10/26/07 "The
Guardian"
--- -
The newest and least attractive import from America,
following on behind Coca-Cola, McDonald's and
Friends, is the pro-Israel lobby. The latest target
of this US-style campaign is the august
Oxford Union.
This week, two Israeli colleagues and I were due
to appear at the union to participate in an
important debate on the one-state solution in
Israel-Palestine. Also invited was the American
Jewish scholar and outspoken critic of Israel,
Norman Finkelstein. At the last minute, however,
the union withdrew its invitation to him, apparently
intimidated by threats from various pro-Israel
groups.
The Harvard Jewish lawyer and indefatigable
defender of Israel,
Alan Dershowitz, attacked the topic of the
debate as well as the Oxford Union itself. In an
article headlined "Oxford Union is dead", he accused
it of having become "a propaganda platform for
extremist views", and castigated its choice of what
he termed anti-Israel and anti-semitic speakers.
Yet Dershowitz could have restored the balance as
he saw it; he was the first person invited by the
Oxford Union to oppose the motion but he declined
due, as he put it, to "the terms of the debate and
my proposed teammates".
Dershowitz's article attacking the Oxford Union
appeared in the Jerusalem Post in Israel and
Frontpage magazine in the US. [Because of British
defamation laws Cif has been advised not to provide
a link - Ed.]
Dershowitz and Finkelstein were protagonists in a
much-publicised
academic row in the US, though it is unclear
whether this has any relevance to the Oxford Union
spat.
In solidarity with Finkelstein and to oppose this
gross interference in British democratic life, the
three of us on the "one state" side - myself,
Avi Shlaim, of St Anthony's College, Oxford, and
the Israeli historian
Ilan Pappe - decided to withdraw from the
debate. This was not an easy decision, since the
topic was timely and necessary given the current
impasse in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process,
where innovative solutions are in short supply.
Dershowitz and the other pro-Israel activists may
rejoice at their success in derailing an important
discussion. But it is of little comfort to those of
us who care about freedom of speech in this country.
Last May, Dershowitz interfered in British academic
life when the University and College Union voted
overwhelmingly to debate the merits of boycotting
Israeli institutions. He teamed up with a British
Jewish lawyer, Anthony Julius, and others,
threatening to "devastate and bankrupt" anyone
acting against Israeli universities.
In another example of these bullying tactics, the
Royal Society of Medicine, one of Britain's most
venerable medical institutions,
came under an attack this month, unprecedented
in its 200 year history. It had invited Dr Derek
Summerfield, a psychiatrist (who has also documented
Israelıs medical abuses against Palestinians in the
Occupied Territories), to its conference on
Religion, Spirituality and Mental Health. The RSM
was immediately bombarded with threats from
pro-Israel doctors demanding Dr Summerfield's
removal on the grounds that he was Èpoliticalı and
biased, and that the RSM's charitable status would
be challenged if he remained. Intimidated, the RSM
asked Dr Summerfield to withdraw, although they
later reinstated him.
The power of the Israel lobby in America is
legendary. It demonstrates its influence at many
levels.
Campus Watch is a network that monitors alleged
anti-Israel activity in US academic institutions.
The difficulties of promotion in the US for scholars
deemed anti-Israeli are notorious. The notable
Palestinian academic, Edward Said, was subjected to
an unrelenting campaign by pro-Israel groups at
Columbia University with threats on his life. His
successor, Rashid Khalidi, is the current object of
the same campaign of vilification and attack.
Finkelstein himself has been denied tenure at his
university and everywhere else. The authors of a
recent study of the Israel lobby's influence on US
foreign policy have been called anti-semites and
white supremacists. Former president Jimmy Carter's
book,
Palestine: peace not apartheid, has earned him
the label of "Jew-hater" and Nazi sympathiser. The
British publisher, Pluto Press, is likely to be
dropped by its American distributors, the University
of Michigan Press, because pro-Israel groups
accuse it of including "anti-Semitic" (ie
pro-Palestinian/critical of Israel) books on its
list.
Such activities are familiar in the US. People
there are hardened or resigned to having their
freedom of expression limited by the pro-Israel
lobby, and the threats of Dershowitz would cause no
surprise to anyone. But Britain is different,
naively innocent in the face of US-style assaults on
its scholars and institutions. No wonder that those
who have been attacked give in so quickly, nervous
of something they do not understand. The UCU
leadership, shocked and intimidated by the ferocious
reaction to the boycott motion from pro-Israel
groups, resorted to legal advice to extricate itself
and announced in September that a call to boycott
Israeli institutions would be "unlawful". The Oxford
Union jettisoned one of its participants rather than
stand up to the threats of its critics. The RSM
tried to distance the offending speaker from its
conference to protect itself from abuse.
All this is understandable, but it is exactly the
wrong response. Appeasing bullies like Dershowitz
will not stop them. It will rather encourage them to
go further. The question is, do we in this country
want a McCarthyite witch hunt? If not, then we must
confront the bullies and expose them for the
intellectual terrorists they are, bent on destroying
the values of a free society. To do otherwise will
invite the fate of all repressed people, cowed and
intimidated, hating their tormentors, but too afraid
to say so.