Swedish Uppsala University Promoting BDS

11.06.25

Editorial Note

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. 

REFERENCES:

Uppsala Declaration of Conscientious Objection

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.

You can sign the Uppsala Declaration here.

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 organisations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Israel is currently being investigated for the crime of genocide by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and Israeli leaders are wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the crime of extermination. In July 2024, the ICJ ruled that Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, is illegal, amounts to annexation and violates the prohibition against apartheid. As UN human rights experts have clarified, in order for UN member states to meet their obligations as triggered by the ICJ ruling, they must “[c]ancel 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.”

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 2024Shlaim 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.

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 individualsThe guidelines called for:

  • 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:

  1. We will not contribute to any collaborations with complicit Israeli institutions, and we will not publicise, promote, or encourage such collaborations;
  2. 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;
  3. 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:

* * *

You can learn more about the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) on the website of the international BDS movement.

You can learn more about Swedish universities’ involvement with complicit Israeli institutions in the Boycott Report issued by Workers and Students in Swedish Academia for Palestine (WASSAP).

You can contact the drafters of the Uppsala Declaration at uppsaladeclaration@protonmail.com (Swedish or English).

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.

* * *

You can sign the Uppsala Declaration here.

Alternatively, you can email us with 1) your name (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.

Uppsala, 19 May 2025

Anne Ramberg
Chair

Anders Hagfeldt
Vice-Chancellor

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

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. 

On behalf of Academics for Palestine Uppsala:

Fouad El Gohary

Alexandre Raffoul

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


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.

Anders Berndt

Read more

Statement concerning the war between Israel and Hamas, Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions website (not available in English)

Student protest in Carolina Park, news item, 15 May 2024

When should the University take a position? Vice-Chancellor’s Blog, 8 February 2024.

Concerning the conflict in Israel/Gaza, news item, 1 February 2024.

University Board issues statement on free debate and freedom of expression, news item, 16 November 2023

Scholars at Risk

Israeli Academics Among the Supporters of the German Party Die Linke in Adopting the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism

05.06.25

Editorial Note

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.

Over the last two decades, IAM has demonstrated that Van Leer housed some of the most radical Israeli academic activists.

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.

REFERENCES:

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism

Definition

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.

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

IHRA

Working definition of antisemitism

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:

  1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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).
  5. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
  9. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  10. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
  11. 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

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

https://www.fr.de/kultur/gesellschaft/mehr-als-50-wissenschaftler-bekennen-sich-zur-sogenannten-jerusalemer-erklaerung-zum-antisemitismus-antwort-auf-die-maengel-93736809.html

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.

https://www.fr.de/kultur/gesellschaft/mehr-als-50-wissenschaftler-bekennen-sich-zur-sogenannten-jerusalemer-erklaerung-zum-antisemitismus-antwort-auf-die-maengel-93736809.htmlWissenschaftler bekennen sich zu Jerusalemer Erklärung zum Antisemitismus: „Antwort auf die Mängel“

Stand: 16.05.2025, 17:24 Uhr

Demonstration in New York, hier nach der Festsetzung des Palästinensers M. Khalil. © Imago Images

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.

Genocide Scholars Including Israelis: Israel is Committing Genocide in Gaza

29.05.25

Editorial Note

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.”

However, the NRC’s anti-Israel bias is apparent. For example, its recent two-day coverage of the war in Gaza includes the following, “Yaqeen Hammad, 11-year-old Instagram influencer from Gaza, killed by Israeli shelling”; “At least 81 dead in Gaza from Israeli attacks since Monday morning”; Chancellor Merz condemns Israeli actions”; “Chancellor Merz speaks out for the first time against Israeli violence in Gaza”; “‘Israel wants to occupy 75 percent of Gaza within two months”; “At least 20 dead in overnight Israeli attack on school sheltering refugees.”

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. 

 

REFERENCES

Researchers from Israel, the Netherlands, the US, the UK, Australia, Croatia and Canada say Israel’s conduct meets the legal threshold of genocide

By Sondos Asem

Published date: 17 May 2025 17:17 BST | 

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

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

Top genocide scholars unanimous that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza: Dutch investigation

Press/Media: Press / Media

Description

Researchers from Israel, the Netherlands, the US, the UK, Australia, Croatia and Canada say Israel’s conduct meets the legal threshold of genocide

Period17 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

Producer/Author Sondos Asem

URL https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/top-genocide-scholars-unanimous-israel-committing-genocide-gaza-investigation-finds

Persons Melanie O’Brien

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

Google Translate

https://www.facebook.com/groups/628101398076856/posts/1726759091544409/

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.

https://www.nrc.nl/…/zeven-gerenommeerde-wetenschappers...
Seven renowned scientists almost unanimous: Israel commits genocide in Gaza

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.

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

https://www.netherlandsandyou.nl/web/israel/w/reaction-to-article-in-dutch-newspaper-nrc

Reaction to article in Dutch newspaper NRC

News item | 16-11-2023 | 13:55

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.  

Israeli Academics to Participate in the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress in Vienna

21.05.25

Editorial Note

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. 

 

REFERENCES:

Apr 30, 2025 — by EJP in Events

First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress, June 13-15, Vienna

First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress from 13.6 to 15.6

Friday June 13th to Sunday 15th the First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress will take place in Vienna, Austria.

Speakers:

  • 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.”

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

https://www.juedisch-antizionistisch.at/enThe First Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress

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”

ZVR: 1213260151

info@juedisch-antizionistisch.at

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

Name of association Für Demokratie und Menschenrechte in Palästina
c/o Keine Eintragung gespeichert
Postal address Leopoldsgasse 51/7
1020 Wien
Registered office Wien (Wien)
Date of creation 20.06.2024

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

Palestine Congress Vienna 2024 | October 5 & 6

For a free Palestine – without colonialism and apartheid!

When: October 5 & 6, 2024
Where: Kudlichgasse 3-5, 1100 Vienna.

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”

ZVR: 1213260151

info@palaestinakongress.at

Yael Berda: Anti-Israel Activist Disguised as an Academic

14.05.25

Editorial Note

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.

REFERENCES:

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.”

05-06-25-courtesy-dickeyzionism.jpg

Courtesy of Naomi Wade.

By Sohum Desai

Published May 8, 2025

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.

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

Legacies of Empire: Israel, Palestine, and the Quest for a Just Peace

Dickey Center for International Understanding3.39K subscribers 257 views May 2, 2025

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

Transcript

Follow along using the transcript.

Show transcript

Dickey Center for International Understanding

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

A Historic Junction

The Israeli left after October 7.

Sally AbedYael BerdaEli Cook and Joshua LeiferWinter 2024

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.

Israel Prize Laureate Ruth Kark Attacked by Anti-Israel Activists

08.05.25

Editorial Note

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. 

She should be proud of this, too.

REFERENCES:

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.

Issued on: 28/03/2025

By:

Benjamin DODMAN

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”.

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

———- הודעה שהועברה ———
מאת: Oren Yiftachel
תאריך: יום ב׳, 28 באפר׳ 2025 ב-9:35
נושא: [Academia-IL-Bashaar] אווה אילוז ורות קרק

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. 

על מחקריה פעילותה של קרק ראו כאן https://www.haaretz.co.il/magazine/2025-04-23/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/00000196-6215-de3a-afd6-efdd264b0000?utm_source=App_Share&utm_medium=iOS_Native

————————-
Prof. (Em.) Oren Yiftachel אורן יפתחאל اورن يفتحئل
Lloyd Hurst Family Chair of Urban Studies

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba

Geography Dept, and DPU, Bartlett, UCL (Hon. Prof.)

personal/lab homepage: https://bgurbanlab.wixsite.com/website?lang=en
About: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oren_Yiftachel

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

———- 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? 

מאיר

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

On 17 Apr 2025, at 4:28 PM, Rachel Zimrot wrote:

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. 

דר רחל צימרוט

From: Academia-IL [mailto: Etan Ben-dov
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2025 5:18 PM

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.

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

מכתבים למערכת

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.

נעמי שוט,

ירושלים

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

http://www.scottishpsc.org.uk/index.php/zionism/since-1948/a-zionist-state/mass-dispossession/1575-findhorn-community-proudly-hosts-supporters-of-ethnic-cleansing

Findhorn Community “proudly hosts” supporters of ethnic cleansing

UPDATE: Findhorn Foundation statement

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.

Mick Napier
Edinburgh 21 June 2013

Palestinian refugees on the move in 1948Palestinian 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 exemplary mass 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’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 AmnestyHRW, 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.

Mick Napier
Edinburgh 21 June 2013
mick@scottishpsc.org.uk

Among the presenters at this conference are

  • Michael Livni of Kibbutz Lotan
  • Graham Meltzer who spent two years on a Kibbutz not identified
  • Menachem Topel, a member of Kibbutz Mefalsim near Gaza
  • Jan Martin Bang a member of Kibbutz Gezer
  • Aharon Azati a member of Kibbutz Beit Haemek
  • David Leach once lived on Kibbutz Shamir
  • Ruth Kark
  • Shula Keshet, a member of Kibbutz Givat Brenner
  • Yaakov Oved, a member of Kibbutz Palmachim
  • 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
  • Judith Yoel, a kibbutz member since 1982

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

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/

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.”

The Netherlands: Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators Occupy Universities’ Buildings

30.04.25

Editorial Note

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. 

 

REFERENCES:

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.

Divest

There are no direct financial flows to or from the Israeli government or institutions; the UvA has no investments in Israel. Read more about what this demand ‘divest’ means.

Boycott

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

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

Palestine protesters spend the night in footbridge above Erasmusplein

14 Apr 2025 Ken LambeetsVincent DecatesAlex van der Hulst

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

Radboud University ACP Advice Hebrew University March 2025

pdf 487.29 KB

Recommendation regarding cooperation with Tel Aviv University

Radboud University ACP Advice Tel Aviv University March 2025

pdf 531.59 KB

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

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.

 17-04-2025

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 UtrechtMaastricht, 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.

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

Home

TUESDAY, 15 APRIL 2025 – 10:20

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.

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

https://advalvas.vu.nl/campus-cultuur/bellevuegebouw-op-de-campus-bezet-door-pro-palestinademonstranten/

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.’

Emma Sprangers

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


Committee advises Radboud University to suspend cooperation with Israeli universities

02 Apr 2025 Ken Lambeets

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.

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

Police end occupation, protesters removed from glass corridor

Bart Smout

January 31, 202500:36

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.

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

Employees asked to work from home

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.

News

By Ries Agterberg Isabella Hesselink , Translation Marjorie van Elven

on 03/04/2025 – 11:07

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.

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

https://www.observantonline.nl/Home/Artikelen/id/63037/demonstrerende-studenten-verstoren-pro-israelische-lezing-op-tapijn

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.

Author: Peter Doorakkers

Daniel Bar Tal Continues to Espouse anti-Israel Information

23.04.25

Editorial Note

IAM reported before on Tel Aviv University professor emeritus Daniel Bar-Tal, an expert in political psychology and a long-time political activist masquerading as an academic. Recently, he was interviewed in an article titled “Israelis know little about what is happening in the Gaza Strip.” The interview was published in Polish on April 13, 2025, by journalist Agnieszka Zagner. She began by stating, “The war continues because it serves Netanyahu to maintain power. To this end, he has engaged the entire state machine, manipulated the media, and wants to throw out the attorney general. He has even begun to suggest that the elections scheduled for next year will be held later, says Israeli social psychologist Daniel Bar-Tal.”

Zagner then asked, “According to Palestinian sources, over 50,000 people have already died in Gaza. Do Israelis know about this?” 

Bar-Tal responded, “To a small extent. They have not seen Palestinians for a long time, they do not see the occupation – this word has disappeared from their vocabulary. The Palestinians ‘disappeared’ from their horizon some 15 years ago, when the peace process collapsed. Gaza, where most of the 1948 refugees have taken refuge, is the embodiment of this Israeli blindness. Even among some sections of the Israeli left, there is a belief that while the occupation itself is bad, what is happening in Gaza can be ignored. There is a belief that after the withdrawal of Israeli settlers from there in 2005, it is a free country (albeit with a totalitarian regime) that should be grateful to Israel for providing water and electricity. This false image, repeated so many times that it has become ingrained in the minds of most Israelis, exempts from responsibility for what is happening in Gaza. It is not easy to ignore the presence of 6 million Palestinians, including 2 million in the Gaza Strip. On the surface. For years, the Israeli state has tried to separate Israelis and Palestinians from each other. A separation wall was created. Until October 7, 2023. This attack was a shock, but was immediately appropriated by Benjamin Netanyahu.”

In another interview last month, Bar-Tal was in Italy promoting the Italian edition of his book, La trappola dei conflitti intrattabili (The trap of intractable conflicts), recently published by Franco Angeli, an Italian version of Sinking Into the Honey Trap: The Case of the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict. The book is described as “an in-depth study on how people build exclusive narratives that prevent them from seeing things from the other’s perspective.” In the Abstract, the book “describes how Israeli society has positioned itself in the comfort zone, ignoring the reality in which it exists. It is about the story leaders tell us and is accepted by most people. This story shapes the consciousness of Israeli Jewish society by presenting half truths about the past, hiding the present and describing a deceptive vision for the future. Sinking into the Honey Trap explains the mechanisms that allow Israelis to ignore reality and to live in a situation that prolongs the conflict with the Palestinians and postpones the solution to an unseen future with ongoing violence. The book describes the political forces that have driven Israel to advance the occupation, settling Jews on the West Bank, outside of Israel’s internationally recognized borders. Israeli society is paying a heavy price for the continuation of the conflict—not only in loss of life, emotional health problems and economic costs, but also in the deterioration of democracy and morality that accelerates the development of an authoritarian regime characterized by extreme nationalism and intense religiosity.”

In his Italian interview, Bar Tal stated, “For some time now, the word occupation has not been used in Israel when talking about Palestine. Now even peace has become a subversive term in public opinion. We can no longer even envisage that there is someone on the other side with whom to make it.”

For Prof. Bar-Tal, “Narratives color reality. It doesn’t matter if what they say is true or not. People act on the basis of what they think is true. We are linked to interactions, to stories that constitute reality for us. And if leaders have power, they shape reality, which becomes the one accepted by the people. Why can’t Israel and Palestine move away from the logic of an endless conflict? The ethos of conflict has dominated Israel since the Ben Gurion years.” 

Bar-Tal continues, “until the 1970s, when something began to change: Israeli society became more open. When Rabin recognized the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1993, 35 percent of the country supported the peace process, another 35 percent were firmly against it, and the rest were in the middle. But everything changed in 2000. When a man like Ehud Barak, a Labor Party prime minister, elected as a man of the peace front, went back to that narrative by saying that there is no partner who wants peace in Palestine to justify the failure of the Camp David negotiations, the result was not only physical, but above all psychological. About 65 percent of Israelis do not want to look at those on the other side, forgetting that what we are witnessing is an asymmetrical conflict: Israel has all the levers of the balance of power with the Palestinians firmly in its hands.”

Bar-Tal admits he was “personally engaged in the attempt to build a different narrative.“ In 1994, “the then Minister Arnon Rubinstein called me to work in the Ministry of Education. He told me: You have to start working on peace education. It was a huge responsibility. For years, we had all learnt that the Palestinians were terrorists, Nazis. Suddenly we had to present something different. We told ourselves that we had to start with short-term changes, and then come up with those that require more time, such as rewriting textbooks.“We started collecting stories that showed cooperation between Arabs and Jews in the 1920s and 1930s. We began to provide information about the Palestinians and their history. Then in 1995 Rabin was killed, and the following year Netanyahu won the elections. The new Minister of Education told me: It’s over, you’re fired.”

Today, according to Bar-Tal, the climate in schools has completely changed. “My granddaughter goes to kindergarten and is greeted by a map of Israel that goes from the river to the sea… You don’t need a teacher to tell them; that’s the pattern in which our kids grow up. I conducted a survey of 17-year-olds in Israeli high schools. They don’t know what the Green Line is, for them it is established that Hebron or the settlements of Samaria are part of Israel.”But this collective removal pollutes Israel itself.” 

In his book, Bar-Tal cites the prophecy of his teacher, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, the great Jewish public intellectual, who lucidly spoke as early as November 1967 of the harm that would come to Israelis if they took control of the territories inhabited by the Palestinians. Bar Tal said, “The occupation penetrates more and more into the State of Israel every day, you have to accept its narrative. To those in power, even if only a small minority offers an alternative narrative in favor of peace, it is something unacceptable. Israel needs soldiers, those who work to propose something else must be stopped. So it is no longer allowed in schools. Laws have been approved by the Ministry of Justice that limit freedom of expression, freedom to demonstrate. It’s a different kind of occupation.” 

Worth noting that Bar-Tal was hired as an expert in early childhood development by the Department of Education at Tel Aviv University, but, as IAM reported in the past, he became a full-time peace activist after obtaining tenure. He switched to full-time research on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to bolster his new career as a peace activist. Tel Aviv University accepted the switch, although it was unethical because faculty are hired on the basis of their expertise and are expected to teach and research on the subject. 

Instead, he spent his career pushing the argument that the Israeli Jews were afraid of peace because of their alleged Masada complex, or Holocaust complex. He was the co-editor of the Palestine-Israel Journal, a one-sided publication that bashed Israel and blamed Jews alone for the absence of peace. 

This should come as no surprise, as Bar Tal was a disciple of Johan Galtung, a Norwegian sociologist who is credited with developing the field of peace research.  Galtung, a harsh critic of Israel, devolved into an outright antisemite who spoke about Jewish influence over the media and finances, quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  In 2006, Galtung was invited to a panel organized by the Palestine-Israeli Journal to discuss prospects for peace. 

It is sad that even after October 7, Bar-Tal, a professor emeritus living on his Tel Aviv University’s pension, is still spreading disinformation about Israel. 

REFERENCES:

03/18/2025, 21.13

GATEWAY TO THE EAST

Bar-Tal: ‘there is no partner’ in the narrative of ‘endless conflict’

by Giorgio Bernardelli

The Israeli academic and scholar of “intractable conflicts” talked to AsiaNews about the way the Gaza war is going and its consequences for Israeli society. Talking about peace today is considered a threat. Seventeen-year-olds “don’t know what the Green Line is”. The families of the hostages are “the most important voice”.

Milan (AsiaNews) – “For some time now, the word occupation has not been used in Israel when talking about Palestine. Now even peace has become a subversive term in public opinion. We can no longer even envisage that there is someone on the other side with whom to make it,” said a disenchanted Daniel Bar-Tal, professor emeritus of political psychology at Tel Aviv University.

The Israeli scholar is currently in Italy to talk about his book La trappola dei conflitti intrattabili (The trap of intractable conflicts) recently published by Franco Angeli, the Italian edition of Sinking Into the Honey Trap: The Case of the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict, an in-depth study on how people build exclusive narratives that prevent them from seeing things from the other’s perspective, which is the main obstacle to conflict resolution.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict tops the list. Just this morning, after two months of a fragile ceasefire, the horror of bombings, deaths and rubble is back in Gaza, and so is the anguish of the families of the Israeli hostages that remain in Gaza despite claims by Israeli authorities that they still want to free them.

For Prof Bar-Tal, “Narratives colour reality. It doesn’t matter if what they say is true or not. People act on the basis of what they think is true. We are linked to interactions, to stories that constitute reality for us. And if leaders have power, they shape reality, which becomes the one accepted by the people.”

Why can’t Israel and Palestine move away from the logic of an endless conflict? “The ethos of conflict has dominated Israel since the Ben Gurion years,” the Israeli academic replies. “It was the unchallenged narrative until the 1970s, when something began to change: Israeli society became more open.

“When Rabin recognised the Palestine Liberation Organisation in 1993, 35 per cent of the country supported the peace process, another 35 per cent were firmly against it, and the rest were in the middle. But everything changed in 2000.

“When a man like Ehud Barak, a Labour Party prime minister, elected as a man of the peace front, went back to that narrative by saying that there is no partner who wants peace in Palestine to justify the failure of the Camp David negotiations, the result was not only physical, but above all psychological.

“About 65 per cent of Israelis do not want to look at those on the other side, forgetting that what we are witnessing is an asymmetrical conflict: Israel has all the levers of the balance of power with the Palestinians firmly in its hands.”

Professor Bar-Tal, who arrived in Israel in 1957 from Poland at the age of 11, together with his mother, whose entire family was killed in the Treblinka extermination camp, was personally engaged in the attempt to build a different narrative.

“In 1994,” he says, “the then Minister Arnon Rubinstein called me to work in the Ministry of Education. He told me: You have to start working on peace education. It was a huge responsibility. For years, we had all learnt that the Palestinians were terrorists, Nazis. Suddenly we had to present something different. We told ourselves that we had to start with short-term changes, and then come up with those that require more time, such as rewriting textbooks.

“We started collecting stories that showed cooperation between Arabs and Jews in the 1920s and 1930s. We began to provide information about the Palestinians and their history. Then in 1995 Rabin was killed, and the following year Netanyahu won the elections. The new Minister of Education told me: It’s over, you’re fired.”

Today the climate in schools has completely changed. “My granddaughter goes to  kindergarten and is greeted by a map of Israel that goes from the river to the sea,” he says. “You don’t need a teacher to tell them; that’s the pattern in which our kids grow up. I conducted a survey of 17-year-olds in Israeli high schools. They don’t know what the Green Line is, for them it is established that Hebron or the settlements of Samaria are part of Israel.”

But this collective removal pollutes Israel itself. In his book Bar-Tal cites the prophecy of his teacher, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, a great Jewish public intellectual, who lucidly spoke as early as November 1967 of the harm that would come to Israelis if they took control of the territories inhabited by the Palestinians.

“The occupation penetrates more and more into the State of Israel every day, you have to accept its narrative. To those in power, even if only a small minority offers an alternative narrative in favour of peace, it is something unacceptable. Israel needs soldiers, those who work to propose something else must be stopped. So it is no longer allowed in schools. Laws have been approved by the Ministry of Justice that limit freedom of expression, freedom to demonstrate.

“It’s a different kind of occupation. Paradoxically, even the head of Shin-Bet, the internal security services that have always been at the forefront of the repression of Palestinians, has been accused of being a traitor, simply for daring to open an investigation into the relations between some of Netanyahu’s close aides and Qatar.”

The only counter narrative is offered by the pain of the families of the hostages who remain in Gaza. “They are the most important voice,” says Bar-Tal. A poll a few days ago found that 70 per cent of Israelis support their cause, and only 20 per cent said that the fight against Hamas comes first.

“Netanyahu does not want to end the war. He would like to extend the first phase of the ceasefire, without entering the second because, as long as the war goes on, he will not have to take responsibility, unlike what Israeli military leaders have done.”

Can the families of the hostages be the start of a different path? “Immediately after the war in 1973, only one person began to demonstrate. Day and night he stood in front of the seat of government. Slowly, people joined him and in 1977 those who had always governed lost the elections. Will it happen again?

“In a year and a half, Israel will go to elections. But the opposition is made up of very different groups. Even if they were to defeat Netanyahu in November 2026, they would still not address the Palestinian issue. Especially with Trump allowing Israel not to do so.”

Is it impossible to get out of the trap of intractable conflicts? “It’s very difficult,” Bar-Tal replies. “Look at Rwanda, Sri Lanka with the Tamils, Chechnya. These conflicts were resolved militarily with one side prevailing over the other. But are these conflicts really resolved? And what countries have they become?

“The other way is that of those who try to take charge of the problems of those on the other side by offering solutions. It happened in Spain with the Basques, for example. They gave up the armed struggle, but Madrid conceded practically everything they asked for in terms of autonomy. It happened, but it’s a rare fact.”

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

Google Translate

Israelis know little about what is happening in the Gaza Strip
April 13, 2025 
Drama in the Gaza Strip.

The war continues because it serves Netanyahu to maintain power. To this end, he has engaged the entire state machine, manipulated the media, and wants to throw out the attorney general. He has even begun to suggest that the elections scheduled for next year will be held later, says Israeli social psychologist Daniel Bar-Tal.
AGNIESZKA ZAGNER: – According to Palestinian sources, over 50,000 people have already died in Gaza. Do Israelis know about this?
DANIEL BAR-TAL: – To a small extent. They have not seen Palestinians for a long time, they do not see the occupation – this word has disappeared from their vocabulary. The Palestinians “disappeared” from their horizon some 15 years ago, when the peace process collapsed. Gaza, where most of the 1948 refugees have taken refuge, is the embodiment of this Israeli blindness. Even among some sections of the Israeli left, there is a belief that while the occupation itself is bad, what is happening in Gaza can be ignored. There is a belief that after the withdrawal of Israeli settlers from there in 2005, it is a free country (albeit with a totalitarian regime) that should be grateful to Israel for providing water and electricity. This false image, repeated so many times that it has become ingrained in the minds of most Israelis, exempts from responsibility for what is happening in Gaza. It is not easy to ignore the presence of 6 million Palestinians, including 2 million in the Gaza Strip. On the surface. For years, the Israeli state has tried to separate Israelis and Palestinians from each other. A separation wall was created. Until October 7, 2023. This attack was a shock, but was immediately appropriated by Benjamin Netanyahu.

Izraelczycy niewiele wiedzą o tym, co dzieje się w Strefie Gazy

13 kwietnia 2025

7 minut czytania

2Ramadan Abed/Reuters / Forum

Wojna trwa, bo służy Netanjahu w utrzymaniu władzy. W tym celu zaangażował całą machinę państwową, zmanipulował media, chce wyrzucić prokurator generalną. Zaczął nawet sugerować, że wybory zaplanowane na przyszły rok odbędą się później – mówi izraelski psycholog społeczny Daniel Bar-Tal.

AGNIESZKA ZAGNER: – Według palestyńskich źródeł w Gazie zginęło już ponad 50 tys. osób. Czy Izraelczycy o tym wiedzą?
DANIEL BAR-TAL: – W nieznacznym stopniu. Już od dawna nie widzą Palestyńczyków, nie widzą okupacji – to słowo wyszło z ich słownika. Palestyńczycy „zniknęli” im z horyzontu jakieś 15 lat temu, kiedy załamał się proces pokojowy. Gaza, gdzie w większości schronili się uchodźcy z 1948 r., jest ucieleśnieniem tej izraelskiej ślepoty. Nawet w części izraelskiej lewicy panuje przekonanie, że o ile sama okupacja jest zła, o tyle można machnąć ręką na to, co dzieje się w Gazie. Panuje przekonanie, że po wycofaniu stamtąd izraelskich osadników w 2005 r. to wolny kraj (chociaż z totalitarnym reżimem), który powinien być wdzięczny Izraelowi za dostarczanie wody i prądu. Ten fałszywy obraz, tyle razy powielony, że utrwalił się w umysłach większości Izraelczyków, zwalnia od odpowiedzialności za to, co dzieje się w Gazie. Nie jest łatwo zignorować obecność 6 mln Palestyńczyków, w tym 2 mln w Strefie Gazy. Pozornie. Państwo izraelskie przez lata starało się oddzielać Izraelczyków i Palestyńczyków od siebie. Powstał mur separacyjny. Aż do 7 października 2023 r. Ten atak był szokiem, ale natychmiast został zawłaszczony przez Beniamina Netanjahu.

Nimrod Ben Zeev and Leena Dallasheh Fighting Israel Side by Side

16.04.25

Editorial Note

In April 2024, the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives announced that he is expanding the House Education Committee’s investigation into antisemitism on college campuses. Earlier that year, in January 2024, the House Committee on Ways and Means launched a probe into the University of Pennsylvania’s tax-exempt status, citing an alleged failure to protect Jewish students on campus.

Penn is the alma mater of Dr. Nimrod Ben Zeev, where he completed his PhD in the History Department in 2020. 

The subject of his dissertation is Israel’s construction industry and its Arab workers. For Ben Zeev, they “remain part and parcel of the colonial, exploitative structure the erection of which this dissertation has narrated, would likely furnish an infuriating and tragic laundry list. From the Israeli Right’s notion that construction in illegal settlements was the ‘proper Zionist response’ (tguva tziyonit holemet) to all manners of perceived Palestinian and international encroachments on Israel, held and acted upon since the late 1970s; to the disastrous equations of demolition endorsed by current Israeli leadership, whereby the homes of Palestinians within Israel built without a permit are demolished to appease popular rightwing anger at government demolitions of structures in illegal settlements in the West Bank.” 

Ben Zeev’s PhD supervisor was Prof. Eve Troutt Powell, an anti-Israel activist. For example, Troutt Powell filed a lawsuit against her University in March 2024, alleging a pattern of “McCarthyism” for preventing speech in opposition to Israel. The lawsuit was filed with Huda Fakhreddine, associate professor of Arabic literature, in conjunction with Penn Faculty for Justice in Palestine. The complaint alleged that “efforts to investigate the University over alleged antisemitism on campus have threatened professors’ academic freedom.” The case was dismissed.

Ben Zeev’s PhD committee included Prof. Sherene Seikaly from UC Santa Barbara. Seikaly’s bio indicates she held the Qatar Postdoctoral Fellowship at Georgetown University. Seikaly’s book Men of Capital: Scarcity and Economy in Mandate Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2016) explores how “Palestinian capitalists and British colonial officials used economy to shape territory, nationalism, the home, and the body.” Her forthcoming book, From Baltimore to Beirut: On the Question of Palestine “focuses on a Palestinian man who was at once a colonial officer and a colonized subject, an enslaver and a refugee. His trajectory from nineteenth century mobility across Baltimore and Sudan to twentieth century immobility in Lebanon places the question of Palestine in a global history of race, capital, slavery, and dispossession.” Seikaly currently serves as co-editor of the Journal of Palestine Studies and co-founder and co-editor of Jadaliyya.

Seikaly was featured in an online series, “What Have We Learned? Israel’s Genocide — One Year On,” in October 2024. The Co-Organizers: Arab Studies Institute, Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, George Mason University’s Middle East and Islamic Studies Program, Rutgers Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Birzeit University Museum, Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Brown University’s Center for Middle East Studies, University of Chicago’s Center for Contemporary Theory, Brown University’s New Directions in Palestinian Studies, Georgetown University’s Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Simon Fraser University’s Centre for Comparative Muslim Studies, Georgetown University-Qatar, American University of Cairo’s Alternative Policy Studies, Middle East Studies Association’s Global Academy, University of Chicago’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, CUNY’s Middle East and Middle Eastern American Center, University of Illinois Chicago’s Arab american cultural Center, George Mason University’s AbuSulayman’s Center for Global Islamic Studies, University of Illinois Chicago’s Critical Middle East Studies Working Group, George Washington University’s Institute for Middle East Studies, Columbia University’s Center for Palestine Studies, New York University’s Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies. 

Interestingly, Penn University boasted about Ben Zeev’s four-year postdoctoral appointment at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute.  Penn is apparently unaware that the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute is not an academic institution and, therefore, not recognized by Israel’s Council for Higher Education. 

Earlier this month, Ben Zeev co-authored an article titled “Fighting Side by Side in Israel-Palestine.” His co-author, Dr. Leena Dallasheh is an Israeli Arab who describes herself as “An activist scholar.” According to her website, her research focuses on the history of Palestine/Israel. “She held several academic positions, the last of which was associate professor at Cal Poly Humboldt. She received her PhD in the joint History and Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies program at NYU. Before coming to NYU, she received a law degree from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.”

The authors begin their article by stating, “There is a long and noble history of Jewish Israelis and Palestinians resisting Israel’s crimes together.”

The article discusses Masafer Yatta and the documentary film “No Other Land,” which brought to global attention “yet again Israel’s crimes as occupier and violator of Palestinian rights and showed how progressives from across the national divide collaborate to achieve common objectives… The debate brought into focus the whole question of cross-national activism for Palestinian justice, and ‘co-resistance,’ or joint struggle, against Israeli occupation and Jewish supremacy.” 

According to the authors, “Co-resistance focuses on protecting Palestinian existence on the land, exposing Israeli colonial crimes, and making inroads within the Jewish community to oppose Israeli repressive mechanisms, pushing Jewish activists to use their structurally privileged position in the region to aid Palestinian rights and liberation. It is of particular value in the context of Palestine/Israel because of the settler colonial context in the land. As multiple Palestinian scholars and activists have noted, the way Zionist settler colonialism developed in Palestine/Israel renders the expulsion of the settler population neither practical nor moral. Co-resistance offers a politically sound strategy toward substantive decolonization, along with independent struggle within the respective communities. In the long run, through co-resistance, a growing number among the settler population can embrace a decolonial future in the land, expanding the fissures within Israeli society and providing fertile ground for international mobilization to end Israeli occupation and injustice.”

They detailed the history of movements that brought together Arabs and Jews. They first discussed Communism, followed by the founding in 1974 of “the student movement CAMPUS (the Hebrew acronym for Groups for Social and Political Student Involvement) brought together Palestinian and Jewish students in Israeli universities. The movement joined Palestinian protests against the occupation. Another organization, the Committee for Solidarity with Birzeit, was founded in 1981 as an Israeli group in solidarity with the Palestinian struggles at Birzeit University, then a hub of the Palestinian left’s anti-occupation struggles. The movement, ‘Down with the Occupation,’ was a continuation of the Committee for Solidarity. With the start of the Palestinian Intifada in 1987, its members vocally expressed solidarity with the uprising. These groups worked on using their privileged status as Israelis to defend Palestinians, bring Palestinian opposition voices to Israelis, and shape Israeli public opinion.”

Then, they moved on to discuss “After Jewish Supremacy.” Stating that “The Oslo years were mostly a retreat from co-resistance and saw the emergence of dialogue groups, which consisted of meetings between Israelis and Palestinians mostly devoid of a clear political project and glossed over the deepening occupation, segregation, and inequality in the region. Palestinian critics rightly called out these dialogue groups and the cottage industry of programs, which uncritically espoused co-existence without challenging the status quo and normalized the Israeli state’s colonial practices. The collapse of the Oslo process with the beginning of the Second Intifada led to a reexamination of previous modes of resistance and a clearer concept of what joint struggle, or co-resistance, entails.” 

The authors discuss how in 2001, “Palestinian and Israeli activists established Ta’ayush, Arab-Jewish Partnership. Part of Ta’ayush’s innovation was that the movement explicitly framed its struggle as a decolonial struggle in a settler colonial setting by developing a model that could challenge the very structures governing Palestinians’ lives. Ta’ayush activists accompanying Palestinian farmers and shepherds to their lands. This was, in part, a response to the shortcomings of previous co-resistance and coexistence endeavors. Ta’ayush’s founders understood these earlier efforts as reproducing existing power disparities between the two communities, as a result prioritizing Jewish perspectives and concerns. Palestinian communities shaped and led the movement’s direct-action practices, while Israeli Jews were called to use their privilege to protect Palestinian communities. This formula sought to bring the colonial reality into focus while also resisting it. Ta’ayush was consolidated at a dire moment: the Israeli assault on and reoccupation of the West Bank’s urban centers, in which Israeli forces laid siege to cities, laid waste to entire neighborhoods, and deprived Palestinian communities of basic needs such as food, water, and security. As the group sought to respond to these needs, it worked to develop a political project against occupation and for social justice. It pursued the widest possible platform to allow greater participation by Israelis, while adhering to a clear political line: Ta’ayush defined its work not as humanitarian action but as shedding light on Israeli crimes and presented an alternative future based on living together, through justice and equality. Ta’ayush’s approach to co-resistance played an important role in developing the forms of joint struggle.”

Recently, Tel Aviv University recruited Ben Zeev to its History Department. Interestingly, Professor On Barak from Tel Aviv University was also a member of Ben Zeev’s PhD committee.  

Tel Aviv University is a public university. The taxpayers who support tertiary education expect good value for their investments. Ben Zeev’s anti-Israel scholarship is a poor return for their money.  As IAM documented, some liberal arts departments at the University have a long history of hiring and promoting activist academics who use their position to advocate for radical left-wing causes.  

Worse, Ben Zeev’s polemical scholarship, like other missives of anti-Israel academics, bolsters the flames of antisemitism on Western campuses.   Since October 7, Israel has launched numerous initiatives to combat this phenomenon.  What is the point of providing Ben Zeev with a paid platform to produce material that might be used by the academic delegitimizers of Israel? 

REFERENCES:

04.01.2025Fighting Side by Side in Israel-PalestineBYLEENA DALLASHEH NIMROD BEN ZEEV

There is a long and noble history of Jewish Israelis and Palestinians resisting Israel’s crimes together.

When the Palestinian-Israeli coproduction No Other Land won the Academy Award for best documentary feature film in early March, jubilation was palpable. It brought to global attention yet again Israel’s crimes as occupier and violator of Palestinian rights and showed how progressives from across the national divide collaborate to achieve common objectives.

This week, this reality was brought again into sharp relief with the assault and arrest of one of the film’s directors, Hamdan Ballal, after Israeli settlers attacked his community.

No Other Land follows the struggle of the people of Masafer Yatta, a cluster of nineteen Palestinian communities in the south of the occupied West Bank. It chronicles their ongoing fight against Israel’s attempts to dispossess and displace them through military decrees, the repeated demolition of homes and community structures, settler violence, destruction and deprivation of access to their resources, and court rulings. It also documents community struggles between 2019–2023, making use of home videos, interviews, and archival footage to tell the story of the people of Masafer Yatta’s decades-long fight for their homes, land, and lives, while also shedding light on the Israeli activists who joined and documented that struggle.

Unsurprisingly, Israeli officials, journalists, public figures, and others launched an assault on the film, frequently while stating that they have not seen it nor do they intend to. But counterintuitively, No Other Land was also attacked by some participants in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

While many lauded its role in exposing Israeli colonial practices and centering Palestinians’ steadfastness, others argued it reproduced colonial dynamics in which Palestinians required Israeli permission to narrate their story. The debate brought into focus the whole question of cross-national activism for Palestinian justice, and “co-resistance,” or joint struggle, against Israeli occupation and Jewish supremacy.

Rather than relitigating the definition of normalization or summarizing the debate, we focus here on the practice of co-resistance, its viability, and historic meanings in Israel-Palestine by examining several key historical examples of Jewish-Palestinian co-resistance from the period of British rule until the early 2000s. This is by no means an exhaustive list of such struggles. But it illuminates the historical dynamics, challenges, and limitations of co-resistance.

These examples show that co-resistance was historically practiced in a wide range of ways in the region, from political parties to direct action, depending on the particular circumstances. What unites these instances is the principle of shared and active opposition to the colonial order, first under the British and subsequently under Israeli rule.

Co-resistance focuses on protecting Palestinian existence on the land, exposing Israeli colonial crimes, and making inroads within the Jewish community to oppose Israeli repressive mechanisms, pushing Jewish activists to use their structurally privileged position in the region to aid Palestinian rights and liberation. It is of particular value in the context of Palestine/Israel because of the settler colonial context in the land. As multiple Palestinian scholars and activists have noted, the way Zionist settler colonialism developed in Palestine/Israel renders the expulsion of the settler population neither practical nor moral. Co-resistance offers a politically sound strategy toward substantive decolonization, along with independent struggle within the respective communities.

In the long run, through co-resistance, a growing number among the settler population can embrace a decolonial future in the land, expanding the fissures within Israeli society and providing fertile ground for international mobilization to end Israeli occupation and injustice.

Side by Side

Since the British Mandate period, Jews and Palestinians have repeatedly joined forces in resisting colonial structures. In the 1920s, Palestinian Arabs and Jewish immigrants joined forces in the Palestine Communist Party (PKP). The party’s history is far from an ideal for co-resistance. Yet the Communist experience kept the possibility of imagining a democratic, anti-colonial alternative alive.

The party was unevenly reconstituted as a single party — which Jewish leaders dominated — the Israeli Communist Party (MAKI), in the wake of the Nakba in 1948. Despite the unequal structure within the party, MAKI provided the main space for the struggle of Palestinians who became citizens of Israel to remain in their homeland in subsequent decades, when Israel imposed a military rule on Palestinian citizens. Acts of solidarity and resistance led or supported by MAKI members radicalized a core of Jewish activists to continue anti-colonial struggles over the following decades.

In the early 1960s, Israeli authorities’ plans to establish a new Jewish town, later dubbed Carmiel, in the Palestinian-majority area of the Shaghur galvanized resistance among a broad coalition. It also introduced a new generation of Israeli-Jewish activists who worked alongside the Shaghur’s Palestinian residents. The latter’s role in the struggle attracted considerable media attention in the Israeli press and helped generate support for the Shaghur residents among a then nascent international antiwar and nonproliferation movement.

The 1970s and ’80s witnessed another wave of joint activism. Founded in 1974, the student movement CAMPUS (the Hebrew acronym for Groups for Social and Political Student Involvement) brought together Palestinian and Jewish students in Israeli universities. The movement joined Palestinian protests against the occupation. Another organization, the Committee for Solidarity with Birzeit, was founded in 1981 as an Israeli group in solidarity with the Palestinian struggles at Birzeit University, then a hub of the Palestinian left’s anti-occupation struggles.

The movement, “Down with the Occupation,” was a continuation of the Committee for Solidarity. With the start of the Palestinian Intifada in 1987, its members vocally expressed solidarity with the uprising. These groups worked on using their privileged status as Israelis to defend Palestinians, bring Palestinian opposition voices to Israelis, and shape Israeli public opinion.

After Jewish Supremacy

The Oslo years were mostly a retreat from co-resistance and saw the emergence of dialogue groups, which consisted of meetings between Israelis and Palestinians mostly devoid of a clear political project and glossed over the deepening occupation, segregation, and inequality in the region. Palestinian critics rightly called out these dialogue groups and the cottage industry of programs, which uncritically espoused co-existence without challenging the status quo and normalized the Israeli state’s colonial practices. The collapse of the Oslo process with the beginning of the Second Intifada led to a reexamination of previous modes of resistance and a clearer concept of what joint struggle, or co-resistance, entails.

In 2001, Palestinian and Israeli activists established Ta’ayush, Arab-Jewish Partnership. Part of Ta’ayush’s innovation was that the movement explicitly framed its struggle as a decolonial struggle in a settler colonial setting by developing a model that could challenge the very structures governing Palestinians’ lives.

Ta’ayush activists accompanying Palestinian farmers and shepherds to their lands. (Tal King / Flickr)

This was, in part, a response to the shortcomings of previous co-resistance and coexistence endeavors. Ta’ayush’s founders understood these earlier efforts as reproducing existing power disparities between the two communities, as a result prioritizing Jewish perspectives and concerns. Palestinian communities shaped and led the movement’s direct action practices, while Israeli Jews were called to use their privilege to protect Palestinian communities. This formula sought to bring the colonial reality into focus while also resisting it.

Ta’ayush was consolidated at a dire moment: the Israeli assault on and reoccupation of the West Bank’s urban centers, in which Israeli forces laid siege to cities, laid waste to entire neighborhoods, and deprived Palestinian communities of basic needs such as food, water, and security. As the group sought to respond to these needs, it worked to develop a political project against occupation and for social justice.

It pursued the widest possible platform to allow greater participation by Israelis, while adhering to a clear political line: Ta’ayush defined its work not as humanitarian action but as shedding light on Israeli crimes and presented an alternative future based on living together, through justice and equality.

Ta’ayush’s approach to co-resistance played an important role in developing the forms of joint struggle which Masafer Yatta’s local communities continue to lead in their now over two-decades-long struggle against ethnic cleansing.

Following Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023, this struggle has intensified. Increasing attacks by Israeli settlers backed by the police and army have led to the displacement of two local communities in Masafer Yatta out of a total of twenty West Bank communities, which state and settler violence have displaced since then. Throughout, co-resistance has retained an important role in Masafer Yatta’s strategies of sumud (“steadfastness”). During this period, No Other Land documents Masafer Yatta’s residents’ ongoing resistance to these attacks, with the support of Israeli activists.

No Other Land demonstrates that in Masafer Yatta, as elsewhere, co-resistance has been a crucial way to carry out anti-occupation struggle and envision a society after Jewish supremacy. Running through its history is a common thread: the refusal to accept the separatist logic of colonialism, while working to upend the hierarchies it imposes. 

CONTRIBUTORS

Leena Dallasheh is a Palestinian historian and independent scholar.

Nimrod Ben Zeev teaches history in the Department of Labor Studies at Tel Aviv University.

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

Nimrod Ben Zeev receives a post-doctoral fellowship at the Van Leer Institute’s Polonsky Academy in Jerusalem

April 10, 2020

Nimrod Ben Zeev has received a four-year post-doctoral fellowship at the Van Leer Institute’s Polonsky Academy in Jerusalem (https://polonsky.vanleer.org.il/home/).   Nimrod is planning to defend his dissertation this summer, and take up the fellowship in October.  Nimrod is currently a Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation’s Charlotte W. Newcombe Fellow, and a Graduate Fellow at the Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy. In previous years, his research has been supported by the Social Sciences Research Council’s International Dissertation Research Fellowship (IDRF).

Nimrod’s dissertation is entitled: “Foundations of Inequality: Construction, Political Economy, and the Senses in Palestine/Israel, 1918-1973.”  His committee is: Eve Troutt Powell (Supervisor); Kathy Brown; Heather Sharkey (NELC); Sherene Seikaly (UC Santa Barbara); and On Barak (Tel Aviv University).

Nimrod describes his project on his Departmental webpage:

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

An activist scholar

Leena Dallasheh is an independent scholar. Her research focuses on the history of Palestine/Israel, with a particular interest in Palestinians who became citizens of Israel in 1948. She is currently finishing a manuscript on the social and political history of Nazareth from 1940 to 1966, tracing how Palestinians who remained in Israel in 1948 negotiated their incorporation in the state, affirming their rights as citizens and their identity as Palestinian. She has published articles and reviews in IJMES, JPS, AHR, and edited collections. She has also been engaged in academic and public conversations on Palestine/Israel, and has been interviewed and published in various media outlets. She held several academic positions, the last of which was associate professor at Cal Poly Humboldt.

She received her PhD in the joint History and Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies program at NYU. Before coming to NYU, she received a law degree from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

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

What Have We Learned? Israel’s Genocide — One Year On Featuring Sherene Seikaly (21 October)

By : Jadaliyya Reports

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

  

Featuring

Sherene Seikaly

Moderated by:

 Bassam Haddad

TUESDAY, 22 OCTOBER 2024  2:00PM EST | 9:00 PM GAZA

WATCH LIVE YOUTUBE.COM/@JADALIYYA/STREAMS

Join our eighth edition of “What Have We Learned?” after one year of Israel’s Genocide with Sherene Seikaly, hosted by Bassam Hadddad. Scholars, journalists, activists, and authors select 5 themes/topics and analyze what we have learned about them. 

Gaza in Context Project is billing this series as lessons learned, one year on, to break through the fog of observations, narratives, data, propaganda, and images we unfathomably continue to access/witness every day. These conversations are relatively short, intense, and insightful, delivered by thoroughly engaged speakers. Catch our next Episode this week with Sherene Seikaly.

Gaza in Context Collaborative Teach-In Series

We are together experiencing a catastrophic unfolding of history as Gaza awaits a massive invasion of potentially genocidal proportions. This follows an incessant bombardment of a population increasingly bereft of the necessities of living in response to the Hamas attack in Israel on October 7. The context within which this takes place includes a well-coordinated campaign of misinformation and the unearthing of a multitude of essentialist and reductionist discursive tropes that depict Palestinians as the culprits, despite a context of structural subjugation and Apartheid, a matter of consensus in the human rights movement.

The co-organizers below are convening weekly teach-ins and conversations on a host of issues that introduce our common university communities, educators, researchers, and students to the history and present of Gaza, in context. 

Co-Organizers: Arab Studies Institute, Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, George Mason University’s Middle East and Islamic Studies Program, Rutgers Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Birzeit University Museum, Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Brown University’s Center for Middle East Studies, University of Chicago’s Center for Contemporary Theory, Brown University’s New Directions in Palestinian Studies, Georgetown University’s Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Simon Fraser University’s Centre for Comparative Muslim Studies, Georgetown University-Qatar, American University of Cairo’s Alternative Policy Studies, Middle East Studies Association’s Global Academy, University of Chicago’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, CUNY’s Middle East and Middle Eastern American Center, University of Illinois Chicago’s Arab american cultural Center, George Mason University’s AbuSulayman’s Center for Global Islamic Studies, University of Illinois Chicago’s Critical Middle East Studies Working Group, George Washington University’s Institute for Middle East Studies, Columbia University’s Center for Palestine Studies, New York University’s Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies

Featuring

Sherene Seikaly is Associate Professor of History at the University of California, Santa Barbara. She held the Qatar Postdoctoral Fellowship at Georgetown University and the Europe in the Middle East Postdoctoral Fellowship at the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin. Seikaly was Director of the Middle East Studies Center at the American University in Cairo (2012-2014), where she was awarded an Excellence in Teaching Award in 2014. Seikaly’s Men of Capital: Scarcity and Economy in Mandate Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2016) explores how Palestinian capitalists and British colonial officials used economy to shape territory, nationalism, the home, and the body. Her forthcoming book, From Baltimore to Beirut: On the Question of Palestine focuses on a Palestinian man who was at once a colonial officer and a colonized subject, an enslaver and a refugee. His trajectory from nineteenth century mobility across Baltimore and Sudan to twentieth century immobility in Lebanon places the question of Palestine in a global history of race, capital, slavery, and dispossession. Seikaly is the recipient of the National Endowment for the Humanities Research Fellowship, the Distinguished Teaching Award from the Academic Senate, the University of California, Santa Barbara; the Harold J. Plous Award at UCSB; and the UC President’s Faculty Research Fellowship. She currently serves as co-editor of Journal of Palestine Studies and co-founder and co-editor of Jadaliyya.

Bassam Haddad (Moderator) is Founding Director of the Middle East and Islamic Studies Program and Associate Professor at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. He is the author of Business Networks in Syria: The Political Economy of Authoritarian Resilience (Stanford University Press, 2011) and co-editor of A Critical Political Economy of the Middle East (Stanford University Press, 2021). Bassam is Co-Founder/Editor of Jadaliyya Ezine and Executive Director of the Arab Studies Institute. He serves as Founding Editor of the Arab Studies Journal and the Knowledge Production Project. He is co-producer/director of the award-winning documentary film, About Baghdad, and director of the acclaimed series Arabs and Terrorism. Bassam is Executive Producer of Status Podcast Channel and Director of the Middle East Studies Pedagogy Initiative (MESPI). He received MESA’s Jere L. Bacharach Service Award in 2017 for his service to the profession. Currently, Bassam is working on his second Syria book titled Understanding The Syrian Tragedy: Regime, Opposition, Outsiders (forthcoming, Stanford University Press).

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

Penn responds to lawsuit by professors alleging ‘McCarthyism’ for preventing anti-Israel speech

By Ben Binday 05/11/24 3:14pm


Credit: Abhiram Juvvadi

Penn filed a motion earlier this week to dismiss a lawsuit filed by several professors alleging a pattern of “McCarthyism” for preventing speech in opposition to Israel and seeking to stop the University from submitting documents to Congress.

The lawsuit was originally filed on March 9 by associate professor of Arabic literature Huda Fakhreddine and history and Africana studies professor Eve Troutt Powell in conjunction with Penn Faculty for Justice in Palestine, a collective of Penn faculty who say they are standing in solidarity with Palestinians. The complaint alleges that efforts to investigate the University over alleged antisemitism on campus have threatened professors’ academic freedom.

Penn’s motion to dismiss sharply disagrees with the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, which was filed approximately a month after their initial complaint, calling the motion “meritless.”

A University spokesperson declined to comment.

At the time of the initial filing, a press release from PFJP said that the lawsuit hopes to convince the University not to comply with the House Committee on Education and the Workforce’s request for a plethora of documents pertaining to on-campus antisemitism. According to the press release, the request included “teaching files, emails, and other material for political scrutiny.”

The Committee first opened its investigation into Penn on Dec. 7, 2023, following former Penn President Liz Magill’s testimony before Congress on Dec. 5. On Feb. 7, The Daily Pennsylvanian reported that Penn would begin a multi-week process of transferring documents to the Committee. The requested documents included those relating to antisemitism or anti-Zionism on campus, pro-Palestine groups and actions at Penn, foreign donations to the University, and data on Jewish enrollment.

Penn’s response to the complaint contends that “Plaintiffs’ issue is with HEW and not with Penn,” citing the Committee’s motives, definition of antisemitism, and ongoing investigation into the University.

The new motion provides several responses to both the plaintiffs’ lawsuit and motion for a preliminary injunction. It contends that all of the claims lack standing because the original complaint “offer[s] nothing but allegations of possible future injury” rather than any injury that is “certainly impending.”

“Plaintiffs may disagree with Penn’s decision to comply with HEW’s request. But that disagreement does not entitle them to this Court’s jurisdiction,” the lawsuit reads. “Because they have failed to allege enough facts that come close to showing any future injury that is likely to occur—much less certainly impending—their complaint must be dismissed for lack of … standing.”

The response also contends that the plaintiffs’ claims under the United States Constitution and Pennsylvania Constitution fail because they did not sufficiently demonstrate that Penn is a state actor.

The University’s third response to the complaint contends that the plaintiffs failed to state a breach of contract claim by not identifying specific promises and assertions made by Penn.

Penn also contends that the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction should be dismissed due to their aforementioned arguments for why the case should be dismissed. If not dismissed, however, the University also posits that the request should be dismissed “because Plaintiffs have come nowhere close to satisfying their heavy burden.”

Penn — while citing several of their arguments used in response to the motion to dismiss — argues that the preliminary injunction request should be denied because the plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claims and unlikely to “suffer irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief.” It also contends that the requested injunctive relief would harm the House education committee and not be in the public interest.

On April 30, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) announced that he is expanding the House education committee’s investigation into a housewide probe into antisemitism on college campuses. At the time, a Committee on Education and the Workforce aide told the DP that their investigation was going to continue despite the housewide expansion.

The House Committee on Ways and Means also announced a probe into Penn’s tax-exempt status on January 10, citing an alleged “failure” to protect Jewish students on campus.

Palestinians Recruit Israeli Academics to Approve Sumud

09.04.25

Editorial Note

Online forums for academics recently posted an invitation to a tour of Southern Hebron Hill, Masafer Yatta, taking place on April 25, 2025, to show support to the locals.

The invitation reads, “In recent months, the attack on the area known as ‘Southern Hebron Hill,’ Masafer Yatta, as it is called by its Palestinian residents, has reached its peak. This is an opportunity to visit one of the most explosive areas in Area C of the West Bank, just when the residents of the area need Israeli presence and support more than ever. The tour, guided by Dr. Amiel Vardi and Palestinian guides, the residents of the area, will take place on Friday, April 25, 2025, from 9 am to 3:30 pm, and will include meeting residents of the villages under attack, a generous lunch, and transportation from Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. The price per participant will be determined according to the number of participants. All profits will be transferred to the residents of Masafer Yatta. Additional details will be sent to those who register.”

The story of Masafer Yatta even reached Hollywood. However, in a January 2025 article titled “Oscar-nominated film ignores legal reality,” published in Psakdin, an Israeli law journal, attorney Snir Zahavi discussed the award-winning film “No Other Land.” Zahavi wrote that the film “presents the struggle of the residents of Masafer Yatta, a group of villages in the southern Hebron Hills, against what is presented as a systematic attempt by Israel to uproot them from their land following its declaration in 1980 as a firing zone.” Zehavi notes that the “filmmakers – two Israelis and two Palestinians – described their work as an act of shared destiny and a struggle for an equal and empathetic future. However, a closer look at the High Court of Justice ruling, in which the residents’ claims were rejected, paints a completely different picture.”

Zehavi argued that while the film presents the residents as having lived there for generations, the High Court ruling outlined evidence such as “aerial photographs and historical documents that refuted these claims.”

The “petitioners did not attach any document indicating that they have property rights to the lands in the fire zone area. The court ruled that there was no permanent settlement in the area and that the area was used at most for seasonal grazing. According to the High Court, the construction of permanent structures in the area only began in 2000, in violation of legal orders and prohibitions… the ruling sharply criticizes the petitioners’ conduct. The judges accuse them of taking advantage of temporary orders issued in their favor to build illegally in the area. The court emphasized that the petitioners violated the terms of the orders, thereby illegally strengthening their hold on the site.”   Zehavi added the words of Judge David Mintz, “The petitioners’ lack of cleanliness of their hands is intensified in light of their conduct since the current petitions were filed, as construction in the area of the firing zone has intensified since 2013.”

Zehavi argues that the film provides a “historical narrative according to which the villages in the area appeared on Ottoman maps as early as the 19th century, but the aerial photographs presented in the High Court refute this claim. Even aerial photographs submitted by the petitioners themselves showed that there was no significant construction in the area until recent decades and that settlement in the area began only in recent years, undermining the place’s status as a closed military area… However, according to the ruling, it was precisely the High Court’s interim orders that allowed access to the area for more than two decades, while the state worked for years to offer compromise solutions that included the possibility of civilian uses under different conditions and at different times alongside military uses. The state even refrained from conducting live-fire training exercises at the site over the years.”

Zehavi ends by stating that “the High Court’s ruling calls into question the historical and legal accuracy of the central claims.”

Dr. Amiel Vardi, the academic tour guide to Masafer Yatta, is a longtime political activist whom IAM has reported on before. Vardi teaches at the Hebrew University Department of Classical Studies, History Institute. Vardi has been an activist for a number of decades with the Palestinian-Israeli group Ta’ayush. “Ta’ayush is a grassroots movement engaging since 2000 in non-violent collective action and civil disobedience in Palestine/Israel.” Yet, it is questionable whether the Ta’ayush activities are non-violent; in early March, one of the Ta’ayush members, Vardi’s colleague, deliberately ran over a Jewish Israeli farmer and wounded him. 

It is well known that Palestinians practice Sumud (steadfastness in Arabic). As explained by Wikipedia, the term means refusing to leave. “Sumud represented the Palestinian political strategy as adopted from 1967 onward. As a concept closely related to the land, agriculture and indigenousness, the ideal image of the Palestinian put forward at this time was that of the peasant who stayed put on his land, refusing to leave.” Sumud is practiced in various areas, such as in the Negev Desert, East Jerusalem, and Area C, where Palestinian groups erect tents and shacks for their families with children to live, in harsh sanitary conditions. By the time the Israeli state intervenes, the dwellers refuse to leave. 

Vardi is one of the scores of academics that IAM has profiled over the years.  The activists come from liberal arts and use their position to engage in political activities.  Vardi, who obtained his doctorate in 1983, is a senior lecturer in the Classics Department with a minimal publishing record. This should come as no surprise; he seems to spend most of his time on activism, notably with Taayush. 

IAM has repeatedly contended that universities that provide salaries to activists do wrong to the taxpayers and the students.  The Hebrew University is public, supported by the taxpayers who would be undoubtedly upset about the use of their money. The activist professors also shortchange their students and the propagation of knowledge. 

The question is, why are Vardi and other activists exempt from the high standards applied to their peers?

REFERENCES:

———- Forwarded message ———
From: David Levi-Faur
Date: Sun, Apr 6, 2025 at 1:22 PM
‪Subject: [Academia-IL-Bashaar] סיור חברי סגל אקדמי ומנהלי לדרום הר חברון, מספאר יטא, במסגרת הסידרה עוולות ותיקונן‬
To: Academia Network <academia-il@listserver.huji.ac.il>

הזמנה לסיור פרטי בסידרה עוולות ותיקונן.  סיור ראשון במסגרת סדרה שעד כה התרכזה בהרצאות אורח. 

על מסאפר יטא בויקיפדיה. כאן.   על אחד הפוגרומים האחרונים, בynet . כאן.

 כתובת אתר הסידרה כאן.  כתובת ערוץ היוטיוב שלנו כאן.   מספר המקומות מוגבל. רישום חובה כאן

מספאר יטא-01 (1).jpg

 Maavarim-IL   Regulation & Governance Journal  Regulation and Governance Theories The Dead Sea Project, The Injustice and Redress Project. Homepage

בחודשים האחרונים המתקפה על האזור המכונה “דרום הר חברון”, או מאספר יטא בפי הפלסטינים תושבי המקום, נמצאת בשיאה. זוהי הזדמנות לבקר באחד האזורים הנפיצים ביותר בשטחי C שבגדה המערבית, בדיוק כאשר תושבי האזור זקוקים לנוכחות ולתמיכה הישראלית יותר מאי-פעם.

הסיור, שיתקיים בהדרכת ד”ר עמיאל ורדי ומדריכים פלסטינים תושבי האזור, יתקיים ביום שישי ה- 25/04/2025 החל מהשעה 9 בבוקר ועד לשעה 15:30 אחרה”צ ויכלול מפגש עם תושבי הכפרים הנתונים למתקפה, ארוחת צהריים נדיבה והסעה מתל-אביב או מירושלים. המחיר למשתתף יקבע בהתאם למספר המשתתפים. כל הרווחים יועברו לתושבי מאספר יטא. פרטים נוספים ישלחו לנרשמים.

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

הסרט שמועמד לאוסקר מתעלם מהמציאות המשפטית

“אין ארץ אחרת”, המתעד את המאבק של קהילה פלסטינית בדרום הר חברון, הוא יצירה מרגשת. אבל לפי פסק דין של בג”ץ, הוא מבוסס על הנחות שחוטאות לאמת.

עו”ד שניר זהבי | פסקדין|30.01.25 | 

הסרט “אין ארץ אחרת“, זוכה פרסים ומועמד לאוסקר 2025 בקטגוריית הסרט התיעודי, מציג את מאבקם של תושבי מסאפר יטא, קבוצת כפרים בדרום הר חברון, נגד מה שמוצג כניסיון שיטתי של ישראל לעקור אותם מאדמתם בעקבות ההכרזה עליה כשטח אש ב-1980. היוצרים – שני ישראלים ושני פלסטינים – תיארו את עבודתם כמעשה של שותפות גורל ומאבק למען עתיד שוויוני ומלא אמפתיה. אולם מבט מעמיק על פסק דין של בג”ץ, שבו נדחו טענות התושבים, מצייר תמונה שונה לחלוטין.

היוצרים הם באסל עדרה, יובל אברהם, חמדאן בלאל ורחל שור. הם מדגישים כי עבודתם המשותפת מבוססת על חוויות החיים תחת שתי מערכות חוק: חלק מהצוות חי תחת כיבוש צבאי ללא זכויות בסיסיות, בעוד האחרים נהנים ממעמד אזרחי וזכויות מלאות במדינת ישראל. “אין בינינו סימטריה”, הם כותבים. לדבריהם הסרט נועד לחשוף את העוול ההיסטורי והמתמשך של גירוש תושבי מסאפר יטא, להיאבק על כבוד האדם ולהציע עתיד שוויוני לשני העמים.

מפסק הדין של בג”ץ בנושא מסאפר יטא עולה גרסה אחרת בתכלית. בעוד הסרט מציג את תושבי האזור כמי שחיו בו במשך דורות, פסק הדין משרטט כיצד ראיות ברורות כמו צילומי אוויר ומסמכים היסטוריים הפריכו טענות אלו. זאת, בזמן שהעותרים לא צירפו מסמך כלשהו שמעיד כי יש להם זכויות קנייניות באדמות שבשטח האש.

בית המשפט קבע כי לא הייתה התיישבות קבע במקום, וכי השטח שימש לכל היותר למרעה עונתי. לפי בג”ץ, בניית מבני קבע באזור החלה רק מאז שנת 2000, תוך הפרת צווים משפטיים ואיסורים מפורשים.

אחת הטענות המרכזיות בסרט נוגעת לעיכוב ההכרעה המשפטית מצד בג”ץ, שלטענת היוצרים איפשר את גירוש התושבים. אולם פסק הדין מותח ביקורת חריפה על התנהלות העותרים. השופטים מייחסים להם ניצול צווים זמניים שהוצאו לטובתם כדי לבנות באופן בלתי חוקי בשטח. בית המשפט הדגיש כי העותרים הפרו את תנאי הצווים, ובכך חיזקו את אחיזתם במקום באופן בלתי חוקי.

“חוסר ניקיון הכפיים של העותרים מתעצם נוכח התנהלותם מאז הוגשו העתירות הנוכחיות, שכן הבנייה בתחום שטח האש התגברה והתעצמה מאז שנת 2013”, כתב השופט דוד מינץ, שציין כי טענת באי כוח העותרים שלפיה “החיים חזקים מכל צו ביניים” היא לא פחות ממקוממת.

הסרט מתבסס על נרטיב היסטורי שלפיו הכפרים באזור הופיעו במפות עותמאניות עוד מהמאה ה-19, אולם צילומי האוויר שהוצגו בבג”ץ מפריכים טענה זו. אפילו תצלומי אוויר שהוגשו על ידי העותרים עצמם הראו כי לא הייתה בנייה משמעותית באזור עד לעשורים האחרונים, וכי ההתיישבות במקום החלה רק בשנים האחרונות תוך פגיעה במעמדו של המקום כשטח צבאי סגור.

הסרט מציג את בג”ץ כגוף שאינו יכול להעניק צדק אמיתי לעותרים הפלסטינים, שנאלצו לפנות לבית משפט שאינו משלהם כדי למנוע את הגירוש. אלא שלפי פסק הדין, דווקא צווי הביניים של בג”ץ הם אלה שאפשרו במשך יותר משני עשורים גישה לשטח, כשהמדינה פעלה לאורך שנים להציע פתרונות פשרה שכללו אפשרות שימושים אזרחיים בתנאים ובמועדים שונים בצד השימושים הצבאיים. המדינה אף נמנעה מאימונים באש חיה במקום במשך השנים.

אין ספק כי הסרט נוגע ללב ומעורר מחשבה. הוא מצליח לשים את הזרקור על חוויות אנושיות של פלסטינים שחיים כאן. אולם פסק הדין של בג”ץ מעמיד בספק את הדיוק ההיסטורי והמשפטי של הטענות המרכזיות בו. במקום להציג תמונה מורכבת ומלאה, הסרט מתמקד בגרסה חד-צדדית תוך השמטת פרטים חיוניים שיכולים לשנות את תפיסת הצופים.

• לקריאת פסק הדין המלא – לחצו כאן • הכתבה בשיתוף אתר המשפט הישראלי פסקדין • עו”ד שניר זהבי הוא עורך אתר פסקדין • ynet הוא שותף באתר פסקדין

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

בבית המשפט העליון בשבתו כבית משפט גבוה לצדק בג”ץ 413/13 בג”ץ 1039/13 לפני: כבוד השופט י’ עמית כבוד השופט ד’ מינץ כבוד השופט ע’ גרוסקופף העותרים בבג”ץ :413/13 .1 מוחמד מוסא שחאדה אבו עראם ו107- אח’ .2 האגודה לזכויות האזרח בישראל העותרים בבג”ץ :1039/13 .1 מחמוד יונס ו142- אח’ נ ג ד המשיבים: .1 שר הבטחון .2 מפקד כוחות צה”ל באזור יהודה ושומרון המבקשת להצטרף: המועצה הכפרית מסאפר יטא התנגדות למתן צו מוחלט תאריך הישיבה: י”ב באדר ב התשפ”ב (15.3.2022) בשם העותרים בבג”ץ :413/13 עו”ד דן יקיר; עו”ד רוני פלי בשם העותרים בבג”ץ :1039/13 עו”ד שלמה לקר בשם המשיבים: עו”ד יצחק ברט בשם המבקשת להצטרף: עו”ד נטע עמר-שיף פסק-דין השופט ד’ מינץ: העתירות שלפנינו מתמקדות בהכרזה משנות ה80- של המאה הקודמת על שטח של כ30,000- דונם המצוי דרומית-מזרחית לכפר יטא שבדרום הר חברון (בחלק מאזור המכונה “מסאפר יטא”) כשטח צבאי סגור, הידוע כשטח אש 918 (להלן: שטח האש או השטח). .1 בתחילה, הוכרז שטח האש בחלקו הצפון-מערבי בהיקף של כ15,000- דונם, במסגרת צו סגירה /2/80ס’ מיום 8.6.1980 (כפי שכונה בזמנו: “שטח אש 4”, או “שטח אש 924”) והוא סווג כשטח אימונים “ללא אש”. ביום 12.11.1982 תוקנה ההכרזה, כך שצורף לשטח זה אזור נוסף, דרומית-מזרחית לו, וזאת במסגרת צו סגירה /5/82ס’. בשנת 1993 שונה סיווגו של שטח האש ל”שטח אימונים באש שטוח מסלול עד 1,500 רגל”, ובהמשך אותה שנה סווג כ”שטח אש תלול מסלול”. על רקע החתימה על הסכם הביניים בין מדינת ישראל לרשות הפלסטינית בשנת ,1995 הוצא בשנת 1999 צו הכרזה חדש לשטח האש (צו סגירת שטח מס’ /6/99ס’), אך לא חל שינוי בגבולות השטח. .2 בתמצית שבתמצית, בטבורה של המחלוקת בין הצדדים עומדת טענת העותרים כי בתחומי שטח האש התקיימה במשך שנים התיישבות חקלאית מסורתית כאשר מבני ציבור ומגורים שהוקמו במקום, חרף ההכרזה על שטח האש כשטח צבאי סגור, מהווים המשך ישיר של אותה התיישבות מסורתית. מנגד, לטענת המשיבים לא עלה בידי העותרים להוכיח כי הם או אבותיהם התיישבו בשטח ישיבה של קבע קודם להכרזתו כשטח צבאי סגור. כפי שניווכח להלן, מחלוקת זו ניטשת בין הצדדים מזה עשרות שנים. בין הצדדים התנהלו הליכים משפטיים קודמים העומדים ברקע להליך שלפנינו, על חלקם נעמוד בקצרה להלן. הרקע העובדתי והליכים קודמים .3 כאמור, בשנת 1980 הוכרז שטח האש כשטח צבאי סגור, ובמשך שנות ה80- וה- 90 של המאה שעברה הוא שימש לאימוני יחידות שונות של צה”ל, לרבות חיל האוויר. כפי שמתואר בתצהיר התשובה מטעם המשיבים, החל משנות ה80- לאחר ההכרזה על שטח האש ועד שנת ,2000 המינהל האזרחי פעל לאכיפת הצו המכריז על השטח כשטח צבאי סגור. .4 לצד פעולות האכיפה האמורות לסילוק מבנים קבועים משטח האש, נוהלו מגעים בין הגורמים המקומיים לבין שלטונות הצבא בכל הנוגע לשהייה במקום לצרכי מרעה וחקלאות, אך לא למגורי קבע. לבסוף, גובש מתווה פשרה עם חלק מהשוהים בתחומי השטח, במסגרתו הותרה אליו כניסת חקלאים ורועי צאן בזמנים בהם לא מתקיימים אימונים, בעיקר בסופי שבוע ובחגי ישראל. המשיבים אף היו נכונים להימנע מלקיים אימונים במשך שתי תקופות בנות חודש כל אחת מדי שנה, כדי לאפשר זריעה וקציר בשטח ולצרכי מרעה. מתווה פשרה זה, שאסמכתאות שונות לקיומו צורפו לעמדת המשיבים, נעשה אל מול נציג השוהים בקרקע, עו”ד אליאס ח’ורי (להלן: מתווה ח’ורי). 2 יצוין כי העותרים שלפנינו טוענים כי ככל שאכן נקבע מתווה מוסכם כאמור בין הצדדים, הרי שהם לא היו צד לאותו הסכם והוא איננו מחייב אותם. .5 מכל מקום, מכיוון שההסכמה בין הצדדים הייתה מתוחמת רק לשהות במקרקעין לצרכי מרעה וחקלאות בזמנים מוגדרים של השנה, המשיכו המשיבים לפעול לסילוק עבודות בינוי ופלישה לשטח. בשנת 1997 הוגשו שלוש עתירות לבית משפט זה שעסקו בצווי פינוי שהוצאו למבנים המצויים בשטח (בג”ץ 6754/97; בג”ץ 6798/97; בג”ץ 2356/98). בעתירות אלו הוצאו צווי ביניים המונעים את פינוי העותרים באותן עתירות (החלטה מיום 16.11.1997 בבג”ץ 6754/97; החלטה מיום 18.11.1997 בבג”ץ 6798/97; החלטה מיום 10.4.1998 בבג”ץ 2356/98). בעתירות אלה טענו העותרים (חלקם נמנה על העותרים בענייננו) ובדומה לטענות העותרים בהליך שלפנינו, כי הם מתגוררים דרך קבע באזור שטח האש והתגוררו בו עוד קודם למתן צו סגירת השטח. .6 בדומה לעמדת המשיבים לפנינו, גם באותה פרשה שללו המשיבים קיומם של מגורי קבע בתחומי השטח עובר להכרזה עליו כשטח צבאי סגור. המשיבים אף הבהירו כי בידיהם ראיות לפיהן חלק מהעותרים מתגוררים דרך קבע בכפרים מוכרים בסביבה, וכי שהותם בתחומי שטח האש נעשתה בעבר, אם בכלל, לצרכי מרעה וחקלאות בלבד. יחד עם זאת, המשיבים היו נכונים להרחיב את אפשרות כניסת העותרים לשטח האש עוד מעבר למה שנקבע במתווה ח’ורי. לפיכך, הציעו לעותרים כי תותר להם כניסה לשטח האש בימים בהם לא מתבצעת פעילות מבצעית בשטח (כ120- ימים בשנה), בכפוף לתיאום מוקדם ובאישור רשויות הצבא. כל זאת, תוך שמירת זכויות וטענות מי מהעותרים, במקרים בהם נשללה מהם יכולת משמעותית לרעות או לעבד אדמה בתחומו. בהתאם לכך ביום 5.8.1999 נמחקו אותן עתירות בהסכמה. בעקבות מחיקת העתירות בוצעו במהלך חודשים אוקטובר-נובמבר 1999 פעולות פינוי והריסה על-ידי יחידת הפיקוח של המינהל האזרחי (להלן: יחידת הפיקוח). לטענת המשיבים, ביום 14.12.1999 נערך סיור בשטח וממצאיו היו כי שטח האש ריק מאדם. .7 אולם בכך לא תמה הדרך. בשנת 2000 הוצאו צווים נוספים לפינוי פלישה לשטח האש וכנגד הוגשו שתי עתירות נוספות שעסקו בצו סגירת שטח האש כמו גם בצווי הפינוי שהוצאו במהלך שנה זו (בג”ץ 517/00 ו-בג”ץ 1199/00; להלן: העתירות הקודמות). העותרים באותן עתירות טענו כי חרף ההסכמות אליהן הגיעו הצדדים, חל איסור על המשיבים לפנות אותם מהשטח. זאת בהסתמך על הוראות סעיף 318 לצו בדבר 3 הוראת ביטחון [נוסח משולב] (יהודה והשומרון) (מס’ 1651), התש”ע2009- (להלן: צו בדבר הוראות ביטחון; יצוין כי בשעתו עמד בתוקף צו בדבר הוראות בטחון (יהודה והשומרון) (מס’ 378), התש”ל1970- (צו בדבר הוראות בטחון משנת 1970), אשר קבע בהוראה 90 שבו הסדר זהה לזה הקבוע כיום בסעיף 318 לצו בדבר הוראות ביטחון). לטענת העותרים שם, טענה הניצבת אף במוקד העתירות שלפנינו, הוראות הסעיף האמור כמו גם כללי המשפט הבינלאומי, אוסרים על פינויו של “תושב קבע” משטח שהוכרז כשטח סגור. במסגרת העתירות הקודמות טענו חלק מהעותרים כי הם מתגוררים בשטח האש באופן קבוע וכי הם בעלי קניין פרטי בקרקע; אחרים טענו שהם מתגוררים בו רק בחלק מהשנה, במגורים עונתיים; ויתר העותרים טענו כי הם עושים בו בעיקר שימוש חקלאי שאיננו כולל מגורים. בתגובה לעתירות הקודמות, עמדו המשיבים על הצורך הביטחוני בשימוש בשטח האש לצורך אימונים, על השימוש החקלאי והארעי שנעשה בשטח על ידי מי מהעותרים, ועל היעדרה של התיישבות קבע בתחומי שטח האש. .8 ביום 29.3.2000 נערך דיון לפני בית משפט זה בעתירות הקודמות. בסיומו של הדיון הורה בית המשפט על מתן צו ביניים המורה על הקפאת המצב בשטח כדלקמן: “עד להחלטה אחרת בענין יישמר הסטטוס קוו כפי שהיה קיים ערב הוצאת הצווים. לעותרים (בעתירה 1199/00) – עד כמה שהם שוהים מחוץ לשטח – יתאפשר לחזור אליו לצרכי מרעה ומגורים לצרכי מרעה, כפי שהדבר נעשה בעבר. כן יתאפשר הדבר לעותרים 4-1 בעתירה .517/00” .9 העתירות הקודמות נדונו במשך עשור במהלכו הופנו הצדדים לגישור אשר לא צלח, התקיימו מספר דיונים ונעשו ניסיונות נוספים להסדרת המחלוקת מחוץ לכותלי בית המשפט. ביום 20.7.2012 הוגשה הודעה מעדכנת מטעם המשיבים בה צוין כי לאחר שהעניין הובא לפני משיב ,1 הוחלט כי שהיית קבע של העותרים תתאפשר בחלקו הצפון- מערבי של שטח האש, אשר יתקיימו בו אימונים “יבשים” בלבד, אך לא תתאפשר שהיית קבע ביתרת השטח. לצד האמור, נקבע כי יתאפשר לעותרים להיכנס לשטח האש לצורך עיבוד חקלאי בתקופות שבהן לא מתקיימים אימונים (סופי שבוע וחגי ישראל). המשיבים אף היו נכונים להעמיד לרשות העותרים שתי תקופות נוספות מדי שנה, בנות חודש כל אחת, לצורך עיבוד חקלאי ומרעה. על רקע האמור ביום 7.8.2012 נמחקו העתירות כיוון שהן מיצו את עצמן, תוך שמירת טענות הצדדים בעניין. העתירות שלפנינו 4 .10 בסמוך לאחר מחיקתן של העתירות הקודמות, ביום 16.1.2013 הוגשה העתירה בבג”ץ 413/13 וביום 7.2.2013 הוגשה העתירה בבג”ץ ,1039/13 הן העתירות שלפנינו. בשתי העתירות נטען כי על המשיבים להימנע מלפנות בכפייה את העותרים ובני משפחותיהם משטח האש, להסדיר את מגוריהם של העותרים בתחומו בהתאם לחובתם של המשיבים לפי דיני התפיסה הלוחמתית וכן לנמק מדוע לא יבוטל צו סגירת שטח האש מס’ /99/6ס’. כמו כן, ביום הגשת העתירה בבג”ץ 413/13 הוגשה גם בקשה לצו ביניים, ובאותו היום ניתן צו ביניים ארעי על פיו המשיבים יימנעו מלפנות בכפייה את העותרים ובני משפחותיהם מבתיהם אשר בשטח האש. ביום 14.3.2021 נקבע כי צו הביניים הארעי יחול גם על העותרים בבג”ץ .1039/13 .11 ביום 2.9.2013 התקיים הדיון הראשון בעתירות, והוצע לצדדים לפנות להליך גישור. לאחר שהצדדים הסכימו להצעה, ביום 24.10.2013 הועבר הדיון לגישור לפני כב’ השופט (בדימ’) י’ זמיר. כפי שצוין בתצהיר התשובה מטעם המשיבים, במסגרת הליך הגישור הצדדים הסכימו להקפאת מצב הבנייה והשהות בשטח למשך תקופת הגישור (אשר לטענת המשיבים, לא כובד על ידי השוהים במקום). ביום 1.2.2016 הודיעו הצדדים כי הליך הגישור לא צלח, ועל כן חזר הדיון להתנהל לפני בית משפט זה. ביום 11.1.2017 הוצא בעתירות צו על תנאי, אשר הובהר כי “אין בו כדי להצביע על נטיה מצדנו לפתרון בינארי” תוך שצוין כי ראוי שהצדדים יגיעו לפשרה מוסכמת. חלפו להן השנים ללא התקדמות משמעותית בהליך עד אשר ביום 24.2.2021 הוגשה בקשת “המועצה הכפרית מסאפר יטא” להצטרף להליך במעמד של ידיד בית משפט. ביום 15.3.2022 התקיים לפנינו דיון נוסף בהתנגדות למתן צו מוחלט בו נדונה גם בקשת ההצטרפות. .12 לשלמות התמונה יצוין כי נגד צווי פינוי, הריסה והחרמה שניתנו למבנים שונים שהוקמו בשטח האש ולשוהים בתחומו, במהלך השנים ננקטו הליכים משפטיים שונים נוספים, מקבילים לענייננו (ראו למשל: בג”ץ 1514/20 עווד נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל בגדה המערבית (30.6.2020); בג”ץ 7590/19 דבאסה נ’ המפקד הצבאי באזור הגדה המערבית (17.11.2019); בג”ץ 5296/18 אלדבאבסה נ’ היחידה המרכזית לפיקוח באיו”ש (19.7.2018); בג”ץ 805/05 עוואד נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל בגדה המערבית (17.9.2013); וכן עתירות מינהליות התוקפות החלטות של לשכת התכנון במינהל האזרחי שלא לאשר תכניות הנוגעות לבנייה בתחומי שטח האש: עת”מ (מינהליים י-ם) 57023-12-19 חושיה נ’ מפקד כוחות צהל בגדה המערבית (15.3.2020); עת”מ (מינהליים י-ם) 53731-11-19 דבאבסה נ’ המפקד הצבאי באזור הגדה המערבית (26.1.2020)). כמו כן, במקביל להליך שלפנינו הוגשה עתירה אחרת בעניין צווי הפסקת עבודה שהוצאו לעשרות מבנים 5 שהוקמו בשטח האש על ידי העותרים באותה עתירה (על חלקם נמנים העותרים שלפנינו) (בג”ץ 5901/12; להלן: עתירת צווי ההריסה). עתירה זו נמחקה ביום 28.12.2020 לאור ההשפעה שעשויה להיות להכרעה בהליך שלפנינו על אותו עניין. בתוך כך, באותה עתירה ניתן ביום 11.1.2017 צו ביניים אשר הורה על “הקפאה מותנית” של אותם צווי הפסקת עבודה שניתנו, תוך שהודגש שהדבר מותנה בכך “שלא תיעשה כל בניה שהיא במושאי צווי ההריסה או בסמוך להם. ככל שהתנאי האמור לא יקוים, לא תעמוד ההקפאה בעינה, וצו הביניים ייבטל מאליו”. בהמשך, ביום 14.6.2020 צומצם צו הביניים המותנה ביחס למבנים המפורטים באותן עתירות. טענות הצדדים .13 טענתם המרכזית של העותרים בשתי העתירות (כאשר הטענות יובאו להלן במשולב) היא כי ההכרזה על שטח האש איננה חוקית ודינה בטלות. בבסיס עמדתם עומדת הטענה העובדתית לקיומה של התיישבות רציפה של מתיישבים ממשפחות העותרים באזור שטח האש במשך עשרות שנים קודם להכרזה עליו כשטח צבאי סגור. לטענתם הם הוכיחו זיקה ברורה להתיישבות בשטח האש, בשל מגורים בשטח במשך רוב ימות השנה. .14 לטענת העותרים, כ12,000- דונמים משטח האש, לכל הפחות, הם מקרקעין בבעלות פרטית, ואילו רק כ5,600- דונמים מהשטח הם אדמות מדינה מוכרזות. ההתיישבות החקלאית-המסורתית באזור הייתה אמנם בתחילה עונתית בלבד, אולם במרוצת השנים ובטרם ההכרזה על שטח האש, הפכה ההתיישבות במקום לקבועה. העותרים מתבססים בהקשר זה על הספר “חיים במערת הר חברון” שנכתב בשנת 1985 על ידי מר יעקב חבקוק (להלן: חבקוק); על חוות דעת מאת גב’ שולי הרטמן, אנתרופולוגית חברתית; על חוות דעת מאת פרופ’ גדעון קרסל, שהוגשה במסגרת העתירות הקודמות; וכן על תצלומי אוויר שונים. .15 לעמדת העותרים ההכרזה על שטח האש אינה עולה בקנה אחד עם כללי המשפט הבינלאומי, תוך שהם מפנים בין היתר להוראת סעיף 49(1) לאמנת ג’נבה הרביעית בדבר הגנת אזרחים בימי מלחמה, 1949 (להלן: אמנת ג’נבה הרביעית) האוסרת על העברה בכפיה של אוכלוסייה מוגנת השוהה בשטחים התפוסים בתפיסה לוחמתית. ההכרזה גם עומדת בניגוד להוראת סעיף 43 לתקנות בדבר דיניה ומנהגיה של המלחמה ביבשה הנספחות להסכם האג הרביעי משנת ,1907 המטיל חובה על המפקד הצבאי להתחשב בצרכיה של האוכלוסייה המוגנת. כמו כן, התנאי הקבוע בסעיף 318 לצו בדבר הוראות ביטחון, המסייג פינוי משטח סגור כלפי מי שהוא “תושב קבוע”, אינו קיים בדין 6 הבינלאומי. זאת שכן על פי הדין הבינלאומי די בכך שהשטח הסגור מהווה “מרכז חייהם” של התושבים המוגנים, כדי למנוע את פינויים. לטענת העותרים עלה בידם להוכיח ברמה מספקת כי הם בעלי זכויות בחלקים מהמקרקעין שלגביהם הוכרז הצו בעניין שטח האש, כאשר העובדה כי ההכרזה על השטח נעשתה שלא בדרך של החרמה, הפקעה או תפיסה, שהם ערוצים המאפשרים העברת משאבים פרטיים לרשות גורם צבאי, מלמדת על אי-חוקיות ההכרזה ועל התנערות המשיבים מן החובות והמגבלות המוטלות עליהם על פי דין. כן נטען כי פעולות המשיבים גורמות לפגיעה בזכותם לקניין פרטי, בחופש התנועה, בזכותם לפרנסה, מדור ומחסה, באופן בלתי מידתי ובלתי סביר. נוסף על כך, המשיבים לא הוכיחו קיומו של צורך צבאי מובהק בשימוש בשטח האש דווקא, כאשר מחסור כללי בשטחי אימונים לצרכים צבאיים אינו מצדיק כשלעצמו פינויים של תושבים רבים מבתיהם באופן המנתק אותם ממקור פרנסתם ומחייהם החברתיים. .16 בנוסף על האמור, אין מקום לבחון את השאלה האם התקיימה התיישבות קבועה בתחומי שטח האש החל משנת .1980 יש לראות רק את הצו האחרון, שהוצא בשנת ,1999 כצו שמכוחו תובעים המשיבים סמכות להורות על פינויים של מי שאינם תושבי קבע. בשל כך, נוכח העובדה כי אף לעמדת המשיבים במהלך שנות ה80- וה90- של המאה הקודמת שהו מתיישבים שונים בשטח באופן קבוע, אין ספק כי עוד בטרם מתן הצו, התקיימה התיישבות קבועה בתחומי שטח האש. .17 לעתירתם צירפו העותרים תצלומי אוויר אשר לטענתם עולה מהם, כמו גם מתצלומי אוויר שצירפו המשיבים, כי התקיים רצף התיישבותי בכפרים עוד לפני שנת ,1967 ואף ניתן לראות את מעבר המתיישבים במקום מישיבה ארעית במערות ליישוב קבע “מעל פני הקרקע”. עוד לטענתם, תצלומי אוויר מאוחרים יותר מהשנים 1985 ו- 1999 שהציגו המשיבים, אינם יכולים להעיד על אופי ההתיישבות במקום, אם כישוב קבע או כישוב ארעי, כיוון שבתקופה זו האזור היה שומם לחלוטין עקב הריסת המבנים במקום ופינוי המתיישבים, וזאת עד לשנת 2000 עת הוצא צו הביניים על ידי בית משפט זה. .18 עוד נטען כי המשיבים לא פעלו כנדרש לבירור שאלת זיקת המגורים של העותרים לשטח האש ואף נהגו שלא בתום-לב, תוך הימנעות מבחינת מעמד זכויות הקניין הפרטי של המתיישבים במקרקעין ומבחינת חלופות שפגיעתן פחותה. 7 .19 המשיבים מנגד טענו כי דין העתירות להידחות הן על הסף והן לגופן. טרם ההכרזה על שטח האש בשנת ,1980 נעשתה עבודת מטה ממושכת ובדיקה מקיפה שהעלתה כי לא היו מגורים קבועים בשטח האש באותה עת. בכל התקופה משנת 1980 ועד לשנת 1997 לא הוגשה כל עתירה בעניין שטח האש לבית המשפט. מדובר בשיהוי ניכר אשר גרם נזק ראייתי משמעותי ביותר. אמנם עבודה מאומצת של המשיבים הובילה למציאת מסמכים רבים מאותה תקופה, אולם חלק מהמסמכים הרלוונטיים אבדו עם הזמן ולא ניתן להשיגם. אין כל ספק שאילו היו העותרים מתגוררים באופן קבוע בשטח האש, הם היו יודעים על ההכרזה בסמוך למועד שבו היא ניתנה. השתהות בת שני עשורים מהווה בנסיבות אלו עילה לדחיית העתירות על הסף. מובן מאליו שטענה זו נכונה במיוחד כלפי 192 מהעותרים אשר כלל לא היו שותפים לעתירות הקודמות. בנוסף, דין העתירות להידחות על הסף אף מחמת אי גילוי עובדות רלוונטיות. ביחס למרבית העותרים קיים מידע פוזיטיבי השולל את טענתם כי הם מתגוררים באופן קבוע בשטח האש. כך, לחלק מהעותרים יש בתים קבועים בכפר יאטה וחלקם הצהירו במסגרת העתירות הקודמות שהם אינם תושבים קבועים בשטח האש. בנוסף, מבלי שהדבר צוין בעתירות שלפנינו, חלקם היו צדדים לעתירות הקודמות שנמחקו לאור הערות בית המשפט. בהינתן העובדה שחלק גדול מהעותרים לא פירטו בעתירות את מלוא העובדות הרלוונטיות הנוגעות אליהם, דין העתירות להידחות על הסף גם בשל כך. .20 בנוסף, דין העתירות להידחות על הסף גם בגין היעדר ניקיון כפיים של העותרים. במסגרת העתירות הקודמות שמרבית העותרים היו צד להן, ניתן צו ביניים שנותר על כנו במשך כעשור. על פי צו הביניים נאסרה על העותרים בנייה נוספת בשטח האש, אולם בשנים שלאחר הוצאת צו הביניים הם הפרו אותו פעמים רבות חזור ושנה. העותרים בנו מבני קבע רבים ללא היתר, ביניהם בורות מים, מבני שירותים, בתים, בתי ספר, מסגד ומבני קבע נוספים. בנוסף, נכנסו לשטח במשך השנים אנשים רבים שלא היו צד לעתירות הקודמות אשר ניצלו את המצב לקביעת “עובדות בשטח” באמצעות בנייה בלתי חוקית. השוואת תצלומי האוויר מהשנים הרלוונטיות מלמדת כי עד לשנת 2000 לא הייתה בניית קבע בתחום שטח האש, ומאז שנת 2000 החלה תופעה רחבת היקף של בניית מבני קבע ללא היתר. חוסר ניקיון הכפיים של העותרים אף מתעצם נוכח התנהלותם מאז הוגשו העתירות הנוכחיות, שכן הבנייה בתחום שטח האש התגברה והתעצמה מאז שנת .2013 .21 לגוף העתירות נטען כי לא עלה בידי העותרים להראות כי הופרו הוראות הדין בכל הנוגע להכרזה על שטח האש כשטח צבאי סגור. ההכרזה על שטח האש עולה בקנה אחד עם דיני התפיסה הלוחמתית שבמשפט הבינלאומי, וכן עם הדין החל באזור וכללי המשפט המינהלי להם כפוף המפקד הצבאי. העותרים לא היו תושבי קבע בשטח האש 8 עובר להכרזה על סגירת השטח. ההכרזה על שטח האש נועדה לצרכי אימוני צה”ל, כאשר קיים בכך צורך חיוני ביותר ולא נמצא שטח אחר הזהה לו בטיבו. התיישבותם של העותרים בשטח האש נעשתה כאמור לאחר סגירת השטח ובניגוד לדין, ועל כן לא מתקיימות הוראות הדין המבקשות להגן על “תושב קבע” שצפוי להיפגע מסגירת שטח. גם ההגנות מתחום המשפט הבינלאומי אינן מתקיימות בנסיבות אלו. לביסוס הטענה בדבר העדר התיישבות קבע בשטח האש עובר להכרזה, הפנו המשיבים לתצלומי אוויר של שטח האש שצולמו בין השנים 2000-1967; לספרו של חבקוק ממנו עולה כי באזור שטח האש לא היו מגורים קבועים אלא עונתיים בלבד; ולתצהירו של פרופ’ משה שרון מהמכון ללימודי אסיה ואפריקה בפקולטה למדעי הרוח באוניברסיטה העברית בירושלים, על פיו ההתיישבות בריכוזי המערות והח’רבאות נעשתה רק בתקופת החורף, למשך פרק זמן של מספר חודשים. המשיבים גם הצביעו על כך שכמה מהח’רבאות המוזכרות בעתירות ככאלה המשמשות כמגורים, משמשות כאתרים ארכיאולוגיים עוד מימי המנדט הבריטי ומוטלות הגבלות על השימוש במקרקעין בהם הן מצויות מכוח חוק העתיקות הירדני משנת .1966 גם מהעובדה שבשטח האש התקיימו עד לשנת 1993 אימוני מטוסי חיל האוויר שכללו גם ירי חי ועבודות בינוי וסלילה של מטרות מעידה על כך שלא היו במקום מגורים קבועים. .22 יצוין כי חרף האמור, בשולי תשובתם הציגו המשיבים מתווה במסגרתו יוּתר לעותרים לשהות בשטח האש לצורך עיבוד חקלאי ומרעה בתקופות שבהן לא מתקיימים אימונים, ולהשתמש במקרקעין במשך חודשיים נוספים במהלך השנה לצרכי עיבוד חקלאי. העותרים מנגד הבהירו כי אין מקום למתווה המאפשר פינויים עיתיים לטובת אימונים באש חיה אשר יגרמו להם סבל רב ואין להתיר אימונים כלל באזור שטח האש. .23 בדיון שהתקיים לפנינו ביום 15.3.2022 חזרו המשיבים וטענו כי לאחר בירור ובדיקה נוספים באשר לנחיצות השימוש בשטח האש, עבודת מטה שנערכה מעלה כי מדובר בשטח שהנחיצות בו היא חד-משמעית. המשיבים עמדו עוד על קיומן של עילות הסף לדחיית העתירות ובעיקר ניצול הליכי משפט לרעה בהמשך הבניה בשטח בחסות צווי ביניים שניתנו בהליכים השונים. מנגד, במהלך הדיון טענו העותרים בין היתר, כי אין הרבה מקום לספק כי נחיצות שטח האש איננה מוחלטת, זאת בהתייחס גם לבקשות הארכה הרבות שהוגשו במשך השנים על ידי המשיבים; כי שטח האש אינו משרת את צרכי הצבא באזור יהודה ושומרון כי אם לכל היותר צרכים צבאיים כלליים של מדינת ישראל; וכי אין מקום להעלאת טענות סף לאחר שניתן צו על תנאי בעתירות. דיון והכרעה 9 .24 9 שנים חלפו מאז הוגשו העתירות שלפנינו. בחלוף השנים הוגשו כתבי טענות, בקשות ומסמכים שונים, והתקיימו מספר דיונים בהם נשמעו טענות הצדדים בעל-פה. כן נעשו ניסיונות לגשר בין הצדדים באופן שייתר את ההכרעה בעתירות. אולם משאלה העלו חרס, ומשהונחה לפנינו התשתית המלאה הנדרשת, הגיעה עת ההכרעה. אקדים אחרית לראשית ואציין כי דעתי היא כי דין העתירות להידחות, הן על הסף והן לגופן. .25 תחילה באשר לטעמי הסף. יש ממש בטענות המשיבים כי דין העתירות להידחות ולוּ בשל השיהוי שנפל בהגשתן. בהקשר זה ייאמר ראשית, כי אין בסיס לטענת העותרים כי איסור הכניסה לשטח חל רק מעת שניתן הצו בשנת .1999 כאמור לעיל, ביום 8.6.1980 הוצא צו סגירה /2/80ס’ בו הוגדר השטח הצפון-מערבי כ”סגור לצרכי הצו בדבר הוראות בטחון”, כאשר הכניסה אליו נאסרה למעט לחייל או לשוטר לצורך מילוי תפקידם או למי שבידו “תעודת היתר”. טענות העותרים, שנטענו ללא כל ביסוס, כי אין מדובר בתקופה לגביה היה קיים איסור כניסה לשטח המוכרז באותה עת, אינן ממן העניין. כמו כן, ממועד ההכרזה הראשונה בשנת 1980 ועד לשנת 1997 (אז הוגשו העתירות הראשונות שעסקו בצווי פינוי שהוצאו למבנים בשטח האש) לא ננקטו הליכים משפטיים כלשהם בקשר להכרזה על שטח האש. על כך יש להוסיף כי כפי שציינו המשיבים, 192 מהעותרים לפנינו לא היו כלל צד להליכים הקודמים. כלומר, פנייתם הראשונה לבית משפט זה הייתה רק בשנת .2013 העתירות לוקות אפוא בשיהוי מובהק, ארוך ומשמעותי. מדובר בשיהוי הן במישור האובייקטיבי, בחלוף תקופת זמן משמעותית ביותר מאז שננקטו הליכים כלשהם, וודאי ההליכים שלפנינו תוך שהעותרים שקטו על שמריהם במשך שנים ארוכות; והן במישור הסובייקטיבי, המתייחס לנזקים הראייתיים המשמעותיים ביותר שהיו עלולים להיגרם למשיבים. על הסיכון להיווצרותו של נזק ראייתי, שהוא סיכון מהותי ורב-משמעות, נאמר בעניין עע”מ 867/11 עיריית תל אביב- יפו נ’ אי.בי.סי ניהול ואחזקה בע”מ (28.12.2014): “ככל שהזמן עובר מסמכים נוטים להיעלם; זיכרונות מתעמעמים; ופקידים ששימשו בתפקיד במועדים הרלוונטיים אינם זמינים לעדות. הואיל ופקידי ציבור מטפלים בנושאים מגוונים ובעניינים רבים, חלוף הזמן מגביר את הסיכון שזכרונו של בעל התפקיד הרלוונטי שטיפל בנושא העתירה יתעמעם והעובדות ישתכחו ממנו. פתיחה בהליך שיפוטי בחלוף זמן קצר ככל האפשר ממועד היווצרות העילה מביא לידיעת הרשות ונציגיה כי נפתח הליך משפטי, ומאפשר לה לברר את העובדות עם בעלי התפקיד לפני שזיכרונם יקהה […]” (שם, פסקה .(25 10 ובהמשך: “הצורך בהגבלת המועד להגשת הליך משפטי בזמן חיוני לתפקודם של הרשויות ושל בתי המשפט, שכן אם לא תוטל הגבלה, משמעות הדבר היא שניתן יהיה להביא לבירור כל מחלוקת שהתעוררה אי-פעם ובכל עת. תוצאה זו עלולה לשתק את מערכת המשפט והיא פוגעת באינטרס הציבור במובנו הרחב. נזקים עקיפים אלה מצטברים יחדיו – בבחינת “תורת המספרים הקטנים” – לנזק לא מבוטל […] ומובילים למסקנה כי הידרשות לעתירה לאחר שחלף זמן רב ממועד היווצרות העילה גורם כשלעצמו נזק לאינטרס הציבורי. ודוקו: אף שחלוף הזמן כשלעצמו אינו עולה כדי שיהוי אובייקטיבי המצדיק לדחות עתירה […], הגשת עתירה באיחור ניכר פוגעת כשלעצמה באינטרס הציבור. מובן עם זאת כי אין בשיקול זה כדי להכריע את הכף לבדו, והוא לעולם יאוזן כנגד השיקולים האחרים המתחרים בו” (שם, ההדגשות במקור). ואכן, בנסיבות כגון דא ונוכח השיהוי הקיצוני, בירורן של הטענות שמועלות בעתירות, בעיקר בהתייחס לשאלה העובדתית המרכזית אם התגוררו העותרים מגורי קבע בתקופה הרלוונטית, היינו עובר לשנת ,1980 הופך להיות קשה מאוד (למרות שכפי שנראה להלן, המשיבים עמדו בכבוד במשימתם חרף נקודת הפתיחה הנחותה בה ניצבו). מה גם, אין בפי העותרים כל טענה המצדיקה שיהוי זה. למותר לציין כי אין במשך הזמן שחלף מאז הגשת העתירות כדי לרפא את השיהוי שדבק בהגשתן. השיהוי נמדד ביחס לחלוף הזמן שבין מועד היווצרות העילה לבין מועד הגשת העתירה לקבלת הסעד, שהרי לאחר מועד זה הרשות מודעת לקיומו של ההליך המשפטי באופן המאפשר לה לברר את הדברים. העובדה שחלף זמן רב מאז הגשת העתירות ועד ההכרעה בהן, אף אם אינה נוחה, אין בה אפוא כדי ליטול את העוקץ מהשיהוי העמוק שדבק בעתירות. .26 זאת ועוד, אין הרבה מקום לספק כי דין העתירות להידחות אף מחמת היעדר ניקיון כפיים מוחלט של העותרים. לעותרים, אשר לא צירפו מסמך כלשהו על פיו יש להם זכויות קנייניות באדמות שבשטח האש, הוצאו צווי פינוי מהשטח. העותרים חסו תחת כנפיהם של צווי ביניים שהוצאו במשך השנים אשר אסרו על העתקתם מהשטח. זאת החל משנת ,1997 כאשר הוגשו העתירות הראשונות לבית משפט זה על ידי חלק מהעותרים שלפנינו, ובהמשך וביתר שאת לאחר הגשת העתירות הקודמות ולאחר שניתנו במסגרתן צווי ביניים נוספים. חלק מצווי הביניים שניתנו בהליכים אחרים אף הותנו במפורש בכך שתושבי המקום (חלקם נמנים על העותרים שלפנינו) לא ינקטו פעולות להמשך הבניה הבלתי חוקית במקום (למשל: צו ביניים שניתן בבג”ץ 805/05 מיום 11 17.2.2005; צו ביניים שניתן בעתירת צווי ההריסה ביום 11.1.2017 והבהרה מיום 14.6.2020). ברם, הבניה בשטח (שאין צורך לומר כי היא בניה בלתי חוקית וללא היתר בהיעדר התכנות תכנונית בשטח האש), התגברה בשנים האחרונות. ענין זה כלל אינו שנוי במחלוקת בין הצדדים. על פי העותרים עצמם, לאחר פינוי תושבי הכפרים בשנת 1999 הם חזרו בשלהי שנת 2000 להתיישב במקום וזאת “בעקבות צו הביניים של בית המשפט הנכבד בעתירות הראשונות” (פסקה 16 לעיקרי הטיעון מטעם העותרים בבג”ץ 413/13; לעיקרי טיעון אלה מפנים גם העותרים בבג”ץ 1039/13). הבינוי בתחום שטח האש הלך וצבר תאוצה. הכל בחסות צווי ביניים שאסרו על המשיבים להעביר את העותרים ממקומם, וחרף הסכמת הצדדים במסגרת הליך הגישור להקפאת מצב הבנייה והשהות בשטח למשך תקופת הגישור. אולם פעולה של עשיית דין עצמי ובקשה למתן סעד מן הצדק, אינן יכולות לדור יחדיו בכפיפה אחת (ראו גם: בג”ץ 7013/21 אבו זיתון נ’ ראש המינהל האזרחי, פסקה 7 (18.11.2021); בג”ץ 2652/21 מושקוביץ נ’ שר הביטחון, פסקה 7 (1.6.2021); בג”ץ 3246/17 אבו טיר נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל, פסקה 27 (11.6.2019)). על כגון דא נאמר זה מכבר: “חייב אדם להחליט בלבבו אם מבקש הוא סעד מבית- משפט או אם עושה הוא דין לעצמו. שני אלה בה-בעת לא יעשה אדם, דהיינו: בית-משפט לא יושיט סעד למי שבמקביל לפנייה לבית-המשפט עושה דין לעצמו ומבקש להעמיד את זולתו בפני עובדות מוגמרות” (בג”ץ 8898/04 ג’קסון נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל באיו”ש .((28.10.2004) .27 צווי ביניים נועדו להקפיא את המצב הקיים ולמנוע שינוי לרעת אחד הצדדים בעוד ההליך תלוי ועומד (ראו למשל: בג”ץ 1754/19 תנועת “התעוררות בירושלים” נ’ ממשלת ישראל (18.9.2019)), אך לא לשפר את מצבו של מבקש הצו. לפיכך, טענת העותרים, כי לא ניתן לצפות שהחיים במקום “יעמדו מלכת”, או בלשונו של בא-כוח העותרים בדיון לפנינו: “החיים חזקים יותר מכל צו ביניים”, לא פחות ממקוממת. צו הביניים נועד למנוע מהמשיבים לפנות את השטח, וברי שאינו יכול לשמש ככסות ואצטלה להרחבת והעמקת בניה בלתי חוקית ושנויה במחלוקת. ולא למותר לציין כי מן העבר השני, המשיבים מצדם מילאו אחר צו הביניים ככתבו וכלשונו וכן נמנעו מלקיים אימונים באש חיה בשטח האש במשך השנים, וזאת בין היתר נוכח מבנים רבים שהוקמו בתחומי שטח האש חרף צווי הביניים שניתנו. .28 בהקשר זה יש גם לומר כי אין לקבל את טענת העותרים לפיה אין מקום לשעות לעילות סף משניתן צו על תנאי בעתירות. משמעותו של צו על תנאי היא שמתן הסעד 12 נגד המשיבים הוא “על תנאי”, היינו מושעה עד לקבלת תשובה (דפנה ברק-ארז משפט מינהלי כרך ד 436 (2017)). “צו על תנאי אינו אלא רשות הניתנת על ידי בית המשפט להתחיל בהתדיינות, כלומר, להעביר את העתירה אל הרשות המינהלית ולהזמין אותה לתת תשובה לטענות שבעתירה” (יצחק זמיר הסמכות המינהלית כרך ג 1646 (2014)). על כן, אין פגם בבחינת טענות סף כבר לאחר שניתן צו על תנאי בעתירה (ראו למשל דיון בטענות סף לאחר מתן צו על תנאי, מיני רבים: בג”ץ 7957/04 מראעבה נ’ ראש ממשלת ישראל, פ”ד ס(2) ,477 546-545 (2006); בג”ץ 2988/15 עואודה נ’ מדינת ישראל (18.12.2016); בג”ץ 4386/16 מדיו נ’ נציבות בתי הסוהר, פסקאות פה-פח (13.6.2017) (שם אף הועלתה על ידי העותרים הטענה כי עילות הסף התייתרו)). .29 דין העתירות להידחות אפוא אך בשל האמור לעיל. אולם, משהגענו עד הלום, ולאור גלגוליהן של העתירות עד כאן, ראיתי לנכון להתייחס גם לגופם של דברים, ובעיקר לסוגיה העיקרית העומדת בבסיס העתירות. .30 נקודת המוצא היא כי המפקד הצבאי מוסמך להכריז על שטחים סגורים ולאסור את הכניסה אליהם ללא היתר. סמכות זו מעוגנת בתקנה 125 לתקנות ההגנה (שעת חירום), 1945 ובהוראת סעיף 318 לצו בדבר הוראות ביטחון (יוער כי הגם שלעניינינו רלוונטית הוראת סעיף 90 לצו בדבר הוראות הביטחון משנת 1970 שעמד בתוקף בעת הרלוונטית, מדובר כאמור בהוראות זהות ועל כן מטעמי נוחות נתייחס לסעיף העומד בתוקף כיום). מדובר בסמכות רחבה שנועדה לשרת אינטרסים ביטחוניים צבאיים, ובכלל זה תיחום שטחי אימונים לצורך הכשרת לוחמים ושמירה על כשירותם. בפסיקת בית משפט זה הובהר כי בעלים או מחזיקים במקרקעין שלגביהם ניתן צו סגירת שטח נדרשים לפנות למפקד הצבאי לקבלת רישיונות כניסה לשטח. זכויות קנייניות בשטח סגור אינן מקנות כשלעצמן זכות כניסה אליו (ראו: ע”א 2281/06 אבן זוהר נ’ מדינת ישראל, פסקה .((28.4.2010) 40 .31 אין לקבל את טענות העותרים כי הפעלת סמכות מכוח סעיף 318 לצו בדבר הוראות הביטחון עומדת בסתירה חזיתית להוראות המשפט הבינלאומי, ובכלל זה ובעיקר להוראות אמנת ג’נבה הרביעית (וראו באשר לשאלת תחולתן של האמנות הבינלאומיות בדבר זכויות האדם באזור יהודה ושומרון: בג”ץ 1890/03 עיריית בית לחם נ’ מדינת ישראל – משרד הבטחון (3.2.2005); בג”ץ 9961/03 המוקד להגנת הפרט מיסודה של ד”ר לוטה זלצברגר נ’ ממשלת ישראל, פסקה 20 (5.4.2011); בג”ץ 769/02 הוועד הציבורי נגד העינויים בישראל נ’ ממשלת ישראל, פ”ד סב(1) ,507 548 (2007-2006)). על 13 כן, גם אם נניח כי יש לבחון את פעולות המפקד הצבאי באזור בהתאם להוראות האמנה “המנהגיות”, אין חולק כי כאשר הוראת חוק מפורשת בחוק הישראלי עומדת מול כללי המשפט הבינלאומי, הדין הישראלי מכריע (בג”ץ 785/87 עפו נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל בגדה המערבית, פ”ד מב(2) ,4 35 (1988); בג”ץ 253/88 סג’דיה נ’ שר הביטחון, פ”ד מב(3) ,801 815 (1988); בג”ץ 2690/09 “יש דין” – ארגון מתנדבים לזכויות אדם נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל בגדה המערבית – אלוף גד שמני, פסקה 6 (28.3.2010)). כך גם, בית משפט זה הכיר זה מכבר בסמכותו של המפקד הצבאי להורות על סגירת שטח, וזאת כנגזרת מכללי התפיסה הלוחמתית, סמכות אשר יונקת את שורשיה בין היתר מן החובה לדאוג לשלומה וביטחונה של האוכלוסייה בשטח. כך למשל צוין בבג”ץ 9593/04 מוראד נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל ביהודה ושומרון, פ”ד סא(1) 844 (2006): “אזור יהודה ושומרון מוחזק על ידי מדינת ישראל בתפיסה לוחמתית ואין מחלוקת כי המפקד הצבאי, המופקד מטעם מדינת ישראל על האזור, מוסמך להורות בצו על סגירת השטח כולו, או כל חלק ממנו, ובכך למנוע כניסה או יציאה של אנשים מהשטח הסגור. סמכות זו של המפקד הצבאי נגזרת מכללי התפיסה הלוחמתית, על פי המשפט הבינלאומי הפומבי, ומחובות המפקד הצבאי לדאוג לשלום תושבי האזור, לביטחונם ולסדר הציבורי באזור (ראו: סעיף 23(g (וסעיף 52 לתקנות בדבר דיניה ומנהגיה של המלחמה ביבשה, הנספחות לאמנת האג הרביעית מ1907- […]; סעיף 53 לאמנת ג’נבה הרביעית בדבר הגנת אזרחים בימי מלחמה, 1949 […]). סמכות זו של המפקד הצבאי עוגנה גם בחקיקת הביטחון בסעיף 90 לצו הוראות הביטחון […]” (שם, עמ’ 861-860). .32 לא למותר לציין כי אין מקום לטענת העותרים שהתמקדה בהוראת סעיף 49(1) לאמנת ג’נבה הרביעית, שכן לא רק שנקבע כי מדובר בהוראה הסכמית אשר אינה משקפת משפט בינלאומי מנהגי (ראו למשל: בג”ץ 698/80 קוואסמה נ’ שר הביטחון, פ”ד לח(1) 617 (1981); בג”ץ 253/88 סג’דיה נ’ שר הביטחון, פ”ד מב(3) ,801 815 (1988); בג”ץ 814/88 נסראללה נ’ מפקד כוחות צה”ל בגדה המערבית, פ”ד מג(2) ,265 269-268 (1989)); אף אין בין הוראה זו, אשר נועדה למנוע מעשי גירוש המוניים של אוכלוסייה בשטח כבוש לשם השמדתה, ביצוע עבודות כפיה או השגת מטרות מדיניות שונות, לבין נסיבות ענייננו, מאומה. .33 משלא מצאנו כי יש בטענות העותרים בדבר השפעתם של כללי המשפט הבינלאומי כדי לסייע להם, יש לפנות לבחינת השאלה המרכזית שבמוקד דיוננו, והיא האם התגוררו העותרים מגורי קבע באזור שטח האש עובר להכרזתו. טענה זו מבוססת 14 על הוראת סעיף 318 לצו בדבר הוראות הביטחון, המסייגת את האפשרות לפנות משטח סגור מי שהוא “תושב קבוע” בו. גם בעניין זה אקדים אחרית לראשית ואציין כי המסקנה הברורה העולה ממכלול החומרים שהונחו לפנינו היא כי ערב ההכרזה על שטח האש, לא היו מגורים קבועים בגבולותיו. בטרם ארחיב בדברים אדגיש כי אמנם, עתירה לבג”ץ אינה ככלל המסגרת המתאימה לבירור מעמיק של שאלות עובדתיות מורכבות (ראו למשל: בג”ץ 884/86 הוועד המקומי נוה-זוהר נ’ שר הפנים, פ”ד מב(4) ,441 449 (1988); בג”ץ 2196/00 הקאמרטה הישראלית, ירושלים נ’ שר המדע, התרבות והספורט, פ”ד נח(4) ,807 815 (2004); בג”ץ 3354/12 זנלכל בע”מ נ’ ממשלת ישראל, פסקה 17 (18.8.2014)). ברם בענייננו, כפי שיפורט להלן, לא מדובר בשאלה עובדתית סבוכה כי אם בשאלה שההכרעה בה, בפרט לצורך העתירות שלפנינו, אינה מורכבת כלל וכלל. .34 המשיבים ציינו בתגובתם, כי פענוח תצלומי האוויר של שטח האש אשר צולמו בשנים הרלוונטיות מעלה כי אין סימנים כלשהם המעידים על נוכחות של תושבים קבועים במקום לפני שנת .1980 מנגד, העותרים טענו כי מצילומי האוויר שבידיהם ניתן לזהות “רצף התיישבותי בכפרים” במשך 45 שנים. אף כי אין חולק כי פענוח צילומי אוויר הוא עניין של מומחיות, עיון בצילומי האוויר, הן אלה שהגישו המשיבים והן אלה שהגישו העותרים, אף בעין בלתי מיומנת ומקצועית אלא בעיני הדיוט לדבר, מגלה מסקנה חד משמעית וברורה כי הדין עם המשיבים. צילומי האוויר שצורפו על ידי המשיבים מתייחסים לפרקי זמן משמעותיים – חלקם החל משנת 1967 ועד לשלהי שנת .2012 כך צורפו צילומים המתעדים את ח’רבת ט’ובא מהשנים ,1985 ,1990 ,1999 ,2003 ,2006 ,2008 2010 ו2012-; ח’רבת מגעורה מזרח מהשנים ,1985 ,1990 ,1999 ,2004 ,2006 ,2008 2010 ו2012-; ח’רבת צפאי מהשנים ,1985 ,1990 ,2000 ,2003 ,2006 ,2008 2010 ו2012-; ח’רבת אל תבן מהשנים ,1967 ,1979 ,1984 ,1990 ,1999 ,2002 ,2005 ,2007 ,2008 ,2009 2011 ו2012-; ח’רבת אל פחות מהשנים ,1967 ,1981 ,1990 ,1991 ,1999 ,2001 ,2003 ,2005 ,2007 ,2009 2011 ו2012-; ח’רבת חילווה מהשנים ,1967 ,1979 ,1981 ,1991 ,1999 ,2001 ,2003 ,2005 ,2007 ,2009 2011 ו2012-; ח’רבת גנב’ה מהשנים ,1999 ,2001 ,2003 ,2004 ,2005 ,2007 2010 ו2012-; ח’רבת מרכז מהשנים ,1967 ,1979 ,1981 ,1991 ,1999 ,2001 ,2002 ,2005 ,2008 ,2009 2011 ו- 2012; ח’רבת מעיז מהשנים ,1985 ,1990 ,1999 ,2000 ,2003 ,2007 2010 ו2012-; וביר אל עיד מהשנים ,1967 ,1969 ,1974 ,1980 ,1989 1992 ו.1995- מדובר במצבור משמעותי של צילומי אוויר המגלה מצב דברים ברור וחד-משמעי. בעוד שעד שנת 1980 לא ניתן לזהות בשטח סימנים למגורים, ודאי לא מגורי קבע בכל השטח, ניכרת על פי הצילומים תנופת בניה בח’רבאות במהלך שנות ה90- ובעיקר החל משנת 2000 והלאה. זאת אף “בניכוי” צילומי האוויר משנת ,1985 משנת 1999 ומשנת 2000 אשר לטענת 15 העותרים עלולים ליצור רושם מטעה, שכן באותם שנים נהרסו המבנים שהיו על הקרקע על ידי המשיבים. .35 תמונה זו עולה מאליה לא רק מתצלומי המשיבים, אלא אף מהתצלומים שצירפו העותרים לעתירתם בבג”ץ .413/13 אף שמדובר בצילומי אוויר ממספר שנים מצומצם יותר מאלה שצרפו המשיבים, גם בהם ניכר באופן שאינו משתמע לשני פנים היעדר הבניה בשנים המוקדמות לעומת המבנים הרבים שהתווספו במהלך השנים. אדרבה, לא מעט מהתצלומים שצורפו מתייחסים לאותן ח’רבאות שתצלומיהן צורפו על ידי המשיבים. כך צירפו העותרים צילומי אוויר של ח’רבת מג’אז (מעיז בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1972 ,1981 ,1993 2001 ו2011-; ח’רבת אספיי אל תחתא (תצלום החופף בחלקו לתצלום ח’רבת צפאי שצורף על ידי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1967 ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו2001-; ח’רבת אל תבא’ן (אל תבן בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו- 2011; ח’רבת אל פח’ית (אל פחות בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו- 2011; ח’רבת “אל מרכז” (מרכז בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1967 ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו2011-; ח’רבת “אל חלאווה” (ח’לווה בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1981 ,1993 1972 ו2011-; וח’רבת “ג’ינבה” (גנב’ה בתצלומי המשיבים) מהשנים ,1967 ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו.2011- מעבר לאלו, צורפו תצלומי אוויר של ח’רבת אספיי אל פוקא מהשנים ,1967 ,1972 ,1981 ,1993 2001 ו2011-; וח’רבת אל דבע מהשנים ,1972 ,1981 1993 ו.2011- המסקנה המתבקשת מעיון בתצלומים אלו זהה לחלוטין למסקנה המתבקשת מתצלומי המשיבים. .36 לשם הדוגמה, נמקד מבטנו בצילומי האוויר של “ח’רבת אל פחות” שהציגו המשיבים (“אל פח’ית” בפי העותרים). בשנים 1967 ו1981- השטח ריק לגמרי ממבנים. התפתחות מסוימת נגלית במהלך השנים 1990 ו.1991- בשנת 2001 ניכר כי כבר נבנו בח’רבה מספר מבנים, וכאלה נבנו עוד ועוד בשנים ,2007 ,2009 2011 ו.2012- תמונה זהה מתגלה מצילומי האוויר שצירפו העותרים ואף ביתר בהירות. ניתן אף להבחין כי בשנת 1972 ובשנת 1981 אין עדות למבנים בשטח לעומת שנת ,2011 בה ניכרת בנייה רבה במקום. כך גם ביחס לח’רבת חילווה (“אל חלאווה” בפי העותרים). אין הרבה מקום לספק כי בשנים המוקדמות (,1967 ,1979 1981 ואף 1991) אין כל עדות לבניה במקום. לעומת זאת בשנים ,2007 ,2009 2011 ו2012- נבנו עוד ועוד מבנים ובתים. גם כאן, תמונה דומה נגלית מצילומי האוויר שהוגשו על ידי העותרים: הבדל חד וניכר בין התמונות מן התקופה המוקדמת (בשנים ,1972 1981 ואף 1993) לבין התמונה משנת 2011 בה ניתן לזהות בבהירות בניה ברורה. טענת העותרים בתשובתם למשיבים, כי הם אינם מכחישים שכמות המבנים גדלה באזור לאורך השנים, תוצאה של מהלך טבעי של 16 גידול האוכלוסייה וביטוי למהלך של יציאה הדרגתית מהמערות אל פני השטח, גם היא איננה תומכת בטענתם כי בתחומי שטח האש היתה נוכחות של תושבים קבועים בימי עבר. .37 בצדק גם טענו המשיבים כי קיומם של אימוני תקיפה מהאוויר שנערכו על ידי חיל האוויר עובר למועד ההכרזה על שטח האש ועד לשנת 1993 (עובדה אשר גם לא נסתרה על ידי העותרים) מחזק אף הוא את המסקנה האמורה כי לא היו מגורי קבע במקום באותה עת. המשיבים גם גיבו טענה זו בדיווח מיום 21.9.1989 שניתן על ידי “ממונה אזור יהודה” ביחידת הפיקוח, אשר מתייחס לעבודות השונות שבוצעו בשטח לצורך ביצוע האימונים. כך גם באותו דיווח מצוין כי בשטח האש ישנן שתי חורבות בהן מתגוררים בעונת החורף במערות רועים עם עדריהם, כאשר המערות נסתמו לאחר שנבדק כי הן ריקות מאדם. .38 זאת ועוד, תיאור המשיבים כי בניית בתי המגורים ויתר התשתיות בשטח האש נעשתה תחילה לאחר שנת ,1980 ואף לאחר שנת ,1990 וביתר שאת לאחר שנת ,2000 עולה בקנה אחד גם עם ראיות נוספות. על אף הקושי המובנה במציאת תיעוד של אירועים ופעולות שבוצעו לפני עשרות שנים, המשיבים הציגו שורה של מסמכים המתעדים פעולות שביצעו גורמים שונים המאפשרים להתחקות אחר ההתפתחות שחלה באזור החל ממועד ההכרזה. כך, מדיווחי פעילות יחידת הפיקוח וגורמים נוספים בין השנים 1980 ועד 2000 עולה תמונה ברורה על פיה לא הייתה התיישבות קבועה בשטח האש בטרם הכרזתו. מהדיווחים השונים גם עולה כי פקחי יחידת הפיקוח פעלו למיגור וסילוק פולשים שונים והקמת מבנים בו, לאחר ההכרזה בשנת ,1980 באמצעות דרכי אכיפה שונות. כך למשל עולה מהדיווח מיום 2.3.1984 של רכז פיקוח חברון המתייחס לרעיית צאן באזור, שוד עתיקות ולתופעת ניסיונות הבניה בשטח; כך עולה מהדיווח מיום 2.5.1984 של פקח רשות שמורות הטבע בעניין השתלטות פולשים על ח’רבת ג’ינבא וח’רבת מרכז לאחר שנת 1980; וכך גם עולה מדיווח מיום 1.2.1985 של רכז פיקוח חברון על אודות תלונה שהוגשה במשטרת חברון נגד תושבי הכפר יאטא שפלשו לשטח האש והתמקמו בח’רבת מרכז (ודיווח על תלונה נוספת לגבי פולשים נוספים נמסר ביום .(7.2.1985 התמודדות נוספת עם פולשים באה לידי ביטוי בין היתר בדיווח מיום 15.4.1985 של רכז פיקוח חברון המפרט על סיור שנערך בשטח האש ביום ,14.4.1985 וכן מדיווח מיום 5.5.1985 על תפיסת עדרים בתחום שטח, כמו גם על הגשת תלונה למשטרה בנושא, ועוד. ניתן לומר אפוא, כי חרף הקושי הראייתי המובנה בהתחקות אחר מסמכים 17 המתעדים פעילות בזמן אמת נוכח חלוף הזמן, המשיבים הציגו תמונה ראייתית ברורה על פיה לא הייתה תופעה של מגורי קבע לפני ההכרזה. .39 מן העבר השני, חוות הדעת עליהן מסתמכים העותרים אינן מסייעות להם. באשר לחוות הדעת מטעם פרופ’ שולי הרטמן, אנתרופולוגית חברתית, הרי שעל פי האמור ב”פתיח” לה, היא מבוססת על ביקורים וסיורים שערכה באזור דרום הר חברון “החל משנת 2006″, ביקורים שבהם שוחחה עם המתגוררים במקום וצפתה בשגרת יומם. מעבר לכך, חוות הדעת מתמקדת, כפי שמעידה כותרתה, ב”אורחות החיים של קהילות פלחים רועים בתחום שטח אש 918″. כך בעיקר מפרטת חוות הדעת דפוסי התנהלות במרחב הביתי והחקלאי של המתגוררים בתחום שטח האש. ברם, תיאור הרקע ה”היסטורי” על ידי פלונית אינו אלא התרשמותה מהנמסר לה על ידי תושבי המקום בתקופה מאוחרת – על פי דבריה שלה, החל משנת .2006 בנסיבות אלו, קשה להסיק מחוות הדעת מסקנה לגבי הסוגיה השנויה במחלוקת בין הצדדים, שעה שחוות הדעת לא נשענה על נתונים אובייקטיביים כלשהם או על סיורים במקום ב”זמן אמת”. חוות דעת נוספת צורפה על ידי העותרים מטעם פרופ’ גדעון מ. קרסל, ראש היחידה למחקרים חברתיים באוניברסיטת בן-גוריון בנגב, אך קשה לומר כי מדובר בחוות דעת משכנעת. כל שמצוין בה בקביעה כללית, המתבססת על פי האמור בחוות הדעת עצמה על ביקור במקום בשנת 1984 ועל חבקוק (בעניינו יפורט בהמשך), הוא כי “במרוצת השנים” אוכלסו המערות על ידי חלק מהמשפחות שהתגוררו בהן, באופן קבוע. גם לא התרשמתי שיש בפרוטוקול “ישיבת הועדה להתישבות המשותפת לממשלה ולהסתדרות הציונית העולמית” מיום 12.7.1981 שהציגו העותרים כדי לשנות מן המסקנה האמורה. זאת בהינתן בין היתר כלליות הדברים וניתוקם מהקשר ברור. .40 כאמור, שני הצדדים ביקשו להישען על האמור בספרו של חבקוק. העותרים הפנו לקטעים מתוך הספר המצביעים על כך שעל פי מחקרו של חבקוק, תושבי דרום הר חברון מקיימים מזה דורות אורח חיים תרבותי ייחודי של מגורים במערות (עמ’ 31 ו53-). העותרים הפנו גם לעמודים שבהם נאמר כי תנאי האקלים וזמינות הקרקעות באזור הר חברון עודדו את ההתיישבות באזור זה והניעו תהליך של יציאה מעיירות האם (יאטא ודורא) למרחבים שסביבן, תהליך שהחל בראשית המאה ה19- ונמשך עד לשלהי תקופת המנדט הבריטי ותחילת השלטון הירדני (עמ’ 26). אלא שאין בהפניה לעמודים אלה, ולעובדה כי חבקוק אכן מתאר תופעה כללית של “התפשטות” תושבי הכפרים יאטא ודורא אל מחוץ לגבולות המקוריים של כפריהם ולהתיישבות באתרים נטושים שבסביבה (עמ’ 26), כדי לתמוך בעמדת העותרים כי מרכז חייהם עוד לפני שנת 1980 היה במערות שבתחומי שטח האש. אדרבה, ככל שניתן ללמוד מספר זה על התיישבות בשטח האש 18 בתקופה הרלוונטית, ישנה רלוונטיות רבה יותר לעמודים אליהם הפנו המשיבים. כך, על פי תיאורו של חבקוק, תושביהם של החורבות החדשות “נותרו קשורים בטבורם לכפרי האם” (עמ’ 27). חבקוק גם מונה שני סוגים של מערות מגורים שניתן למצוא באזור: מערות המשמשות משכנות קבועים; ומערות המשמשות משכנות עונתיים (עמ’ 35). בהתייחסו לחורבות אשר “הפכו במשך השנים לכפרים של ממש” לעומת החורבות ש”נשארו יישובים ארעיים המשרתים את התושבים של כפרי אם”, מונה חבקוק רשימה של ארבע חורבות שהפכו לכפרים מיושבים דרך קבע: אל ברג’; בית מרסם; דיר צאמת; וחרבת כרמל (עמ’ ,34 הערה 8). אף אחת מהח’רבאות לגביהן טוענים העותרים למגורי קבע אינה נמנית על רשימה זו. מנגד, כאשר מונה חבקוק ח’רבה המשמשת חלק מהעותרים לפנינו (עותרים 169-110), ח’רבת ג’ינבא, זו נזכרת כחורבה נטושה שהייתה ישוב עונתי ונותרה כזו (עמ’ ,34 הערה 9). .41 כמו כן, על פי המפה המצורפת לספרו של חבקוק, בתחום שטח האש היו מצויות 11 ח’רבאות, כולן, על פי חבקוק – עונתיות: ח’רבת אל-מפקרה; ח’רבת צרורה; ח’רבת אל-כויס; ח’רבת אל-פח’ית; ח’רבת מרכז; וח’רבת ג’ינבא. על ח’רבאות אלה, אליהן מתייחסים העותרים כאל מקום מגוריהם הנטען (ח’רבת אל-פחית לעניין עותרים -106 103 ועותרים 186-177; ח’רבת מרכז לעניין עותרים ,107 108 ו233-252-; וח’רבת ג’ינבא לעניין עותרים 169-110) מציין חבקוק כי מדובר “במשכנות עונתיים במשך תקופת המרעה” כאשר “לכל המשפחות הללו יש משכנות של קבע בכפרי האם שלהן, והמערות הנפוצות בחורבות שבסביבה משמשות את משפחות הרועים כמקומות מגורים ארעיים וכמקומות בהם הן מחזיקות את עדריהן בשעות הלילה בעונת המרעה” (עמ’ -36 35). חבקוק שב ומדגיש כי במועד כתיבת הספר (שנת 1984) ניתן לראות כי מדי שנה נוהגים רועים מהכפרים הסמוכים לשהות בח’רבאות אלה ו”בתום החורף שבות משפחות הרועים ונוטשות את המערות, ששימשו במהלך חודשי המרעה, ועוקרות אל כפרי האם שלהן או למקומות מרעה אחרים, מבטיחים יותר” (עמ’ 56). אין אפוא בהפניה לספרו של חבקוק כדי לסייע לעותרים. בקשת ההצטרפות להליך .42 ובאשר לבקשת המבקשת להצטרף להליך, “המועצה הכפרית מסאפר יטא”. בין השיקולים שיש לשקול בעת בחינת בקשת הצטרפות כידיד בית משפט ניתן למנות את מהות הגוף המבקש להצטרף, את מומחיותו ואת תרומתו הפוטנציאלית לדיון. יש לקחת בחשבון גם את מהות הסוגיה העומדת להכרעה, מהות ההליך, השלב אשר בו הוא מצוי 19 ואם אין בצירוף משום פגיעה ביעילות הדיון (מ”ח 7929/96 קוזלי נ’ מדינת ישראל, פ”ד נג(1) ,529 555 (1999)). בראי השיקולים האמורים, אין כל מקום לספק בענייננו כי דין הבקשה להידחות. זאת לא רק בהתחשב בשלב הדיוני המאוד מתקדם שבו הוגשה הבקשה (לאחר שנשמעו טענות כל הצדדים בכתב ובעל פה בהליך שנפרש על פני כמעט עשור), אלא גם בהינתן שאין מדובר בבקשת צד שלישי שאינו מיוצג או שאינו קשור למי מהעותרים (השוו: בג”ץ 769/02 הוועד הציבורי נגד העינויים בישראל נ’ ממשלת ישראל, פ”ד נז(6) 285 (2003)). על אף שהדבר לא מצוין במסגרת הבקשה, מר אבו עראם, ראש “המועצה הכפרית מסאפר יטא”, הוא עותר 17 בבג”ץ .1039/13 לא זו אף זו, “מועצה כפרית” איננה מוסד שלטוני מוכר, ודאי לא גוף בעל מומחיות. גם מבחינה מהותית, המבקשת להצטרף מייצגת אינטרסים הזהים לאינטרס העותרים. אין מדובר אפוא בנסיבות המצדיקות את קבלת הבקשה. .43 יתר על כן, במידה רבה של צדק טענו המשיבים כי הבקשה נדמית כניסיון “לשיפור עמדות” בשלב דיוני מאוחר ביותר, כאשר המבקשת להצטרף מעוניינת לצרף מסה משמעותית של מסמכים וראיות אשר לא צורפו על ידי העותרים עד כה. בקשה להצטרף כידיד בית משפט אין משמעותה התרת הרסן לצירוף ראיות שלא הוגשו בשלב מוקדם יותר כמעין “מקצה שיפורים”. במיוחד בולט הדבר כאשר מדובר בראיות שצורפו זה מכבר על ידי העותרים והמבקשת להצטרף מנסה “לשפץ” אותן או להאיר בהן פנים נוספות. זאת למשל בנוגע להפניית המבקשת להצטרף לעמודים נוספים מתוך ספרו של חבקוק ול”ניתוח תצלומי האוויר” על ידי עמותת “במקום – מתכננים למען זכויות תכנון”. לא למותר לציין כי על תצלומי האוויר שצורפו לעתירה מוטבע סמלה של עמותה זו ופשיטא כי הייתה בידי העותרים האפשרות לצרף את ניתוח התצלומים. בקשה להצטרף כידיד בית משפט איננה הכלי המתאים לעשות כן. ממילא אין מקום להתייחס לניסיונה של המבקשת להצטרף להפנות לעמודים נוספים מתוך הספר של חבקוק, אליו הפנו העותרים. .44 הרבה למעלה מן הצורך יצוין כי גם עיון במסמכים הנוספים שהמבקשת להצטרף ביקשה לצרף, אינו מגלה כי יש בהם כדי לתרום תרומה של ממש או אף תרומה כלשהי לבירור התמונה המשפטית והעובדתית בענייננו. כך, בקצרה, חוות הדעת שהוגשו כלל אינן ממקמות במרכזן את הסוגיה השנויה במחלוקת, שאלת מגורי קבע בתחום שטח האש טרם ההכרזה עליו ובסמוך אליה. ב”חוות דעת מומחה” מיום 12.12.2020 שהוגשה מטעם פרופ’ ראסם ח’מאיסי צוין כי השאלה העומדת בבסיס חוות הדעת היא “האם ניתן לקדם תכנון אזרחי בשטח אש ,918 בכדי להמשיך לקיים הכפרים הפלסטינים בשטח זה ולייתר החרבתם והעברתם בכפיה ממקומם”. חוות הדעת מניחה כהנחת היסוד כי 20 “ההכרזה על שטח צבאי 918 היא פסולה ובסיסה בשיקולים טריטוריאליים/ גיאופוליטיים עליהם הולבשה פרקטיקה של צרכים צבאיים” וכן כי “הקהילות הגרות באזור גרו בעבר, גרות עכשיו וימשיכו להתגורר במרחב…”. הנחות יסוד אלו עליהן מושתתת חוות הדעת הן אלה השנויות במחלוקות בענייננו, ומשכך ממילא לא ניתן היה ליתן לחוות דעת זו כל משקל. הוא הדין גם באשר ל”חוות דעת מומחה בעניין החובה להגן ולהמשיך ולקיים את המורשת הארכיאולוגית החומרית והתרבותית בכפר ג’ינבה…” מיום 11.12.2020 מטעם הארכיאולוג גדעון סולימני. חוות הדעת המתמקדת בחשיבותן וערכן של העתיקות הארכיאולוגיות שבמקום אינה מעלה ומורידה לענייננו. כך גם חוות דעת היסטורית מטעם ד”ר מייקל פישבך שעניינה במצב ההתיישבות בשטח האש עד שנת ,1967 בהתייחס לתיעוד לקיומן של ח’רבאות אלה גם בעבר. שעה שאין חולק כי הח’רבאות בשטח האש היו קיימות גם בעבר (אלא שלעמדת המשיבים הן שימשו למגורים עונתיים בלבד ולא למגורי קבע) אין בחוות דעת זו כדי לתרום לבירור הסוגיה העומדת על הפרק. במסמך שצורף לבקשה התבקשה הצגת עדויות וראיות חפציות שונות (על אודותיהן פורט בנספח ב8/ לבקשה) אולם גם לגביהן לא ברור כיצד הן יכולות לתרום להכרעה. .45 גם בבקשה הנוספת לצירוף מסמך שהגישה המבקשת להצטרף ביום 29.4.2021 אין כדי לתמוך בטענות העותרים או כדי להשליך על הסוגיות השנויות במחלוקת. לבקשה זו צירפה המבקשת להצטרף דו”ח שנערך בינואר 1968 המתייחס לפעילות צה”ל בשטח האש (בחרבת ג’ינבה) ולתושבים שהתגוררו שם באותה עת. אין הרבה מקום לספק כי גם קיומם של בתי אבן בחורבת ג’ינבה בשנת 1966 אין בו כדי ללמד דבר על מצב הדברים בשנת .1980 מה גם שבהתחשב בתמורות שחלו באזור בעקבות המלחמה שפרצה בתווך, גם אם הייתה מוכחת הטענה למגורי קבע בשנת ,1966 אין די בה לצורך הכרעה בשאלה אם היו במקום מגורי קבע למעלה מעשור לאחר מכן. סיכום .46 המסקנה היא אם כן כי דינן של העתירות להידחות הן על הסף והן לגופו של עניין. לא רק שהעתירות לוקות בשיהוי כבד ובהיעדר ניקיון כפיים, גם לא עלה בידי העותרים להוכיח את טענתם למגורי קבע עובר להכרזה על שטח האש. זאת אף לא בראי הראיות החדשות שהתבקש להוסיפן על דרך של “בקשה להצטרף”. לא למותר לציין כי טענה כללית שנשמעה מצד העותרים במהלך הדיון לפנינו בדבר אפליה לעומת ישוב סוסיא הסמוך לאזור שטח האש, אינה ממן העניין. מדובר בטענה שהועלתה באופן כללי וכוללני בהיעדר כל תשתית התומכת בה ואין להידרש לה. כמו כן, סוגיית נחיצות ההכרזה שבה ונתעוררה בדיון שהתקיים לפנינו, כאשר עודכַנו על ידי המשיבים כי בחינה 21 עדכנית העלתה כי שטח האש אכן חיוני לצרכים צבאיים וביטחוניים. גם לא מצאתי ממש בטענותיהם הכלליות של העותרים בדבר שיקולים זרים העומדים בבסיס ההכרזה או באשר לספק שביקשו לעורר ביחס למידת הצורך בשטח האש המסוים הזה דווקא. .47 עוד לא למותר לציין כי במסגרת ההליך הוצע לעותרים מתווה המבוסס על התפנותם משטח האש בעת עריכת אימונים. מעבר לכך המשיבים הבהירו, בלי קשר ליישום המתווה, כי בכל מקרה העותרים יהיו רשאים להיכנס לתחום שטח האש לצרכי חקלאות ומרעה בימי שישי ושבת ובחגי ישראל, וכי פתוחה לפניהם הדרך לתאם כניסות לשטח האש במועדים נוספים. כמו כן, הובהר כאמור כי המשיבים אף מוכנים לאפשר לעותרים להיכנס לתחום שטח האש במשך כחודשיים בשנה לצורכי חקלאות ומרעה. לא רק שהעותרים לא הצליחו להעמיד תשתית עובדתית מבוססת להוכחת טענותיהם, אלא שניתן אף לומר כי המשיבים בהחלט לוקחים בחשבון את צורכי החקלאים במקום, וזאת במידה רבה אף לפנים משורת הדין. אם תשמע דעתי אפוא, העתירות תידחנה. העותרים בבג”ץ 413/13 יישאו ביחד ולחוד בהוצאות המשיבים בסך של 20,000 ש”ח; וכך גם יישאו העותרים בבג”ץ 1039/13 ביחד ולחוד בהוצאות המשיבים באותו הסכום. ש ו פ ט השופט י’ עמית: .1 העובדה ששטח האש שימש בשנות ה89- וה90- לאימוני חיל האוויר, מדברת בעד עצמה, ושוללת את טענות העותרים למגורי קבע בשטח האש. לכך יש להוסיף את האינדיקציות הרבות הנוספות שנסקרו בפסק דינו של חברי, השופט ד’ מינץ. למעשה, גם העותרים עצמם מודים בתופעה של “עליה אל פני הקרקע” בשנים האחרונות, קרי, בנייה מעל המערות ששימשו משך השנים חלק קטן מתושבי יאטה הסמוכה על בסיס עונתי בתקופת החורף. .2 בע”א 2281/06 אבן זוהר ואח’ נ’ מדינת ישראל (28.4.10), דחה בית המשפט תביעה לפיצוי של בעלי קרקע עקב סגירת מקרקעין לצורכי אימונים של צה”ל, על אף הפגיעה בקניינם. במצב הדברים הרגיל, השכיח גם בתחומי הקו הירוק, בעלים או מחזיקים של מקרקעין בשטחי אש, נדרשים לפנות למפקד הצבאי על מנת לקבל היתרי 22 כניסה למקרקעין שבבעלותם או שבהחזקתם (ראו מאמרה של סרן (מיל’) דפנה ברק (כתוארה אז) “שטחי אש ושטחי אימונים – ההיבט המשפטי” משפט וצבא כרך 11-12 ,153 159 (התשנ”ב)). במקרה דנן, נעשו פעם אחר פעם ניסיונות כנים להגיע להסדר עם העותרים, באופן שיצמצם את הפגיעה בפרנסתם – החל מהסכם הפשרה בשנות ה,80- שבמסגרתו הותרה כניסת חקלאים ורועי צאן לשטח האש מדי סופי שבוע ובחגי ישראל ובמהלך שתי תקופות בנות חודש מדי שנה. במסגרת הליך הגישור שהתנהל בפני שופט בית המשפט העליון (בדימ’) פרופ’ יצחק זמיר, הועלו למיטב ידיעתנו, הצעות מעשיות שונות, והמשיבים חזרו והעלו הצעות מעשיות שיאפשרו לעותרים להמשיך לשהות בשטח האש בתנאים ובמועדים שונים. ברם, הצעות הפשרה נדחו פעם אחר פעם על ידי העותרים, ותמיהה היא, האם שיקולים מעשיים של הקטנת הנזק מנחים את העותרים, או תפיסה של “הכל או לא כלום”. כל זאת, כאשר ביני לביני, תוך הפרה של צווי הביניים שהוצאו בעתירות דנן, המשיך הבינוי בשטח. .3 מכל מקום, והחשוב לענייננו, שעדיין לא ננעלו שערי הפשרה וההידברות. גם כיום, המשיבים נכונים להתיר לעותרים להיכנס לשטח האש לצורך עיבוד חקלאי ומרעה בסופי שבוע ובחגי ישראל, שאז לא מתקיים אימונים בשטח, וכן כניסה לשטח האש למשך שתי תקופות של חודש בכל אחת מדי שנה, בעונות הזריעה והקציר. המשיבים אף הוסיפו ו”פתחו דלת” להצעה פרקטית נוספת, שבמסגרתה ייתכן שניתן לצמצם עוד יותר את השימוש בשטח האש, במסגרת תוכנית אימונים חצי שנתית (פסקה 10 לכתב התשובה של המשיבים). ככל שהעותרים מבקשים לקדם את האינטרס החקלאי-כלכלי-תרבותי שלהם, טוב יעשו אם ייפנו למסלול של הידברות עם המשיבים. ש ו פ ט השופט ע’ גרוסקופף: אני מסכים לפסק דינו של חברי, השופט דוד מינץ, ומצטרף לדבריו של חברי, השופט יצחק עמית. הדיון בעתירות שלפנינו נעשה בשני מסלולים מקבילים: האחד, המשפטי, התמקד בתוקפם של צווי הסגירה שהוצאו ביחס לשטח אש ,918 דהיינו בשאלה האם ניתן היה בשעתו (קרי, החל מ- 1980) לאסור על כניסה ויציאה מהשטח על מנת לייעדו לשימושים צבאיים; השני, המעשי, עסק בניסיונות להגיע לפשרה שתאפשר שימושים אזרחיים בצד השימושים הצבאיים. התמשכות ההליכים לאורך קרוב לעשור נבע מתפיסת 23 בית משפט זה, במותבים משתנים, כי מסלול הפשרה המעשי עדיף על מסלול ההכרעה המשפטי. זאת מתוך הבנה שהכרעה משפטית לכאן או לכאן עלולה שלא לקדם את פתרון הסכסוך. לצערנו, לעת הזו, ולאחר שמוצו הניסיונות לפשרה לדעת כל הצדדים, אין מנוס מחזרה למסלול המשפטי – וכפי שמראה חברי, השופט מינץ, כשפוסעים בו מגיעים לתוצאה שדין העתירות להידחות. בכך מסתיים הדיון בעתירות דנן, ואולם הסכסוך לא בא על פתרונו. בשטח אש 918 הוקמו במהלך השנים מבנים רבים, ונעשים בו שימושים אזרחיים על ידי טוענים לזכויות בקרקע, אשר יש הכרח ליישב בינם לבין השימושים הצבאיים לשמם הוכרז כשטח אש. הרשויות הצבאיות המופקדות על תכנון השימוש בשטחי אש יבחנו מטבע הדברים, הן את צורכי הצבא והן את האילוצים הקיימים בשטח, בטרם יורו על חידוש האימונים בשטח אש ,918 ויקבעו את טיבם והיקפם. בעשותן כן, חזקה עליהן כי יבחנו את מכלול החלופות בראי הצרכים הצבאיים, ויביאו בחשבון אף את הצרכים והאינטרסים של האוכלוסייה האזרחית הטוענת לזכויות בשטח. ש ו פ ט הוחלט כאמור בפסק דינו של השופט ד’ מינץ. ניתן היום, ג’ באייר התשפ”ב (4.5.2022). ש ו פ ט ש ו פ ט ש ו פ ט _________________________ הב 13004130_N89.docx מרכז מידע, טל’ ,077-2703333 3852*אתר אינטרנט, il.gov.court.supreme://https 24

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

פעיל שמאל קיצוני דרס יהודי ותקף אותו כשהוא שוכב פצוע

היהודי שהותקף הוא חקלאי תושב הר חברון, לוחם משוחרר שעדיין מתמודד עם פציעה מהמלחמה בעזה

מאת  אביגיל זית

ב׳ באדר ה׳תשפ״ה (02/03/2025 13:54)

אתמול (שבת), דניאל קרונברג, אנרכיסט ופעיל שמאל קיצוני, דרס בכוונה חקלאי יהודי בדרום הר חברון. לאחר הדריסה הפעיל יצא מהרכב ותקף את הפצוע עד שפעיל אחר, עמיאל ורדי, משך את התוקף בכוח מהמקום. המשטרה עיכבה לחקירה את פעיל השמאל הדורס ולקחה את הרכב בו נהג.

האירוע התרחש בשעות הבוקר כאשר קבוצה של כעשרה אנרכיסטים מארגון תעאיוש הגיעו לשטח חקלאי של יהודים בחוות מיתרים. שני חקלאים שהבחינו ברכבים נכנסים לתוך השטח הגיעו למקום ועצרו בסמוך לרכבי הפעילים. ברגע שאחד מהחקלאים מהם ירד מהטרקטורון איתו הגיע, פתח פעיל השמאל שנהג ברכב בנסיעה, ופגע בו.

למקום הגיעו כוחות צבא, משטרה ורפואה. הפצוע, לוחם משוחרר שעדיין מתמודד עם פציעה מהמלחמה בעזה, פונה לקבלת טיפול רפואי בבית החולים סורוקה בבאר שבע. הוא סבל מחבלות במקום בו נפצע במלחמה, ובסורוקה נערכו לו בדיקות רפואיות ו-CT.

ראש מועצת הר חברון אלירם אזולאי הגיב לאירוע החמור וקרא לרשויות למצות את הדין עם הדורס ולפעול באופן אקטיבי להרחקת האנרכיסטים מהר חברון בפרט ומיהודה ושומרון בכלל: “אלימות האנרכיסטים עולה מדרגה. בזמן שמדינת ישראל במלחמה, קומץ אנרכיסטים קיצוניים משבשים את פעולות צה”ל, תוקפים מתיישבים ומלבים את האש במטרה ברורה של הכפשת ישראל בעולם. היום ראינו עליית מדרגה בתקיפה מכוונת של חקלאי השומר על אדמות המדינה. הגיע הזמן להפסיק לעצום עין, ולהרחיק את אותם גורמים עוינים מיהודה ושומרון”.

השר עמיחי שיקלי מסר בתגובה לאירוע: “‏מדי שבת מגיעים אנרכיסטים מארגונים כדוגמת: תעאיוש, יש דין, שלום עכשיו ואחרים, כולם מתוקצבים בידי מדינות זרות, להטריד, לעורר פרובוקציות ולייצר עימותים שמטרתם להזין את מפעל הדה לגיטימציה להתיישבות היהודית ביהודה ובשומרון בדגש על קמפיין ״אלימות המתנחלים״. ‏כחלק מהמאבק בBDS- משרד התפוצות והמאבק באנטישמיות קיבל מנדט (שיחל ב 9.3) לעשות סדר בפעילות הארל״מים (ארגונים לסיוע הומניטרי) הפועלים ביו״ש. ‏כל ארגון שלקח או יקח חלק בפעולות הטרדה כנגד אזרחי ישראל ביו״ש יאבד את רשיונו וכניסתו לארץ תיאסר. ‏אני קורא לשר הביטחון, לרמטכ״ל הנכנס ולאלוף פיקוד המרכז לשים סוף לתופעה הבזויה הזו של הטרדות אלימות נגד אזרחי ישראל ביו״ש”.