UCU academic boycott of Israel defeated

The academic boycott of Israel proposal that had achieved so much notoriety, was squelched Friday when the UK University and College Union (UCU) announced, after seeking legal advice, that a boycott would be unlawful and could not be implemented. This episode should make Israel boycott opponents think really hard about their strategy in the future, and gain a better understanding of the reasoning behind the Boycott Israel campaigns.

A union resolution last May had called for discussion about the boycott in union branches, but curiously, nobody checked if the proposal was legal. After finally getting legal advice, the union's strategy and finance committee unanimously adopted the recommendation of UCU General Secretary Sally Hunt that the union should immediately inform branches and members that a boycott call would be unlawful and cannot be implemented.

The legal advice given to the union stated that: "...It would be beyond the union's powers and unlawful for the union, directly or indirectly, to call for, or to implement, a boycott by the union and its members of any kind of Israeli universities and other academic institutions; and ... the use of union funds directly or indirectly to further such a boycott would also be unlawful."

The advice further warned that "to ensure that the union acts lawfully, meetings should not be used to ascertain the level of support for such a boycott."

So what is the point? The point is that it would have been no problem to investigate the legal aspects of the boycott before the vote, especially since the UCU motion was based on previous motions. UCU was the product of a merger of two unions. The Association of University Teachers (AUT) had passed a boycott motion and then reversed it, and then the NATFHE (National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education) voted to Boycott Israel. They went even further and voted to support the nice Hamas.

In a better world, it would not occur to academics to support a group of reactionary gangsters like Hamas, or to delude themselves that such support represented a "progressive" cause, or to boycott the universities of a country because they disagree with the political policies of that country. Legal coercion would not be necessary. But we don't live in a better world, we live in this one.

In all the time that has passed since the boycotts were first proposed, it would have been no problem at all to check the legal implications of such decisions, but nobody did it it. Either that, or they had checked and didn't care. The point of the boycott resolutions is not in the actual results they might or might not obtain, but in the great stir and discussion they cause, putting the spotlight on Israel. A good part of this publicity is due to well meaning supporters of Israel. In effect, tiny groups of fanatics are able to use these boycott calls to leverage on the substantial resources of supporters of Israel and ordinary decent union members in order to bring their odious ideas to the attention of the public and lend them the air of legitimacy that comes with notoriety.

And so, I ask again - "Are we victims of the Israel boycott con? "

Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Israel boycott Solidarity: US University Heads protest British Boycott in N.Y Times

Boycott solidarity. We need a lot more of this, don't we?

 

300 U.S. university heads slam British boycott in NY Times

By Tamara Traubmann


Three hundred U.S. college and university heads signed a petition denouncing the call by Britain's University and College Union to consider a boycott of Israeli educational institutions in May. The UCU move has been criticized by faculty members throughout the world as well as British government institutions.

The New York Times yesterday ran a full-page paid advertisement against the boycott, signed by some 300 college and university presidents. "Boycott Israeli Universities? Boycott Ours, Too!" the ad declared.

The signatories include presidents of leading U.S. universities, including Princeton, Northwestern and MIT. The ad was paid for by the American Jewish Committee.

The signatories were endorsing a statement that Columbia University President Lee Bollinger issued shortly after the UCU resolution was passed:

"As a citizen, I am profoundly disturbed by the recent vote by Britain's new University and College Union to advance a boycott against Israeli academic institutions. As a university professor and president, I find this idea utterly antithetical to the fundamental values of the academy, where we will not hold intellectual exchange hostage to the political disagreements of the moment. In seeking to quarantine Israeli universities and scholars, this vote threatens every university committed to fostering scholarly and cultural exchanges that lead to enlightenment, empathy and a much-needed international marketplace of ideas.

"At Columbia I am proud to say that we embrace Israeli scholars and universities that the UCU is now all too eager to isolate - as we embrace scholars from many countries regardless of divergent views on their government's policies. Therefore, if the British UCU is intent on pursuing its deeply misguided policy, then it should add Columbia to its boycott list, for we do not intend to draw distinctions between our mission and that of the universities you are seeking to punish.

"Boycott us, then, for we gladly stand together with our many colleagues in British, American and Israeli universities against such intellectually shoddy and politically biased attempts to hijack the central mission of higher education."

Continued (Permanent Link)

Israel Boycotts: Comfort ye, comfort ye my people

Journals are filled with "good cheer" stories about overcoming the effects of anti-Israel boycotts. Shall we overcome? According to the Guardian, Israeli universities signed a new European Union agreement that allows the nation's scientists to take part in the next six-year research program. The Guardian notes:

 

Israel's participation in European research programmes was called into question in 2002 when two British academics had a letter published in the Guardian advocating a moratorium on all grants and contracts to Israel from European cultural and research institutions.

 

Janze Potocnik, the EU's research commissioner, said: "Israel's association to the framework programme has proved to be of mutual benefit for both sides over the last couple of years. Whereas the European research area will benefit from the renowned excellence of the Israeli research community, Israel will gain full access to the biggest research programme in the world.

 

Of course, that doesn't prevent journals from boycotting articles by Israeli scientists and other academics, and it doesn't force researchers to treat Israeli post-doctoral applicants equally. There have been cases of discrimination in both areas and many others, even without the boycott initiatives.

 

The Institute for Advanced Studies (IAS) of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem has been accepted to a presitigious international consortium of such institutes. According to a Hebrew University announcement:

 

Membership for the Hebrew University's IAS was voted by the consortium's existing members -- considered the Ivy League of advanced institutes. These include the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton; the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford; Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard; the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study; and Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin Institute for Advanced Study at Berlin. The Hebrew University is the tenth member to join the consortium.
 
The IAS in Jerusalem was accepted for its unique approach in hosting collaborative research groups and its academic achievements. It hopes that membership will open doors to further academic exchange and collaborative projects.

 

"We are looking forward to sharing experiences with these distinguished institutes for the benefit of all," said director of the IAS in Jerusalem, Prof. Eliezer Rabinovici. "Science should move forward by the tradition of openness and sharing and not by the ill winds of exclusion. Membership status in the SIAS consortium is a testament to the high caliber, innovative and collaborative research Israel engages in."

 

The IAS is the only one of its kind in the Middle East and was the fifth in the world to be established in 1975 – the first one being at Princeton. Twelve Nobel Laureates are associated with the Institute in the fields of chemistry, physics, medicine and economics.

 

And in the United States, labor unions roundly condemned the British boycott initiatives. An initiative begun by the Jewish Labor Committee was endorsed by a host of unions and union leaders, including the presidents of the AFL-CIO; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; American Federation of Teachers; United Food and Commercial Workers; Communications Workers of America; Masters, Mates and Pilots / ILA; American Postal Workers Union; International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; UAW; American Federation of School Administrators; Office and Professional Employees International Union; American Federation of Government Employees; UNITE-HERE; United Mine Workers of America; Sheet Metal Workers International Association; International Union of Painters and Allied Trades; Transportation Communications Union; American Federation Musicians; Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union; International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers; and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and the presidents of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists and the A. Philip Randolph Institute. 

 

Others may join the initiative as well.

 

They signed the statement appended below. It is comforting and heartening to know that Israel still has friends who will speak up for fair play, but the ignorance and hate demonstrated by the boycotters is nonetheless unnerving, and the trend seems to be growing, despite the rise of the Hamas, and despite the Israeli disengagement from Gaza. The boycotts and divestment initiateves are a well organized and well financed pseudo-grass-roots campaign, conceived by people who are experts in organizing "spontaneous" movements and demonstrations. It has been been planned for years, and Jewish organizations were caught napping. (See Israel Boycotts and Divestment )

It really would have been better if we did not need this show of support.

 

Ami Isseroff

 

Statement of Opposition to Divestment from or Boycotts of Israel

 

July 18, 2007

 

We view with increasing concern the phenomenon of trade unions in a number of countries, including, most recently, the United Kingdom, issuing resolutions that either directly or indirectly call for divestment from and boycotts of Israel.

 

With the large number of local, regional and international conflicts, with the diverse range of oppressive regimes around the world about which there is almost universal silence, we have to question the motives of these resolutions that single out one country in one conflict.

 

We note with increasing concern that virtually all of these resolutions focus solely on objections to actions or policies of the Israeli government, and never on actions or policies of Palestinian or other Arab governments, parties or movements. We notice with increasing concern that characterization of the Palestinians as victims and Israel as victimizer is a staple of such resolutions. That there are victims and victimizers on all sides, and that many if not most of the victims of violence and repression on all sides are civilians, are essential items often not mentioned in these resolutions.

 

Any just and fair resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be brought about through meaningful negotiations between their elected representatives. We believe strongly in a two-state solution, brought about through meaningful negotiations, with the involvement and encouragement of the world community.

 

Trade unionists and their organizations seeking such a just and fair resolution should be assisting those working to bring the two sides together in direct talks and then negotiations. In this regard, we call for increased engagement of trade unions with their counterparts on all sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We support efforts of Palestinian and Israeli trade unionists and their organizations to maintain contact and cooperative and mutually supportive activities, even in the midst of tumult and political change within their respective communities and polities.

 

Calls for academic boycotts of Israel are inimical to and counter to the principles of academic freedom and freedom of association, key principles for which academics and educational unions have struggled over many years. Rather than limiting interactions with Israeli educators, academics and educational institutions, we see the importance of maximizing, rather than proscribing, the free flow of ideas and academic interaction between peoples, cultures, religions and countries.

 

Similarly, calls for journalistic boycotts of Israel are inimical to the free flow of information and journalistic objectivity, and must be opposed.

 

Rather than divestment from Israel, we believe that investment of time, energy and material aid is the best means to alleviate the ongoing suffering of Palestinians and Israelis. Engagement, rather than disengagement, with the Israeli people and the Palestinian people is needed, so that a just and fair resolution of this conflict may be pursued, and so that meaningful progress towards achieving the legitimate needs of Palestinians and Israelis can be made.

 

We offer our support to assist trade unionists as well as interested members of the community-at-large who are grappling with these matters, and who share our concern over simplistic and non-constructive approaches, whether in the form of misguided resolutions or other statements on the tragic conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.
   

    Stuart Appelbaum
    President, Jewish Labor Committee
    President, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union / UFCW

 

    Edward J. McElroy
    Secretary, Jewish Labor Committee
    President, American Federation of Teachers

 

    Morton Bahr
    Treasurer, Jewish Labor Committee

 

    John J. Sweeney
    President, AFL-CIO

 

    Clayola Brown
    President, A. Philip Randolph Institute

 

    Timothy A. Brown
    International President, International Organization of Masters, Mates &
    Pilots / ILA

 

    R. Thomas Buffenbarger
    International President,
    International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers

 

    William Burrus
    President, American Postal Workers Union

 

    Larry Cohen
    President, Communications Workers of America

 

    Barbara J. Easterling
    Secretary-Treasurer, Communications Workers of America

 

    John J. Flynn
    President, International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers

 

    John Gage
    President, American Federation of Government Employees

 

    Ron Gettelfinger
    President
    United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America
    International Union

 

    Michael Goodwin
    President, Office and Professional Employees International Union

 

    Joseph T. Hansen
    International President, United Food and Commercial Workers International
    Union

 

    Edwin D. Hill
    International President, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

 

    James P. Hoffa
    General President, International Brotherhood of Teamsters

 

    Frank Hurt
    International President
    Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International
    Union

 

    Thomas F. Lee
    President, American Federation of Musicians

 

    Jill S. Levy
    President, American Federation of School Administrators

 

    William Lucy
    President, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists

 

    Gerald W. McEntee
    President, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

 

    Bruce S. Raynor
    General President, UNITE HERE

 

    Cecil E. Roberts
    President, United Mine Workers of America

 

    Robert Scardelletti
    International President, Transportation Communications Union / IAM

 

    Michael J. Sullivan
    General President, Sheet Metal Workers International Association

 

    George Tedeschi
    President, Graphic Communications International Union / IBT

 

    James A. Williams
    General President, International Union of Printers and Allied Trades

 

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

Continued (Permanent Link)

Israel Academic Boycott: Principles versus political reactions

In "Israel Academic Boycott threatens Academic Freedom," John Furedy takes issue with Israel academic boycott protesters who try to reverse boycotts based on Israel's presumed lack of innocence. That is not the point, he writes. The boycotts threaten everyone's academic freedom. Anyone should have the right to speak up as they wish on any topic.

That is his opinion, but do we really want to leave ourselves defenseless against professors who teach linkage between race and intelligence based on bad data, against Holocaust deniers and other miscreants? How about even less acceptable doctrines? Does a university have the right to fire a professor who teaches the flat earth theory? Does a theology journal have the right to reject an article that insists that Molokh is the real god, and human sacrifice is the only good form of worship?

You be the judge.

Ami Isseroff

Israel Academic Boycott threatens Academic Freedom

Radically principled vs. compromisingly political reactions
to the academic anti-Israeli boycott: "Welcome to the fight".

At end of the classic film, "Casablanca", when Rick finally decides to abandon his neutrality with regard to the Nazi and Vichy regimes, the resistance fighter Victor Laszlo says, "Welcome to the fight." Victor's words seem apt as the academic anti-Israeli boycott, that abuse of academic freedom, continues. Anti-Semitism and other dark impulses may likely motivate the boycott. Whatever the motives for the boycott may be, however, the boycott threatens the central mission of any genuine university. That mission is the search for truth through the conflict of ideas. For academics, then, a phrase from the theme song of Casablanca is also relevant: "The fundamental things apply."

Opposition to the boycott, indeed, is incumbent on all who value a free society, in which freedom of speech is a central tenet. This tenet was recently formulated by Nathan Sharansky, who distinguished between free and "fear" or totalitarian societies. He noted that in a free society, even the most outrageous opinions can be publicly stated without fear of criminal punishment.

For those who believe in a free society, then, academic freedom on campus and freedom of speech off campus should be closely related. In particular, non- academics should not make the mistake of treating academic freedom as merely an "ivory tower" issue. Another mistake is to minimize the boycott on the grounds that it merely places Israeli professors in a sort of academic Coventry. The essence of academic freedom is, as I have argued, the right of all members of the academic community (students and faculty) to be evaluated solely on their academic performance, and not at all on their politics, religion, or citizenship. The boycott denies this right, and is therefore properly labeled an abuse of academic freedom. Those who are not direct victims of this abuse (in this instance those who do not hold Israeli citizenship or are not Jews) should not treat the boycott with indifference, or worse still, join, even in a partial way, those who threaten academic freedom. Like justice, freedom is indivisible.

Read the rest at  Israel Academic Boycott threatens Academic Freedom

Cross posted: Israel News  Middle East Analysis

Continued (Permanent Link)

British: 'Please don't boycott us'

Indeed, Britain has the trade ties with Israel that are described below, and indeed, Israel probably benefits from them more than Britain does.

 

Calls for boycotting Britain by Israel alone are senseless. But not everything in this special pleading is quite as true as it should be. For example:

 

"Remember, too, that these boycotts in no way reflect official British government policy toward Israel."

 

"Official policy" can mean many things. The BBC for example, is an autonomous broadcasting service licensed by the British government. It has been a source of blatant anti-Israel agitation for quite a while.

 

Still, we don't boycott Egypt, where media are much more anti-Israel.

 

Israel is always in a precarious position and should not be initiating boycotts. Of course, that doesn't mean that the US teamsters union is obligated to unload cargoes that were shipped by their UNISON and Transport Workers Union counterparts. Israel is not the place for boycotts of course, but that doesn't mean that the US NIH has to open fellowships to British university applicants.

 

Ami Isseroff

 

Britain and Israel: Business as usual

 

By Richard Salt

 

When people talk about good relations between countries, it is important to ask exactly what that means. As I see it, mutually-beneficial trade and investment links are an important part of the "meat" of a bilateral relationship. Major British companies such as HSBC, British Airways and British Gas have interests out here, and two-way trade was close to 2.4 billion pounds sterling (around $5 billion) last year.

 

In addition, many Israeli companies and businessmen see the United Kingdom as an attractive place to grow and expand their businesses. The UK, as an international financial hub, is the doorway to a world of opportunities for companies and entrepreneurs. More than 200 Israeli companies have set up operations in the UK, and that number continues to rise. Another encouraging figure: close to 40 Israeli companies have already chosen the AIM stock exchange to raise capital, rather than the more expensive and distant option of the U.S.

 

I am well aware at the shock and anger felt here in Israel by recent attempts by a handful of British organizations, such as UNISON and the University and College Union (UCU), to push for a boycott of Israel, particularly given the warm relations between our two countries. It is important to remember that attempts to boycott Israel generally fail or have no real impact on the strong ties between Britain and Israel. The decision reached by the UCU in late May merely calls on members to consider a boycott of Israel, and does not actually impose a boycott of Israeli academia. The motion passed by UNISON in mid-June simply reiterated the union's long-standing policy on the Middle East & a policy that has not stopped UK-Israel trade relations, or academic links, from flourishing in recent years.

 

Remember, too, that these boycotts in no way reflect official British government policy toward Israel. UNISON and the UCU are totally independent. The UK government cannot interfere in the their internal deliberations, but we certainly do not support attempts to boycott Israel and have made that clear. We firmly believe that the best way to solve conflicts is through negotiations and inclusive dialogue. I, therefore, firmly believe that calls from some in Israel to impose a counterboycott on the UK are highly regrettable, and I am glad to see that these calls, like those in the UK, do not seem to have broad support.

 

What the UK government does support is encouraging ties with Israel in key areas, such as science, education, trade and industry. These are not just words, but concrete, continuous activities. Just last month, Britain's Minister of State for Higher Education, Bill Rammell, visited Israel to promote academic ties between our two countries. We also hosted a group of six senior British scientists who attended a conference on stem cell research at the Weizmann Institute. The UK government last year sponsored a visit by our most famous scientist, Professor Stephen Hawking, to advance cooperation between our scientific communities. And we annually sponsor scholarships for Israelis to study in the UK under our Chevening Scholarship scheme.

 

The scope for continued cooperation between our countries is enormous, for example, under the European 7th Framework Program. Under the 6th Framework Program, in which Israel participated as an Associated Country, there were 262 projects featuring UK and Israeli partners with contracts to the value of 1.5 billion euros. I encourage Israeli companies to keep on investing in the UK, and British companies to realize the huge R&D, investment and business opportunities that exist in Israel.
We now have a new government in the UK with a new prime minister, who brings with him 10 years of experience as chancellor of the exchequer. Israel, and this region as a whole, remain a top priority for Britain. And that includes ensuring that the commercial relationship between our two countries continues to prosper.

 

Richard Salt is director of UK trade & investment at the British Embassy Tel Aviv.

Continued (Permanent Link)

British Transport Workers join the Israel Boycott Bandwagon

The boycotts keep "happening" with discouraging regularity, and so do the bombings in England. I am so fond of British people. What a pity.

 

 

Last update - 22:08 08/07/2007   

 

Major British workers' union joins moves to boycott Israel

 

By Haim Bior, Haaretz Correspondent

Britain's Transport and General Workers' Union has called upon its 800,000 members to boycott Israeli-made products based on what they term Israel's "criminal policies in Palestinian territories."

 

The decision to call for a boycott, reached at a union conference in Brighton, is declarative and does not include concrete steps to implement the boycott.

 

The TGWU is the second British union to call for a boycott on Israel this year - last month the British public services union UNISON also urged its members to refrain from purchasing Israeli products, basing the call on Israel's "criminal behavior in the territories," and Israel's responsibility for the Second Lebanon War.

 

In the last six months, Ontario, Canada's public services union also proposed a similar anti-Israel boycott, as did several professional unions in South Africa. In addition, Britain's University and College Union called upon its members earlier this year to consider an academic boycott of Israel, which would include holding funding from research projects run by Israeli professors and preventing Israeli lecturers from participating in seminars.

 

Histadrut International activities director Avital Shapira said Sunday afternoon that the Histadrut labor federation views the TGWU's boycott call with severity. According to Shapira, the Histadrut has decided not to cooperate with these unions. "They expect us to help them with everything surrounding joint activities with Palestinian unions, but in light of their behavior toward us, we will hold these activities without them."

 

The British embassy in Israel issued a response Sunday saying "the British government opposes boycotts of any kind."

 

"The boycott declared by the Transport and General Workers' Union will not harm the growing commercial relations between the two countries," the statement said.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Christian Zionism

What is Christian Zionism ?

 

"Christian Zionism" has been the subject of much controversy. Opponents of  Christian support for Israel apparently invented this name. They claim that all Christian Zionists are dispensationalists and that the movement was originated by J.N. Darby. At the same time, they mayclaim, paradoxically, that any Christian who supports Israel is a Christian Zionist. Supposedly, all such people are extremist fanatics who believe in imminent rapture, and try to hasten the apocalyptic battle of Armageddon. Supposedly, they are also all seeking to convert the Jews, and they all oppose territorial concessions by Israel on theological grounds. The Reverend Stephen Sizer in particular, has been active in propagating these views. His motives are transparently political beneath a theological veneer, as are the motives of most such critics.

 

Though some Christian Zionists do hold the above views in various forms, that is far from a veridical picture of Christian Zionism and Christian support for Israel. Among the most active and visible Christian Zionists, many are not dispensationalists and do not believe in rapture or hastening the battle of Armageddon, nor do they seek to convert Jews.  Christian supporters of Israel include Christians of many Protestant denominations and beliefs, as well as some Catholics.

 

Historically, Christian support for restoration of Israel preceded J.N. Darby by over two hundred years. It originated in the doctrines of the Puritans, which were transmitted from England to the United States. Support for restoration of Israel became much more than an article of faith. Just as previously anti-Semitism had taken hold and become an integral part of European culture, so in the United States, support for restoration of Israel became embedded in American culture. Christian support for restoration of Israel has a long and impressive history in practical as well as political Zionism and theology, that began long before the arrival of dispensationalism in the United States. We have prepared an extensive resource that discusses the theological issues, the critiques and the history of Christian support for Israel at http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/christian_zionism.htm Christian Zionism .

 

We hope you will find this resource of use in understanding the nature of Christian Zionism, and we will appreciate constructive comments, links and support. The work, large as it is, is a work in progress.

 

Cross posted: Israel News  Midde East Analysis  

Continued (Permanent Link)

ADL: Methodist committee report on Israel 'borders on anti-Semitism'

Invest in Caterpillar, General Electric, Blockbuster, General Dynamics - firms that do business with Israel and are targetted for it.

 

"I argue that those who single out Israel for unique criticism not directed against countries with far worse human rights records are themselves guilty of international bigotry. So long as criticism is comparative, contextual, and fair, it should be encouraged, not disparaged. But when the Jewish nation is the only one criticized for faults that are far worse among other nations, such criticism crosses the line from fair to foul, from acceptable to anti-Semitic."

 - Professor Alan Dershowitz

New York Sun -- June 29, 2007 

 

Methodist Report `Borders on Anti-Semitism'

BY SETH GITELL - Special to the Sun
June 29, 2007
http://www.nysun.com/article/57560

A leading Jewish group said the United Methodist Church's call to divest from 20 companies that do business with Israel "borders on anti-Semitism," upping the pressure on President Bush and Senator Clinton — both Methodists — to distance themselves from the church's statement.

 

The report, which drew criticism from the Anti-Defamation League yesterday, was written by the Divestment Task Force of the church's New England Conference and targeted such companies as Blockbuster, General Dynamics, and General Electric.

 

"The urgency of the humanitarian crisis in the occupied Palestinian territories cannot be overstated," the report stated. "Palestinians face soaring unemployment, malnutrition, restrictions on movement, denial of medical care, denial of access to their agricultural lands, humiliation at checkpoints and extended lockdowns called curfews."

 

The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, said in a statement that the report "borders on anti-Semitism."

 

He added: "The authors of the report must be living in a bubble to ignore ongoing attacks on Israel and Hamas's violent takeover of Gaza to issue such an outrageous, biased report that focuses only on Israel."

 

Representatives for President Bush and Senator Clinton did not immediately respond to calls seeking comment on the Methodist divestment action.

 

The deputy director of the Jewish Community Relations Council in Boston, Alan Ronkin, said his group would be meeting with local Methodists on the issue. "We are going to try to educate and let them know where we're coming from," Mr. Ronkin said. Efforts such as the divestment push, "delegitimize Israel, damage any chance to make progress in the Middle East, and are morally offensive," he added.

 

The report also drew criticism from within the United Methodist Church. A senior minister at First United Methodist Church of Palo Alto, the Reverend Archer Summers, said he would work to get the next General Conference to reject a divestment move and to push the body to pass a resolution similar to the United Church of Christ's recent measure calling for "a balanced study" of the Middle East conflict.

 

"They're flat-out wrong. They went off the deep end this time," Rev. Summers said of the New England Conference. "The powers that be in the New England Methodist Church are clueless about how to bring about a just peace. The report would make it appear that there's some sort of animus on the part of the United Methodist Church toward the state of Israel, which undermines our credibility as an institution which preaches the good news of peace."

 

The Methodists' action comes as the United Church of Christ, another Protestant denomination, moved forward a resolution moderating its stance toward Israel. The UCC's "balanced study " measure is now being seen as a counter to the 2005 passage of both a "divestment" motion and a "tear down the wall" resolution, which urged the dismantling of Israel's security barrier.

 

Senator Obama — who is a member of the UCC and who addressed the church's national gathering in Hartford last Saturday — issued a statement saying he "strongly disagrees with the portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict presented by individual members of the church."

 

The Methodist report cited the following companies as targets for divestment: Alliant Tech Systems, Blockbuster, Boeing, Caterpillar, Cement Roadstone Holdings, General Dynamics, General Electric, Globecomm Systems Inc, ITT Corporation, Lockheed Martin, Magal Security Systems, Motorola, Northrop Grumman, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Raytheon, Silicon Graphics, Terex, United Technologies, Veolia Environnement, and Volvo.

 

The Methodists' New England Conference is seen as a precursor to the church's General Conference in Fort Worth, Texas, in April.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Alan Dershowitz on the British boycott of Israel

It is quite true that the UK boycotts of Isarel are initiated by a small group. It is also true however, that they were successful in passing boycott motions both in UNISON and the UCU. The UCU motion also supports the Hamas.

 

 

Wall Street Journal -- June 28, 2007

An Academic Hijacking

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ

 

When a relatively small number of British academics tried to hijack the traditional trade union agenda of the British University and College Union by calling for an academic boycott of Israel, they expected little opposition. The union, after all, is British, and the nation whose academics were to be boycotted is Israel.

Anti-Israel sentiment among left-wing academics, journalists, and politicians in Britain is politically correct and relatively uncontroversial (as is anti-American sentiment). Several years earlier, a petition to boycott several Israeli universities initially passed but was later rescinded, and the British National Union of Journalists has also voted to boycott Israeli products. At about the same time, a British academic journal fired two of its board members apparently because they were Israeli Jews. Some popular British political leaders, most notoriously, London's Mayor "Red Ken" Livingstone, have made anti-Israel statements that border on anti-Semitism, in one instance comparing a Jewish journalist to a Nazi "war criminal."Many of the academics who have been pushing the boycott most energetically are members of hard-left socialist-worker groups. These radicals devote more time and energy to international issues than to the domestic welfare of their own members, who have suffered a serious decline in salary and working conditions. Their pet peeve, sometimes it appears their only peeve, is the Israeli occupation -- not of the West Bank and, before its return, of Gaza but rather of all of Palestine, including Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. These are not advocates of the two-state solution, but of a one-state dissolution of Israel, with the resulting state being controlled by Hamas.

In a world in which dissident academics are murdered in Iran, tortured in Egypt, imprisoned in China and fired in many other parts of the world, the British Union decided to boycott only academics from a country with as much academic freedom as in Britain and far more academic freedom -- and more actual academic dissent -- than in any Arab or Muslim country. Indeed, Arabs have more academic (and journalistic) freedom in Israel, even in the West Bank, than in any Arab or Muslim nation.

But these union activists couldn't care less about academic freedom, or any other kind of freedom for that matter. Nor do they care much about the actual plight of the Palestinians. If they did, they would be supporting the Palestinian Authority in its efforts to make peace with Israel based on mutual compromise, rather than Hamas in its futile efforts to destroy Israel as well as the PA.

What they care about -- and all they seem to care about -- is Israel, which they despise, without regard to what the Jewish state actually does or fails to do. The fact that this boycott effort is being undertaken at precisely the time when Israel has ended the occupation of Gaza and is reaching out to the PA, and even to Syria, in an effort to make peace proves that the boycott is not intended to protest specific Israeli policies or actions, but rather to delegitimize and demonize Israel as a democratic Jewish nation. One union activist said on a BBC radio show that "Israel is worse than Stalinist Russia."

The boycotters know that Israel, without oil or other natural resources, lives by its universities, research centers and other academic institutions. After the U.S., Israeli scientists hold more patents than any nation in the world, have more start-up companies listed on Nasdaq, and export more life-saving medical technology.

Israelis have received more Nobel and other international science prizes than all the Arab and Muslim nations combined. Cutting Israel's academics off from collaboration with other academics would deal a death blow to the Israeli high-tech economy, but it would also set back research and academic collaboration throughout the world.

Moreover, many Israeli academics, precisely those who would be boycotted, are at the forefront in advocating peace efforts. They, perhaps more than others, understand the "peace dividend" the world would reap if Israeli military expenses could be cut and the money devoted to life-saving scientific research.

It is for these reasons that so many American academics, of all religious, ideological and political backgrounds, reacted so strongly to the threat of an academic boycott against Israel. As soon as it was reported, I helped to draft a simple petition in which signatories agreed to regard themselves as honorary Israeli academics for purposes of any boycott and "decline to participate in any activity from which Israeli academics are excluded."

Working with Prof. Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in physics, and Ed Beck, the president of Scholars For Peace in the Middle East, we circulated the petition. I expected to gather several hundred signatures.

To my surprise, we have secured nearly 6,000 signatures, including those of 20 Nobel Prize winners, 14 university presidents as well as several heads of academic and professional societies. Three university presidents -- Lee Bollinger of Columbia, Robert Birgeneau of Berkeley and John Sexton of New York University -- have issued public statements declaring that if Israeli universities are boycotted, their American universities should be boycotted as well. Every day, I receive emails from other academics asking to be included as honorary Israeli academics for purposes of any boycott. We expect to reach at least 10,000 names on our petition.

It is fair to say, therefore, that the British boycott appears to be backfiring. British academics are on notice that if they try to isolate Israeli academics, it is they -- the British academics -- who will end up being isolated from some of the world's most prominent academics and scientists.

No one wants that to happen. Academics and scientists should collaborate with each other in the interests of promoting knowledge. The hope is that this ill-conceived boycott will be voted down by general membership of the university and college union, and that those radicals who are pushing it will be delegitimized in the eyes of the vast majority of British academics who will not want to see their union hijacked by single-issue bigots.

Mr. Dershowitz is a professor at Harvard University school of law and the author of "Blasphemy -- How The Religious Right Is Hijacking Our Declaration of Independence" (Wiley, 2007).

Continued (Permanent Link)

IRD Commends UCC's New found Middle East Balance

IRD PRESS RELEASE

The Institute on Religion and Democracy

June 25, 2007 Contact: Loralei Coyle 202-682-4131

United Church of Christ Chooses Fairness

Toward Israelis and Palestinians

"The United Church of Christ is willing to admit that the situation in the Middle East is not readily reducible to good-guy Palestinians versus bad-guy Israelis--or vice versa."

-- James D. Berkley , IRD Director of Presbyterian Action

Washington, DC - The United Church of Christ (UCC) took a major step toward evenhanded treatment of Palestinian and Israeli interests at its General Synod meeting in Hartford, CT, on June 22. A General Synod resolution acknowledged that two previous resolutions from 2005 focused entirely on Israel, and that the General Synod "has yet to fully address other forces contributing to the ongoing violence, oppression and suffering in the region."

The statement indicated significant reconsideration of the 2005 resolutions: "The escalating violence between Fatah and Hamas now calls us to consider whether we may have overlooked many aspects of an extraordinarily complicated situation."

The rationale of this latest UCC resolution explained, "As a peacemaker, the Church in all of its settings must continue to speak out whenever violence, hatred, and oppression occur, standing in support of all who are oppressed and subjected to injustice." Therefore, the General Synod established "a Task Force to engage in ongoing and balanced study of the causes, history and context of the conflict."

James D. Berkley, IRD Director of Presbyterian Action, commented:

"I am impressed by the magnanimity of the United Church of Christ in this action. It has recognized the narrow partiality of its previous resolutions and is willing to admit that the situation in the Middle East is not readily reducible to good-guy Palestinians versus bad-guy Israelis--or vice versa.

"It is difficult to admit error and pursue a fairer and more faithful course of action, and yet the UCC General Synod rose to the occasion. The IRD commends the UCC for its action. Now this church body is no longer placed in the untenable role of strident champion of the unsupportable.

"In June 2006, the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly set an example by replacing a 2004 resolution that threatened anti-Israel divestment with a balanced resolution that seeks the welfare of both Palestinians and Israelis. Now such evenhandedness appears to be providentially contagious. First the United Church of Canada (later in 2006) and now the United Church of Christ have made similar turns toward fairness in their approach to the Middle East."

------------------

John Lomperis

Research Associate

The Institute on Religion and Democracy

1023 15th Street NW, Suite 601
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 682-4131
(202) 682-4136 (Fax)

http://www.ird-renew.org/

Continued (Permanent Link)

How to stop the UCU boycott - A strategy

Though some academics are outraged by the UCU boycott resolution, we must admit that the anti-Israel boycotters did a clever thing. Like a virus (or aliens from extra-galactic space) they have taken over the leadership of the UCU, and their resolution states essentially that they can use union funding and facilities to push the cause of Israel hate and McCarthyism. It is a brilliant implementation of a classic Bolshevik strategy.

The resolution states that UCU will "circulate a motion to all its branches to discuss calls from Palestinian trade unions for a "comprehensive and consistent international boycott of all Israeli academic institutions". The motion is going to branches for "their information and discussion." The resolution is one sided of course, as it will not discuss calls for boycotting trade unions controlled by terror groups, Arab Palestinian trade unions that support terrorism or anyone else. Only Israel is on the agenda, and only one course of action is on the agenda.

Boycotts of Israel, called "anti-normalization," have been endemic to Arab world trade unions for many years, in particular, Jordanian and Egyptian trade unions have used these boycotts to sabotage their country's peace agreements with Israel, and to terrorize journalists and academicians into breaking off any contact with Israelis. This activity began long before the current Intifada and has nothing to do with the occupation. Aided by British anti-Zionist activists, these trade unions, supported by the most extreme elements in Palestinian society, in Egypt and Jordan, have now succeeded in exporting their racist campaign to other countries. Through the UCU, they have found a way to spread their poisonous approach.

It is better for them than a boycott resolution, because it will be a chance for boycott leaders to use union facilities to brainwash membership, and it will give them a way to keep the Israeli-Palestinian issue alive and gather support, even if they can never get enough votes for an actual boycott. The discussion is going to be much more harmful than the boycott.

A Strategy

Opponents of academic boycotts must make themselves heard at all such union meetings, and must ensure that meetings are not engineered to only allow a one-sided message. They should bring a proactive program to those meetings, of the type that was used to successfully blunt a similar one-sided divestment resolution of the Presbyterian Church (see Presbyterian Church USA reverses divestment - proactive for peace ) and should probably consult the organizers of that campaign. The basic question that UCU members should be asking themselves is whether they are for dialogue and reconciliation in the Middle East, and whether or not boycotts and anti-normalization campaigns will supoort these goals.

Some key points of the anti-boycott campaign should be:

• Explain the roots of the boycott request by Palestinian trade unions in the context of the Arab-world anti-normalization campaign.
  
• Expose the hidden agenda of groups like the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel , which tells youth that dialogue groups like "Seeds of Peace" are dangerous, and explains that there is no point in dialogue, since Israel is a foreign implant in the Middle East and must be eradicated.
  
• Urge UCU members to support dialog between the sides and academic cooperation between Israeli unversities and others.
  
• Urge UCU members to adopt a resolution favoring a two-state solution, and deploring terror and racist incitement as well.
  
• Urge UCU members to adopt a resolution boycotting "anti-normalization" groups, as well as urging academic freedom for Palestinian Arabs.

Ami Isseroff

Academics express outrage at Israeli boycott

Debbie Andalo
Thursday May 31, 2007
EducationGuardian.co.uk

Academics and students today hit back at the decision by university lecturers to support calls for a boycott of Israeli institutions.

Yesterday the University and College Union decided by 158 votes to 99 to circulate a motion to all its branches to discuss calls from Palestinian trade unions for a "comprehensive and consistent international boycott of all Israeli academic institutions". The motion is going to branches for "their information and discussion".

But the decision taken at the inaugural UCU national conference in Bournemouth was condemned by the Russell group of research-led universities, the National Union of Students and organisations with an interest in Israel and academic free speech.

In a hard-hitting statement, the Russell group "rejected outright" the boycott call.

Its chairman, Prof Malcolm Grant, who is also president and provost of University College London, said: "It is a contradiction in terms and in direct conflict with the mission of a university.

"It betrays a misunderstanding of the academic mission, which is founded squarely on freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech.

"Any institution worthy of the title of university has the responsibility to protect these values, and it is particularly disturbing to find an academic union attacking academic freedom in this way."

Prof Grant promised that its universities "will uphold academic freedom by standing firm against any boycott that threatens it".

Meanwhile, the executive director of the International Advisory Board for Academic Freedom (IAB), Ofir Frankel, accused the union of allowing itself "to act as a one-sided player in Middle Eastern politics".

He said: "The IAB is amazed that the extremists that led their union to such an initiative decided not to discuss the option to pass this initiative to a vote of all 120,000 members, a decision that could have allowed the majority to rescue their union from this discriminatory action by reharnessing the values of academic freedom, discourse and debate, as their own general secretary suggested."

The chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, Jeremy Newmark, described the union's decision as "an assault on academic freedom" that "damages the credibility of British academia as a whole". He called for the union to organise a full membership ballot before introducing any boycott.

The decision by the UCU was also condemned by the Academic Friends of Israel, which accused the union of having "failed to support the wishes of its membership".

Criticism of the UCU decision also came from student organisations.

The president of the National Union of Students, Gemma Tumelty, said it did not support the principles behind an academic boycott of Israel because it "undermines the Israeli academics who support Palestinian rights".

It also "hinders the building of bridges between Israelis and Palestinians".

She added: "Retaining dialogue on all sides will be crucial in obtaining a lasting peace in the Middle East. International academics have a lot to offer higher education students in the UK and a boycott of this specific country is extremely worrying.

"We will express our concerns to UCU and we are awaiting clarification from them on the exact nature of this policy and its potential impact on students and the academic community."

There were also reservations about the UCU decision from the World Union of Jewish Students.

Its chairwoman, Tamar Shchory, a student at Ben Gurion University in south Israel, said: "In campuses abroad the climate of hostility towards the state of Israel and Jewish students is getting stronger.

"It seems like the UCU has chosen a one-sided, not constructive, position in a very complex and sensitive matter instead of promoting the basic value of academic freedom and constructive initiatives."

Continued (Permanent Link)