A victim of the boycott

When the academic boycott was announced by the British Association of
University Teachers on April 25, I looked around for something practical I
could do. At that time I was reviewing a scientific paper submitted by a
British group to the American journal "Molecular Cancer Therapeutics," which
is published by the American Association for Cancer Research. Not knowing
the scope of the boycott, but being aware of the growing atmosphere of
anti-Semitism/anti-Israelism on British campuses, I decided that I would not
review this paper, but that I would write to the journal and politely
decline to review it because I objected to this British boycott.
So far so good. Then I decided that I would not hide my small action, but
would also write to a group of scientific colleagues to tell them what I had
done and suggest that they join in a general boycott of British academia.
From an American and Israeli perspective this seemed eminently justified.
Not only had a large British teacher's Union (46,000 members) opted to adopt
a boycott of two Israeli Universities (Haifa and Bar Ilan) but the prospect
of further actions of the kind could certainly be anticipated. Urgent
action was needed to cut off this trend, before it moved on to other fertile
ground. When I sent my letter I had no illusions that I alone would spark a
general boycott of British science, only that some individuals would know
about the possibility of this action.
In response, I received a few positive supporting notes from some
colleagues, but imagine my shock and surprise when I received a long and
insulting letter from a prominent British Jewish scientist (who shall be
unnamed), accusing me of being as bad as the boycotters, of being a "racist"
and many other things. Not only that, he stated that I should not be
employed at the Hebrew University and threatened that he would make it his
business, through his good contacts, to get me fired! I had thought that
sending my letter to the UK would not be exactly appropriate, but I never
envisaged such a vehement and arrogant response. I never expected to be
threatened with a boycott myself.
Naturally I responded to him, pointing out that a counter-boycott is not the
same as a boycott (if it were the UN would never use sanctions), and
certainly denying that I am a racist. There are two other points worthy of
comment. This person said that the only valid response was to boycott only
those who had actually boycotted Israel, not anyone else. In my opinion this
is a matter of judgment, since sanctions and boycotts are intended to hurt
the innocent to bring pressure on the guilty. Also, he claimed that the AUT
was not important and he knew no members of it. I regarded this as
irrelevant, because they certainly exist and took the action they did. It
seems to me that he had lost sight of the point of it all, much like the
British officer in "The Bridge on the River Kwai."
This particular scientist not only continued in this unbalanced approach and
responded similarly to another colleague who took up my case. Finally,
he wrote to the Rector of the HU and told him that I was a racist and an
enemy of Israel, and asked him to take action against me. Because of his
relationship with the Rector (who has invited him to lecture here), the
Rector took this matter very seriously. Luckily I had kept my host in HU
informed of my actions and of this person's reaction, so there was someone
who could refute these claims and put the matter into some perspective.
Also, since I am a Visiting Professor, I am not strictly under the authority
of the Rector, but that of my host.
A conciliatory letter was sent to this person and it was pointed out in the
letter that there are various ways to respond to a boycott, no-one has the
monopoly on the correct response. Further, those opposed to the boycott
should not be wasting their time and efforts fighting each other. The focus
should be on the counter-boycott. He responded quickly in the same tone as
before and vaguely threatened my host, who decided not to respond to this
"provocation."
In this situation one has to wonder why a British Jewish scientist would be
so motivated as to try to actually boycott an Israeli Jewish scientist
working at an Israeli University. What is there in the British Jewish
characterthat could instigate such a perverse reaction (or was it one
individual)?
Anyway, the question becomes moot now that the AUT boycott has been
rescinded. But, a lot of damage has been done, and the enemies of Israel
are not influenced by rational considerations. The next possible challenge
will be the companion Union NATFHE that is having their annual meeting next
week. I had a long and acrimonious exchange with their Secty. General, and
he is a died-in-the-wool "liberal fascist" i.e. he is more concerned that
the Palestinians not suffer from colonial occupation than that Israeli
children are killed by suicide bombers. So don't expect this struggle to be
over.