<p>New</a> Columbia Israel Director Denounced 'Occupation' - February 28, 2008 - The New York Sun</p>
<p>Way to go, Columbia --- putting an antisemite like Rashid Khalidi in charge of the search committee for the new Israeli Studies Dept!</p>
<p>“Such service too often involves carrying out orders that have no place in a democratic society founded on the sanctity of human life,” the letter read. “For thirty five years an entire people, some three and a half million in number, have been held without basic human rights. The occupation and oppression of another people have brought the State of Israel to where it is today.”</p>
<p>Can anyone dispute that this man is making a debatable point. I’m not really an expert on the issues in the Middle East, but it seems that he does make valid arguments. Even a pro-Israel spokesman said: “Professor Cohen voiced his criticism of Israel in a reasoned and responsible manner,” a spokesman for a pro-Israel student group, LionPAC, Jacob Shapiro, said in an e-mail message. “Regardless of his personal beliefs, we hope that Professor Cohen will continue to demonstrate his commitment to meaningful discussion about Israel and its role in the international community.”</p>
<p>Wouldn’t it be equally as outrageous if the search committee nominated someone who completely ignored the reality that both parties (Israelies and Palestinians) play a role in the violence-ridden society that they share. </p>
<p>Dr. Cohen has lived IN Israel. He not unly studies Israel, he’s EXPERIENCED Israel. In my mind (and I AM neutral), this guy’s biased opinion is legitimate. He’s not just some crazy lunatic who has no foundation for his opinions. I think what you want is someone who is one-sided, no matter the facts. Whether your conservative or liberal, if you have a worthy foundation backing up your beliefs, then you deserve to be heard.</p>
<p>Columbia2002: You’re probably rolling your eyes or outraged about how liberal I sound and how Columbia is way too liberal. But I’m really just an fair-minded CONSERVATIVE, who welcomes a good debate (such as the one that Dr. Cohen will provide; I’m not saying that I disagree or agree with him, since I do not know nearly enough about the many intricacies that are involved; I am not one to make a judgement based on public belief).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>explain to me exactly how disagreeing with a country’s political policy is equated with racism? That’s alot like saying anyone who disagrees with the iraq war…or iraq occupation if you will…is anti-american or hates all americans.</p>
<p>Well, I myself am Jewish, yet I’m also quite vehemently opposed to some of Israel’s policies. I respect the need for a sovereign Jewish state, but we could’ve put it in present-day Uganda or at least executed the occupation of Palestine more peacefully.</p>
<p>Cohen’s statements are very anti-Israeli biased. The letter implies that the reason for the terrible conditions faced by the Palestinians is entirely Israel’s fault. Regardless of whether he has lived in Israel or studied it, this viewpoint is hardly defensible. The policies of the Israeli gov’t are not aimed at limited anyone’s human rights, but rather protecting the lives of its own citizens. The party who refuses to negotiate for peace is the Palestinians.</p>
<p>This is really disappointing to hear. And Shraf, he was not merely disagreeing with Israeli political policy but rather was making it like Israel is the oppressor and the Palestinians are the oppressed and therefore Israel is a horrible entity. Signing a letter like that does not help the extremely difficult process of establishing peace in the Middle East and instead fuels the fires of hate that exist on both sides of the debate. Uch, stuff like this p*sses me off so much.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s outrageous to put two completely different “roles” on equal footing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This argument doesn’t fly here or anywhere else. We don’t let crack addicts write our drug laws because they’ve EXPERIENCED crack.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t want Rashid Khalidi choosing the person for this job.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What’s the debate? Columbia creates an Israeli Studies department that is run by an anti-Israel guy who was appointed by an antisemite MELAC professor. It’s just more of the same. I’m not sure how this new department is different from MELAC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Antisemitism isn’t “racism.” And it’s fair to say that someone who is associated with a TERRORIST organization is an antisemite.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You don’t know your history well enough, then. The state is where it is – as opposed to in Uganda – because the major symbolic/cultural/religious/historical significance to the Jewish peoples. And what the he1l is the “occupation of Palestine”? It belonged to the Jewish peoples first.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right that the “we were here first” argument isn’t Exhibit 1 for the Zionist case. (It’s still a compelling argument, and one that gets lost.) I wrote it specifically in reference to a guy who’s Uganda comment demonstrates his absolute lack of historical understanding of the situation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right that it’s just getting started, so we have to wait and see. But what we have so far is a bad start. Is Khalidi going to be responsible for appointing the rest of the faculty?</p>
<p>@ columbia2002. i agree that it’s a shame and that it’s certainly ironic that a guy like Rashid Khalidi is in charge of appointing the head of a new Israeli Studies Dept. At the same time, I’d have to assume that he’ll be joined by other, more pro-Israel scholars, so this guy’s view will merely be one among many. With regard to your comment about the Jews being in Palestine first, I’d simply like to say that I don’t think that argument is effective rhetorically. It’s not really fair to draw on facts from a thousand years ago. More significant, I think, is the fact that the Palestinian leadership has historically been extremely unwilling to compromise in any way with the Israelis (and recent election of Hamas people is only more evidence of this). In any case, this debate plays out all the time, and there’s probably no use in taking it too far over here. For now, let’s just hope that this new dept. manages to measure up to the academic standards that Columbia purports to require of all its depts.</p>
<p>i see that got all mucked up since i re-wrote my original post. but yea, if this new dept. is worth anything, it’s not going to be made up of a bunch of scholars who are hypercritical of Israel. needless to say, a guy like cohen probably isn’t in the majority when it comes to scholars devoted specifically to the study of Israel.</p>
<p>Yep, my fear is that this new department becomes a straw-man for MELAC. If you’re a MELAC faculty member, you’d just love it if Columbia created an Israel Studies department and let YOU appoint to it pinheads with names like Cohen and —stein and —berg and —witz who are in total agreement with your views.</p>
<p>yea, well i guess unfortunately that’s a legitimate fear. but this is really just the state of things in academia i guess. another point: it’s unclear from the article you’ve posted whether cohen has denounced some sort of general “occupation” or whether his criticisms refer more specifically to, say, settlements in the West Bank. haven’t read the guy’s work, so i wouldn’t know. in any case, in a way it’s a positive thing that a country like Israel produces scholars such as Cohen. It speaks to the freedoms the country provides. To be sure, a scholar who professed some sort of strong admiration for Israel might not make it too long if he were living in the Palestinian territories.</p>
<p>Columbia2002,</p>
<p>Thanks for telling me about my own history. I’ve been diligently going to Hebrew school for the past eleven years or so. Of course Israel is religiously and culturally significant, but the original purpose of Zionism was to create a safe haven for Jews all across the world to provide shelter in case of a future Holocaust. I don’t think it’s at all audacious to make the presumption that a far lower number of Jewish casualties would have taken place due to war and counter-terrorism since 1948 if we had claimed Uganda instead of Palestine. </p>
<p>Oh, and Israel is occupying Palestine. Regardless of Jews first emerging in Palestine around 1300 BCE, the founding of the government of Israel was not born in Israel. The Palestinians they pushed out were, in fact, born there.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but I still don’t understand why you’re calling me “guy who’s Uganda comment demonstrates his absolute lack of historical understanding of the situation.” Were you aware that Theodore Herzl, the very founder of modern Zionism, supported a Jewish state in Uganda? Herzl’s idea met its demise mostly due to British politics. </p>
<p>I hope that’s enough for you to recognize my historical understanding of the situation.</p>
<p>there is nothing wrong with having both views represented, as long as they are BOTH there and both have equal influence. Either a pro-israel or anti-israel idea being overpowering would not fulfill the idea that colleges are supposed to be openminded places for all ideas to be heard. Freedom of speech people, let both sides have their turn.</p>
<p>^^
I would normally agree, but it seems that MELAC and presumably their choice (Cohen) tend to spew hate instead of reasonable argument. Would want a white supremacist heading a African studies department? Even if there were civil rights advocates in faculty spots? Now I would whole-heartedly support including Palestinians and/or Palestinian supporters in the Israel Studies dept., since the Israel/Palestine conflict is obviously and extremely important part of Israeli Studies. However, I would expect people who want to work towards peace and understanding, not people who add fuel to the fire and increase a sense of division/hatred.</p>
<p>Nice. It appears as though Jeremy Dauber, NOT Yinon Cohen, has been appointed to the position of director. Way to get the facts straight, Sun.</p>
<p>See today’s Spectator for details: [Yiddish</a> Prof Named Acting Director of Israel Institute After False Media Speculation | Columbia Spectator](<a href=“http://columbiaspectator.com/node/29836]Yiddish”>http://columbiaspectator.com/node/29836)</p>
<p>wmmk,</p>
<p>I do not know what is going on in columbia, but from what I am reading in this thread you are a true Jew.</p>
<p>I applaud you for respecting your religion/heritage enough to take the time to learn the true facts and NOT be overcome with the political propoganda which fills the minds of many today.</p>
<p>Your view are very impressive…if only more ppl saw the stuff the same way u did, we would live in a much better society.</p>
<p>plzaccept, </p>
<p>Thank you; I’m quite flattered by your comments. I’ve been lucky to grow up in a very liberal and intellectual synagogue, be raised by a practicing Jew and practicing Catholic (and be taught the traditions of both religions), and be surrounded by friends who come from just about every faith you can think of. </p>
<p>I really feel that the efforts of institutions like Columbia (albeit sometimes controversial and not perfectly executed) are going a long way to encourage ecumenical, open discourse about theology and its place in politics.</p>
<p>Thank goodness it’s not true, I was scared of Columbia2002’s vicious rage as a part of this argument, especially when he’s pro-israel.</p>
<p>Columbia has a long history of supporting some kind of morally shady figures. Not that opposing Israel’s occupation of Palestine is unequivocally “shady”, though.</p>