Blogs > Cliopatria > Another British Boycott?

May 11, 2006

Another British Boycott?




Last year, the AUT, a British faculty union, attracted international condemnation when it passed a resolution demanding an academic boycott against two Israeli universities and all Israeli scholars at the two schools who failed to condemn the security policies of their government. Now, Britain's other major faculty union, the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE), has entered the fray. (NATFHE and AUT are in the process of merging.) The group is scheduled to vote on a resolution to urge a voluntary boycott against professors at all Israeli universities, as a way of protesting Israeli"apartheid policies, including construction of the exclusion wall and discriminatory educational practices." Ha'aretz reports that the resolution is expected to pass.

In the past decade, the only country against which NATFHE has considered a boycott is Israel. The conference is also considering a motion condemning the"outrageous bias" of the British government in opposing Hamas' victory in Palestinian elections--as if Britain, a liberal democracy, should have supported a party that embraces terrorism and whose charter calls for the destruction of its neighbor.

Given the backlash against the AUT resolution, it's unclear what NATFHE activists hope to accomplish: they appear to be so blinded by their dislike of Israel that they don't realize their action likely will be counterproductive to their goals.

But perhaps they're onto something, and we should extend the practice. Germany has been very critical of the Iraq war, so maybe German faculty unions should resolve to boycott British academics. But Germany, of course, has long mistreated its Turkish minority--surely justifying a call to boycott German professors coming from Turkey. And Turkish treatment of its Kurdish minority would be more than enough reason for a human-rights friendly regime to pass a resolution boycotting Turkish scholars.

Eventually, we'll be left with the scholars of only the nation that has practiced a foreign policy closest to perfect (I nominate Finland) being boycott-free. The center of international intellectual exchange can shift to Helsinki, the only place on the planet where academics from all countries know they could travel without possibility of a boycott.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Robert KC Johnson - 5/14/2006

I don't believe I ever stated that the PSC isn't a local of the AFT.

I believe that the AFT passed a resolution supporting the war in Afghanistan. Yet despite the AFT's position, the PSC has never supported the war in Afghanistan.

The PSC delegate assembly has passed dozens of resolutions on a variety of national and international issues over the past two years, none of which mentioned the boycott.

But overall, this post wasn't about the attitude of American faculty unions toward Israel, which was the main reason I didn't mention the US reaction in the post. I have written on this topic, fairly extensively, in the past. And I explored the PSC's general attitude toward Israel in a piece for The New Republic published a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060424&;s=johnson042606


Leo Edward Casey - 5/14/2006

So now we are reduced to pretending that the PSC is not a local of the AFT...


Robert KC Johnson - 5/12/2006

Indeed, my own union, the PSC, has never taken a formal, public position on the issue of the British academic unions' efforts to boycott Israeli universities.

Overall, I do wish that American faculty unions had been more consistent on this matter: after the AAUP condemned the AUT's action, it scheduled the disastrous Bellagio conference, which culminated in Joan Scott claiming that critics of the conference had violated a (still unrevealed) AAUP procedure.


Leo Edward Casey - 5/12/2006

It is charcteristic of K C Johnson's hostility toward unions that he manages to highlight what British academic unions do wrong without mentioning that American academic unions -- including the one to which he belongs, and which has been the rather constant target of his blog submission -- have been outspoken in their criticisms of what the Brits did.

http://www.aft.org/presscenter/releases/2005/052005.htm


Brian Ulrich - 5/11/2006

Yeah, someone needed to say it that bluntly.