By Daled Amos
Vicious antisemitic attacks against Jewish students on campus are certainly
nothing new, but one particular incident led to a potential tool that could
both help protect Jewish students and offer acknowledgment of their Zionist
identity.
Let's take a look back.
In 2016, San Francisco State University was rated 10th on The
Algemeiner's List of the US and Canada’s Worst Campuses for Jewish Students, based on the ongoing disruption of activities and deliberate intimidation
of the students. One of the incidents that earned SFSU their
inclusion on The Algemeiner's list was their response to an appearance by the
then-Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat when he came to speak. Anti-Israel
students disrupted the speech.
But it was more than just a disruption.
And it resulted not only in being
included on a list -- it led to a lawsuit.
According to a Lawfare Project press release, the disruption in 2016 demonstrated that the administration of San
Francisco State University itself was part of the problem:
The lawsuit was triggered following the alleged complicity of senior
university administrators and police officers in the disruption of an April,
2016, speech by the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat. At that event organized by
SF Hillel, Jewish students and audience members were subjected to genocidal
and offensive chants and expletives by a raging mob that used bullhorns to
intimidate and drown out the Mayor’s speech and physically threaten and
intimidate members of the mostly-Jewish audience. At the same time, campus
police – including the chief – stood by, on order from senior university
administrators who instructed the police to “stand down” despite direct and
implicit threats and violations of university codes governing campus conduct.
The civil rights lawsuit was brought by The Lawfare Project the following year against then-president Leslie Wong along with
several other university officials. The lawsuit alleged that the situation had
deteriorated to the point that “Jews are often afraid to wear Stars of David
or yarmulkes on campus, and regularly text their friends to describe potential
safety issues and suggest alternate, often circuitous, routes to campus
destinations.”
In March 2019, California State University public university system settled.
As part of the settlement, SFSU agreed to the following:
o Public statement: Issue a statement affirming that "it
understands that, for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of their
identity";
o Coordinator of Jewish Student
Life: "Hire a Coordinator of Jewish Student Life within the Division of
Equity & Community Inclusion" and dedicate suitable office space for
this position;
o External review of policies:
"Retain an independent, external consultant to assess SFSU’s procedures for
enforcement of applicable CSU system-wide anti-discrimination policies and
student code of conduct";
o Independent
investigation of additional complaints: "SFSU will, for a period of 24
months, assign all complaints of religious discrimination under either E.O.
1096 or E.O. 1097 to an independent, outside investigator for
investigation";
o Funding viewpoint diversity:
"SFSU will allocate an additional $200,000 to support educational outreach
efforts to promote viewpoint diversity (including but not limited to
pro-Israel or Zionist viewpoints) and inclusion and equity on the basis of
religious identity (including but not limited to Jewish religious
identity)"; and
o Campus mural: Engage in the
SFSU process to allocate "space on the SFSU campus for a mural to be
installed under the oversight of the Division of Equity & Community
Inclusion, paid for by the University, that will be designed by student
groups of differing viewpoints on the issues that are the subject of this
litigation to be agreed by the parties (including but not limited to Jewish,
pro-Israel, and/or Zionist student groups, should such student groups elect
to participate in the process)."
That first condition -- San Francisco State University
publicly acknowledging that "for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of
their identity" -- was an unprecedented recognition of the importance
of Zionism to Jewish identity.
Just imagine if universities across the country followed this example in
recognition of Zionism. It could be the academic equivalent of the legislative
campaign to have the boycott of Israel made illegal in all 50 states.
When I asked Ziporah Reich, Director Of Litigation at The Lawfare Project, about the potential to establish these
guarantees at other universities around the country, she responded that
we think Jewish students will recognize the need to fight for the same
guarantees we’ve received in our settlement agreement with SFSU. We also
believe that our success will serve as fertile ground upon which Jewish
students can begin their journey to fight for their rights on campus.
This is not something that should require legal enforcement. Take, for
example,
the stand taken in 2019 by Martha Pollak, president of Cornell University, in response to the demand by JVP to
divest from Israel:
BDS unfairly singles out one country in the world for sanction when there
are many countries around the world whose governments’ policies may be
viewed as controversial. Moreover, it places all of the responsibility for
an extraordinarily complex geopolitical situation on just one country and
frequently conflates the policies of the Israeli government with the very
right of Israel to exist as a nation,
which I find particularly troublesome. [emphasis added]
Pollak not only took a stand against BDS. She publicly stated her
personal rejection of BDS and went beyond vague appeals to diversity
and respect for ideas on campus.
But how many university presidents have been willing to deal head-on with
the problem of Zionophobia on campus?
What are the chances of other
universities adopting the measures in the settlement?
For that matter,
has San Francisco State University really learned its lesson?
Apparently not.
In September 2020, the terrorist Leila Khaled was invited to speak at
SFSU. Khaled participated in the hijacking of TWA Flight 840 from Rome to
Tel Aviv in August 1969. The following year she took part in the hijacking
of an El Al flight from Amsterdam to New York City.
So how did the president of SFSU, Lynn Mahoney, respond in light of the
lawsuit settlement?
Let me be clear: I condemn the glorification of terrorism and use of
violence against unarmed civilians. I strongly condemn antisemitism and
other hateful ideologies that marginalize people based on their identities,
origins or beliefs.
At the same time, I represent a public
university, which is committed to academic freedom and the ability of
faculty to conduct their teaching and scholarship without censorship.
Mahoney went on to pay lip service to the now-required recognition of the
Zionist identity of the university's students:
My conversations with SF Hillel and
Jewish student leaders
have enhanced my appreciation for the deeply painful impact of this upcoming
presenter, as well as past campus experiences.
I understand that Zionism is an important part of the identity of many of
our Jewish students.
The university welcomes Jewish faculty and students expressing their beliefs
and worldviews in the classroom and on the quad, through formal and informal
programming. [emphasis added]
Prof. Judea Pearl, professor of computer science and statistics at UCLA and
president of The Daniel Pearl Foundation, was unimpressed by Mahoney's attempt
to reconcile welcoming a terrorist who targets Jews on the one hand
with declaring support for the Jewish Zionist identity on the other. He
points out:
it is a logical contradiction from the scientific perspective and a breach of
contract from the legal perspective...and I’m known to be expert on the
logical perspective.
Should Khaled ever speak on campus, not only would that be
a breach of the settlement agreement, but also a gross violation of
the university’s fundamental responsibility to protect its Jewish students.
[emphasis added]
But what is happening is more than just a continuation of antisemitic hatred
on college campuses with the typical weak response by the university
administration. We are all familiar with groups that claim to affiliate
with the Jewish community while rejecting Israel and a Zionist
identity.
What is being overlooked is that there is a pro-Zionist voice at the
beginning stages of asserting itself, and the public statement required by the lawsuit settlement is part of that -- even if imperfectly implemented by the university.
I predict American Jewry will soon undergo a profound, painful and
irreparable split. I cannot think of another period in Jewish history where
the schism was so deep, and growing deeper so rapidly. I see the split in
every aspect of life and on many levels...On the surface, most of our faculty and students are still sitting on the
fence, true, but the polarization is growing; the Zionist group is
becoming more assertive and is closing ranks rapidly, while the
Zionophobic group is becoming louder, more organized and more
aggressive. [emphasis added]
That pro-Zionist voice showed itself in response to a student at USC,
Yasmeen Mashayech, who attacked Jews with tweets such as:
o "I want to kill every motherf**cking Zionist"
o "Death to Israel and its b**tch the U.S."
o "Israel has no history just a criminal record"
o "yel3an el yahood [curse the Jews]."
But even more important than those tweets and the criticism of the
university's weak response is the reaction from Jewish leaders -- something
that has been ignored by the media.
In
An Open Letter to the Leadership of USC, more than 65 faculty members at USC took a stand:
We, the undersigned faculty, wish to register our dismay about ongoing open
expressions of anti-Semitism and Zionophobia on our campus that go
unrebuked. The silence of our leadership on this matter is alienating,
hurtful, and depressing. It amounts to tacit acceptance of a toxic
atmosphere of hatred and hostility.
The letter went beyond just condemnation of antisemitism and rejecting the
university claim that
because of legal considerations, USC "cannot discuss university processes or actions with respect to a
specific student, much less denounce them publicly." The faculty said it was
time for the university to publicly welcome Zionists on campus:
Most importantly,
Jewish, Zionist, and Israeli students, as well as those who support the
right of the State of Israel to exist need to hear from our leaders that
they are welcome on our campus.
Such a statement would not infringe on free speech or take sides in
political dispute. It is a call for character and dignity. It is overdue.
[emphasis added]
This would parallel the SFSU's settlement agreement recognizing the Zionist
identity of its students -- and not because Zionists need to be
protected as victims. More than that.
Again, Prof. Pearl:
We want the university to say there is something noble about Zionism.
Zionists are welcome here not because everybody needs to be protected, but
because they can contribute here.
This is what has been missing till now from the hand wringing of
universities, with their vague promises to their Jewish students that they
will deal with antisemitism on campus.
This is what has to change.
And the SFSU lawsuit and the USC faculty letter show that there are those
willing to start to demand it.
Tuesday, December 21, 2021
