Hillel Threatens Its Swarthmore Chapter With Expulsion Over Israel Dispute

College Becomes First To Associate With 'Open Hillel' Movement

Wikicommons

By Derek Kwait

Published December 11, 2013, issue of December 20, 2013.
  • Print
  • Share Share
  • Multi Page

Hillel International, American Jewry’s campus outreach group, appeared headed toward a clash with its Swarthmore College chapter following the Swarthmore Hillel’s decision to allow militant critics of Israel and Zionism to take part in its programming.

The unanimous December 9 vote by Swarthmore Hillel’s student board repudiated Hillel International’s Israel programming guidelines as constrictions on free discourse. Swarthmore Hillel’s new stance will, in the board’s words, enable it to welcome “all…to walk through our doors and speak with our name and under our roof, be they Zionist, anti-Zionist, post-Zionist or non-Zionist.”

In a letter to Swarthmore Hillel’s communications coordinator, undergraduate Joshua Wolfsun, Hillel President and CEO Eric Fingerhut termed this “not acceptable.”

“Let me be very clear,” wrote Fingerhut in the December 10 letter, “anti-Zionists will not be permitted to speak using the Hillel name or under the Hillel roof, under any circumstances.”

Fingerhut also reaffirmed Hillel International’s rules prohibiting Hillel campus chapters from hosting programs that include groups or individuals that “deny the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish and democratic state with secure and recognized boundaries; delegitimize, demonize or apply a double standard to Israel,” or that support boycott, divestment or sanction campaigns against Israel.

He appeared to threaten Swarthmore Hillel with expulsion from the Hillel network if it actually allowed programs under its roof that violated these strictures. “Hillel International expects all campus organizations that use the Hillel name to adhere to these guidelines,” he wrote. “No organization that uses the Hillel name may choose to do otherwise.”

In a response, Wolfsun reaffirmed the decision taken by Swarthmore Hillel’s board, but said, “We look forward to a productive and fruitful dialogue with both you and with Hillel of Greater Philadelphia.” He invited Fingerhut to visit Swarthmore in person to discuss the issue, adding, “These are important and hard conversations that we are having within our community, but they are necessary.”

Drafted in 2010, Hillel International’s Israel programming guidelines have been a matter of contention at a number of campus Hillels for some time — condemned by critics as a barrier to open and critical discourse on Israel in a Jewish setting; defended by supporters as a legitimate boundary that allows for ample debate but which draws the line at giving an official imprimatur to enemies of Israel.

In his letter to Wolfsun, Fingerhut said that the guidelines were drafted and agreed to by a “broad coalition” of Hillel students, staff, and other stakeholders. “Hillel welcomes a diversity of student perspectives on Israel and strives to create an inclusive, pluralistic community where students can discuss” Israel-related issues, the guidelines state.

But in its resolution, the Swarthmore student board cited a recent decision by the Hillel center at Harvard University to bar Avraham Burg, a former speaker of the Israeli Knesset and chairman of the Jewish Agency, from giving a talk under its roof as an immediate cause for its decision. The Harvard Hillel objected to the fact that Burg’s talk was cosponsored by Harvard College’s Palestinian Solidarity Committee, along with several Jewish groups, including Harvard Students for Israel.

The board’s resolution also noted that some campus Hillels had barred the group Breaking the Silence, an organization composed of Israeli army veterans that promotes discussion of the ways in which it says the demands of military service in the Israeli-occupied West Bank corrode soldiers’ moral standards, and those of the Israeli Army itself.

Wolfsun told the Forward his Hillel is not worried about losing funding from donors unhappy with its stance since it is funded entirely by an endowment and has no board of overseers. But Rabbi Howard Alpert, executive director of the Hillel of Greater Philadelphia, under whose umbrella the Swarthmore Hillel sits, said that it is up to the Jewish community and the board of his Greater Philadelphia group to decide where Hillel of Greater Philadelphia’s funding goes.

The Swarthmore Hillel has not yet invited speakers to campus that might be subject to prohibition under Hillel International’s guidelines. But according to Wolfsun, what is important is that the center can now do so if and when there is a student demand to hear the views of such speakers.

The student board gave a signal of some of the individuals it might consider inviting in a statement accompanying its resolution. The statement cited several figures whom board members said the guidelines currently bar, including liberal Zionist Peter Beinart, who has written in support of a limited boycott of products produced on exclusively Jewish Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank; linguist Noam Chomsky, a scathing Jewish critic of Israel who nevertheless supports a two-state solution to end its occupation of the West Bank, and Jewish philosopher Judith Butler, author of a radical critique of Zionism that rejects its moral legitimacy.

In declaring itself free of Hillel’s Israel Guidelines, Swarthmore Hillel’s board became the first to declare itself affiliated with the nascent Open Hillel movement. Founded by student activists in late 2012, Open Hillel bills itself as a “student-run campaign to encourage inclusivity and open discourse at campus Hillels,” specifically in regard to changing the “standards of partnership” enumerated in Hillel’s Israel Guidelines.

Lex Rofes, an Open Hillel organizer, said Swarthmore contacted his group before it made its decision. “They said they liked what we were doing and wanted to be a model for what this could look like,” he said. “We are incredibly excited for this.” Rofes said his group had not heard from any other Hillel chapters but added that many individuals affiliated with Hillel chapters had privately expressed interest in Open Hillel.

Jacob Plitman, president of J Street U, the campus arm of the dovish pro-Israel lobby J Street, said his group has taken no position on the Swarthmore Hillel’s decision but supports efforts to open the conversation to voices beyond the current boundaries. “We think the health of Israel and the Jewish community requires a diverse conversation, and we must accept that this will include Palestinians and anti-Zionists,” he said.

Beinart has voiced support for Open Hillel, calling it “a deeply important effort to ensure that Jews on campus can ask the hard questions and have the open debates that they deserve, and which Israel needs.”

Wulfson admitted that the Swarthmore Hillel student board was concerned that its decision could alienate more conservative students. But he said, on a campus as liberal as Swarthmore, the board wanted to “create a conversation where everyone can take part, and this will help us to reach out to students who might otherwise feel left out.”

Derek Kwait is the editor in chief of New Voices Magazine, a publication of the Jewish Student Press Service.


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • "I’ve never bought illegal drugs, but I imagine a small-time drug deal to feel a bit like buying hummus underground in Brooklyn."
  • We try to show things that get less exposed to the public here. We don’t look to document things that are nice or that people would like. We don’t try to show this place as a beautiful place.”
  • A new Gallup poll shows that only 25% of Americans under 35 support the war in #Gaza. Does this statistic worry you?
  • “You will stomp us into the dirt,” is how her mother responded to Anya Ulinich’s new tragicomic graphic novel. Paul Berger has a more open view of ‘Lena Finkle’s Magic Barrel." What do you think?
  • PHOTOS: Hundreds of protesters marched through lower Manhattan yesterday demanding an end to American support for Israel’s operation in #Gaza.
  • Does #Hamas have to lose for there to be peace? Read the latest analysis by J.J. Goldberg.
  • This is what the rockets over Israel and Gaza look like from space:
  • "Israel should not let captives languish or corpses rot. It should do everything in its power to recover people and bodies. Jewish law places a premium on pidyon shvuyim, “the redemption of captives,” and proper burial. But not when the price will lead to more death and more kidnappings." Do you agree?
  • Slate.com's Allison Benedikt wrote that Taglit-Birthright Israel is partly to blame for the death of American IDF volunteer Max Steinberg. This is why she's wrong:
  • Israeli soldiers want you to buy them socks. And snacks. And backpacks. And underwear. And pizza. So claim dozens of fundraising campaigns launched by American Jewish and Israeli charities since the start of the current wave of crisis and conflict in Israel and Gaza.
  • The sign reads: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances.”
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.