Decision is AUT of control
In Monday’s Times the leading letter signed by four distinguished academics from the University of Oxford (Blakemore, Dawkins, Noble and Yudkin) stated: “The AUT’s proposed academic boycott of certain Israeli universities breaks a long-standing international consensus, which has proved to be of great value for the freedom of association of academics and the advancement of knowledge”.
The consensus they refer to is in Statute Five of the International Council of Science the relevant section which states that there should be: “freedom of association and expression, access to data and information, and freedom of communication and movement in connection with international scientific activities without discrimination on the basis of such factors as citizenship, religion, creed, political stance, ethnic origin, race, colour, language, age or sex."
This statute has been fundamental in protecting the freedom of academics in different political regimes so that scientific ideas can be exchanged. As academics, we must seek to defend freedom of thought. The last Vice Chancellor, Sir Colin Lucas stated in his 2002 oration.
“The principles upon which a University rests should lead us to resist and remedy explicit or implicit discrimination … Academics fail their profession if they anathematise whole categories of people for the misdeeds of some individuals or of their government, or else thoughtlessly speak with contempt about persons or groups on the basis of their race, religion or sex."
The Times judgement on the AUT's decision was to call it ‘Blinkered and ill - timed’ and it went on to say: “the AUT boycott of two universities in Israel was a mockery of academic freedom … and that their actions are an echo of the Nazi ban on Jewish academics and the general discrimination so common three generations ago”… In both Universities Jews and Arabs studied together and Haifa there is substantial number of Arab lecturers and students.
Restricting academic relationships to advance particular political goals, diminishes the spirit of open collaborative scholarship. When science and research become hostages to political agendas, the value of both endeavours is demeaned. Academic boycotts undermine the basic premise of intellectual life which is that ideas make a difference. From personal experience I have seen how intellectual exchanges across cultures can open minds. Dialogue not confrontation must always be the way forward.
Why did not the AUT ask the Universities to present their positions? The solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is complex. The AUT boycott is also retrograde when one considers the positive steps that have been taken recently in the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians.
Indeed in Rome on May 3rd and 4th in 2004 there was an agreement of principles between five Israeli Universities and four Palestinian Universities, with EU representatives as observers in order to enable them to work together. I have been working for the last 30 years to use technology as bridge for peace, throughout the world and particularly in the Middle East.
I have seen first hand how scientific collaborations between Israelis and Palestinians at Beer Sheva University in the Negev have been a powerful force for healing and for peace. I continue to believe that the sharing of science and all knowledge should know no barriers. I wrote to President Anwar Sadat before he made his historic visit to Israel suggesting that Oxford may have a role to play in fostering academic exchanges between Israel and Egypt.
I was encouraged by his response and that of the Israelis academics who saw this as an opportunity to work for better relations between the two countries. And they are happening between Israel and her other neighbours. We all have a part to play in supporting the opportunities that now exist for peace. There are many collaborations going on which are far from the limelight. Neither the Palestinian or the Israeli are drawing attention to these. They are quietly getting on with them.
These kind of collaborations do not generate headlines. But they do bring people together. Without boycotts, without hatred and by building bridges.
2nd Jun 2005