The decision of the UK Association of University Teachers (AUT), to
boycott Israeli universities gives cause for despair to any British mother
hoping to provide her children with a meaningful education. It is not the
decision to boycott that disturbs, but the totally irrational reasoning
process.
Parents are entitled to believe that their children will be taught to
think and to make decisions based on carefully verified facts. But when
academic teachers make no attempt to distinguish between facts and
assumptions before making very important decisions, it is frightening to
contemplate the irrational influence they are exerting on their students.
It bodes ill for the reasoning abilities with which they are equipping our
future leaders.
Let me explain by quoting just one example. The decision to boycott Haifa
University was based on a claim that senior lecturer Ilan Pappe, faced
possible dismissal because he "slandered departments and members in the
humanities faculty, damaged their professional reputation and endangered
the possible promotion of some of them." In normal circumstances the AUT
would not deny any university the right to take a member of staff to task
for the reasons cited. The AUT's anger results however, from the fact that
the university's action arose from Pappe's defense of graduate student,
Teddy Katz, whose Master's thesis had been revoked. No consideration has
been given by the AUT as to the reasons for the revocation.
The readily ascertainable, indisputable facts are that In March 1998 Katz
submitted a thesis, in which he claimed that in 1948, Israeli soldiers
carried out a massacre in the village of Tantura. Pappe was his unofficial
supervisor. Far from denying freedom of expression, Haifa University
granted Katz an A+ for the thesis.
However, when veterans of the battle learned of Katz's allegations, they
adamantly denied them and sued for libel. When faced with proof that he
had falsified evidence, Katz recanted and apologized. It is astonishing
that the AUT refuses to recognize that in these circumstances any self
respecting university would be obliged to suspend the degree they had
granted. It is frightening indeed to realise that the education of our
children is in the hands of such shallow thinkers. Katz later recanted his
recantation and unsuccessfully appealed to the Supreme Court. It has been
reported that his legal fees were paid by the PLO.
If there were any logic at all in the AUT's reasoning, one would expect it
to heap praise on, rather than boycott, the university' for its dedication
to academic freedom in having decided to take no action against Pappe. The
anomaly is that Pappe, the strongest supporter of the boycott is the first
to break it, continuing as he does, to work for and interact with Haifa
university. .
If the AUT is motivated by a sincere concern for human rights, its
singling out of Israeli universities demonstrates not only inconsistency,
but ignorance. Far from the academic freedom, characteristic of Israeli
universities, Palestinian educational institutions are tightly controlled.
The Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG) has in the past
reported that undercover agents are present on Palestinian campuses in
flagrant violation of students freedom to express opinions. Even a student
writing a report in the classroom may be questioned by undercover security
members. If AUT's motives are to be considered sincere, one would expect
simultaneous support for PHRMG's call for the PA to eliminate these
practices. |