
Received by e-mail from the author, Denis
MacEoin,
a senior editor of the Middle East
Quarterly,
The Committee
Edinburgh University Student
Association
May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA?
I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic
History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell
Sutton, two of Britain's great Middle East experts in their day. I later went on
to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle
University. Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles
in this field.
I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle
Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the
EUSA motion and vote. I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has
never been a system of apartheid in Israel. That is not my opinion, that is fact
that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she
choose to visit Israel to see for themselves.
Let me spell this out,
since I have the impression that those member of EUSA who voted for this motion
are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all
likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the
anti-Israel lobby. Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable. But I'm not
talking about ordinary criticism of Israel. I'm speaking of a hatred that
permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out. Thus, Israel is
repeatedly referred to as a "Nazi" state. In what sense is this true, even as a
metaphor? Where are the Israeli concentration camps? The einzatsgruppen? The SS?
The Nuremberg Laws? The Final Solution? None of these things nor anything
remotely resembling them exists in Israel, precisely because the Jews, more than
anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for. It is claimed that there has
been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere). Where? When? No honest
historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves. But
calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way
to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.
Likewise
apartheid. For apartheid to exist, there would have to be a situation that
closely resembled things in South Africa under the apartheid regime.
Unfortunately for those who believe this, a weekend in any part of Israel would
be enough to show how ridiculous the claim is. That a body of university
students actually fell for this and voted on it is a sad comment on the state of
modern education. The most obvious focus for apartheid would be the country's
20% Arab population. Under Israeli law, Arab Israelis have exactly the same
rights as Jews or anyone else; Muslims have the same rights as Jews or
Christians; Baha'is, severely persecuted in Iran, flourish in Israel, where they
have their world centre; Ahmadi Muslims, severely persecuted in Pakistan and
elsewhere, are kept safe by Israel; the holy places of all religions are
protected under a specific Israeli law. Arabs form 20% of the university
population (an exact echo of their percentage in the general population). In
Iran, the Baha'is (the largest religious minority) are forbidden to study in any
university or to run their own universities: why aren't your members boycotting
Iran?
Arabs in Israel can go anywhere they want, unlike blacks in
apartheid South Africa. They use public transport, they eat in restaurants, they
go to swimming pools, they use libraries, they go to cinemas alongside Jews =
something no blacks could do in South Africa. Israeli hospitals not only treat
Jews and Arabs, they also treat Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank. On the
same wards, in the same operating theatres.
In Israel, women have the
same rights as men: there is no gender apartheid. Gay men and women face no
restrictions, and Palestinian gays often escape into Israel, knowing they may be
killed at home. It seems bizarre to me that LGBT groups call for a boycott of
Israel and say nothing about countries like Iran, where gay men are hanged or
stoned to death. That illustrates a mindset that beggars belief. Intelligent
students thinking it's better to be silent about regimes that kill gay people,
but good to condemn the only country in the Middle East that rescues and
protects gay people. Is that supposed to be a sick joke?
University is
supposed to be about learning to use your brain, to think rationally, to examine
evidence, to reach conclusions based on solid evidence, to compare sources, to
weigh up one view against one or more others. If the best Edinburgh can now
produce are students who have no idea how to do any of these things, then the
future is bleak. I do not object to well documented criticism of Israel. I do
object when supposedly intelligent people single the Jewish state out above
states that are horrific in their treatment of their populations. We are going
through the biggest upheaval in the Middle East since the 7th and 8th centuries,
and it's clear that Arabs and Iranians are rebelling against terrifying regimes
that fight back by killing their own citizens. Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs
alike, do not rebel (though they are free to protest). Yet Edinburgh students
mount no demonstrations and call for no boycotts against Libya, Bahrain, Saudi
Arabia, Yemen, and Iran. They prefer to make false accusations against one of
the world's freest countries, the only country in the Middle East that has taken
in Darfur refugees, the only country in the Middle East that gives refuge to gay
men and women, the only country in the Middle East that protects the Baha'is....
Need I go on? The imbalance is perceptible, and it sheds no credit on anyone who
voted for this boycott.
I ask you to show some common sense. Get
information from the Israeli embassy. As for some speakers. Listen to more than
one side. Do not make your minds up until you have given a fair hearing to both
parties. You have a duty to your students, and that is to protect them from
one-sided argument. They are not at university to be propagandized. And they are
certainly not there to be tricked into anti-Semitism by punishing one country
among all the countries of the world, which happens to be the only Jewish state.
If there had been a single Jewish state in the 1930s (which, sadly, there was
not), don't you think Adolf Hitler would have decided to boycott it? Of course
he would, and he would not have stopped the. Your generation has a duty to
ensure that the perennial racism of anti-Semitism never sets down roots among
you. Today, however, there are clear signs that it has done so and is putting
down more. You have a chance to avert a very great evil, simply by using reason
and a sense of fair play. Please tell me that this makes sense to me. I have
given you some of the evidence. It's up to you to find out more.
Yours
sincerely,
Dr. Denis MacEoin