacuees were not from areas anywhere near what some refer to as occupied territories where “settlers” live.” He added that this was proof that the “reviewer is clearly politically biased in his/her/their review.”

The psychiatrist appealed, and complained that the rejection of the article was “particularly unfair and disturbing.” Within a short time, the journal’s chief editor apologized and sent the article to a new peer reviewer. It was published his month. At the end of the abstract, a sentence was added saying that the paper was written from an Israeli viewpoint and the author acknowledges the suffering and psychiatric needs of Gazans. This was the journal’s suggestion, Strous notes, and he agreed.

An Israeli professor who also serves as a deputy editor at a highly regarded journal of psychology got a similar reaction. She receives articles from researchers worldwide and sends them on for professional review. In mid-February she sent an article by an American psychologist to a Spanish scholar – who refused to peer-review it.

“I do not feel comfortable collaborating with nationals from a country which is committing war crimes,” the referee wrote. ” I hope that this state of affairs will soon come to an end, but, meanwhile, I want you to know that I will not be able to take any further request from you.”

The Israeli editor was flabbergasted. She doesn’t know either the author or the referee, and has no connection with the article itself.

“I was very sorry to receive your email and to discover that you are associating a review request with accusations of war crimes,” she wrote back. “Needless to say, accepting or declining a review request is not a personal favor to any specific editor…Therefore, I find your response highly unprofessional and inappropriate.”

In another incident, physicist Nir Davidson of the Weizmann Institute submitted an article to a journal together with a scientist from Bar-Ilan. Along with professional comments, the referee wrote that he hopes “the situation in the strip of Gaza will become more ‘human’ as soon as possible. Mistakes have been made by both sides, but bombing is not the right way of addressing any problem (not even retaliation).” Davidson and his co-author wrote to the journal’s chief editor, who apologized. The article is still under discussion.

Reactions like this, open and documentable, are unusual. In many cases, the situation local academics face remains ambiguous, but no less disturbing. In early February, a professor at an Israeli university was informed that his article had been accepted for publication in a journal dealing with the exact sciences. However, the paper – after being cleared for publication by the editor and scientific reviewers – became stuck at the ultimate stage when it came under the scrutiny of the publisher.

“No matter how many emails I sent, I didn’t get any response,” the author explains. “After a month, when I understood that no answer was forthcoming from the publisher, while other articles were being handled and getting published, I informed them that I was withdrawing the article. I submitted it to a different journal, and the whole process started over. I am a veteran member of the faculty. Neither I nor my colleagues can recall this sort of conduct.”

Prof. Mark Last, from Ben-Gurion’s Department of Software and Information Systems Engineering, submitted an article about artificial intelligence to an academic journal, together with two of his students, two months ago. “A few weeks went by and I got no response,” Last relates. “We hoped that the reason was that the article had been sent for refereeing. Then, last month, notification arrived that it had not met the requisite standards. I’d already received rejections of that sort, but usually a short explanation is added. I wrote to the chief editor asking for details. Within 24 hours, he wrote that he had reexamined the matter and had sent the article out for review. A few days ago the comments arrived; minor changes were needed.”

“In November, I submitted an article to a journal that isn’t considered to be very competitive,” a social sciences professor tells Haaretz. “A week or so later I received a letter of rejection. They said they hadn’t even sent it for peer review, and in one laconic sentence declared that it didn’t meet their standards. I have almost 15 years’ experience and that has never happened to me. I wrote a long letter to the editors about how peculiar their behavior was. I wrote that it’s customary to at least add an explanation for the decision. I never received a reply.”

“The most common way to discriminate against someone is to ignore them or provide a generic negative reply,” explains legal scholar Barak-Koren, one of whose main areas of research is discrimination. “Explicit rejections on a discriminatory basis are extremely rare. It’s easier, certainly via email, to ignore [people]. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the cases of explicit refusal we’re seeing are only the tip of the iceberg of a broader phenomenon, in which researchers receive generalized refusals and are ignored because they are Israelis.”

The boycott is severing our ability to be involved in the forefront of research. All scientific research that does not involve the international community is research that is less good. The severance from the world is suffocating us. 

* * *

“I am writing to let you know that I have decided to step down from the Ph.D. committee [reviewing a student’s thesis],” a foreign social sciences scholar wrote the Hebrew University recently. “Following the university’s recent declaration of commitment to Zionism in the context of the war that is raging in Gaza, I feel I can no longer be associated with this institution. I have enjoyed working with you all and it is with a heavy heart that I am making this decision.”

The “commitment to Zionism” the professor cited was part of the fierce public condemnation the university issued against sharp remarks by Israeli-Palestinian Prof. Shalhoub-Kevorkian, of its law faculty, against Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza. “As a proud Israeli, public, and Zionist institution,” the university stated, it condemned her comments and suspended her, before reinstating her two weeks later.

The email from the foreign academic who asked to stop advising the Hebrew University doctoral student is only one example of an apparently growing phenomenon whereby scholars overseas no longer want to help prepare the next generation of lecturers and researchers at Israeli institutions: Sources at a few such institutions admit that they find it increasingly difficult to obtain the letters of evaluation from academics abroad that must be submitted in advance of discussions of staff promotions in Israel.

For the present, it looks as though the latter trend is particularly noticeable in the social sciences and the humanities: in sociology and anthropology, Middle Eastern studies and literature. But according to a source at one university, the field of law is also falling victim to such dwindling collaboration with foreign schools.

Specifically, Israeli academics seeking promotions at local universities must be assessed by means of surveys, if possible submitted by individuals at an elite university abroad. “There have always been refusals to referee, but in recent months there has been a rise in the phenomenon,” a source at one local university explains. In one case, requests were sent to 20 foreign experts, in two rounds. To date only one reply has been received. “It’s unprecedented,” the source says.

“If the Israeli government commits irrevocably to either a two-state (within 1967 borders) or one-state solution in which all Palestinians in both Israel and the occupied territories have equal rights to Israelis – I will be happy to engage with Israeli institutions,” a senior researcher at a prestigious institution in Europe wrote recently, in response to a request to write an evaluation for an Israeli academic. “Until that day, no.” Another European academic wrote: “I do not believe that this suffering of civilians can be justified and I believe that Israel is not acting in accordance with international human rights law. In light of that, I feel I cannot collaborate with any Israeli institution at the moment.”

Correspondence of this sort is not generally publicized, but Philip Cohen, a professor of sociology and demography at the University of Maryland, decided otherwise. Two weeks ago, he explained in his blog why he had refused a request from the Israel Science Foundation to review a research proposal. “I believe the international community cannot permit the normalization of relations with the State of Israel in light of its actions in Gaza and the West Bank since October 7,” he wrote, adding, “In the absence of responsible state action by your government (or ours), I must instead do what I can to contribute to the diplomatic, political, and even scientific isolation of the state… I don’t know if my peers in Israel understand the extent of their global isolation.”

In November, Prof. Gili Drori, dean of Hebrew University’s social sciences faculty, took an unusual step. She decided to suspend the “external assessment” of all the faculty members who were seeking to be promoted. The reason: the concern that feedback by foreign referees would be colored by the war in Gaza. It’s difficult to think of a clearer manifestation of the deterioration in relations between Israeli academia and the international academic community. The suspension was, however, lifted three weeks later.

“The dam has burst,” Drori declares now. “Talking about an academic boycott of scientists in Israel has become legitimate. It’s a whole new world. We are in a very extreme situation, and I don’t know whether and how it will be possible to reverse things. The boycott is severing our ability to be involved in the forefront of research. All scientific research that does not involve the international community is research that is less good. The severance from the world is suffocating us.”

If the pool of international experts who are willing to cooperate with Israel does continue to shrink, Israeli academics will face discouraging alternatives: to approach less senior academics from less well-regarded universities (which, according to a knowledgeable source, is already happening in some cases), or to increase the proportion of assessments provided by local faculty – not a particularly palatable solution.

“Inbreeding in a family is not recommended, and it’s the same in academia,” says one source. “In the absence of fresh blood, academia degenerates.” The implication, he adds, is “a radical change in the process of promotion, which will affect the ranking of the institutions in international indices, where they examine, among other things, the potency of the promotion processes. If the refusal trend continues, we can give up the ambition of being the Harvard of the Middle East.”

A number of universities and academic organizations in Belgium, Spain, Italy and Norway recently announced full boycotts or a suspension of ties with Israeli institutions until they receive clarifications with regard to topics ranging from the state of academic freedom on their campuses, to their moral, financial and material support for Israel’s defense forces. For one, Ghent University recently requested such information from its counterpart in Haifa.

Yet some heads of college and university administrations still take the view that the situation “hasn’t yet reached the point of no return,” as one puts it. “It’s too early to know how the process we are now involved in will unfold,” adds another. After all, new articles by local scholars are still being accepted for publication, research requests have been submitted and discussed abroad. But for one, Tel Aviv University President Ariel Porat says that, “there are too many people in academia [abroad] who see us as outcasts. There is no doubt that the numbers are large. I don’t remember a situation when entire universities sought to boycott us.”

“The best-case scenario is that within a short time we will return to some sort of stability,” says American studies professor Milette Shamir, vice president of Tel Aviv University and director of its international academic collaborations. “Our standing in the world will be rehabilitated and we will be able to return to the situation we were in, to very extensive international activity.”

But Shamir acknowledges that she “doesn’t know whether that scenario is realistic.” Two weeks ago, she was in Australia to attend an academic fair at the University of Sydney. When she arrived, pro-Palestinian demonstrators shouted that Tel Aviv University shares in crimes against the Palestinians and that all collaborations with Israel should end.

“The worst-case scenario is that we are headed in the direction of South Africa [in the apartheid period],” she says, “with boycotts that keep mounting to the point of paralyzing the system. The result will be a mortal blow to Israeli academia. It will take on a provincial character and we will not be able to integrate into the forefront of the world’s research.”

==========================================================

https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-global-academic-community-snubbing-israeli-researchers-1001470960

Global academic community snubbbing Israeli researchers

12 Feb, 2024 11:57
Gali Weinreb

A survey finds young Israeli researchers struggling to secure vital international collaboration, and that more wish to leave the country.

International cooperation is part and parcel of science. Researchers depend for their advancement on peer reviews by their colleagues around the world. But when there are those in the academic world who perceive it as correct and moral to punish researchers for the policies of their countries, we are probably facing trouble in one of the most important areas for Israel’s economic strength.

A survey carried out in December last year by The Israel Young Academy (founded by the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities) and the Afik in Academia Israeli Women Professors Association, the findings of which have now been released, shows that this negative trend is being strongly felt. The survey, in which 1,015 senior faculty members from all the universities in Israel participated, reveals that many young researchers are already experiencing damage to international ties: to mutual visits, to join research work, and to the ability to recruit and keep international students. The researchers are not optimistic about the future. They expect substantial damage in many other areas, such as the ability to win research grants, to publish in professional journals around the world, and to collaborate with non-Israeli researchers.

“As soon as the events occurred, it was clear to us that Israel’s academic ties had been damaged and would be damaged,” says Prof. Miri Yemini, a member of The Israel Young Academy and Professor of Education at the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, who led the survey. “Within the first few weeks, I heard about someone who sent an article on medicine for publication, and was told ‘The article is about the Israeli population, and this is not the time to publish such an article.’ The editor of the journal wrote this to her explicitly.

“I have also experienced several instances. I invited experts from all over the world to an international course that I run, and when the war started I asked them to appear at the course online. One of them, and it’s important to stress that it was only one, said that she could not participate in a course held under the logo of the Technion. ‘I like you, but I’m receiving threats from my colleagues in Britain,’ she said.”

Yemini makes clear that the explicit instances are few, and most of the damage is behind the scenes. “If, in a few years’ time, we measure a 5-10% decline in academic activity, it will be hard to know to what to attribute it, particularly when it occurs in a period in which there are budget cuts, or threats of budget cuts, at academic institutions, when in any case all researchers are experiencing difficult emotional and logistical challenges.”

According to the survey, the damage is not the same across all disciplines. “We are seeing worse damage in the humanities and social sciences than in the exact sciences, engineering, and medicine,” says Yemini. “From the outset we got into this situation with inequality between the disciplines. In natural sciences, many of our researchers are at the top of their fields. In the social sciences and humanities this is less the case. These are disciplines that are more language-dependent, and when research is done on an Israeli population, it is anyway seen as a more niche study.

“That doesn’t mean that we can give up on these disciplines. The damage is liable to be manifest later on, in education, in social work, in psychological health, and in all the areas that are so important to the country’s resilience and its recovery.”

And if the feeling was that as time goes by since October 7 there is a trend of improvement vis-à-vis the international research community, Yemini makes clear that that is not the situation.

Female researchers worse affected

In addition to the damage to international ties, predictably, the researchers report economic and emotional damage and disruption to daily life. The greatest impact is of course the direct effect of the war, which is not unique to academic institutions. 11% reported that members of their research groups had been directly affected by the murder, injury, or abduction of people close to them.

A far as the emotional, financial, and day-to-day harm is concerned, the impact is most felt by young researchers, especially those without tenure. That is not surprising, but this is the generation of researchers that is supposed to carry the universities and research institutes into the coming decades.

For researchers at the early stages of their careers, not only are the professional requirements tougher and the uncertainty great, they often have to look after small children and elderly parents at the same time. There is also gender inequality: young female researchers are more affected than men. The differences are marked in the three areas that were investigated: financial, emotional, and daily life. “Good science needs emotional and psychological space,” says Yemini. “You can’t do good science in quarter of an hour between things, or even in two hours.”

Against this background, what happens to the desire to leave Israel? The survey presents an interesting finding. At the end of 2022, on a scale of zero to ten, the desire of researchers to leave was at 0.9. In March 2023 (after the announcement by Minister of Justice Yariv Levin of his judicial overhaul plan and the beginning of the protest movement against it) it rose to 3.4. It currently stands at 3.3. The researchers were asked what the level of their desire to leave was before October 7, and the average score was 2.92. That is, the desire to leave rose because of the judicial overhaul, faded slightly, and then rose again, but not to a level higher than after the judicial reform plan.

All the same, when respondents were asked whether they would accept a post at an elite university if it were offered to them, the score was higher, at around 4. This is interesting, since it was the elite universities that received the most publicity for allowing anti-Israel, and sometimes antisemitic, calls on their campuses. In seems that when the advantages of such a post – prestige, resources, connections, and the ability to do science at the highest level and receive recognition for it more easily – are weighed up, it seems a worthwhile proposition. Some of the researchers say they would want to bring these assets back to Israel later on.

Those who carried out the survey did not suffice with mapping the situation. They also suggested possible ways of improving it, and asked the respondents to rank them. The help most in demand was funding for taking on students for higher degrees (including incentives for international students). The survey participants also sought funding for inviting overseas visitors, funding for publishing articles in journals so that they would be available for everyone to read (journals charge high fees for reading an article), funding of research using unique Israeli know-how, and training on how to deal with hostile responses and advocacy internationally. Proposals such as joint degrees with overseas institutions and training in social networks were ranked lowest.

“Good science also requires money”

“There is also an optimistic angle,” says Yemini. “I grew up in Ukraine, and there it was clear that the Jews had to be the best. My generation had to be the best pupil in town, because there was only room for one Jew in medical studies. I believe that at least some of the researchers will take up the challenge to be even better, so good that no excuse will be sufficient to reject us. For me, as someone who has been exposed to antisemitism in the past, it’s clear that that’s how the world works, and now we are all becoming aware of it. But we need backing from the government and from regulators, because good science also requires money.”

Could it be that we will be strengthened by Jewish students fleeing from antisemitism on some campuses?

“We can’t count on that. You can’t do ethnic science, and in any case their parents won’t necessarily rejoice at the idea of sending them to study in a country where an active war is taking place.”

18.04.24

Editorial Note

IAM reported recently that a group of twenty Israeli academics joined some 1,000 scholars from around the world who signed a letter calling US President Joe Biden to stop arming Israel in its current war with Hamas. The letter suggested that Israel is conducting a “plausible genocide.”

One of the signatories was Dr. Regev Nathansohn, who teaches communications at Sapir College. Shortly after the letter was published, hundreds of Sapir College students signed a petition asking the administration to fire Nathansohn. “We will not tolerate educators who incite and call for a boycott against our country, as well as those who slander our soldiers,” the students wrote.

In response to the academics’ letter to Biden, Sapir College said, “We forcefully condemn the rhetoric against IDF soldiers and take very seriously the offense felt by the students… We must clarify beyond any doubt: The petition, and its signatories, do not represent Sapir in any way… While upholding basic principles of academic freedom and free speech, which the college has respected since its founding, the college unequivocally directed the lecturer not to use the name of the college in personal and/or political contexts and that he doesn’t represent the college in these contexts.” 

After discussions with the College administration, Nathansohn agreed to take unpaid leave. But he stated, “They presented me with a mafioso-like choice: either go back to teaching without protections and with more limited freedom of speech, or remain on unpaid leave that dramatically affects my livelihood.” 

Prof. Neve Gordon, who chairs the Academic Freedom Committee of the anti-Israel group British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES), rushed to support Nathanson. Gordon is a decades-long pro-Palestinian activist, formerly from Ben Gurion University, who was recruited by Queen Mary University of London to teach and research anti-Israel themes. To recall, Gordon has called for the boycott of Israel on the pages of the Los Angeles Times in 2009. In 2004, Gordon was invited to Sabbatical by the pro-Palestinian Nezar Alsayyad, an Arab professor at UC Berkeley, to write his book Israel’s Occupation, which, among others, claimed that the Israeli government runs an Orwellian-style surveillance state. 

Gordon declared that Sapir College breached Nathansohn’s academic freedom. He urged the College to: “Publicly reaffirm its commitment to the academic freedom and freedom of expression of all its academic staff and students; Issue a public statement rejecting the calls for Dr. Nathansohn’s dismissal and supporting his academic freedom and freedom of expression; Ensure Dr. Nathansohn’s physical and mental well-being in line with the College’s duty of care; Offer Dr. Nathansohn paid leave until the atmosphere among students and faculty is one in which he feels he can safely conduct his teaching.”

Two additional cases renewed the debate on freedom of speech and academic freedom.  

The first, as IAM reported recently, pertained to Prof. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian of the Hebrew University Law Faculty, who said in an interview, “yes it’s time to abolish Zionism; this is where I’m going today, just abolish Zionism. Well, it can’t continue… it’s criminal. Only by abolishing Zionism, we can continue… The state of Israel is using women’s bodies to play with in political terms… we don’t see women coming out and saying what happened… it’s shame on the state to use women’s bodies and sexuality to promote political agendas… to promote further dispossession of land to promote further killing, to promote abuse and rape and you know keep in mind that the rapability of the Palestinians based on the Zionist agenda… the state, they will use everything to further kill, it’s a killing machine and it’s a necro, political regime that can survive only on the erasure of Palestinians… soldiers today getting into Palestinian homes using the laundry, playing with it using and laughing and putting it on tanks and putting it on rifles, what is it, what is this if it’s not sexual abuse?… the body of the Palestinian, the living body, the dead body, the cut to pieces body, are all capital in the hands of this Zionist entity and of course they will use any lie, they started with babies, they continued with rape, they will continue with million other lies, every day with another story, we stopped believing them. I hope that the world will stop believing them.” After a rather perfunctory apology, Shalhoub-Kevorkian was allowed to teach. 

The second case involves Dr. Anat Matar, a philosopher at Tel Aviv University, which IAM has reported on numerous times. Matar had recently provoked controversy after she had eulogized Walid Daqqa, a terror-convicted prisoner, on her personal Facebook page. She called Daqqa a “dear friend” upon hearing of his death. She wrote, “Peace be upon you, dear and beloved friend. You were and will be an endless source of inspiration. My heart goes out to you, Sanaa and Milad. With Asad and the whole family. And with the entire Palestinian People, who today lost one of their most excellent sons.” Daqqa was the longest-serving Palestinian prisoner who died from cancer on April 7, after 37 years in Israeli prison. He had been involved in planning the 1984 abduction of soldier Moshe Tamam, who was killed by his kidnappers. Daqqa became a writer and befriended several Israeli intellectuals. Matar, a long-time radical leftwing activist, began exchanging letters with him after founding the Israeli Committee for Palestinian Prisoners in the early 2000s.

Ariel Porat, the President of Tel Aviv University, announced that TAU will not fire Matar. In a letter, Porat wrote: “The university administration condemned Dr. [Anat] Matar’s conduct. However, it also added that she had done nothing illegal, and we therefore do not intend to sack her… Put another way: by law, in the State of Israel, free expression also covers pronouncements that are infuriating, hurtful, and insensitive, whether you like it or not.” 

Not surprisingly, a heated debate on academic freedom occurred in the Academia IL Network. One comment is typical of Israeli academics. Prof. Uriel Procaccia of the Hebrew University Faculty of Law wrote: “I would like to draw attention to the differences in the reactions of our university administration and the administration of Tel Aviv University. In both cases opinions were voiced without a trace of illegality, expressing identification, explicit or implicit, with the struggle of the Palestinian people against the thugs of the occupation. In the first case, it was the statements of Professor Nadera Shalhoub, some of whom accused her of Arab nationalism, and in the second case, it was the statements of Dr. Anat Matar, who paid tribute to a personal Palestinian friend of hers who died in prison. In the first case, Our Rector and President expressed themselves in a condescending way. In the second case, Tel Aviv University President, Professor Ariel Porat, wisely put the accusers in their place and stood up for the principle of freedom of speech and the discourse ceased to be taken for granted, even in cases where the discourse is infuriated by these or other personalities who wish to withdraw Israel to the time of the infamous Senator McCarthy.”

Israeli academics expect unlimited academic freedom and freedom of speech. Research commissioned by IAM in 2014, comparing academic freedoms with the US, UK, and Germany, found that Israeli academics enjoy unprecedented academic freedom. More to the point, many academic activists have abandoned the disciplines they were hired to teach and research, to concentrate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As IAM noted, students enrolled in departments where faculty took up the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the expense of their areas of expertise, were deprived of a sound professional education. 

The comparative research also emphasized that scholars in public universities (supported by taxpayers’ money) have an unlimited right to academic freedom. In Israel, almost all research universities are public, a fact that is rarely mentioned.  

This situation increases the public perception that the social science departments operate in a radical leftist elitist bubble supported by the public coffer.

REFERENCES:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-academics-slammed-for-signing-letter-accusing-israel-of-plausible-genocide

‘WE WON’T TOLERATE EDUCATORS WHO BOYCOTT OUR COUNTRY’Israeli academics slammed for signing letter accusing Israel of ‘plausible genocide’Two dozen members of academia call on the US to stop arming Israel in its war against Hamas in Gaza; students from the country’s devastated south demand their firing

By ASAF ELIA-SHALEV14 April 2024, 9:38 pm

JTA — A lecturer at an Israeli university is going on unpaid leave after students demanded he be fired for signing a petition that claims Israel “appears to” be guilty of genocide.

Regev Nathansohn, who teaches communications at Sapir College, is one of two dozen Israeli academics who have signed a petition calling for the United States to stop arming Israel in its war with Hamas. The petition, which more than 1,000 academics from around the world have signed, characterizes Israel’s conduct as a “plausible genocide.”

“President Biden, do not let the United States go down in history as the enabler of genocide,” said the petition, which has more than 1,000 signatories, from a group called Academics4Peace. “Respect the US’s obligation under international law and basic morality. The only way to stop the starvation of two million people, including 100+ Israeli hostages, is to end this war.”

Sapir is located on the Gaza border near the town of Sderot, which was one of the sites attacked in Hamas’s October 7 invasion of Israel that saw 1,200 people butchered and 253 abducted to the Gaza Strip, roughly 130 of whom are still in Hamas hands.

Many of the school’s students and staff hail from the area, and hundreds of its students signed a letter asking the college administration to fire Nathansohn for signing the petition. Israel rejects accusations of genocide and says it takes measures to avoid civilian casualties.

“We will not tolerate educators who incite and call for a boycott against our country, as well as those who slander our soldiers,” said the students’ letter.

Nathansohn has not been fired. But the school released a statement to the press condemning the petition, distancing Sapir from its content and saying it had instructed him not to use his academic affiliation while making political statements. Since then, Nathansohn and the administration have fought over what the college owes one of its faculty members, whether and how he should be protected and, more broadly, how far academic freedom should extend.

Nathansohn, who earned his doctorate at the University of Michigan, is one of at least five Israeli signatories who have faced intense backlash from students, according to the petition’s organizer, Shira Klein, an Israeli American history professor at Chapman University in California. She said the others are Eran Fisher of the Open University of Israel, and three scholars at Beersheba’s Ben Gurion University: Michal Givoni, Maor Zeev-Wolf and Uri Mor. Klein pointed to posts from students denouncing them on social media and in an online petition, as well as, in one case, a campus protest.

In total, more than 20 Israeli academics have signed the letter, among more than 1,000 overall. Outside of Israel, signatories include two Nobel laureates and numerous scholars of the Holocaust and Jewish history. Klein is an expert on the Holocaust and has studied contemporary antisemitism.

The campus conflicts are especially notable in Israel, where institutions of higher education — including Sapir — are one of the few spaces in which Jewish and Arab Israelis interact. Other campus conflicts have erupted in the country since October 7.

“We forcefully condemn the rhetoric against IDF soldiers and take very seriously the offense felt by the students,” Sapir’s statement said. “We must clarify beyond any doubt: The petition, and its signatories, do not represent Sapir in any way.”

It continued, “While upholding basic principles of academic freedom and free speech, which the college has respected since its founding, the college unequivocally directed the lecturer not to use the name of the college in personal and/or political contexts and that he doesn’t represent the college in these contexts.”

Nathansohn said the college should have done more to defend his right to free expression. Following coverage of the students’ letter in the Israeli press, he said he received anonymous phone calls as well as messages from fellow faculty members condemning him.

In a letter to Sapir’s administrators on March 28, Nathansohn wrote that they did not “prevent the creation of a hostile work atmosphere in the college.” He said he could not teach in the spring semester, which was due to begin April 1, and requested a leave of absence.

Administrators understood his email as a request for unpaid leave, said granting a paid leave would not be possible according to the school’s regulations, and offered an unpaid leave of six months, according to correspondence reviewed by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Administrators also rejected his accusations, saying that they had vigorously defended his continued employment on the grounds of academic freedom.

“In recent days, we have unequivocally defended your right to express your opinion as a private citizen, in the face of a range of fronts that we are contending with — from the students’ association to government agencies,” read a letter dated April 1 from Sapir CEO Orna Gigi and its rector, Omri Herzog. The college did not reply to a request for comment from JTA.

Nathansohn eventually agreed to take an unpaid leave, but he did not consider the choice voluntary. He said that the restrictions on using his academic affiliation on petitions were unjust and, if applied only to him, could constitute an illegal double standard.

“They presented me with a mafioso-like choice: either go back to teaching without protections and with more limited freedom of speech, or remain on unpaid leave that dramatically affects my livelihood,” Nathansohn said.

A reporter with Israel’s Channel 14 tweeted the names of the recent petition’s signatories who work at Israeli colleges and universities. The post garnered outrage from many users, some of whom accused the academics of treason.

The petition is the fourth organized by Academics4Peace. The first, which went online in August, prior to the Israel-Hamas war, sought to direct attention to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians amid mass protests against the government’s efforts to weaken the judiciary. The next three have focused on October 7 and its aftermath.

Along with the letters calling for him to face consequences, Nathansohn has received support from a number of academic associations and professors. One fellow academic wrote in an email to Sapir’s leadership that Nathansohn “has been subjected to political persecution and unjust treatment by actors within the Sapir Academic College community and specifically by its management.”

Herzog responded that Sapir has tried to uphold its values in an increasingly challenging environment.

“We’re serv[ing] as a gatekeeper, with all the complexities that you may or may not be aware of,” he wrote. “I’m proud of the work we do in the classrooms and on campus.”

=============================================================

https://www.brismes.ac.uk/news/letter-to-sapir-college-regarding-dr-regev-nathansohn

Academic Freedom | Letter to Sapir College Regarding Dr Regev Nathansohn

• Posted: 10/04/2024

Professor Nir Kedar
President, Sapir College 
Sent by Email: President@sapir.ac.il

Professor Omri Herzog
Rector, Sapir College
Sent by Email: herzog_o@sapir.ac.il

Dear Professors Nir Kedar and Omri Herzog,

I write on behalf of the Academic Freedom Committee of the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES) in order to express our profound concern over Sapir College’s response to the vicious campaign waged by Im Tirzu and some Sapir students calling for the dismissal of Dr Regev Nathansohn from the Department of Communications. We are deeply concerned by Sapir College’s failure to adhere to its duty of care towards a member of its academic staff and by the actions it has taken since the campaign was launched, actions which in effect stifle academic freedom.

Founded in 1973, BRISMES is the largest national academic association in Europe focused on the study of the Middle East and North Africa. It is committed to supporting academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region, both in the UK and globally. 

 We understand that in late March, Dr Nathansohn signed a petition circulated by Academics4Peace entitled ‘Genocide is plausible; stop arms to Israel’. The petition calls on President Biden to respect the US’s obligations under international law and to stop the transfer of all offensive arms and related funds to Israel. On March 27, a group of Sapir students sent a letter demanding Dr Nathansohn’s dismissal, while circulating their letter to several media outlets.

 In a response to the Israeli media outlet Ynet, Sapir College stated: 

We vehemently condemn statements against IDF soldiers and take seriously the harm experienced by the students. It is important for us to clarify beyond any doubt: the petition and its signatories do not represent Sapir in any way. Many of the students and faculty members at Sapir are survivors of the murderous Sabbath, evacuated from their homes, and serve in the military reserves and security forces, and we strengthen their hand. Alongside the basic value of academic freedom and freedom of expression, which the college has been enshrining since its foundation, we made it unequivocally clear to the lecturer that he cannot use the college’s name in personal and/or political contexts, and he does not represent the college in these contexts.

We understand that alongside the media coverage there were incitements against Dr Nathansohn in online student forums, that his personal phone number was circulated among Im Tirtzu members and as a result he began receiving unsolicited phone calls, and that on the college’s Instagram account there were numerous instances in which Dr Nathansohn was maligned and described as a supporter of terrorism. The college’s Instagram manager ‘liked’ one of these remarks, which read: ‘Regev Nathansohn — Dismiss! Terror Supporter’.

We understand that on March 28 the university approved an unpaid leave of absence for six months, despite the fact that Dr Nathansohn had not requested such a leave. Furthermore, university senior management refused requests from Dr Nathansohn that the university clarify that the petition did not call for the harm of IDF soldiers.

In their response from April 1, Prof. Herzog and Sapir College’s CEO, Ms. Gigi, wrote that it was Dr Nathansohn’s decision to sign the petition, rather than the university’s response, that ‘produced the hostile working environment for [him]’.  

While we understand why some Israelis might disagree with the petition circulated by Academics4Peace and may even find it offensive, it is precisely during times of war that academic freedom and freedom of expression are tested and need to be assiduously and robustly protected. It appears to us that the College has become a hostile environment for Dr Nathansohn. Since this is not the only case of a breach of academic freedom–we were told, for example, that Dr Yeela Renan’s teaching hours have been reduced following attacks from right wing students–that has occurred in Sapir College since October 7, we ask the College to:

1. Publicly reaffirm its commitment to the academic freedom and freedom of expression of all its academic staff and students;
2. Issue a public statement rejecting the calls for Dr Nathansohn’s dismissal and supporting his academic freedom and freedom of expression;
3. Ensure Dr Nathansohn’s physical and mental well-being in line with the College’s duty of care;
4. Offer Dr Nathansohn paid leave until the atmosphere among students and faculty is one in which he feels he can safely conduct his teaching.   

Yours sincerely,

Professor Neve Gordon
Vice President, BRISMES
On behalf of the BRISMES Committee on Academic Freedom

==============================================================

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Uriel Procaccia
Date: Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 1:39 PM
‪Subject: Re: [Academia-IL-Bashaar] תורת המשחקים, אסטרטגיית ההרתעה ומלחמת שבעה באוקטובר‬
To: 

ברצוני להפנות את תשומת הלב להבדלי התגובות של הנהלת האוניברסיטה שלנו והנהלת אוניברסיטת תל אביב. בשני המקרים הושמעו דעות לא נפל בהן שמץ של אי חוקיות, המביעות הזדהות, מפורשת או משתמעת, עם מאבקו של העם הפלסטיני כנגד בריוני הכיבוש. במקרה הראשון, היה מדובר בהתבטאויותיה של פרופסור נדירה שלהוב שיש המאשימים אותה בלאומנות ערבית, ובמקרה השני היה מדובר בהתבטאויותיה של ד”ר ענת מטר שספדה לידיד פלסטיני אישי שלה שמת בכלא. במקרה הראשון התבטאו הנשיא והרקטור שלנו בצורה משתלחת בפרופסור שלהוב, ובמקרה השני השכיל נשיא אוניברסיטת תל אביב, פרופסור אריאל פורת, להעמיד את המקטרגים במקומם ולעמוד על עקרון חופש הדיבור. אוי לנו אם עקרונות חופש הדיבור והשיח חדלו להיות מובנים מאליהם, גם במקרים שהשיח מקומם אישים אלה או אחרים החפצים להסיג את ישראל לתקופתו של סנטור מק-קרתי הידוע לשמצה.

===================================================

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/tel-aviv-university-president-says-school-wont-fire-staffer-who-eulogized-terror-convict/Tel Aviv University president says school won’t fire staffer who eulogized terror convict

By NOAM LEHMANN

15 April 2024, 8:31 pm

Ariel Porat, the president of Tel Aviv University, announces that the institution will not fire a lecturer who had eulogized terror convict Walid Daqqa on her personal Facebook page.

In a letter dated Sunday and addressed to MK Yosef Tayeb, head of the Knesset’s Education Committee, Porat writes: “The university administration condemned Dr. [Anat] Matar’s conduct. However, it also added that she had done nothing illegal, and we therefore do not intend to sack her.”

“Put another way: by law, in the State of Israel, free expression also covers pronouncements that are infuriating, hurtful, and insensitive, whether you like it or not,” says Porat in the letter, which was subsequently sent to TAU students and faculty.

The university president says he received “with shock” Tayeb’s summons to a Monday committee hearing on “campus incitement” following Matar’s post, given the myriad problems facing Israeli society during the Gaza war.

“In this state of affairs, you have no shame in convening a Knesset discussion on an insignificant post by a single lecturer who represents only herself,” writes Porat.

“Are your eyes too shut to see the absurdity of this? Even war flaring up with Iran hasn’t made you cancel the session.”

Porat says he is abroad and will therefore not attend the “outrageous and illegitimate” committee meeting.

“Like other university presidents, I am fundraising to help, first and foremost, our reservists, our students, to whom we owe so much” writes Porat.

Matar, a philosopher of language, had provoked controversy after she called Daqqa a “dear friend” upon hearing of his death.

Daqqa, the longest-serving Palestinian prisoner, died from cancer on April 7 after 37 years in Israeli captivity. He had been involved in planning the 1984 abduction of soldier Moshe Tamam, who was killed by his kidnappers.

Daqqa later expressed regret for his actions and renounced violence. He became a writer and came into contact with several Israeli intellectuals.

Matar, a longtime leftwing activist, began exchanging letters with Daqqa after founding the Israeli Committee for Palestinian Prisoners, alongside his wife, Sanaa, in the early 2000s

==============================================

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/hycvnjxgc

Tel Aviv University lecturer eulogizes terrorist Walid Daka as ‘a source of inspiration’

Dr. Anat Matar pays tribute to terrorist who died in prison at age of 62; students will demonstrate, demanding her dismissal; university condemns her words, will investigate whether they’re in breach of freedom of speech policy

Tamar Trabelsi-Hadad|04.10.24 | 10:03

Tel Aviv University students are demanding the dismissal of Dr. Anat Matar, a senior lecturer in the department of philosophy, after she posted on Facebook a heartfelt eulogy for Arab-Israeli terrorist Walid Daka, one of the murderers of soldier Moshe Tamam in 1984.
“Goodbye dear and beloved friend. You were and will be an endless source of inspiration,” the lecturer wrote about Daka, one of the oldest security prisoners held in an Israeli prison, who died of cancer on Sunday at the age of 62. “My heart goes out to you, Sanaa and Milad. With Asad and the whole family. With the entire Palestinian people who lost one of their greatest sons today.”

Her words provoked outrage among many students, who called on the university management to fire her and announced that they would hold a protest at Entin Square. “This is a call to everyone who agrees that the public veneration of a person known for murder on ethnic grounds is a terrible incitement that goes far beyond the limits of freedom of expression,” the students wrote.

One of them, Tamar Cohen, said that she and her friends were shocked by Dr. Matar’s post and that for her it was the “straw that broke the camel’s back” since she had made previous statements against the State of Israel on Facebook and in interviews to international media. “As a student, it is so painful and frightening to see Dr. Anat Matar’s statement. To know that the academic institution I study in, which is supposed to be enlightened and democratic, has a lecturer who openly supports a murderer, makes me feel less safe at the university.”

She expressed disappointment in the conduct of the academic institution. “After Dr. Matar has already expressed herself in such ways in the past, to know that she continues to express herself in an extreme way as a faculty member, especially in this period, is infuriating and insensitive. There are a lot of students in the reserves who are fighting now so that she can continue lecturing, so that we can continue studying,” the student said.

“It’s not a matter of right or left, we’ve all been affected since October 7. Israeli citizens from all sectors, as well as foreign citizens,” Cohen added. “Among the victims are university students who were murdered. I really hope that the university handles this case as soon as possible and that it doesn’t end with a reprimand. I don’t feel safe with a lecturer who expresses herself like that.”

The right-wing organization Btsalmo said that it will file a complaint against the lecturer for violating the rules of discipline, and also a complaint to the police for violation of the terrorism law. “He who is sad that a terrorist died, his ideological and realistic place is with the terrorist,” the organization said in a statement.
“After October 7, anyone who is a friend of the enemy is like an enemy and must pay a very heavy price for it. We will not remain silent in the face of any instigator even if he is mistakenly called a doctor or a professor.”

Matan Jerafi from the right-wing movement Im Tirtzu also expressed outrage at the lecturer’s eulogy for the terrorist. “What message exactly does the university president’s silence convey in the face of this serious statement? We demand the immediate termination of Matar’s employment at Tel Aviv University,” he said.

Tel Aviv University responded in a statement, “Tel Aviv University strongly condemns Anat Matar’s words. This is a private statement outside of the academic framework. It will be examined based on the university’s policy regarding freedom of expression.”
The current storm joins the one that erupted following the statements of Professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, a lecturer from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who was suspended after she published a petition that accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. The head of the investigation and intelligence department in the Israel Police, Chief Yigal Ben Shalom, recently recommended to the prosecutor’s office to approve the opening of a criminal investigation against Shalhoub-Kevorkian on suspicion of incitement.