The situation in the Middle East is one that has often been a source of fierce debate. There are several reasons why Southampton’s attempt to weigh in on this is a pointless and offensive endeavour.
From the 17th to the 19th of April, the University of Southampton will play host to various speakers and academics who will attempt to “diagnose the legal position with regard to the nature of Israel”. They will, to put it simply, tell all those in attendance that the state of Israel has no right to exist.
The conference has drawn the attention of various Jewish community leaders, and even high-ranking politicians. The Conservative peer Lord Leigh said that “it is very disappointing that a distinguished university like Southampton has organised this conference. They have never held a conference questioning the right of existence of any other country”, while the Chief Executive of the Jewish Leadership Council said that he was “gravely concerned about this unbalanced, delegitimising conference, which will have a detrimental impact on cohesiveness”.
RT University of Southampton: Cancel Your Upcoming Anti-Israel Conference. http://t.co/Z1QQ6edqpJ via
— Lucille Grant ()
The very name of the conference, “International Law And The State Of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility And Exceptionalism”, raises issue of bias. The organisers are suggesting that the existence of Israel is something which can be debated. They do not see Israel as a state, contrary to international law; they see it as a theory. Debating the existence of any other state would most likely be met with ridicule, why not Israel?
The organiser is a professor at the University, Oren Ben-Dor. He is an ex-Israeli, who has been nothing short of vocal in his criticism of Israel in the past. There is nothing wrong with criticism in itself, but the way in which Prof. Ben-Dor has gone about it is somewhat questionable.
In a 2008 article for the newsletter Counterpunch (which has been referred to as “Anti-Zionist radical left-wing” by the Anti-Defamation League and others), Prof. Ben-Dor talks of signing a petition to prevent the ‘Silencing of Gilad Atzmon”.
This is seemingly harmless, until you look further into Atzmon himself. His charming remarks include such gems as “I’m not going to say whether it is right or not to burn down a synagogue, I can see that it is a rational act”, and “the holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense”.
Prof. Ben-Dor has also referred to Israel as an “arrogant and self-righteous Zionist entity” in another article for Counterpunch. The list of speakers has been released, and the anti-Israel bias is overwhelming. Let it suffice to say that if the conference shares the viewpoint of its organisers, it is likely to descend into shamelessly biased Israel-bashing, bordering on thinly-veiled antisemitism.
An open letter to the University of Southampton http://t.co/fJ5yEnaNT1 on the Israel conference in Southamptom
— David Collier ()
Free speech is one of the most important pillars of our society. People should have the right to criticise the actions of others if they feel they are wrong; it is the best way to maintain a balance of opinion. But this comes with a crucial condition: that others have the right to defend themselves. It is here that the University’s conference falls short.
The very nature of the conference means that there will be a lack of balance. Academics who share the same opinion (namely that Israel is a ‘big bad wolf’ which must be stopped) will gather to pat each other on the back, preaching to the choir and inciting a rally-like anti-Israel atmosphere. How this can be supported by the University of Southampton, an institution with close ties to several Jewish bodies such as the Parkes Institute, can allow this to go ahead, is baffling.
An academic conference on the very legitimacy of Israel seems highly problematic, or The Onion-worthy. Or both. http://t.co/Pu4hFFAdEE
— Brent E. Sasley ()
We are left with two courses of action:
- Cancel or move the conference. In its current form, the conference will merely serve to circulate biased opinions and decrease social cohesion, and showing support for this will only reflect poorly on the University.
- Alter the title and format of the conference. It is currently masquerading as an intellectual debate, when its intrinsic bias means it will never be such a thing. If the University will not cancel the conference altogether, they must demand that the views of both sides of the debate are equally represented.
The University of Southampton is an institution of education, not indoctrination. As such, we must allow the views of those on both sides of every debate to be represented, so that those fortunate enough to attend are able to make free and informed choices. Southampton must not be allowed to become a platform for hatred, and this conference must be stopped or changed to ensure that this is achieved.
If you also believe that the conference should not be allowed to go ahead, you can sign a Change.Org petition .
The goyim know. Shut it down
Reply
Whoever wrote this is just fucking dumb. You clearly don’t know the meaning behind the racist words you use.
Reply
Israel was formed on the premise of displacing a nation of people and breaks international law on a daily basis. I think academics are allowed to question it’s legitimacy and how it escapes the possible political consequences from doing so. I don’t think balance is an issue here either, if it was a conference on climate change and ways to mitigate it would you argue against a climate change sceptic not being invited to talk?
And being anti-zionist does not equate to being anti-semitic, if anything the actions of zionists are anti-semitism as Palestinians are also a semitic people.
Reply
Absolutely on point. Israel abuses International public/human rights law on a level that Syria, Iran & other such nations generally accepted by the West as ‘oppressive’ don’t even come close to. Would we see such a uproar about these questions being asked about them? The West must abandon the political and legal protection it currently affords Israel and start talking openly about these issues. I for welcome welcome this conference as a small step towards this.
Reply
I for one welcome*
Reply
Really? The human rights abuses of the Syrian government, which has killed tens of thousands of people in the last couple of years do not approach that of Israel, which even its least charitable critics can’t argue operates on that scale?
The human rights abuses of Saudi Arabia, which sentenced a man to being flogged weekly for the horrendous crime of blogging, are not comparable to that of Israel, in which free speech is respected?
In Iran a month ago, a young man who was arrested as a minor and sentenced to death for belonging to a Kurdish national liberation movement was executed. His crime was “enmity with God”.
I think the problem is not that these issues are not talked about, or that Israel is particularly egregious. Rather it is your utter lack of perspective.
Reply
This isn’t purely a numbers game.
It’s Israel’s illegal seizure and occupation of land
It’s Israel’s building of settlements on said land
It’s Israel’s inhumane blockade and stranglehold on Gaza
Its the killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians
Its the ‘national rights’ reserved only for Jews
And so on.
Assad’s rule has been a humanitarian disaster, but Israel has been committing what can only be described as a systematic genocide against the Palestinian people since the 1940’s.
My point simply put is that no other country (except perhaps Saudi Arabia – oil) could get away with this. And no the issues are not talked about sufficiently, as you are then quickly branded an anti-semite.
Reply
That’s funny that it’s not purely a numbers game. When we’re comparing the number of Israeli and Palestinian casualties it’s suddenly a numbers game, it’s a matter of proportion. It’s only a numbers game when that’s a game Israel loses apparently.
I think you’ll find I didn’t call you an anti-Semite. I still haven’t. What you are is fairly delusional. A systematic genocide? Israel is a modern, armed, industrial nation. If it wanted to commit a systematic genocide, you’d know because the casualty statistics would be in the millions. I mean honestly, that’s an insane point to make.
Armenian genocide, a million dead.
In Rwanda, 800,000 killed in 100 days.
These are genocides. There have been many others.
Now I get that we’re students, and we can basically talk crap, but you accused a country of systematic genocide. Now please explain, that in the context of every other genocide that has ever happened, and with a bit of respect for their victims, how either of those terms are valid.
Reply
What’s your point? Because it isn’t a ‘genocide’ by definition and human rights abuses are worse/have been worse elsewhere nobody should draw attention to the human rights abuses that Israel commit? The fact is that Britain and America and the west fund and support Israel and because of this funding and ongoing support, Israel have weaponry and resources which allow them to suppress, control, beat down and basically slaughter Palestinians whenever they feel like it, without taking hardly a scratch themselves. Many are homeless, and access to clean water and food is limited for some too. These people are having their human rights abused continuously at the hands of Israel. And they are allowed – no encouraged – to get away with it by the rich, powerful west. It doesn’t really matter if not as many people have been killed as in past genocides, the issue is that they are allowed to get away with this behavior without ever having their actions questioned. It is hypocrisy by Western leaders who ‘condemn’ human rights abuses, at its finest and most obvious. THIS is why people are angry. And since we live in a country whos government finances this ongoing oppression, we have every right to be.
Well, Israel is just conducting operations on a scale that the international community will allow it to, it’s not stupid. If it started wiping them out wholesale then they would be forcibly stopped – if not by the West, by the rest of the region. Whether that’s genocide or not is debatable, but there’s no question that it’s highly illegal under the most basic levels of international law and are openly committing war crime after war crime. Ignoring all the “accidental” killings of Palestinian children, restricting their food supply to “put them on a diet” was particularly heinous.
That being said, it is not in the same league as Assad. And while they’ve lost all sense of reason, they genuinely believe they are just protecting their country – Assad is murdering to retain his dictatorship.
I think that’s fairly obviously not my point – obviously because I didn’t say it. My point was that you shouldn’t accuse people of genocide, who haven’t committed genocide. Because that’s an awful thing to do.
So comparison to past genocides matters, because without it the horrific, offensive and untrue claim of genocide is left unchallenged.
Also, just so you know, Britain does not fund Israel.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/uk_aid_to_israel
I’m deliberately not getting into the thick of the debate over whether Israel is justified or not in its actions by the way, in case you haven’t realised. What I’m doing here is essentially fact-checking and calling people out for making absolutely awful, egregious and demonstrably untrue claims. Within what I’ve said you could paint a nationalist Israeli or a vehemently anti-Zionist picture, but it would be a more honest one than the untrue claims of genocide – claims which are in essence blood libels.
Well said!
Reply
The definition of anti Semitism is somewhat broader than 50 years ago, these days it includes anti Zionism
Reply
“will gather to pat each other on the back, preaching to the choir and inciting a rally-like anti-Israel atmosphere. How this can be supported by the University of Southampton, an institution with close ties to several Jewish bodies such as the Parkes Institute, can allow this to go ahead, is baffling”
But the state of Israel is detestable in it’s repeated brutality against the people of Palestine, and deserves condemnation. Why are you making out like this is a hate rally, it’s not, but seeing as the majority of mainstream media ACTIVELY avoids putting Israel under any real scrutiny, why is it a problem when a group of academics get together to do something like this to bring attention to the detestable and depraved behaviour of the joke of a state that is Israel. This is a pretty poorly thought out article, with no real understanding of why people are anti Israel, dressed up with a few tweets, quotes and a relatively good use of language to try and have display an air of intelligence and thoughtfulness. Why don’t you tell the parents of the three children killed playing football on a beach by the Israeli army that you don’t think this should go ahead. People are dying my friend. As-salamu alaykum.
Reply
Spot on. I sincerely hope the talk goes ahead, good on Southampton uni for having the balls to host this
Reply
Freedom of speech is very important, therefore we should not allow these views to be expressed at an institution for learning and discussion. Fantastic logic.
Reply
The author of the article seems to think the existence of the state of Israel is not debatable… Yet Israel and US are two of the UN members which tried to stop Palestine becoming a non-member state of the UN. Oh the fucking irony.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/29/united-nations-vote-palestine-state
Reply
Better Southampton does it than Fox News…
Reply
The author of this article, along with extremely paranoid people, are against discussing – just discussing – the legitimacy of a terrorist state which commits continuous massacres to the Palestinians who most of them are refugees now, because the so called Israel stole and still stealing their land. Last summer Israel killed 2000 civilians, 500 of them are children, and still not have been punished by any international body till now. You will not shut are voices. We will keep exposing Israeli crimes until the Palestinians get all their rights.
Reply
The University finds itself stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, I’m sure the powers that be are aghast at the negative publicity this is creating, but on the other, cancelling the event, or pressuring the organisers to do so will give the appearance that controversy trumps academic freedom, which would be an awful assault on academic freedom, no matter how badly that freedom is being exploited.
That said – every time someone draws a line between anti-Israel sentiment and anti-Semitism, it makes me want to kick a puppy.
Reply
Whether you agree with the legal position on the state of Israel or not, by allowing the conference to go ahead in this form the university are suggesting that they agree with Palestine’s position and are ignoring the other issues. I’m sure the university itself has no official position on whether it agrees with Israel’s right to exist (and presumably would not, for fear of alienating one community or another!). How is that freedom of speech, ignoring the other side of the argument?
Reply
‘Palestine’ does not have a position because there is no such state as Palestine. Similarly, those who live in the former Palestine territories are non-people according to the Israeli state. So, you have a non-people living in a non-state, both caused by the creation of an Israeli state, and the UK Jewish lobby are complaining about a conference to debate what is an obvious injustice in any definition of International law.
Reply
Another update to the story – with a new response from the University is here:
http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/another-update-to-story-of-southampton.html
Reply
This article contains many factual inaccuracies. This is an academic conference at which speakers and the delegates will be presenting a spectrum of views on the matter. The call for papers was circulated widely, all over the world. In addition, personal, and sometimes face to face invitations were made to academics from Israel and elsewhere to attend and present their views. The Parkes Institute was also invited to summit papers and attend. Many on both sides refused to participate, but many brave and open minded people will be attending. You will be able to to see from the published conference programme on the website that we have a broad spectrum of views, including a paper arguing why the conference should not be held.
The academic questions that will be discussed at the conference are already being debated and will continue to be debated after the conference. All at welcome to register to attend the conference and participate in the respectful and thoughtful debate. But people who do not wish to participate cannot have their cake and eat it!
I am a Palestinian whose family is currently living in Gaza – an open air prison in which people are left to die slowly. Israel even controls the amount of food at the minimum possible calories as revealed by its government papers. My family was ethnically cleansed from Majdal Askalan (now called Ashkelon) 6 months after the establishment of the state of Israel. Israel refuses to allow us to return to our home in Majdal in violation of international law and UN Security Council resolutions. Yet Israel seems to get away with it. Hence the title of the conference! I and all Palestinians and indeed many people around the world want answers to these questions. And what better place to do this than at an academic institution? It will help ‘change the world for the better’ in line with the University’s Vision. The alternatives -war, terrorism, oppression, stifling of freedom of speech – continue to fail to provide answers and are turning our world into a dangerous place.
I would like to take this opportunity to personally invite Mr Harry Majin and the readers to register to attend the conference where they can participate in the free and respectful debate.
Professor Suleiman Sharkh
University of Southampton
Reply
Maybe if the conference wasn’t £30 students would be more likely to attend.
Reply
Professor Sharkh: To be honest, if your desire for this conference to go ahead is based on personal motives, I think you should consider whether you are able to present an unbiased point of view to those who are undecided.
Two: £30 is pretty reasonable for a conference! It’s probably only going to just about cover running costs/food for a student to attend.
Reply
Of course, I shall be presenting and defending my view that the State of Israel is not legitimate as its creation has been responsible for the suffering of the Palestinians, with exceptional impunity. It is up to others with different views to attend and present their views. This is the point of a conference – you have a spectrum of views that are debated. If everybody agrees, there is no point holding the conference. People with opposing views can add ‘balance’ to the conference by attending and presenting their views, not by trying to silence and attack others.
My motivation is not just personal! This is a human tragedy that is inflicting direct and indirect suffering around the world. I care about both Palestinians and Jews. The State of Israel, its government, is not doing the Jewish people any favours by brutalising its young through an army service that involves humiliating, hurting and killing innocent people, men women and children. Jews and anyone from any religion or culture should be welcome to live in Palestine – immigrating and settling in Palestine has never been the issue before the creation of the state of Israel. People moved around freely looking for places to live peacefully. The issue is that the Zionist movement planned an executed an ethnic cleansing plan to expel the Palestinians from their homes and land, and subjected those who resisted expulsion to repressive and racist laws that explicitly give more rights to Jews than Palestinians. Such racism was not acceptable in South Africa and has not been acceptable everywhere, except in Israel.
My vision is to have a democratic country where Palestinians and Jews have equal rights. This will be a place where Jews will feel safe, much safer than now! There is no need for a country that is exclusively ‘Jewish’. You also need to remember that many of the Palestinians may be Jewish descendent. After all Jesus and the early Christians were Jews!
As for the fee of £30, it hardly covers basic costs!
Reply
The fact that you repeatedly compare Jewish and Palestinain rights against one another is the reason people think this conference should not go ahead.
Yes, Israel is a Jewish State, however a large proportion of the population of Israel are not Jewish. The issues created by Israel for the Palestinain people are not due to the rights they give to Jews over Palestinians, It’s due to the rights they give to ISRAELIS over Palestinians. So by you mis-categorising Jews instead of writing/meaning Israelis your points become
1. Non-factual and therefore invalid
2. Racist frankly
You’re ignoring the fact that there are several Muslims, Christians, atheists etc. that live in Israel peacefully who either are Israeli born or claim Israeli- citizenship and therefore are also treated better than Palestinians who refuse to agree with Israels policies.
I empathise with the Palestinians, and it upsets me greatly what’s going on because regardless of religion, culture, or nationality, at the end of the day people are suffering greatly. I am Jewish and for that reason, it angers me that in the Jewish state this is happening, especially because what has happened to my family and ancestors time and time again throughout history.
However, you have to disregard religion from this. This is an issue between Israel and Palestine. NOT between the Jewish people and Palestine. There are many Jews alongside me that are upset by what the Palestinians are going through.
But if you and others alike keep stating that it is a Palestianians vs Jewish People issue than I’m afraid you will not get mine and a lot of others support.
Please do not bring my religion into this because you’re painting us all with the same brush which is completely ignorant and incorrect.
Reply
The fact that you repeatedly compare Jewish and Palestinain rights against one another is the reason people think this conference should not go ahead.
Yes, Israel is a Jewish State, however a large proportion of the population of Israel are not Jewish. The issues created by Israel for the Palestinain people are not due to the rights they give to Jews over Palestinians, It’s due to the rights they give to ISRAELIS over Palestinians. So by you mis-categorising Jews instead of writing/meaning Israelis your points become
1. Non-factual and therefore invalid
2. Racist frankly
You’re ignoring the fact that there are several Muslims, Christians, atheists etc. that live in Israel peacefully who either are Israeli born or claim Israeli- citizenship and therefore are also treated better than Palestinians who refuse to agree with Israels policies.
I empathise with the Palestinians, and it upsets me greatly what’s going on because regardless of religion, culture, or nationality, at the end of the day people are suffering greatly. I am Jewish and for that reason, it angers me that in the Jewish state this is happening, especially because what has happened to my family and ancestors time and time again throughout history.
However, you have to disregard religion from this. This is an issue between Israel and Palestine. NOT between the Jewish people and Palestine. There are many Jews alongside me that are upset by what the Palestinians are going through.
But if you and others alike keep stating that it is a Palestianians vs Jewish People issue than I’m afraid you will not get mine and a lot of others support.
Please do not bring my religion into this because you’re painting us all with the same brush which is completely ignorant and incorrect.
Reply
Charlotte,
I did not compare Jews and Palestinians as you suggested! I carefully used the phrase ‘ State of Israel’, by which I mean the Government, the Establishment, the Elite.
I am very glad that many Jews live and want to be in Palestine (or Israel) – the name does not really matter. I am glad they perceive it as a place where they can feel safe. But I want it to be even safer for them and everybody else, by ensuring equality, justice and freedom of all inhabitants, of all religions. In fact, if I understood you correctly, I think you and I are actually in agreement on this point.
I am heartened by you empathy with the Palestinians, thank you.
The Palestinians that the Israeli Government calls ‘Israeli Arabs’ – a very racist term – do not have equal rights to Jews as you claim – there are explicit laws that give Jews more rights. I do not distinguish between Palestinians wherever they are – they are victim of various degrees of oppression. They are not the only one subjected to oppression and discrimination in the State of Israel – Arab Jews suffer from that too, for example, which is equally important to me.
Please come to the conference and join the debate. I will be very glad if you are able to attend. I am extending a hand of friendship. It will be lovely to see you.
You are clearly misinterpreting my point about bringing my religion into this.
I did not mention ‘Israeli Arabs’ (a term which I also am disgusted by). I am simply stating that those who recognise and accept the land as Israel (who are either born there or become citizens there), are given more rights over the Palestinian people. NOT all these people are Jewish.
These explicit laws you mention, give rights to those people who believe the land should be Israel and not Palestine. Being Jewish has NOTHING to do with this.
Stop saying the Jews have more rights because some Jewish people who prefer to claim Palestinian citizenship and do not agree with the current ongoings of the land, do not have them.
Again this is an Israeli/Palestinian issue. NOT a Jewish/Palestinian issue
Charlotte,
I understand your point, and I agree with it! You are right, it is an Israeli/Palestinian issue, not a Jewish/Palestinian one. I hoped this was implied in my previous messages, but clearly this did not come across. I used the word ‘Jews’ in reference to the discriminatory laws, such as the law of return, because the word is explicitly used in those laws and it should be understood in that context. Thank your for clarifying the matter and sorry if this caused any offence. I shall be more careful in the future.
What’s Jesus and Christianity got to do with this? If you’re assuming I’m Christian, then you assume incorrectly. I am an atheist on the basis that religion causes nothing but problems, and the world would be far better off without it.
Reply
Professor Sharkh: Just because “academics” will be making presentations and have submitted papers to a conference does not hide the fact that this will be nothing more than a bigoted hate fest. As one of the organisers of the event, I assume you are counting on this.
My family has been chased out of three countries over the past three generations but we have moved on with our lives, as have most people who are forced to leave their countries of residence. It’s a shame your family is stuck in Gaza. It’s a terrible place to live. But that has more to do with Hamas right now than Israel.
As for Israel’s refusal to let your family move back to Ashkelon, that does not violate International Law. Israel has no obligation to allow your family to move there, just as the countries that my ancestors were chased from have no obligation to allow me to move to those countries.
Reply
Bill,
Please ready my second post. Contrary to what you claim, this will be a ‘love’ not a ‘hate’ conference. Bigotry will not be tolerated. Come and judge for yourself.
Israel is actually obliged under international law, by security council resolution 194, to allow the Palestinians to return to their homes.
I do not support Hamas, but they are not the ones who control the borders and restrict food, medicine and other supplies. It is Israel which is doing this – this is explicit Israeli government policy, the Israeli government says this!
Reply
Professor,
Security Council Resolution 194 was a General Assembly resolution, not a Security Council resolution. As such, Israel is not obliged to follow it and Israel’s failure to follow it does not violate International law. Similarly, the failure of the Arab States to follow the resolution does not violate International law either.
The section of 194 that you refer to says, “refugees who wish to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date”. It does not refer to the descendants of refugees, only to the refugees themselves.
With regard to your comments in your second post, Israel already is a democratic country in which Arabs and Jews have equal rights. It is not, as you allege, a country that is or plans to be exclusively Jewish. By contrast, Palestinian leaders have called for a Palestinian State that is free of Jews, indicating that if there is any plan for ethnic cleansing, it is a Palestinian plan. Israel is the only country in the Middle East whose Muslim and Christian populations are both growing, more evidence that there is no ethnic cleansing going on Israel.
Also, Israel does not control all Gazan borders. Egypt controls some too. And for the past few months, while Egypt had completely closed its border with Gaza, Israel was letting in food, medicine and other supplies. The Gazan borders would be open if Hamas agreed to live in peace with Israel but they will not do this. The responsibility for the disaster in Gaza lies with Hamas, as much as you don’t like them. If you want to improve the lives of the people of Gaza, you should direct your focus on Hamas, not Israel.
While I appreciate that this is a sensitive issue for you given your family history, nothing you have written leads me to believe that this conference will be anything other than an orgy of hate, lies and bigotry.
Reply
Professor Sharkh gives us a preview of the dishonesty that will be parroted at this conference which you Bill have easily and clearly debunked. I just assume no one at the conference will be able to debunk it. This conference will clearly be about twisting interpretations of international law to delegitimise Israel and the spreading of more hatred. One only needs to look at the list of academics taking part to see that if the spectrum of views are broad as Professor Sharkh suggests, then they inhabit a very narrow part of the whole spectrum
Reply
So all the usual culprits playing happy families at a latter contemporary version of the Nuremberg rally . What’s that you say ? Comparing us to Nazis . Surely you jest . We are not against Jews – at least not the ones who stay quiet and behave as Jews are meant to behave . No it’s those nasty Zionist Jews we detest . The ones who have the temerity to stand up for themselves and refuse to capitulate to those who have tried to wipe them out for the last 56 years by three wars , two intifada and when all that fails try BDS . Listen to your little ditties ‘ From the River to the Sea etc despite the Good Professor Norman likening BDS to a cult .
No two state solution for the hate brigade . Not that it was ever on the table as far as the Palestinians were concerned . If it was how come no state of Palestine between 1948 and 1967 when there was no occupation and no settlements ? Don’t worry purely rhetorical .
Anyway I digress . Go ahead and stage your hate fest as prosecution , judge and jury and then head off to the pub experiencing that good feel warm glow . At the end of the day students will be students and Neo fascist ideologues posing false narratives and faux humanitarian concerns will have added nothing to conflict resolution and less still to alleviate the suffering of both Israelis and Palestinians
Reply
And to discover why the UK is now a cesspool of anti Israel and anti Semitic garbage, just read the comments!
Reply
The topic was discussed in Senate today.
The bottom line is that the university is legally obliged (under Section 43 of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986) to support Freedom of Speech, so long as it fits within the law.
The policy is here:
http://www.calendar.soton.ac.uk/sectionIV/freedom-speech.html
which includes a linked Word policy file.
Unfortunately there is no requirement for balance in any event or debate.
Comments can be sent to the VC’s office via .
Reply
Perhaps no legal requirement, but an ethical and moral one most certainly. Shame on Southampton.
Reply
Why is nobody allowed to comment on Israel’s treatment of Palestine without it being called antisemitism? Seen so much of this in this thread! Israel is funded by the rich west, and Palestinians have no money or resources, they have increasingly had their homes and land stolen; seen themselves become third-class citizens, been treated like dirt, no wonder they’ve resorted to disgraceful terrorist groups like Hamas to protect them! Their plight is ignored by the rest of the world. Just look at the amount of casualties Palestinians take compared to Israel! And yet as soon as anyone questions Israel’s actions, they’re branded an Antisemite! So are we supposed to say nothing about this injustice? Is it okay that these people are suffering because of Zionism? How can anyone say that’s okay?!
Reply
Israel, you’ll have your state, for a while, but before more than a few generations will pass, your state will be a state of sand. Global warming will see to your rivers, your soils and your people, and the only things you might stumble upon as you make your way through the blasted desert will be the stony remains of an unrepentent society. And all this unfathomable human emotion will be but a memory of very old people and pages in history books.
Reply
I think the Romans would have agreed with you. Shame for you they were wrong
Reply
Fatuous & dull article churning out the most average and standard centre-right thinking. Thought I think you slip into bigotry more by accident of stupidity rather than malice.
At your most original when you take Prof. Ben-Dor’s comments out of context to the point of libel, (you completely eschew their meaning and points of reference).
CounterPunch is excellent. Have you ever read it, or Alexander Cockburn for example? (You seem happier to take the Anti-Defamation League’s view of it – the league is an ultra-zionist, bull-shit organisation).
Reply
Re Cancel or move the conference. Cancelling is the right thing to do but tricky to achieve, as there is, naturally, institutional defensiveness and our justifications for cancelling, while perfectly valid, are complicated.
Moving it – I’m not sure how that helps.
Alter the title and format of the conference: Yes, it is currently masquerading as an intellectual debate, which is a travesty – will there be a single instance of an opposing viewpoint, or discussion about the validity of the views expounded?
No, it will be a dialogue of the deaf, incredibly self-confirmatory (and very boring at that). There is no excuse for labelling it as an educational exchange of views.
If the University will not cancel the conference altogether, yes they must demand that the views of both sides of the debate are equally represented.
Questions for the University:
Will there be similar conferences on the political legitimacy, and legitimacy of borders, of such artificial colonial constructs as Syria Lebanon Jordan Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Greece etc. ad nauseam?
a) Why not?
b) Using one of the EU – agreed definitions of antisemitism, viz. singling out Jews and holding them to standards that one would not entertain for any other national / ethnic grouping – this event is clearly anti-semitic. Does the University understand this and what is its position on this point?
Whilst not denying the obvious existence of a refugee problem, have they considered a conference on the fact that the Palestinian people chose to define their existence as Palestinians, only after Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967? – there is some academic legitimacy for that (see page 1 of the screed below) :-
c) Presuming that the University is absolutely genuine about free entry and exchange of views, I (as a Jew and a Zionist) and others with diametrically opposed views, would be allowed open entry to every session and the right to pose questions to every speaker without fear of intimidation and censorship. Anyone want to sponsor me and join me in attending and asking questions?
Reply
Sure. If you’re willing to go to the majority of the event, show respect to people at the event even if you horribly disagree with them, and write it all up afterwards and post your write-up online so we can read it afterwards. You can find me via a staff search. I’m assuming you’re eligible for the student rate?
I am making this offer privately, and not as a representative of the university. I have nothing to do with the conference or anybody involved.
Reply
Sigh. he/she has not contacted me.
Reply
How this can be supported by the University of Southampton, an institution with close ties to several Jewish bodies, is baffling.
What utter rubbish. There is absolutely no contradiction whatsoever in supporting Jewish groups while criticising Israel. That’s akin to claiming you can’t criticise Saudi Arabia while supporting moderate Muslim groups. Jewish does not equal Israeli.
And contrary to popular belief, there are thousands and thousands of Jews (many of them Israeli themselves) aghast at the way Israel acts. Should the university refuse to interact with the group of 300 Jewish holocaust survivors who find Israeli actions disgusting and akin to genocide?
Reply
The Palestinians could have stayed in Israel which many did but many didn’t want to live with Jewish people as they hate them so much so moved out and lost their right to citizenship Those who stayed have been given some of the best treatment of Palestinians in the Middle East. Many other countries never accepted them and Lebanon never even allowed the Palestinians citizenship which barred them from buying land and getting many professional jobs. This is something which is never raised by the Palestinians when criticising their current situation. If they stopped dropping bombs on Israel perhaps a 2 state solution could be reached. Pakistan seemed able to move a whole race of people out of their homeland and this seems to be ok even though it affected so many people and there were so many other Muslim countries they could have gone to. But the real problem is that the Palestinians don’t want the Jews to exist.
Reply
My two cents:
From my discussions with staff of all levels, the University is very happy for this to go ahead. Their view is fundamentally that academic freedom does not require balance and censoring a controversial conference is not in the interest of the institution (note: I am not suggesting that there is or is not balance in the conference, simply that the University has no legal or institutional obligation to ensure balance in academic conferences).
In fact, the only thing the University is concerned about is the health and safety of staff both working the conference and who are on-site during the conference. These sort of conferences risk attracting fringe extremist groups (both in support and against the issues being debated) and this is fundamentally something they wish to avoid.
There is naturally a debate about the ethical obligations of a University regarding this conference as well as the reputation damage that the University risks in allowing this to go ahead, but don’t confuse a conference as being a forum that necessitates a balance of views – we don’t often invite climate change skeptics to climate conferences, but everyone is generally happy to accept the conclusions of such a conference, despite the lack of represented views.
I actually welcome being part of an institution in which the legitimacy of a state can be debated openly and freely. Much debate has been had around the foreign policy of modern nations, the right to exist of states such as Serbia and Kosovo, and so on – why should one nation be immune to scrutiny?
It’s funny that the same student body that rejected membership of the NUS (a decision motivated as much by financial motives as those of ideology with respect to issues such as the ‘no platform’ of the NUS) is so hypercritical of this conference.
Finally, freedom is speech is only freedom of speech WITHIN THE LAW. Any real hate speech or preaching would risk criminal prosecution. Please don’t condescend or misrepresent that there is any likelihood of this being a free-for-all in which anti-Semitic slurs will run rife – the minute that happened, I can guarantee someone would call the police and this conference would be finished in spectacular fashion.
Sometimes people have different views to you on things. That’s life.
Reply
I’m not sure how you’ve decided opposing NUS membership is the same as opposing this conference…?!
Reply
Hopefully soon, Southampton will host a Conference on the medical merits of Mengele’ s experiments in Auschwitz or maybe Holocaust deniers Congress, David Irving is just up the road !!
What really makes me want to cry are all the moronic anti Israel knee jerkers turning up,they seem all quiet on the Syrian front, no?.
Reply
Ever hear of Godwin’s law?
Reply
I don’t think enough people have heard of Godwin’s law, unfortunately.
Reply
How about legitimacy of Russia over Ukraine and now Latvia ? Try
that one on for size ! And how long would it take until those professors
reap winds of rage at the hands of legitimate Russian secret service personelle post wink and nod from a certain ex. KGB man ?
Innocent people being snuffed out all over the globe all in the cause
of rights and other bull shit opinions. Go tell it to another mountain and
see what reaction you or they get. Stuff of nauseating nonsense…
Reply
The problem with this talk is not that it’s criticising Israel, it’s that it compounds this notion that Israel is the worst regime on the planet.
What people so often fail to realise is that Israel is NOT unique, let alone the worst of its kind. You do not have to look hard in the history books to find countless other examples of nations being created in ways worse than Israel – like through actual genocide and mass transfer of people across lands. Look at Nigeria, India, Pakistan. Hell, look at the U.S, South Africa, Australia. The problem here is that no one questions the legitimacy of these countries’ existence. The other problem here is, despite the fact that people so often accuse the media of being pro-Israel, the media rarely reports on or shows documentaries on these other countries I mentioned or of actual genocides occurring today in places like Dafur. The media focuses SO MUCH on Israel/Palestine that people believe that the situation is, not only completely unique, but the worst thing that’s happened.
And since numbers are so often utilised when it portrays Israel in a bad light here are some numbers for thought:
1. The Israel/Palestine conflict ranks 49th in terms of death toll since it’s inception in comparison to all other conflicts that have occurred since.
2. The percentage of Palestinians killed by Israel equals 0.3% of all Arabs killed in the Middle East.
http://www.danielpipes.org/4990/arab-israeli-fatalities-rank-49th
Reply
And so it goes on on on Assads genocide of his own people, Syrians of the very recent past were a civilised nation that CLAIMED hate for Israel. Now it seems that same hate turned on selves, now compounded by those refugees running off to Lebanon, now Lebanese threw them out to any wolves that fancy Syrian flesh for supper!! And
Israel is the only country to blame for all the above eh .? World wide
genocides ad infinitum so why not pick on the one country that has JEWISH citizens in a ZIONIST run internationally recognised sovereign state that has been in existence for over 60 years ? A legitimate state legislature exists and has handed down countless state laws for protection and rights of indigenous Palestinian Israeli citizens possessing everything including voting rights. Will that come up in this conference and if so how skewed will any discussion turn out ?
Yes there are abberations in the State of Israel, none more painfull than those found in all of Western Society, and every civilised country on the modern globe. We in Israel relish constructive criticism. By all means,
some people, have good ideas in many areas of life. The state of Israel is almost to the day the same time frame as modern Pakistan. And look at the difference in the advancement of Pakistan with it’s myriad of prejudices, and backward society ? Apparently, in that country, men are permitted to abuse young children even in public ? That evil would result in a long prison sentence in Israel and extensive rehabilitation with stringent rules applied post release. The list goes on and on and I
suspect none of these blogs will make one iota difference to the outcome ?
Reply
Great article Harry – & I completely agree. There are two sides to any debate, and when you’re only allowing one side of the debate any time, you are no longer having an academic discussion.
This conference should most certainly be cancelled indefinitely.
Reply
1. The Jewish people have long had ties to the Land of Israel, and Jews have always resided in the Holy Land.
2. Most of the land on which Jews lived starting in the late 1800s through the 1940s was PURCHASED by Jews from Arab landowners.
3. The United Nations in 1947 voted to partition the Palestinian Mandate (run by Britain) into a Jewish state and an Arab state, with an internationalized Jerusalem. The partition lines were drawn, basically, based upon where Jews lived and where Arabs lived. The Arabs rejected it; Jordan (then known as Trans Jordan) took over the land earmarked for the Arab state (East Jerusalem and the West Bank).
4. The State of Israel was founded on the land granted it by the UN.
5. Egypt, Trans Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon attacked Israel minutes after Israel declared its independence; Israel lost a huge percentage of its people in the ensuing war.
6. The so-called “borders” with the West Bank and Gaza are not “borders” – they are the ceasefire lines from the 1948 War.
7. Israel has not “occupied” the land of another nation under international law; Israel took over that part of Jordan that is the West Bank and the Gaza Strip from Egypt in the 1967 War – when Israel defended itself from the countries that wanted to annihilate Israel.
8. Jordan stopped decades ago claiming the West Bank.
9. Egypt stopped decades ago claiming the Gaza Stip.
10. There has NEVER been a nation called “Palestine” so it could not be “occupied” under international law.
11. Since there is no occupation, the settlements are not illegal under international law.
12. Israel has defended itself against attacks by Arab countries or terrorist groups.
13. While Hamas was democratically elected, Hamas killed or drove out the lawful government in the Gaza Strip (representatives of Fatah and other organizations).
14. Hamas has a charter that vows destruction of Israel.
15. GENOCIDE IS DEFINED IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AS DESTROYING/KILLING WITH THE INTENT TO WIPE OUT AN ENTIRE PEOPLE (ARMENIANS, JEWS IN WWII’S HOLOCAUST, RWANDAN TUTSIS) – ISRAEL HAS NOT DONE THIS WITH EITHER THE ARAB PEOPLE GENERALLY OR PALESTINIAN ARABS IN GENERAL.
Reply
For those of you who think this conference is well balanced, take a look at this blog post: http://mid-eastplus.blogspot.co.uk/2015_03_01_archive.html
Scroll down to the bottom, and you’ll find a summary of the opinions of each of the speakers. Almost all of them are anti-Israel. So, is this a balanced conference? No, it is not. Is this a freedom of speech issue? No, this the anti-Israel crowd wanting to voice their opinion unchallenged. That’s not academia either! If you’re afraid to be challenged, you chose the wrong career.
Reply
Yes, yes and yes.
Reply
They said this is bad news for Israel if it goes ahead it will expose their evils against Palestinians and Israel’s illegitimacy. If it is prevented it shows how a minority weld too much power and use it hatefully to stifle freespeech. This is loose/loose situation for Israel & Zionisim. Besides who needs to debate what we already know……Britain had no right to occupy Palestine and certainly no right to pass it on to anyone fullstop end of debate. They have no real PROOF they were ever there and lets say in an alternate reality they did flee abandoning their land. How is it right or just that now they have settled and are susuccessful everywhere else the Palestinians who have virtually nothing but Palestine should be kicked out (no compensation or alternative arrangements) and go where??????? At least the Palestinians don’t flee their land although Israel has Persecuted and murdered them for 50 years.
Reply
Not really “end of debate”. Whether Britain had the right to hand it over or not, there are now people living there and you can’t just ask them to up and leave. After all the crap the Jewish people have been through they need somewhere to live, it’s just unfortunate they live next to a bunch of people who don’t believe in their right to exist. Difficult to negotiate on that.
This cartoon comes to mind: http://jerusalemcats.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Cartoon-Death-Jews-880×632.png
Reply
From a different perspective: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/blogs/politics/17711-israel-lobby-pressure-on-southampton-shows-signs-of-desperation
Reply