The 5th International Sociological Association (ISA) is hosting a Forum titled “Knowing Justice in the Anthropocene” at the Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, from July 6 to 11, 2025.
The International Sociological Association (ISA), founded in 1949 under the auspices of UNESCO, is a member of the International Social Science Council and has NGO consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. The Forum, the first to be held in the region, is expected to welcome nearly 5000 participants.
In the list of panels, the Palestinian issue and the war in Gaza are amply debated.
The Forum even issued a statement titled “ISA Solidarity Statement with the Palestinian People” on May 13, 2025, stating that the ISA “has been concerned for some time and condemned the acts of violence that have occurred in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Since the beginning of the conflict, the ISA has issued general and critical statements on the conflict and has supported colleagues who have been persecuted and harassed for standing against violence and for defending the human rights and freedoms of the people in these territories.”
The ISA then argued that “Israel’s relentless assault on Gaza has resulted in 52,535 confirmed deaths, although it is estimated that the actual figure could be closer to 300,000.” The statement further accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, adding, “We condemn those universities and higher education institutions in Israel that have played a central role in Israel’s government settler-colonial and apartheid regime, including their links to military intelligence, epistemicide, and scholasticide. We recognize and commend the work of Israeli sociologists, academics, and academic institutions who have consistently campaigned against war and genocide, as well as other pro-peace mobilizations and organizations in the country. We also pay tribute to the academic institutions, colleagues, students, social movements, and organizations that have courageously spoken out against and protested the violation of human rights and the suppression of freedom of expression around the world.”
The ISA calls for “An end to the genocide in Gaza and the escalating violence in the West Bank, and a complete end to Israel’s military occupation and all colonial practices in these territories, as well as in Lebanon and Syria. An end to the apartheid-like conditions faced by Palestinians with Israeli citizenship; the establishment of conditions that enable the return of Palestinian refugees, including ensuring a viable and dignified life upon return; and the urgent, unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid—such as food, healthcare, and water—which is currently being obstructed by Israel’s government. The protection of academic freedom and freedom of speech for all people, especially faculty and students who research, teach, and speak out against Israel´s government’s violent practices, both within Israel and globally.”
Interestingly, the BDS Movement threatens to boycott the ISA Forum. In a public letter, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) “calls upon academics standing in solidarity with the inalienable rights of the Indigenous people of Palestine, to pressure the International Sociological Association (ISA) to cancel the participation of academics de facto representing Israeli institutions complicit in Israel’s settler-colonial and apartheid regime in the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology.” Because “This participation is a violation of the BDS movement’s academic boycott guidelines and the anti-normalization guidelines that apply to the Arab region. Should the ISA fail to cancel the participation of scholars representing complicit Israeli academic institutions, we call for boycotting the ISA 5th Forum.”
For PACBI, the ISA 5th Forum, “contradicts itself by including broad participation from complicit Israeli universities, including the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ben-Gurion University, Bar-Ilan University, the Open University of Israel, and Tel Aviv University.”
PACBI ended its demand by bringing the BDS movement’s anti-normalization guidelines which state: “ensuring that joint projects and activities between Arabs and Israelis do not undermine the principle that the struggle for the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights is an Arab struggle is certainly not the same as a boycott of Israeli individuals because of their Israeli identity. Indeed, the BNC has never called for or condoned the latter. What anti-normalization principles reject are attempts to represent Israel alongside Arab countries as if it were a normal part of the region, not a settler-colonial and apartheid state. This stance emerges from the particular context of this struggle and the centuries-old intimate relationship between Palestinians and other Arab peoples of the region.”
The ISA Forum responded to the threat in a statement, “ISA Response to the Call for Boycott of the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology,” authored, “with respect and in solidarity,” by the ISA President and Vice-President. They stated, “Both individually and in our roles at the ISA, we share the global outrage over the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Since October 2023, the ISA has released three public statements expressing our profound concern for the suffering of the Palestinian people and calling for an immediate end to war and violations of human rights. In those statements, the ISA officially called for: An end to the genocide in Gaza and the escalating violence in the West Bank, and a complete end to Israel’s military occupation and all colonial practices in these territories, as well as in Lebanon and Syria; An end to the apartheid-like conditions faced by Palestinians with Israeli citizenship; the establishment of conditions that allow for the return of Palestinian refugees, and the urgent, unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid—currently obstructed by Israel’s government; The protection of academic freedom and freedom of speech for all, especially faculty and students who research, teach, and speak out against the Israeli government’s violent practices, both within Israel and globally.”
They continued that the ISA has “consistently defended the academic freedom of scholars persecuted for their views on this issue, including Israeli sociologists who have condemned the war and faced serious professional and personal consequences, including exile. These individuals are among those named in PACBI’s call for boycott. Sociologists around the world have long stood at the forefront of social movements and political critique. The ISA Forum in Rabat continues this tradition. Several major panels will be dedicated to the Palestinian cause. Solidarity with Palestine and with Palestinian colleagues is central to our mission and will be clearly visible throughout the Forum. Palestinian scholars have been offered free registration, and we are working to support those unable to travel. The opening and closing ceremonies will reaffirm our condemnation of the genocide in Gaza and our solidarity with communities facing systemic violence and dispossession.”
In particular, they stated that “The ISA maintains no institutional relationship with Israeli universities or with the Israeli government. We welcome participation from individual Israeli scholars… on the basis of academic freedom. The Israeli Sociological Society, a non-governmental body, has opposed settlement expansion and supported Palestinian colleagues.”
They ended by saying, “We are deeply concerned that, rather than amplifying Palestinian voices, this boycott call may end up silencing them—especially those Palestinian scholars who plan to share their research and testimonies with a global audience in Rabat. Our commitment to Palestine has been visible throughout the organization of the Forum. Ironically, it is precisely this commitment that now makes the Forum a convenient target for pressure, despite its role as a rare and open space for critical reflection and solidarity. We respect the right of civil society organizations to express disagreement and to call for boycotts. However, the ISA remains committed to its founding purpose: to offer a platform where sociologists—regardless of nationality, institutional affiliation, or political stance—can engage in meaningful, open, and critical dialogue. We therefore respectfully ask those calling for a boycott to reflect on whether this particular Forum—organized for the first time in the Arab world, with a strong presence of Palestinian voices and a commitment to justice and decolonial knowledge—is the most appropriate target for such a campaign.”
Another boycott threat came from the Global Sociologists for Palestine (GSP), which issued a call titled “Global Sociologists for Palestine Join Palestinian Calls To Boycott ISA 5th Forum Over Ties to Complicit Israeli Institutions.” The GSP states that “due to the ISA’s continued refusal to exclude academic representatives of Israeli institutions complicit in occupation, apartheid, and genocide. This is not a call against individual Israeli scholars who have taken a principled stand for Palestinian national liberation. Rather, it is a call to boycott the Israeli Sociological Association and institutional representation, in line with the ethical framework of the academic boycott.”
The GSP declares that this “call has also been supported by the Palestinian Sociological and Anthropological Association (PSAA), a member of the International Sociological Association, and our colleagues in Morocco, including the Moroccan Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel.”
The GSP call claims that ISA “has categorically refused to take similar action against the Israeli Sociological Society (ISS),” despite: “The well-documented entanglement of Israeli academia with the military and intelligence apparatus; and The ISS’s complete silence—its failure to condemn, or even acknowledge, the genocide unfolding in real time. This silence is not neutrality—it is an active form of complicity. For instance, the Israeli Sociological Society maintains a dedicated ‘Army & Security’ subgroup that has worked in close coordination with the Israeli military and intelligence establishment, a clear example of how Israeli academic institutions directly contribute to military operations against Palestinians. Moreover, Israeli adults are subject to a compulsory draft and serve in the military reserves after their draft, including many academics who may have directly participated in or enabled war crimes. In this context, the ISS’s refusal to take clear action on this matter raises serious ethical and political concerns about the organization’s integrity. There is no place in our academic institutions for the normalization of regimes engaged in occupation, apartheid, and genocide.”
They ended by urging, “We invite you to stand in active solidarity with Palestinians, Moroccan civil society, and all those resisting academic complicity in colonial violence. Join efforts to organize alternative panels.”
The ISA then issued a statement, “ISA Executive Committee Decision on the Israeli Sociological Society,” reiterating its declaration that, “as part of its public stance against the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, it has no institutional relationships with Israeli public institutions. We regret that the Israeli Sociological Society has not taken a clear position condemning the dramatic situation in Gaza. In a decision that reflects the extraordinary gravity of the current situation, the Executive Committee has decided to suspend the collective membership of the Israeli Sociological Society.”
Worth noting that the Forum does not include any reference to the role of Hamas in the destruction of the Palestinian society in Gaza, aimed at world condemnation of Israel.
ISA Executive Committee Decision on the Israeli Sociological Society
The ISA reiterates its declaration that, as part of its public stance against the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, it has no institutional relationships with Israeli public institutions.
We regret that the Israeli Sociological Society has not taken a clear position condemning the dramatic situation in Gaza. In a decision that reflects the extraordinary gravity of the current situation, the Executive Committee has decided to suspend the collective membership of the Israeli Sociological Society (ISS).
The 5th ISA Forum of Sociology will take place in Rabat, Morocco on July 6-11, 2025. This is the first ISA Forum to be held in the region and specifically in a country that is known for being at the crossroads of civilizations spanning the Mediterranean, the Middle East and Africa. This unique geographic location, and the campus of Mohammed V University where we will be hosted, is the perfect setting for the intense intellectual debates that are foreseen around the theme “Knowing Justice in the Anthropocene”. The dates of the Forum provide us with the opportunity to engage these debates in our Forum and in a sociological film festival that will be open to the public, just before the city will turn its gaze from sociology to football as host of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations.
The Forum will bring together sociologists from around the world to unpack this complex theme. Our point of departure lies in the recognition of the Anthropocene and the environmental concerns that accompany it. This word entered our lexicon at the turn of the Millennium when geologists first began to identify what they considered to be irreversible geological traces of human societies on the planet. In March 2024, the ‘scientists’ (according to a New York Times reporter) decided that no, we were not really in a new geological epoch. But the journalist noted that the term had already gained so much importance in anthropology and history that it will most likely stay relevant in societies. This situation of contested knowledges is precisely what we will tackle in Rabat.
What does it mean to “know” in the context of the Anthropocene? Whose knowledge counts? What forms of knowing (understood in its feminist and relational sense) are prioritized, and with what consequences, in societal change? While some sub-disciplines have been actively contributing to academic and public debates, sociology writ large has not been at the center of these debates regarding the conditions of living with and in the Anthropocene. How might engaging the sociological imagination in discussions of the Anthropocene better equip sociologists and citizens to contribute to these public debates about our individual and collective capacities to live together in such an epoch?
This brings us to the question of justice. How do we know what is fair and just? Can we forge new understandings of justice for the Anthropocene? What can sociology contribute to how we know justice among knowledges (ontological and epistemic justice) or about aspects of our social worlds, such as environmental justice, legal justice, transitional justice, land justice, water justice, interspecies justice, racial justice, ethnic justice, or gender justice? What new questions are opened about these types of relations when the conditions of the Anthropocene are taken seriously?
This broad theme provides a space for dialogue within and across ISA’s 67 Research Committees (RCs), Working Groups (WGs), and Thematic Groups (TGs). We invite all sociologists from all walks of life and all corners of the earth to join us in Rabat in 2025!
Allison Marie Loconto Vice-President for Research & 5th ISA Forum President
ISA Solidarity Statement with the Palestinian People
The International Sociological Association (ISA) has been concerned for some time and condemned the acts of violence that have occurred in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Since the beginning of the conflict, the ISA has issued general and critical statements on the conflict and has supported colleagues who have been persecuted and harassed for standing against violence and for defending the human rights and freedoms of the people in these territories (ref. ISA Statements & the article by former ISA President Michael Burawoy). This has been done through letters to their academic institutions and issuing public statements. The ISA has also endorsed statements by other organizations and disseminated them through its social media platforms.
The violation of human rights has been increasing exponentially and sustained over time. We observe with great indignation the deterioration of the situation and the deepening and widening of this conflict beyond any limits we could have imagined and are therefore compelled to issue a new declaration.
Israel’s relentless assault on Gaza has resulted in 52,535 confirmed deaths, although it is estimated that the actual figure could be closer to 300,000. Around 70% of those killed were women and children. And 118,491 Palestinians have been injured (as of March 4th, 2025). Since the 7 October attack that killed 1,200 Israelis, the world has witnessed the Israeli military’s indiscriminate bombardment of hospitals, schools, universities, mosques, churches, and areas that the Israeli government has designated as ‘safe zones’ across Gaza, including after the declared ceasefire.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières, the International Federation for Human Rights, and the UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories have all concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Despite formal ‘ceasefire’ declarations in January 2025, the Israeli military has continued to bomb Gaza, also cutting off electricity and restricting access to water and food.
The continued assault on Gaza is accompanied by a wave of violence and forced displacement in the West Bank, where more than 50,000 Palestinians have been displaced, as well as murderous attacks against Palestinians in Israel. The Israeli government has also expanded its military operations in Lebanon and Syria and carried out bombings in Iran and Yemen.
We condemn those universities and higher education institutions in Israel that have played a central role in Israel’s government settler-colonial and apartheid regime, including their links to military intelligence, epistemicide, and scholasticide.
We recognize and commend the work of Israeli sociologists, academics, and academic institutions who have consistently campaigned against war and genocide, as well as other pro-peace mobilizations and organizations in the country.
We also pay tribute to the academic institutions, colleagues, students, social movements, and organizations that have courageously spoken out against and protested the violation of human rights and the suppression of freedom of expression around the world.
The ISA therefore calls for:
An end to the genocide in Gaza and the escalating violence in the West Bank, and a complete end to Israel’s military occupation and all colonial practices in these territories, as well as in Lebanon and Syria.
An end to the apartheid-like conditions faced by Palestinians with Israeli citizenship; the establishment of conditions that enable the return of Palestinian refugees, including ensuring a viable and dignified life upon return; and the urgent, unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid—such as food, healthcare, and water—which is currently being obstructed by Israel’s government.
The protection of academic freedom and freedom of speech for all people, especially faculty and students who research, teach, and speak out against Israel´s government’s violent practices, both within Israel and globally.
ISA Response to the Call for Boycott of the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology
Both individually and in our roles at the ISA, we share the global outrage over the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Since October 2023, the ISA has released three public statements expressing our profound concern for the suffering of the Palestinian people and calling for an immediate end to war and violations of human rights.
In those statements, the ISA officially called for:
An end to the genocide in Gaza and the escalating violence in the West Bank, and a complete end to Israel’s military occupation and all colonial practices in these territories, as well as in Lebanon and Syria;
An end to the apartheid-like conditions faced by Palestinians with Israeli citizenship; the establishment of conditions that allow for the return of Palestinian refugees, and the urgent, unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid—currently obstructed by Israel’s government;
The protection of academic freedom and freedom of speech for all, especially faculty and students who research, teach, and speak out against the Israeli government’s violent practices, both within Israel and globally.
The ISA has consistently defended the academic freedom of scholars persecuted for their views on this issue, including Israeli sociologists who have condemned the war and faced serious professional and personal consequences, including exile. These individuals are among those named in PACBI’s call for boycott.
Sociologists around the world have long stood at the forefront of social movements and political critique. The ISA Forum in Rabat continues this tradition. Several major panels will be dedicated to the Palestinian cause. Solidarity with Palestine and with Palestinian colleagues is central to our mission and will be clearly visible throughout the Forum. Palestinian scholars have been offered free registration, and we are working to support those unable to travel. The opening and closing ceremonies will reaffirm our condemnation of the genocide in Gaza and our solidarity with communities facing systemic violence and dispossession.
The ISA maintains no institutional relationship with Israeli universities or with the Israeli government. We welcome participation from individual Israeli scholars—as we do from Russian scholars—on the basis of academic freedom. The Israeli Sociological Society, a non-governmental body, has opposed settlement expansion and supported Palestinian colleagues. The Palestinian Sociological Association, a collective ISA member, has not called for a boycott of the Forum, and several Palestinian colleagues have explicitly supported our position.
The ISA Forum, held every four years, is organized by 68 Research Committees composed of individual ISA members. These committees do not represent countries or governments. The 2025 Forum in Rabat will welcome nearly 5,000 participants from over 100 countries.
We are deeply concerned that, rather than amplifying Palestinian voices, this boycott call may end up silencing them—especially those Palestinian scholars who plan to share their research and testimonies with a global audience in Rabat. Our commitment to Palestine has been visible throughout the organization of the Forum. Ironically, it is precisely this commitment that now makes the Forum a convenient target for pressure, despite its role as a rare and open space for critical reflection and solidarity.
We respect the right of civil society organizations to express disagreement and to call for boycotts. However, the ISA remains committed to its founding purpose: to offer a platform where sociologists—regardless of nationality, institutional affiliation, or political stance—can engage in meaningful, open, and critical dialogue.
We therefore respectfully ask those calling for a boycott to reflect on whether this particular Forum—organized for the first time in the Arab world, with a strong presence of Palestinian voices and a commitment to justice and decolonial knowledge—is the most appropriate target for such a campaign.
With respect and in solidarity,
Geoffrey PLEYERS, ISA President Allison-Marie LOCONTO, President of the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology & ISA Vice-President for Research
Global Sociologists for Palestine Join Palestinian Calls To Boycott ISA 5th Forum Over Ties to Complicit Israeli Institutions
Published28-06-2025
Author infoPalestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI)
Dear colleagues and participants of the 5th ISA Forum in Rabat,
This call comes at a critical and urgent time. As the genocide in Gaza continues, with hundreds of thousands of Palestinians killed, displaced, or starved, we write to reaffirm and amplify the call for boycott issued this week by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI). PACBI is a founding member of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement National Committee (BNC), the largest coalition in Palestinian society leading the global BDS campaign.
PACBI has called for a boycott of the 5th ISA Forum in Rabat (July 6–11, 2025) due to the ISA’s continued refusal to exclude academic representatives of Israeli institutions complicit in occupation, apartheid, and genocide. This is not a call against individual Israeli scholars who have taken a principled stand for Palestinian national liberation. Rather, it is a call to boycott the Israeli Sociological Association and institutional representation, in line with the ethical framework of the academic boycott.
This call has also been supported by the Palestinian Sociological and Anthropological Association (PSAA), a member of the International Sociological Association, and our colleagues in Morocco, including the Moroccan Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (MACBI), who highlight how ISA’s refusal to act aligns with the Moroccan regime’s broader normalization agenda with Israel, at a time when Israel is committing grave war crimes across Palestine and military expansionism in the region. Maintaining business-as-usual with Israeli institutions in this context renders ISA actively complicit in that agenda.
We believe that attending the Forum without challenging these conditions not only normalizes Israeli war crimes and occupation but also undermines the ethical and political integrity of our scholarly community and contradicts the values at the core of our discipline.
ISA’s Double Standards
The ISA’s position reflects a deeply troubling double standard. When Russia invaded Ukraine, the ISA:
Relocated its meeting out of Russia,
Froze the membership of the Russian Sociological Association, and
Yet, it has categorically refused to take similar action against the Israeli Sociological Society (ISS), despite:
Israel’s ongoing mass atrocities and genocidal violence in Gaza;
The well-documented entanglement of Israeli academia with the military and intelligence apparatus; and
The ISS’s complete silence—its failure to condemn, or even acknowledge, the genocide unfolding in real time.
This silence is not neutrality—it is an active form of complicity.
For instance, the Israeli Sociological Society maintains a dedicated “Army & Security” subgroup that has worked in close coordination with the Israeli military and intelligence establishment, a clear example of how Israeli academic institutions directly contribute to military operations against Palestinians.
Moreover, Israeli adults are subject to a compulsory draft and serve in the military reserves after their draft, including many academics who may have directly participated in or enabled war crimes. In this context, the ISS’s refusal to take clear action on this matter raises serious ethical and political concerns about the organization’s integrity.
There is no place in our academic institutions for the normalization of regimes engaged in occupation, apartheid, and genocide. At this moment of profound political, humanitarian, and moral emergency, we must uphold the principle that there is no academic business as usual with institutions complicit in such crimes.
We invite you to stand in active solidarity with Palestinians, Moroccan civil society, and all those resisting academic complicity in colonial violence. Join efforts to organize alternative panels (including panels currently scheduled for the Forum) and scholarly spaces in Rabat, in coordination with our local Moroccan colleagues, independent civil society and the Global Sociologists for Palestine network. These spaces will allow us to continue our academic engagement in a principled and just manner.
PACBI: ISA MUST EXCLUDE ISRAEL AND ITS COMPLICIT INSTITUTIONS FROM ITS 5TH FORUM OR FACE A BOYCOTT
Published24-06-2025
Author infoPalestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI)
The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), a founding member of the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the largest coalition in Palestinian society that leads the global BDS movement, calls upon academics standing in solidarity with the inalienable rights of the Indigenous people of Palestine, to pressure the International Sociological Association (ISA) to cancel the participation of academics de facto representing Israeli institutions complicit in Israel’s settler-colonial and apartheid regime in the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology, scheduled to take place at Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, from July 6–11, 2025. This participation is a violation of the BDS movement’s academic boycott guidelines and the anti-normalization guidelines that apply to the Arab region.
Should the ISA fail to cancel the participation of scholars representing complicit Israeli academic institutions, we call for boycotting the ISA 5th Forum.
At a time when Israel, supported by the colonial West, is perpetrating the world’s first livestreamed genocide against 2.3 million Palestinians in the occupied and besieged Gaza Strip, and in line with international law, Israel should be isolated and expelled from all international fora.
Following the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 determination that Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is entirely illegal and that it is violating the prohibition against apartheid, dozens of UN human rights experts called on all states to “cancel or suspend economic relationships, trade agreements and academic relations with Israel that may contribute to its unlawful presence and apartheid regime in the occupied Palestinian territory” [Emphasis added].
By accepting Israeli institutions to be represented in a conference held in an Arab country* the ISA and its members are in breach of the Palestinian civil society picket line that refuses to normalize with Israel within all fields, including academic normalization. Israeli academics participating in conferences in the Arab world can only be seen as representatives of their country and institution – as representing their “flags,” so to speak – rather than as private individuals.* This violates the BDS movement’s anti-normalization guidelines.
It is precisely this representation, which comes in the context of Israeli academics at complicit Israeli institutions establishing relations with Arabs and the Arab region, that creates a situation of normalization because it attempts to present Israel and its institutions as a normal part of the region. It also serves to further colonize people’s minds with a deceptive normalcy and a false premise of symmetry/parity between the oppressors and the oppressed, ultimately perpetuating the oppressive status quo. Such normalization undermines the struggle for Palestinian liberation and self-determination as well as the international solidarity movement’s inspiring efforts to cut the links of state, corporate, institutional, and academic complicity in Israel’s regime of colonial oppression.
Recognizing the deep complicity of all Israeli universities in the state’s regime of illegal occupation and apartheid, international law experts at the University of Antwerp in Belgium published a legal opinion in August 2024 calling on universities and research institutions in Belgium and beyond to meet their legal obligations by ending “all collaborations with [Israeli] academic and other institutions directly or indirectly implicated in the violations of international law.” Severing all links with Israel – including with its complicit institutions – that aid or assist in maintaining its occupation and apartheid regime is a legal, not just moral, duty.
The ISA 5th Forum, which is held under the theme of “Knowing Justice in the Anthropocene,” contradicts itself by including broad participation from complicit Israeli universities, including the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ben-Gurion University, Bar-Ilan University, the Open University of Israel, and Tel Aviv University. Can sociologists claim “knowing justice” when their own academic association is criminally complicit in systems of injustice?
Israeli higher education institutions have long played a role in planning, implementing, and justifying Israel’s occupation and apartheid policies while maintaining a uniquely close link to the Israeli military and security apparatus. Much of Israel’s military arsenal and patently criminal and dehumanizing doctrines are developed in deep collaboration with Israeli universities. There is also institutionalized racial discrimination against Palestinians throughout Israel’s education system, including higher education institutions.
To give a few examples of this deep criminal complicity of Israeli universities, the Hebrew University Mount Scopus campus is partially built on land illegally expropriated from Palestinian owners in Israeli occupied Jerusalem directly serving the ongoing land theft and dispossession of Palestinians; it also hosts a military base on campus to offer academic training to Israeli soldiers. Ben Gurion University (BGU) hosts the Homeland Security Institute whose partnerships include Israel’s top weapons companies and the Israeli Ministry of Defense. The Israeli military is building a technology campus next to its campus aimed at furthering the ties between the military and BGU to “reinforce the army’s operational capabilities.” Tel Aviv University runs joint centers with the Israeli military and Israel’s arms industries; it also hosts the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), which developed the so-called Dahiya Doctrine, or doctrine of disproportionate force. This doctrine, adopted by the Israeli military, calls for “the destruction of the national infrastructure, and intense suffering among the [civilian] population.”
Furthermore, the representation of complicit Israeli universities strengthens and solidifies their presence in the Arab region, which seems to contradict ISA’s much appreciated recent statement in solidarity with the Palestinian people in which it condemns “those universities and higher education institutions in Israel that have played a central role in Israel’s… settler-colonial and apartheid regime, including their links to military intelligence, epistemicide, and scholasticide.”
Although the primary responsibility falls upon the ISA, Israeli participation in a forum hosted by a public Moroccan university further demonstrates the Moroccan authoritarian regime’s complicity in Israel’s oppression and crimes against Palestinians. During Israel’s ongoing genocide, Moroccan ports have facilitated U.S. military equipment transfers to Israel’s army. The regime has also chosen ElbitSystems—Israel’s leading arms company that is directly implicated in Israel’s genocide and other atrocity crimes against Palestinians—as a primary arms supplier, and hosted joint military exercises with Israeli forces involved in the Gaza genocide.
In this context, Moroccan universities, all under direct regime control, have engaged in persistent attempts at normalization through partnerships with Israeli academic institutions despite firm mass opposition from thousands of Moroccan students and academics, not to mention Moroccan society at large. These normalization actions reflect the regime’s disregard for the people’s will and expose its role in enabling Israel’s academic whitewashing. By engaging in this normalization, the ISA aligns itself directly with the despotic Moroccan regime, its policies of normalization with the Israeli state, and its complicity in Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. By being a party to this normalization, the ISA places itself in opposition to the struggle waged by Palestinian and Arab civil society, including academic unions and associations, against normalizing Israeli settler-colonialism. In this context of the Arab region, we call on the ISA to do no harm.
PACBI also calls for pressure to be exerted on Mohammed V University to respect the Palestinian boycott call and to align with the academic boycott and anti-normalization guidelines.
PACBI demands the cancellation of the participation of Israeli academics affiliated with complicit universities that have, for decades, played a central role in sustaining Israel’s system of oppression, unless the following conditions are met:
The Israeli participant publicly and unequivocally recognizes the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights under international law, foremost among them the right of return for Palestinian refugees and an end to Israel’s illegal military occupation and apartheid;
The Israeli participant’s presentation falls within the framework of co-resistance to oppression and not coexistence under oppression, and if they state the Israeli universities to which they are affiliated, ISA must add a land acknowledgement* and a brief description of those universities’ complicity;
The conference organizers investigate all Israeli participants to insure that they have not been directly or indirectly involved—including through incitement or dehumanizing justification—in Israel’s grave violations of Palestinian rights, particularly war crimes, crimes against humanity (including apartheid), or genocide.
Finally, PACBI calls on all Palestinian, Arab, and international academics to boycott the ISA 5th forum entirely should it fail to meet the above demands.
* Upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the BDS movement condemns racism and discrimination (according to the UN criteria) in all its forms. It rejects the exclusion of national/ethnic minorities in the Arab region as well as all discrimination or persecution against them. It understands “Arabism” not in its narrow ethnic or national sense, but rather in its progressive and inclusive sense of democratic citizenry that considers national/ethnic minorities as an integral part of the composition of the Arab region and its peoples.
* The BDS movement’s anti-normalization guidelines state: “ensuring that joint projects and activities between Arabs and Israelis do not undermine the principle that the struggle for the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights is an Arab struggle is certainly not the same as a boycott of Israeli individuals because of their Israeli identity. Indeed, the BNC has never called for or condoned the latter. What anti-normalization principles reject are attempts to represent Israel alongside Arab countries as if it were a normal part of the region, not a settler-colonial and apartheid state. This stance emerges from the particular context of this struggle and the centuries-old intimate relationship between Palestinians and other Arab peoples of the region.”
* Upholding the United Nations’ 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ISA must acknowledge the inalienable rights of Indigenous peoples, including Palestinians, to “the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired” (Article 26), in all its events and publications.
In March, I registered for the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology.However, BDS has launched a boycott (see link). As a supporter of the BDS movement, the only consequential decision for me is to withdraw my participation unless BDS's demands are met #FreePalestinehttps://t.co/KtP93qrSbJ
In March, I registered for the 5th ISA Forum of Sociology.However, BDS has launched a boycott (see link). As a supporter of the BDS movement, the only consequential decision for me is to withdraw my participation unless BDS’s demands are met #FreePalestine
In late May, IAM reported on the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in which Israeli academics were participating. Among them is Prof. Haim Bresheeth-Zabner, a film studies scholar formerly of Sapir College, who retired from the University of East London and now teaches at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). Bresheeth was an activist with Matzpen, an Israeli socialist revolutionary group opposing Zionism.
A day before the Congress, Bresheeth and his comrade Ronnie Barkan co-authored an article, “Joining forces: Time for Jews to unite in the struggle against Zionism, apartheid and genocide.” They wrote that the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress was going to take place from June 13 to 15, with the “aim of amplifying Jewish voices against Zionism and assisting the global movement for justice and liberation in Palestine.”
In a symbolic act, the meeting took place in Vienna, the hometown of Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism. According to Bresheeth et al., the Congress intended to “use the voice of anti-Zionist Jews, whose numbers have swelled worldwide in the last decade, especially since October 7, 2023, to assist a necessary and urgent change in Western attitudes towards the crimes of Zionism.” They wrote, “We believe it is crucial to create an international political movement for ending Zionism and decolonizing Palestine. The genuine organization representing Palestinian civil society is the BDS/BNC movement, with which we are aligned, which we fully support, and which will be led by. The various progressive forces in Europe and elsewhere must unite behind it, and we hope the Congress will assist this process. We intend to enable opposition to Zionism, helping Palestine gain support across the globe; we see ourselves as an integral part of such a movement… this struggle is not just against Zionism in Palestine but against our own Western governments, elites, and deep states who aid and abet in Israeli crimes.”
Bresheeth and Barkan postulate that “Palestine should become the litmus test of every ‘democracy’ in the West.”
Bresheeth and Barkan even claimed that “The six million Jews who died in the Holocaust were not Zionists – most were anti-Zionist, either as Bundist Socialists, or Ultra-Orthodox religious Jews, who saw Zionism as anti-Jewish in the extreme. By exterminating the great Jewish communities of Europe, the Nazis killed off Anti-Zionism, leaving behind some 250,000 survivors, mostly incarcerated in European DP camps after WW2. Europe, the U.S., UK, Canada, and the rest of the West were loath to take in any survivors, if they could help it. So instead of offering the broken people who survived the Nazis a home in their own lands, they just sent them to Palestine – out of sight, out of mind.“
Bresheeth and Barkan argued that “The Nakba in 1948 compounded the severe injustice of the UN depriving Palestinians of 55% of their land, in order to find a place for the victims of European fascism and Nazism – a conflict the Palestinians or other Arabs had no part in. This injustice, which the UN decided not to address apart from passing resolutions defied by Israel, had only deepened in 1967, with Israel taking control of the whole of Palestine, and starting to settle it illegally. Today, Palestinians do not control even 5% of their own country. Despite this, the UN has avoided any sanctions against Israel. All efforts to start sanctions were all vetoed by the West. This has been the situation since 1948, but it does not have to be that way.”
Bresheeth and Barkan asked, “how much more justified is it against Israeli crimes, including genocide, mass starvation, denial of medication, the mass destruction of housing, universities, schools, mosques, and basic services including water purification, sewage disposal, electricity production, roads and agricultural land – all bombed out of existence. There seems to be no war crime that Israel has not enacted in Gaza, with the full support, funding, and armament supplied by the West.”
Bresheeth and Barkan stated, “We need to build the struggle together with all progressive and socialist groups everywhere, bearing in mind that some are silent or reluctant to act openly due to political suppression in their society.” They regretted that “Some ‘left’ organizations in Europe even support Israel, like in Germany and Austria. But this is changing. The wide opposition to Zionism is emerging from across society, sometimes unexpectedly, as people realize that the state is using support for Palestine as the stick against freedom of speech and action. And this is where we come in.”
For Bresheeth et al., the purpose of the Congress is to bring “together global voices against the crimes of Zionist settler-colonialism, practiced and supported across the West, against the Palestinians and their supporters. The Congress is organized by Jews and Palestinians, but it is for everyone. One does not need to be Jewish to oppose Zionism.”
They expressed their hope for some of the following: “An event uniting Anti-Zionist Jews, Israelis, Palestinians, and all other groups – blacks, Arabs, Muslims, feminists, environmentalists, and more – against the terrifying crimes by Zionism against humanity, international Law, the environment, political justice, religious tenets – and against the Palestinians. This is also a crime against Jews, denying the history of common existence in Palestine for more than a thousand years, until the arrival of the Zionist colonists. A clarion call for all citizens, whatever their politics, religion, history – to unite against toxic Zionism, its lawlessness, brutality, supremacism, racism, and sheer cruelty.”
For Bresheeth and Barkan, “The Jewish Anti-Zionist voice demonstrates moral fibre, progressive history, legal vigor, morality of coexistence.” They ended by stating, “Our Congress aims to focus Jewish voices against Zionism, to connect to the liberation of Palestine, and to assist the global movement for justice and peace, for Palestinians and for those Israeli Jews who wish to be part of a democratic, equal polity, from the river to the sea.”
Some 500 people attended the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress. Israeli Prof. Ilan Pappe, formerly of the University of Haifa and later the University of Exeter, also participated.
Pro-Israel Liam Hoare provided another report from the Congress. His report was published on June 18, 2025. He noticed that the slogan “Neither Herzl nor Hitler” was chanted in unison. Dalia Sarig, formerly of the German desk at the Givat Haviva Institute in Israel, said that the delegates gathered “in the very country where Herzl launched Zionism as a racist colonist ideology.” Austria’s “deliberate alliance with Zionism” is a “racist, nationalist and colonial ideology… brought about a genocide,” placing Austria “on the wrong side of history.” Hoare noted that many people were wearing keffiyeh, watermelon earrings, and hats with “Make Palestine Whole Again” and “Make Palestine Free Again.”
Hoare noted that the Congress “was a clear and deliberate attempt to seize the memory of the Holocaust and the legacy of anti-fascism to grant moral legitimacy to the anti-Zionist cause.”
Hoare noticed that the Congress’s political representation “came exclusively from the far-left. Among the Congress’s supporters were the last remaining Trotskyists of the Revolutionary Communist Party who sold copies of their newspaper, the Funke. Also participating were prominent members of the Gaza List, which ran for parliament in September 2024’s national elections, gaining a meagre 0.4 percent of the vote.” Among its leading candidates were Sarig, who lived in Israel before returning to Austria because of Israel’s “structural racism,” Hoare noted.
A week before the Congress, Sarig and her comrades staged a political action by temporarily renaming Theodor Herzl Square—Gaza Square. Sarig then said: “Theodor Herzl is honored annually in Vienna—and for what? For an ideology of colonialism and racist nationalism? As anti-Zionist Jews, we reject this ideology, which justifies colonial violence and expulsion.”
Hoare cited Bresheeth, who said, “This is the first day of Israel’s fast decline… They have attacked humanity. They have no longer just attacked in Gaza, but everywhere in the Middle East. No one anywhere in the Middle East is safe from Zionism. There is no safety anywhere as long as Zionism is with us… There is no place for Zionism in today’s world—anywhere.” Or that “the UN is a useless body and it was made useless by Zionism and the West.”
Hoare noted that Jewish Prof. Donny Gluckstein, a historian who teaches at Edinburgh College and is a lifelong Marxist, claimed in the Congress that “Herzl didn’t even mention a Jewish state in Palestine.” Gluckstein should be reminded that Herzl wrote two books, Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews), published in 1896, arguing that the Jewish people should leave Europe for Palestine, their historic homeland. His second book, Altneuland (The Old New Land), published in 1902, is a utopian novel imagining a future Jewish society in Palestine. Gluckstein further erroneously argued that “antisemitism is a product of capitalism and that to erase capitalism would be to erase antisemitism.”
As part of the Congress, the group produced the Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration, stating: “We, the undersigned, as individuals from Jewish family backgrounds, descendants of displaced persons and/or Holocaust victims, Holocaust survivors, and resistance fighters against the Nazi regime, all with ties to Austria, oppose Zionism and the actions of the state of Israel in our commitment to universal human rights, equality, and a just peace in the Middle East. We declare that our values are not represented by the Vienna ‘Israelitische Kultusgemeinde’, which claims to speak for Jews in Austria and which unconditionally supports Israel. We oppose the marginalization or suppression of Palestinian and anti-Israel voices within Austrian politics, media, and state institutions and in particular, we call for dissenting Jewish voices to be heard…”
Non-Jewish anti-Zionist stalwarts like the musician Roger Waters and Rima Hassan, a member of the European Parliament, were on hand to offer support.
In choosing Vienna—the birthplace of Theodor Herzl—as their stage, the organizers of this so-called anti-Zionist congress aimed for symbolism but succeeded only in highlighting their profound detachment from geopolitical and moral reality. To denounce Zionism as a colonial project while Israeli civilians were under fire from Iran and its proxies is not only historically illiterate—it borders on complicity. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, whose own country gave rise to Hitler and Nazism, put it plainly: Israel has “done the dirty work for all of us” in confronting Iran’s escalating threats.
The Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress, as the organizers stated clearly, was not Jewish but predominantly Palestinian and pro-Palestinian. The Jewish elements were minimal and were recruited to deflect accusations of antisemitism.
Clearly, rejecting the Jews’ right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland is antisemitic.
Joining forces: Time for Jews to unite in the struggle against Zionism, apartheid and genocide
The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress will take place from June 13 to 15 in Vienna, Austria, with the aim of amplifying Jewish voices against Zionism and assisting the global movement for justice and liberation in Palestine.
Protestors carry a banner reading, “Jewish Bloc for Palestine” at the front of a march. (Photo courtesy of Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress)
Anti-Zionism is as old as political Zionism. Both movements were born in the same year, 1896. One was a small movement, started by a Viennese journalist, Theodor Herzl, while the other was a mass movement of Jewish workers in Eastern Europe and Russia – the Socialist Labour Bund. While the Bund became a large movement in several East European countries – in Poland, for example, it was the second largest party in the Seym, the Polish Parliament – Zionism represented less than 1% of the Jewish population in Europe. During the great period of Jewish emigration out of Eastern Europe starting in 1881, millions of Jews immigrated to North and South America, Britain, South Africa, and Australia. During the same period, a few thousand Zionist Jews immigrated to Palestine.
If not for Hitler, Zionism would have remained a small and insignificant Jewish colony in Palestine in all probability. The six million Jews who died in the Holocaust were not Zionists – most were anti-Zionist, either as Bundist Socialists, or Ultra-Orthodox religious Jews, who saw Zionism as anti-Jewish in the extreme. By exterminating the great Jewish communities of Europe, the Nazis killed off Anti-Zionism, leaving behind some 250,000 survivors, mostly incarcerated in European DP camps after WW2. Europe, the U.S., UK, Canada, and the rest of the West were loath to take in any survivors, if they could help it. So instead of offering the broken people who survived the Nazis a home in their own lands, they just sent them to Palestine – out of sight, out of mind. This is one of the main reasons that these states voted in 1947 for dividing Palestine – the larger part – 55% – for Zionism, with the rest – 44% – ‘given’ to the indigenous population, the Palestinians, who made up the great majority – more than two thirds – of the population. This kind of justice has been applied to Palestine by the West ever since.
The Nakba in 1948 compounded the severe injustice of the UN depriving Palestinians of 55% of their land, in order to find a place for the victims of European fascism and Nazism – a conflict the Palestinians or other Arabs had no part in. This injustice, which the UN decided not to address apart from passing resolutions defied by Israel, had only deepened in 1967, with Israel taking control of the whole of Palestine, and starting to settle it illegally. Today, Palestinians do not control even 5% of their own country.
Despite this, the UN has avoided any sanctions against Israel. All efforts to start sanctions were all vetoed by the West. This has been the situation since 1948, but it does not have to be that way.
While the West, led by the U.S., automatically vetoes all Security Council Resolutions against Israel, it cannot veto UNGA resolutions, which constitute international law. In 1974, the UNGA voted to suspend South Africa for the crime of Apartheid. It was passed by a large majority—91 for, 22 against. Most of the West, led by the US, UK, and France, voted against. South Africa was only readmitted in 1994, under President Mandela.
There is no reason why this cannot happen again. If this is the right action against the crime of apartheid, how much more justified is it against Israeli crimes, including genocide, mass starvation, denial of medication, the mass destruction of housing, universities, schools, mosques, and basic services including water purification, sewage disposal, electricity production, roads and agricultural land – all bombed out of existence. There seems to be no war crime that Israel has not enacted in Gaza, with the full support, funding, and armament supplied by the West.
The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress is to take place from June 13 to 15 in Vienna, the hometown of Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism. It intends to use the voice of anti-Zionist Jews, whose numbers have swelled worldwide in the last decade, especially since October 7, 2023, to assist a necessary and urgent change in Western attitudes towards the crimes of Zionism.
We believe it is crucial to create an international political movement for ending Zionism and decolonising Palestine. The genuine organisation representing Palestinian civil society is the BDS/BNC movement, with which we are aligned, which we fully support, and which will be led by. The various progressive forces in Europe and elsewhere must unite behind it, and we hope the Congress will assist this process. We intend to enable opposition to Zionism, helping Palestine gain support across the globe; we see ourselves as an integral part of such a movement.
With Jews living mainly in the West, making up part of its delinquent elites, this struggle is not just against Zionism in Palestine but against our own Western governments, elites, and deep states who aid and abet in Israeli crimes. Palestine should become the litmus test of every ‘democracy’ in the West. We need to build the struggle together with all progressive and socialist groups everywhere, bearing in mind that some are silent or reluctant to act openly due to political suppression in their society. Some ‘left’ organisations in Europe even support Israel, like in Germany and Austria.
But this is changing. The wide opposition to Zionism is emerging from across society, sometimes unexpectedly, as people realise that the state is using support for Palestine as the stick against freedom of speech and action. And this is where we come in.
The Congress brings together global voices against the crimes of Zionist settler-colonialism, practiced and supported across the West, against the Palestinians and their supporters. The Congress is organised by Jews and Palestinians, but it is for everyone. One does not need to be Jewish to oppose Zionism. We hope for some of the following:
An event uniting Anti-Zionist Jews, Israelis, Palestinians, and all other groups – blacks, Arabs, Muslims, feminists, environmentalists, and more – against the terrifying crimes by Zionism against humanity, international Law, the environment, political justice, religious tenets – and against the Palestinians. This is also a crime against Jews, denying the history of common existence in Palestine for more than a thousand years, until the arrival of the Zionist colonists.
A clarion call for all citizens, whatever their politics, religion, history – to unite against toxic Zionism, its lawlessness, brutality, supremacism, racism, and sheer cruelty.
The Jewish Anti-Zionist voice demonstrates moral fibre, progressive history, legal vigour, morality of coexistence – in joining the struggle against Zionism, fighting on the Palestinian side to liberate not only Palestine – but also liberate Judaism from Zionism.
Both Mandela and Archbishop Tutu reminded us “none of us are free, until Palestine is free!”. A Jewish partner of Mandela, the leader of the armed struggle in South Africa, Ronnie Kasrils, stated in support of the Congress:
“The question then of bringing together Jewish anti-Zionists from all over the world in such a congress is of historic importance. And it’s a project, of course, it’s a work in progress. The organisers aren’t claiming that they represent the final view and crystallisation of what this is about.
But it’s a step towards the creation of now a political movement of anti-Zionist Jews involved with Palestinian people directly, as was the case with a few whites who were directly involved in the struggle to free South Africa.”
We stand together, because our message is one of peaceful, equal and just coexistence in Palestine – an upgraded version of the Muslim-led Convivencia (life together) in Palestine, North Africa, Al Andalus, the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East, Arabia, Iran, India and few other territories in Southern Europe – where the three religions were existing in accord rather than conflict. This model for resolving conflicts, in a world where conflict has become the standard mode of action, is what we support; the conflict is now not just between nations, religions, states, blocs, and empires, but with nature, the living environment, and its delicate balance supporting life on this planet. Coexistence is the future, if we are to have a future.
Our Congress aims to focus Jewish voices against Zionism, to connect to the liberation of Palestine, and to assist the global movement for justice and peace, for Palestinians and for those Israeli Jews who wish to be part of a democratic, equal polity, from the river to the sea.
Around 500 people attended the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, Austria, in early June 2025.Rebecca Collard/The World.
In the city of its birth, Jews reject Zionism
Among Jewish people around the world, there’s a growing movement that’s challenging the pairing of Zionism with Judaism. In Vienna, Austria, where the idea of modern political Zionism was born, Jewish organizers held a first-of-its-kind congress to challenge the idea.
June 19, 2025
Over a weekend in mid-June, about 500 people gathered in Vienna, Austria, for what organizers dubbed the city’s first Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress. Israelis, Jews, allies, activists and academics from around the world gathered under banners in German and English that read: “Stop Zionism,” “Judaism is not Zionism” and “Never Again for Anyone.”
They came to reject Zionism in the very city of its birth.
Inside the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress held in Vienna, Austria.Rebecca Collard/The World
In 1896, Theodor Herzl, a Jewish journalist, writer and Vienna resident, published “Der Judenstaat, or “The Jewish State,” arguing that Jews could only be truly safe in a country of their own.
On the side of a small stone stairway in Vienna’s first district, a plaque memorializes Herzl as the man who had “the bold idea for the foundation of the state of Israel.” Herzl wasn’t the first to advocate for an independent Jewish state, but he is largely seen as the father of secular, national Zionism.
From the bottom of the steps, one can see across the Danube River to Leopoldstadt, once a marshy island, which later became a densely populated Jewish neighborhood — in part because of antisemitic persecution and expulsions of Jews from the center of Vienna. Leopoldstadt was also where Herzl’s family first settled upon arrival from Budapest, Hungary, in 1878.
The Theodor Herzl stairway in Vienna’s first district.Rebecca Collard/The World
Herzl held his First Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, in 1897 — not in Vienna or Munich as he had first planned. Dr. Yavov Rabkin, a history professor at the Université de Montréal in Canada, said that Herzl’s idea was met by three types of Jewish opposition.
“One, religious, [against] the idea that you can gather Jews in the Holy Land before the arrival of the Messiah,” Rabkin said. “Two, the Jews who were integrating into European societies, and they didn’t want to hear that they don’t belong there because Zionism had pretty much the same message as antisemitism. And finally, there were people who considered Zionism to be a distraction from class struggle.”
Holocaust survivor and speaker at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress Stephen Kapos outside the conference.Rebecca Collard/The World
Within several decades, however, that opposition was eroded among many European Jews who had survived the Holocaust during World War II. For American Jews, that moment came after the 1967 Six-Day war, which resulted in Israel’s capture of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Old City of Jerusalem from Palestine, the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria.
Rabkin added that Jewish people no longer feared being seen as having split loyalties — an accusation that had often been levied against them.
“So, you can be a Zionist and all the while remaining a good American,” he explained. “It wasn’t always like that, because between the two wars, there was real concern about dual loyalty. [Afterward], this concern disappeared.”
But Rabkin said younger Jews today, especially in the United States, are rejecting Zionism for other reasons: “Most young people are averse to the idea of apartheid, of ethnic nationalism, of supremacy of all kinds. And Israel encapsulates all three.”
Dalia Sarig, one of the organizers of the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress this month, said her family had fled to Palestine before the creation of Israel, and then returned to Austria after the Holocaust. She said she grew up on the idea of Zionism and even moved to Israel when she was 18 years old.
“I think Zionism delivered something that a lot of people bought into. It was, you know, ‘How can I be Jewish when I’m not religious?’” Sarig said. “So, it’s this that Zionism used to gather Jews around the world and to collect them into this national ideology.”
She said what she saw and learned while living in Israel made her give up on that ideology and once again moved back to Austria. She points to conversations she had with a Palestinian teacher while at the University of Haifa.
“ He told me his story of expulsion. How his family was expelled from their Palestinian village,” she said. “I started to think how he would be feeling as a Palestinian living in this Jewish state. … I understood how racist this was.”Speakers at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, Austria.Rebecca Collard/The World
The organizers of the June event kept the exact location secret until just days before the event. Previous Palestinian solidarity events in Vienna have been met with pushback from pro-Israel groups and the official Jewish community. (In Austria and Germany, there are Jewish organizations that are considered official representatives for the community.)
The divide between that official community and those attending the congress is reflective of the growing divide among Jewish communities globally over support for Israel, not just over the occupation of Palestinians or the war in Gaza, but over the very idea of a Jewish state.Police arrive at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, Austria, at the request of the congress organizers.Rebecca Collard/The World
The expected opposition from the official Jewish community didn’t materialize, but a Volkswagen hatchback with German plates flying Israeli flags and flags of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party did. One of the two occupants of the car said she was Jewish, and only gave her first name, Sophia.
“For me, anti-Zionism is equal to antisemitism,” she said, despite the organizers of the congress being Jewish. “We have seen from historical experience, anti-Zionism is always connected with killing Jews.”An Israeli activist challenges counter-demonstrators at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna who arrived with Israeli flags and the flags of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party.Rebecca Collard/The World
Participants at the conference reject that notion, and say a Jewish state hasn’t kept Jews safe and has cost the lives and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.
And in the very city where Herzl made his case for the Jewish state, they are coming together now to reject it
From June 13 to 15, the first anti-Zionist Jewish congress was held in Vienna, aiming to give voice to fierce opponents of the Zionist abomination. From the Austrian capital, and in the name of the memory of the Shoah, the slogan “Neither Herzl nor Hitler” was chanted in unison, as if the two were ultimately one and the same. Is this moral “clarity” sufficient to illuminate the political path ahead? Our correspondent Liam Hoare’s report suggests not: all is not clear among the anti-Zionist Jews, who were joined for the occasion by their allies Roger Waters and Rima Hassan.
VIENNA – Dalia Sarig was barely audible as she took the stage to open what was billed as the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress. Technical issues plagued the opening day of the event on June 13, and her microphone screeched and hissed and faded in and out as she made her opening remarks. Delegates, she said, were gathered “in the very country where Herzl launched Zionism as a racist colonist ideology.” Austria and its political elites remain in a “deliberate alliance with Zionism”—a “racist, nationalist and colonial ideology” which has “brought about a genocide”—and that places Austria “on the wrong side of history.”
Sarig was addressing an audience likely in the low hundreds that almost filled the hall, a space typically used for weddings and Turkish community and cultural gatherings. Must-have fashion accessories included the black-and-white keffiyeh typically draped over the shoulders, watermelon earrings, and faux-MAGA hats in green with slogans like ‘Make Palestine Whole Again’ and ‘Make Palestine Free Again.’ The stage was phalanxed by two large olive trees, and the tables in front of the speakers’ black leather chairs were decorated with white roses in memory of the anti-Nazi resistance group and yellow daffodils, the symbol of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.
Domestic and international Jewish anti-Zionists made up a chunk of the congress’ delegation. These included some of the 36 Viennese anti-Zionist Jews—out of a Jewish community of around 10-12,000 people—who put their signatures to the Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration published in December 2024 prior to the congress. The paper ends with the clarion call: “Judaism does not equal Zionism!”
Present too—either in person or via Zoom—were folk heroes of the international anti-Zionist movement: musician Roger Waters, who instead of giving a speech read the lyrics to a terrible new song he had been working on; Francesa Albanese, United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories; and Rima Hassan, Member of the European Parliament for the far-left La France Insoumise and participant in June’s Gaza Freedom Flotilla with Swedish climate campaigner turned anti-Israel activist Greta Thunberg.
The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna was a clear and deliberate attempt to seize the memory of the Holocaust and the legacy of anti-fascism to grant moral legitimacy to the anti-Zionist cause. The manipulation of history and memory would become this event’s leitmotif.
From what appeared to be streetside at a Parisian café, Hassan recounted her experience of being, as she framed it, “kidnapped” and detained by the “Israel Occupation Forces.” As she spoke, she cradled in her hands a flower bulb, something evidently of tremendous meaning to her for it brought her to tears to speak of it. It was plucked, she explained, from the soil of historic Palestine prior to her deportation, a gesture one of her captors allowed her to undertake. Her story would be among the first, but far from the last, displays of alarming cognitive dissonance.
Like Hassan, the congress’ political representation came exclusively from the far-left. Among the congress’ supporters were the last remaining Trotskyists of the Revolutionary Communist Party selling copies of their newspaper, the Funke. Also embedded in the organizational structure were prominent members of the Gaza List, which ran for parliament in September 2024’s national elections, gaining a meagre 0.4 percent of the vote. Among its leading candidates were Sarig—who frames herself as someone who lived in Israel for “many years” before returning to Austria because of Israel’s “structural racism”—and Astrid Wagner, perhaps most famous for having acted as the child rapist Josef Fritzl’s lawyer.
At either ends of the hall were two large banners displaying the congress’ principal slogans: ‘Stop Zionism’ and ‘Never Again for Anyone.’ The latter, a reclamation of the German and Austrian anti-fascist commandment ‘never again,’ was a prelude of things to come. The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna was a clear and deliberate attempt to seize the memory of the Holocaust and the legacy of anti-fascism to grant moral legitimacy to the anti-Zionist cause. The manipulation of history and memory would become this event’s leitmotif.
Vienna, the city of Lueger, Herzl and Hitler
At the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries, Vienna was home to three people of enormous significance to the destiny of European Jewry. Vienna was the city of Karl Lueger, mayor of the Austrian capital during the fin de siècle period. Even if he himself was not an antisemite, through antisemitic rabble-rousing, anti-Jewish agitation, and a party platform steeped in nationalism and xenophobia as well as Germanic and Catholic supremacism, Lueger rode a wave of anti-Jewish hatred among the Viennese lower-middle class to reach Vienna’s highest office.
Vienna was the city of Adolf Hitler, who relocated there in 1907 as part of a failed attempt to get into Vienna’s Academy of Fine Arts that left him homeless and destitute. Lueger was still mayor of Vienna at that time, and Hitler later wrote in Mein Kampf that he was “one of the most immense German mayors of all time.” Although Lueger and his party were not Nazis, for the Catholics and German nationalists constituted separate political camps divided by the question of Austrian nationhood, Hitler “absorbed pan-Germanism, the concept of the Aryan master race, antisemitism, and anti-Slavism,” in Lueger’s Vienna, Avineri concludes.
By staging their first Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, the organizers undertook a conscious attempt to insert themselves into this historical framework, albeit via an inversion and a perversion of historical and political events. “The antisemitic mayor of Vienna, Karl Lueger, once declared: ‘I decide who is a Jew,’” reads the Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration. “Those who aligned with his policies were exempt from being labeled as ‘Jews’ by Lueger, while dissenting voices opposing his policies were, by his definition, the voices ‘of the Jews’”:
Even today, our anti-colonial Jewish voices in Austria are silenced and delegitimized according to this principle—albeit reversed as ‘We decide who is not Jewish.’ Those who align with Israel are allowed to be considered ‘Jewish’ and to speak as Jews, while those who do not are expected to remain silent as ‘non-Jews.’ We recognize this as a form of antisemitism and as complicity in spreading antisemitism, as it conflates Jewish identity inseparably with the genocide of Palestinians and fuels hatred against Jews.
Karl Lueger is not dead. He is, in fact, alive and well in the hearts and minds not only of the Austrian political establishment but also, by extension, the Austrian Jewish one too, who are all antisemites. His contemporary victims are Austria’s anti-Zionist Jews whose rights and freedoms are being suppressed: “We, the undersigned, unequivocally demand the right to freely express our democratic and anti-colonial views,” a funny demand to issue prior to an organized anti-Zionist congress and after running an explicitly anti-Zionist party in national elections.
As Dalia Sarig noted in her opening remarks, the Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration was issued in Herzl’s city. A week prior to the congress, Sarig and her comrades staged a political action temporarily renaming Theodor Herzl Square—a rather innocuous piece of concrete beside Vienna’s Marriott hotel—Gaza Square. Sarig said: “Theodor Herzl is honored annually in Vienna—and for what? For an ideology of colonialism and racist nationalism? As anti-Zionist Jews, we reject this ideology, which justifies colonial violence and expulsion.”
Dalia Sarig
So too in her address to congress did Sarig reference the Mauthausen Oath, a commitment sworn by survivors of the concentration camp on May 16, 1945, which read in part:
True to these ideals, we make a solemn oath to continue to fight, firm and united, against imperialism and against the instigation of hatred between peoples. … We want to erect the most beautiful monument that one could dedicate to the soldiers who have fallen for the cause of freedom of the international community on a secure basis: A world of free men.
“Invoking this oath in support of radical anti-Zionism distorts its historical meaning,” researcher Stephanie Courouble-Share warned prior to the congress. “By mobilizing the Mauthausen Oath against Israel, the organizers suggest that the Jewish state represents the very system of oppression the survivors vowed to resist. This comparison, lacking historical accuracy, is a rhetorical maneuver that distorts Holocaust memory for political purposes, erasing the specificity of Nazism and the genocide of European Jews.” This, though, precisely the point—not only of this citation but, far too often, this congress.
Israel is weak but the game is strong
The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress was undermined by a series of internal contradictions and characterized by a detachment from historical and political reality. In the early hours of June 13, Israel launched a series of quite extraordinary targeted strikes against Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure. Its long-term ramifications remain unclear, but in the short-term, in contradistinction to the deadly failings of October 7, 2023, it demonstrated the inherent strength of Israel’s military and intelligence apparatus.
The [Jewish Anti-Zionist] congress could never quite make up its mind whether Zionism was so weak that it was on the verge of total collapse or so strong that it is responsible for all the world’s ills.
Whether congressional delegates knew or could comprehend this is unclear. “This is the first day of Israel’s fast decline,” thundered Haim Bresheeth, professional research associate at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, one of the many old comrades from the international anti-Zionist movement to make it Vienna. “They have attacked humanity. They have no longer just attacked in Gaza, but everywhere in the Middle East. No one anywhere in the Middle East is safe from Zionism. There is no safety anywhere as long as Zionism is with us.”
Bresheeth—who gave a largely irrelevant speech to congress about the history of Andalucia—was rather prone to aphoristic proclamations that appeared to come from nowhere and had about as much substance as a Kinder Egg. “There is no place for Zionism in today’s world—anywhere,” for example, or “the UN is a useless body and it was made useless by Zionism and the West.” At one point, he asked delegates: “Which side are Jews on?”: with the European West, responsible for colonialism, or the East, which, it goes without saying, has never perpetrated an act of war or colonialism in its life.
Much like Bresheeth himself, congress could never quite make up its mind whether Zionism was so weak that it was on the verge of total collapse—not just a decline but a fast decline, no less—or so strong that it is responsible for all the world’s ills, its reach stretching from the bomb-damaged nuclear facilities of Iran to the congress halls of Vienna where anti-Zionists’ free speech was being stifled. “Everybody in this room is convinced that this is the beginning of the end of Zionism,” the Egyptian journalist and influencer Rahma Zein said in remarks that somehow were not intended as a joke.Haim Bresheeth
Anti-fascism and identity politics
This congress, Israeli anti-Zionist activist Ronnie Barkan said in his opening address, “is not about discussing Judaism or identity politics”—a rather astonishing statement for an event that frames itself as being both Jewish and anti-Zionist. If Barkan’s words are genuine, then Palestinian author and academic Ghada Karmi, who spoke explicitly both about Jewish identity and her perception about the role of Jews both in the Zionist and anti-Zionist movements, didn’t get the memo.
“Anti-Zionist Jews are still a small minority in Israel and in the world outside,” she observed. “The majority of Jews actively or passively support Israel. You have to ask yourself how would Israel have become so powerful in the U.S. and Europe if it were not for these Jewish accomplices.” It is her belief, therefore, that “the fight against Zionism is an intra-Jewish affair in which the Palestinians should play no part. It is for Jews to turn away from Zionism.”
Zionism, Karmi said, “has caused dissimilation among Jewish communities in Diaspora,” before going on to argue that “we need a transition from tribalism to universalism” among Jews in Diaspora who have tended towards a view that “they belong to a tribe.” Rather giving the game away, she appealed: “It is the task of anti-Zionist Jews who have seen the light to do this work and only they can do it. It doesn’t have the same credibility as Jews who have turned away from Zionism or were never for it in the first place.”
Barkan’s perception of his own congress was incredible. “We are following in their footsteps,” he said of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. An attempt to claim the legacy of Jewish anti-fascism is nothing if not a form of identity politics. In an op-ed published on the anti-Zionist portal Mondoweiss prior to the event, Barkan wrote that “the Jewish anti-Zionist voice demonstrates moral fiber, progressive history, legal vigor, morality of coexistence—in joining the struggle against Zionism, fighting on the Palestinian side to liberate not only Palestine—but also liberate Judaism from Zionism.”
The Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration is also bound up in identity politics and intracommunal struggle: “We do not feel represented by the [Jewish Community of Vienna], which claims to represent Jews in Austria and unconditionally supports every action of Israel,” argue its three-dozen signatories. The declaration is, too, an attempt to situate anti-Zionism in the legacy of Jewish anti-fascism:
We, the undersigned, are individuals with Jewish family backgrounds, descendants of displaced persons and/or Holocaust victims, Holocaust survivors, and resistance fighters against the Nazi regime with ties to Austria. We are committed to universal human rights, equality, and a just peace.
But more than that, the declaration ties to distinguish anti-Zionist Jews from the Zionist Jewish majority and cast that majority as racist, colonialist, and ethno-nationalist by implication. “Around the globe, Jews like us condemn Israel’s actions against Palestinians, the genocide Israel is committing in Gaza, the ethnic cleansing, and the colonial seizure of the West Bank. We unequivocally declare”—in case you had missed the point—’This does not happen in our name!’”Vienna, June 14, 2025, Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress
Historical unreality, moral unclarity
Ronnie Barkan notes that, in the year The Jewish State was published, “a mass movement of Jewish workers in Eastern Europe and Russia, the Socialist Labor Bund” was born. (The General Jewish Labor Bund was actually founded one year later.) “While the Bund became a large movement in several East European countries, Zionism represented less than 1 percent of the Jewish population in Europe.” And then two extraordinary sentences:
If not for Hitler, Zionism would have remained a small and insignificant Jewish colony in Palestine in all probability. The six million Jews who died in the Holocaust were not Zionists: most were anti-Zionist, either as Bundist socialists or ultra-Orthodox religious Jews who saw Zionism as anti-Jewish in the extreme.
Setting aside the implication that only the good Jews died in the Holocaust, never has the small word ‘if’ been responsible for so many heavy lifting. Indeed, if not for the rise of Nazism, perhaps European Jewish history, and therefore Israeli history, would have been different. But that is neither the history we have nor the reality in which we live. Israel is an established state, and two peoples with two distinct national identities claim ownership, either in whole or in part, of the same strip of land. The anti-Zionist movement claims to have the power of facing unpleasant facts while displaying none of it, choosing instead to comfort itself in an alternate reality.
Historical flights of fancy were a problem at the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress. Donny Gluckstein, who teaches at Edinburgh College (rather troublingly for his students), claimed that Herzl didn’t even mention a Jewish state in Palestine, which suggests he either has not read or could not read The Jewish State, in which Herzl wrote of Palestine as Jews’ “ever-memorable historic home.” Gluckstein further argued that antisemitism is a product of capitalism and that to erase capitalism would be to erase antisemitism, which would be news to the Jews of postwar Poland and the Soviet Union.
The anti-Zionist movement claims to have the power of facing unpleasant facts while displaying none of it, choosing instead to comfort itself in an alternate reality.
Comfort food was one of congress’ catering options. Rahma Zein said—again, apparently in all sincerity—that “anybody who’s here today is proving that they’re human.” What kind of humanity is it, however, what kind of morality, that regards Zionism as a conspiracy and the dominant force in the world, responsible for all its problems. Ghada Karmi described Zionism in insidious terms as “a foreign political force was snaking its way into our homeland with malign intent.” No question about it, she said: “Zionism is evil, and if you are against evil, you must be against Zionism.”
What kind of morality, too, that blurs the line or inverts the relationship between victim and perpetrator. “Israel has to stop using the suffering of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis to justify their crimes against the Palestinians,” said the local Palestinian activist Samy Ayad. “Like de-Nazification in 1945, there has to be a de-Zionization of every single institution, every single group” in a future Palestinian one-state, Haim Bresheeth said, who also remarked: “After 1945, there was a problem: How do you live with Germans in Europe? Just as difficult a question as we are discussing in Palestine. How do you live with génocideurs in your midst?” before he was cut off in something resembling his prime.
“Wide opposition to Zionism is emerging from across society,” Ronnie Barkan wrote, but if the post-October 7 protest movement against Israel is a sign of that, the narrow, far-left audience at the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress scarcely indicated a burgeoning future. The situation today in Gaza is indeed intolerable: for the remaining Israeli hostages in Hamas captivity as well as the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced en masse, their homes and environs destroyed. Yet October 7 itself was hardly acknowledged at the congress, and in the sessions I attended, there was not one critique of Hamas, its ideology, or its actions which provoked Israel’s counter-operation.
Moreover, if the conversation is to be, as Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud framed it, that “the solutions should be focused on a one-state solution, a state called Palestine, and nothing else,” then the suffering of the Palestinian people is doomed to continue. It was to her credit that Karmi was prepared to acknowledge that there were two communities in Palestine who, fundamentally, do not want to live together—who would prefer a divorce over an arranged marriage. “What do you do?” she asked, a question to which the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress had no answer.
https://x.com/JVoiceLabour/status/1901302952117125298Viennese Jewish Anti-Zionist Declaration We, the undersigned, as individuals from Jewish family backgrounds, descendants of displaced persons and/or Holocaust victims, Holocaust survivors, and resistance fighters against the Nazi regime, all with ties to Austria, oppose Zionism and the actions of the state of Israel in our commitment to universal human rights, equality, and a just peace in the Middle East. We declare that our values are not represented by the Vienna “Israelitische Kultusgemeinde”, which claims to speak for Jews in Austria and which unconditionally supports Israel. We oppose the marginalization or suppression of Palestinian and anti-Israel voices within Austrian politics, media, and state institutions and in particular, we call for dissenting Jewish voices to be heard… https://juedisch-antizionistisch.at/en
On May 31, 2025, an article titled “The Shame of Israeli Medicine” was published by Prof. Neve Gordon, Dr. Guy Shalev, and Dr. Osama Tanous in The New York Review of Books. The authors claimed that Israel’s medical establishment has disregarded the field’s most basic ethical principle, the right to health.
Gordon, Shalev, and Tanous, the three Israeli academics, explained that affidavits are collected by Physicians for Human Rights–Israel (PHRI), a nonprofit organization “where one of us, Guy Shalev, is the executive director and another, Osama Tanous, is a board member.” The authors were “drawing on data gathered by rights organizations and the Palestinian Authority.”
The article discusses cases of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, among others, and states, “Palestinians in general and prisoners in particular have long been dehumanized.”
The article claims, “When Palestinian doctors working in Israeli hospitals were persecuted, the medical establishment refused to support them. The overwhelming majority of doctors—not to mention every Israeli hospital and the Israeli Medical Association—refused to condemn the destruction of Gaza’s health care system; some openly praised it and even called for the demolition of hospitals in Gaza. As these offenses accumulated, in most cases the country’s major medical-ethics institutions refused to speak out.”
The article argues, “The Israeli medical establishment has long had close ties with the state and security apparatus, not least because most senior officials come from the military Medical Corps. Leading hospitals have taken pride in joining war efforts: ‘In wartime, the civilian and military systems became one’.”
The article postulates, “in the first days of Israel’s attack on Gaza, cases of medical neglect and complicity escalated dramatically. On October 11, 2023, Israel’s Moshe Arbel, then Minister of Health, instructed hospital directors to refuse treatment to ‘terrorists’ and send them back to medical facilities belonging to the prison authorities and the military.”
For Gordon, Shalev and Tanous, “In practice, government officials and the mainstream media tend to apply the word ‘terrorist’ indiscriminately to Palestinian men between fifteen and seventy.”
The writers state, “Even as hospitals turned away Palestinian detainees, their own Palestinian employees—who comprise a quarter of all doctors and almost half of new doctors and nurses in Israel—found themselves under suspicion. About a week after October 7 several people sent complaints alleging that Abed Samara, director of the cardiac intensive care unit at Hasharon Hospital in Petah Tikva, had expressed support for Hamas on Facebook.”
Palestinian doctors and nurses have confided PHRI, according to Gordon, Shalev and Tanous, that “they fear posting anything that could be construed as political on their private social media accounts. Hospitals, they testify, have been suffused with an atmosphere of militarization, scrutiny, and silencing.”
The article mentions a medical worker who said in a report by the Mada al-Carmel Research Center, “Nowadays, to continue working in the hospital, you are required to become inhumane.” According to the authors, “You are not allowed to express sympathy for anyone dying on the other side, even if it is a child.”
The authors complained that Israeli medical staff “circulated an Instagram post featuring doctors dressed in military garb and stationed in Gaza.”
Moreover, Gordon, Shalev, and Tanous reject an Israeli claim that “the residents of Gaza saw fit to turn hospitals into terrorist nests to take advantage of western morality. [They] brought destruction upon themselves.”
The authors end their article by stating sarcastically that “Sheba Medical Center was named the eighth-best hospital in the world by Newsweek, a prestigious recognition that reflects not just Sheba’s reputation but that of Israel’s health care system as a whole. In a press release celebrating the designation, it promised that its doctors would ‘keep striving…to raise the standard of healthcare for all’.”
In response, Zion Hagay, the President of the Israeli Medical Association (IMA), and Malke Borow, the Director of Division of Law and Policy at IMA, refuted these allegations on behalf of IMA on the pages of the New York Review of Books. They stated, “We were deeply dismayed by many of the claims in your article… Its glaring omissions, selective interpretations, and misrepresentation of facts call for an urgent and clear response.”
Hagay and Borow posited that Gordon, Shalev, and Tanous provided an extremely one-sided view, “the piece makes no mention whatsoever of the unprovoked October 7th Hamas massacre—the horrific attack that precipitated the current war. Simply put, Hamas declared war on Israeli civilians, not the other way around.” The IMA response pointed out that Gordon, Shalev, and Tanous failed to “acknowledge the 251 hostages, many of whom were denied food, water, and medical care, and who endured unimaginable cruelty.” Accordingly, “It is not only possible—but essential—to grieve the devastation in Gaza’s health care system while also recognizing the calculated violence inflicted on Israeli civilians.”
For Hagay and Borow, the article by Gordon, Shalev, and Tanous “adopted an overtly biased tone, presenting unverified allegations as fact while ignoring any perspectives or evidence that might challenge its narrative.”
Hagay and Borow, speaking on behalf of the IMA, emphasized that their organization “consistently acted to uphold medical ethics and international humanitarian law.” They gave an example, “in January 2024, the IMA issued a public statement affirming that Israeli physicians must provide care to all individuals—regardless of identity, affiliation, or actions—based solely on their shared humanity. We reached out to hospital directors facing pressure to cease treating terrorists and reaffirmed their ethical responsibilities, offering the IMA’s full support.”
With regard to the bombing of Palestinian hospitals, Hagay and Borow stressed that the IMA “reaffirmed that medical facilities must never be deliberately targeted.”
According to Hagay and Borow, the article by Gordon, Shalev and Tanous ironically “references the Geneva Convention’s call for the protection of hospitals but omits the critical clause stating that such protection may cease if hospitals are used to commit harmful acts against the enemy.” They further argued that “to criticize Israeli doctors for joining the IDF and taking pride in defending their country. To imply that such service is incompatible with medical ethics is both unjust and profoundly naive.” The claim that the IMA has “failed grievously in its obligations to defend medical ethics” is “not only unfounded—it is clearly both false and offensive.”
Hagay and Borow ended by stating, “The New York Review of Books owes its readers a more honest and comprehensive portrayal of the complexities at hand.”
Worth noting that Prof. Neve Gordon, Dr. Guy Shalev, and Dr. Osama Tanous are all Israeli academics. Their article also appears on the pages of the Palestinian newspaper Alquds.
Gordon, formerly of Ben Gurion University, is currently teaching at Queen Mary University of London. He called for the boycott of Israel on the pages of the Los Angeles Times in 2008. Prior to that, he was recruited by Prof. Nezar alSayyad to produce an anti-Israel scholarship at UC Berkeley in 2004. In his book Israel’s Occupation, Gordon listed Israeli efforts to improve the standard of living of Palestinians after 1967’s victory, “In the health field practices were introduced to encourage women to give birth at hospitals (a means of decreasing infant mortality rates and monitoring population growth) and to promote vaccinations (in order to decrease the incidence of contagious and noncontagious diseases). Palestinian teachers were sent to seminars in Jerusalem, where they were instructed in methods of ‘correct’ teaching. A series of vocational schools were established to prepare Palestinians who wished to join the Israeli workforce, and model plots were created to train farmers. Many of these controlling devices aimed to increase the economic productivity of the Palestinian inhabitants and to secure the well-being of the population.” But for Gordon, all these good measures were merely acts of control.
Shalev is employed by the Hebrew University. His 2016 paper, “A Doctor’s Testimony: Medical Neutrality and the Visibility of Palestinian Grievances in Jewish-Israeli Publics,” published in Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, “follows the testimony of Izzeldin Abuelaish, a Palestinian physician who bears witness to his experiences working, living, and suffering under Israeli rule. He presents his story… to challenge the limited legitimacy of Palestinian grievances. In this paper, I explore his testimony as a medical voice that at once recounts the suffering and loss endured by the Palestinian people and also struggles to negotiate the values associated with being a ‘reliable’ witness.”
Tanous is a pediatrician and public health scholar based in Haifa and a visiting scientist at Harvard. His 2023 article, “On Settler Colonialism, Environment, and Health,” published by Jerusalem Quarterly, was refuted by a group of health scholars, who published a review essay titled “Identifying Settler Colonial Determinants of Health (SCDH) as the Upstream Cause of Palestinian Ill Health Is Both Incorrect and Harmful,” on the pages of Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal, in April 2025.
Israel Academia Monitor pointed out many times before that radical academic critics of Israel misrepresent International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Article 19 of the Geneva Convention, adopted in 1949, states, “The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy. Protection may, however, cease only after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded.” Gordon, who is now an “expert on international law,” should know that the Hague and Geneva Conventions consider using the civilian population as human shields, a practice that Hamas has perfected, to be a grave violation of IHL.
We were deeply dismayed by many of the claims in your article entitled “The Shame of Israeli Medicine,” published recently. Its glaring omissions, selective interpretations, and misrepresentation of facts call for an urgent and clear response.
To begin with, oddly, the piece makes no mention whatsoever of the unprovoked October 7th Hamas massacre—the horrific attack that precipitated the current war. Simply put, Hamas declared war on Israeli civilians, not the other way around. The article also fails to acknowledge the 251 hostages, many of whom were denied food, water, and medical care, and who endured unimaginable cruelty. More than fifty (both dead and alive) remain in captivity today. It is not only possible—but essential—to grieve the devastation in Gaza’s health care system while also recognizing the calculated violence inflicted on Israeli civilians.
Secondly, the article adopts an overtly biased tone, presenting unverified allegations as fact while ignoring any perspectives or evidence that might challenge its narrative. In stark contrast, the Israel Medical Association (IMA) has consistently acted to uphold medical ethics and international humanitarian law.
For example in January 2024, the IMA issued a public statement affirming that Israeli physicians must provide care to all individuals—regardless of identity, affiliation, or actions—based solely on their shared humanity. We reached out to hospital directors facing pressure to cease treating terrorists and reaffirmed their ethical responsibilities, offering the IMA’s full support.
When reports emerged that certain Israeli doctors had endorsed the bombing of Palestinian hospitals, the IMA immediately condemned such statements, reaffirmed that medical facilities must never be deliberately targeted, and personally contacted each signatory to reinforce the ethical obligations of the profession.
Ironically, the article references the Geneva Convention’s call for the protection of hospitals but omits the critical clause stating that such protection may cease if hospitals are used to commit harmful acts against the enemy. This caveat is central to the debate. Claims that Hamas utilized hospitals for military purposes have been substantiated by reputable outlets, including The New York Times. Testimonies from both Israeli intelligence and video footage from Hamas members confirm that hospitals were used as command centers and to hold hostages.
On the matter of prisoner restraint, the IMA’s ethical stance long predates the current conflict. Our first statement was issued in 1997, the issue was revisited in 2008 and an updated edition was released in September 2023, prior to the war. Most recently, we reiterated this position in a February 2025 letter to the Ministry of Health.
The authors also criticize Israeli doctors for joining the IDF and taking pride in defending their country. No one longs more to return to the sanctity and relative comfort of clinical practice than these physicians—treating patients of all ethnicity and religions. But in the face of existential threats to the country, they are called to serve. To imply that such service is incompatible with medical ethics is both unjust and profoundly naive.
The claim that the IMA has “failed grievously in its obligations to defend medical ethics” is not only unfounded—it is clearly both false and offensive. We have long and consistently condemned any unethical behavior by Israeli physicians, investigated individual complaints, and reasserted our unwavering commitment to medical neutrality and humanitarian principles (latest statement).
In times of war, nuance matters. The New York Review of Books owes its readers a more honest and comprehensive portrayal of the complexities at hand.
Zion Hagay, M.D. President, Israeli Medical Association (IMA)
Malke Borow, J.D. Director, Division of Law and Policy, IMA
Faced with the destruction of Gaza’s hospitals and the systematic deprivation of Palestinians’ right to health, Israel’s medical establishment has disregarded the field’s most basic ethical principles. May 31, 2025
Gordon, Shalev & Tanous for NYBooks:
“In late March 2024 Israeli soldiers raided Nasser Hospital in the southern Gaza Strip. They arrested medical staff and patients, as well as civilians who were sheltering in the hospital compound. H., an orthopedic doctor, was partway through a shift when the soldiers began beating him. They kicked him in the stomach, groin, and testicles, told him to take his clothes off, handcuffed and blindfolded him, and escorted him to the hospital yard. Then they drove him across the Israeli border to the infamous Sde Teiman military base, near the southern city of Be’er Sheva, where at the time hundreds of Palestinians were being held blindfolded and shackled in overcrowded, filthy cages, some forced to sleep on the floor without mattresses or blankets.
In October 2024 H. gave an affidavit to Physicians for Human Rights–Israel (PHRI), a nonprofit where one of us, Guy Shalev, is the executive director and another, Osama Tanous, is a board member. H. recounted that at one point during his sixty-nine days at Sde Teiman his guards put him in a “disco room” with no mattresses, where deafening music blared at all times. Eventually they took him to an interrogation room, where, he testified, “for six days they tortured me by tying my hands and feet to a chair behind my back, hitting my stomach, and slapping me while I was blindfolded.” After forty-three days at Sde Teiman, he was sent to a prison not far from Tel Aviv to be interrogated.
There he saw a doctor, who affirmed that H. had developed inguinal and abdominal hernias as a result of the beatings. “He said I needed surgery and should not be interrogated,” H. said. But he was sent back to Sde Teiman without treatment. “As soon as I returned to the detention facility,” H. recounted, “the soldiers beat me up, banged my head on the ground and rubbed my face in the sand, kicked me and punched me.”
After another three weeks at Sde Teiman, they transferred H. once again, to a prison facility in Ashkelon, near the Gaza border. There he was seen by another doctor, who made him keep his blindfold on during the examination. “We are colleagues in the same profession,” H. said. “You are supposed to treat me humanely.” In response, he remembered, the Israeli doctor “slapped me while I was still blindfolded.” “You are a terrorist,” he recalls the man saying.
A few weeks later, at the Israel Prison Service’s medical facility in Ramleh, H. met with yet a third doctor, who confirmed in a ten-minute exam that he needed a hernia operation—yet the doctor insisted it was not urgent and H. was again returned, this time to Ofer prison. H. recalls in the affidavit that at a court hearing last July the judge extended his detention for forty-five days; neither there nor in the following interrogations was he given access to a lawyer. In August, when he appeared before a judge in a phone hearing, he was told that he is considered “affiliated with a terror organization.” Before the judge abruptly hung up the call, he told H. that he would be remanded to Ofer until further notice. “I am a doctor,” H. protested. Then the judge was gone.
*
H. remains incarcerated at Ofer awaiting trial—one of the over 380 health care workers from Gaza who have been detained by Israeli forces since October 2023. (According to Health Care Workers Watch, two dozen of them have been subjected to enforced disappearance and remain missing.) Between July and December 2024 PHRI gathered testimony from twenty-four of these Palestinian medical professionals, who were held across civilian and military prison systems in Israel. Practically all of them described suffering torture in the form of severe beatings, continuous shackling, and sleep deprivation. According to documents that PHRI obtained through a freedom of information request, at least sixty-three Palestinians died in Israeli custody between October 2023 and September 2024, including the doctors Adnan al-Bursh, Iyad al-Rantisi, and Ziad al-Dalou, as well as the paramedic Hamdan Abu Anaba. Since then, drawing on data gathered by rights organizations and the Palestinian Authority, the group has determined that at least twenty-seven further detainees have died in the past nineteen months, bringing the total number to ninety. In comparison, nine inmates died in detention at Guantánamo Bay over a period of more than twenty years.
The affidavits gathered by PHRI reveal some recurring themes. One is the use of dogs to attack and humiliate prisoners. M.T., the head of the surgery department at the Indonesian Hospital in northern Gaza, told PHRI that soldiers from a counterterrorism unit called Force 100 raided his detention enclosure in Sde Teiman with dogs three days in a row, “beating prisoners and allowing the dogs to urinate and defecate on us.” K.S., a twenty-nine-year-old surgeon at al-Shifa Hospital, recounted that “they beat us with batons, with their fists, and let their dogs urinate on us. There are always dogs with them…. They attacked me twice with dogs.”
Another repeatedly cited abuse was pervasive medical neglect. Echoing other detainees, a twenty-seven-year-old general practitioner from al-Aqsa Hospital named M.S. described the scabies outbreaks in his prison ward. “Nobody is treating these infections,” he said, “nor anything else.”
Those who did manage to see Israeli doctors often had experiences similar to the ones that H. described. K.S. recalled a doctor telling him his scabies “would heal on its own.” N.T., a forty-nine-year-old surgeon who takes medication for hypertension, was denied access to a physician for months after he was detained during the March 2024 raid on Nasser Hospital. In his affidavit, he describes being taken to Sde Teiman, handcuffed and blindfolded, and forced to wear only underwear for the first seventeen days. He spent the next month in a detention facility called Anatot, near the Palestinian village Anata in the occupied West Bank, then the next two months at Ofer, where he finally saw a physician. The doctor prescribed medication—but only for ten days.
Neglect can be a death sentence. In his testimony M.T. recounted that another prisoner, M., had a stroke in the enclosure where prisoners with medical conditions were held. “A shawish [an inmate delegated as a go-between by the prison authorities] called for a nurse,” M.T. recalled, “who told him, ‘You’re not a doctor, don’t interfere.’” The following day they alerted the guard, then a Shin Bet officer. “They warned him that the prisoner was going to die,” M.T. said. At last a doctor showed up, “but M. was already dead.”
*
In 1989 the South African physicians William John Kalk and Yosuf Veriava treated twenty political prisoners who had been hospitalized in Johannesburg after participating in a hunger strike. When the authorities asked them to send their patients back to detention, they refused, fearing that the men might be tortured. Known in the literature of medical ethics as “Kalk’s refusal,” their action has since served as a moral roadmap for doctors unwilling to violate their ethical obligations toward patients. In 1999 it was cited in the Istanbul Protocol, the most important UN guideline for medical professionals who are documenting cases of torture and ill-treatment, which instructs doctors to refrain from returning a detainee to the place of detention if an examination supports allegations of abuse.
Over the past year and a half, however, a different kind of refusal has characterized medical institutions in Israel. Some hospitals initially refused to treat wounded Palestinian detainees. Later some doctors continued to refuse on an individual level; many who did treat detainees failed to demand that their blindfolds and shackles be taken off. When Palestinian doctors working in Israeli hospitals were persecuted, the medical establishment refused to support them. The overwhelming majority of doctors—not to mention every Israeli hospital and the Israeli Medical Association—refused to condemn the destruction of Gaza’s health care system; some openly praised it and even called for the demolition of hospitals in Gaza. As these offenses accumulated, in most cases the country’s major medical-ethics institutions refused to speak out.
Demonstrators in Ramallah holding up posters of the Palestinian pediatrician Hussam Abu Safiya, the director of Kamal Adwan Hospital, to protest his detention by Israel, January 14, 2025
The groundwork for these refusals has been laid for decades. Palestinians in general and prisoners in particular have long been dehumanized. The Israeli medical establishment has long had close ties with the state and security apparatus, not least because most senior officials come from the military Medical Corps.1 Leading hospitals have taken pride in joining war efforts: “In wartime, the civilian and military systems became one,” Yoel Har-Even, vice president of global affairs at Sheba Medical Center, said at the Jerusalem Post’s Miami summit this past December.
But in the first days of Israel’s attack on Gaza, cases of medical neglect and complicity escalated dramatically. On October 11, 2023, Israel’s then–health minister, Moshe Arbel, instructed hospital directors to refuse treatment to “terrorists” and send them back to medical facilities belonging to the prison authorities and the military. (In practice, government officials and the mainstream media tend to apply the word “terrorist” indiscriminately to Palestinian men between fifteen and seventy.) That same day Ichilov Hospital in Tel Aviv and Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan denied treatment to Palestinian detainees; a right-wing mob, meanwhile, stormed Sheba looking for “terrorists.” Less than a week later, reportedly fearing another such mob attack, Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem refused to admit an injured Palestinian man whom the military had brought to the emergency room for serious gunshot wounds. “Sources within the hospital” told Haaretz that treating him would “hurt national feelings.”
Soroka Hospital, in Be’er Sheva, took this practice further. In the ten months following Hamas’s October 7 attacks, according to Haaretz’s reporting, hospital staff called the police on at least three undocumented Palestinian women when they reached the emergency room. (Spokespeople for the hospital stressed to the journalists that this was a policy devised “in coordination with the police,” even after the police themselves “denied that such a directive exists.”) In one instance a pregnant Palestinian woman from the West Bank arrived experiencing contractions. Since 2013 she had been living with her husband in Rahat, a Bedouin town in Israel; her three children are Israeli citizens. Once the physician had seen her, she was detained by the police before even being formally discharged, taken to a West Bank checkpoint, and left stranded there until her husband picked her up and drove her to Jenin, where her parents live. She gave birth five days later.
Even as hospitals turned away Palestinian detainees, their own Palestinian employees—who comprise a quarter of all doctors and almost half of new doctors and nurses in Israel—found themselves under suspicion. About a week after October 7 several people sent complaints alleging that Abed Samara, director of the cardiac intensive care unit at Hasharon Hospital in Petah Tikva, had expressed support for Hamas on Facebook. On October 18 Yinon Magal—a television anchor, right-wing influencer, and former Knesset member—insisted on his telegram channel that Samara had “changed his profile picture to a Hamas flag, agitating and talking about the Muslims’ ‘Day of Judgment.’” The image in question featured a green flag bearing the Shahada, a saying repeated by every observant Muslim five times a day: “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.”
That same day the hospital suspended Samara after fifteen years of service. Israel’s brand-new health minister, Uriel Busso, insisted on social media that Samara had headed his profile with “Hamas flags” and written “words of support for the terrorist organization that slaughtered and murdered hundreds of Jews in cold blood.” By the time the police and Shin Bet notified the hospital that the picture had been posted in 2022 and merely expressed religious devotion, Samara had been subjected to death threats and hundreds of hate messages and had decided he no longer felt comfortable returning to work.
Other Palestinian doctors and nurses have confided in PHRI that they fear posting anything that could be construed as political on their private social media accounts. Hospitals, they testify, have been suffused with an atmosphere of militarization, scrutiny, and silencing. “Nowadays, to continue working in the hospital, you are required to become inhumane,” one medical worker said in a report issued by the Palestinian research center Mada al-Carmel. “You are not allowed to express sympathy for anyone dying on the other side, even if it is a child.”
*
Their Israeli colleagues have felt no such inhibitions about their own speech. Palestinian doctors and nurses who spoke to PHRI described overhearing coworkers suggesting that Israel should “ethnically cleanse Gaza,” “transform Gaza into rubble,” and “flatten it.” They have seen colleagues post messages on social media like the one recirculated on October 21, 2023, by a senior surgeon from Carmel Medical Centre in Haifa. Apparently first posted by someone serving in Gaza, it invoked the famous prisoner exchange Israel negotiated with Hamas for the release of the captured solider Gilad Shalit:
The UN is asking for a proportional response. So here, some proportions: for Gilad Shalit we released 1027 prisoners. One Jew is equal to 1027 terrorists. 1350 murdered Jews times 1027 [equals] 1,386,450 dead in Gaza. This is the proportion we have become accustomed to; I was happy to help.
This and other genocidal calls were not limited to the first weeks and months after the October 7 massacre. Nineteen months into the war on Gaza, Amos Sabo, a senior surgeon at Maccabi Healthcare Services, posted on X that he considered his reserve service a way of advancing public health by “eliminating cockroaches and other loathsome insects.” A few months earlier he wrote: “Gaza should be erased. There are no uninvolved people there.”
Hospitals themselves have likewise rallied on social media around Israel’s war in the Strip. In November 2023 Bnai Zion Medical Center in Haifa circulated an Instagram post featuring doctors dressed in military garb and stationed in Gaza, with the message “sending regards from the front.” A Sheba Medical Center Instagram story from June 2024 covered the “double life” of one of its doctors, who splits his time between the operating room and the cockpit of an F16 fighting jet. There are parallels between combat flying and surgery, the pilot says:
Both take you to the edge and both require precision, responsibility, decision-making under pressure, and the ability to deal with failure. There’s no such thing as “I almost hit the target”—either you hit it, or you didn’t. If you weren’t accurate at altitude, you crashed—if you cut a blood vessel one millimeter to the right, the result could be catastrophic.
These posts appeared at a time when Israel’s aerial and ground attacks were frequently killing scores of civilians a day and producing an extremely precarious environment for health care workers in Gaza, where, according to the UN, the number of health and aid professionals killed in military strikes is unprecedented in recent history.
In early November 2023—around the time the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that the Israeli military had already killed at least 9,770 Palestinians, including an estimated 4,000 children, and injured an additional 25,000—dozens of Jewish Israeli doctors published an open letter calling on the military to bomb Palestinian hospitals. The doctors were not dissuaded by the fact that fourteen out of Gaza’s thirty-six hospitals had already stopped functioning due to air strikes or shortages of fuel, oxygen, medicine, medical equipment, and food. Nor were they deterred by international humanitarian law, which stipulates that medical facilities “must be protected at all times and shall not be the object of an attack.” Because “the residents of Gaza saw fit to turn hospitals into terrorist nests to take advantage of western morality,” these doctors reasoned, they “brought destruction upon themselves.… Abandoning Israeli citizens while granting protection to mass murderers simply because they are hiding in hospitals is unthinkable.” One of the signatories, an American-born Israeli gynecologist named Chana Katan, explained: “I will do everything I can to defend and protect IDF soldiers and ensure they return safely to their homes. It is the IDF’s duty to bomb the terrorists hiding in hospitals in Gaza.” (UN officials as well as human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, repeatedly emphasized that Israel had not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate its claims about militant groups’ use of hospitals. An analysis of Israeli visual material found those claims not credible.)
The acting head of the ethics committee at the Israeli Medical Association, Tammy Karni, soon issued a concise statement in response to the doctors’ letter. “Even in these sensitive days, in times of war, it is the role of doctors to treat the wounded,” Karni felt the need to explain:
Upholding a moral position is what distinguishes the State of Israel. Throughout history, Israeli doctors have not agreed to be dragged into the conscientious and moral decline that our enemy has reached…. The doctors of the IMA will not encourage crimes against humanity.
And yet less than three weeks later the IMA—a professional association that represents 95 percent of physicians in Israel—would itself sign on to a statement that, in effect, justified the Israeli army’s assaults on Palestinian hospitals in the Strip. In mid-November the Israeli military laid siege to al-Shifa Hospital, shelled its surroundings, cut off its supply of water and electricity, and sent ground troops into the compound, which then housed 7,000 displaced people, 1,500 healthcare staff, and 700 patients, including premature infants. Israeli military spokespeople had insisted that “Hamas’s headquarters” were located in tunnels directly under the medical facility—an accusation for which Israel failed to provide substantiating evidence, despite eventually occupying the entire site.
Starting on November 8, 2023, officials with the WHO and UNRWA had denounced the siege for its “disastrous” effect on medical conditions. On November 23 the ethics committees of six Israeli health associations—including the IMA, the National Association of Nurses, and the Israeli Psychological Association—sent a letter to the WHO not to join it in condemning the siege but to castigate it for its “silence” about Hamas’s alleged control of al-Shifa. Parroting the government’s delegitimizing rhetoric about the Palestinian health care system, the heads of the ethics committees explained that “once terrorists or militants see that no objections are raised when hospitals are used for combat, they will feel free to do so on other occasions and in other locations as well.”
*
Meanwhile the members of these associations’ ethics committees have remained largely silent as health care staff in Israel violate the profession’s ethical principles. What began as an institutional policy of refusing to admit detained Palestinians in October 2023 soon turned into a pervasive practice of individual refusals by practitioners: late that month, upon the arrival of a fifteen-year-old detainee to a hospital in Israel’s Center District, one nurse refused to provide medical treatment, while another forcibly removed his intravenous drip and demanded his immediate transfer from the hospital. The pattern persisted for many months after the war started; a nurse at Kaplan Medical Center in Rehovot refused to treat a detainee as recently as this past February.
When detainees are admitted, their hands and legs are regularly shackled to the bed in what the guards call “four-point restraints.” One doctor confided to one of us that coworkers “withheld painkillers after invasive procedures, and then explained to colleagues that pain medication is a privilege that Palestinian detainees do not deserve.” After months of complaints submitted by PHRI’s ethics committee, in February the IMA at last issued a letter condemning “the restraint of prisoners and detainees in hospitals across the country.”
In still other cases detainees have received only minimal treatment before being sent back to a detention facility, even when their conditions were life-threatening. On July 6, 2024, a detainee was transferred from Sde Teiman to Assuta Hospital in Ashdod after suffering critical injuries to his neck, chest, and abdomen, as well as a ruptured rectum. The medical examination indicated that he had been subjected to torture and sexual violence while in custody. Immediately after the treatment, however, he was sent back to his torturers. According to Human Rights Watch, detainees at Sde Teiman could hear the screams of other inmates being tortured; doctors at the field hospital—where patients routinely arrived with injuries indicative of severe violence—would surely have heard them, too. Physicians working there were prohibited by military authorities from using their names or license numbers when examining prisoners or signing medical reports. When doctors are asked to conceal their identity in this way, the aim is usually to shield them from future scrutiny over their complicity in the facility’s abuses.
In April 2024 Haaretz reported that an Israeli physician had sent a letter to the ministers of defense and health and the attorney general detailing the harsh conditions to which Palestinian detainees were subjected at the facility and the tacit assent expected from the medical staff. “Just this week,” he explained, “two patients had their legs amputated due to injuries from being cuffed. Sadly, this has become routine.” The doctor went on to describe how patients were fed through straws, made to use diapers for defecation, and kept handcuffed and blindfolded at all times. “Since the early days of the field hospital’s operation,” he wrote, “I have been grappling with challenging ethical dilemmas…. We have all become partners in violating Israeli law. As a physician, I am even more troubled by the violation of my fundamental commitment to provide equal care to all patients—a pledge I made upon graduating twenty years ago.” (In a response to the paper’s reporter, the ministry of health insisted that “the medical treatment provided at Sde Teiman complies with the international rules and conventions to which Israel is committed.”)
Between February and April 2024 PHRI published two reports detailing how incarcerated Palestinians had been systematically deprived of the right to health. In both reports the group urged the IMA to ensure that detainees receive medical care in line with Israeli law, international treaties, and ethical medical standards. Finally, that April, Yossef Walfisch, the new chairperson of the IMA’s ethics committee, responded with an official statement. “Israeli physicians,” he stressed, “are required to adhere by international conventions, medical ethics principles, and the Geneva Declaration.” They “must provide all necessary medical care, whether in hospitals, prisons, or military facilities, and should be guided exclusively by medical considerations.”
He elaborated on that letter in an article on Doctors Only, a website for the country’s medical community. Yet even here Walfisch paired his lofty pronouncements about the significance of providing everyone humane medical care with attempts to deny the evidence of Palestinians’ horrific treatment. Again and again he referred to Palestinian patients as “Hamas terrorists.” Because the medical staff’s “safety takes precedence over any other ethical consideration,” he explained, the professional bodies responsible for incarceration ought to determine who should be restrained and blindfolded, and although health care staff in prisons and hospitals should strive for “a minimum of handcuffing,” on the whole they should follow the authorities’ guidelines. He invoked Sde Teiman but failed to say a single word about the beatings, torture, and medical neglect there. Instead he revealed that, when he visited the base’s medical team, he found staffers who “work day and night to provide the most suitable treatment within the limitations of this type of facility.” Echoing a self-congratulatory trope often used to describe the Israeli military, he called them “among the most moral doctors I have met.”
It is hard not to conclude that the IMA has failed grievously in its obligations to defend medical ethics. It could have criticized Israeli doctors who posted genocidal messages on social media, investigated health professionals who allegedly facilitated torture, and defended Palestinian doctors like Abed Samara who were wrongly persecuted for supporting terror. Instead it has not just turned a blind eye to these abuses but adopted Israel’s line of defense, blaming Hamas for Israeli transgressions in Gaza that include not only egregious crimes of starvation, murder, and forced displacement—widely acknowledged by rights groups as amounting to genocide—but more specifically the destruction of the Strip’s medical system, the killing of more than 1,400 health care workers, and the unlawful detention of nearly four hundred others.
In recent months the Israeli medical establishment’s silence has grown all the more deafening. Not a single prominent medical official, to the best of our knowledge, spoke up after reports emerged that, in the early hours of March 23, Israeli forces had ambushed and massacred fifteen Palestinian paramedics and aid workers who were carrying out a rescue mission in southern Gaza, then tried to cover up the crime by burying the bodies in a sandy mass grave alongside their smashed ambulances and fire truck; nor when it was revealed that a military spokesperson had lied about the atrocity, falsely claiming that the ambulances’ emergency lights were off when they arrived at the scene and accusing the murdered paramedics of having “advanced suspiciously.” No hospital director, dean of medical faculty, or IMA official said a word even after two witnesses from the UN retrieval team claimed that at least one dead aid worker had his hands bound, nor after the doctor who carried out the postmortems said that several had been killed by gunshots to the head and torso.
A month earlier, Sheba Medical Center was named the eighth-best hospital in the world by Newsweek, a prestigious recognition that reflects not just Sheba’s reputation but that of Israel’s health care system as a whole. In a press release celebrating the designation, it promised that its doctors would “keep striving…to raise the standard of healthcare for all.””
We speak to political scientist Neve Gordon and medical anthropologist Guy Shalev about their new article, “The Shame of Israeli Medicine,” which looks at the “complicity of the Israeli medical establishment with Israel’s egregious violations of international law.” The article’s third author, Osama Tanous, is a Palestinian citizen of Israel and has not been able to make media appearances for fear of reprisal by the Israeli government. “The Israeli medical establishment in general identifies with Israel’s colonial project and puts the colonial project over the most basic ethical principles of their profession,” says Gordon, who previously served as the inaugural director of the organization Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. Shalev, the current executive director of the group, connects the Israeli military’s targeting of healthcare workers and infrastructure in Gaza with its silencing of the great number of Palestinians who make up the medical workforce in Israel. The authors call for an international boycott of Israeli medical institutions, until “Israel stops its colonial project, [and] after the Palestinians receive liberation and self-determination.”
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Earlier today, Israel attacked the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza City. It marked the eighth time the hospital has been attacked over the past 600 days. Three Palestinian journalists were killed at the hospital. A fourth journalist was seriously wounded. We turn now to look at how the Israeli medical establishment has responded to Israel’s systematic attacks on Gaza’s health system.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re joined now by the co-authors of a new article headlined “The Shame of Israeli Medicine,” published in The New York Review of Books. Joining us in Tel Aviv, in Israel, is the medical anthropologist Guy Shalev, who serves as executive director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. And in London, the Israeli political scientist Neve Gordon, who was the first director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, he’s a professor of international law and human rights at Queen Mary University of London.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Professor Neve Gordon, let’s begin with you. Talk about what you found.
NEVE GORDON: What we found is that the support for Israel’s assault on Gaza, the genocidal assault, including the decimation of its medical system, including the killing of 1,400 health workers, including the detention and disappearance of 400 medical doctors and healthcare workers, including the torture of detainees, has been supported by the Israeli medical establishment through and through, whether it’s from the top, the Israeli Medical Association, that represents 95% of Israeli doctors, the other healthcare associations, including the Nursing Association and the psychological associations and their ethical committees.
We found that hospitals did not accept Palestinian detainees who were wounded and needed medical care. We found that doctors inside hospitals were unwilling to treat Palestinian detainees or did not demand that the shackles from their legs and their arms and their blindfold be removed before they were treated. We found that doctors did not provide painkillers to Palestinians, claiming that they should suffer from the pain. We found doctors in Israeli hospitals that sent, posted genocidal messages on their private social media accounts. We found persecution of medical doctors and nurses, Palestinian medical doctors and nurses, in the Israeli establishment. So, there’s a whole system. The whole medical establishment inside Israel has been actually supporting Israel’s assault on the Palestinian people, and particularly on its healthcare system.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Now, Guy Shalev, you are joining us from Tel Aviv. You are the executive director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. It is this organization, your organization, that gathered testimony from 24 of these Palestinian health workers. Can you explain how the testimony was collected, and, you know, the key things, what most surprised you about what you found?
GUY SHALEV: Right. So, first of all, it was impossible to collect testimonies for many months, since the beginning of the war. In the beginning, there was no access to detainees. We could not send lawyers to visit them. We could not have any kind of supervision of their conditions of how they’re being held. After approximately six months, we could have starting — we could start to send lawyers to visit them, to collect the testimonies.
And then, what we heard was just impossible to hear: doctors that were detained while they were doing their work in hospitals, other doctors who were detained while crossing checkpoints across Gaza, after the soldiers found out that they are doctors, and then being taken to facilities in Israel — most famous, probably infamous, is the Sde Teiman facility — being subjected to torture, medical neglect, violence, starvation. Four doctors — three doctors and one paramedic died in Israeli facilities. These are four out of the 90 Palestinian detainees who died in the past 20 months.
And we tried to figure out what was the reason why doctors were targeted in such a way. And we realized that in their investigations, they were asked to provide information or kind of reveal the structure of hospitals and what they know, which is a violation of the international law and protection of medical workers. You cannot detain a medical worker for the purpose of collecting information, if you don’t have any evidence that they violated any law. And in fact, these people, most of these people, were held without a trial, without charges. Many of them are still held. Approximately 150 medical personnel are still held in Israeli detention facilities.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Guy Shalev, you also point to an extraordinary statistic regarding the number of Palestinians who work in the Israeli medical establishment. You say Palestinians comprise 25% of all doctors and almost 50% of all new doctors and nurses in Israel. So, can you explain how they have been treated in the months since October 7th, these Palestinians who work in Israeli hospitals?
GUY SHALEV: Right. And, yes, first of all, these are amazing numbers, and this is the outcome of a long process of many years of Palestinians studying medicine, both in Israel and abroad, and choosing medicine as their kind of profession for the reasons that many people in the world choose that profession, but also for the reason that many minorities and people of marginal communities choose medicine, because they see that as an opportunity for social mobility, an opportunity to be accepted as equal. And that is why we see a lot of doctors in the Israeli medical system.
And unfortunately, this ideal of a system that is — that considers them as equal was never a reality, and definitely not after October 7, when there was basically a witch hunt of Palestinian medical workers in the Israeli system. Social media profiles were scanned to see whatever they’re posting there. And then a very large number of doctors and medical workers were subjected to hearings and other kind of processes, including firing doctors and medical workers for just the most basic social media posts, such as supporting children in Gaza or just feeling compassion for the people of Gaza. And it created this atmosphere that basically silenced and censored an entire group of doctors and medical workers in the Israeli system.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re speaking with two of the three authors of the piece, “The Shame of Israeli Medicine,” published in The New York Review of Books. We’re speaking with the medical anthropologist Guy Shalev in Tel Aviv and with Neve Gordon, professor, speaking to us from London. The third author is Dr. Osama Tanous, a pediatrician, board member of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. He was advised by his lawyers not to do the interview. Guy Shalev, can you explain why?
GUY SHALEV: Yes, this is exactly what we just talked about. It is just too risky for a Palestinian citizen of Israel to be publicly kind of resisting the war, publicly criticizing the Israeli establishment. And we’ve seen cases. For example, professor Nadera Shalhoub, a very famous professor in the Hebrew University, who participated — was interviewed in a podcast and was later — had to resign from the university for very basic kind of critical opinions, professional critical opinions she had over the Israeli policies in Gaza. So, the risk is, unfortunately, high. And we are — we’re sorry that his voice is silenced once more, once again, because Neve and I are here, and Osama is not.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Professor Neve Gordon, if you could say what exactly are you calling for?
NEVE GORDON: Well, I think what we managed to show in the article is the complicity of the Israeli medical establishment with Israel’s egregious violations of international law, including the Genocide Convention. And what we also know from past experience and from what we detail in the article is that change will not emerge from within without pressure from without.
And so, what we think — or at least I think — is that the international medical establishment and medical community needs to put pressure on their counterparts in Israel in order that they raise their voice against Israel’s policies. The Israeli medical establishment in general identifies with Israel’s colonial project and puts the colonial project over the most basic ethical principles of their profession. And that, we think, needs to change. So, one very practical idea is that students and staff in research institutions in the United States, Canada, in the U.K., in Europe map the kinds of partnerships their institutions have with Israeli medical institutions, with Israeli research teams, with Israeli medical corporations and demand from their own institutions to cut these partnerships, to cut ties with these partnerships, to end the contracts with Israeli medical corporations — not as a principle, but as a strategy, saying to their Israeli counterparts, “We’ll be happy to carry out these partnerships again, we’ll be happy to do business, but only after Israel stops its colonial project, after the Palestinians receive liberation and self-determination.” It is time, we think, that the international community boycott the Israeli establishment in order to bring about change and to stop this genocide we’re witnessing.
AMY GOODMAN: Neve Gordon, we want to thank you for being with us, Israeli political scientist, the first director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. He’s a professor of international law and human rights at Queen Mary University of London, speaking to us from London. And Guy Shalev, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, speaking to us from Tel Aviv. We’ll link to your new article, “The Shame of Israeli Medicine,” published in The New York Review of Books.
Next up, we go to the British journalist Carole Cadwalladr, talking about taking on the broligarchy. Back in 20 seconds.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: “Black Spartacus Heart Attack Machine” by Tom Morello here in our Democracy Now! studio.
In conversations about Israel and Palestine, I am often asked about my views on the internal resistance to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
My questioners point to hundreds of thousands of Israelis who have been taking to the streets to protest against the government and its efforts to introduce a judicial overhaul over the past two years and inquire why I remain apathetic to these efforts to end Netanyahu’s rule.
My answer is simple – the real problem facing Israel is not its current government. The government might fall, but until we radically transform the nature of the regime, not much will change, and particularly not in relation to the basic human rights of Palestinians. A recent Israeli Supreme Court decision underscores my point.
On March 18, 2024, five Israeli human rights organizations filed an urgent petition with Israel’s Supreme Court, asking the court to instruct the Israeli government and military to fulfill their obligations under international humanitarian law and address the civilian population’s humanitarian needs amid the catastrophic conditions in Gaza.
The petition was submitted at a time when aid was entering Gaza, but the amount crossing the border was far from sufficient to meet the minimal needs of the population, of whom 75 percent had already been displaced. The rights groups wanted the government to lift all restrictions on the passage of aid, equipment and personnel into Gaza, particularly in the north where there were already documented cases of children dying from malnutrition and dehydration.
The court did not issue a ruling for more than a year, effectively allowing the government to continue restricting aid unchecked. Three weeks after the rights groups filed the petition, the court convened only to provide the government additional time to update its preliminary response to the petition. This set the tone for how the petition would proceed over the next 12 months.
Each time the petitioners provided data on the worsening conditions of the civilian population and emphasized the urgent need for judicial intervention, the court simply asked the government for further updates. In its April 17 update, for example, the government insisted that it had significantly increased the number of aid trucks entering Gaza, claiming that between October 7, 2023, and April 12, 2024, it had allowed 22,763 trucks to cross the checkpoints. This amounts to 121 trucks per day, which according to every humanitarian agency working in Gaza, does not come close to meeting the population’s needs.
In October 2024, at least half a year after the petition was submitted, the rights organizations asked the court to issue an injunction after the government deliberately blocked humanitarian aid for two weeks. In response, the government claimed that it had been monitoring the situation in northern Gaza closely and that there was “no shortage of food”. Two months later, however, the government confessed that it had underestimated the number of Palestinian residents trapped in northern Gaza – thus acknowledging that the aid entering the Strip was insufficient.
On March 18, 2025, after Israel breached the ceasefire agreement and resumed its bombardment of Gaza and the minister of energy and infrastructure halted the supply of electricity to the Strip, the petitioners submitted yet another urgent request for an interim order against the government’s decision to prevent the passage of humanitarian aid. Again, the court failed to issue a ruling.
Finally, on March 27, more than a year after the rights organizations had filed the petition, the court issued a verdict. Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit and Justices Noam Sohlberg and David Mintz unanimously ruled that it lacked merit. Justice David Mintz interlaced his response with Jewish religious texts, characterizing Israel’s attacks as a war of divine duty, while concluding that, “[The Israeli military] and the respondents went above and beyond to enable the provision of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, even while taking the risk that the aid transferred would reach the hands of the Hamas terrorist organization and be used by it to fight against Israel.”
Thus, at a time when humanitarian agencies have pointed again and again to acute levels of malnutrition and starvation, Israel’s Supreme Court – both in the way it handled the judicial process and in its ruling – has ignored Israel’s legal obligation to refrain from depriving a civilian population of objects indispensable to their survival, including by wilfully impeding relief supplies. In effect, the court legitimized the use of starvation as a weapon of war.
This is the court that hundreds of thousands of Israelis are trying to save. It’s March 27 ruling – and almost all other rulings involving Palestinians – reveal that the Supreme Court of Israel is a colonial court – one that protects the rights of the settler population while legitimizing the dispossession, displacement, and horrific violence perpetrated against the Indigenous Palestinians. And while the Supreme Court might not reflect the values of the existing government – particularly on issues relating to political corruption – it undoubtedly reflects and has always reflected the values of the colonial regime.
Hence, the liberal Zionists who fill Tel Aviv’s streets every weekend are not demonstrating against a judicial overhaul that endangers democracy, but against an overhaul that endangers Jewish democracy. Few of these protesters have any real qualms about the court’s horrific ruling on humanitarian aid, or, for that matter, on how the court has consistently upheld Israeli apartheid and colonial pillars. The regime, in other words, can continue to eliminate Palestinians unhindered as long as the rights of Israel’s Jewish citizenry are secured.
This article first appeared in Al Jazeera.
Neve Gordon is a Leverhulme Visiting Professor in the Department of Politics and International Studies and the co-author of The Human Right to Dominate.
Guy Shalev is a medical anthropologist interested in the intersections of professional and national politics in the Israeli health sphere. His research considers the everyday border-work that marks the lives of Palestinian physicians in the Israeli public health system and ask how medical expertise and ethics play a role in ethnonational politics both within and without the medical field.
Selected publication:
Shalev, Guy. 2016. A Doctor’s Testimony: Medical Neutrality and the Visibility of Palestinian Grievances in Jewish-Israeli Publics. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry 40(2), 242-262.
Minerva Center for the Rule of Law Under Extreme Conditions
Guy Shalev was a postdoctoral fellow at the Minerva Center for the Rule of Law Under Extreme Conditions between October 2021 and September 2023. Guy is the Executive Director of Physicians for Human Rights Israel. He is a medical and political anthropologist with a strong interest in the intersection of medical professionalism, ethnonational politics, and bioethics in Israel/Palestine. He received his Ph.D. in Cultural and Medical Anthropology from The University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill in 2018 and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Martin Buber Society of Fellows at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Guy’s publications have appeared in American Anthropologist , Israeli Sociology, and Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry.
In February, IAM reported on “BDS Activities in Swedish Universities” and the way pro-Palestinian activists targeted Swedish universities. IAM detailed an online event titled “Academic Boycott as an Act of Justice for Palestine,” hosted by a group of academics and students from several Swedish universities named “Workers and Students in Swedish Universities.” They also released a report, “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Report for Swedish Universities.”
Recently, in May 2025, a petition titled “Uppsala Declaration of Conscientious Objection” was published online. Behind it are faculty and staff in Swedish higher education and research who “declare their conscientious objection to collaborate with Israeli institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law.” The petition garnered nearly 2,000 signatories of faculty and staff, including PhD candidates and postdoctoral students.
The group states, “We the undersigned, faculty and staff working in Swedish higher education and research, are horrified by Israel’s rampant destruction of Palestine and the Palestinian people. Along with the unprecedented killing, maiming, and starving of Gaza’s besieged population, and the incessant attacks on health care professionals, humanitarian workers, UN staff, and emergency personnel, the systematic destruction of food and medicine supplies, agriculture, water and energy infrastructure has turned Gaza into a graveyard for both people and international law. The unlawful Israeli blockade of all humanitarian aid since March 2 is deliberately designed to punish, harm and destroy the civilian population of Gaza, nearly half of which is children. As the death toll continues to rise, Israel’s actions in Gaza have been declared a genocide by the UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People (A/79/363, IX), by senior UN human rights experts and numerous human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.”
According to the group, “as the genocide unfolds, we note Israel’s relentless killing of students, teachers, researchers, journalists, and cultural workers, and its systematic destruction of schools, universities, libraries, archives, heritage sites, and cultural institutions, which effectively have obliterated the entire sector of education and research in Gaza. Following Karma Nabulsi, UN experts already in April 2024 labeled Israel’s actions in Gaza a ‘scholasticide’.”
To make a connection to academia, the petitioners stated that “Israeli universities have long been major, willing and persistent accomplices in Israel’s regime of military occupation, settler-colonialism, apartheid, and now genocide. They have played an active role in developing weapon systems and military doctrines used to maintain the illegal occupation of Palestine, justifying unlawful colonization and annexation of occupied lands, rationalizing ethnic cleansing and extra-judicial killings of indigenous Palestinians, and participating in other explicit violations of human rights and international law; they have also been systematically discriminating against ‘non-Jewish’ students and staff.” Moreover, “given the complicity of Israeli universities in the denial of Palestinian rights, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) already in 2004 called for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions to build non-violent pressure on Israel to comply with international law. In line with the internationally-accepted definition of freedom of expression as adopted by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (UNESCR), PACBI’s guidelines set out how the boycott should be applied to institutions and not individuals.”
The group chastised Swedish institutions as well, stating that the “Swedish academic institutions have, on the contrary, insisted at maintaining collaborations with Israeli institutions complicit in violations of international law, and have even promoted new partnerships with such institutions. As scientists and scholars, we can no longer accept to participate in such collaborations. Asserting our moral right to conscientiously object to participate in acts that fundamentally contradict our principles of academic integrity, including our belief in the equal rights and dignity of all human beings, we have decided to individually heed the call from our Palestinian colleagues and break ties with Israeli universities and institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law.”
The group published some guidelines. “We will not contribute to any collaborations with complicit Israeli institutions, and we will not publicize, promote, or encourage such collaborations; We will not contribute to any exchanges of students and/or staff with complicit Israeli institutions, and we will not publicize, promote, or encourage such exchanges; We will not participate in any activities organized and/or hosted by complicit Israeli institutions, whether they organize and/or host them alone or in collaboration with other institutions, and we will not publicize, promote or encourage participation in such activities. In line with the PACBI Guidelines for the International Academic Boycott of Israel, we are committed to boycotting complicity, not identity. This means that while we do not call for a generalized boycott of Israeli researchers on the basis of their identity, we conscientiously object to collaborating with Israeli institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law. Indeed, because Israeli academic leadership is complicit in such crimes, dissident academics in Israel have called upon the international community to exert greater pressure. The undersigned are committed to international law and human rights and, as such, we urge our colleagues in Sweden and elsewhere to collaborate with principled international partners who recognize the rulings of international courts and bodies, including UN Resolution 194 (III), which guarantees the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes.”
Uppsala is the home of the group “Academics for Palestine Uppsala,” which is behind many BDS activities. In response to their demands, Uppsala University’s management published on its website a declaration a year ago, explaining that “The University Management and Academics for Palestine Uppsala, the organization behind the protest in Carolina Park, are engaged in continuous dialogue.” The University’s Management explained that the Palestine Groups in Sweden have initiated “Tuesdays for Palestine” since November 2023. The organization demonstrated outside Uppsala University’s Library.
The University’s Board published a statement in November 2023: “The University Board welcomes debate. So long as they do not seriously disrupt teaching or create dangerous situations, students and teachers must be able to express different points of view in accordance with applicable regulations and our tradition of academic freedom.” Anders Hagfeldt, Vice-Chancellor of Uppsala, added: “We always welcome respectful debate and encourage everyone to stand up for their opinions and share their knowledge… this also applies to the students who are camping and demonstrating.” Pro-Palestine demonstrators have also demonstrated in several university buildings. Demonstrations are not permitted indoors without official permission.
The University Management explained it had held two meetings with “Academics for Palestine Uppsala” and exchanged letters. In their first letter on 21 November 2023, “Academics for Palestine Uppsala,” wrote the university, “we ask that you: – Clarify the University’s position on Israel’s invasion and siege of Gaza.- Detail the concrete steps Uppsala University will undertake to ensure freedom of expression while ensuring a safe and inclusive environment for all, specifically addressing rising antisemitism and Islamophobia.”
In its reply, the university wrote that “Uppsala University is committed to our values of academic freedom, democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and mutual respect. However, as a general rule, Uppsala University as an institution will not take a collective position on current events since this might inhibit the full freedom of dissent on which the University thrives. The University is the home and sponsor of critics, but not a critic itself. Staff and students at Uppsala University are covered by the law on freedom of expression and may express a personal opinion. This is not something we wish to or are able to influence.”
In their letter on 7 May 2024, “Academics for Palestine Uppsala” urged “to establish new collaborations with Palestinian universities, and secondly, that Uppsala University should discontinue relations with Israeli universities until the state of Israel complies with international law.” Vice-Chancellor Anders Hagfeldt responded: “You want Uppsala University to actively seek cooperation with Palestinian universities and to support Palestinian universities, lecturers and students. I agree with you and will instruct our Division for Internationalisation to study the proposals for cooperation that you have formulated. I am sure there are collaborations between researchers at individual level. We do not chart these collaborations for the same reason that we do not chart research collaborations at individual level with Israeli researchers.”
The organization then stated: “we maintain that to support the end of a regime of apartheid and oppression in Palestine, Uppsala University should suspend ties with complicit Israeli universities until the state of Israel complies with international law.”
In his reply, the Vice-Chancellor stated: “It is not the role of the University to take a stand on foreign policy conflicts. It is important for universities to stand free. If the University as an organization were to take a position, this could limit the right of students and members of staff to express their opinions freely, which would ultimately jeopardize academic freedom. The collaborations are based on scientific and scholarly foundations and their aim is to advance knowledge. Research and education are transnational and global by their very nature.”
Members of “Academics for Palestine Uppsala,” Fouad El Gohary and Alexandre Raffoul, pointed out the July 2024 decision of Uppsala University to maintain institutional agreements with Israeli universities.
Hagfeldt responded that collaboration is a “fundamental principle” of Uppsala University, leading to positive change.
The two activists responded that the University “overlooks the fact that whether or not collaborations are ‘good’ depends on their consequences… The Swedish Higher Education Act notes that universities’ international activities must contribute, nationally and globally, to sustainable development, making sure that present and future generations are provided with a healthy and good environment, economic and social welfare and justice.”
For the activists, “Collaborating with institutions that develop weapons or surveillance technology or that provide logistic support to armies engaged in human rights violations does not align with the principles of ‘positive change’.”
Not surprisingly, the activists support critical theorists. “We do recognize that collaborating with critical researchers could have beneficial consequences and so we reiterate once more that our demand is an end to institutional ties with complicit Israeli universities, not individual collaborations. Just as research must consider legal and ethical considerations, so too must academic collaborations.” They ended by stating that, “Limits on academic collaborations should be based on consistent principles, regardless of the perpetrator or the Swedish government’s position. Universities have the constitutional authority to autonomously cut ties with complicit Israeli universities, the only thing missing seems to be the willingness to act.“
Succumbing to pressure, the Board of Uppsala published a statement on May 19, 2025, calling on the Swedish government to “explicitly condemn Israel’s actions, to immediately resume its funding of UNRWA, and to actively work within the EU to take all available measures (including imposing trade sanctions against Israel) to prevent a genocide in Gaza.”
As can be seen, there is an omission of Hamas and its brutality or its use of Gazan civilians as human shields, a major war crime as per the Hague and Geneva Conventions. Nowhere was it pointed out that Hamas and its aligned militias in Gaza built a tunnel system below public spaces, notably hospitals, schools, and mosques.
The University, apparently fearful of upsetting the activists, did not mention the gross violations of humanitarian laws by Hamas.
This lack of academic integrity and civic courage on the part of the university leadership has contributed to the construction of a deeply flawed narrative that equates Israel’s right to self-defense, another principle of International Humanitarian Law, with “genocide,” while portraying Hamas, the perpetrator of the most brutal attack on Jews since the Holocaust and the death of Palestinian human shields, as innocent victims.
Faculty and staff in Swedish higher education and research declare their conscientious objection to collaborate with Israeli institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law.
We the undersigned, faculty and staff working in Swedish higher education and research, are horrified by Israel’s rampant destruction of Palestine and the Palestinian people. Along with the unprecedented killing, maiming, and starving of Gaza’s besieged population, and the incessant attacks on health care professionals, humanitarian workers, UN staff, and emergency personnel, the systematic destruction of food and medicine supplies, agriculture, water and energy infrastructure has turned Gaza into a graveyard for both people and international law. The unlawful Israeli blockade of all humanitarian aid since March 2 is deliberately designed to punish, harm and destroy the civilian population of Gaza, nearly half of which is children.
As the genocide unfolds, we note Israel’s relentless killing of students, teachers, researchers, journalists, and cultural workers, and its systematic destruction of schools, universities, libraries, archives, heritage sites, and cultural institutions, which effectively have obliterated the entire sector of education and research in Gaza. Following Karma Nabulsi, UN experts already in April 2024 labelled Israel’s actions in Gaza a “scholasticide” (Desai 2024, Shlaim 2025). By systematically destroying education as well as Gaza’s material and immaterial cultural heritage, including the cemeteries, Israel is not only destroying the Palestinian people in the present; it is also destroying its past and future.
On the other side of the barrier encircling Gaza, Israeli universities have long been major, willing and persistent accomplices in Israel’s regime of military occupation, settler-colonialism, apartheid, and now genocide. They have played an active role in developing weapon systems and military doctrines used to maintain the illegal occupation of Palestine, justifying unlawful colonisation and annexation of occupied lands, rationalising ethnic cleansing and extra-judicial killings of indigenous Palestinians, and participating in other explicit violations of human rights and international law; they have also been systematically discriminating against “non-Jewish” students and staff (Wind 2024). Israeli higher education institutions are thus complicit in what the ICJ has recognised as the criminal occupation of Palestine, a country that Sweden, along with a majority of the world’s nations, has recognised as a sovereign state.
Refusing any form of academic and cultural cooperation with Israeli institutions;
Advocating a comprehensive boycott of complicit Israeli institutions;
Promoting divestment from Israel by international academic institutions;
Working toward institutional condemnation of Israeli policies;
Supporting Palestinian academic and cultural institutions directly without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts.
In 2011, the University of Johannesburg became the first international institution to disassociate itself from the Israeli regime, ending an agreement with Ben Gurion University over its complicity in human rights violations, including the theft of Palestinian water. The striking symbolism of initiating academic collaborations with Israel during apartheid rule and ending them during democracy cannot be lost on anyone.
Since Israel unleashed its genocidal war on Gaza, and largely due to effective pressure campaigns organised locally by students and staff, more universities around the world have followed the lead of South Africa, including five Norwegian universities that cut ties with complicit institutions in 2024.
Swedish academic institutions have, on the contrary, insisted at maintaining collaborations with Israeli institutions complicit in violations of international law, and have even promoted new partnerships with such institutions. As scientists and scholars, we can no longer accept to participate in such collaborations. Asserting our moral right to conscientiously object to participate in acts that fundamentally contradict our principles of academic integrity, including our belief in the equal rights and dignity of all human beings, we have decided to individually heed the call from our Palestinian colleagues and break ties with Israeli universities and institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law. We declare that we will henceforth abide by the following principles:
We will not contribute to any collaborations with complicit Israeli institutions, and we will not publicise, promote, or encourage such collaborations;
We will not contribute to any exchanges of students and/or staff with complicit Israeli institutions, and we will not publicise, promote, or encourage such exchanges;
We will not participate in any activities organised and/or hosted by complicit Israeli institutions, whether they organise and/or host them alone or in collaboration with other institutions, and we will not publicise, promote or encourage participation in such activities.
In line with the PACBI Guidelines for the International Academic Boycott of Israel, we are committed to boycotting complicity, not identity. This means that while we do not call for a generalised boycott of Israeli researchers on the basis of their identity, we conscientiously object to collaborating with Israeli institutions complicit in illegal occupation, apartheid, genocide, and other violations of international law. Indeed, because Israeli academic leadership is complicit in such crimes, dissident academics in Israel have called upon the international community to exert greater pressure. The undersigned are committed to international law and human rights and, as such, we urge our colleagues in Sweden and elsewhere to collaborate with principled international partners who recognise the rulings of international courts and bodies, including UN Resolution 194 (III), which guarantees the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes.
This declaration was drafted in Uppsala by faculty and staff at Uppsala University. While we have named it after our university in honour of its stated mission to make knowledge and education work “for a better world”, we encourage faculty and staff at any Swedish institution of higher education and research to sign it.
The final text of this declaration was confirmed in Uppsala on May 8, 2025. The first batch of signatories was released on May 15. Anyone with a position in Swedish higher education and research can sign. This includes PhD candidates, who are salaried research staff in the Swedish system.
Signatories of the Declaration as per 21 May, 2025, in alphabetical order:
Laila Abdallah, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Dalia Abdelhady, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Lund University Joel Abdelmoez, PhD Candidate, Centre for Advanced Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University Afrah Abdulla, Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Saad Abdullah, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University Maimuna Abdullahi, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Henok Girma Abebe, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Philosophy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Hiba Abou-Taouk, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Ehsan Abshirini, Lecturer, Department of Environmental and Life Sciences, Karlstad University Andreas Admasie, Affiliated Researcher, Division for Research, Swedish Labour Movement’s Archives and Library Johanna Adolfsson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department for Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender, Stockholm University Thomas Aerts, PhD Candidate, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Tina Afshari, Project Coordinator, School of Business, Economics and Law (Environment for Development), University of Gothenburg Mahmut Agbaht, Lecturer, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Vilhelm Agdur, PhD Candidate, Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University Katja Aglert, Senior Lecturer, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts Crafts and Design Gustav Agneman, Associated Professor, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology Ulises Navarro Aguiar, Senior Lecturer, HDK-Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Malin Ah-King, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Louise Ahl, PhD Candidate, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Beth Maina Ahlberg, Professor Emerita, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Mudassar Ahmad, PhD Candidate, Department of Mathematics, Mälardalen University Fereshteh Ahmadi, Professor, Department of Social Work, Criminology and Public Health Sciences, University of Gävle Eirini Akavalou, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Astrid Ottosson al-Bitar, Senior Lecturer, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern studies, Stockholm University Walid Al-Saqaf, Associate Professor, Social Sciences (Journalism), Södertörn University Linda Alamaa, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, Halmstad University Vinicius Moraes de Albuquerque, PhD Candidate, Department of Electrical Engineering, Uppsala University Carlo Nicoli Aldini, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Johan Alfonsson, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, Halmstad University P. Henrik Alfredsson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Engineering Mechanics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Clara Alfsdotter, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Lund University Bo Algers, Professor Emeritus, Department of Applied Animal Science and Welfare, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Jonas Algers, PhD Candidate, Division of Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Lund University Mohamad Ali, Researcher, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Minoo Alinia, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Lindita Aliti, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Marzia Alizada, PhD Candidate, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University Susanne Alldén, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University Majsa Allelin, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, Halmstad University Jonas Allesson, PhD Candidate, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Björn Alling, Professor, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Linköping University Anja Allwood, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Swedish, Multilingualism and Language Technology, University of Gothenburg Carl Martin Allwood, Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg Simon Allzén, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Erika Alm, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Adam Almqvist, Researcher, Department of Political Science, Lund University Zaki Alomar, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Uppsala University Kristina Alstam, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Ulf Alsterlund, PhD Candidate, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Per Alström, Researcher, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Ingrid Altamirano, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Niklas Altermark, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Lund University Özge Altin, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology & Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Seif Alwan, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Fanny Ambjörnsson, Professor, Department for Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender, Stockholm University Emmeline Laszlo Ambjörnsson, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University August Ambjörnsson, PhD Candidate, Division of Human Geography, University of Gothenburg Jens Amborg, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Jennifer Amin, PhD Candidate, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences (Psychology), Örebro University Stefan Amirell, Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Marwa Amri, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Kari Andén-Papadopoulos, Professor, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Amanda Anderlid, Librarian, Uppsala University Library, Uppsala University Michel Anderlini, Associate senior lecturer , Department of Global Political Studies , Malmö University Tobias Andermann, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Helena Andersen, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Catrine Andersson, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Jenny Andersson, Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Kristina Andersson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Education, Uppsala University Linnéa Andersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry – Ångström Laboratory, Uppsala University Malin Andersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Sandra Andersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Li Eriksdotter Andersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Petra Andersson, Research Fellow, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Cornelia Andersson, Programme Administrator, Department of Sociology, Lund University Cecilia Andersson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Bitte Andersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Niklas Andersson, Affiliated to Research, National Centre for Suicide Research and Prevention, Karolinska Institute Åsa Andersson, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Tobias Andersson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Ida Andersson, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Johan Andersson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Experimental Medical Science, Lund University Sara Haug Andersson, Communications Officer, Department of Political Science , University of Gothenburg Jan Andersson, Technician, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts and Craft Sara Andersson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, University West Emma Sandberg Andrasko, PhD Candidate, Institution for Pedagocial Studies, Karlstad University Maja Andreasson, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Frida Andréasson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Rasmus Andrén, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Leadership and Command & Control, Swedish Defence University Mats Andrén, Professor, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Dragi Anevski, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Roland Anrup, Professor Emeritus, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Patrick Anthony, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Mahwish Anwar, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology Björn Apelkvist, Lecturer, Department of Language, Literature and Intercultural Studies, Karlstad university Staffan Appelgren, Associate Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Gisela Ferré Aramburu, Department Administrator, Department of Educational Sciences, Lund University Anna Ardin, PhD Candidate, Department of Civil Society and Religion, Marie Cederschiöld University Autilia Arfwidsson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Law, Uppsala University Bergný Ármannsdóttir, PhD Candidate, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute Maria Arnelid, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University Eva Arnqvist, Research Engineer, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Marcus Aronsson, PhD Candidate, Unit of Economic History, Umeå University Malin Arvidsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Lund University Henry Ascher, Senior Professor, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Gothenburg Matthew Ashton, Guest Researcher, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Tina Askanius, Professor , School of Arts and Communication , Malmö University Adéle Askelöf, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetic, Stockholm University Signe Askersjö, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Sofia Aslanidou, Education Officer, Office for Medicine and Pharmacy, Uppsala University Anahita Assadi, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Government, Uppsala University Kıvanç Atak, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Criminology and Work Science, University of Gävle Vera Atarodi, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute Helen Avery, Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages, Linnaeus University Priscyll Anctil Avoine, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Chloé Avril, Associate Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Tomas Axelson, Professor, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Eva-Lena Axelsson, Study Counsellor, Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Gothenburg Tesfaye Woubshet Ayele, PhD Candidate, Department of English, Stockholm University Sebastian van Baalen, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Matilda Back, HR Generalist, Organismal Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala University Louise Backelin, PhD Candidate, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Lisa Backman, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Andreas Bacn, Assistant Lecturer, Department of Geography, Umeå University Sanela Bajramović, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities, Education and Social Science, Örebro University AnnKatrin Jonsson Bakken, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, University West Myung Hwa Baldini, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Pauline Balk, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Matilda Baraibar, Associate Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University Love Barany, PhD Candidate, Department of Electrical and Information Technology, Lund University Glenn Bark, Senior Lecturer, Division of Geosciences and Environmental Engineering, Luleå University of Technology Giacomo Barlucchi, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Mimmi Barmark, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Lund University Shabane Barot, PhD Candidate, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institute Igor Barreto, Teaching Assistant, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Alexandra Barry, PhD Candidate, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg Emma Bartfai, PhD Candidate, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Karolinska Institute Farzana Bashiri, PhD Candidate, Business administration , Lund University Lucija Batinovic, PhD Candidate, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Zahra Bayati, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Zulmir Becevic, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Odd Bech-Hanssen, Professor, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg Ludvig Beckman, Professor, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Ulrika Beckman, PhD Candidate, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg Frida Beckman, Professor, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Talha Bedir, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science (Computational Linguistics), University of Gothenburg Dorna Behdadi, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies, Umeå University Andrea Belgrano, Associate Professor, Department of Aquatic Resources, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Martin Bellander, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet Karin Bengmark, Senior Lecturer, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Elin Bengtsson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department for Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender, Stockholm University Mattias Bengtsson, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Ulrika Bengtsson, Associate Professor, Institute of Health and Care Science, University of Gothenburg Tova Bennet, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Law, Lund University Lise Benoist, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Sara Bentzel, Doctoral Student, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Gothenburg Isak Benyamine, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Stockholm University Annika Berg, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Daniel Berg, Research Fellow, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Linda Berg, Associate Professor, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Sofia Bergbom, Senior Lecturer, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, Örebro University Ingegerd Bergbom, Professor Emerita, Sahlgrenska Academy, Insitute of Health and Care Sciences Terese Bergfors, Senior Research Engineer, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Elliott Berggren, PhD Candidate, Department of Languages, Linnaeus University Erik Berggren, Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Henrik Bergius, PhD Candidate, Centre for Geomedia Studies, Karlstad University Jenny Berglund, Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Tomas Berglund, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Karl Berglund, Assistant Professor, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Leo Berglund, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Anders Berglund, Professor Emeritus, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Anna Bergman, PhD Candidate, Unit of Economic History, Umeå University Sanna Bergman, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Kersti Bergqvist, Study Administrator, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Clara Bergstrand, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Matilda Amundsen Bergström, Researcher, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Caroline Bergström, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Lennart Bergström, Professor, Department of Chemistry, Stockholm University Liza Bergström, Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institute Oriana Quaglietta Bernal, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Kristianstad University Maria Bernal, Professor, Department of Romance Studies and Classics, Stockholm University Rasmus Bernander, Researcher, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Tim Berndsson, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Imad Berrouyne, Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University Maja Berry, PhD Candidate, Department of Communication, Quality Management and Information Systems, Mid Sweden University Ana Betancour, Associate Professor, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Maria Bexelius, Lecturer, Department of Human Rights and Democracy, University College Stockholm Oshin Siao Bhatt, PhD Candidate, Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology Satyaki Bhattacharya, PhD Candidate, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Ellen Bijvoet, Associate Professor, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Rebecca Dobre Billström, Senior Lecturer, School of Music, Theatre and Art, Örebro University Fredrik Bjarkö, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Fredrik Bjarman, Systems Developer, Uppsala University Library, Uppsala University Erling Björgvinsson, Professor, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Mårten Björk, Research Fellow, Centre for Theology and Religious Studies, Lund University Oscar Björk, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Jenny Björklund, Professor, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Henrik Björklund, Associate Professor, Department of Computing Science, Umeå University Johanna Björklund, Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science, Umeå University Sara Björklund, PhD Candidate, Department of Nursing and Integrated Health Sciences, Kristianstad University Emma Björkvik, Researcher, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Lena Björnholm, Assistant, Educational Unit, University of Gothenburg Elisabeth Bladh, Associate Professor, Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University Elin Blanck, Senior Lecturer, Department of Caring Science, University of Borås Sarah Bloem, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Lisa Karlsson Blom, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Pontus Blomberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Textile Technology, University of Borås Kalle Blomberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Carl Blomqvist, Research Engineer, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Johannes Blomqvist, Study and Careers Adviser, Student Service Centre, Malmö University Donald Blomqvist, Lecturer, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg Ann-Charlotte Glasberg Blomqvist, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Olof Blomqvist, Researcher , Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Pontus Blüme, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Samuel Blyth, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Sarah Bodelson, PhD Candidate, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Simone de Boer, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Christina Boger, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies (Peace and Development Research), University of Gothenburg Markus Bohlers, Service Administrator, Facility Services, University of Gothenburg Ingemar Bohlin, Senior Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Anna Bohlin, Associate Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Andrea Bohman, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Saga Bokne, PhD Candidate, Department of Language, Literature and Intercultural Studies, Karlstad University Maja Bondestam, Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Wijnand Boonstra, Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Per Bore, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University Klas Borell, Professor of Sociology and Social Work, Department of Social Work, Jönköping University Kristina Boréus, Professor, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Anton Carlander Borgström, Lecturer, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås Jonna Bornemark, Professor, Centre for Studies in Practical Knowledge, Södertörn University Hanna Bornäs, Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Olof Bortz, Researcher, Department of History, Stockholm University Ingrid Bosseldal, Senior Lecturer, Department of Educational Sciences, Lund University Cansu Bostan, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Hanna Boström, Assistant Professor, Department of Chemistry, Stockholm University Petra Lundberg Bouquelon, PhD Candidate, Department of Educational Sciences, Lund University and Södertörn University David Bowling, PhD Candidate, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Jason E. Bowman, Senior Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Elin Boyer, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, Uppsala University Savas Boyraz, PhD Candidate, Film and Media, Stockholm Konstnärliga Högskola Hannah Bradby, Professor, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Lovise Brade, Senior Lecturer, Forum for Gender Studies, Mid Sweden University Emilio da Cruz Brandao, PhD Candidate/Artistic Teacher, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Chalmers University of Technology Jennie Brandén, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Gabriel Brea-Martinez, Researcher, Department of Economic History, Lund University Anna Bredström, Senior Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Susanne Bregnbaek, Associate Professor, Department of Social Anthropology, Lund University Signe Bremer, Senior Lecturer, Department of Psychology and Social Work, Mid Sweden University Sara Brogaard, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Moa Broqvist, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Hilda Broqvist, PhD Candidate, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Lovisa Broström, Researcher, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Beatrice Brovia, Senior lecturer, Department of Crafts, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Pål Brunnström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Linnéa Bruno, Senior Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Micaella Bruton, PhD Candidate, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University Boel Brynedal, Affiliated to Research, Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institute Erik Bryngelsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Södertörn University Emma Brännlund, Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Elin Brödje, Administrator, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Kerstin von Brömssen, Senior Professor, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, University West Margret Buchholz, Lecturer, Sahlgrenska Academy , University of Gothenburg Frida Buhre, Assistant Professor, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Anne Charlotte Bunge, PhD Candidate , Stockholm Resilience Centre , Stockholm University Andrew Burchell, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Anders Burman, Professor, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Emmie Burman, Programme Administrator, Department of Subject Didactics, Stockholm University Linda Andersson Burnett, Associate Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Allan Burnett, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Moa Bursell, Associate Professor, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Anna Burstedt, Director of Studies, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Martine Buser, Associate Professor, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Beatrice Bylén, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Kaan Bür, Senior Lecturer, Department of Electrical and Information Technology, Lund University Katarina Båth, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Jonas Bååth, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of People and Society, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Rikard Bögvad, Professor, Department of Mathematics, Stockholm University Natasja Börjeson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University Adelaida Caballero, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Annelie de Cabo, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Ece Calikus, Assistant Professor , Department of Information Technology , Uppsala University Naima Callenberg, Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Adrià Carbonell, Lecturer, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Josep Soler Carbonell, Professor, Department of English, Stockholm University Carolina Valente Cardoso, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Lourenço Roque Pombo Cardoso, PhD Candidate, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Martina Angela Caretta, Associate Professor, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Maria Carlander, Project Manager, Communication and Outreach Unit, Uppsala University Julián Moyano Di Carlo, PhD Candidate, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Tina Carlsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Vanja Carlsson, Senior Lecturer, School of Public Administration, University of Gothenburg Charlotta Carlström, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Pablo Miranda Carranza, Senior Lecturer, Department of Architecture and the Built Environment, Lund University Alejandra P Carrasco, Study Counsellor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Wim Carton, Associate Professor, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Carl Cassegård, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Marcos Castillo, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Economic History, Lund University Camilo Castillo, Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Yénika Castillo-Muñoz, Part-Time Teacher , School of Arts and Communication (K3), Malmö University Andrea Castro, Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Pia Cederholm, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Agneta Cederström, Researcher, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Ulrika Centerwall, Senior Lecturer, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås Naima Chahboun, Researcher, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Proshant Chakraborty, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Elton Chan, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Aikaterini Chantziara, PhD Candidate, Department of Engineering and Physics, Karlstad University Niladri Chatterjee, Researcher, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Marwa Chebil, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Loulou Cherinet, Professor, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Craft and Design Ekaterina Chertkovskaya, Project Coordinator and Researcher, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Kerry Chipp, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts, Luleå University of Technology Elena Chiti, Senior Lecturer, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Stockholm University Niki Chondrelli, Research Engineer, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Matilda Svensson Chowdhury, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Iben Maj Christiansen, Professor, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Rolf Christianson, Assistant Lecturer, Department 1 (Acting), Stockholm University of the Arts Lisbet Christoffersen, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Therese Christoffersson, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Ellie Cijvat, Senior Lecturer, Department of Physics and Electrical Engineering, Linnaeus University Jean-Loup Claret, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Eric Clark, Professor Emeritus, Department of Human Geography, Lund University David Clarke, PhD Candidate, Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg Helena Cleeve, Researcher, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Gloria López Cleries, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Samantha López Clinton, PhD Candidate, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Christopher Alan Cockerill, PhD Candidate, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Mark Coeckelbergh, Visiting Professor, Department of Informatics and Media, Uppsala University Tomas Cole, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Philippe Collberg, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, Halmstad University August Collsiöö, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Göran Collste, Professor Emeritus, Department of Culture and Society (Applied Ethics), Linköping University William Colom-Montero, Research Engineer, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Professor, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication / Graphic Design and Illustration, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Armel Cornu, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Hervé Corvellec, Professor, Department of Service Studies, Lund University Erin Cory, Senior Lecturer, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Miranda Cox, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Andrea Creutz, Lecturer, Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Craft and Design Sandra Cronhamn, Affiliated Researcher, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Muriel Côte, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Alexandra D’Ubaldo-Gauffin, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research , Uppsala University Alexandra D’Urso, Educational Developer, Division of Learning and Digitalisation, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Ulrika Dahl, Professor, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Gudrun Dahl, Professor Emerita, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Helena Dahlberg, Associate Professor, Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy , University of Gothenburg Elisabeth Dahlborg, Senior Professor, Department of Health Sciences, University West Marianne Dahlén, Associate Professor, Department of Law, Uppsala University Nanna Dahler, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Mats Dahllöv, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Sara Dahllöv, Educational Developer, Unit for Teaching and Learning, Karolinska Institute Lukas Dahlström, PhD Candidate, Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, Uppsala University Karin Dahlström, Senior Lecturer, Business Studies, Södertörn University David Dahlström, Education Officer, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Marie Dalby, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Florence Damiens, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Margaux Dandrifosse, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Lund University Simon Gran Danielsson, Lecturer, Umeå Academy of Fine Arts, Umeå University Andrea Dankić, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Gregory R. Darwin, Senior Lecturer, Department of English, Uppsala University Maria Darwish, PhD Candidate, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Ulrike Maria Dauter, PhD Candidate, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute Tobias Davidsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Simon Davidsson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Local Government Studies, University of Linköping Rola El-Husseini Dean, Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science, Lund University Flore Debruyne, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Stockholm University Mats Deland, Associate Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Lucie Delemotte, Professor, Department of Applied Physics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Lisen Dellenborg, Senior Lecturer, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Chares Demetriou, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Lund University Ameli Dévé, Lecturer, HDK-Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Camelia Dewan, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Anthropology, Uppsala University Tiago Duarte Dias, Teaching Staff, Department of Sociology, Lunds University Dide Dijkers, PhD Candidate, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Pinar Dinc, Researcher, Department of Political Science, Lund University Merima Dizdarević, Guest Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Göran Djurfeldt, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology, Lund University Kristina Dobricic, PhD Candidate, Department of Technology Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology Aifric Doherty, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Stephanie Dolenz, PhD Candidate, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Maitri Dore, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Marianne Dovemark, Senior Researcher , Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg Memet Aktürk Drake, Senior Lecturer, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Leyla Belle Drake, Visiting Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Annelie Drakman, Senior Lecturer and Researcher, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Mills Dray, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Elżbieta Drazkiewicz, Researcher, Departament of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Frank Drewes, Professor, Department of Computing Science, Umeå University Heiko Droste, Professor, Department of History, Stockholm University Faruk Dube, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Devdatt Dubhashi, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Rosie Duivenbode, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Rebecca Duncan, Associate Professor and Researcher, Department of Languages, Linnaeus University Andrea Dunlavy, Researcher, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Marie Eckerström, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg Johan Eddebo, Associate Professor, Faculty of Theology, Uppsala University Emil Edenborg, Associate Professor, Department for Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender, Stockholm University Sara Edenheim, Associate Professor, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Samuel Edquist, Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Rodney Edvinsson, Professor, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Jeannette Eggers, Program Director, Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Maria del Pilar Herrera Egoavil, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Johan Ehrlén, Professor Emeritus, Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University Maira Viana Einarsson, Financial Administrator, Department Service, Faculty of Social Sciences, Lund University Johanna Einarsson, Lecturer, Department of Swedish, Multilingualism, Language Technology , University of Gothenburg Emma Ejelöv, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Andjeas Pestov Ejiksson, Postdoc, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Richard Ek, Professor, Department of Geography, Media and Communication, Karlstad University Kristoffer Ekberg, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Alexander Ekelund, Researcher, , Mångkulturellt centrum Bo G. Ekelund, Professor, Department of English, Stockholm University Agnes Zúniga Ekenberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences , Uppsala University Hedvig Ekerwald, Professor Emerita, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Elin Ekholm, Lecturer, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, Örebro University Agneta Ekholm, Administrator, Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University Lina Eklund, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University Lisa Eklund, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Lund University Mona Eklund, Professor Emerita, Department of Health Sciences, Lund University Anders Eklöf, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Kristianstad University Mattias Ekman, Associate Professor, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Kerstin Eksell, Professor Emerita, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Stockholm University Hanna Ekström, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science and Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University Elin Ekström, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Hana El-Shazli, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Sara Eldén, Professor, Department of Society, Culture and Identity, Malmö University Evangelia Elenis, Associate Professor, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Emma Eleonorasdotter, Researcher, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Marie Elf, Professor, School of Health and Welfare, Dalarna University Gabriella Elgenius, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Amanda Elgh, Student Coordinator, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Erik Elgh, PhD Candidate, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Khamees Elkhateeb, IT Infrastructure Specialist, IT Operations, University of Gothenburg Ask Ellingsen, PhD Candidate, Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University Irene Elmerot, Researcher, Department of Slavic and Baltic Studies, Finnish, Dutch and German, Stockholm University Torun Elsrud, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Katarina Elvén, Senior Lecturer, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Viktor Emanuelsson, PhD Candidate, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Bulëza Emerllahu, Programme Coordinator, International Office, Faculty of Social Sciences, Lund University Kajsa Emilsson, Researcher, School of Social Work, Lund University Lina Emmesjö, Postdoctoral Researcher, Institute of Health and Care Science, University of Gothenburg Jesper Enbom, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Media Studies, Umeå University Hanna Enefalk, Associate Professor, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Aron Engberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Natural and Social Sciences, Jönköping University Hugo Engholm, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Uppsala University Göran Englund, Professor Emeritus, Department of Ecology, Environment and Geosciences, Umeå University Linn Englund, Amanuensis, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Lisa Engström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Alexander Engström, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Criminology, Malmö University Maria Engström, Course Administrator, Department of Law, Uppsala University Alexander Engström, Course Administrator, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University Anna Enström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Education (Aesthetics), Södertörn University Claes Entzenberg, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University Sonja Entzenberg, Lecturer, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Petter Ericson, Staff Scientist, Department of Computing Science, Umeå University Mathias Ericson, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Niclas Ericsson, Researcher, Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Johanna Erikson, PhD Candidate, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Lars-Henrik Eriksson, Associate Professor, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Mia Eriksson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Linnaeus University Nairomi Eriksson, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Åsa Eriksson, Researcher, Mångkulturellt Centrum, Gunilla Eriksson, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Kalle Eriksson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Johan Eriksson, Lecturer, Department of Game Design, Uppsala University Madeleine Eriksson, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Umeå University Magnus Eriksson, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Anna Eriksson, Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts Crafts and Design Sophia Eriksson, Amanuensis, Departement of Philosophy, Stockholm University Axel Eriksson, Researcher, Department of Microtechnology and Nanoscience, Chalmers University of Technology Erik Erlanson, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Film and Literature, Linnaeus University Milton Ernarp, Amanuensis, Department of Philosophy, Stockholms University Nina Ernst, Senior Lecturer, Department of Film and Literature, Linnaeus University Henrik Ernstson, Professor, Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Cecilia Esbjörnsson, Coordinator and Study Adviser, Division of Educational Affairs, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Jeannette Escanilla, Assistant Librarian, Scholarly Communications Division, Uppsala University Library, Uppsala University Johanna Esseveld, Professor Emerita, Department of Sociology, Lund University Sergio Estrada, Researcher, Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Uppsala University Ivy Estrella, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Kathinka Evers, Senior Researcher, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics, Uppsala University Susanne Ewerlöf, PhD Candidate, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Juan Fabbri, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Samuel Faber, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Stockholm University Hugo Faber, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Johan Fagerberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Ida Al Fakir, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Movement and Society, Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences Hjalmar Falk, Associate Professor, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Petter Falk, Lecturer, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Marcus Falk, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Lund University Maryam Fanni, PhD Candidate, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Ahmad El Far, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Fataneh Farahani, Professor, Department of Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Athena Farrokhzad, Visiting Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Eda Farsakoglu, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Christine Fawcett, Professor, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University Greta Faxberg, Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Roberto Felicetti, Researcher, Department of Electrical Engineering, Uppsala University Terence Fell, Senior Lecturer, School of Business Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University Nicolas Femia, PhD Candidate, Department of Swedish, Multilingualism and Language Technology, University of Gothenburg Chaymae Fennine, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Plant Protection Biology, Swedish University of agricultural sciences Janne Fenz, PhD Candidate, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Mexhid Ferati, Associate Professor, Department of Informatics, Linnaeus University Sara Ferlander, Associate Professor, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Florencia Fernández, Doctoral Candidate, Department School Development and Leadership, Malmö University Julia Fernelius, PhD Candidate, Department of English, Stockholm University Cristián Alarcón Ferrari, Associate Professor, Division of Rural Development , Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Zlatan Filipovic, Associate Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Rebecka Fingalsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Natural Science, Mathematics and Society, Malmö University Johanna Finnholm, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Sverker Finnström, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Otto Fischer, Professor, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Rasmus Fleischer, Researcher, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Marita Flisbäck, Professor, Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare, University of Borås João Florêncio, Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Azul Romo Flores, PhD Candidate, Department of Media and Communication Studies, Södertörn University Maria Florutau, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Lisa Flower, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Lund University Janne Flyghed, Professor Emeritus, Department of Criminology, Stockholm University Veronica Flyman, PhD Candidate, Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Sandra Foresti, Lecturer, Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Gothenburg Kamran Forghani, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Johan Fornäs, Professor Emeritus, School of Culture and Education (Media and Communication Studies), Södertörn University Laleh Foroughanfar, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Lisa Fors, Assessment Developer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Julia Forsberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University Jan Forsberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Engineering and Chemical Sciences, Karlstad University Gustaf Forsell, Senior Lecturer, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Axel Forslin, Teaching Assistant, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Adrian Forsythe, Researcher, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Petronella Foultier, Senior Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University Ragnar Francén, Professor, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Joakim Frank, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Denis Frank, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Esme Fransen, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Lovisa Fransson, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Helene Fransson, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Anna Friberg, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Moa Frid, PhD Candidate, Department of Health, Education and Technology, Luleå University of Technology Jonas Friden, Senior Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Jasmine Fridljung, Adjunct Lecturer, School of Health Sciences, Örebro University Charlotte Fridolfsson, Associate Professor, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University Gustav Fridolin, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Julia Fries, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Anna Frigge, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Josephine Fritiofsson, Study and Research Administrator, School of Health Sciences, Örebro University Petter Frühling, Researcher, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Isabella Sjölander Frühling, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Johanna Fryksmark, Study Counsellor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Carin Fröjd, PhD Candidate, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Flavia Fusco, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Johanna Gustafsson Fürst, Professor, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Lena Fält, Researcher, Department of Human Geography, Stockholm University Sara Gabrielsson, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Mafalda Gamboa, PhD Candidate, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Henrique Garbino, PhD Candidate, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Oscar García, Associate Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Melissa García-Lamarca, Associate Senior Lecturer, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Helena Gard, PhD Candidate, Department of Care Science, Malmö University Mattias Gardell, Professor, Centre for Multidisciplinary Studies on Racism, Uppsala University Katja Garson, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Lund University Karl Gauffin, Researcher, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Johanna Gebhard, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Peder af Geijerstam, Adjunct Assistant Lecturer, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University Lena Gemzöe, Professor, Department for Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender, Stockholm University Alison Gerber, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Lund University Arne Gerdner, Professor Emeritus, School of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University Nora Germundsson, Researcher, Department of Social Work, Stockholm University Danial Ghasempour, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Poya Ghorbani, Associate Professor, Division of Surgery and Oncology, Karolinska Institute Sheila Ghose, Senior Lecturer, Department of English, Södertörn University Kaniska Ghosh, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Alexandre Gilardet, PhD Candidate, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Juliana Restrepo Giraldo, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Davide Girardelli, Senior Lecturer, Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg Ulrika Lundin Glans, PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Tina Glenvik, Lecturer, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Martina Gnewski, PhD Candidate , Department of Communication , Lund University Greta Gober, Researcher, Department of Real Estate and Construction Management, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Agustín Goenaga, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Lund University Fouad El Gohary, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, Uppsala University Isabel Goicolea, Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University Mariana Gomes, PhD Candidate, Department of Geography, Media and Communication, Karlstad University Ricardo Fernandez Gonzalez, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Stockholm University Sara Goodman, Lecturer, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Mirey Gorgis, Researcher, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Charlotte Gottfries, Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Sara Gottschalk, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Giulia Gozzini, PhD Candidate, Centre for Theology and Religious Studies, Lund University Jonas Grahn, PhD Candidate, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Lisa Grahn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Sandra Grahn, Associate Researcher, Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg Elpis Grammatikopoulou, PhD , Department of Education and Special Education , University of Gothenburg Maria Granberg, Study Administrator, Umeå Academy of Fine Arts, Umeå University Kristina Grange, Professor, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Louise Granlund, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University Lotta Granqvist, Researcher, Departure of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Christina Gratorp, PhD Candidate, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Veronica Green, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Catia Gregoratti, Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science, Lund University Annie Gregory, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Mats Greiff, Professor, Department of Society, Culture and Identity, Malmö University Nina Gren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology & Centre for Advanced Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University Simon Grendéus, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy and Cognitive Science, Lund University Anna Berg Grimstad, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Louise Grip, Phd Candidate, Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Adrián Groglopo, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Katarzyna Gruszka, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computer Science and Media Technology, Malmö University Ana Grzeszczak, PhD Candidate, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Uppsala University Angelica Wågby Gräfe, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Hedvig Gröndal, Researcher, Department of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Rode Grönkvist, Statistician, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Gothenburg Ida Grönroos, Substitute Senior Lecturer, Department of ALM, Uppsala University Sigmundur Gudmundsson, Professor, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Carlos Guerrero-Bosagna, Associate Professor, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Dimitrius Santiago Passos Simões Fróes Guimarães, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institute Alva Murray Guldager, Research Assistant, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Rakel Gunnemark, PhD Candidate, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Kunal Gupta, PhD Candidate, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Sunny Gurumayum, PhD Candidate, Gender Studies, Lund University Ivan Gusic, Associate Professor, Department of Government, Uppsala University Anna W. Gustafsson, Associate Professor, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Jennie Gustafsson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Jenny Gustafsson, Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Andreas Gustafsson, Research Assistant, Institute for Social Research, Stockholm University Hampus Östh Gustafsson, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Mats Gustavii, Head of Department, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Malena Gustavson, Associate Professor, Department of Ethnology, History of Religion and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Malin Gustavsson, PhD Candidate, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Tove Gustavsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Renuka Gustavsson, Education Administrator, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Hanna Gyllensten, Associate Professor, Institute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Katerina Pia Günter, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Umeå University Markus Balázs Göransson, Senior Lecturer, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Malin Göteman, Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering, Uppsala University Chris Haffenden, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Sten Hagberg, Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Anders Hagberg, Professor, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Tuva Haglund, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Karin Idevall Hagren, Associate Professor, Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University Jim Hagström, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Rikke Lie Halberg, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Lund University Patrik Hall, Professor, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Anna Hall, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Andreas Hallberg, Associate Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Lena Halldenius, Professor, Division of Human Rights Studies, Lund University Eva Hallgren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Frida Hallqvist, Adminstrative Officer, Faculty of Culture and Society, Malmö University Hära Jess Haltorp, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Agnes Hamberger, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala university Sami Abu Hamdeh, Ward Physician/MD/PhD, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Fatemeh Hamedanian, Associate Researcher, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University James Hamilton, Adjunct, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Feras Hammami, Associate Professor, Department of Conservation, University of Gothenburg Maja Hammarén, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Mia-Marie Hammarlin, Senior Lecturer, Department of Communication, Lund University Harald Hammarström, Professor, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Tor Hammer, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Mid Sweden University Bruno Hamnell, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Mo Hamza, Professor, Department of Building and Environmental Technology, Lund University Gül Bilge Han, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Communication and Culture, Mälardalen University Emelie Hane-Weijman, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Umeå University Rasmus Hane-Weijman, Procurement Officer, Financial Office, Umeå University Christina Hansen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Beatrice Hansen, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Anders Lund Hansen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Helena Hanson, Lecturer, Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University Erik Hansson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Emily Harle, Coordinator, Student Service Centre, Malmö University Ashleigh Harris, Professor, Department of English, Uppsala University Katherine Harrison, Associate Professor , Department of Thematic Studies , Linköping University Alex Hart, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Thomas Hartvigsson, Researcher, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Ashley Haru, Coordinator, Department of Education, Uppsala University Zeenath Hasan, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Frieda Haselbach, PhD Candidate, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Gothenburg Fawad Hassan, Associate Professor, Department of Physics, Stockholm University Esther Hauer, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Karin Hauptmann, Producer, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Annika Elisabeth von Hausswolff, Adjunct Professor, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Vjollca Haxha, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Rikard Heberling, PhD Candidate, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Finn Hedefalk, Researcher, Department of Economic History, Lund University Elias Hedkvist, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Christina Hedman, Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Khedidja Hedna, Researcher, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, University of Gothenbrug Jenny Hedström, Associate Professor, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Emma Heeman, PhD Candidate, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Amrah Heikkinen, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Stockholm University Sofia Anceau Helander, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Government, Uppsala University Disa Helander, Senior Lecturer, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Lisa Heldt, PhD Candidate, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Hannah Helgegren, PhD Candidate, Department of Food and Nutrition and Sport Science, University of Gothenburg Lisa Hellman, Professor, Department of History, Lund University Kahl Hellmer, Researcher and Coordinator, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Lars Gösta Hellström, Affiliated Lecturer, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institute Petter Hellström, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Ahmad Assem Hemmat, Phd Candidate, Department of Communication, Quality Management and Information Systems, Mid Sweden University Olga Hendel, Project Manager, Division of Networked and Embedded Systems, Mälardalen University Carlos Henderson, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Josefine Henman, PhD Candidate, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Wilma Henning, Research Assistant, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Linus Hermansson, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Klara Hermansson, Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Criminology and Public Health Sciences, University of Gävle Rahmanu Hermawan, PhD Candidate, Division of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Mälardalen University Maria Padrón Hernández, Researcher, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Mikela Lundahl Hero, Senior Lecturer, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Maja Herstad, PhD Candidate, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Anna Hertzberg, Lecturer and Physician, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Marcus Herz, Professor, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Basile Herzog, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Roger Hildingsson, Researcher, Department of Political Science, Lund University Per-Anders Hillgren, Professor, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Ella Hillström, PhD Candidate, Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Rebecca Hilton, Professor, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Hanna Hindriks, Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Marius Hingel, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry, Stockholm University Moritz Hirsbrunner, PhD Candidate, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Zara Luna Hjelm, PhD Candidate, Department of Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Mikael Hjerm, Professor, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Hanna Hodacs, Associate Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Tintin Hodén, Affiliated Researcher, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Ben Hogan, PhD Candidate, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Markus Holdo, Senior lecturer , Department of political science , Lund University Ståle Holgersen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Stockholm University Helena Holgersson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Ulrika Holgersson, Associate Professor, Department of Communication, Lund University Stig-Olof Holm, University lecturer, Department of Ecology ans Environmental Science, Umeå University Emma Holmberg, PhD Candidate, Division of Urban and Regional Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Linda Holmer, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Erik Holmgren, PhD Candidate, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Sara Holmgren, Researcher, Division of Environmental Communication, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Linn Egeberg Holmgren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Thea Holmlund, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Sam Holmqvist, Associate Professor, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Anna Holmqvist, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Emma Holmström, Professor, Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Anders Holst, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Helena Honkaniemi-Hoppe, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Mavis Hooi, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Samantha Hookway, Lecturer and PhD Candidate, Design and Interaction Design, University of Gothenburg and Chalmers University of Technology Johanna Motilla Hoppe, Postdoctoral Researcher and Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Luisa Hugerth, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Mattias W. Hugerth, PhD Candidate, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University Karin Larsson Hult, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education , Mid Sweden University Magdalena Hulth, Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Anna Hultman, Researcher, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Silvana Hultsch, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University Hanna Husberg, Assistant Professor , Research Centre, Stockholm University of the Arts Linnea Huusko, PhD Candidate, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University Tobias Hübinette, Senior Lecturer, Department of Language, Literature and Intercultural Studies, Karlstad University Uffe Hylin, Senior Lecturer, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institute Kaj Håkanson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Helena Håkansson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Sandra Håkansson, Researcher, Department of Government, Uppsala University Jonna Kallaste Håkansson, PhD Candidate, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Marie Hållander, Associate Professor, Teacher Education, Södertörn University Felicia Hägerbäck, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Linus Hägg, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Helena Hägglund, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Sören Häggqvist, Senior Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University El Häkkinen, PhD Candidate, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Anna-Maria Hällgren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Creative Studies, Umeå University Hanna Hällström, Administrator, Professional Services, Luleå University of Technology Elin Hällström, PhD Candidate, Department of Health, Education and Technology, Luleå University of Technology Sebastian Hällund, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Stockholm University Joel Högberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Society, Culture and Identity, Malmö University Charlotte Högberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Björn Högberg, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Sofia Högstadius, Lecturer, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Jens Högström, Associate Professor, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute Tova Höjdestrand, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Division of Social Anthropology, Lund University Fanny Wendt Höjer, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Mattias Höjer, Professor, Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Thomas Hörberg, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University Magnus Hörnqvist, Professor, Department of Criminology, Stockholm University Aida Ibricevic, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Elin Inge, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University Petter Ingemarsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Andrea Iossa, Senior Lecturer, Department of Law and Economics, Kristianstad University Asifa Iqbal, Associate Professor, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, University of Gävle Sarah Philipson Isaac, Postdoctoral Researcher, Center for Sustainability Research, Stockholm School of Economics Lina Isacs, Postdoctoral Fellow, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Elias Isaksson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Political Science, Umeå University Erik Isberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Philosophy and History, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Christian Isendahl, Professor, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Ellinor Isgren, Senior Lecturer, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Sachiko Ishihara, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Rafikul Islam, PhD Candidate, Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University Mine Islar, Associate Professor, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Jonas Ivarsson, Professor, Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg Marieke Ivarsson-Aalders, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Clara Iversen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Sten Eirik W. Jacobsen, Professor, Department of Medicine, Huddinge, and Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institute Daniel Jacobson, Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Anders Jacobson, PhD Candidate, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Kerstin Jacobsson, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Thórunn Jakobsdóttir, International Project Developer, Department of Education, Stockholm University Liza Jakobsson, Senior Lecturer, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Hilda Jakobsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Film and Literature, Linnaeus University Andreas Jakobsson, Professor, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Malena Janson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Torsten Janson, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Theology and Religious Studies & Centre for Advanced Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University Anton Jansson, Associate Professor, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg David Jansson, Associate Professor, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Karin Jansson, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Katja Jansson, PhD Candidate, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Susanne Jansson, Research Coordinator, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Mari Jansson, Librarian, Malmö University Library, Malmö University Sofi Jansson-Keshavarz, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Andreas Jarblad, PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Nour Jarbu, Administrator, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Ulf Jederlund, Associate Professor, Department of Special Education, Stockholm University Jokum Lind Jensen, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Sofia Jeppsson, Associate Professor, Department of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies, Umeå University Jessie Jern, PhD Candidate, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Maria Jernnäs, Assistant Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Daniel Jewesbury, Senior Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Anne Jifält, HR Assistant, Nordital, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Carolina Jinde, Assistant Professor, Department 2 (Film and Media), Stockholm University of the Arts Aida Jobarteh, PhD Candidate, Department of Ethnology, History of Religion and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Kerstin Johannesson, Senior Professor, Marine Sciences, University of Gothenburg Livia Johannesson, Associate Professor , School of Public Administration, University of Gothenburg Maria Johansen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Tormod Johansen, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Guro Gravem Johansen, Professor, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Caroline Johansson, Associate Professor, Department of Law, Uppsala University Cecilia Johansson, Academic Advisor, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Moa Johansson, Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Patrik Johansson, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Umeå University Sven Anders Johansson, Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Dan Johansson, Researcher, Department of History, Stockholm University Niclas Johansson, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Pontus Johansson, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Mikael Johansson, Associate Professor, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Ida Johansson, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Christina Johansson, Junior lector/teacher (Adjunkt), Department of Social Work, Umeå Universtiet Alice Johansson, Program Coordinator , Department of Political Science , University of Gothenburg Jörgen Johansson, Associate Professor, School of Public Administration , University of Gothenburg Richard Johansson, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Gothenburg and Chalmers University of Technology Annie Johansson, Technician, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, Gothenburg University Lena Johansson, Associate Professor, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg Ditte Kvist Johnson, PhD Candidate, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Emma Johnson, PhD Candidate, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Ernst Johnson, PhD Candidate, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Janica Jokela, PhD Candidate, Department of Language Studies, Umeå University Matylda Jonas-Kowalik, PhD Candidate, Uppsala Centre for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Department of History, Uppsala University Lotta Jons, Associate Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Lilja Kristín Jónsdóttir, PhD Candidate, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Mattias Jonson, Researcher, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, University of Gothenburg Elisabeth Jonsson, Finance Officer, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Karin Jonsson, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Stefan Jonsson, Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Ewa Jonsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Amanda Jonsson, Knowledge Officer, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University Annika Jonsson, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Karlstad University Björn Jonsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Anna Jonsson, Associate Professor, Department of Computing Science, Umeå University Ellen Jonsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Martin Joormann, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Maria Josephson, Administrative Officer/PhD, Unit for Medical History and Heritage, Karolinska Institute Hannes Junestav, Lecturer, Jazz Department, Royal College of Music in Stockholm Ivar Jung, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Majlinda Juniku, Course Administrator, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Alice Junman, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Valon Junuzi, PhD Candidate, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Anne Juren, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Ilir Jusufi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology Håkan Jönson, Professor, School of Social Work, Lund University Johan Jönsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Erik Jönsson, Associate Professor, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Jenny Iao Jörgensen, Visiting Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Sara Kaaman, Senior Lecturer in Graphic Design, Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Defne Kadıoğlu, Project Researcher, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Anna Kahlmeter, Researcher, Department of Criminology, Stockholm University Torbjörn Kalin, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Jönköping University Kim Silow Kallenberg, Head of Department/Associate Professor, Department of History and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Petter Kallioinen, Research Assistant, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University Jan-Adrian H. Kallmyr, PhD Candidate, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University Anna Kallos, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Panagiotis Kalogeropoulos, PhD Candidate, Department of Molecular Biosciences, The Wenner-Gren Institute, Stockholm University Sara Kalucza, Researcher, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Kahkashan Kamal, Phd Candidate, Department of Molecular Biosciences, The Wenner-Gren Institute, Stockholm University Zarreen Kamalie, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Ricardo Fiallo Kaminski, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Daniel Kane, Professor, Department of English, Uppsala University Elin Kanhov, Postdoctoral Fellow, Division of Speech, Music and Hearing, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Åsa Hammarborg Kaouk, Education Officer, Office for Medicine and Pharmacy, Uppsala University Sabina Kapetanovic, Associate Professor, Department of Social Studies, University West Anastasios Kapodistrias, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Balsam Karam, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Sara Karimi, PhD Candidate, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Jonas Karlén, Educational Developer, Unit for Pedagogical Development and Interactive Learning, University of Gothenburg Linnéa Karlsson, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Maria Karlsson, Associate Professor, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Mikael Mery Karlsson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Mariko Takedomi Karlsson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Peter Karlsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Nature and Society, Jönköping University Håkan Karlsson, Professor, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Daniel Karlsson, Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Lund University Caroline Karlsson, Lecturer, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Per-Arne Karlsson, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Stockholm University Matilda Karlsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Anna Karlström, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Ancient History and Conservation, Uppsala University Ilona Karppinen, Academic Advisor, Department of History, Lund University Sophie Karrenberg, Professor, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Åsa Kasimir, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Gothenburg Alexander Katourgi, PhD Candidate, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Paul Katsivelis, Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Shamal Kaveh, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Stockholm University Uzma Kazi, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Thomas Keating, Assistant Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Department of Thematic Studies Ilhan Kellecioglu, Research Assistant, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Deniz Kellecioglu, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Ben Kenward, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Caroline Kerfoot, Professor Emerita, Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University Terese Kerstinsdotter, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas, and Religion, University of Gothenburg Mahmoud Keshavarz, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Katharina Keuenhof, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Physiology, University of Gothenburg Svenja Keune, Researcher, Swedish School of Textiles , University of Borås Abdulhadi Khalaf, Senior Researcher, Department of Sociology, Lund University Kajsa Khanye, International Coordinator, International Office, Malmö University Ahmad Al Khatib, Lecturer, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Alaa Kheir, PhD Candidate, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University Linnea Khodiar, PhD Candidate, Department of Educational Sciences, Lund University Shahram Khosravi, Professor, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Jomo Kigotho, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Uppsala University Johan Kihlert, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Svenbjörn Kilander, Professor Emeritus, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Onur Kilic, Postdoctor, Humlab, Umeå University Bim Kilje, PhD Candidate, Department of Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Wooseong Kim, Postdoctoral Fellow, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute Jyri Kimari, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Engineering Sciences (Nuclear Science & Engineering), KTH Royal Institute of Technology Björn Kindenberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Judith Kiros, PhD Candidate, Department of Language, Literature and Intercultural Studies, Karlstad University Blaise Kirschner, Professor, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Nina Kivinen, Associate Professor , Division of Industrial Engineering and Management , Uppsala University Ida Kjellberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Johan Kjellman, Curator, Museum of Evolution, Uppsala University Ulrika Kjellman, Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor, Department of Archives, Libraries and Museums, Uppsala University Cathryn Klasto, Senior Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Bart Klem, Associate Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Leif Klemedtsson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Earth Siences, University of Gothenburg Johan Örestig Kling, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Umeå University Zlatana Knezevic, Assistant Professor , Division of Social Work, Dalarna University Ina Knobblock, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Gustav Knutsson, Research Engineer, Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University Max Koch, Professor, School of Social Work, Lunds University Cindy Kohtala, Professor, Umeå Institute of Design, Umeå University Jenni Koivisto, Senior Lecturer, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Johanna Koivunen, Administrator, The Office of Human Science, Stockholm University Dianne Kok, Project Assistant, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Marta Kolankiewicz, Senior Lecturer, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Zhivka Koleva, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Lisette van Kolfschoten, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Matthias Konrad-Schmolke, Senior Lecturer, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Gothenburg Anastasiya Kotova, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Law, Lund University Arianna Koufopoulou, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala Universitet Peter Krajnik, Professor, Department of Industrial and Materials Science, Chalmers University of Technology Naima Kraushaar-Friesen, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Clary Krekula, Professor, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Nina C. Krickel-Choi, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Political Science, Lund University Karin Krifors, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Elisabeth Kring, Quality Assurance Coordinator, Faculty of Engineering, Lund University Supriya Krishnamurthy, Associate Professor, Department of Physics, Stockholm University Karin Kristensson, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Mia Krokstäde, Coordinator, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Charlie Kronberg, Administrator and Dean Support, Faculty of Technology and Society, Malmö University David Kronlid, Associate Professor, Department of Education , Mid Sweden University Jenny Kronman, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Moa Eriksson Krutrök, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Media Studies, Umeå University Alexander Krüger, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, Umeå University Sanni Kuikka, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Stockholm University Onkar Kular, Professor, HDK-Valand Academy of Art & Design, University of Gothenburg Teresa Kulawik, Professor, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Christina Kullberg, Professor, Department of Modern Languages, Uppsala University Merit Kullinger, Researcher, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Zeynep Kuyumcu, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Jannice Käll, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Anna Hegardt Källén, Professor, Department of Culture and Media Studies, Umeå University Isabel Köhler, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Gamze Köyluoglu, PhD Candidate, Systematic Theology, Uppsala University Anna Lackner, PhD Candidate, Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment , Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Julia Lagerman, Associate Professor, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Maja Lagerqvist, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Runo Lagomarsino, PhD Candidate, Artistic Living Environment, Royal Institute of Art Stockholm Pirjo Lahdenperä, Professor Emerita, School of Communication, Cuture and Education, Mälardalen University Anna Laine, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Stockholm University Cecilia Lalander, Associate Professor, Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Theodor Lalér, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Joakim Landahl, Professor, Department of Education, Stockholm University Josefine Landberg, PhD Candidate, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Emma Landby, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Demographic and Aging Research, Umeå University Amanda Lanigan, PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Agnes Lanker, PhD Candidate, Department of Education and Special Education , University of Gothenburg Love Lanneborn, Amanuensis, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Emelie Lantz, PhD Candidate, Department of History/Human Rights Studies, Lund University Isa Lappalainen, PhD Candidate, Department of Government, Uppsala University Eric Larsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Stockholm University Lars-Gunnar Larsson, Senior Professor, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University Lisa Larsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Uppsala University Monika Larsson, PhD Candidate, School of Social Work, Lund University Pia Larsson, Research Assistant, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Sara Margretsdotter Larsson, Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Victor Larsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University Jenny Larsson, International Coordinator, Division of Educational Affairs, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Daniel Larsson, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Malin Larsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Kristin Larsson, Lecturer, Department of Crafts, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design David Larsson, Senior Lecturer in Fine Art, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Felix Larsson, Lecturer, Department of Department of Philosophy, Linguistics, and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Martin Lascoux, Professor, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Marcus Lauri, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology and Social Work, Mid Sweden University Johanna Lauri, Lecturer, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Thomas Laurien, Senior Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Ivar Lavett, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Maddie Leach, Senior Lecturer, HDK-Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Karolina Lebek, PhD Candidate, Department of Geography, Umeå University Kosma Lechowicz, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Jayeon Lee, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Janneke van der Leer, PhD Candidate, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Matti Leino, Researcher, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Zakaria Lemmouh, Administrator, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Maria Lengquist, PhD Candidate, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University Caroline Leppänen, PhD Candidate, School of Public Administration , Gothenburg University Tuulia Lerkkanen, PhD Candidate, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Gustave Lester, Postdoctoral Researcher, Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Isabelle Letellier, Assistant Professor, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Elsa Leth, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Áron Levente, PhD Candidate, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Charlotta Eneling Levin, Lecturer, Department of Pedagogy Studies, Karlstad University Joshua Levy, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Magdalena de Fine Licht, Librarian, Library of Science, Lund University Magnus Lidén, Visiting Researcher, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Kicki Liljedahl, Programme Coordinator, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Daniela Lillhannus, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Ida Linander, Researcher, Department of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University Jacob Lind, Researcher, Global Political Studies, Malmö University Ruben Lind, PhD Candidate, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute Mia Lind, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Amanda Lindahl, PhD Candidate, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Annika Lindberg, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Global Studies & School of Public Administration, University of Gothenburg Vilda Lindberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Stefan Lindberg, Lecturer, Department of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Emy Lindberg, Teacher and Researcher, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Boel Lindberg, Professor Emeritus, Department of Swedish, Linnaeus University Inger Lindberg, Professor Emerita, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Eva Lindberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences John Lindberg, Librarian, Social Sciences Libraries, University of Gothenburg Jenny Lindblad, Researcher, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Jonas Lindbäck, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Jöran Lindeberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University Martin van der Linden, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Studies, Linnaeus University Kristin Linderoth, Researcher, Department of History, Lund University Karin Linderoth, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Matilda Lindgren, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Helena Lindholm, Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Susan Lindholm, Senior Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Axel Lindholm, Research Engineer, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University Lisa Lindqvist, PhD Candidate, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Annika Lindskog, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg Linnéa Lindsköld, Associate Professor, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås Freja Lindstedt, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Fredrik Lindstrand, Professor, Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Joanna Lindström, Researcher, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Monica Lindvall, Project Leader, National Centre for Swedish as a Second Language, Stockholm University Oskar Lindwall, Professor, Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg Mikaela Linell, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Tobias Linné, Senior Lecturer, Department of Communication, Lund University Charlotte Linzatti, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Katarina Lion, Assistant Professor, Department 1 (Dance Pedagogy), Stockholm University of the Arts Naomi Lipke, PhD Candidate, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Inari Listenmaa, Lecturer, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Carina Listerborn, Professor, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Dominika Lisy, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Andreas Litsegård, Senior Lecturer , School of Global Studies , University of Gothenburg Lars Littmann, PhD Candidate, Centre for Palaeogenetics, Stockholm University Apollonios Livadiotis, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Ewa Livmar, Coordinator, Centre for Environment and Development Studies, Uppsala University Hedvig Ljungar, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Helena Tinnerholm Ljungberg, Assistant Professor, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute Jonas Ljungberg, Professor Emeritus, Department of Economic History, Lund University Fredrik Ljungkvist, Senior Lecturer, Jazz Department, Royal College of Music in Stockholm Hanna Ljungvall, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Medical Humanities, Uppsala University Angelina Llesi, HR Officer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Natasha Marie Llorens, Professor, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Abdulaziz Lodhi, Emeritus Professor, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Johanna Bergman Lodin, Researcher, Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Angelica Lodin-Sundström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Health Sciences, Mid Sweden University Stefano Longo, Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Gothenburg Elisa López, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology David García López, Education Officer, Department of Romance Studies and Classics, Stockholm University Julia Lord, Librarian, Stockholm University Library, Stockholm University Alfred Lorinius, Lecturer, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Nadia Lovell, Research Coordinator, Centre for Integrated Research on Culture and Society, Uppsala University Arwid Lund, Senior Lecturer, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Adam Lundberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Anna Lundberg, Professor, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Hugo Lundberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Stina Lundberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Medical Cell Biology, Uppsala University Susanna Lundberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Elin Lundell, PhD Candidate, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Mai Lundemark, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University Staffan Lundén, Researcher, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Magnus Lundgren, Director, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Anna Lundgren, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Ingela Lundgren, Professor Emerita, Institute of Health and Care Science, University of Gothenburg Daniel Lundin, Researcher, Department of Biology and Environmental Science/Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Linnaeus University/Stockholm University Jessica Lundin, Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Karin Lundin, PhD Candidate, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Rebecca Bengtsson Lundin, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Culture and Media Studies, Umeå University Catarina Lundin, Associate Professor , Department of Laboratory Medicine , Lund University Stina Lundkvist, Project Manager, Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University Evelina Lundmark, Researcher, Centre for Multidisciplinary Research on Religion and Society, Uppsala University Elin Lundquist, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Maja Lundqvist, Analyst, Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research, University of Gothenburg Elin Lundsten, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Tomas Poletti Lundström, Researcher, Centre for Multidisciplinary Studies on Racism, Uppsala University Markus Lundström, Associate Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Kaly Halkawt Lundström, PhD Candidate, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Ragnar Lundström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Johannes Lunneblad, Professor, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Doris Lydahl, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Liz Adams Lyngbäck, Lecturer, Department of Special Education, Stockholm University Camilla Wallin Lämsä, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Hedvig Lärka, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Josefine Löfblad, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Hektor Löfgren, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Stockholm University Ingeborg Löfgren, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Isabel Löfgren, Senior Lecturer, Media and Communication Studies, Södertörn University Torbjörn Löfqvist, Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science, Electrical and Space Engineering, Luleå University of Technology Gunilla Lönnberg, Researcher, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University Ann-Sofie Lönngren, Professor, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Sebastian Lönnlöv, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Anna Olovsdotter Lööv, Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Marcos Machado, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Jennifer Mack, Associate Professor, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Maja Torres Madzar, Adjunct, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Gunnlaugur Magnússon, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Uppsala University Ali Mahdi, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institute Adnan Mahmutović, Professor, Department of English, Stockholm University Vinicius de Souza Maia, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Lund University Fariba Majlesi, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Stockholm University Lollo Makdessi, PhD Candidate, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University Alice Al Maleh, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Division of Social Anthropology, Lund University Andrea Malesevic, Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Lund University Anthoula Malkopoulou, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, Uppsala University Andreas Malm, Associate Professor, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Magdalena Malmfors, PhD Candidate, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Johan Malmport, PhD Candidate, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Victoria Malmquist, Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Karl Malmqvist, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Emma Maltin, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Edda Manga, Head of Research, Mångkulturellt centrum, Nina Mangalanayagam, Senior Lecturer , HDK-Valand, Gothenburg University Zacharias Manias, Hourly Wage, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Sofia Maniatakou, PhD Candidate, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University Kaisa Mannerkorpi, Professor Emerita, Sahlgrenska Academy, Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg Ameera Mansour, Senior Lecturer , Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Xin Mao, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Caterina De Marchi, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Eleonor Marcussen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Lucille Margerie, PhD Candidate, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet Charlotta Marhold, Senior Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Uppsala university Jasmina Marić, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Jasmina Marić, Senior Lecturer, Computer Science and Engineering, Interaction Design, Chalmers University of Technology Ruben Marin, Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Kristianstad University Josefina Marklund, PhD Candidate, School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University Fran Marquez, Senior Lecturer, Industrial Electrical Engineering and Automation, Lund University Elisa A. Viteri Márquez, PhD Candidate, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Stockholm University Benjamin Martin, Associate Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Vladimir Cotal San Martin, Senior Lecturer, Department of Geography, Media and Communication, Karlstad University Miguel A. Martínez, Professor, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Lena Martinsson, Professor, Department for Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Elliot C. Mason, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of English, Uppsala University Michele Masucci, Lecturer, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Stina Mathiesen, Study Administrator, Department of Criminology, Stockholm University Arild Matsson, Research Engineer, Department of Swedish, Multilinguialism and Language Technology, University of Gothenburg Claudia Di Matteo, PhD Candidate, School of Social Work, Lund University Tove Mattisson, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Linnaeus University Hållbus Totte Mattsson, Professor, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Per-Olof Mattsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Helena Mattsson, Professor, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Tove Mattsson, Lecturer and PhD Candidate, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Katarina Mattsson, Associate Professor, School of Culture and Learning, Södertörn University Karl Mauritsson, Senior Lecturer, School of Engineering Science (Mechanical Engineering), University of Skövde Lucy McCarren, PhD Candidate, Department of Health Informatics and Logistics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Meghan Mattsson McGinnis, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Dominic Mealy, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Lund University Hannah Meason, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Eduardo Medina, Senior Lecturer, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Lorena Melgaço, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Jens Melinder, Senior Researcher, Department of Astronomy, Stockholm University Jöns Mellgren, Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication / Graphic Design and Illustration, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Simone Mellquist, PhD Candidate, Department of Language Studies, Umeå University Suejb Memeti, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology Isabella Menart, PhD Candidate, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Asier Mendizabal, Professor, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Gesina Menz, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University José Antonio Morales Mere, PhD Candidate, Department of Building and Environmental Technology, Lund University Claudia Merli, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Marina Mota Merlo, PhD Candidate, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Aysem Mert, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Anna Metreveli, PhD Candidate, Department of English, Stockholm University Jan Mewes, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Lund University Mårten Michanek, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Mateusz Miesiac, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Jenny Carey Mikkelsen, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Lund University Marta Miklikowska, Researcher, Department of Psychology, Linnaeus University Fraser Miller, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Stockholm University Philip Millroth, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Goran Milutinovic, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, University of Gävle Dannie Milve, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Graham Minenor-Matheson, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Shahab Mirbabaei, PhD Candidate, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Katia Miroff, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Arvand Mirsafian, Postdoctoral Researcher, Unit of Economic History, Umeå University Don Mitchell, Professor, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Jeffrey Mitchell, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Anna Mlasowsky, Professor , Department of Crafts, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Christina Moberg, Professor Emeritus, Department of Chemistry, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Marcus Mohall, Associate Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Youssef Mohamed, PhD Candidate, Department of Electrical Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Sara Nilsson Mohammadi, PhD Candidate, Department of School Development and Leadership, Malmö University Mohsen Mohammadi, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University Kelsey Marleen Mol, PhD Candidate, Unit of Economic History, Umeå University Emma Hagström Molin, Associate Professor, History of Ideas, Södertörn University Irene Molina, Professor, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University David Diez del Molino, Researcher, Deparment of Zoology, Stockholm University Anne Monikander, Student Counsellor and Students Affairs Officer, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Philipp Montenegro, PhD Candidate, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Norma Montesino, Associate Professor, School of Social Work, Lund University Andrea Monti, Researcher, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Mahdiyeh Moosavi, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University Caroline Morand, International Coordinator, International Office, Malmö University Juan Isaac Moreira-Hernández, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Fátima de Arriba Moreno, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Lund University Jonathan Morgan, Researcher, Centre for Theology and Religious Studies, Lund University Diana Morina, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Linnaeus University Sara Moritz, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Laura Moro, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Freja Morris, Researcher, Department of Communication, Lund University Roxanna Mortazavi, PhD Candidate, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Susanne Mortazavi, PhD Candidate, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Lund University Shifte Mosalli, PhD Candidate, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Staffan Mossenmark, Professor, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Petter Mostad, Associate Professor , Department of Mathematical Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology Nasrin Mostofian, PhD Candidate, Department of Archives, Libraries and Museums, Uppsala University Sepideh Atter Motlagh, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Nafiseh Mousavi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Brigitte Mral, Professor Emerita, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Mehek Muftee, Substitute Senior Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Tuija Muhonen, Professor, Centre for Work Life Studies, Malmö University Victoria Muliadi, PhD Candidate, Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Stockholm University Ajlana Mulic-Lutvica, Senior Consultant, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Uppsala University Diana Mulinari, Senior Professor, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Paula Mulinari, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Leandro Schclarek Mulinari, Associate Senior Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Shai Schclarek Mulinari, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Lund University Thomas Munn, PhD Candidate, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Steve Murdoch, Professor, Institute of Military History, Swedish Defence University Alicia Muriel, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Robert Muscarella, Associate Professor, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Berina Mustafic, Coordinator, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Selma Mustafić, Research Assistant, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Tolibjon Mustafoev, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Valbona Muzaka, Professor, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University Laura Johanna Müller, PhD Candidate, Department of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Leos Müller, Professor, Department of History, Stockholm University Ingo Müller, PhD Candidate, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Klara Müller, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Mira Müller, Research Coordinator, Division for Insurance Medicine, Karolinska Institutet Pernilla Myrne, Associate Professor, Department of Languages, University of Gothenburg Pella Myrstener, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Per Månson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Ulrik Mårtensson, Director of Studies, Physical Geography and Ecosystem Sciences, Lund University Anne-Sofie Mårtensson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg Johan Mälberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Leila Naddi, PhD Candidate, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University Ida Nafstad, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Maria Andrea Nardi, Researcher, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Kit Narey, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Valentin Nash, Lecturer, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Noor Nassef, PhD Candidate, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Valeria Naters, Research Coordinator, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Sari Nauman, Senior Lecturer, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Malin Nauwerck, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Alejandra Navarrete, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Anders Neergaard, Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Marthe Nehl, PhD Candidate, Department of Service Studies, Lund University Anja Neidhardt-Mokoena, Project Coordinator, Umeå Institute of Design, Umeå University Moira Nelson, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Lund University Grigor Nika, Assistant Professor, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Karlstad University Rebecca Nikani, Administrative Assistant, Umeå University Library, Umeå University Mirko Nikolic, Researcher, School of Culture and Education , Södertörn University Leo Hansson Nilson, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Jenni Nilsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Ulrika Nilsson, Administrator/PhD, Office of Education and Research Administration, Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences Viktor Nilsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Biology, Karlstad University Kjell Nilsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Lund University Malin Nilsson, Senior Lecturer, School of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University Sanja Nilsson, Senior Lecturer, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Olga Nilsson, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute Albert Nilsson, Biostatistician, Uppsala Clinical Research Centre, Uppsala University Greta Nilsson, Research Engineer, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University Terese Nilsson, PhD Candidate, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University Tabita Nilsson, Lecturer, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology Alma Nilsson, Project Coordinator , Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology (IGP), Uppsala University Sanja Nivesjö, Associate Senior Lecturer, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Vanessa Noack, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Maya Nomoto, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Behzad Khosravi Noori, Researcher, Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Anders Bay Nord, Senior Staff Scientist, Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Gothenburg Patrik Nordbeck, Associate Professor, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Julia Nordblad, Associate Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Ossian Nordgren, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Karin Nordh, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Amanda Nordin, PhD Candidate, Department of Language, Literature and Intercultural Studies, Karlstad University Nikolina Nordin, PhD Candidate, Department of Archives, Libraries and Museums, Uppsala University André Nordin, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Joel Nordin, Assistant Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institute Vanna Nordling, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Isabella Nordlund, PhD Candidate, Department of Accounting, Stockholm School of Economics Lisa Nordlund, PhD Candidate, Department of Psychology, Lund University Pernilla Nordqvist, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Anna Nordström, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Marcus Nordström, PhD Candidate, Department of Economics, Lund University Ulrica Nordström, Communicator, Deaprtment of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Stockholm University Eva Norén, Professor, Departmen of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Sofia Norlin, Senior Lecturer, Department 2 (Film and Media), Stockholm University of the Arts Karin Margaretha Norman, Professor Emerita, Dept of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Josephine Norrbo, PhD Candidate, Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Kimberly Norrman, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Faten Nouf, Assistant Professor, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Andrea Soler i Núñez, PhD Candidate, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Lisa Nyberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Umeå Academy of Fine Arts, Umeå University Lina Nyberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Music Education, Royal College of Music in Stockholm Gustav Nyberg, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Stockholm University Malin Nygren, Student Counsellor, Department of Political Science, Umeå University Victor Nygren, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Katarina Giritli Nygren, Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Olav Nygård, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Karin Nykvist, Associate Professor, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Charlott Nyman, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology , Umeå University Eewa Nånberg, Professor, School of Health Sciences, Örebro University Mattias Näsman, Assistant Lecturer, Unit of Economic History, Umeå University Maggie O’Neill, PhD Candidate, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Maria Oen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Maddi Garate Olaizola, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Gunnar Olofsson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University Irma Olofsson, Project Coordinator, Arctic Centre, Umeå University Elica Ghavidel Olofsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, Stockholm University Hanna Bäckström Olofsson, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Mikael Olofsson, Assistant Professor , National Centre for Swedish as a Second Language , Stockholm University Jonas Olson, Professor, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Maria Olson, Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Nasrine Olson, Associate Professor, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås Nils Olsson, Senior Lecturer, HDK-Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Thomas Olsson, Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Jesper Olsson, Professor, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Lina Olsson, Associate Professor, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Erik Olsson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Mats Olsson, Professor, Department of Economic History, Lund University Gustaf Olsson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lund University Jesper Olsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Gothenburg Lotta Olvegard, Senior lecturer , Department of Swedish, multilingualism, language technology, University of Gothenburg Emilia Olving, PhD Candidate, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Linnaeus University Sara Davin Omar, Research Engineer, Division of Architecture and Urban Design, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Mikael Omstedt, Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Beatrice Øian Onn, Junior Lecturer, Department of Criminology, Mid Sweden University Sama Khosravi Ooryad, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Charlotte Orban, Project Manager, Forum for Social Innovation, Malmö University Auli A. Orlander, Associate Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Jacob Orrje, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Mats Oscarson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Education, University of Gothenburg Veturliði Óskarsson, Professor , Department of Scandinavian Languages , Uppsala University Rachid Oucheikh, Researcher, Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University Nicole Schack Ovesen, Associate Senior Lecturer, National Centre for Knowledge on Men’s Violence Against Women, Uppsala University Agnese Pacciardi, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, University of Lund Ausra Padskocimaite, PhD Candidate, IRES Institute for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Uppsala University Justine Pagnier, PhD Candidate, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Gothenburg Alessandra Paiusco, PhD Candidate and Lecturer, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Lennart Palm, Professor Emeritus, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Felicia Palm, HR Officer, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University Alexandra Zahariadis Palmaer, PhD Candidate, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Brian Palmer, Associate Professor, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Ylva Palmgren, PhD Candidate, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Laura Birnbaum Pantzerhielm, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University Fotios Papadopoulos, Professor, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Anna Pardo, Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Lund University Camille Parguel, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Amir Parhamifar, Building supervisor – Caretaker – Coordinator, Department of Political Science , Lund University Charlotta Friedner Parrat, Associate Professor, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Amin Parsa, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Science, Halmstad University Ellen Parsland, Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Elli Patoulioti, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Uppsala University Ronald Paul, Professor Emeritus, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Jenny Gunnarsson Payne, Professor, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Rebecca Laycock Pederse, Postdoctoral Fellow, Lund Univeristy Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Joana Pedroso, Senior Lecturer, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Moa Peldán, PhD Candidate, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Maria Pemsel, Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Adriana de la Peña, PhD Candidate, Urban Studies, Malmö University Teresa Pereira, Researcher, Department of Medical Cell Biology, Uppsala University Armando Perez-Cueto, Professor, Department of Food, Nutrition and Culinary Science, Umeå University Marie-Caroline Peris, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design (Design Unit), University of Gothenburg Josefin Persdotter, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Technology Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology Maria Persdotter, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Erik Florin Persson, Associate Professor, Department of Film and Literature, Linnaeus University Lina Persson, PhD Candidate, Department 2 (Film and Media), Stockholm University of the Arts Sara Persson, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Anna Bark Persson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Language Studies, Umeå University Tomas Persson, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Emma Persson, Librarian, University Library, Linnaeus University Kristin Persson, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Linda Persson, Lecturer, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Stefan Swartling Peterson, Professor, Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institute Lisa Petersson, Associate Senior Lecturer, Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Ella Petrini, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Lars Petterson, Professor Emeritus, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Torgny Pettersson, Lecturer, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences, Örebro University Kamilla Peuravaara, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Linda Pfister, PhD Candidate, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Maria Pihel, Coordinator, International Office, Malmö University Andrés Brink Pinto, Associate Professor, Department of History, Lund University Åsa Plesner, PhD Candidate, Stockholm Business School, Stockholm University Matilda Plöjel, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Zoé Pochon, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Eleonora Poggio, Researcher, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Mika Pohjola, PhD Candidate, Department of Music Pedagogy, Royal College of Music in Stockholm Dominika V. Polanska, Professor, School of Social Sciences (Social Work), Södertörn University Emin Poljarević, Associate Professor, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Kirill Polkov, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Zoë Poluch, Associate Professor, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Tobias Pontara, Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Axel Pontén, PhD Candidate, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Moa Pontén, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute Daniel Harju Popow, Communications Officer, Communications Department, Malmö University Tove Posselt, Administrative Assistant, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Sophie Bäärnhielm Pousette, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Ellie Power, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Paola Torres Núñez del Prado, PhD Candidate, Department 2 (Film and Media), Stockholm University of the Arts Claudia Preisig, PhD Candidate, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, University West Christophe Premat, Associate Professor, Department of Romance Studies and Classics, Stockholm University Tonja Preusler, HR Generalist, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Keith Pringle, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Sara Backman Prytz, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Uppsala University Jesper Prytz, Affiliated to Research, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Johan Prytz, Professor, Department of Education, Uppsala University Goran Puaca, Associate Professor, Department of Work Life and Social Welfare, University of Borås Ale Pålsson, Researcher, Department of History, Uppsala University Anna Qureshi, Finance Officer, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Annika Rabo, Professor Emerita, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Florencia Radeljak, PhD Candidate, Department of Business Administration, Lund University Alexandre Raffoul, PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Hafijur Rahman, PhD Candidate, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Linnaeus University Royasia Viki Ramadani, PhD Candidate, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg Vasna Ramasar, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Lund University Alice Hymna Ramnehill, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Maria Hymna Ramnehill, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Anders Ramsay, Emeritus Lecturer, Faculty of Human Sciences, Mid Sweden University Morag Ramsey, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Belén Alonso Rancurel, PhD Candidate, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Uppsala University Patrick Randolph-Quinney, Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Ancient History and Conservation, Uppsala University Tanushree Rao, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Riya Raphael, Researcher, Department of Sociology, Lund University David Rapp, PhD Candidate, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Nanna Rask, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Mattias Rask, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Mathias Rask-Andersen, Researcher, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University Katharina Berndt Rasmussen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Maria Rasmussen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Law, Uppsala University Anna Ratecka, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Social Sciences (Social Work), Södertörn University Alma Rauer, Language Advisor, Unit for Academic Language, University of Gothenburg Harita Raval, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Monica Guilera Recoder, PhD Candidate, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Karin Redelius, Professor, Movement, Culture and Society, The Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences Petra Carlsson Redell, Professor, Department of Religious Studies and Theology, University College Stockholm David Redmalm, Associate Professor, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Carl Regnéll, Lecturer, Department of Environmental Science, Kristianstad University Robert Rehammar, Researcher, Department of Microtechnology and Nanoscience, Chalmers University of Technology Baraa Rehamnia, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Umeå University Fiona Reid, Research Coordinator, Division of Planning and Research Support, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Eva Reimers, Senior reseracher, Department of Didactic, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Caroline Reinhammar, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Katarina Rejman, Senior Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Mayssa Rekhis, Lecturer, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Gothenburg Emma Rendel, Senior Lecturer , Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Annika Bergviken Rensfeldt, Senior Lecturer, Department of Applied Information Technology, University of Gothenburg Paulina de los Reyes, Professor Emerita, Department of Economic History and International Relations, Stockholm University Åse Richard, PhD Candidate, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Jenny Richards, PhD Candidate, Department of Crafts, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Samuel Richter, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Muhammad Rifqi, Doctoral Student, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Emma Rimpiläinen, Postdoctoral Researcher, Institute for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Uppsala University Aprilia Nidia Rinasti, PhD Candidate, Department of Electrical Engineering, Linköping University Uwe Ring, Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Annette Risberg, Guest Professor, Urban Studies, Malmö University Andrea Ritosa, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Pediatrics, Gothenburg University Emil Rivera-Thorsen, Researcher, Department of Astronomy, Stockholm University Davide Rizzato, Research Assistant, Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet Sofia Roberg, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Juan C. Rocha, Researcher, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University Einar Rodhe, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Ana Carolina Rodrigues, PhD Candidate, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Carolina Rodriguez, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University Kim Roelofs, Postdoc, Department of Economy and Society, University of Gothenburg Mauricio Rogat, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Anna Backman Rogers, Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sandra Rogne, PhD Candidate, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Arthur Rohaert, PhD Candidate, Department of Building and Environmental Technology, Lund University Carlos Rojas, PhD Candidate, Department of Special Education, Stockholm University Hannes Rolf, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of History, Stockholm University Mikael Roll, Professor, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Carl Rommel, Researcher, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Tetz Rooke, Professor Emeritus, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg Cecilia Roos, Professor, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Guillermo Pérez Ropero, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry, Uppsala University Blanka Rósa, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Stockholm University René León Rosales, Researcher, Mångkulturellt centrum, Jenny Rosén, Associate Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Daniel Rosenblum, PhD Candidate, Human Geography, Uppsala University Dan Rosengren, Associate Professor, School of Global Studies (Social Anthropology), University of Gothenburg Andrea Rosichini, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry, Uppsala University Valentina Rossi, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Manuela Rossing, Faculty Secretary, Joint Faculties of Humanities and Theology, Lund University Claudia Canedo Rosso, Postdoctoral Fellow, Risk and Environmental Studies, Karlstad University Stephanie Rost, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Johannes Rostamo, Professor, Department of Classical Music, Royal College of Music in Stockholm Lambros Roumbanis, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Örebro University Stamatina Roussou, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry, Uppsala University Andreas Rovio, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Laura Royer, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Francesca Ru, PhD Candidate, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Leif Runefelt, Professor, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Caroline Runesdotter, PhD Candidate, Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg Anton Runesson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of History, Stockholm University Helen Rix Runting, Visiting Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication / Interior Architecture and Furniture Design, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Ingrid Ryberg, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Andreas Rydberg, Associate Professor, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Maria Rydell, Associate Professor, Department of Swedish Language and Multilingualism, Stockholm University Eskil Rydhe, Researcher, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Lund University Klara Rydström, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts, Luleå University of Technology Jana Rüegg, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Megan Rådesjö, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Margareta Rämgård, Associate Professor, Department of Care Science, Malmö University Nora Räthzel, Professor Emerita, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Philipp Rönchen, PhD Candidate, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Elin Röös, Senior Lecturer, Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Olivia Saad, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Olivia Abdel Aziz Saad, PhD Candidate, Department of Theology , Uppsala University Tania Al Saadi, Associate Professor, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Stockholm University Linnéa Saaranen, PhD Candidate, Department of Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Carla Sacchi, PhD Candidate, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University Lawrence Sacco, Researcher, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University Charbel Sader, Communication Officer, Research & Innovation Services, University of Gothenburg Maja Sager, Senior Lecturer, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Christina El Saidi, Language Advisor, Unit for Academic Language, University of Gothenburg Essi Sairanen, Senior Lecturer , Department of Social and Psychological Studies , Karlstad University Essi Sairanen, Senior Lecturer , Department of Psychology , Hannah Saldert, Senior Lecturer, Division of Urban Planning and Development, University West James Sallis, Professor, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University Tove Salmgren, Assistant Professor, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Sara Salminen, PhD Candidate, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Tapio Salonen, Senior Professor, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Dario Salvi, Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science and Media Technology, Malmö University Linus Salö, Professor, Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University Anna Samén, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Umeå University Eva Samuelsson, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Stockholm University Tove Samzelius, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Pedro Sanches, Associate Professor, Department of Informatics, Umeå University Julia Sandahl, Researcher, Departmen of Criminology, Stockholm University Linn Sandberg, Associate Professor, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Malin Sandberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Swedish, Linnaeus University Kerstin Sandell, Professor, Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University Gunnar Sandin, Professor Emeritus, Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Lund University Tua Sandman, Senior Lecturer, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Görel Sandström, Associate Professor, Department of Language Studies, Umeå University Imri Sandström, Researcher, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, Gothenburg University Manuel Fernández Santana, PhD Candidate, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University Michael Sappol, Visiting Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Purnendu Sardar, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University Satenik Sargsyan, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Nina Saric, Language Consultant, Social Sciences Faculty Library, Lund University Yanti Sastrawan, PhD Candidate, Media and Communication Studies, Södertörn University Georgia Savvidou, PhD Candidate, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Samer Sawalha, Associate Professor, Department of Energy Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Lena Sawyer, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Lotte Schack, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Miriam von Schantz, Senior Lecturer , Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Lovisa Schau, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Antoinette Scherz, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Carl-Ulrik Schierup, Professor Emeritus, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Jonathan Schlunck, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Ulrika Schmauch, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Sarah Schmidt, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Irina Schmitt, Senior Lecturer, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Thomas Schmitt, PhD Candidate, Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, Uppsala University Ludwig Schmitz, Visiting Senior Lecturer, Department of Film and Literature, Linnaeus University Ulrike Schnaas, Educational Developer, Division for Quality Enhancement, Uppsala University Julia Schneider, PhD Candidate, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Isabel Schoultz, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Felix Schulz, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Barbara Schumann, Senior Lecturer, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Linnaeus University Stefan Schüller, PhD Candidate, Centre for Sustainability Studies, Lund University Marika Schütz, PhD Candidate, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University Eva Schömer, Professor, Department of Law and Economics, Kristianstad University Miguel San Sebastián, Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University Néa Sedell, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Arezu Sehai, PhD Candidate, Division of Molecular Biophysics, Uppsala University Lina Selander, Professor, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Teres Selberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior architecture and Visual communications, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Charlott Sellberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg Karin Sennefelt, Professor, Department of History, Stockholm University Ove Sernhede, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Education, University of Gothenburg Johanna von Seth, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Emma Severinsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Syed Zulfiqar Ali Shah, PhD Candidate, Department of Geography, Media and Communication, Karlstad University Ahsan Shahzad, Programmer, Operational Support, Medicine and Pharmacy, Uppsala University Sarah Shakil, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Hossein Sheiban, Associate Professor, Department of History, Stockholm University Shakti Raj Shrestha, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Aliaksandra Shrubok, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Hannah Siegrist, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Nathan Siegrist, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Henrik Sigurdh, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Umeå University Erika Sigvardsdotter, Coordinator/PhD, Centre for Medical Humanities, Uppsala University Joakim Sigvardson, Associate Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Teresa Silva, Associate Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Karin Silverin, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Kenna Sim-Sarka, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Luciana Simoes, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Véronique Simon, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Ida Simonsson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Religious Studies and Theology, University College Stockholm Amanda Simonsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Benedict Singleton, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Orly Siow, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science, Lund University Sebastian Sirén, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Government, Uppsala University Savina Sirik, Postdoctoral Researcher, Uppsala Centre for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Department of History, Uppsala University Anna Siverskog, Researcher, Gender Studies, Södertörn University Johan Sjons, Lecturer, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Gustav Sjöberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Anna Sjöberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Theology, Uppsala University Arvid Sjödin, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Lotta Sjögran, PhD Candidate, Department of Care Science, Malmö University Anders Sjögren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, Uppsala University Fredrik Sjögren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts, Luleå University of Technology Rutger Sjögrim, Lecturer, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Jonas Sjölander, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University Johanna Johansson Sjölander, Lecturer, Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Gothenburg Angelika Sjöstedt, Professor, Department for Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Stefan Sjöström, Professor, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Adam Sjöström, Communications Officer, Baltic University Programme, Uppsala University Thomas Sjösvärd, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University Alkistis Skalkidou, Professor, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Regina Skarp, Academic Secretary, Ethnology , Södertörn University Karin Skill, Associate Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Mikael Skillmark, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Jönköping University Alicia Skog, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Kicki Skog, Senior Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University William Skoglund, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University Emma Pihl Skoog, Senior Lecturer, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Jakob Naeser Skov, PhD Candidate, Department of Educational Studies, Karlstad University Marie-Christine Skuncke, Professor Emerita, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Anette Skårner, Professor Emerita, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Lisa Funkquist Sköld, PhD Candidate, Department of Psychology, Lund University Zinaïda Sluijs, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Nils Slättberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology Alicia Smedberg, Senior Lecturer, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Carl-Filip Smedberg, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Nicholas Smith, Senior Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Södertörn University Lotta Snickare, Researcher, Division of Real Estate Business and Financial Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Eric Snodgrass, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Lena Sohl, Senior Lecturer, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University Sofia Lindström Sol, Associate Professor, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås Anna Sonander, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology of Law, Lund University Åsa Sonjasdotter, Affiliated Researcher, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Lena Sotevik, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Ethnology, History of Religion and Gender Studies, Stockholm University Celina Ortega Soto, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Sara Soumah, Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Camila Freitas de Souza, PhD Candidate, Human Rights Studies, Lund University Antrea Spanou, PhD Candidate, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Uppsala University Moa Spegel, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Cloé St-Hilaire, Visiting Researcher, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University David Stackenäs, Lecturer, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Sofia Stamouli, Bioinformatician, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Biology, Karolinska Institute Samantha Stedtler, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy and Cognitive science, Lund University Evelina Stenbeck, Senior Lecturer, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Felicia Stenberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Languages, Linnaeus University Alakina Stenlund, Lecturer, Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University Karin Stensjö, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry, Uppsala University Jenny Stentoft, Lecturer, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Alexander Stevens, PhD Candidate, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Amanda Stjerna, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Emil Stjernholm, Associate Professor, Department of Communication, Lund University Ola Stockfelt, Professor Emeritus, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Viviane S. Straatmann, Associate Professor, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Lotta Strandberg, Dental Technician, Department of Orthodontics, Karolinska Institute Carola Strandberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts, Luleå University of Technology Paulien Strandberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Building and Environmental Technology, Lund University Björn Strander, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Gothenburg Ola Strandler, Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Frida Stranne, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, Halmstad University Christian Stranne, Associate Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Pille Strauss-Raats, Postdoctoral Fellow, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute Daniel Stridh, Lecturer, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Isabella Strindevall, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University Maya Ström, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Isabella Strömberg, Researcher, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Clara Strömberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Ola Ståhl, Professor, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Emelie Ståhl, PhD Candidate, Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University Federica Sulas, Associate Professor, Department of Historical Studies, University of Gothenburg Lina Suleiman, Researcher, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Nasrin Sulemani, Student Counsellor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Hossam Sultan, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Mats Sundbeck, Affiliated Researcher, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University Martin Sundby, PhD Candidate, Department of Communication and Media, Lund University Brita Sundelin, Associate Professor, Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University Hedvig Sundelin, PhD Candidate, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Gothenburg Jenny Sundén, Professor, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University & Visiting Professor, Centre for Gender Research, Uppsala University Joakim Sundh, Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University Jeanette Sundhall, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Kajsa Sundin, Lecturer, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Emma Sundkvist, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Rights and Democracy, University College Stockholm Hugo Sundman, Faculty Officer, Office for Humanities and Social Sciences, Uppsala University Gustav Sundqvist, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University Marie Sundström, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Ellen Suneson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Sune Sunesson, Professor Emeritus, School of Social Work & Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies, Lund University Ludvig Sunnemark, Associate Researcher, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Brigitte Suter, Associate Professor, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Stefan Svallfors, Professor, Institute for Futures Studies (Sociology), Erik Svallingson, PhD Candidate, Department of Archives, Libraries and Museums, Uppsala University Sten Svantesson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Tord Ranheim Sveen, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Sebastian Svenberg, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Ola Svenson, Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University Marie Chajara Svensson, Communications Officer, Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University Anna Svensson, Visiting Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Erik Svensson, Professor, Department of Biology, Lund University Ingeborg Svensson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Mikael Svensson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Stockholm University Patrick Svensson, Professor, Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Ragni Svensson, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Stockholm University Therese Svensson, Researcher, Department of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Jakob Svensson, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Media Technology, Malmö University Eva-Maria Svensson, Professor Emerita, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Lisa Svensson, PhD Candidate, Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Eva Svensson, Professor, Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies, Karlstad University Per-Anders Svärd, Senior Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Zeeshan Syed, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Linköping University Hansalbin Sältenberg, Researcher, Division of Gender Studies, Lund University Fanny Söderbäck, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Södertörn University Karolina Södergren, PhD Candidate, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Emma Söderman, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Majken Jul Sørensen, Associate Professor, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Sverker Sörlin, Professor, Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Josef Taalbi, Associate Professor, Department of Economic History, Lund University Luca Tainio, Lecturer, Department of Social and Psychological Studies, Karlstad University Naoko Takayanagi, PhD Candidate, Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University Lisa Tan, Professor, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Ana Tanevska, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Hasan Tareq, PhD Candidate, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University Matteo Tarsi, Researcher, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Mark Tatlow, Doctoral Student, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Claudia Tazreiter, Professor, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Sara Teleman, Professor, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Christina Tente, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Annika Teppo, Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Agnes Termeer, PhD Candidate, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Senta Terner, PhD Candidate, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Ahmad Terra, Industry Doctoral Student, Department of Engineering Design, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Mekonnen Tesfahuney, Professor, Department of Geography, Media and Communication, Karlstad University Anna Thalén, PhD Candidate, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Ebba Theorell, Lecturer, Department of Youth and Child Studies, University of Stockholm Göran Therborn, Affiliated Professor, Department of Sociology, Linnaeus University Louise Schou Therkildsen, Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for European Research/Department of Literature, History of Ideas and Religion, University of Gothenburg Tindra Thor, Lecturer, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University Daniel Thorburn, Professor Emeritus, Department of Statistics, Stockholm University Christopher Ali Thorén, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Ketil Thor Thorgersen, Senior Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Robert Thorp, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Uppsala University Erik Thosteman, PhD Candidate, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University Erik Thulén, Adjunct Lecturer, Department for Education in the Fine Arts, Royal Institute of Art Miranda Thulin, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Tove Thunander, International Coordinator, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Catharina Thörn, Professor, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Håkan Thörn, Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Maria Gedoz Tieppo, PhD Candidate, Department of Educational Sciences, Lund University Linnea Tillema, Researcher, Department of History of Science and Ideas, Uppsala University Linnea Tillenius, Education Administrator, Department of Education, Stockholm University Marco Tjakra, PhD Candidate, Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University Mari Todd-Kvam, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Work, Uppsala University Naoko Tojo, Senior Lecturer, International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University Axel Tojo, Research Engineer, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lund University Cara Tolmie, PhD Candidate, Department of Fine Art, Konstfack Helena Tolvhed, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Stockholm University Eduardo Jiménez Tornatore, Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages and Literatures, Sofie Tornhill, Associate Professor, Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University Olle Torpman, Associate Professor, , Institute for Futures Studies Milena Trabert, PhD Candidate, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Anna Tranberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University Lars Tranvik, Professor, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Birgit Tremml-Werner, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Stockholm University Jill Trenholm, Researcher, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Ylva Trimonyte, Research Assistant, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University Thomas Troëng, Associated Professor, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Markus Tschögl, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg Mikael Tsiouris, PhD Candidate, Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University Crina Tudor, PhD Candidate, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University Maria Tyrberg, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg Emma Nilsson Tysklind, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Torbjörn Tännsjö, Professor Emeritus, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Anton Törnberg, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Gull Törnegren, Senior Lecturer, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Maria Törnqvist, Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Uppsala University Niklas Törnsten, PhD Candidate, School of Teacher Education, Södertörn University Agnes Török, Department Head, Department of Stage Poetry and Storytelling, Stockholm University College of Music Education Karolina Uggla, Senior Lecturer, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University Paula Uimonen, Professor, Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm University Atique Ullah, Lecturer, Department of Computer Science, University of Gävle Susann Baez Ullberg, Associate Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Magnus Ullén, Professor, Department of English, Stockholm University Anastasia Ulturgasheva, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Anastasia Ulturgasheva, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Berrak Pinar Uluer, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Tonicha Upham, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Archaeology, Ancient History and Conservation, Uppsala University Carolina Uppenberg, Researcher, Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Mats Utas, Professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Teemu Vaarakallio, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Swedish Defence University Ghazaleh Vafaeian, Senior Lecturer, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University Anders Vahlquist, Professor Emeritus, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Roberta Vakruchev, PhD Candidate, Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University Chiara Valli, Associate Senior Lecturer, Urban Studies, Malmö University Ricardo Rodríguez Varela, Researcher, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University Isabella Varricchio, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Anna Andersson Vass, Assistant Professor, Ingesund School of Music, Karlstad University Leena Vastapuu, Assistant Professor, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Paulina Vaughn, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Lund University Lode van der Velde, PhD Candidate, Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institute Ellen Verde, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Federico Vernarelli, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Södertörn University Karen Ravn Vestergaard, PhD Candidate, Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University Eskil Vesterlund, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Lund University Carl-Johan Vesterlund, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Henrik Viberg, Educational Developer, Unit for Educational Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Björn Victor, Professor, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Frida Viirman, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Karolinska Institute Axel Vikström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Communication, Lund University Ana Villamil, Researcher, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Eline Visser, Researcher, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Ingela Visuri, Assistant Professor, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Thomas Vogt, PhD Candidate, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University Kjell Vowles, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Nikos Vrantsis, PhD Candidate, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Tina Vrieler, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Milan Vukašinović, Researcher, Department of Linguistics and Philology, Uppsala University Patrik Vulkan, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Benjamin Wagner, PhD Candidate, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Cecilia Wahlberg, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design, Interior Architecture and Visual Communication, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Joakim Wahlström, PhD Candidate, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University Max Waleij, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Litó Walkey, PhD Candidate, Academy of Music and Drama, University of Gothenburg Maria Kjellman Wall, PhD Candidate, Department of Media Studies, Stockholm University Ulrika Wallenquist, Project Coordinator, Office for SciLifeLab in Uppsala, Uppsala University Mattias Wallergård, Senior Lecturer, Department of Design Sciences, Lund University Linn Alenius Wallin, Project Assistant/PhD, Department of Sociology, Lund University Ylva Wallinder, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Maria Wallstam, PhD Candidate, Institute for Urban and Housing Research, Uppsala University Martin Wallstam, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics, Geography, Law and Tourism, Mid Sweden University Alexandra Waluszewski, Professor Emerita, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University Wilhelm Wanecek, PhD Candidate, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University Tom Ward, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Rikard Hjorth Warlenius, Associate Professor, School of Natural Science, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University Omar Warsi, Researcher/Group Leader, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University Felicia Wartiainen, PhD Candidate, Department of Government, Uppsala University August Sergej Torngren Wartin, PhD Candidate, Department of Economics, Lund University Amanda Wasielewski, Associate Senior Lecturer, Department of Archives, Libraries and Museums, Uppsala University Camilla Wasserman, Senior Research Specialist, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Karolinska Institute Cathrin Wasshede, Docent, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Karin Wastesson, Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University David Watson, Associate Professor, Department of English, Uppsala University Anna Watz, Associate Professor, Department of English, Uppsala University Ivy Weber, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Linnea Wegerstad, Associate Professor, Department of Law, Lund University Sasha Weijand, Systems Developer, University Library, Umeå University Kristina Wejstål, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Social Sciences, Södertörn University Maria Wemrell, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Linnaeus University Hilda Wenander, PhD Candidate, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Patrick Wennström, PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Ulrika Wernesjö, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Josepha Wessels, Associate Professor, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University Julia Wester, PhD Candidate, Department of Ethnology, Södertörn University Winnie Westerlund, PhD Candidate, Department of Archaeology, Ancient History and Conservation, Uppsala University Mirjana Westermark, PhL Candidate, Division of Education and Adult Learning, Linköping University Karolina Westling, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg Gijs Westra, PhD Candidate, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University James White, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Elis Wibacke, PhD Candidate, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Ylva Wibaeus, Senior Lecturer, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Annick Wibben, Professor, Department of War Studies, Swedish Defence University Sofia Wiberg, Researcher, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Johan Wickström, Associate Professor, Department of Education, Uppsala University Anette Wickström, Senior Associate Professor, Department of Thematic Studies, Linköping University Sverre Wide, Associate Professor, School of Culture and Society, Dalarna University Per Widén, Senior Lecturer, Department of Art History, Uppsala University Mats Widgren, Professor Emeritus, Department of Human Geography, Stockholm University Charlotta Widmark, Senior Lecturer, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Joachim Wiegert, Researcher, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Jenny Wiik, Associate Professor, Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Gothenburg Cecilia Eriksen Wijk, International Coordinator, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Kristin Wiksell, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg Martina Wiksten, PhD Candidate, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Hanna Wikström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, University of Gothenburg Josefine Wikström, Senior Lecturer, Department of Culture and Learning (Aesthetics), Södertörn University Carl Wilén, Postdoctoral Fellow, Division of Human Rights Studies, Lund University Jesse Wiles, PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology, Lund University Julia Willén, Lecturer, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University Maja Willén, Senior Lecturer, Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Jakob Willerström, PhD Candidate, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University Mac Willners, PhD Candidate, Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Mick Wilson, Professor, HDK Valand Academy of Art and Design, University of Gothenburg Thomas Wimark, Senior Lecturer, Department of Human Geography, Uppsala University Sally Windsor, Associate Professor, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Katarina Wingkvist, International Liaison Officer, International Office, Malmö University Anna Winlund, Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Mattias Winnberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Jonathon Winnel, PhD Candidate, Department of Environment, Ecology and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University Katarina Winter, Senior Lecturer, Department of Criminology, Stockholm University Hanna Wirén, Communications Officer, International Office, Malmö University Lydia Wistisen, Associate Professor, Department of Culture and Aesthetics, Stockholm University Maria Wennerström Wohrne, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Uppsala University Charlie Woodrow, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Nina Wormbs, Professor, Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Claes Wrangel, Researcher, Centre for Multidisciplinary Studies on Racism, Uppsala University Anders Wretstrand, Associate Professor, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University Viktor Wretström, Visiting PhD Candidate, Department of History, Lund University Marlis Wullenkord, Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Lund University Weiqian Xia, Researcher, Department of Sociology, Stockholm University Ahmed El Yaacoub, PhD Candidate, Department of Electrical Engineering, Uppsala University Reyhan Yaka, Researcher, Centre for Palaeogenetics, Stockholm University Huai-Tse Yang, PhD Candidate, Department of Cultural Anthropology and Ethnology, Uppsala University Soheyla Yazdanpanah, Senior Lecturer, School of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Ali Yildirim, Professor, Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg Yasemin Yilmaz, Lecturer, School of Architecture, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Mert Can Yilmaz, Research Engineer, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Burçin Yıldırım, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University Zahra Hasani Yourdshahi, PhD Candidate, Department of Education and Special Education , University of Gothenburg John-Paul Zaccarini, Professor, Department 1 (Circus), Stockholm University of the Arts Karin Zackari, Researcher, Centre for East and Southeast Asian Studies, Lund University Usama Zafar, PhD Candidate, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University Maryam Zahid, PhD Candidate, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University Suneela Zaigham, Associate Professor, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University Patrik Zapata, Professor, School of Public Administration, University of Gothenburg Michell Zethson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Crafts, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design Christina Zetterlund, Associate Professor, Department of Design, Linnaeus University Charlotta Zettervall, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Work, Malmö University Jasmine Zhang, Researcher, Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Qian Zhang, Senior Lecturer, School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University Shirin Ziaei, Associate Professor, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University Maria Zirra, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of English, Stockholm University Sophia Zisakou, PhD Candidate, Sociology of Law Department, Lund University Samaneh Zolfaghari, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Innovation, Design, and Technology, Mälardalen University Martyna Zwoinska, Researcher, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University Karin Åberg, PhD Candidate, Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Anna Åberg, Senior Researcher , Division of Science, Technology and Society , Chalmers University of Technology Henrik Ågren, Professor, Department of History, Uppsala University Ylva Ågren, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Anna Åhlund, Associate Professor, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University Linda Åhäll, Senior Lecturer, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Beatrice Åkerblom, University Lecturer, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University Kristin Åkerlund, Research Engineer, Gothenburg Research Infrastructure in Digital Humanities, University of Gothenburg Angelica Åkerman, Lecturer, Architectural Conservation, Royal Institute of Art Anders Åkerström, Communications officer, Faculty of Humanities, University of Gothenburg Emilia Åkesson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Umeå University Lisa Åkesson, Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Kristofer Årestedt, Professor, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University Gustav Ängeby, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Stockholm University Nicolina Ewards Öberg, PhD Candidate, Division of Migration, Ethnicity and Society, Linköping University Annika Raapke Öberg, Researcher, Department of History, Uppsala University Malin Pettersson Öberg, Visiting Lecturer, Department of Visual Arts and Sloyd Education, Konstfack University of Arts, Crafts and Design May-Britt Öhman, Researcher, Centre for Multidisciplinary Studies on Racism, Uppsala University Ingela Öhman, Administrator, Department 1 (Dance), Stockholm University of the Arts Carl Öhman, Assistant Professor, Department of Government, Uppsala University Ann Öhrberg, Professor Emerita, Department of Literature and Rhetoric, Uppsala University Johanna Öhrn, Lecturer, Department of School Development and Leadership, Malmö University Elisabet Öhrn, Professor , Department of Education and Special Education, University of Gothenburg Joakim Öjendal, Professor, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg Caroline Önnebro, PhD Candidate, Department of Education, Communication and Learning, University of Gothenburg Ramis Örlü, Researcher, Department of Engineering Mechanics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Anton Ösgård, PhD Candidate, Institute for Housing and Urban Research, Uppsala University Eva Österlind, Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Lisa Österling, Assistant Professor, Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University Maja Östling, PhD Candidate, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University.
Alternatively, you can email us with 1) yourname (given name/s followed by family name/s), 2) your academic position (Professor, Professor Emerita/Emeritus, Visiting Professor for gästprofessor, Senior Lecturer or Associate Professor for universitetslektor, Associate Senior Lecturer or Assistant Lecturer for biträdande universitetslektor, Lecturer for universitetsadjunkt, Researcher or Research Fellow for forskare, Postdoctoral Fellow for postdoktor, PhD Candidate or PhD Student for doktorand; any other position as stated on the website of your institution), 3) the name of your university department or centre (in English, as stated on the web site of your institution), 4) the name of your university or academic institution (in English, as stated on the web site of the institution).
Examples:
“Anna Larsson, PhD Candidate, Department of Nursing, Umeå University” “Anna Larsson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Education, Uppsala University” “Anna Larsson, Professor Emerita, Division of Clinical Microbiology, Karolinska Institutet”
Please send your details to uppsaladeclaration@protonmail.com using your institutional email address (we need you to send the email from your institutional address in order to verify your identity). Make sure to state your intent to sign the declaration (in Swedish or in English). There is no need to include any other information in the email. Should you wish to contact us for any other purpose, we encourage you to write to us using a private email address.
Statement by the Board of Uppsala University on the situation in Gaza
2025-05-21
In a letter dated 19 May 2025, the University Board of Uppsala University has called on the Swedish government to explicitly condemn Israel’s actions, to immediately resume its funding of UNRWA, and to actively work within the EU to take all available measures (including imposing trade sanctions against Israel) to prevent a genocide in Gaza.
Here is the letter to the Swedish Government in full:
To the Government of Sweden
Statement by the Board of Uppsala University on the situation in Gaza.
For almost three months, Israel has blocked the entry of food, medicine, fuel and other critical supplies, as well as life-saving assistance to Gaza. At the same time, civilians including children and women are under attack. The attacks are taking place in residential buildings, in tent camps, in shelters, in hospitals, and in areas where the Israeli army has urged people to seek refuge. Israel is also attacking vital infrastructure, hindering everything from access to water, delivery of humanitarian aid and rescue operations. Added to this now are statements about displacing the civilian population. Neither under international law nor common humanity can this be justified by Hamas’s abominable acts of violence on 7 October. What is happening in Gaza is a humanitarian disaster and involves immense human suffering. This has to stop.
Researchers, teachers and students at Uppsala University have long called for a boycott of collaborations with Israeli universities. The University has chosen not to accede to the boycott demands. The reason for this is that universities have a key role in a democratic state governed by law. However, Uppsala University calls on Israeli universities to take their academic and human responsibility, which requires international support, not isolation.
The business of universities is to teach, research, transmit knowledge and promote critical thinking. Universities must offer a safe environment for discussion and dialogue. In this context, universities have a responsibility to ensure that no one is subjected to discrimination or threats.
It is not the task of a university to take a centralised position on foreign policy issues. However, when, as is now the case, serious and large-scale war crimes are deliberately committed by a government and when there is an evident risk of genocide, there are strong reasons for Uppsala University to take an explicit stand and condemn such acts. This is particularly true in the case of a country with which Sweden and the EU have close economic and political cooperation, including in research and education, which requires the parties to respect human rights and democratic principles.
As an occupying power, Israel has a special responsibility under international law to protect the human rights of Palestinians and to protect the civilian population. However, under the Genocide Convention, other states also have a responsibility to seek to prevent genocide. This includes cooperating with other states and international organisations and using diplomatic, economic or military means (in cooperation with the UN) to prevent genocide wherever it occurs.
Sweden has so far not lived up to these obligations under international law. On the contrary, Sweden has both stopped all funding of UNRWA and explicitly refrained from condemning Israel’s actions. This is despite the issuance by the ICC of a warrant for Netanyahu’s arrest, the ICJ’s finding that Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories is illegal and involves systematic human rights violations, as well as very strong appeals from the UN and several human rights organisations. Sweden, which has long been a prominent and important role model in the protection of human rights and prosecution of international law violations, has abandoned its established position.
We therefore call on the Swedish government to explicitly condemn Israel’s actions, to immediately resume its funding of UNRWA, and to actively work within the EU to take all measures at its disposal (including imposing trade sanctions on Israel) to prevent a genocide.
Final reply: “Academic collaborations must take legal and ethical considerations into account”
Universities make autonomous decisions regarding their international collaborations. A call from the Swedish government to end relations is not the same as an obligation, writes Fouad El Gohary and Alexandre Raffoul from Academics for Palestine Uppsala in a final reply to Anders Hagfeldt, Vice-Chancellor of Uppsala University.
This is a discussion article. The opinions expressed are the writer’s own.
In an opinion piece published last week, we argued that Uppsala University’s decision to maintain institutional agreements with Israeli universities complicit with the ongoing genocide in Gaza was not neutral but constituted a political decision. Anders Hagfeldt, Uppsala University’s Vice Chancellor, replied to our article. We thank him for his engagement.
In his reply, the Vice Chancellor argues that collaboration is a “fundamental principle” of Uppsala University, leading to positive change. This statement overlooks the fact that whether or not collaborations are “good” depends on their consequences.
The Swedish Higher Education Act notes that universities’ international activities must contribute, nationally and globally, to sustainable development, making sure that present and future generations are provided with a healthy and good environment, economic and social welfare and justice (1992:1434, sec.5). Collaborating with institutions that develop weapons or surveillance technology or that provide logistic support to armies engaged in human rights violations does not align with these principles. It is diffiuclt to see how such collaborations would place the university on the road to “positive change”.
We do recognize that collaborating with critical researchers could have beneficial consequences and so we reiterate once more that our demand is an end to institutional ties with complicit Israeli universities, not individual collaborations.
Just as research must consider legal and ethical considerations, so too must academic collaborations. Limits to such collaborations were made immediately clear when Uppsala University cut institutional ties with Russian and Belarusian universities. Why would the same standards not apply in the case of Israel’s invasion of Gaza? The reason seems to be that the Vice-Chancellor rejects a comparison between the two cases. He argues that the university’s decision to cut ties followed the Swedish government’s condemnation of the Russian invasion, and a call for all higher education institutions to cease collaborations. This argument dismisses the fact that a “call” is not an obligation, and that universities make autonomous decisions regarding their international collaborations.
As recently as March 1 this year, the Minister of Education reiterated the fact that universities have a “high degree of self-determination over their activities”, stating that it is not “the government’s business to decide which international cooperation projects in education and research they should be part of”.
Given this autonomy, should universities blindly follow government positions? If the government suddenly changed its mind and called for restoring ties with Russia, would universities restore collaborations despite the pro-democracy proclamations they made earlier? Or if the government suddenly called for severing ties with, say, Malawi, for no legitimate reason, would universities comply?
None of these examples seem consistent with the notions of academic freedom and institutional independence. Nor do they reflect a principle that the Vice-Chancellor continues to emphasise – that the university should be “a place for critics and critical thinking”.
Decisions on collaboration are in the hands of the university, and these decisions should be based on the consistent application of the principles the Vice Chancellor claims to support – human rights, freedom of expression, and academic freedom. The government should not be seen as an arbiter on when these rights and freedoms are undermined.
If any authority is to be relied on, it should be the various UN bodies and the human rights organisations that operate independently of governments and specialise in documenting and classifying violations of human rights and international law. The Vice-Chancellor’s position that there is no parallel between the Russian and Israeli invasions may be shared by the Swedish government, but it is certainly not the judgement of the organisations documenting the violence in both conflicts.
If, in the words of the Vice-Chancellor, Uppsala University is to “stand up for human rights, freedom of expression and academic freedom”, it must embody this position in action and not just rhetoric. Limits on academic collaborations should be based on consistent principles, regardless of the perpetrator or the Swedish government’s position.
Universities have the constitutional authority to autonomously cut ties with complicit Israeli universities, the only thing missing seems to be the willingness to act. “Academic freedom also implies academic responsibility” rightly stated Anders Hagfeldt in an email to Academics for Palestine Uppsala. Today, Uppsala University’s responsibility is to take the principled decision required to stay true to its values.
Continuous contacts between the University Management and Academics for Palestine Uppsala
2024-05-23
The University Management and Academics for Palestine Uppsala, the organisation behind the protest in Carolina Park, are engaged in continuous dialogue. This article includes excerpts from the correspondence.
On 7 October 2023, Hamas carried out a terror attack against Israel, which led the Israeli government to start bombing and a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip. The Palestine Groups in Sweden (Palestinagrupperna) started Tuesdays for Palestine on 9 November 2023. This is a collective name for activities at universities, other higher education institutions and folk high schools in support of Palestine. In autumn 2023, the organisation demonstrated outside Uppsala University Library, Carolina Rediviva.
Both the conflict itself and the demonstrations that are in progress around the world in response to the conflict are being monitored intensively by the media.
Statement from the University Board
The University Board (Konsistoriet) made a statement on 16 November 2023 in response to the conflict and the ongoing demonstrations:
“The University Board welcomes debate. So long as they do not seriously disrupt teaching or create dangerous situations, students and teachers must be able to express different points of view in accordance with applicable regulations and our tradition of academic freedom.”
Tent camps
In April 2024, students at American universities started pro-Palestine demonstrations, often in the form of tent camps on the university campus. In connection with the tent camps, pro-Israel counter-demonstrations have also occurred at American universities.
In mid-May, students at Swedish universities and other higher education institutions also began to set up pro-Palestine tent camps. In Uppsala, for example, there is a tent camp in Carolina Park. The organisation behind the tent camp in Carolina Park is Academics for Palestine Uppsala.
“We always welcome respectful debate and encourage everyone to stand up for their opinions and share their knowledge. It goes without saying that this also applies to the students who are camping and demonstrating,” said Anders Hagfeldt, Vice-Chancellor of Uppsala University, in an interview on the University’s website concerning the tent camp in Carolina Park.
Pro-Palestine demonstrators in Uppsala have also demonstrated in several university buildings, among them the Segerstedt Building and Blåsenhus. Demonstrations indoors are not permitted without permission from the facilities manager or equivalent. Since the University, as employer and higher education institution, is responsible for the work environment of both employees and students, the Segerstedt Building is now only open to staff who work there and visitors.
“The protests were not violent in any way and I have great understanding for their frustration about the situation. It is of course extremely important to emphasise that neither antisemitism nor Islamophobia nor any other form of harassment has any place at a university. This is a place where people must be able to discuss even difficult and problematic issues, but naturally this must be done with respect,” said Pernilla Björk, Director of Communications at Uppsala University in an interview with the newspaper Aftonbladet concerning the closing of the Segerstedt Building.
Meetings and correspondence
Since the demonstrations in support of Palestine began, the University Management has had two meetings with the organisation Academics for Palestine Uppsala and an exchange of letters.
In their first letter on 21 November 2023, the organisation wrote: “We expect the same moral clarity and leadership you showed previously in defense of fundamental democratic norms and academic freedoms. As such, we ask that you:
– Clarify the University’s position on Israel’s invasion and siege of Gaza.
– Detail the concrete steps Uppsala University will undertake to ensure freedom of expression while ensuring a safe and inclusive environment for all, specifically addressing rising antisemitism and Islamophobia.”
In its reply, Uppsala University wrote that “Uppsala University is committed to our values of academic freedom, democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and mutual respect. However, as a general rule, Uppsala University as an institution will not take a collective position on current events since this might inhibit the full freedom of dissent on which the University thrives. The University is the home and sponsor of critics, but not a critic itself. Staff and students at Uppsala University are covered by the law on freedom of expression and may express a personal opinion. This is not something we wish to or are able to influence.”
In their latest letter on 7 May 2024, Academics for Palestine Uppsala write that they wish to supplement two points that were raised at a meeting between the organisation and Vice-Chancellor Anders Hagfeldt on 18 April 2024.
These two points are, firstly, to call on Uppsala University to establish new collaborations with Palestinian universities, and secondly, that Uppsala University should discontinue relations with Israeli universities until the state of Israel complies with international law.
Establish new collaborations with Palestine
In their letter, Academics for Palestine write: “First, we asked that Uppsala University seek out and forge new collaborations with Palestinian universities. This includes entering into new long-term institutional collaborations with Palestinian universities in the West Bank and, when possible, Gaza, as well as opening funding mechanisms to support visits from Palestinian scholars from Palestine to Uppsala University.”
In his reply, Vice-Chancellor Anders Hagfeldt writes as follows:
“You want Uppsala University to actively seek cooperation with Palestinian universities and to support Palestinian universities, lecturers and students. I agree with you and will instruct our Division for Internationalisation to study the proposals for cooperation that you have formulated.
I am sure there are collaborations between researchers at individual level. We do not chart these collaborations for the same reason that we do not chart research collaborations at individual level with Israeli researchers.”
Discontinuing collaboration and academic freedom
With regard to the second point in the letter, the organisation writes: “Second, we maintain that to support the end of a regime of apartheid and oppression in Palestine, Uppsala University should suspend ties with complicit Israeli universities until the state of Israel complies with international law (stipulated in UN resolutions 242 and 194).”
In his reply, the Vice-Chancellor states:
“It is not the role of the University to take a stand on foreign policy conflicts. It is important for universities to stand free. If the University as an organisation were to take a position, this could limit the right of students and members of staff to express their opinions freely, which would ultimately jeopardise academic freedom. The collaborations are based on scientific and scholarly foundations and their aim is to advance knowledge. Research and education are transnational and global by their very nature.”
Statement from the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions
The Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions (SUHF) made a statement concerning the conflict on 21 May 2024. SUHF is a cooperative body with a membership of 38 universities and other higher education institutions, including Uppsala University: “Sweden’s higher education institutions underline the importance of and defend freedom of expression and academic freedom. Peaceful demonstrations in legal forms are the right of every member of society and students and staff at higher education institutions also have the right to express their opinions.
Swedish higher education institutions have neither a mandate nor a responsibility to pursue foreign policy issues. This means that neither members of staff, nor students, nor stakeholder groups can expect higher education institutions, as employers or education providers, to express opinions on foreign policy or to take a stand on foreign policy issues. Academia must be free from outside pressures.”
Opportunities for those at risk
In his response, the Vice-Chancellor also describes two collaborative agreements that are relevant in this context:
“Is there anything else we could do? Uppsala University participates actively in the international network Scholars at Risk (SAR), which supports individual academics at risk. The SAR programme provides scholars in war zones or suffering oppression with opportunities to work at one of our departments.
Uppsala University also has a scholarship for Master’s students from universities in countries at war, disaster areas or who are otherwise studying in threatening situations. Palestinian students are eligible to apply for this scholarship. I will make sure that information about calls for applications is more visible.”
Further reading
In the fact box below, you will find links to further reading about the University’s position and management of this issue via news articles and the Vice-Chancellor’s Blog.
Last month, German media published an article titled „Wir unterstützen die Linke im Antisemitismus-Streit“ (“We support die Linke in the anti-Semitism dispute”) about a petition by a group of scholars supporting the German political party die Linke (the Left) in its adoption of the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.
The petition is signed by 55 academics, among them Israelis. The academics stated, “We support the adoption by the die Linke Party of the Jerusalem Declaration as a guideline in the fight against antisemitism.” They explained, “As concerned scholars, we support the decision of the die Linke at its recent party congress to adopt the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA). This step underscores the die Linke’s firm commitment to combating antisemitism while protecting fundamental freedoms. The JDA was developed by renowned academics from relevant academic disciplines who are as deeply concerned about the rise of antisemitism as they are about the erosion of free speech and other democratic freedoms.”
According to the German report, the JDA is supported by some 375 scholars, most of them Jewish and/or Israelis, who specialize in antisemitism, Jewish history, racism, Middle Eastern history, and other relevant fields. For the petitioners, “the JDA enjoys the authority of true expert opinion.”
Admittingly, “The JDA is a direct response to the shortcomings of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism. There is broad academic consensus worldwide that the IHRA definition lacks clarity and is used more as a political tool than as an educational tool and a precise definition of antisemitism. The adoption of the IHRA definition by governments is largely the result of political campaigns by actors aligned with the Israeli government… there is ample evidence that the IHRA definition is being exploited by illiberal forces to undermine civil liberties and human rights. While the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel and antisemitism, the JDA fundamentally distinguishes between these phenomena while highlighting where they potentially overlap.”
The petitioners declare, “There is no evidence that antisemitic speech or acts of violence have decreased since then.”
The petitioners argue, “We therefore believe that the JDA provides a better framework for discussing contentious issues. It strikes a careful balance between combating antisemitism on the one hand and preserving freedom of speech and other democratic freedoms on the other. This balance is essential for a credible and effective fight against antisemitism. We don’t believe that definitions should serve as regulatory and disciplinary tools—that role should be reserved exclusively for law and order. Rather, the purpose of definitions is to provide guidance and serve as an educational tool, since reality is always far more complex than definitions can possibly be.”
Among the list of signatories are some Israeli names, including radical anti-Israel activists that IAM covered before: Gadi Algazi, Omer Bartov, Louise Bethlehem, Daniel Boyarin, Avraham Burg, Naomi Chazan, David Enoch, Shai Ginsburg, Amos Goldberg, Neve Gordon, Elad Lapidot, Nitzan Lebovic, Itamar Mann, Anat Matar, Atalia Omer, Orna Ophir, Miri Rubin, Raz Segal, David Shulman, Tamir Sorek, Yael Zerubavel, Moshe Zimmermann.
Worth noting that the JDA was created by a group of political activist-academics at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute in 2020 with the aim to reject the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism, which came out in 2016.
IAM discussed the JDA in 2021, noting that this document unveiled its political agenda. It declared its support for “the Palestinian demand for justice and the full grant of their political, national, civil and human rights, as encapsulated in international law.” Similarly, the JDA wishes to “support arrangements that accord full equality to all inhabitants ‘between the river and the sea,’ whether in two states, a binational state, unitary democratic state, federal state, or in whatever form.”
IAM argued that the JDA fails to mention that in Palestinian parlance, the “demand for justice and the full grant of their political, national, civil and human rights” is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state on its ruins. Similarly, the Palestinian demand for a “binational state” or a “unitary democratic state” has been used by the PLO since the late 1960s as a code for the transformation of Israel into an Arab state in which Jews are reduced to a permanent minority living on the sufferance of the Muslim majority, a status known in Islamic history as Dhimmis. As for dismantling the “occupation,” this was effectively ended in January 1996 when Israel relinquished control of 95% of the West Bank’s Palestinian population in line with the Oslo Accords.
IAM noted that the key problem with the JDA is its claim that “Criticizing or opposing Zionism as a form of nationalism” is not antisemitic.
The JDA rejected the IHRA Definition because the IHRA argues that antisemitic “manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”
As IAM reported, the Van Leer JDA group explained the motives behind their Jerusalem Declaration. In a workshop explaining the Declaration, they stated, “The working definition adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016 was endorsed widely but quickly became a site of controversy. In recent months this controversy has become more intense. In November 2020, 122 Palestinian and Arab academics, journalists, and intellectuals issued a statement that declared their opposition to antisemitism and to the IHRA’s working definition thereof, which purportedly promotes the suppression of Palestinian rights.”
The JDA was created by radical activist academics to fit a Palestinian agenda and to block the widely accepted IHRA Definition. It failed to stop the increased popularity of the latter. As of mid-2024, 40 countries have formally endorsed the IHRA, along with numerous regional governments, municipalities, universities, and organizations. More importantly, the JDA has lost credibility by trying to separate antisemitism and anti-Zionism.
Since the October 7 war, the level of antisemitic incidents has surged dramatically. In its latest and most dangerous form, Jews are being targeted and even murdered simply for being perceived as Zionists—a trend tragically illustrated by recent incidents in Washington, D.C., and Colorado.
More consequentially, the fact that the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem—widely regarded as a prestigious academic institution both in Israel and internationally—serves as the birthplace of the JDA lends the Declaration a veneer of legitimacy. This has been particularly significant in the international arena, where pro-Palestinian activists are eager to showcase Jewish, and especially Israeli, support for their cause.
The stakes today are far higher because—regardless of the fanciful theories advanced by the JDA—Jews are being attacked and even killed around the world simply for being identified as an extension of Israel, the Jewish state.
Germany, which adopted the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism in 2017, should take note.
Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish).
Guidelines
A. General
1. It is racist to essentialize (treat a character trait as inherent) or to make sweeping negative generalizations about a given population. What is true of racism in general is true of antisemitism in particular.
2. What is particular in classic antisemitism is the idea that Jews are linked to the forces of evil. This stands at the core of many anti-Jewish fantasies, such as the idea of a Jewish conspiracy in which “the Jews” possess hidden power that they use to promote their own collective agenda at the expense of other people. This linkage between Jews and evil continues in the present: in the fantasy that “the Jews” control governments with a “hidden hand,” that they own the banks, control the media, act as “a state within a state,” and are responsible for spreading disease (such as Covid-19). All these features can be instrumentalized by different (and even antagonistic) political causes.
3. Antisemitism can be manifested in words, visual images, and deeds. Examples of antisemitic words include utterances that all Jews are wealthy, inherently stingy, or unpatriotic. In antisemitic caricatures, Jews are often depicted as grotesque, with big noses and associated with wealth. Examples of antisemitic deeds are: assaulting someone because she or he is Jewish, attacking a synagogue, daubing swastikas on Jewish graves, or refusing to hire or promote people because they are Jewish.
4. Antisemitism can be direct or indirect, explicit or coded. For example, “The Rothschilds control the world” is a coded statement about the alleged power of “the Jews” over banks and international finance. Similarly, portraying Israel as the ultimate evil or grossly exaggerating its actual influence can be a coded way of racializing and stigmatizing Jews. In many cases, identifying coded speech is a matter of context and judgement, taking account of these guidelines.
5. Denying or minimizing the Holocaust by claiming that the deliberate Nazi genocide of the Jews did not take place, or that there were no extermination camps or gas chambers, or that the number of victims was a fraction of the actual total, is antisemitic.
B. Israel and Palestine: examples that, on the face of it, are antisemitic
6. Applying the symbols, images and negative stereotypes of classical antisemitism (see guidelines 2 and 3) to the State of Israel.
7. Holding Jews collectively responsible for Israel’s conduct or treating Jews, simply because they are Jewish, as agents of Israel.
8. Requiring people, because they are Jewish, publicly to condemn Israel or Zionism (for example, at a political meeting).
9. Assuming that non-Israeli Jews, simply because they are Jews, are necessarily more loyal to Israel than to their own countries.
10. Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish, collectively and individually, as Jews, in accordance with the principle of equality.
C. Israel and Palestine: examples that, on the face of it, are not antisemitic
· (whether or not one approves of the view or action)
11. Supporting the Palestinian demand for justice and the full grant of their political, national, civil and human rights, as encapsulated in international law.
12. Criticizing or opposing Zionism as a form of nationalism, or arguing for a variety of constitutional arrangements for Jews and Palestinians in the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. It is not antisemitic to support arrangements that accord full equality to all inhabitants “between the river and the sea,” whether in two states, a binational state, unitary democratic state, federal state, or in whatever form.
13. Evidence-based criticism of Israel as a state. This includes its institutions and founding principles. It also includes its policies and practices, domestic and abroad, such as the conduct of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, the role Israel plays in the region, or any other way in which, as a state, it influences events in the world. It is not antisemitic to point out systematic racial discrimination. In general, the same norms of debate that apply to other states and to other conflicts over national self-determination apply in the case of Israel and Palestine. Thus, even if contentious, it is not antisemitic, in and of itself, to compare Israel with other historical cases, including settler-colonialism or apartheid.
14. Boycott, divestment and sanctions are commonplace, non-violent forms of political protest against states. In the Israeli case they are not, in and of themselves, antisemitic.
15. Political speech does not have to be measured, proportional, tempered, or reasonable to be protected under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and other human rights instruments. Criticism that some may see as excessive or contentious, or as reflecting a “double standard,” is not, in and of itself, antisemitic. In general, the line between antisemitic and non-antisemitic speech is different from the line between unreasonable and reasonable speech.
In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.
On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:
Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
Definition of antisemitism“We support the Left in the anti-Semitism dispute”
Documentation: 55 academics support the Left Party, which has committed itself to the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA).
May 17, 2025
10:15 a.m
Statement by 55 academics: “We support the adoption by the Left Party of the Jerusalem Declaration as a guideline in the fight against antisemitism.”
As concerned scholars, we support the decision of the Left Party at its recent party congress to adopt the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA). This step underscores the Left Party’s firm commitment to combating antisemitism while protecting fundamental freedoms.
The JDA was developed by renowned academics from relevant academic disciplines who are as deeply concerned about the rise of antisemitism as they are about the erosion of free speech and other democratic freedoms. The JDA is now supported by approximately 375 scholars, most of them Jewish and/or Israeli, who specialize in antisemitism, Jewish history, racism, Middle Eastern history, and other relevant fields. Accordingly, the JDA enjoys the authority of true expert opinion.
The JDA is a direct response to the shortcomings of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism. There is broad academic consensus worldwide that the IHRA definition lacks clarity and is used more as a political tool than as an educational tool and a precise definition of antisemitism.
The adoption of the IHRA definition by governments is largely the result of political campaigns by actors aligned with the Israeli government. There is no evidence that antisemitic speech or acts of violence have decreased since then. However, there is ample evidence that the IHRA definition is being exploited by illiberal forces to undermine civil liberties and human rights.
While the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel and antisemitism, the JDA fundamentally distinguishes between these phenomena while highlighting where they potentially overlap. We therefore believe that the JDA provides a better framework for discussing contentious issues. It strikes a careful balance between combating antisemitism on the one hand and preserving freedom of speech and other democratic freedoms on the other. This balance is essential for a credible and effective fight against antisemitism.
We don’t believe that definitions should serve as regulatory and disciplinary tools—that role should be reserved exclusively for law and order. Rather, the purpose of definitions is to provide guidance and serve as an educational tool, since reality is always far more complex than definitions can possibly be.
Against this background, we fully support the adoption of the JDA by The Left Party, as it provides precisely the guidance that is needed now. We encourage The Left Party to confidently stand by this decision, which should stimulate deeper and broader reflection in Germany on how best to combat antisemitism. We are available for further consultation if necessary.
The signatories can be found after the English text version
Statement by 55 scholars: “We support the endorsement by Die Linke party of the Jerusalem Declaration as a guiding tool in the fight against antisemitism”
As concerned scholars, we support the decision of Die Linke party at its recent congress to endorse the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA). This step reflects Die Linke’s strong commitment to fighting antisemitism while protecting fundamental freedoms.
The JDA was developed by a group of scholars from renowned institutes and universities, who are deeply concerned about the rise of antisemitism as well as about the erosion of free speech and other democratic freedoms. By now, the JDA has been endorsed by some 375 scholars, most of whom are Jewish and many Israeli, who specialize in antisemitism, Jewish history, racism, Middle Eastern history and other relevant fields. Accordingly, the JDA carries the authority of a real expert opinion.
The JDA is a direct response to the flaws of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. Globally, there is broad scholarly consensus that the IHRA definition lacks clarity and that it serves more as a political instrument than as an educational tool and accurate definition of antisemitism.
The political adoption of the IHRA definition by governments is largely the result of political campaigns by actors aligned with the Israeli government. No evidence exists that antisemitic speech or violence have decreased following these adoptions. However, there is ample evidence that the IHRA definition is being instrumentalized by illiberal forces to undermine civil liberties and human rights.
While the IHRA definition conflates criticisms of Israel and antisemitism, the JDA makes a principled distinction between these phenomena, while showing where they can potentially overlap. Therefore, we believe, the JDA offers a better framework for debating contentious issues, striking a careful balance between the fight against antisemitism and the upholding of free speech and other democratic freedoms. Striking this balance is essential for fighting anti-Semitism in a credible and effective manner.
We do not believe in definitions serving as regulatory and disciplinary tools – that role should be exclusively allocated to the law. The purpose of definitions is rather to offer guidance and serve as educational tools, as reality is always more complex than definitions can be.
Against this background, we wholeheartedly support Die Linke’s endorsement of the JDA, which offers the very guidance now needed. We encourage Die Linke to confidently stand by this decision, which should inspire deeper and broader reflection in Germany on how antisemitism can best be countered. From our side, we remain available for further advice, if needed.
Taner Akçam, Professor, Director of Armenian Genocide Research Program at PAI, UCLA
Gadi Algazi, Professor, Department of History and Minerva Institute for German History, Tel Aviv University
Bonnie S. Anderson, Professor Emerita of History, Brooklyn College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York
Seth Anziska, Professor of Jewish-Muslim Relations, Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies, University College London
Leora Auslander, Arthur and Joann Rasmussen Professor of Western Civilization, Department of History, University of Chicago
Omer Bartov, Dean’s Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Department of History, Brown University
Doris Bergen, Chancellor Rose and Ray Wolfe Professor of Holocaust Studies, University of Toronto
Louise Bethlehem, Associate Professor, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Paul Betts, Professor of Modern European History, St Antony’s College, University of Oxford
Daniel Boyarin, Taubmann Professor Emeritus of Talmudic Culture, UC Berkeley
Renate Bridental, Professor (ret.), Department of History, Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Darcy Buerkle, Professor, Department of History, Smith College
Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and former speaker of the Israeli parliament Knesset
Naomi Chazan, Professor Emerita of Political Science, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; former Member of Knesset for Meretz
Bryan Cheyette, Professor and Chair in Modern Literature and Culture, University of Reading
Lila Corwin Berman, Paul & Sylvia Steinberg Professor of American Jewish History; Director Goldstein-Goren Center for American Jewish History
Hasia R. Diner, Professor, New York University
Deborah Dwork, Professor, Director Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, City University of New York
David Enoch, Professor, Philosophy Department and Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, University of Oxford
David Feldman, Professor, Director Birkbeck Institute for the Study of Antisemitism, University of London
Anna Foa, Associate Professor (ret.) of Modern History, University of Sapienza, Rome
Shai Ginsburg, Associate Professor, Chair Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Duke University
Amos Goldberg, Professor, The Jonah M. Machover Chair in Holocaust Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Neve Gordon, Professor of international human rights and humanitarian law, School of Law, Queen Mary University of London
Leonard Grob, Dr., Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Fairleigh Dickinson University
Atina Grossmann, Professor of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Cooper Union, New York
Wolf Gruner, Professor of History, Shapell-Guerin Chair in Jewish Studies, University of Southern California
Dagmar Herzog, Distinguished Professor of History and Daniel Rose Faculty Scholar, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
Uffa Jensen, Professor Dr., Center for Research on Antisemitism, TU Berlin, Germany
Marion Kaplan, Professor Emerita of Hebrew and Judaic Studies, New York University
Brian Klug, Dr., Honorary Fellow in Social Philosophy, Campion Hall, University of Oxford
Elad Lapidot, Professor of Hebrew Studies, University of Lille
Nitzan Lebovic, Professor of History, Apter Chair of Holocaust Studies, Lehigh University
Mark Levene, Dr., Emeritus Fellow, University of Southampton and Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations
Itamar Mann, Associate Professor of Law, University of Haifa; Humboldt Fellow, Humboldt University
Anat Matar, Dr., Senior Lecturer in Philosophy (ret.), Tel Aviv University
David Mednicoff, Associate Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Public Policy, University of Massachusetts-Amherst
Ralf Michaels, Professor Dr., Director Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg
Susan Neiman, Professor, Director Einstein Forum
Mary Nolan, Professor Emerita of History, New York University
Atalia Omer, Professor of Religion, Conflict and Peace Studies, The University of Notre Dame
Orna Ophir, Associate Director, The DeWitt Wallace Institute of Psychiatry: History, Policy and the Arts, Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York
Mark Roseman, Distinguished Professor in History, Pat M. Glazer Chair in Jewish Studies, Indiana University
Michael Rothberg, Professor of English, Comparative Literature, and Holocaust Studies, UCLA
Miri Rubin, Professor of Medieval and Modern History, Queen Mary University of London
Stefanie Schüler-Springorum, Professor Dr., Director of the Center for Research on Antisemitism, TU Berlin
Raz Segal, Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Stockton University
David Shulman, Professor Emeritus, Department of Asian Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Tamir Sorek, Liberal Arts Professor of Middle East History and Jewish Studies, Penn State University
Barry Trachtenberg, Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History and Professor of History, Wake Forest University
Enzo Traverso, Professor in the Humanities, Department of History, Cornell University
Peter Ullrich, Dr. phil. Dr. rer. med., senior researcher/fellow, Center for the Study of Antisemitism, Technical University of Berlin
Hent de Vries, Professor of Religious Studies (Chair), German, Comparative Literature, and Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, New York University
Yael Zerubavel, Professor Emerita of Jewish Studies and History, Rutgers University
Moshe Zimmermann, Professor Emeritus, The Richard Koebner Minerva Center for German History, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Scholars endorse the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism: “Answer to the shortcomings”
May 16, 2025, 5:24 p.m.
Statement by 53 researchers on the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism
As concerned scholars, we support the decision of the Left Party at its recent party conference to adopt the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA). This step underscores the Left Party’s firm commitment to combating antisemitism while protecting fundamental freedoms.
The JDA was developed by renowned scholars from relevant academic disciplines who are as deeply concerned about the rise of antisemitism as they are about the erosion of freedom of speech and other democratic freedoms.
The persons Taner Akçam (Professor, Director of Armenian Genocide Research Program at PAI, UCLA), Gadi Algazi (Professor, Department of History and Minerva Institute for German History, Tel Aviv University), Bonnie S. Anderson (Professor Emerita of History, Brooklyn College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York), Seth Anziska (Professor of Jewish-Muslim Relations, Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies, University College London), Leora Auslander (Arthur and Joann Rasmussen Professor of Western Civilization, Department of History, University of Chicago), Omer Bartov (Dean’s Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Department of History, Brown University), Doris Bergen (Chancellor Rose and Ray Wolfe Professor of Holocaust Studies, University of Toronto), Louise Bethlehem (Associate Professor, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Daniel Boyarin (Taubmann Professor Emeritus of Talmudic Culture, UC Berkeley), Renate Bridental (Professor (ret.), Department of History, Brooklyn College, City University of New York), Darcy Buerkle (Professor, Department of History, Smith College), Avraham Burg (former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and former speaker of the Israeli parliament Knesset), Naomi Chazan (Professor Emerita of Political Science, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; former Member of Knesset for Meretz), Bryan Cheyette (Professor and Chair in Modern Literature and Culture, University of Reading), Lila Corwin Berman (Paul & Sylvia Steinberg Professor of American Jewish History; Director, Goldstein-Goren Center for American Jewish History), Hasia R. Diner (Professor, New York University), Deborah Dwork (Professor, Director, Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, City University of New York), David Enoch (Professor, Philosophy Department and Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem / University of Oxford), David Feldman (Professor, Director, Birkbeck Institute for the Study of Antisemitism, University of London), Anna Foa (Associate Professor (ret.) of Modern History, University of Sapienza, Rome), Shai Ginsburg (Associate Professor, Chair, Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Duke University), Amos Goldberg (Professor, The Jonah M. Machover Chair in Holocaust Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Neve Gordon (Professor of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, School of Law, Queen Mary University of London), Leonard Grob (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Fairleigh Dickinson University), Atina Grossmann (Professor of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Cooper Union, New York), Wolf Gruner (Professor of History, Shapell-Guerin Chair in Jewish Studies, University of Southern California), Dagmar Herzog (Distinguished Professor of History and Daniel Rose Faculty Scholar, The Graduate Center, City University of New York), Uffa Jensen (Professor Dr., Center for Antisemitism Research, TU Berlin, Germany), Marion Kaplan (Professor Emerita of Hebrew and Judaic Studies, New York University), Brian Klug (Dr., Honorary Fellow in Social Philosophy, Campion Hall, University of Oxford), Elad Lapidot (Professor for Hebraic Studies, University of Lille), Nitzan Lebovic (Professor of History, Apter Chair of Holocaust Studies, Lehigh University), Mark Levene (Dr., Emeritus Fellow, University of Southampton and Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations), Itamar Mann (Associate Professor of Law, University of Haifa; Humboldt Fellow, Humboldt University), Anat Matar (Dr., Senior Lecturer in Philosophy (ret.), Tel Aviv University), David Mednicoff (Associate Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Public Policy, University of Massachusetts-Amherst), Ralf Michaels (Professor Dr., Director, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg), Susan Neiman (Professor, Director, Einstein Forum), Mary Nolan (Professor Emerita of History, New York University), Atalia Omer (Professor of Religion, Conflict and Peace Studies, The University of Notre Dame), Orna Ophir (Associate Director, The DeWitt Wallace Institute of Psychiatry: History, Policy and the Arts, Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York), Mark Roseman (Distinguished Professor in History, Pat M. Glazer Chair in Jewish Studies, Indiana University), Michael Rothberg (Professor of English, Comparative Literature, and Holocaust Studies, UCLA), Miri Rubin (Professor of Medieval and Modern History, Queen Mary University of London), Stefanie Schüler-Springorum (Professor Dr., Director, Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung, TU Berlin), Raz Segal (Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Stockton University), David Shulman (Professor Emeritus, Department of Asian Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Tamir Sorek (Liberal Arts Professor of Middle East History and Jewish Studies, Penn State University), Barry Trachtenberg (Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History and Professor of History, Wake Forest University), Enzo Traverso (Professor in the Humanities, Department of History, Cornell University), Peter Ullrich (Dr. phil. Dr. rer. med., Senior Researcher/Fellow, Center for the Study of Antisemitism, Technische Universität Berlin), Hent de Vries (Professor of Religious Studies (Chair), German, Comparative Literature, and Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, New York University), Moshe Zimmermann (Professor Emeritus, The Richard Koebner Minerva Center for German History, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem).
The JDA is now supported by approximately 375 scholars, most of them Jewish and/or Israeli, who specialize in antisemitism, Jewish history, racism, Middle Eastern history, and other relevant fields. Accordingly, the JDA enjoys the authority of true expert opinion.
The JDA is a direct response to the deficiencies of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism. There is broad academic consensus worldwide that the IHRA definition lacks clarity and is used more as a political tool than as an educational tool and a precise definition of antisemitism.
The adoption of the IHRA definition by governments is largely the result of political campaigns by actors aligned with the Israeli government. There is no evidence that antisemitic speech or acts of violence have decreased since or as a result of it. However, there is ample evidence that the IHRA definition is being exploited by illiberal forces to undermine civil liberties and human rights.
Definitions are intended to provide guidance
While the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel and antisemitism, the JDA fundamentally distinguishes between these phenomena while highlighting where they potentially overlap.
We therefore believe that the JDA provides a better framework for discussing contentious issues. It strikes a careful balance between combating antisemitism on the one hand and preserving freedom of speech and other democratic freedoms on the other. This balance is essential for a credible and effective fight against antisemitism.
We do not believe that definitions should serve as regulatory and disciplinary tools—that role should belong exclusively to law and order. Rather, the purpose of definitions is to provide guidance and serve as an educational tool, since reality is always far more complex than definitions can be.
Against this background, we fully support the adoption of the JDA by The Left Party, as it provides precisely the guidance needed now. We encourage The Left Party to confidently stand by this decision, which should stimulate deeper and broader reflection in Germany on how best to combat antisemitism.
We are available for further consultation if necessary.
Stellungnahme von 53 Forschenden zur Jerusalemer Erklärung zum Antisemitismus
Als besorgte Wissenschaftler unterstützen wir die Entscheidung der Partei Die Linke auf ihrem jüngsten Parteitag, die Jerusalemer Erklärung zum Antisemitismus (JDA) anzunehmen. Dieser Schritt unterstreicht das feste Engagement der Partei Die Linke, Antisemitismus zu bekämpfen und gleichzeitig die Grundfreiheiten zu schützen.
Die JDA wurde von renommierten Wissenschaftlern der entsprechenden universitären Fachrichtungen entwickelt, die über den Anstieg des Antisemitismus genauso tief besorgt sind wie über die Aushöhlung der Redefreiheit und anderer demokratischer Freiheiten.
Die Person
Taner Akçam (Professor, Director of Armenian Genocide Research Program at PAI, UCLA), Gadi Algazi (Professor, Department of History and Minerva Institute for German History, Tel Aviv University), Bonnie S. Anderson (Professor Emerita of History, Brooklyn College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York), Seth Anziska (Professor of Jewish-Muslim Relations, Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies, University College London), Leora Auslander (Arthur and Joann Rasmussen Professor of Western Civilization, Department of History, University of Chicago), Omer Bartov (Dean’s Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Department of History, Brown University), Doris Bergen (Chancellor Rose and Ray Wolfe Professor of Holocaust Studies, University of Toronto), Louise Bethlehem (Associate Professor, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Daniel Boyarin (Taubmann Professor Emeritus of Talmudic Culture, UC Berkeley), Renate Bridental (Professor (ret.), Department of History, Brooklyn College, City University of New York), Darcy Buerkle (Professor, Department of History, Smith College), Avraham Burg (former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and former speaker of the Israeli parliament Knesset), Naomi Chazan (Professor Emerita of Political Science, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; former Member of Knesset for Meretz), Bryan Cheyette (Professor and Chair in Modern Literature and Culture, University of Reading), Lila Corwin Berman (Paul & Sylvia Steinberg Professor of American Jewish History; Director, Goldstein-Goren Center for American Jewish History), Hasia R. Diner (Professor, New York University), Deborah Dwork (Professor, Director, Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, City University of New York), David Enoch (Professor, Philosophy Department and Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem / University of Oxford), David Feldman (Professor, Director, Birkbeck Institute for the Study of Antisemitism, University of London), Anna Foa (Associate Professor (ret.) of Modern History, University of Sapienza, Rome), Shai Ginsburg (Associate Professor, Chair, Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Duke University), Amos Goldberg (Professor, The Jonah M. Machover Chair in Holocaust Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Neve Gordon (Professor of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, School of Law, Queen Mary University of London), Leonard Grob (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Fairleigh Dickinson University), Atina Grossmann (Professor of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Cooper Union, New York), Wolf Gruner (Professor of History, Shapell-Guerin Chair in Jewish Studies, University of Southern California), Dagmar Herzog (Distinguished Professor of History and Daniel Rose Faculty Scholar, The Graduate Center, City University of New York), Uffa Jensen (Professor Dr., Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung, TU Berlin, Germany), Marion Kaplan (Professor Emerita of Hebrew and Judaic Studies, New York University), Brian Klug (Dr., Honorary Fellow in Social Philosophy, Campion Hall, University of Oxford), Elad Lapidot (Professor for Hebraic Studies, University of Lille), Nitzan Lebovic (Professor of History, Apter Chair of Holocaust Studies, Lehigh University), Mark Levene (Dr., Emeritus Fellow, University of Southampton and Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations), Itamar Mann (Associate Professor of Law, University of Haifa; Humboldt Fellow, Humboldt University), Anat Matar (Dr., Senior Lecturer in Philosophy (ret.), Tel Aviv University), David Mednicoff (Associate Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Public Policy, University of Massachusetts-Amherst), Ralf Michaels (Professor Dr., Director, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg), Susan Neiman (Professor, Director, Einstein Forum), Mary Nolan (Professor Emerita of History, New York University), Atalia Omer (Professor of Religion, Conflict and Peace Studies, The University of Notre Dame), Orna Ophir (Associate Director, The DeWitt Wallace Institute of Psychiatry: History, Policy and the Arts, Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York), Mark Roseman (Distinguished Professor in History, Pat M. Glazer Chair in Jewish Studies, Indiana University), Michael Rothberg (Professor of English, Comparative Literature, and Holocaust Studies, UCLA), Miri Rubin (Professor of Medieval and Modern History, Queen Mary University of London), Stefanie Schüler-Springorum (Professor Dr., Director, Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung, TU Berlin), Raz Segal (Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Stockton University), David Shulman (Professor Emeritus, Department of Asian Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Tamir Sorek (Liberal Arts Professor of Middle East History and Jewish Studies, Penn State University), Barry Trachtenberg (Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History and Professor of History, Wake Forest University), Enzo Traverso (Professor in the Humanities, Department of History, Cornell University), Peter Ullrich (Dr. phil. Dr. rer. med., Senior Researcher/Fellow, Center for the Study of Antisemitism, Technische Universität Berlin), Hent de Vries (Professor of Religious Studies (Chair), German, Comparative Literature, and Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, New York University), Moshe Zimmermann (Professor Emeritus, The Richard Koebner Minerva Center for German History, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem).
Mittlerweile wird die JDA von rund 375 Wissenschaftlern, die meisten davon jüdisch und/oder israelisch, unterstützt, die auf Antisemitismus, jüdische Geschichte, Rassismus, Geschichte des Nahen Ostens und andere relevante Bereiche spezialisiert sind. Dementsprechend verfügt die JDA über die Autorität einer echten Expertenmeinung.
Die JDA ist eine direkte Antwort auf die Mängel der IHRA-Arbeitsdefinition von Antisemitismus. Weltweit besteht breiter wissenschaftlicher Konsens darüber, dass es der IHRA-Definition an Klarheit mangelt und sie eher als politisches Instrument eingesetzt wird, statt als pädagogisches Hilfsmittel und als präzise Definition von Antisemitismus zu dienen.
Meine News
LINKE
Felix Klein übt scharfe Kritik an Antisemitismus-Definition
ANTISEMITISMUS
Antisemitismus-Definitionen: Was die Begriffe aussagen
PARTEITAG
Linke weckt Kritik mit Position zu Antisemitismus
KOMMENTAR
Linken-Parteitag in Chemnitz: Einigkeit wirkt
Dass die IHRA-Definition von Regierungen angenommen wurde, ist weitgehend Ergebnis politischer Kampagnen von Akteuren im Einklang mit der israelischen Regierung. Es gibt keinerlei Beweise dafür, dass antisemitische Äußerungen oder Gewalttaten seither und deshalb zurückgegangen sind. Es gibt jedoch ausreichend Belege dafür, dass die IHRA-Definition von illiberalen Kräften instrumentalisiert wird, um bürgerliche Freiheiten und Menschenrechte zu untergraben.
Definitionen sollen Orientierung bieten
Während die IHRA-Definition Kritik an Israel und Antisemitismus vermischt, unterscheidet die JDA prinzipiell zwischen diesen Phänomenen und zeigt gleichzeitig auf, wo sie sich potenziell überschneiden.
Wir sind daher der Meinung, dass die JDA einen besseren Rahmen bietet, um strittige Fragen zu erörtern. Denn sie stellt ein sorgfältiges Gleichgewicht zwischen dem Kampf gegen Antisemitismus einerseits und der Wahrung der Redefreiheit und anderer demokratischer Freiheiten andererseits her. Dieses Gleichgewicht ist für eine glaubwürdige und wirksame Bekämpfung des Antisemitismus unerlässlich.
Wir sind nicht der Meinung, dass Definitionen als Regulierungs- und Disziplinierungsinstrumente dienen sollten – diese Rolle sollte ausschließlich Recht und Gesetz zukommen. Der Zweck von Definitionen besteht vielmehr darin, Orientierung zu bieten und als pädagogisches Hilfsmittel zu dienen, da die Realität immer viel komplexer ist als Definitionen es sein können.
Vor diesem Hintergrund unterstützen wir die Annahme der JDA durch die Partei Die Linke voll und ganz, da sie genau die Orientierung bietet, die jetzt nötig ist. Wir ermutigen Die Linke, selbstbewusst zu dieser Entscheidung zu stehen, die ein tieferes und breiteres Nachdenken in Deutschland darüber anregen sollte, wie Antisemitismus am besten bekämpft werden kann.
Falls erforderlich, stehen wir für weitere Beratung zur Verfügung.
The Dutch newspaper NRC conducted research into the question of whether Israel is perpetuating genocide in Gaza. NRC interviewed seven genocide experts from six different countries about their views and those of their colleagues.
The researchers were Dr. Shmuel Lederman, Israeli researcher at the Open University of Israel, Department of History, Philosophy and Judaic Studies; Dirk Moses, Australian professor at the City University of New York and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research; Prof. Melanie O’Brien, Australian lawyer, researcher at the University of Western Australia and chair of the International Association of Genocide Scholars; Prof. Raz Segal, Israeli genocide researcher at Stockton University in New Jersey, USA; Martin Shaw: British professor at the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals, emeritus professor at the University of Sussex and author of the book What Is Genocide?; Ugur Ümit Üngör, Dutch professor at the University of Amsterdam and the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies; Dr. Iva Vukusic, Croatian genocide researcher at Utrecht University
The NRC found that the leading genocide researchers were “surprisingly unanimous: the Netanyahu cabinet, they say, is in that process – according to the majority even in the final stages. That is why most researchers no longer just speak of ‘genocidal violence’, but of ‘genocide.’”
The Israeli researcher Raz Segal told NRC, “Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that considers all the evidence.”
The Israeli researcher Shmuel Lederman was one of the scientists who previously rejected the genocide label but have since changed his mind.
Turkish-Dutch Ugur Ümit Üngör, speaks of “genocidal violence.” Genocide “remains a loaded term, because of its intertwining with the Holocaust.” There are “certainly still scientists who say it is not genocide,” says Üngör. “But I don’t know them.”
NRC stated it also scoured the most “authoritative scientific journal in the field, the Journal of Genocide Research. In the past year and a half, it collected more than 25 articles on the genocide question in Gaza, from scientists inside and outside genocide studies. Some problematize the term, others analyze genocidal statements by the Israeli government and army or argue from a legal perspective why the ICJ will or will not reach a conviction.”
NCR continued, “since 1948 there has been a legal definition of genocide that all major powers could live: ‘acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, religious or racial group as such.’ Specifically: • ‘killing members of the group • causing serious physical or mental harm to members of the group • deliberately imposing on the group conditions of life aimed at its physical destruction in whole or in part • taking measures intended to prevent births within the group • forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
For NRC, it is a “compromise. Especially because of the elusive phrase ‘with the intent’. Because how do you prove that?”
According to NRC, the genocide concept has “always been contested. After its legal anchoring, a separate scientific field emerged, initially mainly focusing on research into the Holocaust. But slowly, genocide studies grew into a much broader interdisciplinary field of research, with sociologists, political scientists and lawyers, among others, who use their own methods and concepts. And while Holocaust historians insisted that the Shoah was unique—the ‘archetypal’ genocide—in the 1990s, others began to draw comparisons with Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and even pre-World War II genocides. Painful, some historians found.”
For the many researchers NRC spoke to, “the Israeli response to the ICJ’s interim judgment in January 2024 played a key role. In order to prevent genocide, “Israel had to allow emergency aid and stop the inflammatory, dehumanizing language about Palestinians. But the Netanyahu cabinet changed nothing.” For Lederman, “At first he was against the genocide label, but after the verdict, the closing of the Rafah border crossing and the calculation from an urgent letter from 99 American health workers that the actual death toll in Gaza had already exceeded 100,000, he was convinced.”
NRC stated that for Melanie O’Brien, “the decisive factor was the deliberate withholding of food, water, shelter and sanitation.” For Segal, it was the “‘openly genocidal statements’ of Israeli leaders. But for all of them, it is the sum of what, taken separately, would count as ‘ordinary’ war crimes.”
For Üngör, the “gap between Holocaust historians and their colleagues who view genocides in a broader context is shrinking as Israeli violence continues.” Only small Holocaust centers in the US, “funded by Americans who want to uphold the uniqueness of the Shoah, there is an increasing number of Holocaust researchers who do openly speak of genocide. The American Debórah Dwork and the Israelis Amos Goldberg and Omer Bartov, for example.”
According to the NRC, “an unprecedentedly high number of women and children die,” which Shmuel Lederman calls “foreseeable consequences.” This, according to Lederman, “is where the genocide lies.”
NRC stated, “Scientists sometimes find that accusing Israel of genocide is not helpful to their careers. The accusation of anti-Semitism lies close to the surface. For example, after protests, Segal’s appointment as head of the genocide center at the University of Minnesota was withdrawn. And Harvard experienced so much pressure to silence ‘anti-Israel’ voices that it fired two heads of its Middle East center. Segal, who is Jewish himself, says that he is regularly accused of anti-Semitism.”
NRC mentions that Holocaust researcher Omer Bartov resigned from the journal Yad Vashem Studies, affiliated with Yad Vashem, after twenty years. In his resignation letter, he accused the editorial board of acting as if the “extraordinary carnage by Israeli troops, including the killing and maiming of thousands of children, is either none of its business or perfectly justified will leave a stain on the journal and on Yad Vashem for generations to come.”
Not surprisingly, both Iranian media and Qatari-linked media reported the NCR genocide interview. Melanie O’Brien posted a link on her university’s website to the Qatari-linked article.
NRC has an anti-Israel history. An article published on November 13, 2023, titled “Diplomatic memo from Dutch embassy: Israel uses ‘disproportionate force,'” stated that in the War in Gaza – according to a confidential memo from the Dutch Defense Attaché in Tel Aviv – the Israeli army has “the intention to deliberately cause massive destruction to infrastructure and civilian centers.” According to the NRC, this “strategy” explains the “high number of deaths” among the civilian population. NRC stated that Israel uses “disproportionate force” in Gaza, which, “according to critics, constitutes a violation of international treaties and the laws of war.”
The Dutch government issued a statement responding to this NRC report, stating, “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken note of the article published in the Dutch newspaper NRC, on November 13th, about Israel. The article is based on parts of a confidential report from the Embassy. It provides a selective and incomplete picture that does not reflect the Dutch policy in any way. Our colleagues at Embassies must be able to do their work properly, professionally and with integrity. They have the full support of the Ministry. It is utterly unacceptable that they are hindered in their work due to such reporting in the media.”
The accusations against Israel of conducting genocide against the people in Gaza are false on many levels.
First, the definition of genocide states that there must be a special intent, “dolus specialis” to kill a specific group. After the savage Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, the IDF decided to neutralize its military arm, the Qassem Brigades. This was and still is the proclaimed goal and intention of Israel. However, as IAM repeatedly emphasized, Hamas and its partner Palestinian Islamic Jihad, with the help of Iranian Revolutionary Guards, managed to build an extensive tunnel system located under private homes as well as public spaces, hospitals, mosques, schools, parks, etc. According to West Point Academy experts, the Gaza tunnel systems – unparalleled in the modern history of urban warfare – provided the militants a perfect opportunity to embed within the civilian population. This extreme embedding forced the IDF to operate in a situation where total avoidance of hitting civilians is impossible. Even so, the IDF did its best to warn civilians to move away from areas of operation. This factor alone indicates that there is no intent to exterminate civilians, as the genocide definition states.
Second, the Health Ministry, under orders from Hamas, bundles the number of terrorists and civilians killed, so the number of some 50,000 killed became widely accepted of a population of two and a half million. The IDF and a number of statistical studies suggest that about 38 percent of the fatalities were combat-related. The British-based Henry Jackson Society noted that the Ministry of Health inflates the numbers by adding death from natural causes. Still, even if accepting the higher numbers provided by the Hamas-controlled Ministry, this does not square with the definition of genocide as a very significant number of the 2,500,000 Gaza population.
Third, charges that Israel is trying to starve the population of Gaza are false. Since the beginning of the war, with brief exceptions, Israel has allowed the delivery of food. Here again, Hamas is to be blamed for food problems. It has been documented that Hamas militants have commandeered food trucks and sold the content on the black market.
Arthur Lemkin, the Polish Jewish legal scholar who coined the name genocide and whose work led to the adoption of the 1948 Genocide Convention, was devasted by the murder of his six million Jews in the Holocaust, including most of his own family. In Poland alone, only some 250,000 Jews survived out of a population of 3,500,000.
It is especially disheartening that Israeli scholars – who are intimately aware of the history and the moral weight of the Holocaust – should collaborate with the Dutch NRC platform for anti-Israel narratives. As Jews and Israelis, their involvement risks lending legitimacy to what many consider the modern-day blood libel against the Jewish state, a nation that provided a home to many survivors of the Nazi genocide.
A growing number of the world’s leading genocide scholars believe that Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute genocide, according to an investigation by Dutch newspaper NRC.
The paper interviewed seven renowned genocide and Holocaust researchers* from six countries – including Israel – all of whom described the Israeli campaign in Gaza as genocidal. Many said their peers in the field share this assessment.
“Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that takes into account all the evidence,” Israeli researcher Raz Segal told NRC.
Professor Ugur Umit Ungor of the University of Amsterdam and NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies said that while there are certainly researchers who say it is not genocide, “I don’t know them”.
The Dutch paper reviewed 25 recent academic articles published in the Journal of Genocide Research, the field’s leading journal, and found that “all eight academics from the field of genocide studies see genocide or at least genocidal violence in Gaza”.
“And that is remarkable for a field in which there is no clarity about what genocide itself exactly is,” it noted.
Leading human rights organisations have also reached the conclusion that Israel is committing genocide. In December 2024, Amnesty International became the first major organisation to conclude that Israel had committed genocide during its war on Gaza, while Human Rights Watch more conservatively concluded that “genocidal acts” had been committed.
Francesca Albanese, the UN’s top expert on Palestine, authored two reports last year suggesting that genocide was taking place in Gaza.
Genocide studies as a discipline does not treat the issue as a binary, the NRC report said. Rather than asking whether genocide has happened or not, scholars see it as a gradual process.
Ungor compares it to a “dimmer switch” rather than an on-off light.
“Contrary to public opinion, leading genocide researchers are surprisingly unanimous: the Netanyahu government, they say, is in that process – according to the majority, even in its final stages,” the investigation concluded. “That is why most researchers no longer speak only of ‘genocidal violence’, but of ‘genocide’.”
Since Israel’s devastating onslaught on Gaza in October 2023, at least 53,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 15,000 children.
The World Health Organisation reported this week that 57 children have died of malnutrition since Israel’s total ban on humanitarian aid, in effect since 2 March.
The WHO predicts that nearly 71,000 children under the age of five will suffer acute malnutrition over the next 11 months if the ban on aid continues.
Meanwhile, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), a global network of UN agencies and humanitarian groups, reported last week that nearly half a million people in Gaza, or 22 percent of the population, are expected to face “catastrophic” hunger from May to September.
‘It happens because it happens’
The report noted that even researchers who had previously hesitated to use the term have since changed their position, such as Shmuel Lederman of the Open University of Israel.
It also referred to the opinion of Canadian international law scholar William Schabas that Israel is committing genocide, although he is considered otherwise conservative with respect to genocide labelling.
In an interview with Middle East Eye last month, Schabas said Israel’s campaign in Gaza was “absolutely” a genocide.
“There’s nothing comparable in recent history,” said Schabas. “The borders are closed, the people have nowhere to go, and they’re destroying have made life essentially impossible in Gaza.
“We see that combined with the ambition, expressed sometimes very openly by both Trump and Netanyahu, and by the Israelis, to reconfigure Gaza as some sort of eastern Mediterranean Riviera.”
Israel’s inaction following the January 2024 interim ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was a decisive factor in leading many scholars to conclude that its conduct in Gaza amounts to genocide, NRC reported.
The legally binding ruling ordered Israel to take immediate steps to prevent genocide by allowing aid into Gaza and stopping dehumanising rhetoric that incited the extermination of Palestinians.
Lederman initially opposed the use of the genocide label. However, following Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s dismissal of the ICJ’s ruling, the continued closure of land crossings to Gaza and a letter by 99 US health workers stating that the death toll in Gaza exceeded 100,000, he was convinced that Israel’s actions do in fact constitute genocide.
Meanwhile, Melanie O’Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, told NRC that Israel’s deliberate denial of food, water, shelter and sanitation was the key factor in her determination that the military campaign was a genocide.
For all scholars interviewed by NRC, what ultimately influenced their assessment was a holistic view of the situation, the totality of the conduct and the sum of all war crimes viewed together.
The scholars also refuted claims in western public debate that Israel’s military campaign is solely aimed at defeating Hamas, that there is no explicit plan to annihilate the population, that the entire Gaza population has not been killed, that the situation is unlike the Holocaust or that a legal ruling has yet to be issued.
They argued that these points reflect fundamental misunderstandings of how genocide is defined under international law.
The Genocide Convention is a treaty on the prevention and punishment of genocide, rather than waiting for it to fully unfold. The treaty also refers to the partial or complete destruction of a group, not solely its total eradication. For example, the killing of 8,000 Bosniak men in Srebrenica in 1995 is legally recognised as genocide, despite being smaller in scale than the Holocaust.
O’Brien noted that genocide is not dependent on judicial confirmation to be real. “It happens because it happens.”
*The scientists interviewed by NRC are:
Shmuel Lederman: Israeli researcher at the Open University of Israel
Anthony Dirk Moses: Australian professor at the City University of New York and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research
Melanie O’Brien: Australian lawyer, researcher at the University of Western Australia and president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars
Raz Segal: Israeli genocide researcher at Stockton University in New Jersey, US
Martin Shaw: British professor at the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals, emeritus professor at the University of Sussex and author of the book What Is Genocide?
Ugur Umit Ungor: Dutch professor at the University of Amsterdam and the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies
Iva Vukusic: Croatian genocide researcher at Utrecht University
Researchers from Israel, the Netherlands, the US, the UK, Australia, Croatia and Canada say Israel’s conduct meets the legal threshold of genocide
Period
17 May 2025
Media contributions
1
Media contributions
Title Top genocide scholars unanimous that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza: Dutch investigation
Degree of recognition InternationalMedia name/outlet Middle East Eye Media type Web Date 17/05/25 Description Researchers from Israel, the Netherlands, the US, the UK, Australia, Croatia and Canada say Israel’s conduct meets the legal threshold of genocide
Seven renowned scientists almost unanimous: Israel is committing genocide in Gaza
GENOCIDE STUDIES
NRC spoke to seven renowned genocide researchers about Gaza. They are not nearly as divided as public opinion: without exception, they qualify the Israeli actions as ‘genocidal’. And according to them, almost all their colleagues agree with this.
Authors Kasper van Laarhoven Eva Peek Derk Walters
Published on May 14, 2025
A quarter of the babies in the Gaza Strip are acutely malnourished, and Israel refuses to allow thousands of trucks with emergency aid. The military shoots anyone who enters the buffer zone, bombs hospitals and tent camps. For the umpteenth time, the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is ordering many Gazans to leave their homes, while his Minister of Finance announces that Gaza will be “completely destroyed” within a few months and his party member Moshe Saada calls for the starvation and expulsion of all Gazans. Israel has already killed at least 53,000 Palestinians, including at least 15,000 children. Is Israel committing genocide here?
The conclusion that this is the case is no longer reserved for activists. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) considers it “plausible”. And where human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese previously spoke of genocide, the director of the NIOD now also speaks of “genocidal violence”. Other NIOD researchers had already spoken out.
At the same time, it remains a loaded term, because of its intertwining with the Holocaust. In their editorials, newspapers cautiously dance around the concept. On social media, it is also referred to as “g3n0c1d3”, because some tech companies are banning the word. The foreign affairs spokesperson of the German CDU party told NRC that he “does not believe in the theory of genocide”.
But in addition to being a subject of social debate, genocide is also a subject of science. And that field of research, genocide studies, does not see it as a yes/no question, but as a process. Not a light switch, but a “dimmer”, in the words of professor of Holocaust and genocide studies Ugur Ümit Üngör of the University of Amsterdam and the NIOD.
The scientific field of genocide studies does not see it as a yes/no question, but as a process. And unlike public opinion, the leading genocide researchers are surprisingly unanimous: the Netanyahu cabinet, they say, is in that process – according to the majority even in the final stages. That is why most researchers no longer just speak of ‘genocidal violence’, but of ‘genocide’.
NRC asked seven genocide experts from six different countries about their own views and those of their colleagues. “Can I name someone whose work I respect who does not think it is genocide? No, there is no counterargument that takes into account all the evidence,” says Israeli researcher Raz Segal. There are certainly still scientists who say it is not genocide, says Üngör. “But I don’t know them.” There are, however, scientists who previously rejected the genocide label, but have since changed their minds, such as Shmuel Lederman of the Open University of Israel.
NRC also scoured the most authoritative scientific journal in the field, the Journal of Genocide Research. In the past year and a half, it collected more than 25 articles on the genocide question in Gaza, from scientists inside and outside genocide studies. Some problematize the term, others analyze genocidal statements by the Israeli government and army or argue from a legal perspective why the ICJ will or will not reach a conviction.
But here too it is striking: the majority and all eight academics from the field of genocide studies see genocide or at least genocidal violence in Gaza. And that is remarkable for a field in which there is no clarity about what genocide itself exactly is.
Refining and deleting The term was coined by the Polish-Jewish jurist Raphael Lemkin in 1944. He combined the ancient Greek ‘genos’ (people) and Latin ‘caedere’ (dead). Since the 1930s he had been looking for a way to draw attention to the destruction of a group, shocked by the impunity of the Armenian genocide. In the Shoah, 49 of his family members were murdered.
It took until after the war before his proposals were heard – at the then newly founded UN. Years of refining and deleting followed. The Americans, Russians, French and British tried to ensure that their crimes – mass executions of Stalin’s political opponents, atomic bombs on Japan, racist laws in the US, violence in the European colonies – could not be considered genocide.
And so Lemkin had to watch as world powers curtailed his ideal. However flawed, since 1948 there has been a legal definition of genocide that all major powers could live: ‘acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, religious or racial group as such’.
Specifically:
• ‘killing members of the group • causing serious physical or mental harm to members of the group • deliberately imposing on the group conditions of life aimed at its physical destruction in whole or in part • taking measures intended to prevent births within the group • forcibly transferring children of the group to another group’
A milestone for Lemkin, and a stripped-down compromise. Especially because of the elusive phrase ‘with the intent’. Because how do you prove that?
No clear agreement Since then, the concept has always been contested. After its legal anchoring, a separate scientific field emerged, initially mainly focusing on research into the Holocaust. But slowly, genocide studies grew into a much broader interdisciplinary field of research, with sociologists, political scientists and lawyers, among others, who use their own methods and concepts. And while Holocaust historians insisted that the Shoah was unique—the “archetypal” genocide—in the 1990s, others began to draw comparisons with Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and even pre-World War II genocides. Painful, some historians found.
For Üngör, the field, like other sciences, is always in flux. The concept of genocide, he says, is sharpened by new cases. Like China’s large-scale internment of Uighurs, “gives impetus to understanding cultural genocide.” And like Rwanda, genocide is a process—a spectrum—with some experts already seeing the contours of the coming mass murder clearly in 1993.
And yet. Despite all this internal disagreement, the majority of genocide scholars agree, say those interviewed: in Gaza, Israel is engaged in genocide. Some were quick to draw that conclusion. Like, six days after the Hamas attack of October 7, Raz Segal, an Israeli genocide researcher (Stockton University) and the renowned British specialist Martin Shaw. Albeit with different reasoning – Shaw also considers the Hamas attack to be genocidal.
Others were initially more cautious. The Canadian international lawyer William Schabas, for example, a somewhat conservative authority in his field, drew the conclusion last year after Israeli leaders called for a halt to water, food and electricity for Gaza. Professor Dirk Moses of the City University of New York (CUNY) speaks of a “mix of genocidal and military logic”.
For many researchers NRC spoke to, the Israeli response to the ICJ’s interim judgment in January 2024 played a key role. In order to prevent genocide, Israel had to allow emergency aid and stop the inflammatory, dehumanizing language about Palestinians. But the Netanyahu cabinet changed nothing.
For Lederman, a university lecturer at the Open University of Israel, it was a pile-up. At first he was against the genocide label, but after the verdict, the closing of the Rafah border crossing and the calculation from an urgent letter from 99 American health workers that the actual death toll in Gaza had already exceeded 100,000, he was convinced. For Melanie O’Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the decisive factor was the deliberate withholding of food, water, shelter and sanitation; for Segal, it was the “openly genocidal statements” of Israeli leaders. But for all of them, it is the sum of what, taken separately, would count as ‘ordinary’ war crimes. The picture as a whole makes it genocide. That is also the intention of the term, says Shaw: “holistic”.
The gap between Holocaust historians and their colleagues who view genocides in a broader context is shrinking as Israeli violence continues, says Üngör. In contrast to small Holocaust centres in the US, funded by Americans who, according to the UvA professor, want to uphold the uniqueness of the Shoah, there is an increasing number of Holocaust researchers who do openly speak of genocide. The American Debórah Dwork and the Israelis Amos Goldberg and Omer Bartov, for example. And that, says Üngör, is not easy. “Certainly with a view to the continuity of your funding.”
Counterarguments In the Western public debate, the same arguments are often raised against the conclusion that Israel is committing genocide. A few examples: it is a military war to destroy Hamas, there is no clear extermination plan, not all Gazans have been murdered yet, it does not resemble the Holocaust, the court has not yet ruled.
These are misunderstandings and simplifications, say the genocide experts.
For example, the treaty text speaks of “complete or partial” destruction. Should the number of victims approach the six million of the Holocaust? No, the murder of eight thousand men in Srebrenica is also considered genocide. And, says O’Brien, genocide does not happen because a court determines it to be so. “It happens because it happens.”
And does a plan have to be written down, such as – most notoriously – the Final Solution minutes of the Nazi Wannsee Conference? No. Over the past thirty years, the Rwanda and Yugoslavia tribunals and the ICJ have built up a series of jurisprudence in which they have further developed the concept. For example, in early 2007 the ICJ ruled that, in the absence of direct evidence, you can infer intent from a “pattern of behavior.” If it can reasonably be concluded from the scale, nature and intensity of the violence that the aim is to (partially) destroy a group, then that is sufficient evidence.
Does this also mean that the ICJ will ultimately rule that Israel is guilty of genocide? No, as long as she uses the light switch definition, that chance is “fifty-fifty,” estimates Moses, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research. There is a legal and a social-scientific reality.
According to him, the Israeli violence in Gaza does support a theory that has been dormant in the research field for some time: the absolute distinction between military and genocidal objectives is sometimes untenable. The world powers cobbled this artificial distinction into the treaty in 1948, but in practice they often get mixed up.
Behind the Israeli policy, says the Australian, there is “a dual intention.” For example, the emergency aid blockade, the destruction of hospitals and the starvation of Gazans serve two purposes: they hit Hamas, but clearly also (and especially) the civilian population. Not as unintentional collateral damage, but deliberately.
Another example: the Israeli use of artificial intelligence to locate possible Hamas militants using telephone data. The technology is so crude and is deployed with such limited human control that an airstrike quickly results in the deaths of dozens or even – in one case reconstructed by The New York Times – 125 residents.
According to an intelligence source from +972 Magazine, the AI program locates potential targets more easily at home than during combat. And so, the Israeli media outlet writes, the army hopes to increase the success rate by bombing private homes in particular. Preferably at night. The inevitable and accepted consequence, says Moses: an unprecedentedly high number of women and children die. Shmuel Lederman calls the latter “foreseeable consequences”. And that, says Lederman, is where the genocide lies. After all: you accept the population-destroying impact of your actions, even without that being your main goal.
Tense academic debate Although cautious genocide researchers now also believe that Israel’s actions in Gaza are genocidal, the debate is very tense. Scientists sometimes find that accusing Israel of genocide is not helpful to their careers. The accusation of anti-Semitism lies close to the surface. For example, after protests, Segal’s appointment as head of the genocide center at the University of Minnesota was withdrawn. And Harvard experienced so much pressure to silence “anti-Israel” voices that it fired two heads of its Middle East center.
Segal, who is Jewish himself, says that he is regularly accused of anti-Semitism. “Israeli and German scientists in particular use that to attack their colleagues.” The accusation of anti-Semitism, O’Brien also says, has a chilling effect on freedom of expression about Israel’s behavior. “Scientists are less willing to speak openly about what is happening.”
Scientists sometimes find that accusing Israel of genocide is not helpful to their careers The discussions lead to deep frustrations. Holocaust researcher Bartov resigned after twenty years from Yad Vashem Studies, the magazine affiliated with the eponymous museum in Jerusalem, out of dissatisfaction with his fellow editors, who act as if the “massacre by Israeli troops, the killing and mutilation of thousands of children, does not concern them or is completely justified,” the magazine Jewish Currents quotes his letter of resignation.
A German authority in the field who wishes to remain anonymous calls the subject “poisoned” in his country; you are, he says, immediately branded an anti-Semite if you even mention “possible genocide.” If these acts concerned a country other than Israel, he says, all Germans would immediately sound the alarm and speak of genocidal violence, as happened in the Russian mass murder in the Ukrainian city of Butja. But now, he says, it remains completely silent.
According to Dirk Moses, the research field is in crisis as long as it does not challenge the artificial distinction between genocidal and military objectives. Then it makes the mass murder of Palestinians possibly in the name of self-defense against Hamas, he says. As far as he is concerned, that is certainly the case with that part of Holocaust studies that defends Israeli actions in those terms. “Then parts of the field of research are actually dead – not only conceptually incoherent, but complicit.”
Endless pleading
Professor Shaw calls it disappointing that even serious newspapers are not prepared to “address the issue directly”. At the same time, many experts express frustration about the importance that politics and the media, including NRC, attach to the genocide question in Gaza. Why endlessly plead about the precise term, when people are now being murdered, driven away, starved, and entire cities destroyed? What Gazan cares whether she dies in a bombardment that is considered ethnic cleansing, is deprived of food in a crime against humanity, loses parents in a war crime or suffocates under the rubble during a genocide? Doesn’t that distract from the question that should really be discussed: what to do? Legally speaking, it does matter whether it is genocide or not, says O’Brien. “We have a genocide treaty that obliges signatories to prevent genocide. That obligation already comes into effect when there is a risk of genocide. There is no such thing for other crimes.”
According to the experts, the obsession with the term certainly also has everything to do with the sanctification of the concept of genocide, of its status as a ‘crime of crimes’, the ultimate evil. That is not necessarily justified, they say. War crimes and crimes against humanity are just as horrific for the victim – and are punished just as severely. With life imprisonment.
But genocide has always been a morally loaded concept, Shaw emphasizes. “It is not like war: that can in principle be legitimate. Genocide is not. Genocide is a category that encompasses the monumental evil of the attempt to destroy civilian populations, societies and groups.” And the call for action is therefore always inherent in the concept itself.
Researchers
Who did NRC speak to? Shmuel Lederman: Israeli researcher at the Open University of Israel Dirk Moses: Australian professor at the City University of New York and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research Melanie O’Brien: Australian lawyer, researcher at the University of Western Australia and chair of the International Association of Genocide Scholars Raz Segal: Israeli genocide researcher at Stockton University in New Jersey, USA Martin Shaw: British professor at the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals, emeritus professor at the University of Sussex and author of the book What Is Genocide? Ugur Ümit Üngör: Dutch professor at the University of Amsterdam and the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies Iva Vukusic: Croatian genocide researcher at Utrecht University
NRC also spoke to three scientists from related disciplines in the Netherlands and abroad.
Zeven gerenommeerde wetenschappers vrijwel eensgezind: Israël pleegt in Gaza genocide
GENOCIDESTUDIES NRC sprak zeven gerenommeerde genocide-onderzoekers over Gaza. Zij zijn lang niet zo verdeeld als de publieke opinie: zonder uitzondering kwalificeren ze de Israëlische acties als ‘genocidaal’. En volgens hen zijn nagenoeg al hun collega’s het daarmee eens.
Auteurs
Kasper van Laarhoven
Eva Peek
Derk Walters
Gepubliceerd op 14 mei 2025
Leestijd 9 minuten
Een kwart van de baby’s in de Gazastrook is acuut ondervoed, en Israël weigert duizenden vrachtwagens met noodhulp toe te laten. De krijgsmacht beschiet iedereen die zich in de bufferzone begeeft, bombardeert ziekenhuizen en tentenkampen. Voor de zoveelste keer geeft de regering van premier Benjamin Netanyahu vele Gazanen het bevel om hun verblijfplaats te verlaten, terwijl zijn minister van Financiën aankondigt dat Gaza binnen een paar maanden „volledig vernietigd” is en zijn partijgenoot Moshe Saada oproept tot uithongering en verdrijving van alle Gazanen. Israël heeft al zeker 53.000 Palestijnen gedood, onder wie ten minste 15.000 kinderen.
Pleegt Israël hier genocide?
De conclusie dat dit het geval is, is inmiddels niet meer aan activisten voorbehouden. Het Internationaal Gerechtshof (ICJ) acht het „plausibel”. En waar eerder mensenrechtenorganisaties als Amnesty International en Human Rights Watch en VN-rapporteur Francesca Albanese al van genocide spraken, spreekt inmiddels ook de directeur van het NIOD van „genocidaal geweld”. Andere NIOD-onderzoekers hadden zich al uitgesproken.
Tegelijk blijft het een beladen term, vanwege de verwevenheid met de Holocaust. In hun hoofdredactionele commentaren dansen kranten voorzichtig om het begrip heen. Op sociale media wordt ook wel van “g3n0c1d3” gesproken, omdat sommige techbedrijven het woord in de ban doen. Tegen NRC zei de buitenlandwoordvoerder van de Duitse CDU-partij dat hij „niet in de theorie van een genocide” gelooft.
Maar behalve van maatschappelijk debat is genocide ook onderwerp van de wetenschap. En dat onderzoeksveld, genocidestudies, ziet het niet als een ja/nee-vraag, maar als een proces. Geen lichtknopje, maar een „dimmer”, in de woorden van hoogleraar Holocaust- en genocidestudies Ugur Ümit Üngör van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en het NIOD.
Het wetenschappelijke onderzoeksveld genocidestudies ziet het niet als een ja/nee-vraag, maar als een proces
En anders dan de publieke opinie zijn de toonaangevende genocideonderzoekers verrassend eensgezind: het kabinet-Netanyahu, zeggen zij, zít in dat proces – volgens de meerderheid zelfs in het eindstadium. Daarom spreken de meeste onderzoekers niet langer alleen van ‘genocidaal geweld’, maar van ‘genocide’.
NRC bevroeg zeven genocide-experts uit zes verschillende landen naar hun eigen opvattingen en die van hun collega’s. „Of ik iemand kan noemen wiens werk ik respecteer die het geen genocide vindt? Nee, er is geen tegenargument dat ál het bewijsmateriaal in acht neemt,” zegt de Israëlische onderzoeker Raz Segal. Wetenschappers die zeggen dat het geen genocide is, zijn er vast nog wel, zegt Üngör. „Maar ik ken ze niet.” Wel zijn er wetenschappers die eerder het genocidelabel verwierpen, maar inmiddels van mening zijn veranderd, zoals Shmuel Lederman van de Open Universiteit van Israël.
Ook ploos NRC het meest gezaghebbende wetenschappelijke tijdschrift in het veld uit, het Journal of Genocide Research. Dat verzamelde in de afgelopen anderhalf jaar ruim 25 artikelen over de genocidevraag in Gaza, van wetenschappers binnen en buiten genocidestudies. Sommigen problematiseren de term, anderen analyseren genocidale uitspraken van Israëls regering en leger of beargumenteren vanuit een juridisch perspectief waarom het ICJ wel of niet tot een veroordeling zal komen.
Maar ook hier valt op: de meerderheid en álle acht academici uit het veld van genocidestudies zien genocide of ten minste genocidaal geweld in Gaza. En dat is bijzonder voor een veld waarin geen eenduidigheid bestaat over wat genocide zélf precies is.
Schaven en schrappen
De term is gemunt door de Pools-Joodse jurist Raphael Lemkin in 1944. Hij trok het Oudgriekse ‘genos’ (volk) en Latijnse ‘caedere’ (doden) samen. Sinds de jaren dertig zocht hij naar een manier om de vernietiging van een groep onder de aandacht te brengen, geschokt door de straffeloosheid van de Armeense genocide. In de Shoah werden 49 van zijn familieleden vermoord.
Het duurde tot na de oorlog voordat zijn voorstellen gehoor vonden – bij de toen net opgerichte VN. Jaren van schaven en schrappen volgden. De Amerikanen, Russen, Fransen en Britten probeerden ervoor te zorgen dat hún wandaden – massaexecuties van Stalins politieke tegenstanders, atoombommen op Japan, racistische wetten in de VS, geweld in de Europese koloniën – in elk geval niet als genocide konden gelden.
En dus moest Lemkin toekijken terwijl wereldmachten zijn ideaal insnoerden. Hoe gemankeerd ook, sinds 1948 ligt er een juridische definitie van genocide waarmee alle grootmachten konden leven: ‘handelingen gepleegd met de bedoeling om een nationale, etnische, godsdienstige groep, dan wel een groep behorende tot een bepaald ras, geheel of gedeeltelijk als zodanig te vernietigen’. Specifiek:
• ‘het doden van leden van de groep
• het toebrengen van ernstig lichamelijk of geestelijk letsel aan leden van de groep
• het opzettelijk aan de groep opleggen van levensvoorwaarden die gericht zijn op haar gehele of gedeeltelijke lichamelijke vernietiging
• het nemen van maatregelen bedoeld om geboorten binnen de groep te voorkomen
• het gewelddadig overbrengen van kinderen van de groep naar een andere groep’
Een mijlpaal voor Lemkin, én een uitgekleed compromis. Vooral door de ongrijpbare frase ‘met de bedoeling’. Want hoe bewijs je dat?
Geen eenduidige overeenkomst
Sindsdien is het begrip altijd betwist. Na de juridische verankering ontstond er een apart wetenschappelijk veld, met aanvankelijk vooral onderzoek naar de Holocaust. Maar langzaam groeide genocidestudies uit tot een veel breder interdisciplinair onderzoeksgebied, met onder anderen sociologen, politicologen en juristen die hun eigen methodes en concepten hanteren. En waar de Holocaust-historici eraan vasthielden dat de Shoah uniek was – de ‘archetypische’ genocide – begonnen de anderen in de jaren negentig vergelijkingen te maken met Rwanda, Bosnië-Herzegovina en zelfs genocides van vóór de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Pijnlijk, vonden sommige historici.
Wat Üngör betreft is het veld, net als andere wetenschappen, altijd in beweging. Het genocidebegrip, zegt hij, wordt aangescherpt door nieuwe casussen. Zoals China’s grootschalige internering van Oeigoeren „een impuls geeft aan het begrijpen van culturele genocide”. En zoals Rwanda leerde dat genocide een proces – een spectrum – is, waarbij sommige experts in 1993 de contouren van de aanstaande massamoord al scherp zagen.
En toch. Ondanks al deze interne onenigheid is de meerderheid van de genocidewetenschappers het eens, zeggen de geïnterviewden: in Gaza is Israël bezig met genocide.
Sommigen trokken die conclusie al snel. Zoals, zes dagen na de Hamas-aanval van 7 oktober, Raz Segal, een Israëlische genocideonderzoeker (Stockton University) en de vermaarde Britse specialist Martin Shaw. Zij het met verschillende redeneringen – Shaw beschouwt de aanval van Hamas ook als genocidaal.
Anderen waren aanvankelijk voorzichtiger. De Canadese internationaal jurist William Schabas bijvoorbeeld, een ietwat behoudende autoriteit in zijn vakgebied, trok vorig jaar de conclusie nadat Israëlische leiders hadden opgeroepen tot het stopzetten van water, voedsel en elektriciteit voor Gaza. Hoogleraar Dirk Moses van de City University of New York (CUNY) spreekt van een „mix van genocidale en militaire logica”.
Voor veel onderzoekers die NRC sprak, speelde de Israëlische reactie op het tussenvonnis van het ICJ in januari 2024 een sleutelrol. Om genocide te voorkomen, moest Israël van het Gerechtshof noodhulp toelaten en ophouden met de opruiende, ontmenselijkende taal over Palestijnen. Maar het kabinet-Netanyahu veranderde niets.
Voor Lederman, universitair docent aan de Open Universiteit van Israël, was het een opeenstapeling. Eerst was hij tegen het genocidelabel, maar na het vonnis, het sluiten van de Rafah-grensovergang en de berekening uit een brandbrief van 99 Amerikaanse zorgmedewerkers dat het daadwerkelijke dodental in Gaza de honderdduizend al had gepasseerd, was hij overtuigd.
Voor Melanie O’Brien, voorzitter van de International Association of Genocide Scholars, gaf het opzettelijk onthouden van voedsel water, onderdak en sanitaire voorzieningen de doorslag, voor Segal de „openlijk genocidale uitspraken” van Israëlische leiders. Maar voor allemaal gaat het om de optelsom van wat los van elkaar zou gelden als ‘gewone’ oorlogsmisdaden. Het plaatje als geheel maakt het tot een genocide. Zo is het begrip ook bedoeld, zegt Shaw: „holistisch”.
De kloof tussen Holocaust-historici en hun collega’s die genocides in breder verband bekijken slinkt met het aanhoudende Israëlische geweld, zegt Üngör . Tegenover kleine Holocaustcentra in de VS, gefinancierd door Amerikanen die volgens de UvA-hoogleraar de uniciteit van de Shoah hoog willen houden, staat een toenemend aantal Holocaust-onderzoekers die wél openlijk van genocide spreken. De Amerikaanse Debórah Dwork en de Israëliërs Amos Goldberg en Omer Bartov bijvoorbeeld. En dat, zegt Üngör, is niet makkelijk. „Zeker met het oog op de continuïteit van je financiering.”
Tegenargumenten
In het westerse publiek debat klinken vaak dezelfde argumenten tegen de conclusie dat Israël genocide pleegt. Een greep: het is een militaire oorlog om Hamas te vernietigen, er ligt geen duidelijk uitroeiingsplan, nog niet alle Gazanen zijn vermoord, het lijkt niet op de Holocaust, de rechter heeft nog niet geoordeeld.
Dat zijn misverstanden en simplificaties, zeggen de genocide-experts. Zo spreekt de verdragstekst van „geheel of gedeeltelijk” vernietigen. Moet het aantal slachtoffers de zes miljoen van de Holocaust benaderen? Nee, ook de moord op achtduizend mannen in Srebrenica geldt als een genocide. En, zegt O’Brien, een genocide gebeurt niet omdat een rechtbank dat vaststelt. „Het gebeurt omdat het gebeurt.”
En moet er een plan op papier staan, zoals – meest berucht – de Endlösung-notulen van de Wannseeconferentie van de nazi’s? Nee. De afgelopen dertig jaar bouwden de Rwanda- en Joegoslaviëtribunalen en het ICJ in een reeks uitspraken jurisprudentie op, waarmee ze het begrip verder ontwikkelden. Zo oordeelde het ICJ begin 2007 dat je, bij gebrek aan direct bewijs, intentie kunt afleiden uit een „gedragspatroon”. Als er uit de schaal, aard en intensiteit van het geweld redelijkerwijs kan worden geconcludeerd dat het doel is om een groep (deels) te vernietigen, dan is dat voldoende bewijs.
Betekent dit dan ook dat het ICJ uiteindelijk sowieso zal oordelen dat Israël zich schuldig maakt aan genocide? Nee, zolang ze de lichtknop-definitie hanteert, is die kans „fifty-fifty”, schat Journal of Genocide Research-hoofdredacteur Moses in. Er is een juridische en een sociaal-wetenschappelijke werkelijkheid.
Het Israëlische geweld in Gaza onderschrijft volgens hem wel een theorie die in het onderzoeksveld al langer sluimert: het absolute onderscheid tussen militaire en genocidale doelen is soms onhoudbaar. Dat kunstmatige onderscheid frommelden de wereldmachten in 1948 het verdrag in, maar in de praktijk lopen ze vaak door elkaar.
Achter het Israëlische beleid, zegt de Australiër, schuilt „een dubbele intentie”. Zo dienen de noodhulpblokkade, de vernietiging van ziekenhuizen en het uithongeren van de Gazanen twee doelen: ze raken Hamas, maar overduidelijk ook (en vooral) de burgerbevolking. Niet als onopzettelijke nevenschade, maar doelbewust.
Ander voorbeeld: de Israëlische inzet van kunstmatige intelligentie om met behulp van telefoongegevens mogelijke Hamas-militanten te lokaliseren. Die techniek is dusdanig grof en wordt met zulke beperkte menselijke controle ingezet dat een luchtaanval al snel samengaat met de dood van tientallen of zelfs – in één door The New York Times gereconstrueerd geval – 125 omwonenden.
Volgens een inlichtingenbron van +972 Magazine lokaliseert het AI-programma potentiële doelwitten makkelijker thuis dan tijdens de strijd. En dus, schrijft het Israëlische medium, hoopt het leger de succesgraad op te schroeven door met name privéwoningen te bombarderen. Het liefst ’s nachts. Het onvermijdelijke en door Israël geaccepteerde gevolg, zegt Moses: een ongekend hoog aantal vrouwen en kinderen komt om. Dat laatste noemt Shmuel Lederman „voorzienbare gevolgen”. En dáárin, zegt Lederman, zit de genocide. Immers: je accepteert de volk-vernietigende impact van je daden, ook zonder dat dat je hoofddoel is.
Gespannen academisch debat
Hoewel dus inmiddels ook voorzichtige genocide-onderzoekers van mening zijn dat de daden van Israël in Gaza genocidaal zijn, staat er flinke spanning op het debat. Wetenschappers ervaren soms dat het voor hun carrières niet bevorderlijk is om Israël van genocide te beschuldigen. Het antisemitismeverwijt ligt dicht onder de oppervlakte.
Zo werd na protesten Segals benoeming tot hoofd van het genocidecentrum van de University of Minnesota ingetrokken. En Harvard ervoer zo veel druk om ‘anti-Israëlische’ stemmen het zwijgen op te leggen dat ze twee hoofden van haar Midden-Oostencentrum ontsloeg.
Segal, zelf Joods, zegt dat hem geregeld antisemitisme verweten wordt. „Vooral Israëlische en Duitse wetenschappers gebruiken dat om hun collega’s aan te vallen.” Het antisemitismeverwijt, zegt ook O’Brien, heeft een chilling effect op de vrije meningsuiting over Israëls gedrag. „Wetenschappers zijn minder bereid om openlijk te spreken over wat er gebeurt.”
Wetenschappers ervaren soms dat het voor hun carrières niet bevorderlijk is om Israël van genocide te beschuldigen
De discussies leiden tot diepe frustraties. Holocaust-onderzoeker Bartov stapte na twintig jaar op bij Yad Vashem Studies, het aan het gelijknamige museum in Jeruzalem verbonden tijdschrift, uit onvrede met zijn collega-redacteuren, die doen alsof de „slachting door Israëlische troepen, het doden en verminken van duizenden kinderen, hen niet aangaat of volkomen gerechtvaardigd is”, zo citeert het blad Jewish Currents zijn ontslagbrief.
Een Duitse autoriteit in het veld die anoniem wil blijven, noemt het onderwerp „vergiftigd” in zijn land; je wordt, zegt hij, direct voor antisemiet uitgemaakt als je ook maar van ‘mogelijke genocide’ rept. Betroffen deze daden een ander land dan Israël, zegt hij, dan zouden alle Duitsers direct alarm slaan en spreken van genocidaal geweld, zoals gebeurde bij de Russische massamoord in de Oekraïense stad Boetsja. Maar nu, zegt hij, blijft het muisstil.
Volgens Dirk Moses verkeert het onderzoeksveld in crisis zolang het het kunstmatige onderscheid tussen genocidale en militaire doelen niet bestrijdt. Dan maakt het de massamoord op Palestijnen mogelijk in naam van zelfverdediging tegen Hamas, zegt hij. Dat is wat hem betreft zeker het geval met dat deel van Holocaust-studies dat de Israëlische acties in die termen verdedigt. „Dan zijn delen van het onderzoeksveld eigenlijk dood – niet alleen conceptueel onsamenhangend, maar medeplichtig.”
Eindeloos soebatten
Hoogleraar Shaw noemt het teleurstellend dat zelfs serieuze kranten niet bereid zijn om „de kwestie rechtstreeks te adresseren”. Tegelijkertijd uiten veel experts frustratie over het belang dat politiek en media, ook NRC, hechten aan de genocidevraag in Gaza. Waarom eindeloos soebatten over de precieze term, terwijl mensen nú worden vermoord, verjaagd, uitgehongerd, en hele steden vernietigd? Welke Gazaan kan het wat schelen of ze omkomt bij een bombardement dat geldt als etnische zuivering, geen voedsel krijgt in een misdaad tegen de menselijkheid, ouders verliest in een oorlogsmisdaad of onder het puin stikt tijdens een genocide? Leidt dat niet af van de vraag waarover het écht zou moeten gaan: wat te doen?
Juridisch gezien maakt het wel degelijk uit of het genocide is of niet, zegt O’Brien. „We hebben een genocideverdrag dat ondertekenaars verplicht om genocide te voorkomen. Die verplichting treedt al in werking bij een risico op genocide. Zoiets bestaat niet voor andere misdaden.”
De obsessie met de term heeft volgens de experts zeker ook alles te maken met de heiligverklaring van het genocidebegrip, van de status als ‘misdaad der misdaden’, het ultieme kwaad. Dat is niet per se terecht, zeggen ze. Oorlogsmisdaden en misdaden tegen de menselijkheid zijn voor het slachtoffer even gruwelijk – en worden even zwaar bestraft. Met levenslang.
Maar genocide is altijd een moreel beladen begrip geweest, benadrukt Shaw. „Het is niet zoals oorlog: die kan in principe legitiem zijn. Genocide niet. Genocide is een categorie die het monumentale kwaad omvat van de poging om burgerbevolkingen, samenlevingen en groepen te vernietigen.” En de roep om actie ligt daarom altijd in het begrip zelf besloten.
Onderzoekers Wie heeft NRC gesproken?
Shmuel Lederman: Israëlische onderzoeker aan de Open Universiteit van Israël
Dirk Moses: Australische hoogleraar aan de City University of New York en hoofdredacteur van de Journal of Genocide Research
Melanie O’Brien: Australische jurist, onderzoeker aan de University of Western Australia en voorzitter van de International Association of Genocide Scholars
Raz Segal: Israëlische genocide-onderzoeker aan de Stockton University in New Jersey, VS
Martin Shaw: Britse hoogleraar aan het Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals, emeritus hoogleraar aan de University of Sussex en auteur van onder meer het boek What Is Genocide?
Ugur Ümit Üngör: Nederlandse hoogleraar aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en het NIOD Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies
Iva Vukusic: Kroatische genocide-onderzoeker aan de Universiteit Utrecht
Ook sprak NRC met drie wetenschappers in binnen- en buitenland uit aanpalende vakgebieden.
The embassy has received many questions about the NRC article published on November 13th. We want to stress that the article provides a selective and incomplete picture of our internal report. The response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is as follows:
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken note of the article published in the Dutch newspaper NRC, on November 13th, about Israel.
The article is based on parts of a confidential report from the Embassy. It provides a selective and incomplete picture that does not reflect the Dutch policy in any way. Our collegues at Embassies must be able to do their work properly, professionally and with integrity. They have the full support of the Ministry.
It is utterly unacceptable that they are hindered in their work due to such reporting in the media.
The First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress will take place in Vienna, Austria, from June 13 to June 15, 2025. Their motto is “Joining forces with Palestinians and allies in the struggle against Zionism.”
The speakers include Professor Haim Bresheeth-Žabner: A filmmaker and film studies scholar at SOAS University of London, founder of the Jewish Network for Palestine, and author of several influential books. Maya Rinderer: A Communist and Jewish anti-Zionist activist, currently a pre-doc assistant at the University of Vienna. Ilan Pappé: An Israeli historian and professor at the University of Exeter, known for his book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Oded Schechter: A philosopher and Talmudist living in Berlin, co-founder of the Berlin Makhloykes Center. Professor Yaakov Rabkin (online): Professor emeritus of history at the Université de Montréal and author of A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism. Among others.
The invitation reads, “The world watches in horror the unfolding genocide against the Palestinian people committed by Zionism in partnership with the West. As Jews, it is our duty to take action, as this is done in our name. We must join our Palestinian brothers and sisters in their darkest hour, and work for freeing and decolonizing Palestine! To achieve this just aim, we must have progressive organizations and individuals across the world with us, working against Zionist Apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide as the last devastating evidence of colonialism which must be terminated.”
They urge, “Jews and people of Jewish descent everywhere – those whom the Zionist state claims to speak for – are uniting to declare their unwavering opposition to Zionism. Since the First Zionist Congress over a century ago, Zionism claimed to speak on behalf of all Jews, while permanently attempting to silence our opposition to its constant crimes. Jewish tradition, history and culture is totally opposed to genocide. The impressive history of Jewish resistance to Zionism is as long as Zionism – it included religious communities as well as secular movements of Jewish descent, and the vehement Jewish opposition to the creation of the Zionist state in Palestine itself. Zionism is a crime against Judaism and the indigenous people of Palestine, and we are committed to putting an end to it. Over the years, it became clear that Zionism, instead of protecting Jews, placed them in great danger by committing atrocious acts in their name. Zionism is based on racial supremacy, adopting the very racist assumptions which are inherent to antisemitism – describing Jews as belonging to some chosen race – a notion which is fundamentally racist and which has no relation to Judaism.”
According to them, “The Zionist settler-colonial entity denies Palestinians their most basic rights. Zionism operates through colonialism, apartheid, ethnic-cleansing and genocide in Palestine Even before 1948. Fourteen million Palestinians worldwide are its direct victims. To Israel we firmly declare ‘Not in Our Name!’ We are devoted to terminating Zionism and we are devoted to the decolonization of Palestine under Palestinian leadership! Above all, Zionism is a crime against humanity. Dedicated to the oath of the survivors of Mauthausen concentration camp, handed down to us as testimony of resistance against Nazi fascism, we follow their universal legacy and reiterate their message: “The permanence in the camp, lasting years, has reinforced in our minds the knowledge of the value of brotherhood among the people of all nations. True to these ideals, we make a solemn oath to continue to fight, firm and united, against imperialism and against the instigation of hatred between peoples.”
Promising that “Together we will join forces at the first Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress and united we will join the Palestinians in liberating Palestine, and building a democratic, just and equal society for all!”
The authors also published a statement titled “Nakba Day Statement from the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress,” on May 15, 2025. They stated, “Today, on Nakba Day, we commemorate not only the catastrophic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948, but we affirm what Palestinians have always known: the Nakba is not a matter of the past—it is ongoing and hasn’t stopped ever since. From the pre-meditated ethnic cleansing of hundreds of villages in 1948, to the forced exile and denial of return to generations of refugees—who constitute the majority of all Palestinians, to the current genocidal campaign in Gaza, Zionism has always been a project of erasure and racial domination. What is happening today is not a deviation from Zionism—it is its very essence being live-streamed for the whole world to see.”
They argue, “As organizers of the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress we declare with unwavering clarity: Zionism is a crime against the Palestinian people, a crime against Judaism, and a crime against humanity. The same logic of ethnic cleansing that drove the expulsion of Palestinians from Yafa in 1948 and which established the Gaza Strip as a concentration camp to house millions of surplus human beings, is guiding the current genocide in Gaza. It is the inevitable continuation of the settler-colonial project whose entire mission is to complete what was started during the Nakba: the removal of Palestinians from their homeland to make way for a racially pure state. Just like Israeli statements today, this logic was never a secret.”
They end by stating, “We reject the efforts of those who claim there is a ‘moral’ Zionism distinct from these atrocities. Trying to make such a distinction is reprehensible. The same arguments and type of thinking used to justify the ongoing genocide in Gaza are those that were used to justify the Nakba since 1948. Zionism cannot be rehabilitated. It must be dismantled. Therefore, we stand up to Zionism and reject it in its entirety. It is precisely our duty to do so because of the legacy which is handed to us, echoed in the oath of the survivors of the Mauthausen concentration camp: “True to these ideals, we make a solemn oath to continue to fight, firm and united, against imperialism and against the instigation of hatred between peoples.” We call on all people of conscience—Jews and non-Jews, Palestinians and allies, survivors and descendants—to join us in opposing Zionism, rejecting genocide, and working toward a free and decolonized Palestine. End the Nakba. End the Genocide. End Zionism. Decolonise Palestine!”
The organizer of the Congress is the association “For Democracy and Human Rights in Palestine” (Für Demokratie und Menschenrechte in Palästina). The association was created on June 20, 2024.
The association was also behind the “Palestine Congress Vienna” on October 5-6, 2024, urging “For a free Palestine – without colonialism and apartheid!”
They wrote, “In the war against Gaza, the Israeli occupation army has so far killed over 40,000 Palestinians, the majority of them children and women, injured 100,000, completely destroyed civilian infrastructure, displaced and rendered millions homeless—and imposed a starvation blockade on top of that… The strong solidarity movement here, too, that is standing up against this, is being silenced with accusations of anti-Semitism. But more and more people, even those of Jewish background, are saying ‘not in our name’.”
And that, “Freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are being restricted in an unprecedented manner, even leading to criminal prosecution. Back then, they branded Mandela a terrorist; today, they brand the Palestinian resistance – even though it is legitimate under international law. The decisive factor is the reversal of anti-fascism. The Mauthausen Oath was: no more war and imperialism. But that’s exactly what they’re doing again: war, fascism, and imperialism. Anyone who opposes this and supports the Palestinian resistance against annihilation is persecuted as an anti-Semite – what an Orwellian distortion. We stick to this: Never again – for all!”
They summed up, “To give political impact to our moral outcry, we are organizing a Palestine Congress. It aims to: · give a voice to the Palestinian and international resistance to the genocide; · provide a platform for the majority of Austrians who do not want to support the ruling elites’ support of the genocide and advocate neutrality; · challenge the Zionist narrative that disguises barbaric settler colonialism as ‘protection against anti-Semitism’.”
While the original First Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897, established by Theodor Herzl, represented thousands of Zionists in Europe, the current so-called anti-Zionist Congress represents a tiny but determined group of activists-scholars who have used their position to besmirch and distort the history of the Jewish State.
The authors should be aware that the Nakba was self-inflicted. Despite receiving the major share of Mandatory Palestine in the 1947 UN Partition Proposal, the Palestinian Arabs, under the leadership of Haj Amin al-Husseini, rejected the proposal. He spent part of WWII in Berlin to convince Hitler to establish extermination camps in Palestine, his version of the “final solution” for some 600,000 Jews who survived the Holocaust and emigrated to the Jewish State. In 1948, the Palestinian Arabs linked up with seven Arab armies to fight the fledgling Jewish State. The Arabs lost the war, creating a self-made Nakba. Following the Six Day War in 1967, the then Labor government offered generous concessions to the Palestinians who, together with Arab countries, rejected it during the Khartoum Conference.
Similarly, Palestinians in Gaza, headed by Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, started an ill-advised war against Israel on October 7, 2023. They were trained by former members of ISIS who fled to Gaza. Hamas runs a brutal and corrupt regime where even small dissent is savagely punished.
The so-called “anti-Zionist congress” is a thinly disguised effort to legitimize the rising wave of antisemitism by having Jews and Israelis participating.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism states clearly that “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” is antisemitic.
Austria is a member of the IHRA. In fact, in 2021, Austria’s Vice Chancellor Werner Kogler, together with the Federal Minister for European Affairs Karoline Edtstadler and the President of the Vienna Jewish Community Oskar Deutsch, presented the “Austrian National Strategy against Antisemitism” in the Federal Chancellery in Vienna. The strategy “comprises measures for applying the IHRA working definition of antisemitism and for better protecting Jewish communities and institutions and with the involvement of relevant ministries and stakeholders.”
The Austrian government should call out “the anti-Zionist Congress” for blatant antisemitism.
Iris Hefets: A psychoanalyst based in Berlin and board member of Jüdische Stimme für einen gerechten Frieden. She has taken a stand against Israel’s apartheid and was detained for exercising her right to protest.
Tony Greenstein: A Jewish anti-Zionist activist and founding member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods. His latest book examines the historical links between anti-Semitism and Zionism.
Reuven Abergel: A social and political activist in Israel/Palestine for over 50 years, co-founder of the Israeli Black Panthers, and participant in various movements for social justice.
Oded Schechter: A philosopher and Talmudist living in Berlin, co-founder of the Berlin Makhloykes Center.
Professor Yaakov Rabkin (online): Professor emeritus of history at the Université de Montréal and author of “A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism.”
Stephen Kapos: A Holocaust survivor and activist for Palestinian human rights, he emphasizes the importance of standing up for Palestinians living under occupation.
Lamis Deek: An attorney and human rights advocate specializing in defending Arab and Muslim community members. She is a co-founder of the US Palestine Community Network.
Professor Haim Bresheeth-Žabner: A filmmaker and film studies scholar at SOAS University of London, founder of the Jewish Network for Palestine, and author of several influential books.
Maya Rinderer: A Communist and Jewish anti-Zionist activist, currently a pre-doc assistant at the University of Vienna.
Ilan Pappé: An Israeli historian and professor at the University of Exeter, known for his book “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.”
Katie Halper: An American comedian, writer, and political commentator, host of “The Katie Halper Show” and co-host of “Useful Idiots.”
Vienna, June 13-15th, 2025Joining forces with Palestinians and allies in the struggle against Zionism
Get your TICKETS | Offer financial SUPPORT
Join us at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress
The world watches in horror the unfolding genocide against the Palestinian people committed by Zionism in partnership with the West. As Jews, it is our duty to take action, as this is done in our name. We must join our Palestinian brothers and sisters in their darkest hour, and work for freeing and decolonising Palestine! To achieve this just aim, we must have progressive organisations and individuals across the world with us, working against Zionist Apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide as the last devastating evidence of colonialism which must be terminated.
Jews and people of Jewish descent everywhere – those whom the Zionist state claims to speak for – are uniting to declare their unwavering opposition to Zionism.
Since the First Zionist Congress over a century ago, Zionism claimed to speak on behalf of all Jews, while permanently attempting to silence our opposition to its constant crimes. Jewish tradition, history and culture is totally opposed to genocide.
The impressive history of Jewish resistance to Zionism is as long as Zionism – it included religious communities as well as secular movements of Jewish descent, and the vehement Jewish opposition to the creation of the Zionist state in Palestine itself.
Zionism is a crime against Judaism and the indigenous people of Palestine, and we are committed to putting an end to it. Over the years, it became clear that Zionism, instead of protecting Jews, placed them in great danger by committing atrocious acts in their name. Zionism is based on racial supremacy, adopting the very racist assumptions which are inherent to antisemitism – describing Jews as belonging to some chosen race – a notion which is fundamentally racist and which has no relation to Judaism.
The Zionist settler-colonial entity denies Palestinians their most basic rights. Zionism operates through colonialism, apartheid, ethnic-cleansing and genocide in Palestine Even before 1948. Fourteen million Palestinians worldwide are its direct victims. To Israel we firmly declare “Not in Our Name!” We are devoted to terminating Zionism and we are devoted to the decolonisation of Palestine under Palestinian leadership!
Above all, Zionism is a crime against humanity. Dedicated to the oath of the survivors of Mauthausen concentration camp, handed down to us as testimony of resistance against Nazi fascism, we follow their universal legacy and reiterate their message: “The permanence in the camp, lasting years, has reinforced in our minds the knowledge of the value of brotherhood among the people of all nations. True to these ideals, we make a solemn oath to continue to fight, firm and united, against imperialism and against the instigation of hatred between peoples.”
Together we will join forces at the first Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress and united we will join the Palestinians in liberating Palestine, and building a democratic, just and equal society for all!
People of all backgrounds are invited.
Joining forces with Palestinians and allies in the struggle against Zionism
Vienna, June 13-15th, 2025
Support the Call
Nakba Day Statement from the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress
May 15, 2025
Today, on Nakba Day, we commemorate not only the catastrophic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948, but we affirm what Palestinians have always known: the Nakba is not a matter of the past—it is ongoing and hasn’t stopped ever since. From the pre-meditated ethnic cleansing of hundreds of villages in 1948, to the forced exile and denial of return to generations of refugees—who constitute the majority of all Palestinians, to the current genocidal campaign in Gaza, Zionism has always been a project of erasure and racial domination. What is happening today is not a deviation from Zionism—it is its very essence being live-streamed for the whole world to see. READ MORE… HERE
Latest:
Ronnie Barkan is an Israeli dissident, co-founder of Boycott from Within, Anarchists Against the Wall and Palestine Action member. On Nakba Day 2022 he participated in a direct action against the UK headquarters of Israel-based Elbit Systems. Elbit is Israel’s #1 arms manufacturer and currently has boots on the ground in Gaza who help to carry out the genocide. Most recently Barkan was harassed by the German secret police following his Munich talk at Professor-Huber-Platz, where he connected the legacy of the White Rose who opposed Nazism with direct action in opposition to Zionism.
Donny Gluckstein is the son of an anti-Zionist Jewish Palestinian refugee father and Jewish South African mother. He is the author of several works that touch on the subject of jewish opposition to Zionism, jewish working class organizing etc.
Wieland Hoban is a composer, author and academic translator in the fields of philosophy, art music and literature as well as the author of articles in the scientific and journalistic fields. He is chairman of the Jewish Voice for Just Peace, which he also represents in the umbrella organizations EJP (European Jews for Palestine) and GJP (Global Jews for Palestine). His book “German Apartheid Politics” will be published in 2024.
Peter Eisenstein – is a Jewish American historian and filmmaker. He is a board member of the Norwegian Peace and Justice party, Fred og Rettferdighet, and a member of the Norwegian Jewish group, Jødiske Stemmer for Rettferdig Fred. As an American, he is anti-imperialist, and as a Jew, he is anti-zionist. He stands against the Zionist state of Israel which is nothing but a European and now American settler colonial project.
Speakers:
Iris Hefets was born Israel to a jewish family. Iris is workink as a psychoanalyst in Berlin. She is a board member of “Jüdische Stimme für einen gerechten Frieden”. She chose to exercise her constitutional rights and take a stand against Israel’s apartheid and genocide of the Palestinians. She was detained by German authorities on the streets of Berlin simply for exercising her democratic right to protest.
Tony Greenstein is a Jewish anti-Zionist activist and founding member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods. In his latest book, ‘Zionism During the Holocaust: The Instrumentalisation of Memory in the Service of State and Nation’, he analyses the historical link between anti-Semitism and Zionism and how Zionism is mercilessly exploiting the memory of the Holocaust today. Greenstein has written for numerous newspapers, including The Guardian’s ‘Comment is Free’, The Brighton Argus, Brighton and Hove Independent, Tribune, Labour Briefing and Weekly Worker. He is also an active trade unionist and a member of Brighton & Hove Trades Council, UNITE and UNISON.
Reuven Abergel – was born in 1943 in Rabat, Morocco, the fourth of eight children. He immigrated to Israel with his parents and seven siblings in 1950. The family was sent to the immigrant tent camp in Pardes Hana. Later they moved to Musrara, a former Palestinian neighborhood in Jerusalem whose residents were forced to abandon their homes following the 1948 war. Reuven Abergel has been a social and political activist in Israel/Palestine for more than 50 years. After co-founding the Israeli Black Panthers, Abergel participated in numerous movements for social and political justice in Israel-Palestine, including the Peripheries Bloc of the 2011 social uprisings in Israel, as well as the Tarabut movement, which links social and political struggles in Israel. He lives in Jerusalem.
Professor Yakov Rabkin (online) is a professor emeritus of history at the Université de Montréal, author and public intellectual. His published works include studies of relations between science and technology, research on cultural aspects of science. He also contributed to the fields of Jewish and Israel studies. His book A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism was nominated for best French to English translation for “an important and timely work” at the 2006 Governor General’s Awards.
Stephen Kapos – Stephen Kapos – Holocaust survivor: As a young boy, he was separated from his Jewish parents in war-torn Budapest. Hidden in children’s homes under false papers, he lived in constant danger of being discovered by Hungarian fascists of the Arrow Cross Party. Stephen is an activist for Palestinian human rights and an active member of the Camden branch of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Standing up for Palestinians living under brutal occupation is particularly important to him – especially as a Holocaust survivor. “Palestinians live under an apartheid system, as recognized by Amnesty International and other major human rights organizations.” These are Stephen’s political beliefs, which are recognized as protected characteristics under the Equalities Act 2010.
Lamis Deek, an attorney and human rights advocate specializing in defending Arab & Muslim community members, activists and organizers against governmental attack. Lamis is a long time member of Al-Awda NY: The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, the Arab Muslim American Federation, and the National Lawyers Guild. She is co-founder of the US Palestine Community Network.
Professor Haim Bresheeth-Žabner – is a filmmaker, photographer and a film studies scholar, and a Professorial Research Associate at SOAS University of London. He is past member of Matzpen, the first Anti-Zionist organisation, and founder of Jewish Network for Palestine. His books include the best-selling Introduction to the Holocaust , The Gulf War and the New World Order, and The Conflict and Contemporary Visual Culture in Palestine & Israel, special issue of Third Text . His films include the widely-shown State of Danger (1989, BBC2), London is Burning (2013) and Convivencia at the Turnpike (2015). His most recent book is An Army Like No Other: How the IDF Made Israel, published by Verso, 2020. See Verso Website, and Book website.
Ilan Pappé is an Israeli historian and professor at the University of Exeter and was previously a lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa. He is best known for his book ‘The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.
Katie Halper – is a writer, filmmaker and host from and based in New York City. She is the host of the podcast, YouTube show and WBAI radio show “The Katie Halper Show” and co-Host of the podcast and YouTube show “Useful Idiots.” Katie was first censored by The Hill TV and then fired from its morning broadcast, “Rising,” after writing a monologue in which she stood up for US Representative Rashida Tlaib and stated that Israel was, indeed, an apartheid state. She is currently working on a documentary about Jewish Holocaust survivors speaking out against the genocide in Gaza and is the director of the forthcoming award-winning documentary “Commie Camp”, about Camp Kinderland, a summer camp founded by secular Jewish socialists in the 1920s which still exists. She was the recipient of the Women’s Institute for Freedom of the Press’s Women and Media Award in 2022, and the American Muslims for Palestine’s Leadership Annual Award in 2023. Katie has written for outlets including Rolling Stone, The Nation, The Guardian, New York Magazine and more.
Dr. Sami Ayad – born in Jaffa, a victim of the original ethnic cleansing of Palestine (Nakba), is a medical doctor and chairman of the Palestinian Community in Austria.
Ghada Karmi is a Palestinian physician, academic, and writer. She has been a political activist for Palestine since the 1970s, and has written widely on the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Her recent book, One State: the Only Democratic Future for Palestine-Israel (2023) encapsulates her vision for a shared and equitable state as a an end to the conflict.
Rima Hassan is a French-Palestinian jurist and Member of the European Parliament (MEP) with La France Insoumise, part of The Left group in the European Parliament. Born in the Neirab refugee camp in Syria, she moved to France at age 10 where. she studied international law. Her PhD deals with legal frameworks in refugee camps. In 2019, she founded the Observatory of Refugee Camps (OCR), an NGO focused on global refugee camp governance. She has worked with the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons, served as a Rapporteur at the National Court of Asylum, and co-directed a law seminar at iReMMO. She has also served on expert committees related to migrant rights and the Marianne Initiative. In 2023, Forbes named her one of its “40 Women of the Year.”
Oded Schechter is a philosopher and talmudist. He lives in Berlin and is the co-founder of the Berlin Makhloykes Center.
First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress, Vienna
Organized by the association “For Democracy and Human Rights in Palestine”
Shelter for the Future on the Schmelz, extended, Guntherstraße, 1150 Vienna . Due to intimidation, the room was cancelled!
In the war against Gaza, the Israeli occupation army has so far killed over 40,000 Palestinians, the majority of them children and women, injured 100,000, completely destroyed civilian infrastructure, displaced and rendered millions homeless—and imposed a starvation blockade on top of that. The medical journal “The Lancet” has now reported in a study more than 186,000 Palestinian victims as a result of the bombings and massacres by the Israeli occupation army, which have now continued for over 10 months.
All these unspeakable crimes are committed in the name of an inviolable “self-defense” based on a colonial and exclusive claim to a land in which the original population, the Palestinian people, is disenfranchised and displaced. Instead of being able to exercise their fundamental right to self-determination, the Palestinians are subjected to an apartheid regime.
Large parts of the world, especially in the Global South, have transformed their horror and outrage into solidarity. Millions upon millions are filling the streets, even in the West, demanding:
Ceasefire now!
South Africa has accused Israel of genocide before the International Court of Justice, which has accepted the case. It is the country that, with the help of the international solidarity and boycott movement, was able to free itself from white apartheid and fought against Western colonialism for equality before the law for all, regardless of whether they were former colonial rulers or oppressed colonized.
It is the West, the US, the EU, and unfortunately also Austria, that not only enable but actively support apartheid, occupation, ethnic cleansing, and even genocide. Vast quantities of weapons continue to flow to Israel. And our federal government has already voted against a ceasefire three times internationally.
The strong solidarity movement here, too, that is standing up against this, is being silenced with accusations of anti-Semitism. But more and more people, even those of Jewish background, are saying “not in our name.” Freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are being restricted in an unprecedented manner, even leading to criminal prosecution. Back then, they branded Mandela a terrorist; today, they brand the Palestinian resistance – even though it is legitimate under international law.
The decisive factor is the reversal of anti-fascism. The Mauthausen Oath was: no more war and imperialism. But that’s exactly what they’re doing again: war, fascism, and imperialism. Anyone who opposes this and supports the Palestinian resistance against annihilation is persecuted as an anti-Semite – what an Orwellian distortion. We stick to this:
Never again – for all!
To give political impact to our moral outcry, we are organizing a Palestine Congress.
It aims to:
· give a voice to the Palestinian and international resistance to the genocide;
· provide a platform for the majority of Austrians who do not want to support the ruling elites’ support of the genocide and advocate neutrality;
· challenge the Zionist narrative that disguises barbaric settler colonialism as “protection against anti-Semitism.”
Supporters of the Palestine Congress Vienna 2024:
If you would like to support the congress with your name or organization, please contact us using the form below!
Let’s give Palestine a voice!
Dalia Sarig-Fellner, jüdische Friedensaktivistin der Initiative „Not in our name“ Nura Hashem, Austropalästinenserin, Kulturverein Handala Isra Doghman, Rapperin, Aktivistin mit Wurzeln in Palästina, Siegerin des FM4 Protestsongcontests 2022 mit ihrem Anti-Rassismus-Song „9. November“ Ernst Wolrab, Kommunist, Mitglied des KZ-Verbands und Nachfahre jüdischer, kommunistischer Widerstandskämpfer, die im KZ ermordet wurden Ulrike Guérot, Politikwissenschaftlerin, Autorin, Europaexpertin, Friedensaktivistin, Gründerin des „European democracy lab“, Wien. Michael Barenboim, Geiger und Professor an der Barenboim-Said Akademie, Berlin, Deutschland Heini Staudinger, GEA-Unternehmer, Präsidentschaftskandidat 2002, Aktivist, Schrems Franz Sölkner, Steirische Friedensplattform Mary Pampalk, US-Staatsbürgerin, langjährige Aktivistin in Tansania und Mosambik, Mitglied der Anti-Apartheid-Bewegung und heute bei Frauen in Schwarz Wien Josef Pampalk, Afrika- und Politikwissenschaftler, historisches Engagement gegen Portugals Kolonialismus und Südafrikas Rassismus im südlichen Afrika, ehemaliger katholischer Missionar, 1971 aus Mosambik ausgewiesen, heute aktiv gegen Apartheidpolitik im Nahen Em. Bischof Dr. Heinz Lederleitner, emeritierter Bischof Dr. Bert Preiss, Universitätslektor & Friedensforscher, Wien, Österreich Judith Bernstein, Jüdisch-Palästinensische Dialoggruppe München, München, Deutschland Shadi Abudaher, Internist, Primar, aus Gaza stammend Irina Vana, Soziologin, Antiimperialistische Koordination Fritz Edlinger, Herausgeber „International“ und Kreiskyianer in der SPÖ Kilian Paula, Vorsitzender KPÖ Villach Em. Bernhard Heitz, emeritierter Bischof Marco Wanjura, Palästina Solidarität Österreich Andreas Wimmer, Initiative Plattform Demokratie Simon Macheiner, Voice for Palestine, Salzburg Martin Weinberger, Germanist, Selbstbestimmtes Österreich Wilhelm Langthaler, Aktivist für eine gerechtere Weltordnung Franz Piribauer, DIEM25, Koordinator Wien Monika Vykoulal, Mitglied Judeobolschewiener Ortwin Rosner, Philosoph und Publizist, Wien Christina Angerer, Psychotherapeutin, Innsbruck Wolfgang Berger, Art Director, Kleinunternehmer, Aktivist, Wien Fernando Romero-Forsthuber, Filmemacher Vedrana Covic, KPÖ-Mitglied Dylan Pattillo, KPÖ-Mitglied Topoke, Künstler und Lehrer mit kongolesischen Wurzeln Tarkan Tek, Sozialwissenschaftler Astrid Wagner, Strafverteidigerin Yeliz Dagdevir, Psychologin und Diversity-Aktivistin, Innsbruck Peter Oberdammer, Historiker, Wien Asim Bojadzi, Jurist, Spitzenkandidat der Liste GAZA in Wien Nord-West Eva Pfisterer, Journalistin Karl Rottenschlager, Theologe, Sozialarbeiter und Gründer sowie langjähriger Leiter der Emmausgemeinschaft St. Pölten Michael Pröbsting, zu 6 Monaten bedingter Haft verurteilter Palästina-Aktivist für politische Unterstützung des Widerstands Karl Helmreich, Benediktiner, Hirtenberg Erika Mourgues, Mitglied SVU Sozialismus von Unten, Berlin, Deutschland Johannes Wiener, Gärtner und Ökologe Anthony Löwstedt, Kommunikationswissenschaftler, Wien Prof. Helga Baumgarten, Wissenschaftlerin und Autorin, Universität Birzeit Palästina Helmut Sauseng, Friedensaktivist, Aktivist für Bürger- und Menschenrechte, gegen die Allmacht der WHO, Wien Gunter Zeilinger, Open-Source-Software (Healthcare) Entwickler, Wien Iman Shaker, Dar al Janub – Verein für antirassistische und friedenspolitische Initiativen, Wien Michael Pand, Hainburg, Deutschland Ahmad Hijawi, Jenin, Palästina Dr. Erich Wartecker, Richter i.R., Wien, Österreich Henriette Al-Shaban, Psychosoziale Beraterin, Wien, Österreich Nadine Najim, Büro, Wien, Österreich Ariana Macon, Biologin, Wien, Österreich Regine, Hamburg, Deutschland Arwa Elabd, Buchhändlerin, Wien, Österreich Shaddin Almasri, Wissenschaftliche Forscherin, Österreich Alina Dwaoud, Lehramtsstudentin, Case-Managerin, Wien, Österreich Aylin Ak, Wien, Österreich Haruko Maeda, Wien, Österreich Catalina Martinez, Kolumbien Masah Alchach, Wien, Österreich M. Stummer, Wien, Österreich Mahmoud Shukry, Wien, Österreich Claudia Toman, Autorin, Wien, Österreich Igor Böhm, Freistadt, Österreich Margit Leyrer, AHS-Lehrerin i.R., Gleisdorf, Österreich Karl Leyrer, em. Politischer Bildner, Gleisdorf, Österreich Elisabeth Namdar, Wien, Österreich Christl Meyer, Frauen in Schwarz, Wien, Österreich Nadine Karaman, Österreich Dr. Heinz Leitner, Pensionierter Beamter des Arbeits- und Sozialministeriums, Österreich Amjad Ibraheem, Wien, Österreich Andrea Drescher, Friedensaktivistin, Österreich Wolfgang Puschnigg, Wien, Österreich Sabri Ben Hassen, Tunesische Jugendbewegung in Deutschland, Frankfurt, Deutschland Ayten Arslan, Wien, Österreich Thomas Prader, Dr., em. Rechtsanwalt, Wien Medina Avdagić (Gunić), Koordinatorin von International Workers Aid, Österreich Meinrad Schneckenleithner, GRÜNE Parteimitglied, Lichtenberg, Österreich Renate Bursik, Palästina Solidarität, Wien, Österreich Zeynep Türel, Wien, Österreich Monika Mokre, Politikwissenschaftlerin und politische Aktivistin in den Bereichen Asyl, Migration und Gefängnis Corinna Oesch, Historikerin an der Universität Wien Thomas Zechner, Historiker und Fahrradbote Karl-Heinz Hinrichs, Umwelt- und Friedensaktivist, Ramsau am Dachstein David Sonnenbaum, Überlebensaktivist Benjamin Fasching-Gray, Aktivist Judeobolschewiener Markus Raithmayr, Architekt, Lans, Tirol Charly Walter, open space, Innsbruck Silvia Trattnig, Psychotherapeutin, Innsbruck Claudia Fritz, Künstlerin, Lans, Innsbruck Ebru Durukan, Wien, Österreich Verena Hopfner, Musiktherapeutin & Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin, Deutschland Sami Ayad, Dr. med., Wien, Österreich Thomas Lang, Diplomkrankenpfleger, Salzburg, Österreich Daniel Haselwanter, Musiker, Imst, Österreich Judith Rachbauer, Friedensaktivistin, WILPF, Schildorn, Österreich Ruth Katz, Wien, Österreich Özlem Kalkan-Deveci, Dermatologin, Koblach, Österreich Elif Kızılboga A., FÄ f Gyn./Geburtshilfe, Bregenz, Österreich Angie González, abya yala descolonial, Österreich Canan Şenel, Hohenems, Avusturya David Wögerbauer, Wien, Österreich Alessandra Guido, Researcher, Rom, Italien Siraj El Masri, Österreich Laura Weissenberger-Silva, Artist/Filmmaker, Wien, Österreich Ahmed Al-Jabouri, Wien, Österreich Nalan Tasdögen-Kaya, Feldkirch, Österreich Hüseyin Evren, Arzt, Innsbruck, Österreich Semra Kandemir, Spielgruppenleiterin, Vorarlberg, Österreich Nazlican Kalkan, Stlv. Geschäftsführer, Vorarlberg, Österreich Elisabeth Lindner-Riegler, Wien, Österreich Rames Najjar, Architekt und Produktentwickler, Wien, Österreich Johann Wührer, r. cath. priest, Linz, Österreich Christian Wetschka, Pädagoge, Supervisor, Pastoralassistent, Wien, Österreich Tristan Jorde, Schauspieler, Regisseur, Wien, Österreich Klaus Suleiman Kufner, freier Journalist bei Al Jazeera, Wien-Doha-Rabat. Jussuf Windischer, Theologe, e.a. Obmann Vinzenzgemeinschaft, Innsbruck Gisela Posch, Gartentherapeutin, Hanstedt, Deutschland Ewald Benes, Univ. Prof. i.R. TU-Wien , ehemaliger Vorsitzender der Laieninitiative Wolfgang Schiller, Fotograf, Friedensaktivist, Eutin, Deutschland Thrassyvoulos Papadopoulos, Griechenland Solikomitee Kiel, Deutschland Matthias Lauer, Vorsitzender der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Christentum und Sozialdemokratie, Innsbruck, Österreich Nedim Klipo, Vorsitzender KPÖ Ottakring-Hernals, Stadtleitungsmitglied KPÖ Wien Laila Mahfouz, Canada Peter F. Mayer, Publizist, Herausgeber tkp.at, Wien, Österreich Regina Brandstetter, Sozialarbeiterin, Wien, Österreich Adriana Montanaro, Österreich Lilly Brandstetter, Sozialpädagogin, Wien, Österreich Rukaia, Researcher/Activist, Berlin, DE Dr. Frank Haidar, Friedensaktivist, Wien, Österreich Saad Malik, Software Engineer, Zürich, Switzerland Bashar Zapen, Industrial Medical Designer & Researcher, Kiel, D Nickhil Sharma, Researcher, Norwich, United Kingdom Veronika Hilmer, NGO Projekt Managerin, Berlin Hayrunnisa Acin, Wien, Österreich Diana Bulzan, Vienna, Austria Bohán Bálint, Sales agent, Budapest, Hungary Elisabeth Dokulil, Psychotherapeutin, Wien Andrea Wögerbauer, Österreich Priscilla Cassar, Malta Dusty Whistles, Künstlerin, Wien, Österreich Dania Haddad, Malta Tasnim, Österreich Tibor Zenker, Autor, Österreich Karin Krims, Pensionistin/Bibliothekarin, Wien, Austria Angelika Beer, Lehrerin, Mödling, Österreich Gerhard Drexler, Pensionist, Wien, Österreich Samy Othman, Wien, Österreich Dietlinde Alphart, Trainerin Deutsch als Fremdsprache, Wien, Austria Hallak Regina, Craniosacrale Biodynamik/Hebamme, Vienna, Austria Emel, Lehrerin, Feldkirch, Österreich Veronika Rochhart, Graz, Österreich Ines Stoderegger, Location Manager, Gaspoltshofen, Austria Luna-Alyssa Chommakh, Studentin und Musikerin, Wien, Österreich Lara Chommakh, Studentin, Vortragende beim RK und Aktivistin, Wien, Österreich Tuncay Yazgül, Wien, Österreich Shafqat, Researcher, Graz, Austria Frank Hernández, PhD candidate in philosophy, Charles University in Prague, Juarez/Prague, Mexico/Czechia Abeer Haidar, Beraterin, Wien, Österreich Claudia Mongini, Philosophin, Wien, Österreich Rami Ali, Politologe & Islamwissenschafter, Wien, Österreich Nabila Irshaid, Bildende Künstlerin, Wien/Palästina/Deutschland Andrea Torres, Reynosa, Mexico Georg Zlabinger, Proletarier, KPÖ-Mitglied, Wien, Österreich Gholamhossein Mashhadi Gholamhossein, Heilmasseur, Wien, Österreich Gysin Soder, Palästina-Solidarität Region Basel, Gewerkschafter / Menschenrechtsaktivist, Basel, Schweiz Marcelo Gauster, Mitglied der KJÖ Hildegard Schmid, Pensionistin, Wien Mag. Anni Haidar, Wien Zohar Chamberlain Regev, Aktivistin, Freiheitsflottila, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland Hans Wührer, ehemaliger Voest-Pfarrer Joshua Makalintal, Forscher, Innsbruck Hiyam Biary, künstlerische/politische Bildnerin, Berlin, Deutschland Hassan Noah, Österreich Lucia Ashry, pensionierte Lehrerin, Linz Shaban Ashry, pensionierter Techniker, Linz Silvia Vlogger, Österreich Maria Bissan Canaan, Übersetzerin, Aktivistin aus Jenin, Palästina Gerhard Kofler, Friedens- und Umweltaktivist, Wien Friedbert Boxberger, Friedensaktivist, Deutsche Kommunistische Partei (DKP), Heidelberg, Deutschland Selma Nisic, Supervisorin, Wien Dr. Salah Hirmas, Founder & CEO Hirmas Consulting, Vorarlberg Erika Gruber, Wien Anja Baier, Projektleiterin, Detuschland Ralf Pleger, Film- und Bühnenregisseur, Deutschland Silvia Volgger, Österreich Iris Kaloo-Müller, Sozial-und Kulturpädagogin, Psychotraumatologin, KPÖ-Mitglied, Graz, Österreich Tabea Marten, Künstlerin, Berlin, Deutschland Elizabeth Ordonez, Hispanist/Schriftsteller, Wien Sadettin Kaplan, Maschinenbau, Techniker, Augsburg, Deutschland Annette Thieme, Achtsamkeitstrainerin, Berlin, Deutschland Alexander Muth, Poet und Publizist, Wien Yazan Eissa, Ingenieur für erneuerbare Energien, Berlin, Deutschland Louica Olk, Aktivistin, Studentin, Hannover, Deutschland Simona Saluzzo, Ärztin, Wien, Österreich Hans Wührer, Pfarrer, Linz, Österreich Roswitha Al-Hussein, Sozialarbeiterin, Graz, Österreich Nabhan Othman, PhD in Wirtschaft und Ingenieurwesen, Schriftsteller, Ramallah, Palästina Brenda Speck Müllner, Pensionistin, Sankt Andrä-Höch, Österreich Sümeyra Akdeniz Ordu, Theologin & Sozialpädagogin, Freedom Flotilla Mitglied, Frankfurt, Deutschland Peter Unterweger, Sekretär, Internationaler Metallgewerkschaftsbund, i. R., Wien, Österreich Leo Gabriel, Journalist, unabhängiger Filmemacher und Sozialanthropologe, World Social Forum, Wien/Mexiko, Österreich Maria Scheibl, Pensionistin, Bruck/Leitha, Österreich Abhijit Ghosh, Österreich Karl Müller, Schuldirektor i. R., Bad Mitterndorf, Österreich Mohamed Magdy, Ingenieur, Wien, Österreich Stella Meris, Künstlerin, Berlin, Deutschland Arne Andersen, Historiker, Autor von “Apartheid in Israel – Tabu in Deutschland?”, Hamburg, Deutschland Raimund Boris Lechthaler, Angestellter, aktiv in der Solidarwerkstatt Österreich, St. Leonhard, Österreich Denise, Pflegeassistentin/Sozialbetreuerin, Graz, Österreich MPhil Sonja Schrei, Lehrerin, Wien, Österreich Isabel Flamme, Psychologin, Wels, Österreich Irene Ansari, Wien, Österreich Albert Schönhuber, Pensionist, “Lumpen”-Pazifist, Schildorn, Österreich Rama Younes, Bauingenieurin, München, Deutschland Brigitte Neubacher, Frauen in Schwarz (Wien), pensionierte Mitarbeiter der UNO in UNHQ und Afghanistan Michael Bennett, Research Analyst, Victoria, Kanada Cameron Carpenter, Student, Durand, Michigan, Vereinigte Staaten Doris Höflmayer, Ärztin, Deutschland Peter Smutny, Journalist, Österreich Elfi Padovan, Kunsterzieherin i.R., Frauen in Schwarz München, München, Deutschland Issa Abdulkarim Huber, Pensionär, Graz, Österreich Ariane Rosner, Coach & Sozialarbeiterin, Wien, Österreich Khalid Adlan, Arzt, Wien, Österreich Heidi Schloegl, Wien, Österreich Angelika Boss, Psychotherapeutin, Wien, Österreich Cassie Easter, Ceasefire now, USA Maximilian Frühschütz, Software-Entwickler, KPÖ-Mitglied, Wien, Österreich Adel Azazi, Wien, Österreich Claude Clemenz, Österreich Michael Ingber, Uni-Dozent, Wien, Österreich Niki Müller, Deutschland Andrea Krammel, Akademische Atempädagogin, Schladming, Österreich Jutta Müller, Pensionistin, Bad Loipersdorf, Österreich Mathieu Faltys, Long Beach, Kalifornien, Vereinigte Staaten Anja Eder, Executive Assistant, Wien, Österreich Stefanie J. Steindl, Fotografin, 1020 Wien, Österreich Rania Bitar, Wien, Österreich Omar Dajani, Wien, Österreich Sümeyye Altintas, Pädagogin, Wien, Österreich Abdallah Zaben, Wien, Österreich Sandy Fars, Schülerin, Mainz, Deutschland Taghreed Ismael, Schülerin, Mainz, Deutschland Ellen Lewis, ehemalige Lehrerin an einer internationalen Schule, Mitbegründerin von “Not In Our Name”, Wien, Österreich Annelie Kremer, Bildhauerin, Werkfrau, München, Deutschland Stefan Voigt, Unternehmer, Berlin, Deutschland Jawairia Iftikhar, Gujrat, Pakistan Ashraf Yanni, Unternehmer, Wien, Österreich Antonia Taabouri, Koordinatorin für Berufssprachkurse, Berlin, Deutschland Claudia Heilig, Ärztin, Wien, Österreich Ero Kovlakidou, Athen, Griechenland Diethelm Lazar, Rentner, Syke (bei Bremen), Deutschland Evelyn Hecht-Galinski, Publizistin, Malsburg-Marzell, Deutschland Elisa H., Pädagogin, DiEM25, Wien, Österreich Kristian Kovarovits, Social Media Experte & Bar-Manager, Wien, Österreich Georgia, Brüssel, Belgien Angelo Mudanò, PhD-Student, Syrakus, Italien Dr. Adel El Sayed, Politikwissenschaftler, Innsbruck, Österreich Ulrich Nitschke, Entwicklungsexperte/Vorsitzender des Partnerschaftsvereins Bonn-Ramallah e.V., Bonn, Deutschland Freya, Dublin, Irland Osama Bandi, Bethlehem, Palästina Fredy Noé Herrarte, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Rev. Myozan Kodo, Dublin, Irland Gerhard Hertenberger, Freier Publizist, Biologe, Wien, Österreich Elfriede Rechberger, Wien, Österreich Dong Jin Kim, Seoul, Südkorea Diego Sagastume, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Oskar Lechleitner, Wien, Österreich Gianni Tognoni, Rom, Italien Renate Häberle, Lehrerin, Schwäbisch Hall, Deutschland – Friedensnetz, Palästina-Komitee Stuttgart Cristina Fuentes del Cid, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Bernard Reyhart, Kildare, Irland Scott Robinson, Sozialanthropologe, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Clara Ferri, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko – Redefreiheit, Freiheit für Palästina Marco Velázquez, Universitätsprofessor, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Abdel Aucar, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Yolanda Florentino, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Jason Melia-O’Brien, Carlow, Irland Margara Millan, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Ana Esther Ceceña, Queretaro, Mexiko – Observatorio Latinoamericano de Geopolítica, UNAM Eamon Rafter, Dublin, Irland Jeevantha Peiris, Colombo, Sri Lanka Alicia, Cuernavaca, Mexiko – Anthropologin Peadar Whelan, Belfast, Irland – Ehemaliger politischer Gefangener der Irisch-Republikanischen Bewegung Karen Mendis, Bremen, Deutschland – Witwe von Viraj Mendis, engagiert sich gegen Genozid und für Frieden und Gerechtigkeit Berth, Tervuren, Belgien Mohanad Khouja, Angestellter, Wien, Österreich Dario Barolin, Theologe, Colonia del Sacramento, Uruguay Jude Lal Fernando, Dublin, Irland Francois Naetar, Pensionist, Wien, Österreich Jawairia Iftikhar, Gujrat, Pakistan Diethelm Lazar, Rentner, Syke (bei Bremen), Deutschland Anton-Guenther Janssen, Lehrer, Deutschland Franz Binder, für Frieden und Menschenrechte, Grieskirchen, Österreich Maritta Kulmitzer, Angestellte, Wien, Österreich Samuel Wade, Lehrer, Wien, Österreich Roser Gari, , Torrelodones, Spanien Karin Pilz, Rentnerin, Wien, Österreich Jan Veil, Friedens- und Demokratie-Aktivist / Autor, Frankfurt/Main, Deutschland Maria Renders, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Denis Halliday, Dublin 6, Irland Ibis Sepulveda, Texcoco, Mexiko Kumnakch, Tawar, Zahnarzt, Wien, Österreich Tania Volke, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Paola Marugan Ricart, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Karen Volke, , Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Aaraon Diaz Mendiburo, Forscher, Mexiko Humberto Ramos de Oliveira Junior, Piracicaba, Brasilien Cynthia Hernandez Gonzalez, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Academicxs por Palestina contra el Genocidio, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Iain Atack, Dublin, Irland Carlos Armando Zaragoza Gonzalez, Ciudad de México, Mexiko Andrea Meza Torres, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Ulrike Müller, Journalistin, Deutschland Mahir Hrnjic, Sarajevo, Bosnien und Herzegowina Minel Abaz, Forscher / Kolumnist, Sarajevo, Bosnien und Herzegowina Jonathan Zinnecker, Geschichtsstudent, Wien, Österreich Eveline Wollner, Soziologin, Wien, Österreich Philipp Seewann, Game Developer, Wien, Österreich Rita De Swaef, Heverlee, Belgien Niamh Ní Lochlainn, Co. Clare, Irland Rita De Swaef, Leuven, Belgien Mercy Mathew, Trivandrum, Indien Simone Sergeant, Louvain, Belgien Silvia Remondini, Guatemala-Stadt, Guatemala Kristina Pirker, Mexiko-Stadt, Mexiko Ms. Sherard Jayawardane , Colombo, Sri Lanka Jessica Chandrashekar , Toronto, Canada Ms. B. Terrence Fernando , Negombo, Sri Lanka Joyce P Dines , Angeles City, Philippines Klaus Helms , retired, Schwerin/Meckl., Germany
YANTE – Youth, Art & Levant Art Association, Vienna Anti-imperialist Coordination (AIK) Styrian Peace Platform Solidarity Workshop Austria BDS Austria Self-Determined Austria (SEBÖ) EVAL – Reverence for All Life, Ramsau am Dachstein, Austria PIFA – Rome, Italy Palestine Committee Stuttgart e. V. , Stuttgart, Germany Communist Youth Austria (KJÖ) Palestine Solidarity Austria (PSÖ) Diem25 , Local Group Vienna Palestine Aid Ireland , Support for Displaced Families in Gaza, Belfast, Ireland Irish Muslim Peace & Integration Council , Dublin, Ireland The Spark
Groups and initiatives:
Yanis Varoufakis (linked live) is a Greek politician, former Greek Finance Minister, and co-founder of the Mera25 party. Varoufakis is known for his years of solidarity with the Palestinian people.
Amira Hass is a renowned Israeli journalist and Bruno Kreisky Prize winner known for her reporting from the Palestinian territories. Her work focuses on the living conditions of Palestinians under Israeli occupation.
Ghassan Abu Sitteh (unfortunately unable to attend at short notice, separate video message) is a Palestinian doctor specializing in plastic and reconstructive surgery and Rector of the University of Glasgow. During the horror of the Israeli bombing of Gaza, Abu Sitteh spent 43 days in Gaza with Doctors Without Borders, working at Al-Shifa Hospital.
Hebh Jamal is a Palestinian journalist. In her work, Jamal exposes the anti-Palestinian racism of German politics, media, and the judiciary. Jamal’s journalism and activism have made her a central voice of the movement in both the United States and Germany.
Azzem Tamimi is a Palestinian academic, author, and political activist deeply involved with Islamic political movements and the Palestinian cause. He has published several books and articles on Islamism and politics in the Middle East.
Ilan Pappé (also unable to attend, own video message) is an Israeli historian, political activist, and professor at the University of Exeter, England, and director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies. He was previously a lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa. He is best known for his book “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.”
Salah Abdel-Shafi is a Palestinian economist and Palestinian Ambassador to Austria and Permanent Representative to International Organizations.
Iris Hefets was born in Israel and is a board member of the Jewish Voice in Germany. She edited the “Kedma” portal, a platform for Mizrahi discourse in Hebrew. She left Israel for political reasons in 2002 and has since lived in Berlin, where she works as a psychoanalyst in Neukölln.
Our speakers:
Naji El Khatib was born in Beirut in 1954 into a refugee family expelled from Jaffa, Palestine, in 1948. El Khatib received his doctorate in political sociology from the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in 1996. He worked as a researcher at the Medfil Humanities Institute in Paris and as an assistant professor at An-Najah National University in Nablus.
Haneen Zoabi is a former Arab Knesset member and advocated for equal rights for all, for Palestinians and especially for women.
Stavit Sinai is a philosophy lecturer and committed anti-apartheid activist. Recently, she participated in occupations and blockades of several weapons manufacturing sites of the Israeli company Elbit in Great Britain with the Pal Action initiative, and thus also participated in the closure of Elbit factories.
Andrew Feinstein is a South African author, politician, and activist with Austrian roots. His parents were Holocaust survivors who emigrated to South Africa after World War II. Feinstein is known for his commitment to combating global arms trafficking and was a former member of the South African Parliament for the African National Congress (ANC). He ran as an independent candidate in the recent UK elections, challenging the Labour Party with his pro-Palestine stance.
Ahmad Othman is a Palestinian political activist, a former member of the now-banned Palestine Solidarity Duisburg group, and a victim of repression and anti-Palestinian racist policies in Germany. Through his activism, he has gained insight into the repression within the nationwide Palestinian movement.
Qassem Massri , a Palestinian activist and pediatrician specializing in neonatology, pediatric intensive care, and pediatric cardiology, was part of an interdisciplinary medical team deployed to the Gaza Strip from April 15 to 29, 2024. His presentation covers the medical and humanitarian conditions prevailing in three different hospitals during this deployment.
Thomas Zmrzly, trade unionist in the hospital, Committee against the ban of Palestine Solidarity Duisburg www.psdu-verbot.info
Attia Rajab is the founder and activist of the Stuttgart Palestine Committee for decades. His family lives in the Gaza Strip. In his recent interview with SWR (Swiss Broadcasting Corporation), he said, “My parents, my siblings, and my brothers have been displaced. They’ve been living in tents for seven months, without any means of subsistence. No electricity, no water, no medicine.”
Salakh Zakut , born in 1954 in Palestine, Ukrainian nationality, state doctorate in philosophy, former director of the Ukrainian-Arab Institute of International Relations in Kyiv, director of the Arab Cultural Institute “Abu Rushd” at the European University, Arab House member of the European Peace Council (Ukraine branch), political activist in the global solidarity movement
Andreas Wimmer , librarian, Marxist, founder of the alliance “Voices for Neutrality”, descendant of resistance fighters against the Nazi regime and Jewish victims of the same
Participants from Austria:
Irina Vana , sociologist, leading candidate of the GAZA list
Ernst Wolrab , communist, former secretary of the Concentration Camp Association, who was removed for his opposition to apartheid, descendant of communist and Jewish victims of the Nazi regime
Kevin Potter is a literary scholar at the University of Vienna specializing in migration, Marxism, and Palestinian literature. Author of “Poetics of the Migrant: Migrant Literature and the Politics of Motion”
Dr. Sami Ayad, born in Yaffa, victim of the original ethnic cleansing of Palestine (Nakba), physician, chairman of the Palestinian Community of Austria
Hannes Hofbauer is a journalist and publisher, head of Promedia Verlag. He studied economic and social history, wrote for magazines such as Konkret and junge Welt , and authored books on the political and economic situation in Eastern Europe. He has headed Promedia Verlag in Vienna since 1991, and since 2011, jointly with a colleague.
Willi Langthaler, born in Graz in 1969, studied philosophy and is a trained electrical engineer. He was a leading figure in initiatives against the NATO war in Yugoslavia and the US attack on Iraq, as well as in peace initiatives for Syria.
Marco Wanjura , restaurateur, co-founder of BDS Austria, Palestine solidarity activist and candidate of the GAZA list
Martin Weinberger , a German studies scholar, representative of Self-Determined Austria, and candidate on the GAZA list, sees it as his duty to assume responsibility in times of authoritarian politics and social dismantling. He is driven by alignment with the EU, NATO, and the US, as well as the sacrificial approach to environmental protection. Weinberger calls for a democratic opposition to regain Austria’s self-determination.
Noura Hashem, chairwoman of the Handala cultural association and candidate for the GAZA list, grew up in Vienna and also lived in Palestine. She is committed not only because of her Palestinian heritage, but because she represents the values of humanity: “We are all human beings and have a right to freedom and dignity – not only here in Austria, but globally.”
Topoké, a Pan-Africanist and candidate on the GAZA list, is an artist and teacher with roots in the Congo. He is committed to fighting racism, chauvinism, and oppression. “Anyone can point out grievances and speak out against exclusion.” The solidarity of the Global South, especially from Africa, demonstrates the strength of the resistance against genocide and apartheid.
Fritz Edlinger , born in Vienna in 1948, is Secretary General of the Society for Austrian-Arab Relations and editor of the magazine International. He regularly writes guest commentaries for the Kurier newspaper and the Wiener Zeitung. He has edited books such as “With Brush and Spray Can Against the Occupation” (2016) and “The Middle East is Burning” (2016) published by Promedia Verlag.
Rames Najjar Practicing architect, university professor, member of the association Design 4 Communities, with roots in Lebanon
Dalia Sarig, co-founder of the initiative “Not in our Name” founded by Jews in Vienna and candidate of the GAZA list
Shelly Steinberg, born in Israel and raised in Munich, studied at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, where she earned her master’s degrees in Judaic Studies, Jewish History and Culture, and Cultural Sociology. After an internship in the Knesset as part of the International Parliamentary Scholarship (IPS) program, she lived in Tel Aviv and returned to Munich in 2019, where she is a member of the Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group Munich.
Walter Sauer historian
Iman Shaker, student with Palestinian roots and activist at Dar al Janub – Association for anti-racist and peace initiatives
Lara Leila is a German-Palestinian presenter and activist based in Berlin.
Ronnie Barkan is an Israeli dissident and co-founder of Boycott from Within . He advocates for the BDS movement and the abolition of Zionism worldwide and lectures on these topics. On Nakba Day 2022, he participated in a direct action by the group “Pal Action” that caused significant damage to the headquarters of the Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems in Bristol, UK.
Support the congress with your name!
Palestine Congress Vienna 2024
Organized by the Association “For Democracy and Human Rights in Palestine”
On May 1, 2025, Prof. Yael Berda, a Hebrew University sociologist, spoke at a Dartmouth College conference titled “Legacies of Empire: Israel, Palestine and the Quest for Just Peace.” The Dickey Center for International Understanding hosted it as part of the ongoing Dartmouth Dialogues initiative. The central question was whether Zionism was a settler colonialism. Berda discussed the meanings of “colonialism” and focused on “settler colonialism.” Berda began by noting the difficulty in discussing the current war in Gaza. “We have the privilege of thinking and speaking away from the violence, but we have to acknowledge it at the same time… the thousands of people who have been dead and injured and taken hostage after October 7. We have to acknowledge tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza that are dead and injured and displaced and fearful.”
Berda described her work, “I write about colonialism I write about settler colonialism, ordinary colonialism, which we call carceral colonialism, nationalism, these different categories of violence, and right now in Israel, to even talk about colonialism is perceived as something that delegitimizes the state and so I want to encourage everyone to continue using these categories because I do believe that when a state fears certain concepts we have to ask why it fears them.”
She then stated, “one of the things that I’m going through is trying to convince a lot of my Palestinian colleagues, scholars, who have made statements, like yes, you know this has been ongoing since 1948. And I’m trying to convince them that the judicial overhaul or what we call the authoritarian regime coup that Israel is going through since November of 2022 actually makes a difference also in the way the occupation unfolds, that the annexation that we see now, which I think is an annexation de jure not just annexation de facto, and I can clarify that it actually matters, that there is this shift from a semi-liberal partially democratic regime to a regime that is moving to very quickly towards authoritarian rule Orban style, you know, with kind of the Hungary model.”
She added, “I think it’s so important to not shy away from how settler colonialism operates and also why people want to deny it so deeply this is very important because we now have a government that not only does not deny but actually says yes this is our agenda.”
Berda continues, “today is Independence Day in Israel, it’s also the Nakba, it’s not Nakba Day, Nakba Day is on May 15th, but this split screen that used to be unspoken right to say if we were having 15 years ago we would not say independent/nakba you couldn’t put them together, you couldn’t string those words together, today, one of the reasons that you that I can do that is because you have ministers saying, yes, we are perpetuating a nakba in Gaza.”
Moreover, Berda explains that to befriend Palestinians, she adopts the terms colonialism and settler colonialism. “If I don’t want to talk about colonialism and settler colonialism, my ability to understand the way Palestinians perceive Israeli rule greatly diminishes. If I say, ok, let’s just talk about these as two national movements. I might be able to talk to about 10% or 12% of Palestinians today that perceive it as two competing national projects. But if I am willing to say, ok, let’s say I don’t agree with you on the category of settler colonialism, but I want to hear why you think it’s that what is in your experience that makes it that category relevant and then I can build a common language… because it makes us able to speak and understand what the other person is saying and now it doesn’t solve it, this is not a solution, right, but it provides us with the capabilities should the conditions arise. Both conditions of power and leadership and possibilities for change that build us bridges with which we can talk about these possibilities.”
Berda discusses her three published books, “the early part of my work was basically figuring out what I call the bureaucracy of the occupation and the bureaucracy of the occupation that I began I thought it was a kind of small thing civil military administration the governing of Palestinians that was set up in the Oslo Accords as kind of this double-headed bureaucracy… that actually revolved around the issue of labor of Palestinians… and one of the things that was amazing to me was that I stumbled upon this structure that nobody talked about nobody knew about, it wasn’t in the papers even, I called up Yehouda Shenhav who some of you met last week to say to him you know I think something’s going on and it’s about bureaucracy and because you are a sociologist of organizations I think you should research it and then two weeks later he said you know I think maybe you should come and research it and that’s how I got into sociology otherwise I wouldn’t even have known to do it.”
Berda ended her talk by discussing her involvement with “A Land for All,” a social organization which calls for a two-state confederation and “freedom of movement” for Israelis and Palestinians, “acknowledging that for Palestinians, all of historic Palestine is their homeland and for many Jews on a spiritual level, on a religious level.” During the Q&A, one participant raised concerns about the Israeli focus, which he believed did not discuss the “responsibility on the other side.” Berda responded by acknowledging the asymmetry of her presentation but emphasizing that a broader discussion was “outside the purview of what I wanted to talk about today.”
Similarly, in 2024, Berda participated in a roundtable discussion published by Dissent Magazine, where she stated, “For decades, Israel has been going through a very methodological process of engineering public perception of Palestinians as subhumans. While you can’t completely escape the reality of what’s happening in Gaza because of social media, the Israeli public is barely exposed to the atrocities being committed.”
She explained, “As leftists, we are fighting this big machine. It’s not even about fake news, but about how the public perceives this whole thing, which is so detached from the reality for Palestinians, and so detached from our interests as an Israeli public. It’s going to take a lot of work to shift this paradigm. It’s very discouraging to me, but my survival mechanism is, ‘How do we change that?’ Because I can’t accept it.”
Berda disclosed, “I worked with A Land for All for many years. The right of return is a very important factor. You asked, do you think the kid in Gaza thinks about these things? Of course, you know this better than I do. And it’s true that for most Israelis, the right of return, ‘from the river to the sea,’ is an image of total annihilation. But in reality, there are multiple meanings. We can all have democracy and all live here.”
Not only does Berda adopt the Nakba narrative, she also promotes the right of return. “I’m trying to talk about the right of return, and to tell people that the Gaza Strip was created in 1948; it’s a Nakba creation. That people there speak of the right of return as part of their narrative. What does this mean? Does this mean that there’s going to be a forever war? Or is there a possibility to address this? Can we imagine a different life? Can we imagine how other people think? People in Israel will tell you, ‘My heart is closed. I have no empathy. I can’t listen.’ And they mean it. Their hearts really are closed. They really can’t listen.”
For Berda, “Jewish-Arab partnership is a good model to have right now, even if it’s conditioned, even if it’s depoliticized, even if it’s not socialist. I do think it will enable us to model the left that we want. It will open the space for us not to be on the margins. And when I say ‘us,’ I mean the left that is socialist, progressive, Jewish and Palestinian, talking about peace, the occupation, social justice, and welfare. It’s very important that a strong socialist party, or two, comes up with a rebuilding agenda in favor of safety and life. It’s going to take a lot of time. I think we all feel very lonely. At the same time, I am OK with the fact that Meretz and Labor do not exist anymore. We’re not rehabilitating something. We’re building something new.”
There is little surprise in Berda’s recitations of “settler colonialism” and other shibboleths of critical neo-Marxist sociology. After obtaining her doctorate at Princeton, Berda was hired by the Hebrew University, where she resumed her political activism in several pro-Palestinian NGOs. Berda is proud of her dual role as a scholar and activist, revealing that she was influenced by Yehouda Shenhav, a radical scholar at Tel Aviv University and a frequent topic of the IAM posts. Shenhav, who was hired to teach Sociology of Organizations, spent most of his career advocating for the Mizrahim, Jews from African and Asian countries he dubbed “Arab Jews.”
Berda is the “second generation” of activist scholars who bash Israel in international forums. Sadly, they are still supported by the taxpayers.
Professors explore if Zionism is settler colonialism
In a Dickey Center panel last week, Harvard University professor Derek Penslar and Hebrew University professor Yael Berda discussed the meaning of “colonialism” and “apartheid.”
Last week, Harvard University Jewish studies professor Derek Penslar and Hebrew University sociology and anthropology professor and former human rights lawyer Yael Berda discussed “settler colonialism” — and whether the academic term can be used to describe Zionism.
Approximately 60 attendees gathered in Loew Auditorium on May 1 for the event titled “Legacies of Empire: Israel, Palestine and the Quest for Just Peace.” The Dickey Center for International Understanding hosted the event, which was a part of the ongoing Dartmouth Dialogues initiative.
Berda began by noting the difficulty of discussing the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
“We have the privilege of thinking and speaking away from the violence, but we have to acknowledge it at the same time,” Berda said. “We have to acknowledge the thousands of people who have been dead and injured and taken hostage after October 7. We have to acknowledge tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza that are dead and injured and displaced and fearful.”
Penslar offered historical comparisons between Zionism and global settler-colonial regimes throughout history, including South Africa, French-occupied North Africa and Puritan New England.
Penslar emphasized the need for analytical precision in using contested terms such as “colonialism,” “apartheid” and “indigenous.”
“I’ve seen the word ‘colonialism’ used so often that it simply loses meaning,” he said. “The purpose of comparison is to highlight differences.”
Berda urged the audience to reflect on the politicization of academic language.
“Right now in Israel, to even talk about colonialism is perceived as something that delegitimizes the state,” she said. “When states fear certain concepts, we have to ask why they fear them.”
She also warned against giving analytical categories too much weight.
“You won’t go anywhere if you refuse to talk about something because you don’t like how something is being categorized,” Berda said.
Berda ended the event by discussing her involvement with “A Land for All,” a social organization which calls for a two-state confederation and “freedom of movement” between Israel and Palestine.
“[We are] acknowledging that for Palestinians, all of historic Palestine is their homeland and for many Jews on a spiritual level, on a religious level,” she said.
During a Q&A after the discussion, one community member raised concern about the Israeli focus of the conversation, which he believed did not discuss “responsibility on the other side.”
Berda responded by acknowledging the asymmetry of her presentation towards Israel but emphasized that a broader discussion was “outside the purview of what [she] wanted to talk about today.”
Attendee Deven Carkner ’28 said he appreciated the discussion about the power of language.
“In my opinion, you’re gonna have much more power and ability to solve the issues you care so immensely about — that you’re willing to protest about — by sitting in this room and listening to people and understanding the history behind it,” Carkner said.
Professors Derek Penslar and Yael Berda discuss whether Zionism is a colonial movement, exploring settler colonialism and post-colonial legacies in Israel, India, and Cyprus. Dartmouth College, May 1, 2025 This is an event of the Middle East Initiative and Dartmouth Dialogues, a collaborative effort of the John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding and the Middle Eastern Studies and Jewish Studies Programs at Dartmouth. With generous support from Tal and Ariel Recanati P’21
After more than two months of intensive bombardment, Israel’s war in Gaza continues to exact a terrible human toll. As of this writing, Israeli forces have killed close to 20,000 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians. According to the United Nations, roughly 1.8 million people, or 80 percent of Gaza’s population, have been internally displaced since the war’s start. Within Israel, an atmosphere of tension, fear, and anger prevails. Massive billboards and banners draped across high-rises announce, “Together, We Will Win.” Civilians and uniformed soldiers alike walk the streets armed with M-16s. Yet discontent with the government’s conduct of the war has also begun to simmer. Hamas and other Palestinian factions continue to hold at least 120 Israelis hostage, but the Benjamin Netanyahu administration often refers to returning them as only a secondary priority. Against this backdrop, and despite mounting repression, left-wing Israeli organizers and anti-occupation activists have begun to return to the streets. Their demand: a ceasefire and a deal to free all the hostages. On December 6, I spoke with three left-wing Israeli activist-thinkers about the challenges facing the Israeli left right now. —Joshua Leifer
Joshua Leifer: How have things changed for Israeli leftists since October 7? How has the political map shifted?
Yael Berda: Today, there is going to be a small protest in front of the Kirya [the headquarters of the Israeli army’s general staff], under the banner of “stop the war.” I’ve been wanting to do this for at least a month. At first it was hard to find the courage to do it, then it was hard to find partners. I’m hoping it will be twenty, maybe thirty people. It’ll be a huge win, for a few reasons.
One is that there was a huge clampdown that began immediately after October 7, on [the left-wing activist and civics teacher] Meir Baruchin. He was arrested for four days. He was really mistreated, and charged with treason, for putting up pictures of Gazan children. It felt like leftists could not express sorrow or pain for people—civilians—in Gaza. That’s changed in the last two weeks. You’re allowed to express pain, but you still can’t be against the war.
I was speaking with a very good friend and fellow activist about a protest. I said to him, “So what if we get arrested? So what if the right-wingers hit us? We’ve done this before. We know how to deal with it.” And he said, “What’s so hard for me is being looked at by everyone as some wacko.” The sense of being so lonely, so weird, so misunderstood, and so illegitimate—this, to me, is new.
We currently have an authoritarian government. The material difficulty is real. But something is also happening in people’s minds. They can’t bear the social pressure.
Sally Abed: Standing Together has rallies across the country every three to five days. We’re mobilizing people. We’re trying to find a loophole to be able to protest safely; we’re literally renting wedding venues for our meetings. Jewish leftists have come to me, bawling, and saying, “Thank you for making us feel seen.”
We’re at a very dark place in Israel. It really feels like we’re fighting over the soul of the society. As a socialist Palestinian in Israel, if you asked me two months ago what my strategy for the next three years was to build a new left in Israel, I would have told you it was working around social justice issues, economic issues—and really trying to reach the peripheries. That has completely changed. The new Israeli left that we need to build from the ashes has a completely new mission. October 7 has created a historic junction, where the main question will be peace or no peace. I don’t think “peace” is going to be the word, but the next elections are going be on this issue. And it hasn’t been the issue for so many years.
Eli Cook: I went to the big protests on Kaplan [the street in Tel Aviv that became synonymous with the demonstrations against the judicial overhaul plan] almost every week earlier this year. Those were neoliberal protests—pretty conservative, or status-quo oriented. But I could come every week with my anti-occupation shirt and march. There was not a single time where I got shit for that. We thought, “We’re a legitimate fringe, but we’re part of the group.” But I definitely agree with Yael that this is no longer the case.
Since the end of the last ceasefire in late November, there has been a slight change, where you can now, at least a little bit, recognize the suffering in Gaza. But it’s very hard. I will say, though, that the protests to free the hostages have given Israelis on the left a way to say, “End the war,” or, “Ceasefire,” or, “Let’s find another way to talk about wiping out Hamas that doesn’t require wiping out half of Gaza”—while still saying, “Let’s bring the Israelis home,” which I fully believe, too. For me, at least, there has been a place where I can go to hear people who aren’t even leftists saying, “Everyone for everyone”—make a full hostage trade, and just end this part of the fighting.
A lot of polls show that Israelis have moved to the right. But the same polls showed that Bibi [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] is done, and that most people are going to vote for Benny Gantz. I’m not saying that Gantz is some radical leftist, but I do think that there is something there.
At the same time, there has been further regression. When Israel “disengaged” from the Gaza Strip [in 2005], the real leftists were always saying that this could not be a one-sided disengagement—that this had to come with some kind of negotiation with the Palestinian Authority, otherwise it was just going to create a situation where it strengthened Hamas and hurt the moderates. And that’s exactly what has happened. Yet the mainstream Israeli narrative has become, “What do you want from us? We left Gaza and you still did this.”
Leifer: I want to ask about the protests to free the hostages. From afar, they are often the only representation many people see of dissent in Israel about how the war is being conducted. To what extent do you all feel that the zero-sum nature of the war goals is understood by the rest of Israeli society? That totally bombarding and destroying Gaza and returning the rest of the hostages are mutually exclusive aims? Is that a potential line of dissent that might be effective? Or are the calls for war too loud?
Berda: We do see people going out to these protests. That is the only point of light that we have, as leftists. We have to capitalize on it. The government has no plan to actually bring the hostages back without a ceasefire. They don’t have a plan that entails concern for the safety of the hostages, or of all Israelis. The protests for the hostages are by people who are “for life,” versus people who are “for death.” But the government does have a plan, which is Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s “decisive plan” [which entails the annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the expulsion of Palestinians who resist]. And they have a plan to put settlements in Gaza. That is the only plan on the table.
Cook: Maybe I’m too optimistic, but I’m not sure, in the end, the plan is to have settlements in Gaza. In a strategic sense, there is no plan. The people making these decisions are politicians. It’s all very superficial and cynical. I think Netanyahu’s goal is to capture Yahya Sinwar [the head of Hamas in Gaza] and have his Saddam Hussein moment. Netanyahu will do anything for that moment, no matter the costs.
About the hostages: it feels like Israelis have managed to separate two parts of their brain. They want to bomb all these different areas in Gaza, but they also want to bring the hostages home. That disconnect is disconcerting. We’ve also heard that the offer from Hamas for a ceasefire was on the table from the middle of October. But the narrative in Israel is that Hamas would never have given up the women and children if Israel hadn’t done what it did in northern Gaza. A lot of people probably believe that to be true. But serious journalists say this isn’t the case.
Abed: The official narrative is that because of the casualties, civil society in Gaza will eventually convince Hamas to give up. Think how distorted this way of thinking is. In Israel, we are part of a public that has been protesting for ten months, in a regime where you do have freedom of speech and association to a high degree, and we still did not succeed in ousting the government. So the idea that people can overthrow Hamas because Israel is bombing them—in what world does that happen? Yet that’s how Israeli officials are justifying the killing of civilians.
Berda: For decades, Israel has been going through a very methodological process of engineering public perception of Palestinians as subhumans. While you can’t completely escape the reality of what’s happening in Gaza because of social media, the Israeli public is barely exposed to the atrocities being committed. On Channel 14 [a rough equivalent to Fox News], which is now the second-most watched channel, you see counters of how many “terrorists” have been killed, and that includes all the casualties—all the children and all the women.
As leftists, we are fighting this big machine. It’s not even about fake news, but about how the public perceives this whole thing, which is so detached from the reality for Palestinians, and so detached from our interests as an Israeli public. It’s going to take a lot of work to shift this paradigm. It’s very discouraging to me, but my survival mechanism is, “How do we change that?” Because I can’t accept it. We need to understand how we can overcome the urge to morally lecture the Israeli public, and, at the same time, how we can understand their emotional state. But it’s also really tough to give people a completely different set of information, a different perception of life, of our reality.
Leifer: There’s an argument happening in the international left that goes something like this: The Israeli left is marginal. Israeli society has become so militarized and indifferent to Palestinian pain that it doesn’t make sense, strategically, to engage with Israeli leftists. But it seems, at least to me, that if there is going to be any change within Israel, it’s going to require people like you organizing and changing public opinion. What happens, though, if the left abroad totally writes off the left in Israel?
Abed: So many people are now saying, “It’s the progressives that are the problem,” which is pretty unbelievable. That plays right into the right-wing narrative. I see the effects of this in academia—like the idea that postcolonialism is antisemitic now. There are Israeli academics who are saying they have “awakened” from postcolonial theory, and they’re no longer going to use it. This sort of “awakening” is happening across the board.
To me, the key question is, can we change this place? Is it possible? Or is it too far gone? One of the problems with the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign is that it assumes that Israeli society can’t change. And by assuming that it can’t change, important conversations between Israelis and Palestinians don’t happen anymore. The situation becomes worse.
Still, why are people spending time on what the international left says? We have to stop a war, to save people, to save the country from an authoritarian overhaul, from a total decimation of social services. We have work to do. The last thing I have to do with my time is sit and fight with some idiot far away. What are your stakes in this? Do you want people to live, or do you want people to die? What is life-giving? What is legitimizing more death? What is creating polarization that we can’t come back from? We have so much to do; it’s impossible to engage on all fronts.
Cook: I don’t think Israel is especially pathological. But I’m very critical of Israelis’ inability to see the other side. Politically, I try to present pragmatic arguments to Israelis, rather than moralizing ones. One of the really crucial points that I’ve been trying to make is that the tack that Israel has taken, with a tremendous number of civilian casualties, is playing right into Hamas’s hands. Even on the most practical level, this is a misguided policy.
In the last few years, I also think the Israeli left has been talking past a lot of the American left. I could tweet something like, “The occupation needs to end,” and all these people in America will be like, “Yeah, the occupation needs to end”—only I didn’t realize that when they talk about the occupation, they mean everything, and I was talking about leaving the settlements in the West Bank. I do think that is a challenge.
Yael made the suggestion that “progressive-bashing” plays into the hands of the right wing, and I totally agree with that. But we’re also seeing how much the Israeli public has been lapping up the images of the radical left from all over the world. These images really damage the left within Israel. The right says, “You see? They’re not talking about peace, they’re not talking about living side by side. They’re talking about ‘From the river to the sea.’” I think when they see Palestinian flags and only Palestinian flags, it’s like, “Oh, this is just nationalism. It’s a war between my flag and your flag.”
Obviously, this isn’t everyone. But I do hope that there is a moment after this war ends when we have a real deep discussion with the American left on what exactly our goals are for the future. There are times when I feel there is a blurring of lines between Israel proper and the occupation. This blurring of lines is something the Israeli right has worked on for so many years: their argument is that there is no difference between the settler from an outpost south of Hebron [in the occupied West Bank] who is attacking Palestinians and burning their olive groves and the leftie Israeli Jew from Haifa who sends his kid to a bilingual school. I teach at the University of Haifa, and it’s not perfect; there’s a lot of fucked-up shit within the Green Line. But there is a big difference between that and what happens in the occupied territories.
Abed: We already are having discussions. I don’t know if it’s enough. I have done at least five briefings for over forty different organizations in the United States, including people from Black Lives Matter, Sunrise, and IfNotNow.
The Palestinian liberation movement is trying to tell us something very important. And I would never want to discredit or judge what is happening there. The anger is very real. The collective trauma is very real. Most of my fights are actually with people in the Palestinian diaspora who are living in these theorized fantasies of liberation.
Palestinian liberation has been severely discredited, delegitimized, and silenced for decades. We need to understand that this explosion in popularity now is related to this. Still, what are you actually trying to do? I want to be righteous, but we can’t afford only to be righteous. I want to be as angry as I actually am, publicly. But we don’t have the privilege to do that.
People ask me, what about the refugees? What about historic justice? As a Palestinian in Israel, I hold that responsibility for the collective liberation of Palestinians. And I believe this should lead us into a solution-oriented ceasefire. We need to stop the very immediate violent oppression. But a refugee in Michigan actually got to me. He said, “I will never engage in any conversation about peace with Israelis if we don’t resolve the issue of the right of return.” I didn’t express anger with him, because I understand where he’s coming from. But what are the kids in Gaza saying right now? You think that’s their urgent message?
Our mission needs to be building political will. And to do that you need to understand and acknowledge the critical role of Israeli society. Out of self-interest. Out of acknowledging the power differential. Without building the political will within Israeli society, there won’t be liberation. There won’t be peace. So, then, what is your messaging? Who are you trying to convince? Who’s your audience, and what’s your mission?
Berda: I worked with A Land for All [which proposes a two-state confederation model] for many years. The right of return is a very important factor. You asked, do you think the kid in Gaza thinks about these things? Of course, you know this better than I do. And it’s true that for most Israelis, the right of return, “from the river to the sea,” is an image of total annihilation. But in reality, there are multiple meanings. We can all have democracy and all live here.
Abed: But we don’t have the privilege for complex conversations right now. As community organizers, we don’t have that privilege.
Berda: I’m just saying not to forget that there are people trying to make other people more afraid than they already are: those who are constantly mobilizing October 7 and all the horrors again and again, to make sure that no one can have any belief in humanity. We have to notice and challenge that. This is not about moral lecturing, but about being willing to be critical. We need the critique and also the compassion.
Abed: I experience this every day. It’s possible, but it’s very complex. Organizing is very different than public narrative.
Berda: Yes. I’m trying to talk about the right of return, and to tell people that the Gaza Strip was created in 1948; it’s a Nakba creation. That people there speak of the right of return as part of their narrative. What does this mean? Does this mean that there’s going to be a forever war? Or is there a possibility to address this? Can we imagine a different life? Can we imagine how other people think? People in Israel will tell you, “My heart is closed. I have no empathy. I can’t listen.” And they mean it. Their hearts really are closed. They really can’t listen. But then the question is how to say something that tells them: first of all, you’re safe. Which the international left is not interested in telling Israelis.
Abed: I always say that Palestinian liberation necessitates Jewish safety, and vice versa. And I say it to both sides. You’re pro-Israel? You need to liberate Palestinians. You’re pro-Palestinian? You need to talk about Jewish safety. It’s much bigger than the hostages. It’s a much bigger shift in conception. It’s a very simple equation, and I repeat it like crazy. It is the basis of the new left that needs to emerge. When you talk about peace and ending the occupation, it’s related to that very deep, existential interest and need.
Leifer: How are conversations like the ones we’re having being translated into practical politics? As we’ve mentioned, the next election won’t be just a “yes Bibi,” “no Bibi” vote. At the same time, public discourse seems to have moved rightward in an extreme way—yet there are also moments where you’ll hear surprising comments by newscasters and analysts who say, “There needs to be a political solution to this, the status quo can’t continue.”
Maybe there will be some cracks of light, but at the same time there’s so little formalized organization right now. Labor and Meretz are functionally nonexistent; Hadash is doing important work, and it still has representatives, and maybe the Joint List [an alliance of four Arab-majority parties] can resurrect itself again. Yet none of this adds up to much. How do you deal with the lack of political options when the need for something to change is so great? Is this the last chance to make the case to the broader Israeli public that the occupation-management paradigm can’t continue?
Cook: Many people agree that you can no longer manage the conflict the way you did. There’s been a lot of criticism of Netanyahu and his choice throughout his entire political career to support Hamas, to prop them up in order to never allow there to be a viable Palestinian Authority that could reach a two-state solution. As horrible as it is to say, I’m guessing the chances of some kind of solution emerging now are higher than they were on October 6. Before that, Israelis believed, “We can go on like this forever. We’ll just manage the occupation. We’re not really paying any price for it.” But it’s going to take people who are politically brave enough to stand up and push for that compromise.
If you had told me before October 7 that something as horrible as this would happen, I would have expected a civil war between Jewish and Palestinian Israelis. While there has been a clampdown, that hasn’t happened. Even on mainstream TV, there is an understanding that Hamas went for everyone—that they weren’t just trying to kill Jews. Some people have begun to say that maybe we need to get rid of the Nation-State law [which entrenched the definition of Israel as an exclusively Jewish state]. [Arab-Israeli politician] Mansour Abbas is beloved now in certain Israeli circles. That’s a sign that we can build a coalition. Things are not going to be the same as they were. There is going to be a vacuum for a political alternative, and we need to fill that vacuum with hope and constructive ideas. We also really need Donald Trump not to win the election in 2024.
Berda: One thing I was hearing from a lot of young people even before October 7, during the protests against the judicial overhaul, was that they have to enter into civil service, to be part of government and policymaking. That standing around and hating what’s happening and being silent about it, as many did for the last twenty years, is not going to work. We were seeing, in a way, the radicalization of the military, the radicalization of the civil service. People have realized things about the occupation in the West Bank that they ignored before.
Some days, I wake up in the morning and think, “How am I going get a job in the United States and get my kids out of this hellhole?” And the next day, I wake up and think, “Should I go into politics? Would anybody hear what I have to say?” I have a thousand ties to this place. But there are other people that don’t. We’ve seen a leftist drain; we must find a way to retain people, and the only way we do that is by having hope.
Jewish-Arab partnership is a good model to have right now, even if it’s conditioned, even if it’s depoliticized, even if it’s not socialist. I do think it will enable us to model the left that we want. It will open the space for us not to be on the margins. And when I say “us,” I mean the left that is socialist, progressive, Jewish and Palestinian, talking about peace, the occupation, social justice, and welfare. It’s very important that a strong socialist party, or two, comes up with a rebuilding agenda in favor of safety and life. It’s going to take a lot of time. I think we all feel very lonely. At the same time, I am OK with the fact that Meretz and Labor do not exist anymore. We’re not rehabilitating something. We’re building something new.
Cook: Many Israelis now understand that Hamas could do what it did because security forces were diverted to the West Bank to protect settlers. The narrative that settlements don’t give you security has been at the core of the Israeli left’s position since the very beginning. So, to me, there’s a little crack that has been pushed open, and we need to take advantage of that. The fanatics in the West Bank and the radical settlers and the people who want to set the Middle East on fire—they are a huge threat to everyone in Israel.
Leifer: What is the possibility of a return to much more intense protests if Netanyahu decides not to resign?
Cook: I can definitely imagine a situation, if and when the war ends, where it will be hard for Netanyahu to leave his house. There is so much anger. especially from people whose families were killed or kidnapped. These people will have a moral authority among mainstream Israelis.
Abed: The amount of hate and anger people have toward Netanyahu—it’s going to explode.
Berda: I wish that I was as optimistic as both of you. I believe that they’re cooking a civil war. And I believe that they’re going to fight to the death. I want to be wrong about this; I want this to be too apocalyptic. But I am not sure that he’s going to go by democratic means.
Sally Abed is a member of the national leadership at Standing Together, the largest Jewish-Arab grassroots movement in Israel. She is the co-host of Groundwork, a podcast series about Palestinians and Jews refusing to accept the status quo and working to change it.
Yael Berda is an associate professor of sociology and anthropology at Hebrew University.
Eli Cook is an associate professor of history at the University of Haifa.
Joshua Leifer is a member of the Dissent editorial board. His first book, Tablets Shattered: The End of an American Jewish Century and the Future of Jewish Life, will be published later this year.
On Yom Haatzmaut (Israel’s Independence Day), Prof. Emerita Ruth Kark from the Department of Geography at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem was awarded the prestigious Israel Prize in the field of geographical research and knowledge of the Land of Israel.
The Hebrew University congratulated Kark, writing: “This esteemed recognition highlights her exceptional contributions to the study of historical, cultural-settlement, and land geography of the Middle East, with a particular focus on the Land of Israel during the 19th and 20th centuries. Prof. Kark has made an indelible mark on the field through her extensive research and academic contributions. She has published and edited 27 books and authored approximately 200 scholarly articles that explore critical aspects of geographical history. Her work has significantly enriched the understanding of settlement patterns, cultural transformations, and land utilization in the region. Beyond her scholarly achievements, Prof. Kark has dedicated considerable research to highlighting the role of women in shaping Israel’s history. Her studies have shed light on women’s activities in early Jewish settlements, the invaluable contributions of Rachel Yanait Ben-Zvi to Jewish settlement efforts, and the entrepreneurial spirit of rural and Bedouin women in the region. Through her meticulous research, she has provided a deeper appreciation of the pivotal role that women have played in the development of Israeli society.”
While Kark was awarded the prize, Prof. Eva Illouz, a renowned Hebrew University sociologist who was nominated for the Israel Prize as well, has been disqualified over her past support for a petition asking the International Criminal Court to investigate possible Israeli war crimes in Gaza.
The academic community expressed support for Illouz. The forum Academia-IL-Bashaar posted numerous messages.
One message came from Prof. Oren Yiftachel of the Geography Department at Ben Gurion University, whom IAM reported on numerous times. He wrote, “There is no doubt that Eva Illouz’s disqualification is wrong because, according to the regulations, the Israel Prize is intended to honor outstanding scientific achievements and contributions to science in Israel. Eva Illouz is a prominent sociologist of all ages and is widely cited throughout the world. I do not share some of her views, but her scientific achievements in Israel and around the world are undeniable. In contrast to the scandalous and political disqualification of Illouz, another researcher from the Hebrew University – Ruth Kark – did win this year’s prize. Kark has no world reputation, and there is a question mark over the credibility of her research. However, her findings are consistent with the government’s goals, and therefore, it seems, it is a worthy target. The comparison between the two researchers from the same institution is particularly blatant and political. For more on Kark’s research and activities, see here: https://www.haaretz.co.il/magazine/2025-04-23/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/00000196-6215-de3a-afd6-efdd264b0000.”
Yiftachel is a long-time political activist disguised as an academic. In 2012, IAM reported that,“[BGU, Geography] Oren Yiftachel squirming in the witness seat at the Al-Araqib court case March 15, 2012.” IAM explained that Yiftachel, a self-proclaimed critical geographer, is best known for asserting that Israel is a “creeping apartheid state.” He was involved with a group of activists promoting the rights of Bedouins to a large plot of Negev land, while they could not prove land ownership. Yiftachel was also among activists who persuaded UN officials to include the Negev Bedouin tribes on the register of indigenous peoples. IAM explained that critics suggested that the decision was political, as the same tribes in adjacent countries failed to qualify for the list.
Unlike traditional (or positivist) geography, critical geography (also known as radical geography) is part of the critical, neo-Marxist scholarship. It is a reaction to the empirical spirit and quantitative methodology of positivist geography. It sought to “counter quantitative methods with normative methods drawn from Marxist theory.” Quantitative methods were “not useful unless alternatives or solutions were given to problems.” Liberated from the need to support his conclusions with facts, Yiftachel made a career of accusing Israel of apartheid-like policies.
However, Yiftachel’s disregard for empirical reality did not serve him well in the District Court, where he testified on behalf of two Bedouin families claiming land. Professor Kark, an expert on the history of land ownership in Israel/Palestine and the Negev, testified on behalf of the state.
Sarah Dovrat, the presiding judge, took the unusual step of chastising Yiftachel for his sloppy preparation, evasion of truth, and other underhanded tactics and poor performance on the witness stand. At one point, she described Yiftachel as “squirming” in the witness seat. There was another awkward moment when an expert on aerial photography who testified for the plaintiffs implied that Yiftachel influenced him. For the judge, Yiftachel did not do his “homework,” producing shoddy and conflicting evidence. She wrote: “I felt uncomfortable in Prof. Yiftachal’s cross-examination… when it became clear that he relied on sources and quoted them without bothering to read them, but rather quoted from quotes that appeared in another source. The expert’s meanderings on the witness stand in this matter left an uncomfortable, or rather embarrassing, feeling for the expert in the position he found himself in. The expert should not only be objective in submitting his opinion but should at least read the references to which he refers or immediately say without evasion that he relied on secondary sources rather than undergoing a long and embarrassing interrogation and, at the end of the day, admitting it.”
The judge complimented Kark for her meticulous research and thorough presentation.
As expected, Yiftachel rejected the court decision as a “Zionist ploy,” aiming to deprive the Bedouins of their land. He announced, “Whatever the court decision, I am committed to the truth.” This is in line with the neo-Marxist paradigm, where objectivity and facts do not matter, and truth is in the eye of the beholder.
In 2013, IAM published “The Radical Left against Ruth Kark,” on the occasion of her receiving the prestigious Jerusalem Prize. While Kark considered herself apolitical. Yiftachel attacked her alleged political agenda. In a blog published during the trial, Yiftachel impugned Kark’s academic credibility and took credit for “’unpacking’ the main state expert.“ When the judge pointed out his sloppy evidence, he accused her of siding with Kark and the state.
Yiftachel, a self-proclaimed critical political geographer, is also a self-acknowledged neo-Gramscian – a follower of Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Communist who urged intellectuals and academics to use their commanding role in societal discourse to fight for progressive causes. As Yiftachel admits on page 6 of his book Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel and Palestine, his “own approach draws from neo-Gramscian perspective.” Yiftachel’s homepage boasted of trying to “combine teaching and activism for social and political activism” and co-founding “a range of organizations working to assist Arab-Jewish peace, anti-colonialism and social equality in Israel/Palestine.”
Yiftachel’s contempt for Kark’s expertise has extended beyond the courtroom. Prof. Gadi Algazi, a veteran radical activist from TAU, and other pro-Palestinian activists in Israel and the UK have compiled an eBook, “JNF Colonizing Palestine since 1901.” In the first chapter, “Al-Araqib: All Palestine” Salman Abu Sitta quotes Yitachel, “Yiftachel argued that Kark, in quoting these travelers, was biased and deceptive which is not befitting of a university professor.” Abu Sitta added that “Yiftachel was closely monitoring this Zionist expert who was well-practiced in falsification.” The eBook became “required reading” for a large number of pro-Palestinian groups in Great Britain. Indeed, a number of them banded together and sent it to the then-Prime Minister David Cameron and other political figures.
Mick Napier, the head of the Scottish Solidarity Campaign for Palestine, used the disparaging comments about Professor Kark to protest against her participating in the conference “Communal Pathways to Sustainable Living” of the International Communal Studies Association (ICSA) at Findhorn Community in Scotland in 2013. He stated that Israel has committed “savage crimes” against Palestinians. “The crimes are ongoing, promoted by Ruth Kark and other Israeli academics. This is not an antiquarian exercise, history for history’s sake. Some of the ICSA presenters at Findhorn are still actively involved in promoting Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as part of the openly discussed effort to move land into exclusively Jewish ownership, a racist project that has gone on since the founding of the State of Israel. Let us take, as an example, the shocking case of Zionist academic, Ruth Kark, who will be presenting at this conference. Not only did Kark support the racist claim that Jews have rights to land that trump those who ‘have lived there for many generations’ but she fabricated evidence in support of a standard, and academically discredited, Zionist claim that Palestine had been empty before Zionist colonization… Kark puts her dubious ‘expertise’ firmly in the service of the Zionist narrative used to justify the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.”
Throughout the years, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz has given a platform to Yiftachel and fellow anti-Israel activists. The Haaretz article that Yiftachel referred to is titled “Twenty Questions for the Israel Prize Winner in Geography, Prof. Ruth Kark,” written by Or Kashti and published on April 23, 2025. Kashti wrote, “Professor Ruth Kark, congratulations on winning the Israel Prize in Geography. Your academic activity is indeed extensive and rich, but only a few are aware of the decisive role you played in the struggle over the Negev. You are probably the academic who has had the greatest impact on the lives of the Bedouins in Israel. Time after time you have appeared in court and claimed that there was no permanent settlement of Bedouins in the Negev during the Ottoman period, nor was there a thriving agriculture, contrary to a long line of historical evidence. Time after time the courts have relied on your opinions to reject the Bedouin’s claims. Why did you work to dispossess the Bedouins of their land?”
Kashti continued, “In legal proceedings, you claimed that ‘tents are not settlements.’ What is the meaning of this strange statement? Are houses built of concrete more of a settlement than houses built of wood? Can someone who builds from wood claim that an igloo is not a home?” He then asks, “You rely on 19th-century maps from the Palestine Exploration Society. These maps have been criticized for leaving empty areas in places that were inhabited by tens of thousands of people according to a number of other surveyors.”
Kashti went on to argue, “Over the years, you have claimed that the lands of the Negev are ‘dead lands,’ paving the way for their declaration as state lands. Last year, you wrote that ownership of the lands in the Negev was determined through ‘violent takeovers between the Bedouins themselves.’ You added that ‘the Bedouins had no legal hold on the land.’ However, on several occasions, you have noted that Jewish individuals and Zionist movements bought over 100,000 dunams in the Negev that were registered in the names of Bedouins. In other words, the British and the Jewish buyers recognized Bedouin ownership of the lands. How do you reconcile this contradiction?”
Clearly, Kashti and Yiftachel are siding with the Palestinians in their mission to take over lands. As Salman Abu Sitta stated in his chapter, this is a battle over “land that was plundered by the Zionist invader.”
Responding to the Haaretz article, Naomi Shot, Kark’s sister, wrote, “The article on Prof. Ruth Kark is full of lies… I would like to strongly protest this harsh, humiliating, and full of lies article. I am 95 years old, and I was in the Palmach. Between August and November 1948, I was in Kibbutz Mishmar Negev as part of the First Battalion of the Palmach. By virtue of my duties, I traveled frequently between the settlements of Mishmar Negev, Ruhama, Shoval, Dorot, and Beersheba after its conquest. I am speaking from personal knowledge. I do not remember a single tent, herd, farming, or house of Bedouins in this area. Even in later years, when we traveled to visit the Hirbat Mahaz settlement where our comrades fell in battle, I saw no trace of what was written about the thriving settlement of the Bedouins in the Negev. I do not understand why you published the article at all, and you have ruined our joy and pride at the honor that my sister has earned with absolute justice.”
Kark’s employer wrote, “The Hebrew University takes immense pride in Prof. Kark’s accomplishments and her dedication to advancing geographical knowledge. We extend our heartfelt congratulations to her on this well-deserved honor.”
Prof. Kark has endured numerous attacks from anti-Israel academic activists who trashed her work and besmirched her reputation because she is a Zionist.
The Hebrew University Congratulates Prof. Ruth Kark on Winning the Israel Prize in Geographical Research
13 February, 2025
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem is proud to congratulate Prof. Ruth Kark from the Department of Geography on being awarded the prestigious Israel Prize in the field of geographical research and knowledge of the Land of Israel. This esteemed recognition highlights her exceptional contributions to the study of historical, cultural-settlement, and land geography of the Middle East, with a particular focus on the Land of Israel during the 19th and 20th centuries.
Prof. Kark has made an indelible mark on the field through her extensive research and academic contributions. She has published and edited 27 books and authored approximately 200 scholarly articles that explore critical aspects of geographical history. Her work has significantly enriched the understanding of settlement patterns, cultural transformations, and land utilization in the region.
Beyond her scholarly achievements, Prof. Kark has dedicated considerable research to highlighting the role of women in shaping Israel’s history. Her studies have shed light on women’s activities in early Jewish settlements, the invaluable contributions of Rachel Yanait Ben-Zvi to Jewish settlement efforts, and the entrepreneurial spirit of rural and Bedouin women in the region. Through her meticulous research, she has provided a deeper appreciation of the pivotal role that women have played in the development of Israeli society.
Prof. Asher Cohen, President of the Hebrew University, expressed his admiration for Prof. Kark’s achievements: “Prof. Ruth Kark’s remarkable body of work has significantly enriched our understanding of the geographical and historical landscapes of Israel. Her dedication to uncovering the contributions of women in settlement and society is truly inspiring. We are immensely proud of her accomplishments and celebrate this well-deserved recognition.”
The Israel Prize, considered the highest honor awarded by the State of Israel, will be presented to Prof. Kark on the upcoming Independence Day in recognition of her outstanding academic achievements and her invaluable contributions to the study of the Land of Israel.
The Hebrew University takes immense pride in Prof. Kark’s accomplishments and her dedication to advancing geographical knowledge. We extend our heartfelt congratulations to her on this well-deserved honor.
French-Israeli academic Eva Illouz denied top prize over ‘anti-Israel ideology’
Profile
Middle East
Renowned sociologist Eva Illouz has been disqualified from receiving the Israel Prize, the country’s top cultural award, over her past support for a petition asking the International Criminal Court to investigate possible war crimes in Gaza, in a move critics say is indicative of the government’s efforts to muzzle academia and silence dissent.
A globally acclaimed academic, Eva Illouz has been a vocal advocate of Israel’s right to defend itself in the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks that sparked the war in Gaza.
That advocacy, however, has not shielded the French-Israeli academic from the wrath of Israel’s hard-right government, whose increasingly authoritarian bent she has frequently denounced.
Education Minister Yoav Kisch on Monday said he had chosen to disqualify Illouz from receiving the Israel Prize, the country’s highest cultural and academic award, over her decision to sign a 2021 petition to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague.
Kisch, a member of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, cited the court’s alleged bias against Israel in a letter to the prize committee, in which he accused Illouz of ideological “hostility” towards her home country.
“There is absolutely no place for awarding Israel’s highest state honour to someone who – clearly motivated by anti-Israel sentiment – chose to appeal to an institution (the ICC) that eagerly files false complaints against [Israeli army] commanders and soldiers,” he wrote.
Kisch added that he would reconsider Illouz’s candidacy if she retracted her position and “chooses to publicly apologise”.
ICC petition
Illouz, 63, was the jury’s unanimous choice for this year’s Israel Prize, whose past recipients include writers A. B. Yehoshua and Amos Oz, former prime minister Golda Meir, and the Yad Vashem Holocaust institute.
A French-Israeli dual national of Moroccan origin, the sociologist has published a dozen books and has been translated into more than 20 languages. She currently teaches at the prestigious École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris after a distinguished career in Israeli academia.
Israeli newspaper Haaretz described her as “arguably the leading authority in the sociology of emotions worldwide”.
In 2021, Illouz was among more than 180 Israeli scientists, public figures and intellectuals who signed a petition calling on the ICC to investigate whether Israel had committed war crimes in the Palestinian territories. The text, whose signatories included 10 past winners of the Israel Prize, urged the ICC not to rely solely on Israeli authorities to carry out such an investigation.
Earlier that year, in a landmark decision that angered Israel, the Hague-based court ruled that it had jurisdiction over the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza because Palestine was determined to be a member of the court.
The ICC further infuriated the Israeli government last year by issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu and then defence minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza.
Defending Israel
A regular contributor to publications including Haaretz, French daily Le Monde and Germany’s Die Zeit, Illouz has been a relentless critic of Netanyahu and his far-right allies, whom she accuses of dividing the country, sapping its democracy and undermining the rule of law.
But she has also been fiercely critical of the anti-Israeli bias she attributes to parts of the progressive left in Western countries, lamenting a lack of empathy in the wake of the October 7 attacks and accusing pro-Palestinian protesters in US campuses of effectively denying Israel’s right to exit.
In a recent Le Monde op-ed co-authored with other French intellectuals, Illouz denounced the radical left’s use of the word “Zionist” as an insult, writing: “Only Jews who declare themselves to be ‘anti-Zionist’ are now forgiven for being Jewish.”
Speaking to the French newspaper on Wednesday, Shai Lavi, the head of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, described the government’s veto of Illouz as a tragic own goal for Israel.
“I know of no academic, let alone one of Professor Illouz’s international reputation, who has devoted as much time and energy as she has to fighting anti-Semitism and defending Israel in a balanced way over the past eighteen months,” Lavi told Le Monde, lambasting an “extremely stupid decision”.
‘Dismantling democracy’
The controversy comes amid growing concern in Israel about democratic backsliding and an encroachment on academic freedom under Netanyahu’s hardline government – echoing similar concerns in the US under President Donald trump.
“Not a week goes by without scandalous measures being taken against liberal institutions in Israel, particularly higher education establishments,” said Lavi.
Illouz described her case “as a small cog in a larger process of dismantling democracy”. The education minister’s actions, she told Le Monde, “show that Israel is now going down the road of authoritarian regimes, and all Zionist Jews should be very worried”.
While Netanyahu’s government presses ahead with its plans to rein in the judiciary, despite days of mass street protests, judges may yet thwart Kisch’s efforts to deny Illouz her Israel Prize.
Jury members have the option of appealing to the Supreme Court, which has ruled in the past that the prize should be awarded strictly on professional merit.
In 2022, the court ruled that the education minister had no right to deny computer scientist Oded Goldreich the prize over his alleged support for anti-Israel boycotts. In the ruling, Justice Isaac Amit, who now serves as the court’s president, warned that disqualifying Goldreich due to statements he made was “a surefire recipe for politicising the prize” and “an invitation to monitoring, surveilling and persecuting academics”.
אין ספק שפסילתה של אווה אילוז פסולה, כי פרס ישראל לפי התקנון נועד לכבד הישגים מדעיים בולטים ותרומה למדע בישראל. אווה אילוז סוציולוגית בולטת משכמה ומעלה ומצוטטת רבות בכל העולם. אינני שותף לחלק מדעותיה, אבל על הישגיה המדעיים בארץ ובעולם אין חולק. אל מול פסילתה השערורייתית והפוליטית של אילוז, חוקרת אחרת מהאוניברסיטה העברית – רות קרק — כן זכתה בפרס השנה, לקרק אין שם עולמי, וסימן שאלה קיים על אמינות מחקריה. עם זאת, ממצאיה תואמים את מטרות השלטון, ולכן, כך נראה, הוא חפץ ביקרה. ההשוואה בין שתי החוקרות מאותו מוסד בוטה ופוליטית במיוחד.
———- Forwarded message ——— From: Meir Buzaglo Date: Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 7:38 AM Subject: Re: [Academia-IL-Bashaar] אווה אילוז ורות קרק
אורן היקר,
אווה גדולה מהחיים, לא רק במספר ציטוטים, מכאן להשמצה של קרק שקיבלה פרס ישראל מה שייך? לא מכיר את קרק ואין לי מושג על מעלותיה, למה לפגוע, אני ממש לא מבין. שום חסם? הכל כשר?
גם אני מסכימה עם ההגדרה של פרס ישראל כפרס שניתן לא רק על מקצועיות טובה אלא גם כהוקרה לבניה ביום שבו קמה מדינת ישראל. העיתוי המיוחד של הענקת הפרס ביום העצמאות הוא סמלי והוא צריך להינתן רק לאזרחי המדינה שלא שוללים את קיומה ולא רודפים את חייליה ולא מוציאים דיבתה רעה בבית הדין בהאג.
אווה אילוז יכולה לקבל גם פרס נובל ו/או גם The Hirschman Prize, אך מי שפוגע בלגיטימיות של מדינת ישראל, פוגע בלוחמים/טייסים, פוגע ברשויות המדינה, פונה לבית הדין הפלילי הבינלאומי בהאג כנגד המדינה, שרודף את חיילי צה”ל בכל העולם, וטוען כי הם מבצעים פשעי מלחמה, לא ניתן להעניק לו פרס ישראל. זהו פרס שניתן ביום העצמאות במדינה יהודית ודמוקרטית, וצריך להיות איזון בין מקבלי הפרס לבין אישיותם. פרס ישראל אינו פרס מקצועי טכני בלבד, אלא פרס שמעניקה המדינה כהוקרה לבניה הנבחרים. מקרה שבו אדם משמיץ את המדינה אזרחיה וחייליה לא יכול לקבל פרס ישראל.
הכתבה על פרופ’ רות קרק רצופת שקרים. הייתי בפלמ”ח. ראיתי זאת במו עיני
10:39 • 29 באפריל 2025
אני מנויה ותיקה של עיתון “הארץ”, ומעולם לא נתקלתי בכתבה כמו זו שפירסמתם במוסף (“20 שאלות לכלת פרס ישראל בגיאוגרפיה, פרופ’ רות קרק”, 25.5). ברצוני למחות בתוקף על הכתבה הקשה,
המבזה ורצופת השקרים הזאת. אני בת ,95 והייתי בפלמ”ח. בתקופה שבין אוגוסט לנובמבר 1948 הייתי בקיבוץ משמר הנגב במסגרת הגדוד הראשון של הפלמ”ח. בתוקף תפקידי נסעתי לעתים קרובות בין היישובים משמר הנגב, רוחמה, שובל, דורות ובאר שבע לאחר כיבושה. אני מדברת מידע אישי. לא זכור לי אוהל, עדר, חקלאות או בית אחד של בדואים באזור הזה. גם בשנים אחר כך, כשנסענו לבקר במשלט חרבת מחאז שבו נפלו חברינו בקרב, לא ראיתי זכר למה שנכתב על ההתיישבות המשגשגת של הבדואים בנגב. איני מבינה מדוע פירסמתם בכלל את הכתבה, ועכרתם את שמחתנו וגאוותנו על הכבוד שבו זכתה אחותי בצדק מוחלט.
Many supporters of a militaristic movement which was central to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians are among those presenting papers at a conference which “The Findhorn Foundation and community will proudly host” in less than a week (26–28 June). Kibbutzim are based on stolen land whose owners were driven out with great violence, and virtually all kibbutzim operate a stringent racist policy of refusing membership to Palestinian citizens of Israel. Some of the presenters are still active in the Israeli State campaign to move the Palestinian Bedouin of the Negev into concentration zones to facilitate the ongoing seizure of their lands.
Palestinian refugees on the move in 1948Can anything deserving of the name of a humanistic experiment in “communal living” take place after the experimenters have violently expelled the indigenous tillers of the soil? The Findhorn Foundation needs to answer this question unambiguously.
Communal Pathways to Sustainable Living is the 11th Conference of the International Communal Studies Association (ICSA), which was jointly founded in 1985 by the US-based Communal Studies Association and the Kibbutz Studies Centre of Israel. The ICSA Secretariat address is in Israel at Yad Tabenkin, which is also the address of the Research and Documentation Centre of the United Kibbutz Movement.
Attendees will hear no less than 17 presentations over three days from active supporters of the kibbutz movement, who will be keen to conceal the nature of their “experiments in communal living” on land stolen after it was ethnically cleansed of its owners, many of whom live till today in refugee camps.
Some of those expelled remained in Israel after the population dispersals in 1948 and can today see and even visit their property, but they cannot recover it since it has been consigned to exclusively Jewish ownership, enshrined in Israeli law.
All Israeli kibbutzim enforced until recently a bar on membership against Israel’s 1.25 million Arab Palestinian citizens and virtually all still enforce such a rule. The late Israel Shahak, President of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights from 1970 to 1990 noted that:
The Israeli organization which practices the greatest degree of racist exclusion is … the Kibbutz. The majority of Israelis have been aware of the racist character of the Kibbutz as displayed not only against Palestinians but against all human beings who are not Jews, for quite a time.
The kibbutzim share in the general Israeli policy of forced residential separation of Jews and Palestinian citizens of Israel whereby 93% of all Israeli land cannot be sold or leased to non-Jewish citizens of the Jewish State. One only has to imagine how almost everyone would react if Jews in Scotland were only allowed to live in small designated areas, but such a system of apartheid – legally enforced residential segregation – is the hideous reality of Israel today.
The savage origins of the kibbutz “utopian community” From the beginning, the kibbutz was a militaristic community designed to seize and hold Palestinian land as part of the process of colonisation that saw Palestinians driven out of most of Palestine. One ICSA presenter, Aharon Azati, has been a member of Kibbutz Beit Haemek since 1971; he must serve as an example of those who benefit from theft, dispossession and ethnic cleansing and who are determined that the legal owners of their kibbutz land must be deterred from returning, if necessary by violence. A similar story can be told for many other of the ICSA presenters and their kibbutz, but lack of time means that Kibbutz Beit HaEmek must serve as a representative example.
In January 1949, Kibbutz ha-Bonim, later renamed Beit HaEmek, was established on the ethnically cleansed village lands of the Palestinian village of Kuwaykat. Its settlers were Jewish immigrants from England, Hungary and the Netherlands.
Palestinian Kuwaykat had repulsed several Jewish attacks in January and February 1948 but was finally cleansed of its owners by Israel’s Sheva’ and Carmeli Brigades in early July, after heavy bombardment which resulted in several deaths. The villagers fled, fearing massacre after the series of exemplarymass killings of Palestinians carried out by Jewish militias bent on driving out Palestinians to make way for Jewish colonists from Europe. The Deir Yassinmassacre, for example, had taken place only two months earlier.
Those Kuwaykat villagers who were too elderly to flee were later expelled to Kafr Yasif to make way for the Jewish kibbutz and the experiment in communal living. Many of the Kuwaykat villagers ended up in the refugee camp of Bourj el-Barajneh in Lebanon.
Palestinian historian Walid Khalidi described the village in All that Remains (1992):
Little remains of the village except the deserted cemetery, completely overgrown with weeds, and rubble from houses. Inscriptions on two of the graves identify one as that of Hamad ‘Isa al-Hajj, and another as that of Shaykh Salih Iskandar, who died in 1940. The shrine of Shaykh Abu Muhammad al-Qurayshi still stands but its stone pedestal is badly cracked.
This is the Arab-free zone that conference presenter Aharon Azati celebrates as an experiment in communal living.
One other quick note can underline how the same story applies to other kibbutz presenters at the ICSA Conference. Yaakov Oved was a founding member of the ICSA and served as its executive director from 1985 until 2004.. Oved has been a member of Kibbutz Palmachim since its establishment in April 1949 on the lands of the Palestinian village of Nabi Rubin. Eight months before Oved joined the kibbutz, in August 1948, the local Israeli military HQ issued the order for Mivtza Nikayon (Operation Cleaning), aiming at ´cleansing [letaher]´Palestinians from the newly conquered area which included Nabi Rubin. Many similar examples can be given.
The crimes are ongoing, promoted by Ruth Kark and other Israeli academics This is not an antiquarian exercise, history for history’s sake. Some of the ICSA presenters at Findhorn are still actively involved in promoting Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as part of the openly discussed effort to move land into exclusively Jewish ownership, a racist project that has gone on since the founding of the State of Israel. Let us take, as an example the shocking case of Zionist academic, Ruth Kark, who will be presenting at this conference.
Kark’s words were acted upon – Arakib Village was demolished more than 30 timesKark is an active participant in the programme of the Israeli State to concentrate the Negev Bedouin in restricted zones and deliver their lands to exclusively Jewish ownership and use. According to the Negev Coexistence Forum for Civil Equality “Kark had presented an expert opinion, supporting the state’s position that the Bedouins have no ownership rights over their lands in the Negev even if they have lived there for many generations.”
Not only did Kark support the racist claim that Jews have rights to land that trump those who “have lived there for many generations” but she fabricated evidence in support of a standard, and academically discredited, Zionist claim that Palestine had been empty before Zionist colonisation: “There are no Palestinians or anyone else here. There were shepherds who brought their sheep from Saudi Arabia, and then returned.”
Kark puts her dubious “expertise” firmly in the service of the Zionist narrative used to justify the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, that they are all recent arrivals to a previously empty land that only European Jewis colonisers had the ability to make productive. This academic fraud produced an opinion for the Israeli Government that there “had been no permanent settlements in the northern Negev, and that there was no evidence that any lands in the area were owned by anyone”.
One ought to ask why Findhorn is hosting a dodgy academic who still defends the proposition put forward in an utterly discredited work which, according to Noam Chomsky, led “Every major journal, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review, the Observer everybody” to conclude that “this doesn’t even reach the level of nonsense, of idiocy”.
Against Kark’s absurd claims of an empty land on the shores of the Mediterranean prior to Zionist colonisation,Amnesty described the programme Kark endorsed as “a conscious Israeli government policy of dispossession …despite the residents’ Israeli citizenship and their long-established claims to their lands” and called on the Israeli government to “stop its policy of home demolitions both in communities inside Israel, such as Al-‘Araqib in the Negev, and also in the occupied West Bank including East Jerusalem”. Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel described the current plan to forcibly remove tens of thousands of the Naqab ‘s non-Jewish population as “a declaration of war on the Bedouin in the Negev.”
The Coalition of Women for Peace joined with many other human rights groups to protest “the destruction of Al-Arakib” Village. They reported that “large police forces destroyed the village of Al-Arakib for the 11th time*, using violence, including the use of sponge bullets, beatings and arrests…The demolitions in Al-Arakib are part of the plan of the Government of Israel to “Jewdise” the Negev.
The UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) rejected an application by the Jewish National Fund USA, a supporter of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian communities, for consultative status with thousands of other NGOs on the grounds that the JNF’s work in the Negev and elsewhere violated the principles of the UN Charter, which emphasizes respect for human rights and equality.
So it’s Ruth Kark against Amnesty, HRW, Women for Peace and the UN’s ECOSOC. Why has Findhorn provided a platform for Kark and her ilk to greenwash their commitment to ethnic cleansing and racism? Kark is an example of the complicity of the great bulk of Israeli academics in supporting, equipping, defending and seeking to justify Israel’s illegal occupation, apartheid and ethnic cleansing and helps to explain why Palestinian civil society has asked for its counterparts worldwide to support their call for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until it ends its violations of Palestinian human rights.
It also helps to explain why the Church of Scotland recently took a stand for the human rights of the Palestinian refugees whose property was stolen by the kibbutzim where many conference presenters live, why the Scottish Trade Union Congress has declared its opposition to Israel’s racist policies, and why the Friends of the Earth andGreen Parties in Scotland, England and Wales have condemned the greenwashing of Israeli policies of forced population removals.
The Findhorn Community should not aid and abet such greenwashing of ethnic cleansing and state-enforced residential segregation, i.e. apartheid. * As of end of June 2013, Arakib Village had been destroyed 51 times.
Yuval Dror was a member of Kibbutz Hamadia, which took its name from nearby Palestinian village of Al Hamadiyya, destroyed in 1948 by local Zionist militias to prevent Arab villagers returning.
Rami Degani, a member of Kibbutz Nir David, founded in 1936 as the first ‘tower and stockade’ type of military structure to enable colonisation.
Anton Marks a member of Kibbutz Mishol, situated in Nazareth Illit which, according to the director of the IDF Planning Department, Yuval Ne’eman, would “safeguard the Jewish character of the Galilee as a whole, and… demonstrate state sovereignty to the Arab population more than any other settlement operation.” Historian Geremy Forman wrote that Jewish Upper Nazareth was meant to “overpower [Arab] Nazareth numerically, economically, and politically.”
Lee Cahaner, born and raised in Kibbutz Magal, which was a militarised settlement set up in 1953 by the Nahal Infantry Brigade, which also set up illegal settlements in the West Bank, Gaza and the West Bank with the explicitly racist and illegal goal of changing the ethnicbalance of these regions.
Yuval Achouch, a member of Kibbutz Hanita, founded in 1938 in the teeth of Palestinian opposition as a militarised colony on the border with Lebanon
The Press and Journal Moray, Friday, June 28, 2013
Community defends itself in ‘racist speaker’ storm
Conference: Palestine supporters critical of invitation to guest
BY KAYE NICOLSON
A Moray spiritual community has defended itself after claims that it invited an a n t i – Pa l e s t i n i a n academic to a conference.
The Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign raised concerns about the Findhorn Foundation’s Communal Pathways to Sustainable Living event, which ends today.
The conference, at the community’s Universal Hall, was organised to share academic research and experience about environmentally- minded communities such as housing co-operatives and kibbutzim.
However, several residents of the Findhorn ecovillage approached the SPSC after hearing that Israeli academic Professor Ruth Kark was one of the speakers, alongside a number of representatives from Israeli kibbutzim.
The SPSC claimed on a recent blog that Prof Kark was an academic who supported a “racist claim that Jews have rights to land that trump those who have lived there for many generations”.
The blog also claimed that kibbutzim share in a general policy of forced residential separation of Jews and Palestinian citizens of Israel.
Mick Napier, of SPSC, met with Findhorn Foundation representatives yesterday, calling on them to support Amnesty International and Church of Scotland views on the sensitive situation in Israel.
A spokesman for the Findhorn Foundation said yesterday: “After a constructive meeting with both local and national representatives from the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Findhorn Foundation wishes to clarify that it unambiguously supports the principles enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Earth Charter, the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and all UN conventions, and instruments and principles of international law that relate to the rights of refugees and internally displaced persons.
“We also wish to state our unequivocal support for racially inclusive communities and communities that honour and celebrate the full diversity of humankind.
“We look forward to future dialogues to ensure a deeper understanding of the issues involved.” Mr Napier said: “Most of the people from inside the community who registered their great unhappiness were non-members of SPSC, but there were some members too.
“There will be a discussion between management and Findhorn community members to discuss the implications of this.
“Our members of the campaign inside the community will be trying to push that forward.”
On April 14, 2025, dozens of masked pro-Palestinian activists used force to enter the Maagdenhuis, the famous building of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) administration. Staff members were ordered to leave, and the occupiers demanded that the UvA immediately sever all ties with Israeli universities. For them, suspending the collaboration with the Hebrew University alone was insufficient. The group barricaded the entrances, raised the Palestinian flag, hung banners from the windows, and lit green and red flares.
In response, the executive board of the UvA refused to engage in dialogue and filed a police report. Dozens of supporters outside encouraged the occupiers and clashed with the police as they attempted to break through the barriers. Soon after, the police evacuated the Maagdenhuis and removed the activists who had not yet left the building. Inside, the demonstrators had sprayed slogans on the walls such as ‘Free Gaza’ and ‘UvA cut ties now.’ Chairs were overturned or used as barricades at emergency exits. Substantial damage had been caused to the building. According to the UvA spokesperson, the demonstrators caused “enormous damage” in the Maagdenhuis, looting the canteen and defacing walls.
In a similar vein, in Nijmegenon, on the other side of the Netherlands, ten masked pro-Palestinian activists have occupied the Radboud University footbridge leading to university buildings. After several warnings, the administration filed a police report. The Nijmegen occupiers also demanded that the administration sever ties with Israeli universities immediately. In a conversation with them, the executive board chair, Alexandra van Huffelen, stated that a decision would be forthcoming. After a final warning from the Radboud administration, the 21 remaining demonstrators ended their occupation of the footbridge. However, Radboud University was advised by the International Partnerships Advisory Committee to the Executive Board to freeze its ties with the Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University. According to the Committee, “both institutions are contributing to serious and systematic human rights violations.”
A week earlier, an occupation at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam took place. A small group dressed in black and with faces covered entered the building of BelleVUe carrying a megaphone and covering security cameras. From an open window overlooking the campus square, the demonstrators explained their actions, that they would remain in the building until the VU provides insight into its collaborations with Israeli institutions. They want the VU to be open about their collaborations with Israeli institutions. “The fact that they are not, gives the impression that they have something to hide,” they stated.
In early April, pro-Palestinian protesters chained themselves to the doors of the administration building at Utrecht University in the Utrecht Science Park. They blocked people from entering. The activists demanded that the University break off its ties with the Israeli partners.
In mid-March, pro-Palestinian students disrupted a lecture by Rawan Osman at Maastricht University. Osman is a Syrian Lebanese whom they describe as a “pro-Israel activist” because, since the October 7 Hamas attack, she has spoken out for Israel. The activists made a lot of noise, and the lecture was stopped. The police and security forces had to intervene. Thirty students responded to a call from Maastricht Encampment (the group that occupied the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences the year before) to demonstrate against what they see as “the promotion of Zionism.” Activists shouted slogans such as “Say it loud, say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here.” Osman responded, “Palestine does not exist” and “Israel is not the perpetrator.” Several activists were in the hall and chanted, “Free Palestine.” After repeatedly being asked not to disrupt the lecture, most activists left the hall; one activist refused and was led out by the police. Osman’s lecture was also disrupted at Radboud University.
In January, at Tilburg University, pro-Palestinian activists from the group Palestine Solidarity Tilburg occupied the glass corridor at the Cobbenhagen building and were removed by the police. The protesters occupied the corridor because they disagreed with the university’s decision not to boycott Israeli universities.
There were earlier incidents. The Dutch universities are a prime example of how double standards affect free speech issues. While other minorities are protected, Jews and Israel are free game. In 2020, Mark Rutte, then Dutch Prime Minister, apologized that the Netherlands did little to protect its Jews from deportation to the Nazi death camps. At the time, his public apology was praised as “historic.” It behooves the Dutch authorities to realize that exterminating the Jews was only the last step in a process that started when Hitler and the Nazi party adopted a policy of treating the Jews differently from the others. It is disappointing that 80 years after the Holocaust, Jews and Israel – their collective entity – are still treated differently.
Maagdenhuis occupied by Pro-Palestinian protesters
14 April 2025
On the morning of 14 April, masked pro-Palestinian demonstrators occupied the Maagdenhuis at the University of Amsterdam. The police brought the occupation to an end.
Course of Events
The UvA respects and facilitates everyone’s right to demonstrate. However, the UvA must also ensure a socially and physically safe study and work environment. Masked demonstrations and the occupation of buildings are entirely incompatible with this. The Executive Board of the UvA therefore is not entering into negotiations with the demonstrators today and has filed a police report.
The demonstrators were repeatedly urged to leave voluntarily. Some complied with this request. Nevertheless, a group remained in the Maagdenhuis. As a result, the police cleared the building. By around 17:15, all demonstrators had been removed from the Maagdenhuis. It has since become clear that the buildings interior was vandalised, causing significant damage.
Statement by Edith Hooge on AT5
Chair of the Executive Board (CvB) Prof. Edith Hooge stresses that there is no excuse for the occupation and the damage done: ‘Everyone is free to demonstrate, but intimidate and vandalise, you just don’t do that.’
She spoke to AT5 earlier today about the occupation by around fifty masked demonstrators: ‘People were working in the Maagdenhuis and suddenly had to pack up and leave immediately. That feels threatening and intimidating. Many colleagues were shocked. For colleagues who need support, we will arrange aftercare.’
She also explained why the UvA is not responding substantively to the demand: ‘Within our university, there is always space for open dialogue, debate, and discussion. Naturally, we engage in conversations – including about the terrible situation in Gaza. Demonstrating is allowed here, but this is a very different situation. This group entered anonymously, masked, and barricaded the building. We are not engaging with that.’
UvA Collaborations
In recent months, the UvA has worked on new guidelines for partnerships with institutions in conflict areas, such as those currently in Israel and Gaza. These new guidelines are being developed specifically to better prevent our research and teaching collaborations from contributing to, for instance, human rights violations or the misuse of knowledge for undesirable military purposes.
In developing these guidelines, we are mindful of the diversity and complexity of considerations involved in such cases. Collaborations are assessed substantively and on a case-by-case basis.
As part of this process, three urgent cases were reviewed in parallel with the development of the framework, including collaboration with an Israeli university. As a result, it was decided not to extend the student exchange agreement in the current form with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
What are the demonstrators’ demands? And what is the current situation?
Disclose
Like all other universities, we are transparent about our research collaborations. These collaborations can be found on the EU’s CORDIS website. The University of Amsterdam has one ongoing student exchange agreement with Tel Aviv University, which may also be subject to review in the future. Due to a negative travel advice (code red or orange), UvA students are not currently travelling to Tel Aviv.
The UvA has deliberately chosen not to pursue a ‘boycott’ policy. Collaborations are assessed on a case-by-case basis. Any decision applies only to the specific collaboration in question, under the relevant conditions, and at that specific moment. Read more about how external collaborations are reviewed by the UvA
UPDATE – Pro-Palestinian protesters have been occupying the footbridge over Erasmusplein since yesterday afternoon. Their demand: sever ties with Israeli universities immediately. Although the university had forbidden this, the protesters spent the night in the footbridge.
A group of around ten masked pro-Palestinian protesters has barricaded itself since this yesterday afternoon in the footbridge connecting the Lecture Hall Complex (Collegezalencomplex), the Refter, and the University Library. They have blocked access to the hallway. Large banners, displaying well-known pro-Palestinian slogans, have been hung in front of the windows.
In the lobby of the Lecture Hall Complex, another thirty or so protesters are seated, showing solidarity with those occupying the footbridge. ‘We have no intention of leaving until the Executive Board severs ties with Israeli universities’, a spokesperson said. ‘We’re done talking — for the past 17 months we’ve watched a genocide unfold while our university has refused to take any meaningful action.’
The university allowed the protesters to express their views until closing time — 7 p.m. — a university spokesperson confirmed when asked. ‘As long as the situation remains safe.’
Despite the university’s deadline expiring last night, the occupation continues. Earlier, a university spokesperson had stated that the university would file a report if the protesters did not leave.
Last night, the protesters were given an initial warning to vacate the building. They did not comply. Through a back entrance, they managed to bring in food and additional people. According to a message on the university’s website, the university had contacted the security triangle last night and a report was filed, but no evacuation took place.
The action began yesterday at 13:30, when forty students and staff members held a protest march across the campus. They walked from the Maria Montessori building to the Berchmanianum. The protesters said they wanted to talk with the board of directors, but security guards at the various building entrances blocked their way.
Advisory Committee
Once back at the main entrance, Executive Board President Alexandra van Huffelen and Vice President Agnes Muskens came outside to speak with the protesters. When asked when the Board would cut ties with Israeli universities, Van Huffelen replied that a decision would be made soon. ‘We will make a decision based on the advice of the Advisory Committee and additional information we receive — including input from you.’
‘The report has been available for two weeks already, so why haven’t you cut ties yet?’ one protester asked. ‘A decision will be made in the coming weeks,’ the President replied, though she declined to commit to a specific date.
‘Either you make a decision tonight, or we’ll be back here tomorrow — but with more people’, said one of the demonstrators.
After a brief conversation, the demonstrators walked back towards the Lecture Hall Complex, where a smaller group had by then taken control of the footbridge.
A dialogue about the recommendation of the International Partnerships Advisory Committee
01 April 2025 News item
Under what circumstances should the University discontinue, not enter into, or make adjustments to an international partnership? At the request of the Executive Board, the International Partnerships Advisory Committee has submitted a preliminary recommendation on this matter. The Executive Board is inviting students and staff to enter into dialogue about this recommendation.
The summary of the recommendation reads as follows:
concerning the Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Based on a number of legal documents and other national and international rulings by advisory councils and human rights organisations, we conclude that the State of Israel and its defence and security apparatus are guilty of serious and systematic human rights violations, both in Gaza and in the occupied Palestinian territories.
We further conclude that the Hebrew University directly and specifically contributes to these serious and systematic human rights violations and is potentially guilty of violations of academic integrity. The committee therefore recommends that the cooperation with the Hebrew University be subject to a number of conditions, and that, until such time as these conditions are honoured, this cooperation be suspended.
concerning Tel Aviv University
Based on a number of legal documents and other national and international rulings by advisory councils and human rights organisations, we conclude that the State of Israel and its defence and security apparatus are guilty of serious and systematic human rights violations, both in Gaza and in the occupied Palestinian territories.
We further conclude that Tel Aviv University directly and specifically contributes to these serious and systematic human rights violations and is potentially guilty of violations of academic integrity. The committee therefore recommends that the cooperation with Tel Aviv University be subject to a number of conditions, and that, until such time as these conditions are honoured, this cooperation be suspended.
Meeting
On Monday 7 April, from 3.45 to 4.45 pm, staff and students are invited to share their ideas about the recommendation with the Executive Board. Staff and students wishing to attend can register here. Make sure you come on time. Once the programme starts, your seat will be released to any other participants. Large bags are not allowed inside.
You will be granted access to room CC4 in the Lecture Hall Complex on presentation of your student card or employee pass, and your u/s/z number will be registered for you to be assigned a seat, as long as there is space.
If you are a student or employee, and you are unable to attend the meeting, you can submit your thoughts or advice via a feedback form. The ideas and opinions of students and staff on issues concerning international partnerships and the dilemmas involved were previously shared with the Advisory Committee through the outcomes of a participatory process.
Participational bodies
Before taking a decision on this recommendation, the Executive Board will also talk to the deans and the broader university participational bodies, and in view of this particular subject, the Board will, at the request of the UGV, ask for the UGV’s advice on the proposed decision.
Decision
Once these various discussions have taken place, the Executive Board will formulate a proposed decision as soon as possible, publish it on http://www.ru.nl, and elaborate on it during an additional meeting. This will be followed by a recommendation from the UGV, after which the Executive Board will take a final decision.
Recommendation of the International Partnerships Advisory Committee
Recommendation regarding cooperation with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem International
Pro-Palestinian occupations in Amsterdam and Nijmegen
On Monday, pro-Palestinian demonstrators occupied the Maagdenhuis of the University of Amsterdam. A similar occupation action is taking place at Radboud University. In Amsterdam, the police intervened, but in Nijmegen, that wasn’t necessary on Tuesday afternoon.
Around midday on Monday, fifty to a hundred masked pro-Palestinian activists forcibly entered the administration centre of the UvA. The staff members present were required to leave the building.
The occupiers demanded that the university immediately sever all ties with Israeli universities. They stated that suspending collaboration with the Hebrew University was nowhere near sufficient. They barricaded entrances, raised the Palestinian flag, hung banners from the windows, and lit green and red flares.
Slogans
The Executive Board refused to engage in dialogue with the masked occupiers and filed a police report. Dozens of supporters outside encouraged the occupiers, reported the university newspaper Folia in a live blog. They clashed with the police when they attempted to break through the barriers.
The police evacuated the Maagdenhuis and removed the occupiers who had not yet left the building. Inside, the demonstrators had sprayed slogans on the walls such as ‘Free Gaza’ and ‘UvA cut ties now’. Chairs were overturned or used as barricades at emergency exits. The administration reported that substantial damage had been caused to the building.
Footbridge
In Nijmegen, ten masked pro-Palestinian activists had been occupying a covered footbridge between Radboud University buildings since Monday afternoon. After a number of warnings, the administration filed a police report that night.
The Nijmegen occupiers also want the administration to sever ties with Israeli universities immediately. In a conversation with them, Executive Board Chair Alexandra van Huffelen stated that a decision would be forthcoming in a few weeks based on the recently published report from the advisory committee on collaborative ties and on ‘additional information we receive – including from you’. She did not want to be pinned down to an exact date, reported the university paper Vox.
Update: Following a final warning from the Radboud administration, the 21 remaining demonstrators have ended the occupation of the footbridge voluntarily in Tuesday. An evacuation by the riot police, who had arrived in vans, turned out to be unnecessary.
Actions
Pro-Palestinian actions have also taken place at other universities recently, such as in Utrecht, Maastricht, and Tilburg. Just last Wednesday, there was an occupation at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Demonstrators there demanded insight into the collaboration with Israeli institutions, reported the university newspaper Ad Valvas. The VU administration stated that it values the right to free expression but does not accept occupations. In the afternoon, the police evacuated the building.
Amsterdam Univ. expects “enormous damage amount” after latest Gaza support protest
The University of Amsterdam (UvA) expects the repairs of damages caused by pro-Palestine protesters who occupied the Maagdenhuis on Monday to cost an “enormous” amount, a spokesperson for the university told NOS. The police put an end to the occupation on Monday afternoon, arresting between 10 and 15 protesters.
On Monday morning, the activist group Amsterdam Student Encampment occupied the Maagdenhuis, the UvA’s administrative complex. They again demanded that the UvA break all ties with Israeli universities in light of the continued devastating Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip. About 100 demonstrators raised the Palestinian flag and hung banners from the windows. They also set off torches in the colors of the Palestinian flag.
The police ended the occupation on Monday afternoon. The riot police entered the building and started removing protesters one by one amid loud cheers from demonstrators in front of the building. The activists were taken away by bus. After the occupation ended, the demonstrators who had gathered outside the Maagdenhuis entered another UvA building. The police drove them out.
There were several confrontations between the police and protesters during the demonstration. The police also used batons.
According to a UvA spokesperson, the demonstrators caused “enormous damage” in the Maagdenhuis. They looted part of the canteen and defaced multiple walls, the spokesperson told NOS. “They were inside for a few hours, and when you see what has been done, I am shocked.”
A spokesperson for the Amsterdam mayor, police, and prosecutor told the broadcaster that protesters broke into offices in the Maagdenhuis, disabled cameras, and barricaded emergency doors. “A police officer was also hit in the face with an as yet unknown corrosive substance, which resulted in minor injuries,” the spokesperson said.
Amsterdam Student Encampment released a statement saying that they did not cause “any unnecessary damage” to the building or personal belongings. According to the activists, they only added something “to the rich history of the building” with the graffiti on the walls.
The protest was sparked by the UvA wanting to restore ties with the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The UvA recently ended that cooperation after advice from the university’s ethics committee. The UvA still works with other Israeli institutions.
Radboud University in Nijmegen was also recently advised to cut ties with the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the Tel Aviv University. The Nijmegen university’s ethics committee concluded that these Israeli institutions contribute to “serious and systematic human rights violations” in the Palestinian territories.
Pro-Palestine activists also protested at Radboud University on Monday, occupying a footbridge between two university buildings. They, too, demanded that their university sever all ties with Israeli institutions.
VU building occupied by pro-Palestine demonstrators
April 9, 2025The demonstration organized by VU for Palestine on Wednesday afternoon ended in an occupation of the BelleVUe building on campus.
13.00 BelleVUe occupied
A small group dressed in black and with their faces covered entered BelleVUe with a megaphone. They covered security cameras, and students and staff were told they could stay or leave as they pleased. From an open window on the first floor overlooking the campus square, the demonstrators explained their action. They say they will remain in the building until the VU provides insight into its collaborations with Israeli institutions.
On a table in the hallway are QR codes that lead to a form where personal information can be provided in case you are arrested. There is also the name and phone number of a lawyer who can assist the protesters. The doors are opened for people who want to join the occupiers, after which a small group joins. In the meantime, security guards make a round, direct people to the exit – the protesters refuse – and close the doors of classrooms. The protesters have managed to keep two study rooms open. A lot of press is gathered in front of the door with cameras. Apart from the protesting group, the people present on the square seem to continue with what they were doing before.
Ad Valvas’ office is located in BelleVUe, the editorial team will provide updates from here.
14.05 Occupiers are willing to stay
A spokesperson for the group does not want to say whether the action was planned or started spontaneously, but says they are prepared to stay here for a day or two. In the room where most of the occupiers have gathered, there is no food supply or sleeping gear to be seen, but according to the spokesperson there is a “supply chain” through which they can easily get stuff into the building. Their demands have not changed, he says. They want the VU to be open about their collaborations with Israeli institutions. “The fact that they are not, gives the impression that they have something to hide. Depending on what that list looks like, a next demand could be that they break those ties. We can no longer be complicit.”
As soon as that list is available, they say they want to leave the building. But there is no real contact between the demonstrators and the VU yet. “We have a negotiating team ready,” says the spokesperson, “but so far there have only been some security guards and spokespersons who have talked to us about ‘unacceptable’ face coverings. It was not a substantive discussion. I understand that they do not like that face covering, but it is for our own safety. We do not want any academic repercussions for this action.”
The discussions with the VU on this subject have dried up somewhat anyway, he says. According to him, this is due to a “hostile attitude” from the board of directors. For example, minutes should not be taken during the meetings. In the meantime, the VU refers them to the website Cordis , of the European Union, where information can be found about international collaborations, but which is completely confusing according to the spokesperson.
14.50 Police are getting closer
In front of the BelleVUe building, a group of police officers are talking next to the group of seated demonstrators. They were ready in front of the main building, but have now come to the occupation. It is quiet, almost silent in and around the BelleVUe building. According to a demonstrator, the atmosphere is also friendly. She emphasizes that everyone fills out an arrest form “because you never know how the police can behave”.
15.20 VU asks demonstrators to leave
In a statement on its website, VU writes that the demonstrators were asked to leave. Because they did not comply, VU called in the authorities. The message also states that VU ‘recognizes the concerns about the situation in Israel and the Palestinian territories’ and that as a university it abhors any form of violence. ‘We respect freedom of expression and consider demonstrating an important right. However, occupying buildings is not permitted.’ Shortly after the message was published, the protest swelled again. Through a megaphone, the occupiers in front of the BelleVUe building chanted: “VU, VU you can’t hide, you’re supporting genocide”.
15.40 Police keep watch
According to a police spokesperson, the police received a report from the VU at 11:50 about a demonstration on the campus square, which was about an hour before the occupation began. The police then came to the campus. In principle, the police are there mainly to supervise. “It is the VU’s terrain, so they are responsible for it. If they need our help, we will offer it.” The spokesperson does not want to say how many police officers are present, and whether they are being deployed to intervene. He also cannot say whether there has already been successful contact with the demonstrators.
16.20 Atmosphere becomes grimmer
The VU has officially asked the demonstrators to leave, which a small group refuses. In front of the entrance there was talk of starting a human shield, which is not immediately continued. ‘White people, use your privilege’, someone shouts. According to a demonstrator, those present have discussed with each other whether they are ready for possible violence. Those present who are not prepared to be arrested have left the building. The still small group of people present walks around tensely, outside the chanting continues: ‘End VU complicity’.
A protester inside says she is a bit tense, because she could be arrested, but that they remain peaceful, and stick to their demands. A reporter from POWned tries to enter BelleVUe, but is sent away by the two security guards inside. “So masked protesters are allowed in but not us? Nicely arranged here.” A protester comes to thank the security guard: “Did you send POWned away? Respect.” “Don’t you have a face mask for me?” a security guard asks a protester, “now I’m on camera.” “Do you want a keffiyeh?” another laughs. They talk a bit about the housing crisis.
16:45 Police make first attempt to enter building
A group of police officers tries to enter the building, with a VU spokesperson with them. A group of demonstrators has quickly formed a hedge in front of the entrance and does not let them in. The officers leave again. Then a demonstrator calls out that anyone who does not want to be arrested must leave now. They expect the final warning to come soon.
16:55 One of the protesters shouts: everybody to the back now ! Whereupon the group of protesters splits up and some run to the back of the building. Officers have walked to the back entrance of the BelleVU building, where someone from the VU lets them in. A group chants: there is no riot here, why are you in riot gear ?
17:00 A new group of officers walks to the front entrance of BelleVUe with drawn batons. There is some pushing and shoving between police officers and demonstrators. The front door closes and a hedge of officers largely obscures the hall from view. Inside, a few demonstrators can just be seen. The rest are kept at a distance. It is unclear whether there are any officers inside. Ad Valvas was warned to leave by the demonstrators just before the police arrived.
17:10 A large prisoner bus drives onto the campus square. Additional police approach from multiple angles. Protesters still in BelleVUe say they are being held hostage by the police.
17.20 A group of about 150 people are standing on the square, watching. Some join in the chanting, others seem to be waiting to see what will happen. Someone has a pizza delivered, to the hilarity of bystanders. A hedge of police officers separates the hard core in front of the BelleVUE building from the rest of the attendees. Journalists are also no longer allowed behind this hedge. Behind the hedge, at the entrance to BelleVUE, a demonstrator is taken by two police officers to a police car.
17.45 The protesters who were still in BelleVUe have been arrested and are being handcuffed by the police behind the hedge and walked into the arrest bus. The group of protesters on the campus square walks along and shouts: “hands off students” and “you are not alone”.
17:55 Protesters try to block the bus from leaving the campus square, but the police push them back. There is some commotion and tug-of-war, but no visible blows are exchanged.
18:00 The remaining protesters follow the officers as they walk towards their cars. “ Cops off campus ”. The police remain in a hedge in front of BelleVUe. A full water bottle is thrown at the police, but there is hardly any reaction. From inside BelleVUe on the first floor, a security guard pulls a protest banner off the facade, amid loud boos from the crowd.
18.07 Police leave the campus in reverse, while a group of protesters follows them, chanting “ All Zionists are racist .” When the police leave, a protester calls for those present to leave in groups, preferably not alone. The campus square slowly empties.
—-
Later that evening, the VU announced in a statement that it had filed a report of trespassing. ‘As a university, we stand for constructive dialogue with respect for each other’s principles. Unfortunately, the circumstances today left us no other choice and police intervention was necessary to ensure safety on our campus.’
VU for Palestine responds to this via their Instagram by writing that if the Executive Board really attaches such value to dialogue, they would have entered into discussions with the protesters when they requested it this afternoon. ‘VU is hiding behind excuses again, such as that the occupation would have disrupted education and research. It is clear that the VU rejects our demands, no matter how we make them.’
Radboud University should freeze its ties with Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University. That is the advice of the International Partnerships Advisory Committee to the Executive Board. According to the Committee, both institutions are contributing to serious and systematic human rights violations.
Radboud University should suspend its ties with two Israeli universities until the universities meet certain conditions. That is the conclusion of the long-awaited recommendation of the Partnerships Committee, which was published yesterday evening.
The Committee based its investigation on legal documents and reports by human rights organisations. Their conclusion is clear: Israel and its security forces are guilty of systematic violations both in Gaza and in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Armed drones
According to the Committee, Hebrew University trains its students for the Israeli army military intelligence. The students in question combine their military training with a double Bachelor’s study programme in Middle Eastern Studies and in another academic discipline. In another programme, Hebrew University is also working with IDF to train high-achieving students to become experts in military technology, according to the Committee.
The Committee is also concerned about academic freedom and freedom of expression at the university. A Hebrew University employee who had signed a petition calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, expressed doubts about Hamas’ use of sexual violence on 7 October and called Zionism a crime, was first asked to resign and then suspended by the University for a fortnight.
According to the Committee, Tel Aviv University is contributing to the war through investments in defence companies. The Xcelerator programme is financed through venture capital fund TauVentures, an initiative that calls on startups to develop or offer technologies that could be of use to an Israeli security service. The same fund also finances Xtend, which is developing armed drones for the war in Gaza.
Not directly deployable
The committee therefore recommends only proceeding with cooperation with the two universities under strict conditions, such as them ceasing to offer exclusively military study programmes. According to the Committee, Israeli universities should also assure Radboud University that their involvement with IDF does not lead it to contributions to human rights violations. The knowledge and equipment developed at the universities should not be directly deployable in the war in Gaza or the occupation of the other Palestinian territories, the Committee states.
Suspension of cooperation means, among other things, that researchers will no longer be able to engage in joint projects and students will not be able to go on exchanges to these universities.
In conversation
Interestingly, the Committee seems to have gone beyond its remit to investigate only university-wide collaborations. For example, for both universities, the Committee also recommends freezing collaborations that fall outside this limited framework and involve direct cooperation in teaching and research, for example at faculty level. If Radboud University cooperates with these universities in a larger context, such as HorizonEurope, the Committee believes that it would be ‘reasonable to reconsider cooperation and possibly suspend direct cooperation if there is no breach of contract.’
The ball is now in the Executive Board’s court
With the publication of this recommendation, the ball is now in the Executive Board’s court. Before reaching a decision, the Board wishes to discuss the matter with the university community. Next Monday, students and staff are invited to the Lecture Hall Complex to share their thoughts on the recommendation. This will be followed by dialogues with the deans and participational bodies. Before reaching a decision, the Board will also seek the advice of the university participational bodies.
Activists from Palestine Solidarity Tilburg have been removed from the glass corridor at the Cobbenhagen building by the police. The protesters occupied the corridor because they disagree with the university’s decision not to boycott Israeli universities.
The end of the occupation was peaceful. At ten o’clock in the evening, the majority of the protesters, consisting mainly of students and a few teachers, left the glass corridor via the Koopmans building after a police order.
Five protesters, including associate professor Michiel Bot, remained seated. Police officers escorted them outside at a quarter past eleven, where they were greeted with cheers by supporters. No arrests were made. In total, a group of about forty protesters were in the glass corridor.
Protesters demand public debate
Rami Fransawi, leader of Palestine Solidarity Tilburg, calls it a success. PST wanted to make a fist after the university decided earlier this week not to boycott Israeli universities. The action group of students and employees has been advocating a boycott of Tilburg University’s collaboration with Israeli universities since the summer of 2024. They feel that the university is not taking them seriously.
The protest started this afternoon on campus. The action group wanted to offer an open letter to rector magnificus Wim van de Donk. The group did not want to leave the glass corridor until they received the letter, or until they received the promise that the rector would publicly debate with them.
Red line
Tilburg University does not want to meet either demand, much to the demonstrators’ incomprehension. ‘All we ask is an open discussion,’ says activist Jamie Wolvekamp, a student of Liberal Arts and Sciences. ‘Isn’t that a perfectly reasonable demand? Apparently the university would rather send the police after us than enter into a debate with us.’
The university has announced through a spokesperson that it is always open to a conversation, but not if this is demanded under pressure. Previous demonstrations and a camp during the summer of 2024 were allowed by the university, but occupying buildings is a red line for the board.
Pro-Palestine activists block Administration Building
Pro-Palestine protesters chained themselves to the doors of the Administration Building, in the Utrecht Science Park, on Tuesday morning, keeping people from entering the building. Once again, the activists demand the university break off ties with Israeli partners. They also want the Executive Board to support the strike against the cuts to the higher education budget, planned for March 11.
The activists invited students and employees to walk out of their jobs and classrooms to protest the university’s policy towards Israeli institutions. The demonstration had been announced for 10:00 am, in front of the Administration Building on Heidelberglaan, where the Executive Board works. However, students from Utrecht Student Encampment arrived at the building before 7:00 am. Activists chained themselves to every door.
The university then sent a message to all employees working in the building, advising them to work from home. Security guards stood in front of the building’s doors to send anyone who came to work back home or tell them to work somewhere else on campus.
Itaï van der Wal, the spokesperson for the protestors, says the demonstration is a reaction to the university’s silence following the ceasefire in Israel. “The situation is still bad for Palestinians. By collaborating with Israeli universities, UU is indirectly supporting this genocide. The university should explicitly distance itself from this.”
Most employees who came to the Administration Building in vain reacted with resignation, grabbing their bikes and going back home or heading to the Ruppert building to work. One employee talked to the protesters, saying: “What do you aim to achieve with this? With this action, you are supporting Israel and not the Palestinians.” He explains to DUB that he believes the activists are playing into Israel’s hands as people relate the Palestinian question to terror and the fight against Israel loses goodwill.
Van der Wal disagrees. “We have deliberately chosen the administration building as this is where the people responsible for the bad policy are. Besides, we are not affecting educational activities in any way. Sometimes, you’ve got to take action to show people the matter is serious. The Executive Board will continue to work with the Israeli universities, which we believe are playing a role in this genocide.”
The demands remain the same as last year, with one additional demand. “We want the Executive Board to support the strike on March 11,” says the spokesperson. “It’s weird that an executive board that claims to be against the budget cuts is coming up with all sorts of austerity measures and not supporting the protests against the government’s budget reduction.”
The activists intend to blockade the building all day. A demonstration against UU’s policy regarding Palestine began at 10:00 am. By 10:15 am, no more than twenty people were present, but the group quickly grew to fifty or so protestors.
Demonstrating students disrupt pro-Israel lecture at Tapijn
Demonstrations in and outside Building Z
13-03-2025 · News
MAASTRICHT. Pro-Palestinian students disrupted a lecture by pro-Israel activist Rawan Osman on Wednesday evening. There was so much noise inside and outside Building Z on Tapijn that the lecture was stopped, reports daily newspaper De Limburger. Police and security had to intervene at Osman’s lecture at Radboud University in Nijmegen on Monday, reports sister magazine Vox .
Syrian-German Osman is in the Netherlands for three lectures on how she went from anti-Semite to Zionist, all under the banner of the pro-Israel organization Stand With Us. Since the Hamas attack in late 2023, she has spoken out for Israel.
In Maastricht, thirty students responded to a call from Maastricht Encampment (the group that occupied the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences last year) to demonstrate against what they see as “the promotion of Zionism”. In videos shared online by supporters and opponents, activists can be seen banging on the windows of building Z and shouting slogans such as Say it loud, say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here . Osman tries to be heard above the noise and tells the audience that “Palestine does not exist” and “Israel is not the perpetrator”.
Several activists are in the hall, where they chant Free Palestine , among other things . After being repeatedly asked not to disrupt the lecture, they have to leave the hall – most of them do so voluntarily, one of them is led out by the police.
The group Maastricht Encampment called for a protest against Osman’s lecture on Instagram on Tuesday.
Read PACBI’s full statement here: PACBI Statement on the ISA Forum 
Protestors carry a banner reading, “Jewish Bloc for Palestine” at the front of a march. (Photo courtesy of Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress)
Speakers at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, Austria.Rebecca Collard/The World
Police arrive at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna, Austria, at the request of the congress organizers.Rebecca Collard/The World
An Israeli activist challenges counter-demonstrators at the Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna who arrived with Israeli flags and the flags of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party.Rebecca Collard/The World
First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress, Vienna, June 2025. © Liam Hoare
The Lueger Monument, 2021, vandalized with the word “Shame” © Liam Hoare
Dalia Sarig
Haim Bresheeth
Vienna, June 14, 2025, Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress
Palestinian refugees on the move in 1948Can anything deserving of the name of a humanistic experiment in “communal living” take place after the experimenters have violently expelled the indigenous tillers of the soil? The Findhorn Foundation needs to answer this question unambiguously.
Kark’s words were acted upon – Arakib Village was demolished more than 30 timesKark is an active participant in the programme of the Israeli State to concentrate the Negev Bedouin in restricted zones and deliver their lands to exclusively Jewish ownership and use. According to the 
israel-academia-monitor.com 
