Fanciful fads for (out of touch) Academics seems to revolve around their “favored pet notion” of a boycott of Israel. Once again the “activist drum of academia” (this time in Irish circles) is sounding the call for its peers to support an international boycott of their Israeli counterparts.
The call for an academic boycott is nothing new, its been tried before only to be dismissed after heated debate, which later deemed any such move biased and counterproductive. The last “call to arms” (in Britain) ended up in embarrassment for those academics which went along, seeing that a “supposed apartheid Israel” shouldn’t have produced any Israeli Arabs from its academic institutions.
This institutionalized “enlightened activism” of the supposed ” learned”, is pure tomfoolery, that is bigoted from the very start. Any learned person should know that the Israeli teaching institutions are filled with Israeli Arabs, some of which teach in these very same institutions. This of course brings up an interesting dilemma, for a boycott to be enforced, it must include all Israelis, including Arabs and other non-Jews…or will it just focus on Jews, becoming a racial boycott?
“We call for a moratorium on any further such support to Israeli academic institutions, at both national and European levels. We urge our fellow academics to support this moratorium by refraining, where possible, from further joint collaborations with Israeli academic institutions. Such a moratorium should continue until Israel abides by UN resolutions and ends the occupation of Palestinian territories,” the academics concluded.”
This is of course pure stupidity, when one realizes that the international academic community benefits greatly from their Israeli counterparts, and are absolutely loathe to remove themselves from any interaction with them. Only a handful of die hard activist academics remain entranced with the idea. Perhaps these Irish academics have no personal connection with Israeli academia in the first place, and being bitter, wish to deny that opportunity for others?
If you notice the wording of their text, they only mention Israel in connection with UN resolutions, like Israel is at war war with itself, being the only party to the conflict. What UN resolutions are they referring to, Security Council declarations, or those repeatedly passed by the General Assembly? The former being non-binding (chapter 6) resolutions, with the latter being only suggestions, carrying no weight whatsoever. That the GA declarations are usually the work of the Non Aligned Movement (NAM), a hold over from the Cold war period, (whose membership includes gross human rights violators such as, N.Korea, Libya, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Cuba.. etc) only further serves to discredit its utterances. KGS