Why Single Out Israel?

For Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz, petitioners for Harvard to divest from Israel are “bigots.” For University President Lawrence H. Summers, recent petitions “are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent.” This demonization of the divestment drive by a pair of Harvard’s most powerful figures is unjustified.

Our nation and our academic community need more open dialogue on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We need to criticize and question the nature of our relationship with Israel. With the United States government firmly on the side of the Israelis in this bloody conflict, it is in the academic communities, the colleges and universities, where alternative political discussions and ideas must flourish

Granted, Summers was right when he said on Sept. 17 that there has been an alarming increase in anti-Semitism the world over, particularly in the Arab and Muslim world, and all efforts should be made to resist this evil trend. But to equate this ugly, violent development with a serious political argument against the perceived injustices directed at an entire Palestinian population by a democracy and strong American ally is irresponsible. In a similar vein, Summers’ own logic of actions that are in effect, if not in intent, anti-Semitic can actually be used to describe America’s policy against Iraq or other Arab states as “anti-Muslim.” Israel’s own policies can even be considered “anti-Arab.” It is clear that such characterizations are both simplistic and dangerously flawed.

Perhaps Summers would be enlightened to know that one of the reasons Israel is being “singled out” amongst the whole community of nations is not because of anti-Semitism but because it is the largest recipient of American foreign aid and is dependent upon American taxpayers for much of the same weapons and tanks used against the Palestinian population. Americans foot much of the bill for the bullets, tank shells, smart bombs, and helicopters used against the densely packed, largely defenseless Palestinian population. So when these same Americans see this violence played out on their television sets or vividly portrayed in the newspapers everyday, you cannot fault them for questioning the sanity of financing it.

While other nations may undoubtedly have worse human rights records than Israel, like China, the Sudan and North Korea, these same countries do not actively abrogate the rights of millions of people that are not their own citizens. While Israels human rights record within its borders is relatively clean compared to its neighbors, it also projects a humiliating and often violent military occupation outside its national boundaries, affecting the lives of people that it has no official jurisdiction over. The Palestinians are not made citizens of the state of Israel, and are not allowed to create a civil society of their own, free from the entanglements of the Israeli government and military. They are a people in limbo, directly suppressed by the Israeli government from living their normal lives, and stripped of their right to self-determination. This situation is a unique one in the world today, and is the essence behind the focus on Israel in the divestment drive. It is because the conflict is an international one, affecting two different groups of people, with one enforcing an occupation on another, that the worlds attention is focused on Israel. This focus is no different from the focus on the Soviet Union when it occupied Eastern Europe or when Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait. As is the case for Israel now, there was tremendous international outrage and these two countries received widespread condemnation for their actions.

Rather than being unfairly singled out, as Summers claims, Israel is rightly being put in the spotlight for its three and a half decades of waffling on the Palestinian territories issue, all the while absorbing billions of dollars in American aid to pursue its status-quo policy of military occupation. If the American government will not take the initiative to push the Israelis to a resolution of the issue, Harvard must, like in other endeavors, take the lead.