of silencing and weakening the movement. As the movement is decentralized, which will be shown in this and other chapters, the “lawfare” strategy for attacking the BDS movement can attempt to significantly damage local campaigns. This is a point I further consider in chapter six on the movement’s challenges and limitations. Thus, this case study provides evidence on the movement’s scope and organizational structure, which contributes to my argument that the BDS movement is an innovative approach to challenging Israel.
2.1 Background of Institutions of Higher Education in Israel and the Academic Boycott in Britain
Background of Israeli Institutions of Higher Education
There are eight universities in Israel, with an additional university in Ariel, an Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank, and nearly 60 colleges throughout Israel.156 A doctorate can only be obtained through a university, while a bachelor’s, and often master’s, degrees can be obtained from colleges. The Council for Higher Education (CHE) is the accrediting and governing body of higher education in Israel, which is a 25-member council that is recommended by the Israeli government and appointed by the President. The Planning and Budgeting Committee, a subcommittee of the CHE, disperses the budget allotted for higher education to the universities and college, and is responsible for all budgetary related matters to the academic institutions.157
156 Council for Higher Education, “Institutions of Higher Education;” Israel;
http://che.org.il/en/?page_id=15417#Universities.
104 Accordingly, a majority of academic institutions in Israel are funded by the state; research in particular is significantly supported, with the government spending $260 million annually.158
In addition to a close relationship with the state, Israeli institutions of higher education also closely collaborate with private industry. Israeli universities that are research-based have research and development foundations that “facilitate the
commercialization of innovation abilities and industrial know-how of the universities personnel.”159 In addition, “science-based industrial parks” have also been created,
frequently located near university campuses.160 To support technological
advancement in the parks the government “provides investment incentives, loans, grants, and tax benefits to industries moving into the parks.” Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs boasts that the parks provide the expertise of university personnel and expenditure savings through joint purchasing with the universities.
According to campaigners for an academic boycott, Israeli academic institutions are complicit in the state’s violations of Palestinian human rights and other international laws. The rationale for boycott is based on connections between the state, private industry, and Israeli academic institutions; in particular, the latter’s production of knowledge and equipment used in perpetuating oppressive policies and practices towards Palestinians. Academic boycott plays an important contributing role
158 European Commission, “Higher Education in Israel,”
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/participating_countries/overview/israel_tempus_country_fiche_final.p df and Dan Izenberg, “Science and Technology in Israel,” Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2 July 1998; http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/aboutisrael/israelat50/pages/science%20and%20technology%20in%20israel .aspx. 159 Izenberg, http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/aboutisrael/israelat50/pages/science%20and%20technology%20in%20israel .aspx. 160 Ibid.
105 in the larger BDS movement by bringing the Palestinian struggle to the academic sector across borders and pressuring Israel through its academic institutions.
Background of the Academic Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions in Britain
As stated in chapter one, early BDS activities that in part led to the emergence of a border-crossing BDS movement included a 2002 moratorium call regarding joint research projects between Europe and Israel. The call was made by Hilary and
Stephen Rose and was based on Israel’s violations of the human rights terms set out in the framework of the European Research Area.161 That same year, Mona Baker, one of the signatories to the Roses’ open letter and professor of Translation Studies at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology removed two Israeli professors from their roles on academic journals that she published.162 The move was
especially controversial, as it appeared discriminatory of scholars based on their nationality. The matter was significant because it illuminated the inconsistency in how an academic boycott might be interpreted and applied. Baker was widely criticized for the decision and responded by stating, “This is the interpretation of the boycott
statement that I’ve signed.”163 Though still in its early stages, the heated debate of an
academic boycott had already begun.
In April 2004, PACBI issued the official call for the international community to boycott all Israeli academic and cultural institutions or state-sponsored events in support of the Palestinian struggle.164 Specifically, the academic boycott asks scholars and cultural workers to apply the following:
161 Hilary and Stephen Rose, “More Pressure for Mid East Peace,” The Guardian, 6 April 2002. 162 Suzanne Goldenberg and Will Woodward, “Israeli Boycott Divides Academics,” The Guardian, 8
July 2002.
163 Ibid.
106 1. Refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural
cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions; 2. Advocate a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at the national and international levels, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies to these institutions;
3. Promote divestment and disinvestment from Israel by international academic institutions;
4. Work toward the condemnation of Israeli policies by pressing for resolutions to be adopted by academic, professional and cultural associations and organizations;
5. Support Palestinian academic and cultural institutions directly without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts as an explicit or implicit condition for such support.165
Following the PACBI call and building on the Roses’ call for a moratorium on joint research funding between Europe and Israel in 2002, the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP) was formed in 2004. In support of the Palestinian call for academic and cultural boycott, BRICUP’s specific mission is to:
1. Continue to put pressure on the EU and the UK government for the exclusion of Israel from the European Research Area.
2. Develop a policy which encourages individual academics to break their professional links with Israel by such actions as:
Refusing research collaborations with Israeli institutions or to referee papers or grant applications issuing from such institutions
Refusing to attend academic conferences in Israel
Supporting Israeli academic colleagues working with Palestinian colleagues in their demand for self-determination and academic freedom
3. Work within our trades unions and professional organisations in support of such actions
4. Explore forms of support to Palestinian academic colleagues.166