During an hours-long hearing on December 5, members of Congress questioned three presidents of some of the most prestigious educational institutions in the United States – Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of Pennsylvania – about the issue of anti-Semitism at their universities.
Republican Representative Elise Stefanik was the one who attracted attention, when she repeatedly asked the presidents the same question: Is the call to exterminate the Jews on your university campus considered incitement, yes or no? In her questioning, she used a provocative and hostile style that is not appropriate for addressing the presidents of some of the most prestigious universities in the world!
Her knowledge of Arabic words and expressions, such as “Intifada” and the slogan “From the River to the Sea,” which pro-Palestine students used in their demonstrations, was clearly limited, when she interpreted them – with the utmost naivety and ignorance – as a call to exterminate the Jews! It mixed the rejection of Israeli policies on the one hand with the demand for the extermination of the Jews and anti-Semitism on the other hand!
Stefanik’s question was a trap, as it implied that calls for the extermination of Jews on college campuses were widespread, even though she provided no evidence that anyone had, since October 7, called for the extermination of Jews on any American college campus, along with another fact: That there are Jews among those who criticize Israel, and they usually stand side by side with those who chant against Israel’s massacres!
A question like Stefanik’s multiple ideas, mixed between reality and hypotheticals, cannot be answered with a simple “yes” or “no”. Universities are bound by the US Constitution, which prohibits the enactment of any laws that limit freedom of expression, and they do not consider expression in itself to be incitement, unless it targets individuals and is Is so serious, widespread and objectively offensive that it prevents them from accessing an educational benefit or opportunity.
This is what the president of Harvard University and the rest of the university presidents focused on in their responses, influenced to a large extent by the principles of academic freedom, and perhaps by what was stated in the book “Freedom” by John Stewart, when he valued the freedom of the individual, including freedom of thought and discussion, and considered it one of the factors of well-being. the society.
Although the session came in the midst of escalating hostility towards supporters of the Palestinian cause and critics of Israel, and the increase in threats facing Palestinian, Arab and Muslim students and faculty members, reaching the point of murder in some cases, as well as institutional restrictions on student associations sympathetic to Palestine; The Congress session did not address these issues in any way!
Although she explained in a video clip after the session, the pressure succeeded in forcing Liz Magill, the president of the University of Pennsylvania, to resign, and the president of Harvard University is still standing despite all the pressure and moral panic about “abusing donor power, and gathering other donors to pressure these institutions to take action.” Stronger stances against anti-Israel protests on university campuses, accusing them of anti-Semitism.”
When Stefanik asked a question about $1.5 billion in foreign funding for the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard, which is the same issue that Rep. Comair Grylls raised in his question to MIT President Sally Kornbluth about nearly $5 billion that flowed into the institute from foreign sources, she described it as “anti-values.” The United States, which supports terrorism, was led by the State of Qatar and other Arab countries. University presidents emphasized that foreign funding does not interfere with the nature and independence of research.
I refer here to the study “Arab Funding for American Universities: Donors, Beneficiaries, and Impact” by Mitchell J. Bard, which indicates that 258 American universities – according to the US Department of Education – received between 1986 and 2021 contributions worth approximately $8.5 billion from Arab sources. More than 80% of it came from three countries: 51% from Qatar, 25% from Saudi Arabia, and 13% from the UAE.
The researcher notes that these contributions aim to strengthen the dominance of Arab countries and their governments in the field of Middle East studies in American academic circles, and this comes in the context of accusing those countries of supporting extremism and terrorism. Although these contributions focus on strengthening American-Arab relations, the researcher emphasizes that they do not aim to criticize Israel. Despite its apolitical nature, the researcher points out that it contributes significantly to fields such as health care and science. While it seeks to establish branches of American universities in the Middle East, support research, or support Arab students in American universities; Most of these contributions focus on education and research, and not necessarily on the political space.
The pressure on universities to defend Israel was not limited to politicians and donors, but also extended to parties working on campus. Let us take an example that everyone associated with American universities knows well, which is the “Alumni for Campus Fairness” organization, which constitutes an annoying bogeyman and a sword hanging over the necks of university professors, who soon accuse them of anti-Semitism simply for criticizing Israel!
This organization, known by the abbreviation “ACF”, was founded in 2015 with the aim of directing Jewish graduates and mobilizing them to hold educational institutions in the United States accountable, to confront what it considers anti-Semitism and demonization of Israel on university campuses, and it currently includes more than 41 One thousand graduates distributed in 60 university departments spread across 66 American colleges and universities.
This organization adopts several methods to achieve its goal, whether through the survey it conducts of articles published in university newspapers, or the survey it conducts among Jewish students, to monitor and deter any anti-Semitic manifestations critical of Israel and its behavior in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, in addition to providing specific recommendations for the steps that can be taken. For graduates to take action to combat what the organization considers images of hatred toward Jews.
In addition, through its website, ICF invites Jewish graduates to join its petition campaigns, encourages them to report any incidents in which they perceive bias against them, and invites them to participate in its webinars. Regarding the announced funding sources, the organization allows its members and supporters to donate, while giving the donor the option of maintaining the confidentiality and anonymity of his donation.
On the other hand, ACF clearly and unambiguously identifies parties and organizations that it considers opponents and anti-Semites, the most prominent of which is CAIR, some of whose members ACF accuses of being associated with entities related to Hamas.
In 2018, ICF expressed its concern about the decision of the City University of New York to appoint academic and anti-Israel commentator Mark Lamont Hill as a professor of urban education at the university’s Graduate Center, justifying this by expelling Hill from CNN after his call for “Palestine.” Free from the river to the sea,” and his advocacy for the economic boycott of Israel (BDS) movement, and his academic support for its boycott by the American Anthropological Association.
After the Al-Aqsa flood attack on October 7, 2023, ACF issued a statement condemning all forms of silence in condemning the attack, and launched a campaign against a professor at the prestigious Princeton University of Palestinian origins, because of what they considered her failure to condemn Hamas, despite Although she criticized from the beginning the targeting of Israeli civilians! After the professor sent an objection letter, the party quietly apologized to her after publicly targeting her by publishing her name on mobile trucks inside her university!
All of this comes within the unprecedented harassment taking place in the United States, where organizations, politicians and donors supporting Israel launch attacks and campaigns using various methods, tools and interpretations, against universities, students and academics who support the rights of Palestinians and oppose the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and genocidal practices, accusing them of anti-Semitism for merely calling for To a ceasefire and an end to the Israeli occupation and the construction of settlements, as if all of these matters had become an exception to the space of freedom in US universities!
