October 29, 2012: Carleton University issues report on campus relations

By Michael Regenstreif

A decade ago, on September 9, 2002, then-former Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu – who was returned to the position in 2009 – was scheduled to speak at Concordia University in Montreal. The speech never happened because the pro-Palestinian group on campus – abetted by a sympathetic student government and more than a few fellow travellers from outside the university community – staged a violent riot, which prevented the speech from taking place when the RCMP decided they could not guarantee Netanyahu’s security, should he travel the few blocks from his hotel to the campus – even under their protection.

The riot, which included a number of specifically antisemitic events, was, arguably, the worst black eye sustained by any Canadian university in recent memory. It also brought to public consciousness the difficulties, uncomfortable situations and prejudice with which many Jewish students have been faced on our university campuses as the campaign to delegitimize Israel as a Jewish state has gathered momentum over the years.

Two years ago, here in Ottawa, Carleton University established the Commission on Inter-Cultural, Inter-Religious and Inter-Racial Relations on Campus to investigate such relations on campus and make recommendations that would “contribute to a better context for dialogue and understanding on the Carleton campus and in the surrounding community.” The commission membership included Carleton students, faculty and staff, and representation from the broader community.

The commission report was issued October 10 and paints a generally good picture of relations on campus. Two groups, though, were shown to face greater levels of misunderstanding, if not actual discrimination in their relations on campus: aboriginal students and Jewish students and faculty members.

Most of the problems faced by Jewish students and faculty members were shown to be related to anti-Israel activities that evolve into expressions of antisemitism, including verbal and physical harassment, as well as anti-Israel positions adopted by student and faculty associations, which have nothing to do with their respective mandates, and by fears borne of the unbalanced power relationship faced by students in their relationships with professors and teaching assistants who are anti-Israel activists.

The commission makes a number of recommendations for improving the situation, including a new mechanism for students with concerns about academic responsibility and ethics and mandatory cultural awareness training for faculty, staff and students.

To specifically address the concerns of Jewish students, staff and faculty, the commission recommends establishing a Jewish Issues committee by Equity Services, which would “provide a venue for conversation, problem-solving and education.”

The commission report was received favourably by Jewish student organizations and by the greater Jewish community. Jonathan Freedman, local chair of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, said, “Carleton can serve as a model for universities across the country struggling to preserve civility on campus – not just regarding the Middle East, but when it comes to various hot-button social and political issues.”

As might be expected, the report was not met with the same response from anti-Israel quarters. In a letter to the Ottawa Citizen, Carleton sociology professor Peter Gose, who identifies himself as being anti-Israel, wrote the commission “explicitly joins the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism in conflating antisemitism with criticism of the State of Israel.”

But Gose is wrong. Neither Carleton’s commission nor the Parliamentary Coalition equates legitimate criticism of the State of Israel with antisemitism. But, to say that anti-Zionism is sometimes, and all-too-often, not a shield for real anti-Semitism is disingenuous.

That was certainly borne out in a tweet four weeks ago by anti-Israel activist Greta Berlin, co-founder of the Free Gaza Movement, a few days before she spoke here in Ottawa. “Zionists operated the concentration camps and helped murder millions of innocent Jews,” she posted to the Free Gaza Movement’s Twitter account. She later said the posting was an accident, meant only for her personal Facebook list – as if that made it all right.

October 15, 2012: Students should be exposed to a full range of opinion in the Zionist conversation

By Michael Regenstreif

Mira Sucharov, a Carleton University professor who writes the Values, Ethics, Community column in the Bulletin, also has a blog called The Fifth Question on the website of the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz. Sucharov posted a column there on September 22 in which she alleges that “someone like me” would be banned from speaking at events sponsored by Hillel Ottawa, the organization representing and serving Jewish students at our local university and college campuses.

According to Sucharov, the ban is on instruction from the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA). CIJA, the successor organization to several advocacy agencies, including the Canadian Jewish Congress and the Canada Israel Committee, acts on behalf of Jewish Federations of Canada-UIA and in partnership with the various local federations, including the Jewish Federation of Ottawa.

Sucharov made the charge after Hillel Ottawa apparently declined to sponsor an event for students with Peter Beinart, author of The Crisis of Zionism, who will be visiting Ottawa on October 23 as part of a three-city Canadian tour, which will also bring him to Montreal and Toronto. She said Hillel Ottawa consulted CIJA on whether to host Beinart and was instructed not to because Beinart advocates an economic boycott of Jewish settlements on the West Bank, what he calls a “Zionist BDS,” targeting the settlements but encouraging the economic support of Israel within the Green Line.

According to Sucharov, when she contacted CIJA to question the directive, Steve McDonald, CIJA’s Toronto-based associate director of communications, told her it was because of Beinart’s advocacy of “economic coercion” against the settlements.

Sucharov, herself, has endorsed Beinart’s call for a settlement boycott in her Haaretz blog and speculates, therefore, that she too would be unwelcome at Hillel events – or at events of other organizations influenced by CIJA.

As I point out in my review of Beinart’s book on page 20, I think his call for an economic boycott of the settlements is counterproductive. That point aside, I have absolutely no doubt he is a sincere and wholly committed Zionist dedicated to the pursuit of a two-state solution to Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians, which will ensure Israel’s future as both a Jewish and democratic state. And, while I would argue with Beinart about the efficacy of one tactic he advocates, I think he has valuable things to say. I’m looking forward to hearing him speak at Temple Israel.

I think Hillel Ottawa, like any organization, has the right to engage or to decline to engage any speaker for whatever reason it chooses. For example, I wouldn’t expect a decidedly right-wing organization to present a speaker like Beinart or a decidedly left-wing organization to present a speaker like Daniel Pipes. However, despite any personal opinions I have about what such speakers have to say, I want to able to listen to both of them. I think it’s important that we – students and those of us well beyond student-age – be exposed to a full range of opinion. While I want to applaud speakers with whom I agree, I also want to be challenged in my thinking by those with whom I may disagree.

While I understand and share CIJA’s concern with the tactic Beinart advocates, I would have advised Hillel Ottawa, as the Jewish umbrella group for university students, to hold an event with Beinart – who has many valuable things to say, much of which CIJA would have little if any argument with – on the condition there be opportunity for questions and dialogue. Then, challenge Beinart on his call for a “Zionist BDS” and let him compete in the marketplace of ideas.