Students and professors at universities across the country, including Harvard, MIT, Tufts, the University of Michigan and the University of California (UC) schools are looking to disinvest from Israeli corporations and American companies with Israeli investments. Divestment supporters are comparing the Israeli government's treatment of Palestinians to the oppression suffered by South African blacks during the apartheid era. While Brandeis had one of the country's most active divestment movements against South Africa in the 1980s, Israeli divestment has yet to be seriously discussed on campus.Israeli divestment movement

A joint Harvard-MIT Israeli divestment petition was circulated by professors from both universities beginning in April. By now, at least 130 faculty members have signed, and the movement has spread to at least 50 other universities across the nation.

The Harvard-MIT petition states, "As members of the Harvard and MIT University communities, we believe that our universities ought to use their influence - political and financial - to encourage the United States government and the government of Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians." It then calls for the U.S. government to set conditions for continuing arms sales to Israel and asks the universities to divest from Israel and companies selling arms to Israel until the government complies with U.N. standards.

Harvard Psychology Professor Ken Nakayama was among those who organized the petition for divestment. "The Israeli government can do whatever it pleases, and the U.S. can't change its policies. We have no degree of say on how Israel controls relations with Palestinians. Israel is our favored nation, but we have no control over it," he said.

David Adelman, president of Harvard Students for Israel said that pro-Israel Harvard students have been actively countering the much-publicized Israeli divestment petition. An anti-divestment petition has been circulated among Harvard and MIT faculty, staff, students and alumni. He said, so far, 583 faculty members are among the signatories, vastly outnumbering the 130 who have signed the pro-divestment petition.

Adelman said his organization also arranged a panel discussion and submitted op-ed columns to the Harvard Crimson, the University's independent student newspaper. "Now, we have a 'buy Israel' campaign - an invest in Israel drive encouraging people to buy Israeli products," Adelman said.

The University of California schools have also been active in the divestment movement. The editorial board of the Daily Bruin, the UCLA independent student newspaper, took a pro-divestment stance in a July editorial. According to the divestment statements on the University of California websites, both pro and anti-divestment petitions were circulated around the UC campuses. Almost 200 UC professors have signed a pro-divestment petition, while nearly 600 have signed a countering, anti-divestment one.

No public debate at Brandeis

While there has been active divestment discourse at many other universities, Brandeis students and faculty have yet to see a pro or anti-divestment petition.

Executive Assistant to the President Dr. John Hose said he doubts the divestment issue will ever seriously be taken up at Brandeis. "At some institutions, there has been a drive to get the community to look at (divestment from Israel), but there is no drive here," University Treasurer Jeffrey Solomon said, echoing Hose's sentiments.

Although no public divestment debate has yet occurred, some students and faculty members have expressed interest in the subject. Professor David Gil (HS) said he would consider signing a divestment petition if he fully agreed with the text. "I would do some thinking. I would read the text. I would make sure that the text made it clear that the rights of both peoples are acknowledged," he said. "If they are, I would think that sanctions - divestment are appropriate measures, especially if it was accompanied by a commitment to the rights of the Jews and the rights of Palestinians."

Professor Gordon Fellman (SOC) said, "Israel won't respond to reason or humanitarian appeals . so people are turning to divestment as a strategy." But, he said he had reservations about Israeli divestment, especially because American professors, rather than the Palestinian people, began the movement. He said he felt "the tragedy is that people in power now on both sides are at the extremes. The people at the center are marginalized."

Judah Ariel '04, president of Students for Peace in Israel and Palestine, said he praises Brandeis' intercultural relations. "We are blessed with good working relationships and dialogue between all groups on campus, Jews and Arabs, right-wing and left," he said. "There has, thankfully, been no talk of divestment at Brandeis, just as there is no organized 'anti-Israel' presence on campus."

Israeli student Daniel Olinsky '04 said he felt it is important to maintain campus discourse on Israeli issues, but "if someone from Harvard or MIT would come up with an idea about how two peoples can talk around one table, that would be more helpful" than the divestment petition.

He added the financial consequences from university divestment would probably have very little impact on Israel, because most aid to Israel comes directly from the U.S. government, rather than from the American corporations targeted in the divestment campaign.

South African versus Israeli divestment

South Africa's strict apartheid policies toward blacks led American universities as well as city and state governments to disinvest from the country in the 1980s.

One of the divestment movement's leaders was the black South African, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who later won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. In a July International Herald Tribune column, he compared the current Israeli situation to the former South African one. "Yesterday's South African township dwellers can tell you about today's life in the Occupied Territories," he wrote. "The indignities, dependence and anger are all too familiar."

Tutu, Brandeis' 2000 commencement speaker, said in his column he encouraged divestment from Israel. "If apartheid ended, so can the occupation, but the moral force and international pressure will have to be just as determined," he wrote. "The current divestment effort is the first, though certainly not the only, necessary move in that direction."

Not all South Africans say they agree with Tutu's push to divest from Israel. Professor Wellington Nyangoni (AAAS) said he supported South African divestment in the 1980s, having written some pro-divestment arguments. But, he said, "In South Africa, it was a racist ideology. There is not a comparable thing like that in Israel."

Nyangoni added some "Palestinians are Israeli citizens and members of the Knesset, which is not like South Africa (was) at all." Under the apartheid regime, blacks were denied the right to vote.

Dr. Bhekinhosi Sikhakane, principal of Thalana High School in South Africa said that economically, "blacks were hurt by divestment . but the campaign was to force the South African government to change and allow the black South Africans to participate. It helped, because it liberated blacks."

Sikhakane said he was hopeful the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be resolved before divestment would occur. He said, "if the political negotiations fail, I think (divestment) worked for South Africa for people who were heavily oppressed," adding the strategy may work in the Israeli case as well.

South African divestment activism at Brandeis

Despite the seeming lack of interest in Israeli divestment, Brandeis does have a history of active divestment campaigning. In 1986 and 1987, according to the Associated Press, Brandeis had one of the country's most active South African divestment campaigns.

In February 1986, more than 45 Brandeis students constructed a mock South African shantytown and maintained a 24-hour vigil, even in freezing weather, in order to convince the Board of Trustees to divest. The administration had University maintenance crews forcibly remove the shanties a few weeks later, according to a March 18, 1986 Justice article.

Students also obstructed the main gates, leading to 28 arrests. Twenty-five pleaded no contest and received community service and/or probation, while three were acquitted. Brandeis' three chaplains went on a two-week, liquid-only hunger strike in support of divestment. These activities, in addition to class boycotts and rallies with over 800 in attendance helped convince the Board of Trustees to divest from South Africa in May 1987.

Hose, who worked at Brandeis during the South African divestment campaign, said it was not comparable to the current push for Israeli divestment at some universities. "The issues were more starkly drawn (in the South African) case, because it appeared to people that apartheid was an absolute evil, and there was no other side to the story," he said.

Gil and Fellman say they also remember the anti-apartheid divestment movement. Gil said he participated in walks and some faculty meetings. The faculty senate voted unanimously, with two abstentions, for a resolution that condemned the administration for calling police and having anti-divestment protesters arrested. The faculty urged the University president to "drop all charges against the students - judicial or disciplinary."

Activism today

While administrators doubt that a serious discussion about Israeli divestment will occur at Brandeis, some say they are hopeful that the pro-divestment movements at other schools will mobilize Brandeis students to action, whether it is pro or anti-divestment.

"I want Israel to be the greatest in the world and the model on which to behave. Anything that would help is welcome," Olinsky said.

An open, informative debate with all ideas presented is vital to improving the situation in Israel, Fellman said."I think (divestment) ought to be discussed more at Brandeis and everywhere else, without intimidation . a thoughtful exchange.