I've neglected LJ this last week as work absorbed most of my waking moments. As the current U.K. boycott of Israeli institutions of higher education was being voted on - and approved! - here in my department, we were preparing for the opening of an international conference on the Nile Valley which opened yesterday. It brings together scholars from the States (Harvard, Georgetown, Univ. of Chicago), Norway, Italy, Ethiopia and Sudan as well as Arab and Jewish scholars from Israel.

Universities are supposed to be places of open exchange. Rather than speak out against corruption in the PA, or the looming Palestinian civil war, or, if they feel it their place, make a statement against Israeli government policy, the occupation and Olmert's plans to withdraw from the West Bank, 67,000 British academics felt that the best step they could make to stand in solidarity with Palestinians was to boycott Israeli academics and the colleges and universities in Israel, barring them from academic exchange and research possibilities and threatening repercussions from British scholars who maintain contact with their Israeli peers. Of course, that this negatively impacts the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli instituions of higher education by barring them as well, apparently didn't dawn on the British. A piece in today's Guardian (UK), wonders why British academics are being selective in the condemnation. "Some see the boycott as anti-semitic in effect, if not intention. No British universities boycott China because of its human rights violations." http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/mortarboard/2006/05/should_we_boycott_israeli_univ.html

( Haaretz: British Academic Boycott of Israeli Schools )

Tags: academic boycott, israel, nile conference, u.k.
Current Mood: annoyed
Current Music: Dido Armstrong: Sand in My Shoes