MICHIGAN — Arab American scholars and writers recently issued a statement condemning the forms of hate and intimidation several American Studies Association members continue to experience as a result of their stance on the group’s recent decision to endorse an academic boycott of Israeli institutions. 

A passage from the statement that was signed by more than 40 people reads: “We, the undersigned Palestinian and other Arab-American scholars and writers as well as Arab scholars in the United States affirm our strong solidarity with the American Studies Association’s position in favor of the boycott of Israeli academic institutions…We also condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the expressions of hate and intimidation to which ASA members are being subjected, tactics that are illegal or verge on illegality under U.S. law.”

Most of the individuals who signed the statement were professors from well-known academic institutions across the country including Brown University, Columbia University, University of California-Berkeley, University of Michigan, University of Illinois, and University of Maryland, among others.   

“While I have not received such crudely intimidating emails from other scholars, some of them have used their own language of intimidation.   While not true of all critics of the boycott, many of them seem to be angry over contemporary developments in the field,” said ASA President Curtis Marez. 

He says one Brandeis American Studies professor told an Israeli newspaper he blamed the ASA boycott on “the emergence of Ethnic Studies” which  “may have tilted the organization heavily in favor of people of color, in this case the Palestinians.” 

Marez says such a charge unfortunately resonates with the language of the petition organized by a handful of ASA members claiming that a “vocal minority” was trying to “force” the boycott on the Association. 

He added that since the ASA boycott was passed by a vote of the members, the charge of “force” is baseless, but the use of the word “minority” is telling given that the National Council is indeed largely made up of minorities. 

The website BDSloveletters.com features hate mail sent to the ASA. 

One email on the site reads, “By doing this it appears you condone Muslim countries who slice the clitoris off of little girls, hang gays and murder Christians. Either you condone them or you join them with similar feelings about Israel. All of this above and you single out the only country in the area who protects the rights of all faiths and beliefs.” 

In another email, one opponent of the boycott writes, “Shame on you! You are intellectual and moral frauds as well as, frankly, jokes. Except in this case, it isn’t funny.” 

David Skrbina, a Philosophy professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, says he hasn’t witnessed any harassment of his colleagues. That may be in large part because the issue is relatively new and there hasn’t been much discussion on it. 

In the past, Skrbina has received vaguely threatening emails because of his support for divestment from Israel.

He says scholars who are threatened or intimidated because of their support should document the source of the harassment—whether by email, letter, or verbally. They should identify, if possible, the person who initiated the harassment, and file a formal complaint with their administration.

“It is totally unacceptable for scholars to suffer retribution because they support a moral action such as a boycott of the apartheid Israeli regime and its illegal occupation of Palestine,” Skrbina said. 

The 130-year-old Modern Language Association of America recently adopted a preliminary resolution that would denounce Israel for certain actions at its borders. The resolution would pass if approved by the group’s 28,000 members.  

It asks the State Department to contest Israel’s denials of entry by U.S. academics who have been invited to teach or do research at Palestinian universities on the West Bank, according to a report. 

The ASA announced its boycott of Israeli academic institutions Dec. 4. The ASA has less than 5,000 members, and universities including Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, New York University and others have condemned the ASA for its decision. More than 200 American universities have rejected the boycott. 

Many universities have even canceled their memberships with the group. The ASA was founded in 1951. 

Several universities have issued statements strongly opposing the academic boycott of Israel. Skrbina says he was greatly disappointed by the statement of UM President Mary Sue Coleman and provost Martha Pollack dated Dec. 23 in which they “strongly opposed” the idea of a boycott. 

“They claim that such boycotts harm academic freedom.  But they fail to realize that it is precisely this denial of freedom that Israel imposes upon the Palestinians by restricting their freedom of movement and their economic development. And they fail to acknowledge the grave injustice of the Israeli occupation and system of apartheid.  Frankly it is deeply embarrassing that the president and provost of a major university could make such an ill-founded and immoral statement.  President Coleman will soon retire, and we can only hope that the next president will have a higher moral standard,” Skrbina said. 

Scott Kurashige, professor of American Culture at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, says the statement by the University of Michigan’s president and provost represents their own views and perhaps the pressure they feel to placate powerful donors and people with political influence. 

“It does not, however, reflect the view of the entire campus. Many of us support the ASA resolution’s effort to promote ‘academic freedom’ on an equal basis so that all Israelis and Palestinians can study and research freely,” Kurashige said. 

In recent years, the Palestinian cause has gained momentum that only seems to be growing. Much of the activism is taking place at universities where students are at the forefront of raising awareness and organizing demonstrations in support of Palestinian rights. 

 “I think the Palestinian support movement will continue to grow because it has the power of morality and justice on its side.  We have good reason to believe that, in this case, justice will prevail.  The result will be increasing pressure on Israel to stop its ethnic cleansing, to end its illegal occupation, and to halt its system of apartheid—both internally and with respect to the occupied territories.  Ultimately, I think it will lead to a single, secular, democratic state of Palestine, where all residents—Palestinians and Jews—will have equal rights.  And it will not be a ‘Jewish state,’ because that is a racist and morally repugnant idea,” Skrbina said. 

Kurashige says the field of American studies has developed and changed dramatically over the past two decades in two  important and related ways.

He says, first, there is a recognition that the United States is becoming a nation where the majority of residents will be people of color and that the study of diversity, indigenous peoples, racism, and the struggle for equality must be at the center of our analysis. 

Secondly, he says there is a recognition that we must critique and transcend American exceptionalism by situating the study of the United States in a global context. 

“These two factors have led a growing number of students and scholars in American Studies to see the Palestinian issue as something that is critical to understanding our own concepts of politics, culture, and social justice. 

As the debate widens and the facts emerge, I see more scholars, students, and members of the general public questioning the idea of unqualified American support for Israel and seeking a more balanced approach,” Kurashige said.