Academia split over boycott of Israel

[pelsar]

lets clarify for this little forum whos for and against an acedemic boycott of israel.....and just how "foolish" such a stand is:

"Could the Norwegian Veterinary School send a DNA clone sample to be used in gene therapy research at the Goldyne Savad Institute in Jerusalem?"


Prof Hilary Rose compares an academic boycott of Israel with the sporting boycott of South Africa during the apartheid era. "Sporting isolation hurt South Africa and ultimately contributed to the end of that regime. I don't think Israel values sport but it does value science and high culture.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/05/16/wmid116.xml

and more to the point...there is this:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2006/1749752.htm?enviro

As part of a project with Hebrew University and Germany's University of Hohenheim, Qutob and his colleagues will inject compounds from plants found in the occupied West Bank and often used as seasonings into food fed to newborn Nile Tilapia fish.

"This will have an effect on the fish's metabolic (structure) -- it may shift from female to male," said Qutob, a chemist at al-Quds University in East Jerusalem.

"This is a very important project. We are introducing a new food source for the Palestinians."

the boycotters would stop this project if they could

the boycotters and their supporters care far less for the palestenians and are far more interested in "punishing" israelis....they're less concerned with the palestenians....then anything else....call it what you want, but what it isnt is concern for the palestenains well being.

so whos for the boycott?....a show of hands

[liberalpragmatist]

1. This is a terrible idea

And I say this as someone who is pretty pro-Palestinian. Many experts believe that the academic boycott of South Africa actually STRENGTHENED Apartheid, because it cut off the universities, which were a center of liberal opposition to apartheid, from the rest of the world and silenced a valuable anti-apartheid voice.

[eyl]

2. It seems popular, in certain circles,

to compare sanctions against Israel to sanctions against apartheid SA. There ase several other point proponents of sanctions might want to consider:

1) While sanctions are often touted as the force which led to reform in SA, that's not neccessarily true - I've seen claims that sanctions, rather than accelerating reforms, undermined them.
2) Even if sanctions did bring about the end of apartheid SA, that seems to be more the exception then the rule. How effective were the sanctions against Iraq, or the US embargo of Cuba, in bringing about any sort of reform?
3) Without getting into the argument of whether Israeli policy amounts to apartheid or not, there are other problems with the comparison - because the political situation in Israel is not reminiscent of SA. Apartheid SA was, for all intents and purposes, a one-party state. The checks against government power (namely the courts) were largely ineffective, and the state employed political repression not only toward blacks, but also toward its white citizens. There was little political scope for a backlash to sanctions, because the hardliners were already in power.

In Israel, OTOH, the situation is much different. The courts have and do oppose govenment policy when it seems warrented, there's a free press, and a wide spread of views, not only in the public, but also in the Knesset. Factor in also the fact that most Israelis tend to view international organs with a degree of suspicion.

Now, let's imagine sanctions are imposed. Tanya Reinhart and Ilan Pappe aside, I think I can confidently assume that the result will not be to thank the international community and start chanting ashamnu, bagadnu*. Instead, we'll see it as confirming the international community's bias against us (especially considering its refusal to take any action against far more serious violators than Israel) - and validating, at least to some extent, the far right's view, bringing them to power (hell, we might do that just to stick a figure in the international community's eye). And even without that, it will probably lead to greater hardships for the Palestinians, and greater casualties on the battlefield (consider, for example, what would happen if shortages of funds forced the IDF to replace air strikes with artillery barrages). Far more importantly, it will discredit most of the left - part of whose collective security plans rest on international guarantees**.

*Part of the Yom Kippur "confessional" prayer - "we are guilty, we have betrayed" and so on in (Hebrew) alphabetical order.
**Of course, the extent of this discrediting depends on the timing. For example, had the last academic boycott - which came right after Israel had withdrawn from Gaza - stood, it would have done a lot more damage to the left than a boycott now would (though it would still cause a lot of damage)

[nicoll]

3. No there should not be a boycott of Israel

There should not be a boycott of Israel because one is not needed. If there was an intellectual debate on the rights and wrongs of the Israel / Palestinian crisis Israel would come out more the villain than the Palestinians. The stats show this in my opinion over the last couple of decades anyway. What should be done is an aggressive form of debate between academics who do not agree with Israels actions and Intellectuals within Israel who whole heartedly support Israel actions. It is better to win a debate than to ignore someone you disagree with.

[cali]

4. From this post and another

I gather you think it is of terrific importance that blame be apportioned correctly. Although I agree with you that Israel deserves a greater amount of blame for the mess, I think the fixation on blame misses the point. Moving forward, and finding common ground on which to establish peace and an independent, secure and viable Palestinian state, that will exist alongside a secure Israel, is of far greater importance.

[bemildred]

5. I am opposed to academic boycotts.

I have mixed feelings about economic boycotts. But it must be said that the Israeli government doesn't see any problem with economic punishment of the Palestinians - foolish though such a policy is - so one can say that the Israeli people should address their own government if they dislike such boycotts.