No monoliths
Why boycott Haifa University where Israelis and Israeli-Arabs function side-by-side?
Let’s presume that AUT (Association of University Teachers) Council Members who agreed to boycotting two Israeli universities are merely following the trend to be pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli to such an extent that they believed the boycott would achieve something substantial.
Let’s presume they didn’t know that a student visiting the room of Sue Blackwell, the boycott’s proponent, would be struck by its anti-Israel décor and that she wears clothes in Palestinian national colours.
We would understand a call for boycott that was motivated by pure politics - that Haifa University supported the occupation. But Haifa University’s reputation is as an institution in which Israeli and Israeli Arabs function together.
Many Haifa University academics overtly oppose the occupation. Flawed though the Oslo Process may have been, it was the part product of an Israeli academic Yair Hirschfeld - and guess what university he came from?
Education Minister Limor Livnat confirmed at least her, if not the cabinet’s view not just on Ariel College but also on the future of the West Bank.
“Upgrading … is designed to support the settlement vision out of a national interest of the State of Israel,” she said.
Thank you AUT Council.
Ignorance stems prejudice
Whether by intent or design this has challenged Israeli academics who opposed the boycott.
Do not boycott Haifa or Hebrew University - but boycott Ariel University? The old union cry of ‘one out - all out “ does the blanket job. Next may come a total boycott of all Israeli universities. That’s the long range aim of the boycotters.
From ignorance stems prejudice. Yet those who are patently ignorant are those whose profession is based firmly and precisely on the opposite. These are supposed to be learned individuals, in whose hands rest the future shaping and thinking of generations of young students.
And one fundamental of attaining knowledge is the process of questioning. How many AUT Council members asked questions before they consented to a boycott? How many know that not all Israelis are called Ariel Sharon, and that each time Israelis are polled a majority of them agree to a negotiated settlement for a two state solution with an end to the occupation?
No such poll results in apartheid South Africa ever produced such majorities opposed to apartheid, and yet many boycotters persist in comparing Israel with apartheid.
It would be comforting to imagine that this boycott has impacted on Israeli public opinion to such an extent that it has raised its unanimous voice against the occupation, that one inch of Palestinian territory has become sovereign Palestine state land, that one drop of Palestinian and Israeli blood has been saved. Nothing could be further from reality - which in a sense is a description of the boycott itself.
Old and new anti-Semitism?
Remaining is the absurdity of enforcing it - potentially contravening UK employment law - and of getting any Israeli academic worth their salt to agree with it by signing the declaration the boycott offers them as a get-out.
Put aside the personal motivations of the leading boycotters Blackwell in Birmingham and Pappe in Haifa and you are left with a yawning vacuum. From it emerges the awesome conclusion by many opposing the boycott, that its motives are anti-Semitic.
When attacked we often resort to extremes. The boycotters have lumped together all Israeli academics as pro-occupation and anti-Palestinian. Their statements are anti-Israeli. Their opponents conclude that the gap between the old anti-Semitism that produced the holocaust and the new anti-Semitism of this century, is filled by Israel.
“There is no bad or good occupation,” one Palestinian acquaintance once told me. “Occupation is occupation.”
There is no old or new anti-Semitism, even if the latter is shrouded in anti-Israeli sentiment, it amounts to the same thing, conclude Jewish boycott opponents.
One West Country AUT branch statement said, "It is counter productive for UK academics to shut down positive dialogue and discourse. A boycott promotes a one-sided view of a complex situation, a culture of blame where both sides share responsibility for destructive action, and works against a dialogue of peace."
"The ideals of academia and academic freedom are such that we should be promoting open dialogue, and supporting our colleagues in Israel and Palestine by engaging with them in collaborative work, ncouraging them to work together, and welcoming them as colleagues in all forms of academic activity."
- Paul Usiskin is Chair of Peace Now-UK
- AJC launches fund to fight anti-Israel boycott
Outraged by the decision to boycott the two Israeli universities, AJC, in partnership with the American Society of the University of Haifa, has established a special anti-boycott fund.
