MLA: No Boycott, But Censure of Israel for Alleged Curbs on U.S. Scholars

Resolution Decrying West Bank Policies Wins, Narrowly

Before the Vote: Professor Samer Ali moderates a panel supportive of BDS at the Modern Language Association conference on Jan. 10, 2014, one day before the organization voted on a resolution on Israel.
Menachem Wecker
Before the Vote: Professor Samer Ali moderates a panel supportive of BDS at the Modern Language Association conference on Jan. 10, 2014, one day before the organization voted on a resolution on Israel.

By Menachem Wecker

Published January 14, 2014.

(page 2 of 2)

But Russell Berman, a past president of the MLA, noted that many resolutions fail to pass the full membership simply because the required 10% threshold for voter participation is not reached. “I think a lot of the members don’t have particularly a dog in this fight,” he said.

The divide opened up by the MLA’s decision to engage the Israel-Palestinian issue was also on display at the panel discussion on BDS moderated by Ali and stacked with panelists sympathetic to this movement.

The session, one of more than 800 held during the four-day conference, drew about 150 people, ten times the number who came to a handful of other sessions the Forward attended. The panelists included Omar Barghouti, a founder of the international boycott movement against Israel, and David Lloyd, a leader of the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel. No one on the panel was opposed to BDS.

By comparison, a counter-panel held by supporters of Israel across street from the MLA session and outside the MLA’s auspices drew about 60 people.

At the MLA panel, among audience members who rose to offer comments or pose questions, five voice their opposition to BDS and four were in favor.

One surprise critic of BDS at the session, albeit a conflicted one, was Ali, the panel moderator. “I believe that the lessons of the Holocaust call on us to reject any ideology that privileges one group of people over another, which Zionism unfortunately does,” said Ali. Nevertheless, he said he could support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian problem, if one was reached, or a binational state and described himself as “agnostic” of the question of using BDS as a tactic against Israel. “I find it bizarre to boycott Israeli universities when so many of our colleagues there eloquently and bravely criticize Israel’s occupation, and some have been forced to leave,” he said.

The MLA drew strong condemnation from several Jewish groups, including B’nai B’rith International and Stand With Us, for permitting the panel under its auspices. But MLA officials explained that any member can submit a proposal for the conference, provided he or she does so by the April deadline.

Two Jewish groups, Hillel and the Israel on Campus Coalition, learned in December that the panel on Israel and BDS would be held at the conference. They then tried to submit a proposal for a counter-panel — some eight months after the April deadline — but were told that would be impossible.

Jacob Baime, the executive director of the Israel on Campus Coalition, said just before the convention that MLA members opposed to the resolution and to BDS felt like they were “being shut out.”

“They want a chance to participate in this discussion. The conversation should be far broader than the panel as it stands,” he said.

But Feal, the MLA’s executive director, contested this charge. “Our convention is a meeting by and for members. We do not give space to outside groups to organize panels,” she said. “If an MLA member had submitted a special session proposal by the deadline, the Program Committee would have, of course, considered it. In fairness to members who submit proposals in a timely fashion, we do not accept late proposals, no matter what controversies may exist.”

Both the BDS panel and the debate and vote on the Israel resolution took place on the heels of a vote by the much smaller American Studies Association in December to boycott Israeli academic institutions. The ASA vote, also meant to protest Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians, received wide publicity and put a high-profile spotlight on MLA conference’s Israel resolution.

Michael Kotzin, senior counselor to the president of the Jewish United Fund/Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, said it was noteworthy that the Israel resolution was “narrowly drafted” when compared to the ASA’s boycott measure. He suggested that the supporters of the resolution avoided calling for a boycott because they felt they wouldn’t be able to marshal enough support for such a call.

“I think our community needs to be careful in how we think about ourselves and talk about ourselves,” he said. “We are not victims. [So] let’s not talk about it that way. I don’t think it’s healthy, and it’s not effective in terms of what we want to do.”



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.