Update:
Chris Toensing, an outgoing member of MESA’s board of directors, sends a clarification on the boycott vote and what comes next:
MESA’s procedures are that such resolutions are proposed at the members’ business meeting at the annual conference. Resolutions approved at this meeting go to referendum. So the vote on Monday means that the resolution goes to a referendum of the full membership. Should the referendum pass, then MESA will have adopted the resolution.
Original Post:
A huge win for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement at the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) annual conference in Washington. Participating members voted overwhelmingly, by a majority of 265 against 79, to adopt a draft resolution defending their right to boycott Israeli academic institutions, part of the Palestinian campaign for the academic and cultural boycott of Israel.
The resolution “affirms calls for institutional boycott, divestment, and/or sanctions are protected free speech and legitimate forms of non-violent political action” and “deplores..measures of intimidation” that have been directed against other academic associations mentioning 4 by name who have passed similar resolutions in the past.
While the resolution doesn’t commit the association to take its own position on the boycott it “urges” the organization of discussions at MESA annual meetings encouraging MECA’s board of directors to create opportunities throughout the year to provide platforms for “a sustained discussion of the academic boycott” to consider an appropriate position for MESA to assume in the future.
Uri Blau reporting for Haaretz mentioned MECA’s status in the field of Middle East studies as being considered “the most important” and that Israeli academics are calling this both “unprecedented” and a “game changer”. Blau notes “the debate over a boycott of Israel is gradually moving into the center of the academic sphere and is no longer on the margins.”
MESA’s Committee for undergraduate Middle East Studies organized a research workshop on the opening day of the conference, Saturday, November 22, focusing on free speech and academic freedom. Featuring a panel discussion with Dr. Steven Salaita, the focus included “faculty governance”. The impetus for the workshop being the radical decision taken by the administration of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to abruptly fire Salaita from a position as associate professor in the American Indian Studies program, for which he had relinquisted a tenured position. In referencing the workshop and that rescission, MESA’s Preliminary Program (pdf) asks “What does it all mean for Middle East studies scholars?”
Reporting on MESA’s vote on the resolution The Chronicle of Higher Education (TCHE) mentioned attendees of Saturday’s workshop gave Salaita a standing ovation:
At a Saturday panel discussion on academic freedom and criticism of Israel, Rosemary G. Feal, executive director of the Modern Language Association, said her group had to resist pressure not to allow a discussion, at its annual conference this year, on whether to join the BDS movement.
The MESA panel discussion’s audience gave a standing ovation to Steven G. Salaita, who became a cause célèbre for many MESA members last summer after the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign responded to his inflammatory denunciations of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians by withdrawing an offer to hire him as a tenured professor. He alleged in remarks delivered on Saturday that he had been the victim of pressure on Illinois by wealthy donors and of “organized suppression of those who speak on behalf of Palestine and Palestinians.”
The next day of the conference there was a Presidential Forum on the BSD movement. The preliminary program mentions that calls to support the BDS had grown and that attendees would have the have opportunity “in a moderated, open forum” to discuss issues surrounding the BDSmovement.
Here’s the MESA BDS-Resolution Nov-2014, excerpted below:
“Resolved, That the MESA membership:
Affirms that calls for institutional boycott, divestment, and/or sanctions are protected free speech and legitimate forms of non-violent political action; and
Affirms the right of MESA members to engage in open and transparent discussion of the boycott of Israeli academic institutions in the context of the Annual Meeting and other
forums; and
Affirms the right of the memberships of all organizations to discuss, debate, and endorse or not endorse the BDS campaign; and
Deplores the measures of intimidation directed against the American Studies Association, the Association for Asian American Studies, the Critical Ethnic Studies Association, and the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association, among other associations, and some of their individual members, as we MESA members uphold the principles of free speech that protect the expression of such views and actions; and
Strongly urges MESA program committees to organize discussions at MESA annual meetings, and the MESA Board of Directors to create opportunities over the course of the year that provide platforms for a sustained discussion of the academic boycott and foster careful consideration of an appropriate position for MESA to assume.”
This is huge.
The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) is an offshoot of the broader BDS movement.
Thanks, Annie. I did a veritable whoop, holler, and jump for joy when I read of this yesterday. That it was passed by such a resounding margin is glorious.
It is “huge”~ the Resolution is a thing of beauty. Thank you to Professor Salaita, and to all of the good people of MESA.
“Blau notes “the debate over a boycott of Israel is gradually moving into the center of the academic sphere and is no longer on the margins.” ”
Blau’s got that right!
It looks like a commitment to take a vote at next year’s meeting by inviting fora to discuss and debate the issue in the intervening time. To the vocal minority of MESA scholars who not only want to prevent action on BDS, but to shut down discussion of it (by accusing its proponents of anti-Semitism), the motion challenges the opponents of BDS to come to the table with real arguments rather than smears. Let’s hope that MESA carries through on this commitment.
Lol. This is nothingness. It is a resolution by ideologically left academics affirming the right of people to be pro-BDS and the right of people to be anti-BDS, a statement anyone would affirm.
You can keep saying this is huge until the organically feed cows come home, and it still won’t be true.
MESA & BDS
At what point in a moral universe does an organization stand up and say, “Enough”?
While debates can rage about Israel’s morality or justification – or lack thereof – regarding not just “mowing the lawn” or controlling an entire Palestinian population, not only in Gaza but also the West Bank if not within Israel itself, at some point one must ask, “What if I were a Palestinian?”
The fear to act, in this case supporting BDS as an organization, is understandable. MESA fears the Jews. Actually, that may not be true because, notably, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), the fastest growing Jewish organization in the country, stands firmly as a very vocal advocate of BDS so perhaps we should say fear or the Zionists. But when, under whatever fear strikes one’s heart, does one realize that neutrality is no stance at all and that one must take a stand and by doing nothing one is taking a stand.
“Neutrality enables the status quo of oppression (and therefore violence) to continue. It is a way of giving tacit support to the oppressor.” (Kairos South Africa Document)
As is often the case, almost any solidarity with the Palestinians is vehemently opposed by the Israeli lobby who claim to want “neutrality” and “inaction,” and claim that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. But as Rene’ Cassin rightly states, “The solution to anti-Semitism is human rights,”
and as Archbishop Desmond Tutu has said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
At what point would MESA determine enough is enough? How much genocide is enough to finally take a stand? How much human suffering will we put up with before we decide to risk sticking our heads out, getting slapped around and demonized for a moral cause?
This issue is not about Jews; it’s about justice and I long for the day when, as we think of Israel we think of her many wonderful accomplishments in technology, pharmaceuticals, and many other great industries that enhance humanity rather than its Apartheid.
Meanwhile Simon Peres comes out against Boobi’s apartheid policy bill:
“Former President Shimon Peres on Thursday came out against the Jewish nation-state bill, calling it an attempt to “subjugate the Declaration of Independence to fleeting political needs.”
Peres attended a memorial service honoring Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, at his home and burial place, the Negev kibbutz of Sde Boker. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and current President Reuven Rivlin also attended the commemoration.”
“The nation-state bill could rattle the nation and destroy Israel’s democratic status at home and abroad,” Peres said. “Ben-Gurion’s voice demands that we be what Israel was meant to be – a model state that is sane and enlightened, and seeks justice, equality and peace.”
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.628849
If there ever was a medal for a moron who keeps ignoring advice, it should be given to dear Chickenshit Boobi.