For those who have been observing the ‘peace process’ of late, the claim that Israel has been taking “courageous actions toward ending the occupation” rings hollow. Whilst the media regales us with tales of settler angst at the prospect of being ‘ethnically cleansed’ from Gaza, Israel has speeded up the building of the wall in the West Bank, has launched a ferocious campaign against Palestinian communities in East Jerusalem, has authorised the building of thousands of new homes in the West Bank settlements, and has kept West Bank and Gaza residents under appalling conditions, with extremely limited rights of movement. Even after the unilateral Gaza withdrawal takes place, Gazans will have no control over their own borders, and two new walls are being built – one along the Philadelphi Corridor and one on the Israeli side of Gaza. It smacks of more of the Oslo process, where under the pretence of a “very generous offer”, Israel doubled the number of dwellings in settlements in the West Bank.
Within academic circles, the targetted boycott has raised much debate, and concern that the principle of ‘academic freedom’ will be damaged by the boycott. Thus, a group of UK academics have called an emergency meeting of the AUT in an endeavour to overturn the motions voted in at the AUT conference.(2)
As the debate rages on, the position of the occupied is all but forgotten – and whilst Dershowitz even goes so far as to insist that “leading Palestinian academics do not support” the boycott, closer examination of his claims in that regard, reveal that he is quoting an unnamed source at the Al-Quds University, and that is not the dominant view at that university, according to the results of a Questionnaire on Joint Projects with Israeli Academic Institutions, undertaken by the Union of Al-Quds University Teachers and Employees earlier this year.(3)
In reality, the call for an academic boycott of Israeli institutions came from Palestinian academics (4), and that call should now be seriously considered by their counterparts throughout the world.
This undermines another of the arguments doing the rounds – “Why not boycott other academies because of their state’s involvement in human rights abuses” – the answer being that there have not been requests from other occupied or oppressed peoples for an academic boycott of their oppressor’s institutions, and that to attempt to instigate a boycott without a call from the victims of oppression smacks of cultural imperialism. Furthermore, failure to sanction any other academy does not invalidate the reasons for boycotting Haifa University (for its campaign of vilification against Dr. Ilan Pappe and a mature student Teddy Katz) and Bar Ilan University (for its links with a college in Ariel settlement, deep inside the West Bank.)
Ariel Sharon’s response to the boycott against Bar Ilan reaffirms the urgent need for a boycott of Israel, and completely undermines Dershowitz’s claims of “courageous actions toward ending the occupation”. Haaretz (5) reports that the College of Judea and Samaria, (the settlement college where Bar Ilan was providing accreditation) will be accorded university status.
“Vice Premier Shimon Peres called on fellow Labor ministers to vote against an Ariel university, saying it contradicts a government decision to give priority to developing the Galilee and the Negev.
"Establishing this university is an eyebrow-raising mistake," Peres said.
In response, Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed surprise at Labor's objection, saying that a university in Ariel is important for demonstrating that the Ariel bloc will forever remain a part of Israel.”
And there we have it, there are no courageous steps to end the occupation, there is no desire on the part of Sharon to consider giving up all the settlements in order to facilitate the establishment of a viable, contiguous state on 1967 borders.
It is time to give the rights of Palestinians as much discussion as the rights of Israelis are accorded. To overturn this limited boycott would be a travesty of justice.
1)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
2)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
3)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
4)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
5)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Comments
Hide the following 14 comments
ok
04.05.2005 11:40
To include a discussion with Palestinians actually in Palestine and the refugee camps does actually take thought and it would also have to address issues that would go against the left wing principles of being "nice to all" all the time.
A real discussion on Suicide bombing would have to go much further than lefties talking about pain and forcing tears at the site of dead children, as they treat the issue as a mental illness rather than a social phenomina .
Lets get real for once and actually look at the world in its real form and look at what is really going on, rather than looking for trumped up excuses to justify what is already going on.
annon
American Assn of University Professors strongly condemns boycott
05.05.2005 16:33
5/3/05
Washington, D.C. - The American Association of University Professors issued the following statement:
Academic Boycott
Delegates to a recent meeting of the British Association of University Teachers (AUT) approved resolutions that damage academic freedom. The resolutions call on all members of AUT to "refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration, or joint projects" with two universities in Israel, Haifa University and Bar Ilan University. Excluded from the ban are "conscientious Israeli academics and intellectuals opposed to their state's colonial and racist policies," an exclusion which, because it requires compliance with a political or ideological test in order for an academic relationship to continue, deepens the injury to academic freedom rather than mitigates it.
These resolutions have been met with strong condemnation and calls for repeal within the United Kingdom and elsewhere. The American Association of University Professors joins in condemning these resolutions and in calling for their repeal. Since its founding in 1915, the AAUP has been committed to preserving and advancing the free exchange of ideas among academics irrespective of governmental policies and however unpalatable those policies may be viewed. We reject proposals that curtail the freedom of teachers and researchers to engage in work with academic colleagues, and we reaffirm the paramount importance of the freest possible international movement of scholars and ideas. The AAUP urges the AUT to support the right of all in the academic community to communicate freely with other academics on matters of professional interest.
The American Association of University Professors is a nonprofit charitable and educational organization that promotes academic freedom by supporting tenure, academic due process, and standards of quality in higher education. The AAUP has 45,000 members at colleges and universities throughout the United States.
---
I think the real question here is not whether the boycott will survive after May 26 -- it clearly won't -- but whether Sue Blackwell will make it through the next election cycle for causing so much energy and time to be wasted over what will inevitably come to nothing and which does not address the core mission of AUT.
gehrig
Unsurprisingly .....
06.05.2005 10:32
In relation to Haifa, they fail to address the issue of the steps taken by that institution to restrict the academic freedom of Ilan Pappe and Teddy Katz.
Furthermore, for all their high flown ideals about academic freedom, they fail to address the severe restrictions forced on Palestinian academics by the Occupation, and they ignore the fact the call for Boycott came from Palestinian academics.
Its almost as if they only care about Academic freedom in relation to Israelis.
With luck the reconvened meeting of the AUT will consider the restrictions on the academic freedom of Palestinian academics very seriously before siding with universities that serve the Occupation, or who attack the freedoms of critics of Israel.
ftp
my prediction
06.05.2005 16:19
Here's a perfect example of the rank and file reaction:
Did you catch that "unanimously passed"?
And my other prediction is that the people who proposed the boycott will blame its overturn on The All-Powerful International Zi-i-ionist Conspiracy and claim that the will of the union was thwarted -- while the rest will rightfully conclude that the will of the union finally prevailed.
Then some fine doublespeak arglebargle will be used by the proponents to turn their very real defeat -- a boycott which lasted less than zero days, having ended before it began -- into some sort of symbolic major victory.
gehrig
yes gehrig
07.05.2005 01:23
Any chance of you addressing the issue of academic freedom, what steps should be taken to protect it, and the reasons why a Palestinian academics call for boycott should be ignored?
Now what was it that Tanya Reinhart said?
"As usual, we believe that the solution lies in the realm of force. When the Valencia basketball team tried to boycott Israel in March 2004, and announced that it would not participate in the League Championship if it took place in Israel, the steamroller was set in motion; there were threats, there were mutterings about contracts, until Valencia was forced to relent and play here. Similarly, in the case of the academic boycott, the global Israeli lobby has tracked down, one by one, those who have declared support of the boycott, and have tried to make their lives miserable. The attempt by Haifa University to dismiss Dr.Ilan Pappe in 2002 was not instigated because of the Teddy Katz affair, but because Dr. Pappe openly supported the boycott and signed the original British petition calling for it.
It is possible that the bulldozer, which has come to symbolize Israel, will succeed in reversing the decision of the AUT in England. But will this prevent researchers from boycotting us quietly, without involving the media? Perhaps it would be more worthwhile for the Israeli Academy to direct its anger at the government and demand that it finally put a stop to this wall."
Tell you what, when you've addressed the issue of Palestinian academic freedom under the occupation that Bar Ilan is actively supporting, I'll even find some interesting stuff on how the zionist lobby actually does meddle with academic freedom.
Just for you.
;)
ftp
update
12.05.2005 21:45
gehrig
"UK anti-Israel boycott collapses"
13.05.2005 16:27
The Jerusalem Post -- which I generally haven't much use for -- bears a headline today that "UK anti-Israel boycott collapses" which is premature until the special council but rather clearly the writing on the wall.
Meanwhile, to turn to blacklists and loyalty oaths to _enforce_ "academic freedom" is Orwellian.
gehrig
Palestinians Gehrig!!!!
14.05.2005 07:55
Does the AUT not have to even take such a thing into consideration?
Its clear that the branches are going ahead with votes without even having the debate ... do many of the lecturers impose exams before they've covered the material? Or is there some level of interference going on here?
ftp
more news
14.05.2005 15:06
Reading LA against the boycott.
And, of course, because the startling lack of forethought on the proposition against Haifa included not only failure to verify the facts of the "case" about Pappe, which turns out to be non-existent, but including the facts of that "case" _in the resolution text_ gives the University of Haifa an open-and-shut libel case. To defend itself, the AUT would have to prove what the resolution said about Pappe and Katz is true, which will be quite difficult to do since it's false.
Protesting Israeli violations of human rights is not stupid a priori. God knows I'm no fan of Sharon. But there are stupid ways to protest, stupidly counterproductive ways to protest, ways to protest that are so stupidly counterproductive that they succeed only in bringing international condemnation onto the protesters, and ways to protest so stupid that only bring allegedly democratic professional organizations into disrepute for their failure to actually represent the opinions of their rank and file rather than a packet of extremists.
When the smoke clears, then you'll have to ask -- what was really accomplished, other than the "great symbolic victory" that the Israel-must-be-eradicated contingent always claim when their plans some to nothing pragmatically?
gehrig
"it is clear"?
14.05.2005 15:39
Meanwhile, here is Ali Banuazizi, speaking officially as president of the Middle East Studies Association in America -- hardly by anyone's definition an ee-e-e-eevil Zi-i-ionist -- on why the boycott is wrongheaded:
And I see that I have forgotten to mention that Brunel has repudiated the boycott.
I wouldn't care to be Sue Blackwell, leader of the Charge of the Benighted Brigade, at the moment.
gehrig
another one
16.05.2005 16:22
At the moment, I know of no university local which has voted to uphold the boycott.
gehrig
another another one
17.05.2005 13:20
In the meantime, since the falsehoods about Pappe and U Haifa were not merely talking points at the half-debate in April but are actually embedded in the resolution text, if the boycott isn't overturned, the only real decisions U Haifa will have -- given the open-and-shut case of libel caused by the posting of the resolution on the AUT site -- are whether to ask AUT for seven figures or eight (plus legal costs), and whether to come round on a Monday or a Tuesday to collect it.
gehrig
and more
17.05.2005 16:00
No local association has yet voted to support the boycott. Not one. Nevertheless, the same procedural legerdemain that was used to (quite narrowly) pass the boycott in the first place may yet rear its head; in doing so, it's quite clear that the will of the union rank and file would be disregarded, and the AUT would find itself in an even deeper crisis than it now finds itself.
gehrig
congratulations!
17.05.2005 18:15
Although York and Kensington voted against it. So did Keele, Leeds, and Birmingham.
It's really quite an extraordinary show of solidarity.
The latest tactic, incidentally -- based on the clear indication that, barring more procedural peculiarities from the AUT Executive, the boycott will be unambiguously repudiated next week -- is to endorse a yet _smaller_ boycott, one specifically aimed at the newly renamed College of Judea and Samaria. If this resolution carries -- and it's not completely impossible that it might, only quite unlikely given the way the wind is blowing -- then I predict that very quickly we will be told that this was really the boycott's only goal all along and that achieving it is a "great symbolic victory."
gehrig