Shocker: Support for Wiesenfeld from academia
The only place from which I expected less support than among academics for
Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, in his dispute over Tony Kushner's honorary degree from City University of New York, was from Hollywood. Now that Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, (SPME) a group which represents 55,000 scholars, researchers and students on 3,500 campuses across the world, has
come out in Wiesenfeld's favor, will Hollywood and the theater be far behind?
But now, finally, a group has dared to stand up to be counted.
Before this letter was released, those scholars who did not agree with the glamorization of Kushner as the victim and the demonization of Wiesenfeld as the bully kept silent as did the entire organized Jewish world.
This battle for the soul of the Western campus is part of the larger battle for western civilization which is currently under profound attack. Proponents of hate speech and Big Lies are demanding academic freedom and free speech rights while, at the same time, they are denying these same rights to anyone who tells the truth about Israel (if it happens to be positive), or about Islam (if it happens to be negative).
I am reprinting this letter in full here. I hope that other journalists and bloggers will print it and perhaps also interview the spokesmen for SPME: Board member Awi Fedegruen (af7@columbia.edu) and Director Dr. Sam Edelman (spmeexecdir@gmail.com).
Here is the text of the letter:
Read it all.
Labels: City University of New York, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, Scholars for Middle East Peace, Tony Kushner
The Middle East at Halftime in Washington
Today is January 20 and it's exactly two years since Barack Hussein Obama became President of the United States. I was going to preface this post by saying that two years later there is little hope and too much change, but at least when it comes to the Middle East, Elliott Abrams correctly points out that what's needed is
more change - away from the disastrous policies of the last two years.
What led to the adoption of the policies that produced these results, and what might lead to new ones in the second half of Mr. Obama’s term?
Alas, there is no evidence of a fundamental rethinking by the president; his Middle East policy is the product of his view of America and the world. In this take, America has (worst of all under George W. Bush) been too aggressive, insisting on its culture and interests rather than reaching out to “engage” and bending to accommodate the interests of others. And those “others” turn out to be regimes, for in the Obama perspective individuals too often tend to fade away. We seek “engagement” with the Asad regime in Syria and the Mubarak regime in Egypt, and with the ayatollahs in Iran, not with the people who live under their thumbs.
Inherent in this policy is a deep contradiction. The president places great store in multilateralism (as opposed to the allegedly excessive nationalism, the “go it alone” approach, the disrespect for international organizations, inaccurately said to have marked the Bush Administration); he believes in the UN Security Council and the Human Rights Council, in treaties like the NPT and START, in the IAEA, in multilateral cooperation. But the regimes with which he wishes to engage do not, so that Asad tries to ruin the UN’s Special Tribunal for Lebanon and Iran’s nuclear program threatens to destroy the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the IAEA. The president is in this sense in the position of those who for decades sought “world peace” primarily by engaging with the Soviet Union, which did not share that goal.
So the question for the next two years is whether the president will remain wedded to policies that cannot achieve his stated goals. Unless shaken out of the current rut by events—terrible ones like Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, or even worse a terrorist attack in the United States, or positive ones like more revolts against Arab dictatorships—the best bet is that there will be no significant change in policy despite the lack of achievements. None of the personnel changes thus far announced involves anyone with a new and different perspective on the Middle East. No doubt there is some rethinking going on at the White House, but there is no sign that the President believes things have gone wrong. As William Quandt (who served in the NSC in the Nixon and Carter years) wrote in his book Peace Process, “Wishful thinking is a particularly potent way to resolve uncertainty.”
There's one thing that's not changed: Obama is still the anti-Bush when it comes to the Middle East.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Barack Obama, Elliott Abrams, George W. Bush, Middle East peace process, Scholars for Middle East Peace, settlement freeze
Nobel laureates speak out against BDS
38 Nobel laureates have signed onto a statement drafted by
Scholars for Middle East Peace against academic boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) actions against Israeli academics, Israeli academic institutions and academic centers and institutes of research and training with affiliations in Israel.
Of special concern are the continued threat of a boycott by the University of Johannesburg, South Africa, of Ben Gurion University in Israel, student government divestment efforts in the University of California system, an attempt to get signatures for the California Initiative to divest pension funds from companies doing business with Israel or Israeli companies, as well as the initiative to shut down the Georgia Law Enforcement and Education Center at Georgia State University which has training and research connections with similar institutions in Israel.
A central theme of the Nobel Laureates’ statement is:
“Academic and cultural boycotts, divestments and sanctions in the academy are:
* antithetical to principles of academic and scientific freedom,
* antithetical to principles of freedom of expression and inquiry, and
* may well constitute discrimination by virtue of national origin.”
Instead of fostering peace, these boycott and divestment efforts are likely to be counterproductive to the dynamics of reconciliation that lead to peace.
Two of the signatories are from the Technion and one of the others is Elie Wiesel. One of them was a college professor of mine.
Unfortunately, I'll be surprised if it helps.
Labels: BDS, boycott Israel, Nobel laureates, Scholars for Middle East Peace
The only place from which I expected less support than among academics for Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, in his dispute over Tony Kushner's honorary degree from City University of New York, was from Hollywood. Now that Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, (SPME) a group which represents 55,000 scholars, researchers and students on 3,500 campuses across the world, has come out in Wiesenfeld's favor, will Hollywood and the theater be far behind? 
