This is a cross post from Student Rights
A debate that took place last night at the London School of Economics ended in the audience voting against an academic boycott of Israel by a huge margin. The debate was co-hosted by the Palestine Society and the Israel Society and took place in the historic Old Theatre at the LSE.
Arguing in favour of an academic boycott was Dr. John Chalcraft. Arguing against the motion wasProfessor Daniel Hochauser. The Chairman, Professor Kevin Featherstone was the embodiment of grace, courtesy and balance.
In front of an estimated crowd of 400 people, these two academics went at it in excellent debating fashion. Opening the discussion was Dr. Chalcraft, who insisted that an academic boycott was pivotal in bringing apartheid South Africa to an end, despite the conventional modern wisdom that this actually is not the case. Dr. Chalcraft went on to explain how he felt individuals were not being boycotted here, nor were they at risk.
Dr. Hochauser delivered a smashing rebuff to Dr. Chalcraft in elucidating how the boycotts not only caused divisions rather than building bridges, but also cost lives as key medical technologies built between Israeli-British-American institutions would be jeopardised. Hochauser also went on to claim the boycott was either hypocritical, as there were no such calls to boycott British or American academics for similar charges for Iraq and Afghanistan, but also no calls to boycott Turkey or China either.
The Question and Answer session
For the most part, the questions asked of the panel were of a very high quality. Most audience members clearly understood the nuances involved and tailored their questions accordingly. Pertinent points were made about thoughts from inside the region which rejected the idea of boycotts. The Hebrew and Palestinian al-Quds universities joint statement on how they reject divisive boycotts backs this up.
There were questions asked about South Africa, the differences between boycotting China and the United States rather than singling out Israel and one audience member remarked about how they felt ‘it was all they could do’ – effectively calling any peace process null and void.
The audience was then asked to vote on the proposal, which resulted in a substantial rejection of the proposed academic boycott against Israel. Best estimates put around 60% against the motion and very few abstaining.
Those leaving the event from the upstairs may have noticed a verbal scuffle taking place which it seems was between Martha Mundy, who is co-convener of the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP) and Jonathan Arkush, the senior Vice President of the Jewish Board of Deputies. Observers recall Mr. Arkush vocally praising the Chairman of the event, after which Dr. Mundy turned abruptly and ‘threatened to slap Mr. Arkush’.
Dr. Mundy chaired the recent event with Abdel Bari-Atwan and shouted down the LSE anti-racism officer. She protested, “I am not prejudicing against people,” confounding the audience as no such accusations were made.
Student Rights comment: It’s sad when the students are able to have a serious and rational debate, only to end with people like Dr. Mundy threatening people because she disagrees with their views on the chairmanship of the event.
Video of Martha Mundy:
Harry’s Place adds:
The event is discussed in the Jewish Chronicle:
Mr Arkush said after the incident: “It was enlightening to be the object of a vitriolic attack from a person who holds an academic position at LSE.
“I can now understand better the atmosphere in which Jewish students have to suffer on campus.
“How she believes that screaming and threatening violence will help her cause is beyond me.”
habibi adds: Mundy is a piece of work. Have a look at her fawning introduction of Abdel Bari Atwan at the event at LSE last month. Atwan wants to annihilate Israel, has a record of antisemitic statements, and is a fan of Saddam Hussein. So what does Mundy say?
“In May of this year Middle East magazine named Abdel Bari Atwan one of the 50 most influential Arabs. We hope there are more like you among those 50.“