University of Cape Town’s ostracisation of Israeli scholarship hypocritical

In much the same way as University of Cape Town (UCT) academics took Karl Marx seriously in the ’70s and ’80s, they are now following the less famous Marx.

“These are my principles, and if you don’t like them … well, I have others,” said Groucho.

Groucho would be applauding UCT. Last November, the university’s senate roundly defeated a motion to boycott Israeli scholars and institutions. Debate was correctly focused on principle, and not on the intricacies of a 100-year conflict. Let’s face it, no-one on either side will convince their antagonist. Importantly, the senior executive of UCT formally shared the senate’s majority view.

Less than four months later the senate has turned on its principles — at least those who attended the meeting of what was once a serious and august institution. UCT’s council will debate the senate’s decision on Saturday.

Many leading UCT scholars are shocked. Even in a country that has regularly shot itself in the foot, UCT’s actions have caused alarm. Arguably, the senate’s decision will do even greater damage to the institution than events surrounding the #FeesMustFall protests.

And all this has ironically been initiated by the academic freedom committee! I kid you not. Oh, Groucho, where art thou now?

That some individuals have a moral investment in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is their right. But for a university to pronounce on such a complex conflict is another matter. Enemies of the Jewish state see the clash through an SA prism. Jews are alien settlers, the arm of Western imperialism. They also believe the academic boycott of SA led to — or at least aided — the demise of apartheid. In that case, however, the issue was incontestable.

Surely the advocates of a boycott must acknowledge the fact that there are two sides to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — or as they say in the arts block on University Avenue, two narratives. Yes, the occupation has been too long and yes, the occupation is harsh. But this is an unresolved war.

Israel has been at war with its neighbours since the UN (not only Western countries) voted in November 1947 to partition Palestine (then a British mandate) into a Jewish state and an Arab state. In its formulation, Jerusalem was to be an international city. But the Arabs refused to accept the UN decision and, as soon as the British withdrew in May 1948, five Arab armies invaded the nascent Jewish state. The rest is history — entangled and complex, and fraught with arguments on both sides.

UCT surely has the right to censure and be morally vigilant. However, they cannot hold public institutions accountable for the actions of their government. In effect, UCT is saying all members of an institution one is unhappy with are worthy of condemnation. Will UCT remove from its library shelves books written by Israeli scholars? Put simply, a boycott is an infringement of academic culture. As Tami Jackson, writing for Progress SA, put it:

“The primary and indispensable function of a university is to provide a space for free thought and rational inquiry, where learning and teaching can flourish unabated.”

One wonders if UCT will be pronouncing through its senate and council a view on the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Egypt? Will the university consider boycotting India, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, or China? Or any other country that falls foul of its impeccable moral judgment? Moral consistency could well demand that a position be taken.

Given the actions of some regimes, especially the absence of academic freedom in China, sexism in South Korea and the marginalisation of Muslims in India, UCT’s academic freedom committee could well have a busy year or two. But I’m sure our omniscient masters of morality sitting at academic freedom committee table are up to it.

“All states commit crimes,” writes the social theorist Todd Gitlin. “Only one in the world is deemed illegitimate for that reason: Israel.”

Let’s be clear, even if Israel is considered by UCT’s academic freedom committee to be a rogue state, it is only one among many. Who can deny that? To single out the Jewish state only is, I’m afraid, anti-Semitic. In effect if not intent. Shame on UCT.

• Shain is professor emeritus of historical studies at UCT and author of A Perfect Storm. Antisemitism in SA, 1930 – 1948.