A big win for the good guys: The UK academics that have been leading the charge to boycott Israeli universities have given up trying to isolate Israeli academics, and only Israeli academics, because they don’t like the policies of the Jewish State.
The UK lecturers’ union has abandoned attempts to boycott Israeli universities after years of international controversy, opponents of the policy said today.
In the face of legal threats, the leadership of the University and College Union has quietly dropped plans to implement a conference motion that instructed members to “consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions, and to discuss the occupation with individuals and institutions concerned, including Israeli colleagues”.
The union was asked to “widely disseminate” testimony from Palestinians and union delegations to Palestine. This too was shelved by the national executive at a meeting last month.
It’s not that they’ve given up, really. But they’ve come close to admitting defeat:
Any mention of the proposal to discuss the occupation with Israeli colleagues, or consider the moral implications of links with Israel, has been dropped.
Instead, the union will issue guidance to branches about twinning with universities in Zimbabwe and Burma, as well as Gaza and the West Bank; commissioning an independent report on academic freedom; and ensuring expenditure on the motion is within the budget for international work.
And they’re also lying about what they’re doing:
The UCU’s general secretary, Sally Hunt, insisted the union’s position had not changed, and the implementation of motion 25 within the law would continue. “UCU has a proud record of solidarity with academics throughout the world, which will continue. Policy set by UCU congress, the union’s sovereign body, must be respected.
“At UCU congress in May, I said: ‘Because of the constant misreporting of the motions considered by UCU’s congress, I feel I have to state that we have passed a motion to provide solidarity with the Palestinians, not to boycott Israel or any other country’s academic institutions. Implementation of the motion within the law will now fall to the national executive committee.'”
Let’s hear from opposing counsel, please:
Anthony Julius, of solicitors Mishcon de Reya which represents the opponents, responded to the union today saying: “The NEC is not implementing the motion … Just as motion 25 was a boycott motion without the use of the word, so the NEC’s ‘implementation’ is a repudiation of it, without use of that word.”
Uh-huh. The boycott that wasn’t a boycott is being repealed by not being repealed. I know it’s confusing, but here’s the summary: The good guys won. British anti-Semitism (in the name of anti-Zionism) loses another battle.
This is an excellent outcome, of course. But the fact that the boycott proposal was made in the first place, and that it received so much support, is one more piece of evidence about the degree to which much of academia has become the enemy of civilization.
Trade unionists supporting Palestinians, who have nothing resembling a free trade union, as opposed to Israel, which has a very strong labor movement. Ah, yes, what Meryl calls “the Exception Clause” but is properly referred to as “The Bensky Corollary to Everything” proves itself yet again.
I was never much of a leftist but one reason I’m not one at all is that by every proclaimed value of the left, leftists should be wildly pro-Israel. Instead they tend to be wildly anti-Israel, which demonstrates that what really motivates them is not what they claim it is.
As to what really motivates some, not all: if I were a cynic I’d say it’s anti-Semitisim, but credulous soul that I am, I’m sure it’s something else. I just can’t figure out what.