Let me get one thing out of the way first: Obviously, the City University of New York has the legal right to give an award, deny an award, or rescind any award to anyone they please. But that does not make it right that a critically acclaimed playwright cannot criticize Israel’s policies toward Palestinians without forfeiting an honorary degree he was about to receive based solely on that criticism — and on one single individual’s objection to that criticism:
According to a podcast of the Monday meeting and accounts from two CUNY officials who attended it, one of the 12 trustees present, Jeffrey S. Wiesenfeld, objected to John Jay College’s submission of Mr. Kushner for an honorary degree. Mr. Wiesenfeld described viewpoints and comments, which he ascribed to Mr. Kushner, that he had found on the Web site of Norman Finkelstein, a political scientist and critic of Israel.
Mr. Wiesenfeld, an investment adviser and onetime aide to former Gov. George E. Pataki and former Senator Alfonse M. D’Amato, said that Mr. Kushner had tied the founding of Israel to a policy of ethnic cleansing, criticized the Israel Defense Forces and supported a boycott of Israel.
“I think it’s up to all of us to look at fairness and consider these things,” Mr. Wiesenfeld said. “Especially when the State of Israel, which is our sole democratic ally in the area, sits in the neighborhood which is almost universally dominated by administrations which are almost universally misogynist, antigay, anti-Christian.”
First of all, fairness? It’s unfair for a university to allow more than one point of view to be uttered on such an important issue? (Or any issue, for that matter.)
Mr. Kushner, who had not been alerted that Mr. Wiesenfeld would speak against him, said that he was “dismayed by the vicious attack and wholesale distortion of my beliefs.” He has criticized policies and actions by Israel in the past, and said that he believed — based on research by Israeli historians — that the forcible removal of Palestinians from their homes as part of the creation of Israel was ethnic cleansing. But he added that he was a strong supporter of Israel’s right to exist, that he had never supported a boycott of the country, and that his views were shared by many Jews and supporters of Israel.
Emphasis is mine. Now, look back at Wiesenthal’s reason for insisting that Kushner be denied this honorary degree:
“I think it’s up to all of us to look at fairness and consider these things. … Especially when the State of Israel, which is our sole democratic ally in the area, sits in the neighborhood which is almost universally dominated by administrations which are almost universally misogynist, antigay, anti-Christian.”
Shorter Mr. Wiesenthal: You may not criticize Israel because Israel is vital to U.S. strategic geopolitical interests. Nothing in there to indicate that Mr. Wiesenthal disputes Kushner’s charging Israel with ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. And, indeed, he can’t. Blind Israel partisans like Mr. Wiesenthal know in their heart of hearts that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians since 1948 does amount to ethnic cleaning, but they can never acknowledge that. So instead they fall back on the realpolitik “strategic ally” argument. There IS no moral argument for giving Israel an indefinite, permanent pass on the same human rights obligations we require of every other country in the world, but that old hoary “Israel is our only friend in the region” argument always works.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.