UBC-Okanagan resolution jeopardizes neutrality | vancouver sun

Article content

Universities around the world are grappling with the challenge of balancing academic freedom with the right to protest. A recent resolution passed by the UBC – Okanagan Senate on April 25 serves as a clear example of how not to address this delicate balance. TO resolution addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the situation in Gaza condemns Israel’s perpetration of genocide and violation of international human rights laws, supports peaceful opposition to the war, and calls on the UBC community to strengthen ties with those affected by the crisis. However, this resolution distorts a decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), endangers fundamental principles of academic freedom and university neutrality, and contributes to the rise of anti-Semitism.

Article content

The resolution begins with the statement: “Whereas the International Court of Justice ruled on January 26, 2024 that the case presented by the State of South Africa that Israeli military actions in Gaza plausibly constitute genocide…” This statement, although circulating in social networks, is a serious misrepresentation of the ICJ decision. The recently retired president of the ICJ who issued the provisional ruling explicitly stated that the court “did not decide that the claim was plausible,” clarifying that “the shorthand that often appears – that there is a plausible case of genocide – is not what the court decided.”

Article content

Universities must be accurate and correctly refer to the facts, a fundamental responsibility of higher education and research institutions. By misrepresenting the ICJ decision, the UBC-Okanagan Senate has failed in this fundamental responsibility. As a law professor, I emphasize the importance of precision and nuance in language to my students. How can we expect them to be accurate and thoughtful when an official governing body resorts to discourse found on social media?

Article content

Article content

More important, universities should not judge on topics that are currently in public discourse and are still being actively investigated by researchers. Such actions interfere with academic freedom and violate the principle of neutrality. The UBC-Okanagan Senate lacks experience on these issues and oversteps its authority. Imagine being an academic seeking a fellowship or tenure-track position in the field of genocide studies and confronted by an institution that takes a biased stance. Or consider a future student interested in researching the conflict: How can you feel welcome at UBC-Okanagan after this statement?

The Senate statement on the demonstrations in Israel further illustrates its overreach: “Support all those who peacefully oppose this war, including those in Israel who have taken to the streets at great personal risk to protest the invasion.” While I passionately agree with this sentiment, and even hope to join anti-war demonstrations and demand the return of the hostages during my next visit to Israel, my position is irrelevant, as is the Senate’s position. Some argue that these demonstrations weaken Israel’s bargaining power against Hamas in negotiating a ceasefire and hostage release deal. It is not the job of the university to serve as an arbiter of such debates.

Article content

Finally, the use of the term “genocide” in this context is not only inaccurate but fuels anti-Semitic sentiments. Harvard professor Noah Feldman rightly states that the use of this term is part of what he calls “new antisemitism.” Feldman argues that accusing Israel of genocide can function, intentionally or not, as a way to erase the memory of the Holocaust and transform Jews from victims to oppressors. While it is logically possible for an oppressed group to become an oppressor over time, the Senate could have used other terms such as “atrocities” or “war crimes” that would have been less controversial and more accurate. The use of “genocide” perpetuates anti-Semitic stereotypes. Furthermore, while the famine in Gaza is deeply worrying and Israel deserves strong condemnation for restricting humanitarian aid, the resolution’s failure to recognize Hamas’ actions in exacerbating this tragedy reveals a worrying bias and complete lack of judgment.

While individual academics can express their opinions freely, universities must maintain neutrality. The UBC-Okanagan Senate resolution not only misrepresents the facts and undermines academic freedom but also contributes to the spread of anti-Semitism. Universities must foster an environment where individuals can dissent and criticize without the institution itself becoming critical. Only by upholding these principles can universities serve as communities of scholars and contribute positively to public discourse.

Erez Aloni is a associate professor at University of BC Peter A. Allard School of Law

Article content