I speak as someone who has been involved with Palestinian solidarity
action in the past, and who continues to support the rights of
Palestinians to a state, and who is utterly opposed to any violation of
human rights. I speak as someone who has worked hard for the rights of
indigenous peoples against forcible eviction and disruption by
governments of all poltical colours. I also speak as someone of
partially Jewish ancestry very conscious of what some of my family went
through in Europe and the reasons why Israel has just as much right to
exist as a state (which in both cases, Palestine and Israel, is as much
right as any state has to exist, which is of course a deeper question,
but one which won't help us in the immediate future). 

This is not a simple matter than can be addressed by recourse to the
standard sloganeeing of those with evangelical (and I use that word very
carefully in the current climate) political beliefs. I agree that a more
measured and careful response is needed. 

Unfortunately measured and careful is not how I would characterise the
thinking behind this bid. This is more than a simple matter of
boycotting some specific univeristies because of specific bad things
they are doing, it does seem to be considered to be a first step to
isolating Israeli academics as a matter of course. And whilst this
particular first step cannot be considered anti-semitic in itself, it
certainly does buy into strong latent anti-semitism, especially if
placed in the context of other statements by some of the proposers. 

I would also again question why these particular people have targeted
Israeli univeristies as being so particularly iniquitous. Israel as a
state deserves all the criticism it gets and I hold no brief at all for
the current or past regimes. However, I am not going to list the
nation-states that exist in the world that are founded on exclusionary
prinicples, or which have used ethnic cleansing in either state
formation or consolidation because there are too many of them - in fact
it would be easier to list nation-states which are not and have not (of
indeed there are any at all). And just on a purely mathematical
calculation of the number of deaths etc. that have resulted from Israeli
state action, there are many contemporary states that are 'worse' in
their effects on their own people and on others, and yet no-one asks to
boycott their universities. Even the state to which most of our
universities belong (the UK) for long periods of very recent history
operated incredibly racist policies in constant violation of human
rights that resulted in many deaths and injuries in Northern Ireland
(and some would argue, still does). I presume that those who supported
this boycott would also have supported a boycott of any universities
associated with British rule of Northern Ireland? Or is just very
convenient that the situation has quietened down enough that we don't
have to worry about this and we can be safe in our moral indignation of
'somewhere else'.   

So why Israeli universities above all others? Unless someone can
adequately answer this question, this boycott is morally bankrupt. If it
is however, morally consistent, I am fully expecting a boycott of most
universities in Britain, Spain, China, North Korea, the United States,
Saudi Arabia (indeed most other middle-easten states along with Israel,
most of which are based in religious exclusion), Uganda (and any other
state involved in the deaths of over 3 million people in Congo over the
last few years), etc. etc. etc.

'Symbolic action' is simply not good enough as a reason - because you
have to be oh so careful what the action is symbolic of... I was
wondering last night how the AUT might identify the academics from the
universities they have boycotted, and in the spirit of Swift's 'Modest
Proposal', I modestly propose that they might be issued with some item
to wear upon entering the UK so that we might know them and shun them in
the manner required - how about, I don't know, a yellow star, perhaps. I
have heard this was quite effective the last time it was tried in
Europe... 

David.  



>-----Original Message-----
>From: A forum for critical and radical geographers 
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Storey
>Sent: 27 April 2005 15:56
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: AUT boycott
>
>
>Further to Dave Featherstone's comments on the AUT boycott of 
>Israeli academic institutions, there are certainly questions 
>pertaining to such boycotts. Amongst other things, these 
>relate to equity, effectiveness, 
>interpretation,implementation,flexibility. 
>
>Many opposed to such boycotts cite the importance of upholding 
>academic freedom. While many of us might generally wish to 
>uphold this right, it may occasionally conflict with the 
>rights of others (the rights of Palestinian academics for 
>example?). This argument also seems to presuppose a separation 
>of academia from the messy world of politics - a position 
>which hardly seems tenable.
>
>The suggestion that an academic boycott of Israeli 
>institutions carries a whiff of anti-semitism seems to be both 
>illogical and dangerous. It seems to suggest that criticism of 
>the Israeli state is tantamount to racism. While anti-semitism 
>is to be deplored, does this mean that Israel cannot be 
>criticised or that critics should refrain from taking action. 
>Does it mean that British anti-war protestors are 
>anti-British? or that US critics of Bush's foreign policy are 
>anti-American?
>
>Dave
>
>Dr. David Storey
>Department of Applied Sciences, Geography and Archaeology 
>University College Worcester Henwick Grove Worcester WR2 6AJ
>
>Tel: 01905 855189
>Fax: 01905 855132 
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: A forum for critical and radical geographers
>On Behalf Of Dave Featherstone
>Sent: 27 April 2005 14:03
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: What to do against the AUT boycott
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I would like to raise concerns about what is written below...
>
>as an AUT member I am obviously concerned about the procedures at the 
>conference outlined below...I also think an academic boycott 
>is a fairly 
>clumsy way of taking action and there are some flaws...
>
>However, I do think that there is a very strong case for 
>symbolic action 
>against Israeli government and to accuse those supporting the 
>boycott as 
>anti-semitic is to demean those involved. I also think it 
>needs to be made 
>clear that this isn't just a case of being 'fed up with Sharon' which 
>trivialises the scale of injustice that the Israeli state is 
>involved eg 
>through repeated flouting of UN conventions etc...
>
>So despite reservations about AUT procedure and the 
>technicalities of the 
>boycott I think the broader picture for the need for symbolic action 
>against Israel and the political integrity of those lobbying against 
>Israeli government actions need to be taken seriously,
>
>Dave
>
>
>--On 26 April 2005 16:15 +0100 Dr Camila Bassi 
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> This is a forwarded message from David Hirsh (Goldsmiths College, 
>> University of London) which may interest some readers:
>>
>> Many are angry that AUT has now taken the first steps on the road to 
>> boycotting Israeli thinkers, teachers, artists and musicians on the 
>> premise that are responsible for the actions of the Israeli 
>> government.
>>
>> It is crucial that we do not to leave AUT in anger and 
>disgust. If we 
>> seize the moment, we can build a campaign that can reverse 
>the boycott 
>> policy in AUT. People must not resign, they must fight. And 
>the people 
>> who have been fighting for a long time, and feel isolated and angry, 
>> will not be isolated now. A whole new layer of people are ready to 
>> join them in the fight against the boycott.
>>
>> On this issue, debate can change minds. The argument that 'Israel is 
>> apartheid and so we must boycott it' is seductive to people 
>who don't 
>> know much about the issues and who want to 'do something'. But the 
>> commitment of the people who have been thus seduced is weak. So 
>> debate, education and organisation have a strong chance of success.
>>
>> Many AUT members will be worried about union democracy; others about 
>> academic freedom; many will be worried by the whiff of antisemitism; 
>> many members are fed up with Sharon but don't know how to oppose him 
>> and the boycotters at the same time. This is the moment for a 
>> campaign. And I think we can win. Read the following carefully (from 
>> John Pike, Open University).
>>
>> The AUT council at Eastbourne voted to boycott two Israeli 
>> Universities without a proper debate: no speakers were taken against 
>> the resolutions for a boycott moved by Birmingham or against the 
>> resolution calling for the circulation of the call for a boycott, 
>> proposed by the OU. Lack of time prevented any debate on 
>this matter, 
>> which divided the Council down the middle. This should 
>offend all AUT 
>> members, regardless of their position on the substantive issue. For 
>> this reason we want there to be a special council of the AUT 
>properly 
>> to discuss this issue.
>>
>> Under the rules of the AUT there is provision for a special 
>meeting of 
>> Council. Rule 10.3.1 (in full) states that 'The president 
>may summon a 
>> special meeting of council. A special meeting of Council must be 
>> convened within 35 days if a request specifying the business to be 
>> transacted is received from 25 council members.
>>
>> All members of the AUT should contact their representative 
>members of 
>> council. You can generally find out who they are from the 
>local branch 
>> page of the AUT website at 
>> http://www.aut.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=519.
>>
>> Please cut and paste the first statement below and ask 
>council members 
>> to sign it. Please let me know of any successes at 
>[log in to unmask] 
>> and send me signatures as they come in. I'll keep count and post 
>> updates to the Engage website.
>>
>> To the President of the Association of University Teachers
>>
>> As members of the Council of the Association of University Teachers, 
>> we request a special meeting of the Council of the AUT under rule 
>> 10.3.1 in order to have a full debate on proposals to 
>boycott Israeli 
>> Universities.
>>
>> We also ask ordinary members of the AUT to add their names ? 
>email is 
>> fine for this one - to the following statement which will be 
>> circulated to all members of the National executive 
>committee, all of 
>> who are members of Council.
>>
>> To members of the National Executive of the AUT
>>
>> As members of the AUT concerned by the absence of a debate on the 
>> resolutions to boycott Israeli Universities, we ask that you support 
>> the request for a Special Council meeting to have a full debate on 
>> these proposals
>>
>> Jon Pike (Open) AUT membership number 58097
>>
>>
>> Best Wishes
>>
>> David Hirsh
>>
>> Sociology Department
>> Goldsmiths College
>> London SE14 6NW
>> [log in to unmask]
>> +4420 7919 7730
>