British Boycott of Israeli Universities: The End of this Antisemitic Action?

According to the JTA a threat of legal action by Anthony Julius, who was my lawyer in Irving v. Penguin/Lipstadt, has brought an end to the attempt by a small group of university academics to boycott Israeli universities.

Anthony promised free legal assistance to any academic affected by the threatened boycott, and wrote the union’s general secretary that he considered the union’s motion -- to “consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions, and to discuss the occupation with individuals and institutions concerned, including Israeli colleagues” -- to be both a boycott motion and anti-Semitic.

Last week the union, known by as the UCU, dropped its latest boycott call.

Anthony took this action despite the fact that many people -- including some within the UK Jewish community -- opposed it. He knew it was the right thing to do.

I am not the least bit surprised. He took the same stance in my case.

The rest, as is said, is history.

Bravo Anthony [and also to his cohort James Libson who played an equally important role here, as he did in my case].

More on the Italian Posting of Names of Professors

I have just learned from Emanuele Ottolenghi, the Executive Director of the Transatlantic Institute and one of the people whose name and affiliation was posted on the Italian website, that most of the 162 names on the list were not names of Jewish people.

He described many of them as "very pious Catholics," who were appalled by the notion of a boycott of Jewish academics.

But these are distinctions which are lost on antisemites.

UK's UCU [University and College Union] Cancels Boycott Threat

The UCU has been told by its own legal advisers that their threatened boycott against Israeli institutions is illegal.

Now who is going to tell those who spearheaded it that it was also immoral, stupid, and contrary to the very essence of what universities are all about?

EU helps twart academic boycott of Israel

According to the JTA, Israel has signed an agreement with the European Union that thwarts efforts to impose a British academic boycott of Israel.

Under the terms of the agreement Israeli universities will participate in the major public/private research partnership to develop green air transport.

No comment necessary

[compliments of ADL]

Iranian cleric calls for death for Salman Rushdie: Will England's UCU respond with a boycott?

According to a dispatch released by MEMRI, in Tehran in a sermon on this past Friday, Ahmad Khatami of the Iranian Assembly of Experts decreed that the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie must be carried out. His statement was greeted with chants of "Death to England."

He called Rushdie a "wretched man." I wonder if the UCU will propose a boycott of Iran for this attack on one of its own. I am not betting on it...

These are Khatami's words:

"The old, decrepit, and colonialist English regime presents itself as the defender of human rights, yet it awards a medal to such a wretched, bankrupt man [Salman Rushdie], who has offended the sacred values of more than 1.5 billion Muslims. Are these your human rights?"

Crowd chants: "Death to England. Death to England. Death to England."

Ahmad Khatami: "Is this your civilization? This old, decrepit government of England should know that the days of its imperialistic aspirations are gone, and today it is considered America's branded slave. They must also know that the wave of Islamic revival in the world has begun, whether they like it or not.

Under these circumstances, awarding England's highest honor to a wretched man, who lacks any talent whatsoever... He is not considered a prominent novelist or author. They awarded him this medal only because he cursed the Prophet.... Awarding a medal to such a man entails a conflict with one and a half billion Muslims throughout the world, and you will gain nothing from this. The one thing that will happen is that you will see the Islamic world roaring together.

In Islamic Iran, this revolutionary fatwa of Imam Khomeini still exists. It is unchangeable and with God's grace, it must be carried out."

If the UCU doesn't vote for a boycott, will it at least protest??? I doubt that too.

Express your view on the boycott of Israeli universities....

I don't believe in these online votes run by media outlets. They mean little except how active the two sides of the debate in question were in spreading the word and getting their supporters to log in and vote. And for the media outlet it is a way of getting more traffic to their site.

Having said all that, for those readers of this blog who do, you can express you views on the British boycott of Israeli universities at http://www.newstatesman.com/

Tom Friedman nails it: The Proposed British boycott of Israeli universities

A Boycott Built on Bias

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

The New York Times
June 17, 2007

Two weeks ago I took part in commencement for this year’s doctoral candidates at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The ceremony was held in the amphitheater on Mount Scopus, which faces out onto the Dead Sea and the Mountains of Moab. The setting sun framed the graduate students in a reddish-orange glow against a spectacular biblical backdrop.

Before I describe the ceremony, though, I have to note that it coincided with the news that Britain’s University and College Union had called on its members to consider a boycott of Israeli universities, accusing them of being complicit in Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories.

Anyway, as the Hebrew U. doctoral candidates each had their names called out and rose to receive their diplomas from the university’s leadership, I followed along in the program. The Israeli names rolled by: “Moshe Nahmany, Irit Nowik, Yuval Ofir. But then every so often I heard an Arab name, like Nuha Hijazi or Rifat Azam or Taleb Mokari.

Since the program listed everyone’s degrees and advisers, I looked them up. Rifat got his doctorate in law. His thesis was about “International Taxation of Electronic Commerce.” His adviser was “Prof. D. Gliksberg.” Nuha got her doctorate in biochemistry. Her adviser was “Prof. R. Gabizon.” Taleb had an asterisk by his name. So I looked at the bottom of the page. It said: “Summa Cum Laude.” His chemistry thesis was about “Semiconductor-Metal Interfaces,” and his adviser was “Prof. U. Banin.”

These were Israeli Arab doctoral students — many of them women and one of whom accepted her degree wearing a tight veil over her head. Funny — she could receive her degree wearing a veil from the Hebrew University, but could not do so in France, where the veil is banned in public schools. Arab families cheered unabashedly when their sons and daughters received their Hebrew U. Ph.D. diplomas, just like the Jewish parents.

How crazy is this, I thought. Israel’s premier university is giving Ph.D.’s to Arab students, two of whom were from East Jerusalem — i.e. the occupied territories — supervised by Jewish Israeli professors, all while some far-left British academics are calling for a boycott of Israeli universities.

I tell this story to underscore the obvious : that the reality here is so much more morally complex than the outside meddlers present it. Have no doubt, I have long opposed Israel’s post-1967 settlements. They have squandered billions and degraded the Israeli Army by making it an army of occupation to protect the settlers and their roads. And that web of settlements and roads has carved up the West Bank in an ugly and brutal manner — much uglier than Israel’s friends abroad ever admit. Indeed, their silence, particularly American Jewish leaders, enabled the settlement lunacy.

But you’d have to be a blind, deaf and dumb visitor to Israel today not to see that the vast majority of Israelis recognize this historic mistake, and they not only approved Ariel Sharon’s unilateral uprooting of Israeli settlements in Gaza to help remedy it, but elected Ehud Olmert precisely to do the same in the West Bank. The fact that it is not happening now is hardly Israel’s fault alone. The Palestinians are in turmoil.

So to single out Israeli universities alone for a punitive boycott is rank anti-Semitism. Let’s see, Syria is being investigated by the United Nations for murdering Lebanon’s former prime minister, Rafik Hariri. Syrian agents are suspected of killing the finest freedom-loving Lebanese journalists, Gibran Tueni and Samir Kassir. But none of that moves the far left to call for a boycott of Syrian universities. Why? Sudan is engaged in genocide in Darfur. Why no boycott of Sudan? Why?

If the far-left academics driving this boycott actually cared about Palestinians they would call on every British university to accept 20 Palestinian students on full scholarships to help them with what they need most — building the skills to run a modern state and economy. And they would call on every British university to dispatch visiting professors to every Palestinian university to help upgrade their academic offerings. And they would challenge every Israeli university that already offers Ph.D.’s to Israeli Arabs to do even more. And they would challenge every Arab university the same way.

That’s what people who actually care about Palestinians would do. But just singling out Israeli universities for a boycott, in the face of all the other madness in the Middle East — that’s what anti-Semites would do.

The British boycott of Israeli Universities

Ken Stern, of the American Jewish Committee, has written a thoughtful piece on the proposed boycott of Israeli universities by British academics.

Israel as the N-word

A few years ago an American Indian friend phoned me, absolutely perplexed. He could not reconcile two stories in his morning paper – one in the news section, the other in sports. Both were about major Florida universities.

The first story reported universal outrage at and severe sanctions on a fraternity which had hosted an event where participants dressed in blackface. The leadership of the university spoke in strong language about not tolerating racism, the hurt of stereotypes, the psychological impact of dehumanization, and the incompatibility of such offensive behavior with the standards of a university.

The second noted, without comment, that the leadership of another Florida university (which had an Indian mascot) was encouraging students to show up at a major sporting event in red face.

“How can people get it when it comes to racism against African Americans,” he lamented, “but don’t have a clue when Indian people are victimized by the same outrageous nonsense?”

I had some theories, none of them completely satisfactory. But I recall thinking such a blatant double standard rarely appears regarding bigotry against other groups, including Jews.

Recently I opened the New York Times and saw two articles. One reported that a union of academics in the United Kingdom (The University and College Union) voted to support the principle of a boycott against Israeli academics.

The other noted the plight of an Iranian-American academic from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars who was being imprisoned by the repressive regime in Iran. I was tempted to call my Indian friend and ask him, how could it be that academics want to demonize their Israeli colleagues simply because they are Israelis, but are absolutely silent when a repressive regime in the same region is actually imprisoning scholars?

[....]

It is bad enough that repressive regimes in the Arab and Muslim world (many of which are theocratic and autocratic) demonize Israel and promote dehumanizing views of Jews through their media and religious and education institutions.

[....] But now many in intellectual circles, especially in Europe, are also demonizing Israel with such regularity and glee as to resemble sport.

There is an historic parallel here which, while not applicable in every particular, is becoming increasing apt: the way leading Southern institutions treated blacks fifty years ago. Israel has in effect become the ni**er among the family of states or in the terms of anti-Semitic slur, “the ‘kike’ among the nations.”

[....]

Kenneth S. Stern

The proposed British boycott of Israeli academics

I have, much to my chagrin, failed to say enough about this. It is unequivocally outrageous and antisemitic.* It is pernicious and it is stupid. [Most forms of prejudice -- and antisemitism prominently among them -- generally are quite stupid.]

Now that you know how I really feel, let me recommend an outstanding article by Anthony Julius and Alan Dershowitz from the London Times. It is a tour de force.

It is also available in a much longer form.

*Just because there are some Jews involved does not inoculate it against charges of antisemitism. Jews can be antisemitic. Blacks can be racists. Women can be sexist. And most readers of this blog know people who fit into each of these categories.

From Bucharest: A Bi-lateral meeting with the British regarding the UK boycott of Israeli academics etc.

When we had our briefing the State Department folks stressed that much of the "work" takes place in bi-lateral meetings, i.e. meetings where two delegations sit face to face and discuss the issues of concern to them, particularly as they relate to the delegation across the table.

Our first bi-lateral meeting was with the Rt Hon The Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the UK Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.

She spoke of the UK's strong desire to address antisemitism, diversity issues, and questions of immigrants and their acculturation to British society. She pointed out that her husband is descended from Austrian immigrants who were forced to flee from that country when the Nazis took over the country.

Gregg Rickman urged her not to conflate the different issues and pointed out the steep rise in number of antisemitic events in the UK. He also urged the prosecutors be pressed to utilize the laws on the UK books which guard against racial and religious incitement.

Imam Talal Eid, of the Islamic Institute of Boston and Muslim Chaplain at Brandeis, cautioned the Baroness that one cannot depend on members of the Muslim community to report on dangerous people in their midst. Simply put, he stressed, they are frightened. They have been frightened by extremists in their midst. They are simply too scared to stand up to extremists.

He spoke with passion and with force. [Later I pointed out that he had used the word terrorism while places such as the BBC and NPR insist on the pareve "militants." He laughed a bitter laugh and pointed out that the Fatah al-Islam [those who invaded the Palestinian camps and situated themselves there and began fighting with the Lebanese army] had killed Lebanese soldiers.

"If that's not terrorism," he said, what is?

We also discussed the academic boycott. The Baroness condemned it in no uncertain terms. We strongly urged that the British government take pro-active steps to address this problem. It had, we reminded her, terrible potential to spread.

New York Times on boycotts of Israel

Today's New York Times has a provocative and disturbing article on the attempt by some professional groups, trade unions, and artists are being pushed to boycott Israel.

It mentions the apartheid model of protest in relation to Israel. The idea of using this model in relation to Israel was not invented by Jimmy Carter but it has gotten a great of traction from his book.

Richard Cohen on UK journalist's call for boycott of Israel

Richard Cohen, who often has some very critical things to say about Israel, has written a spot-on column about the vote by UK journalists for a boycott of Israel. As I noted earlier on this blog, such a decision -- which ignores any responsibility on the part of the Palestinians and ignores the wrongdoings of the Sudan, Zimbabwe, China, etc. etc. -- smacks of antisemitism.

Ironically -- or maybe not so - a BBC journalists was kidnapped in Gaza and has not been released by the Palestinian group that took him. The journalists don't mention this...

Cohen writes:

The British journalists say they are moved by the plight of the Palestinian people, and they are right to be. But the misery of a Gazan or a West Banker is not solely Israel's doing. The government of Gaza is the political arm of a terrorist organization, and if the West Bank is suffering -- and it is -- the cause is not only Israeli land lust but also a morbid Israeli fear of terrorism. British journalists would no doubt approve similar measures if London's city buses had not once but repeatedly been blown to smithereens by passengers with the exact fare and belts of explosives.

So what explains this fury at Israel -- and only at Israel? What explains this need to denounce, to boycott?

[....]

The British journalists, like the academics before them, dare to tread where an army of goons has gone before. If they do not recognize the ember of anti-Semitism still glowing within them, they ought to park themselves before a mirror and ask why, of all the nations, they single out Israel for reprimand and obloquy. This business of assigning to Jews a special burden, for seeing in them more of mankind's bad qualities and less of its good, has a dark and ugly pedigree: the Chosen People, again -- and again in the wrong way.

University of Leeds [UK] Cancels Speech Critical of Islam: censored speaker responds

Matthew Kuentzel, whose speech critical of Islam was abruptly cancelled by the University of Leeds, has responded to the issue and provides the background detail.

When you couple the behavior of the officials at University of Leeds with the decision of certain UK teachers to teach about the Crusades and the Holocaust the concept of a "reign of [fear of] Muslim terror and/or anger" seems all the more likely and all the more terrifying.

As I have written earlier, deniers should sit back, relax, and wait. In the name of political correctness and fear of angry Muslims [remember their response to the Danish cartoons and the speech by the Pope] history will be rewritten. Much more than the Holocaust and the Crusades will disappear.

Europe seems to be engaged in a true kulturkampf and Muslims, as a result of their previous behavior, just have to sit by while the other side defeats itself.