The Harvard Editorial Board crimsonthe student newspaper of the oldest university in the country, called for a boycott of Israel for alleged “crimes against humanity”, and demanded a “free Palestine”, that is to say the destruction of State of Israel.
The term “Free Palestine” is generally used to mean the establishment of a Palestinian state in all of the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, including not only Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza, but all of Israel itself. .
The editorial says nothing about Israel’s right to exist, or what the borders of a “free” Palestine would be. It also fails to condemn Palestinian terrorism; it simply offers “heartfelt support” to “all civilians affected by warmongering in the region”.
The editorial states in particular:
When oppression strikes anywhere in the world, resistance movements reverberate around the world. The desire for legitimate justice is spreading like wildfire, prompting us to act, speak, write and right our past wrongs.
In the wake of accusations suggesting otherwise, we feel the need to affirm that support for Palestinian liberation is not anti-Semitic. We unambiguously oppose and condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms, including when it appears on the margins of otherwise valid movements. The Jewish people – like all people, including the Palestinians – deserve nothing but life, peace and security.
Twenty years ago, we wrote that divestment was a “blunt tool” that affected all citizens of the target nation equally and should be used sparingly. Yet the tactics embodied by BDS have a historic record; they helped liberate black South Africans from apartheid and have the potential to do the same for Palestinians today. Israel’s current policy is pushing Palestinians towards indefinite statelessness, combining ethnonationalist legislation and a continued attack on West Bank sovereignty through illegal settlements that [sic] the prospect of a two-state solution; it deserves an assertive and unfailing international response. The arguments advanced against BDS could have been and indeed were once advanced against South Africa, and we are no longer inclined to control the demands of a people yearning to breathe freely.
The editorial does not explain why destroying the only Jewish state in the world, and the only guaranteed refuge for Jews facing persecution, would not be anti-Semitic. He claims, on the contrary, that anti-Semitism is a shield against criticism of Israel.
The ‘boycott, divestment, sanctions’ (BDS) movement is seen by many critics as anti-Semitic, as it points the finger at Israel for condemnation, while doing nothing to pressure Palestinians and doing nothing about violations human rights elsewhere.
Elsewhere on the opinion page, the crimson published a somewhat dissenting opinion from a student who criticizes Israel but objects to the use of the “apartheid” analogy. There were no published editorials representing a pro-Israel viewpoint.
Separately, Harvard University reported this week that it had benefited from slavery, both through the ownership of 70 slaves by individuals associated with the university, and through receiving donations from those who made his fortune in the slave trade.
Joel B. Pollak is editor of Breitbart News and host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot Sunday nights from 7-10 p.m. ET (4-7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book Neither Free Nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His latest book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is the winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.