Will Anthropology Faculty Group Become a Political Tool to Boycott and Attack Israel?

At a time of rising antisemitism on campus, why is a professional academic association headquartered in Virginia, poised to embark on a course of action that will further marginalize and alienate Jewish students and potentially contribute to more anti-Jewish hatred and harassment?

On June 15, the American Anthropological Association (AAA) opened a membership-wide referendum on a proposed resolution to boycott Israeli academic institutions. Three months prior, on March 20, the AAA’s president announced that the association’s Executive Board had determined that this discriminatory resolution, endorsed via a petition submitted by a mere fraction (reportedly only 206) of its more than 10,000 members, would be put to an online membership-wide vote.

What is happening is basically a replay of a campaign in 2016, when a small group of committed Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) scholar-activists proposed a nearly identical, ill-advised resolution. The measure was narrowly defeated at the time, but still ended up causing significant damage. Indeed, by the AAA’s own admission, funding sources dried up and the association hemorrhaged members.

On occasion, the AAA has issued letters and statements condemning the abusive policies and unjust actions of other countries. But only Israel continues to be singled out for a punishing boycott of its entire system of higher education.

The vast majority of scholarly societies and academic organizations, like the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), recognize that such a measure runs afoul of the bedrock principles and core mission of the academy. In the AAA’s case, the resolution would contradict its “full embrace” and “deep commitment” to academic freedom, open debate, and the free exchange of ideas and research among scholars and students, hindering the dissemination of anthropological research and many events and programs, which would be forbidden if co-sponsored by Israeli academic institutions.

To counter this legitimate concern, boycott proponents have been doubling down on the specious argument that Israeli universities and colleges can be boycotted without harming the people who actually work, teach, and study in them. In reality, the boycott would operate as a blacklist, penalizing individual academics on the basis of their nationality, political views, and the actions of their employer and government.

But it is not only Israeli academics who would be harmed. Jewish-Zionist students on American campuses would also end up feeling alienated, demoralized, and disempowered within the discipline of Anthropology, an important field of study in the Humanities. On many campuses, its popular courses fulfill the eligibility requirements for the liberal arts core.

Given these serious concerns, there has been a groundswell of opposition against the referendum. A joint statement issued by my organization, the Academic Engagement Network (AEN), and the Alliance for Academic Freedom (AAF) has been endorsed by more than 100 city-wide, state-wide, national, and international educational, Jewish, and civil rights organizations from across the political spectrum.

The Israeli Anthropological Association has issued a scathing reproach, and the Association of Israel Studies has also voiced its opposition.

A network of scholars (Anthropologists for Academic Freedom) has released several statements noting that the resolution is “misguided, is aimed at the wrong target, and will have absolutely no impact upon the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” Several of its members recently participated in a webinar, where they passionately implored colleagues to come to their senses.

The problem is that most of the thousands of eligible voters in the referendum probably are not aware of these materials or resources that cogently present counter-arguments. To its credit, the AAA leadership created a Resources page so that members could become better informed about the issues at stake. But this page is buried in the recently revamped AAA website, and is difficult to find.

Furthermore, the page is top-heavy in materials curated and prepared by a pro-boycott group. A letter organized by the AMCHA Initiative, signed by more than 100 organizations and submitted to over 250 university presidents, doesn’t feature on the page, nor does a warning letter issued by The Deborah Project’s legal team.

In the weeks leading up to the vote, AAA leaders have made no effort to restore balance in the debate. They ignored a reasonable suggestion to organize at least one virtual discussion where both sides could have made their case to the membership, followed by a constructive Q&A. What’s worse is that they have failed to ensure that officers of the association’s many committees present both pro and con arguments, with the result being a manifestly unfair deliberation process. For example, the chair-elect of the Archeology Division is reportedly attempting to create a “space for conversation” about the ballot measure by organizing two upcoming webinars that will only feature BDS supporters.

Now that voting on the referendum has begun, some anthropologists appear to be swayed by two of the resolution’s key claims: Palestinians have asked for this kind of support in a “call from civil society organizations,” and Israeli universities are “complicit” in their oppression. Both arguments rely on most AAA voters having little understanding of the BDS movement or the realities of Israeli campus life.

Rather than originating as a request from Palestinian civil society, BDS was rolled out by far-left European NGOs in 2001, at the infamously antisemitic UN anti-racism conference in Durban. Today, more than two decades later, Palestinian academics and human rights activists do not uniformly support academic boycotts. And Arabs who research and teach in Israel’s universities and colleges are definitely no fans of the tactic.

For example, in a compelling testimonial opposing the resolution, professor Alean Al-Krenawi, a former Dean at Ben-Gurion University and currently the President of Achva Academic College (in Yinon, Israel) pleads with AAA members not to undermine his life’s work in support of Arab scholars and students.

The AAA resolution paints a woefully inaccurate picture of Israeli higher education. The truth is that the Israeli academy is not an arm of the state, nor is it malevolently hostile to Palestinians. Like in the US, Israeli university leaders and faculty often protest encroachment of the government into the academy. They also work hard to advance diversity and inclusion as key priorities, and strive to ensure free expression and diversity of viewpoint on their campuses, including by supporting Palestinian voices.

Come July 14, when the voting period closes, it remains to be seen whether a sufficient number of anthropologists will have rejected turning their professional association into an advocacy organization that mandates absolute positions and virulently anti-Israel ideological orthodoxies, violating the intellectual autonomy of those AAA members who disagree.

But one thing is certain: If this foolhardy and detrimental resolution passes, then it will open the floodgates: pro-BDS faculty zealots at many other large and prestigious professional associations, from the Modern Language Association to the American Historical Association, which have also entertained such irresponsible boycott measures in the past, are likely to once again resurrect them, hoping that this time, they can also prevail.

Those who care about the health of the US academy, and the rising tide of vehemently anti-Israel and often antisemitic activity on campus, should hope for the best — and prepare for the worst.

Miriam F. Elman is the Executive Director of the Academic Engagement Network (AEN), an educational nonprofit that builds and mobilizes networks of university faculty and administrators to counter antisemitism, promote academic freedom, and advance education about Israel. A petition opposing the American Anthropological Association’s proposed resolution to boycott Israeli academic institutions can be found on the homepage of the AEN-hosted website www.noanthroboycott.org. It will remain open for signatures from concerned faculty, students, and community members through July 14.  

The post Will Anthropology Faculty Group Become a Political Tool to Boycott and Attack Israel? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.