36 No. 76 JUSTICE never only about ending the war in Gaza, or even about a Palestinian state. For many it was about removing all ties with Israel, Israelis, and anyone who has any connection to that country or those people. Given that 7 million of the world’s 15 million Jews live in Israel, and that the majority of Jews identify as Zionists, it is apparent that a main target of the BDS movement are Jews themselves. We have seen this playing out in universities for more than two years. This was never just about a ceasefire, or about Palestinian self-determination. For many, it was about delegitimizing and eradicating the State of Israel and isolating and ostracizing Israelis and Jews around the world. Crowds have blocked libraries or marched in public areas demanding “No Zios on Campus.” “Zio,” of course, is a not-so-coded word for Israelis and/or Jews. Jewish student societies and Israel student societies have been targeted, their events threatened, their members doxed. Jewish academics have seen their faces plastered on posters around campus with the accusation “Zionist.” Israeli professors have had masked men and women storm into their lectures threatening violence. The heart of the BDS movement is within universities. Of course, academic boycotts are antithetical to the purpose of universities, which is knowledge production and exchange of ideas. The movement to boycott Israeli universities is based on the premise that those institutions work with, provide research to, and otherwise support Israel’s national military. They insist that the universities therefore bear responsibility for the ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories and for human rights abuses, international crimes, and other violations perpetrated since 1948. Even if we accept that position, the move to boycott Israeli academics − whether in Israel or abroad − has been criticized even by some leading academic proponents of BDS.29 Yet this is the current direction of travel. Anyone who has served in the Israel Defense Force (IDF), including all Israelis who were conscripted as part of their mandatory national service, find themselves targeted. The same is true of anyone who has lived, worked or studied in Israel, or even people who have collaborated with Israeli colleagues. Their boycotts come in different forms. At the most extreme end, there are the violent protestors who stormed in the lecture of Michael Ben-Gad, Professor of Economics at City University of London.30 There are the targeted campaigns plastering the faces of “Zionist” academics across university campuses. There are threats of violence or death sent to individuals in UK universities. And then there are the insidious forms: The rescinding 29. See, e.g., Kevin Jon Heller “Academic BDS and Individual Israeli Scholars,” OPINIOJURIS (Jan. 11, 2015), available at https://opiniojuris.org/2015/11/01/academicbds-and-individual-israeli-scholars/ 30. “Treatment of Professor Michael Ben-Gad,” UK PARLIAMENT (Oct. 27, 2025), available at https://edm. parliament.uk/early-day-motion/64550/treatment-ofprofessor-michael-bengad 31. See Matthew Bolton, Rosa Freedman and John Hyman, “Academic Freedom and Antisemitism in UK Universities,” JUSTICE No. 73 (Winter 2025), 61-70 available at https://www.ijl.org/justicem/no73/61/ of invitations to conferences, workshops or events. The sharp increase in Israeli or Jewish academics not having their papers accepted for publication in journals. The failure to include such academics on funding bids or removing them from research projects. These actions target individuals, no matter their nationality or where they live, and with no regard to their individual views or work. Through these overt and stealth tactics, the aim is to de-Zionize academia. Ways Forward There are laws and regulations in place in the UK that ought to be used to prevent antisemitism and to protect Jewish students.31 However, the current situation calls for concerted action on safeguarding, organizational culture and education within all universities. While many general and generic statements have been issued, too few universities have made clear how they will tackle antisemitism on their campuses. We at ICPG have some clear recommendations. There must be an unequivocal public commitment to combating antisemitism in all its forms. Universities should ensure that they have clear definitions of antisemitism that are included in staff and student codes of conduct and other relevant documents. Those definitions need to be part of the diversity and inclusion training and awareness for all members of the university community. That training should be delivered by people with the necessary expertise. Staff ought to receive clear messages about antisemitism in learning spaces, including what constitutes antisemitism, responsibilities of staff for addressing it in physical and online teaching spaces, and where/whom they can access for support. The nature of antisemitism as a diversity and inclusion issue and the legal protections under national laws must be central to any training and
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=