Israeli war revives academic freedom turmoil on US campuses

The devastating Palestinian attack against Israel has revived political danger for US universities, many of which have long struggled with issues of academic freedom with respect to the decades-old conflict.

The early indicators of trouble included protests and statements from student groups at several US campuses endorsing the attacks by the Palestinian political and militant organisation Hamas that killed more than 1,000 Israelis, mostly civilians.

The attacks represent “a historic win for the Palestinian resistance”, said the National Students for Justice in Palestine, which counts more than 200 campus affiliates across North America. “This is what it means to Free Palestine: not just slogans and rallies, but armed confrontation with the oppressors.”

The group listed about a dozen campuses with chapters backing its position, including those at the University of California, Berkeley, Arizona State University, the University of Arizona, Michigan State University and the University of Virginia.

Separately, a group of about 35 student organisations at Harvard University issued their own petition blaming Israel for the violence and Harvard for enabling it “through its investment in companies operating in illegal settlements”.

Many US students, however, also demonstrated in support of Israel. More than 200 people attended a candlelit vigil at Harvard to mourn the victims in Israel. Hundreds of others gathered at campuses including Stanford University, Duke University and the University of Florida.

The two top Republicans on the Education Committee of the US House of Representatives have said they will hold a hearing next month on what they regard as “antisemitism on campus, and the response to that antisemitism by cowardly campus leadership”.

“Too many colleges require lock-step discipleship behind woke policies and politics,” said the lawmakers, Virginia Foxx and Burgess Owens. “Sadly, the university system has been captured by anti-American and illiberal ideology that is developing and feeding a hatred of Jews.”

At Harvard, a former university president, Lawrence Summers, declared in a social media posting that he was “sickened” by the “morally unconscionable” statement of the university student groups and demanded that the Ivy League institution’s new leader, Claudine Gay, fire back at them.

Harvard later issued a statement from its entire top leadership that took neither side. The Harvard leaders said they were “heartbroken by the death and destruction unleashed by the attack by Hamas that targeted citizens in Israel this weekend, and by the war in Israel and Gaza now under way”. After continued criticism, Professor Gay issued a second statement making clear that the student groups did not speak on behalf of Harvard, adding, “Let there be no doubt that I condemn the terrorist atrocities perpetrated by Hamas.”

The arguing, some academics suggested, showed that Harvard and other universities have long had problems with permitting free speech in cases that raise any criticism of Israel, given the sector’s heavy dependence on wealthy pro-Israel donors and the risk of political repercussions from pro-Israel lawmakers.

Such instances include Harvard’s rejection earlier this year of a fellowship for Kenneth Roth, former executive director of the advocacy group Human Rights Watch, allegedly over his highlighting of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. The dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School, Douglas Elmendorf, later reversed that decision under pressure, and he subsequently announced his own departure.

Other cases that have raised concern include the University of Washington surrendering nearly half the funding for its Israel studies programme after its leader angered a major donor by sympathising with both sides in the Palestinian conflict; the University of Denver distancing itself from an academic who faced threats of violence for suggesting that Israel might have had ties to last year’s stabbing of author Salman Rushdie; George Washington University investigating a professor who allegedly used abusive language in making clear her disdain for Israel; and, in Canada, the University of Toronto retracting and then reinstating under pressure a job offer to an academic critical of Israel.

The Denver academic, Nader Hashemi, was director of his university’s Centre for Middle East Studies when he mentioned Israel as one among several possible players in the Rushdie attack. The university condemned an outside political group that labelled him a top “Jew-hating” professor, but under what Professor Hashemi described as pressure from donors, it later issued a statement saying his comments did not reflect the university’s point of view.

Dr Hashemi then left Denver to take a position as associate professor of Middle East and Islamic politics at Georgetown University.

US universities do try to hold up notions of academic freedom, but find that donor pressure – which is far more often in the direction of supporting Israel than opposing it – makes that difficult, Dr Hashemi said. “In my case, back at the University of Denver, my chancellor failed me – he was completely enthralled by the external lobbyists,” he said.

Professor Summers said Harvard’s initial silence about Israel was especially problematic because the university has spoken out in the past on international issues such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. That silence becomes unacceptable when student groups speak collectively in a way that appears to the outside public as a “university-defined” judgement, he said.

Professor Summers said he would probably support a system in which university leaders simply avoided commenting on all matters beyond their campuses. “All the elite universities are constantly making statements of all kinds with respect to what they perceive as all kinds of social causes,” he said.

Others, though, are pushing for universities to model as expansive an approach to campus debate as possible.

Universities are a “special place” for fostering such discussions, especially at the most difficult times, said Alan Singer, professor of teaching, literacy and leadership at Hofstra University. “The occupation of Palestinian lands has been going on since 1967, and it only becomes something of focus when these kinds of events take place,” Professor Singer said. “When it stops being painful, it’s not going to be discussed.”

“It is incumbent upon universities and colleges,” said Dov Waxman, professor of Israel studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, “to educate their students about what has been taking place in Israel and in Gaza, and not shy away from holding difficult, and probably contentious, discussions about it.”

paul.basken@timeshighereducation.com