RSS
Qatar’s Back Door to Higher Education
Doha, Qatar. Photo: StellarD via Wikimedia Commons.
JNS.org – In an earlier column, I debunked a recent study suggesting that foreign contributions to higher education were responsible for the rise in antisemitism. In my work, I have illustrated some cases where Arab donations have had a nefarious impact, but it’s difficult to do because universities don’t report what most of the money they receive is used for. Besides demanding greater transparency, the United States and the world need to expand our investigation to trace indirect funding to “independent” institutions.
Qatar is by far the largest donor to universities. Since 1986, it has contributed more than $5 billion (billions more are undocumented) contributions since 1986. The largest gifts were for the creation and operation of Weill Cornell Medical College-Qatar in Doha, which can’t be said to cause antisemitism at the Ivy League’s main campus in Ithaca, N.Y. Because of the U.S. Department of Education’s failure to require universities to publish how they spend the foreign donations, we don’t know if any is going to professors or departments because they are pro-Qatar, anti-Israel or antisemitic, or if they adopt those policies after receiving the money. We can only surmise that universities will not want to risk losing funding by publishing anything critical of the emirate.
Meanwhile, gone largely unnoticed is Qatar’s backdoor to universities, the Arab Center Washington DC (ACW), which is affiliated with the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Doha.
The ACW describes itself as “a nonprofit, independent and nonpartisan research organization dedicated to furthering the political, economic and social understanding of the Arab world in the United States and to providing insight on U.S. policies and interests in the Middle East.”
It says it relies on tax-deductible contributions from “individual supporters, organizations, foundations and corporations.” However, according to its tax return, all but $900 of its $2,262,150 in donations came from the center in Qatar.
A hint of its orientation can be found in its two most recent events: “Gaza and the Crime of Genocide: Legal and Political Dimensions of Accountability” and “Repression of Palestine Activism Amid the War on Gaza.”
Khalil E. Jahshan, the executive director and a veteran of several Arab lobby groups, has said the “clearest political message” of Hamas’s attack on Israel was “the one addressed to the ‘Camp of Normalizers’—be they Israeli, Arab, Americans or Europeans—that their plans to forge a ‘New Middle East’ without Palestine shall not pass unopposed.”
He also tweeted: “Top #Biden adviser and confidant Brett #McGurk is obsessed with rewarding #Israel for its #genocidal war in #Gaza by furthering the #Trump-era cash-&-carry #normalization deal between #Saudi_Arabia & Israel at the expense of #Palestinian national rights.”
The center has 14 academic advisers, 13 of whom are professors from universities such as Georgetown, George Washington, Maryland and Princeton. It does not indicate whether any members are paid. Among the professors on the list are Columbia University professor Hamid Dabashi. He refers to ISIS as “murderous thugs” and says, “Their Israeli counterparts meanwhile conquered parts of Syria and declared it part of their Zionist settler colony.” Dabashi does see one difference, which suggests that he doesn’t read The New York Times, “ISIS does not have a platoon of clean shaven and well coiffured [sic] columnists at the New York Times propagating the cause of the terrorist outfit as the Zionists columnists do on a regular basis.”
While Dabashi wears his disdain for Israel on his sleeve, a more slippery example is the University of Maryland’s Shibley Telhami. An Israel critic, he is best known for producing widely quoted surveys related to Israel with questions consistently written to elicit negative responses towards the Jewish state.
Another adviser, Osama Abi-Mershed, an associate professor in the influential Walsh School of Foreign Service and Director of the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS) at Georgetown University, is a supporter of the antisemitic Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He has pledged “not to collaborate on projects and events involving Israeli academic institutions.”
Abi-Mershed’s colleague, Marwa Daoudy, an assistant professor in International Relations at the Walsh School and CCAS, tweeted “Palestinians are denied the right to exist as human beings.” He also praised South Africa’s foreign minister for comparing Israeli policy to apartheid, and accused Israel of genocide and “cultural genocide.”
Another adviser is retired USC professor Laurie Brand, former president of the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) and now chair of its Committee on Academic Freedom, which devotes much of its attention to criticism of Israel and defense of antisemitic speech, as in its post-Oct. 7 letter to universities denying that anti-Zionism is antisemitic. While expressing heartbreak over the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives, the letter has nothing to say about the Hamas massacre that created the toxic campus environment. She is indignant over the supposed silencing of Israel’s detractors while defending the boycott of Israel.
George Washington University history professor Dina Khoury is another former MESA president who supports BDS and has condemned Israel in a prior Gaza conflict for its actions to defend its citizens. Another BDS’er is Amaney Jamal, the Edwards S. Sanford Professor of Politics at Princeton University.
Sheila Carapico, a professor of political science and international studies at the University of Richmond, is another BDS supporter and a consultant to Human Rights Watch. She wrote an article complaining about Saudi Arabia bullying Qatar.
‘The price we had to pay’
ACW also has 18 research fellows, including Dana El Kurd, an assistant professor at the University of Richmond who wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post assailing the normalization of relations between Israel and the Gulf states, claiming that rather than advancing peace, Israel is giving the Arab regimes tools to solidify their authoritarian rule. She claims the Palestinian issue is the “root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict” and suggested that the Abraham Accords emboldened Israel to annex Palestinian territory, ignoring that Israel gave up a plan to exercise sovereignty to achieve the agreement with the Gulf states.
One member of the ACW board is Mohammed Abu Nimer, director of the Peacebuilding and Development Institute at American University. Hamas, he says, has “engaged in the fight against the Israeli occupation since 1987”; that is, two years after every Israeli was withdrawn. He also repeats the canard that Hamas changed its charter and no longer seeks Israel’s destruction. The man who received the 2023 Distinguished Scholar Award for his “groundbreaking work in interreligious dialogue and faith-based peacebuilding” refers to the situation in Gaza as “genocide.”
Another board member is Laurie King, an anthropology professor at Georgetown who was a co-founder of the virulently anti-Israel website Electronic Intifada. She has compared Israel to Afrikaner South Africa and called for it to be boycotted. She falsely accuses Israel of “ethnic cleansing.” Not surprisingly, she objects to antisemites being called out for antisemitism.
Predictably, I found no statements condemning Hamas for massacring 1,200 Israelis.
The creation of the ACW is not Qatar’s first effort to use a Washington think tank as part of its influence operation. In 2007, it convinced the Brookings Institution to open a center in Doha. A few years later, the emirate agreed to a $14.8 million, four-year donation to help fund the affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world. Brookings closed the center in Doha and stopped taking money from the emirate in 2017. Previously, it listed Qatar as one of its top donors, giving more than $2 million. Brookings’s divorce came after its president, Gen. John R. Allen (Ret.), was investigated by the Justice Department for illegally lobbying for Qatar (no charges were brought).
A former visiting fellow at the Doha Center who went on to teach at the University of Queensland in Australia offered one clue to the impact of associating with Qatar. Saleem Ali told The New York Times, “If a member of Congress is using the Brookings reports, they should be aware—they are not getting the full story.” He said he had been warned during his job interview not to criticize Qatar in his published work. “There was a no-go zone when it came to criticizing the Qatari government,” said Ali. “It was unsettling for the academics there. But it was the price we had to pay.”
Qatar didn’t hide what it expected to get for its contributions. When Brookings renewed its agreement for the Doha center in 2012, the Times reported that the Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced, “the center will assume its role in reflecting the bright image of Qatar in the international media, especially the American ones.”
When Brookings finally dumped Qatar, the emirate lost the prestige of associating with a prominent think tank. Undeterred, the Qataris created their own to give an academic veneer to their influence campaign.
Evaluating the impact of Arab funding on higher education is often a chicken-and-egg proposition. Are professors on the advisory board spreading propaganda because they get paid or are they recruited by Qatar to its stable of apologists because they are anti-Israel (I’ll leave it to others to decide if they’re also antisemitic)? If there is no financial or professional benefit, why associate with Qatar?
Whatever their reasons, they have affiliated themselves with the country that supports Hamas and Islamists.
The post Qatar’s Back Door to Higher Education first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Herzog Confirms Behind-the-Scenes Negotiations with Hamas – Deal ‘Possible’
Israeli President Isaac Herzog looks on during a meeting with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, not pictured, in Washington, DC, on Oct. 25, 2022. Stefani Reynolds/Pool via REUTERS
i24 News – President Isaac Herzog revealed on Sunday that contacts are ongoing between Israel and Hamas for a ceasefire and hostage release deal.
In a conversation with Yael Alexander, the mother of the abductee Edan Alexander who has been held captive for 422 days by Hamas, Herzog said that “there are negotiations behind the scenes – and it is possible.”
“I reiterate the call – now, after the agreement in Lebanon, it’s time to make a deal and bring the captives home,” Herzog said.
His meeting comes after Hamas released a video over the weekend showing Edan Alexander, an American-Israeli who was captured on October 7, 2023, while serving in the IDF. The video showed him pleading for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President-Elect Donald Trump to secure a deal.
“There are negotiations with a bitter and cruel enemy whose entire purpose in the video was to demoralize us all,” he said. “On the contrary – I think this video gave us a lot of strength.”
“I had a sleepless night,” Yael Alexander said – “Edan, his voice. and the video which plays continuously. You can see from the video that Edan is going through hell, he is screaming and his eyes look sad, but this gave me a lot of strength – Edan strengthened us with his call to us. We released this video, so everyone can see – Edan is alive, and many other captives are alive and the time has come to do something and release them.”
Out of the 101 hostages held in Gaza, estimates range as to the number still living, with some going as low as two dozen.
The post Herzog Confirms Behind-the-Scenes Negotiations with Hamas – Deal ‘Possible’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Voice of Jacob
Chabad Rabbi Zvi Kogan. Photo: @Chabad/X.
JNS.org – The Jewish world is grieving the horrific murder of Rabbi Zvi Kogan in the United Arab Emirates. A gentle ambassador of Judaism, his young life was snuffed out by the perpetrators of evil. We grieve with his young widow, his parents and his family. May God grant them strength, solace and only simcha (“happiness”) in the future.
In this week’s Torah portion, Toldot, we read of the birth of twin sons to Isaac and Rebecca. These twins could not have been less identical. Genesis 25:27 tells us, “The boys grew; Esau became an expert hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a guileless man, dwelling in the tents (of Torah).”
Esau was a wild man, hunting animals as well as women. Jacob was a student of Torah. One was a gladiator, the other a sage. Esau would become the father of Rome, the destroyers of our temple, while Jacob went on to become one of the founding fathers of our faith, the patriarch who fathered the 12 tribes of Israel.
Who should we want our children to emulate: the wild warrior or the gentle scholar?
“The voice is the voice of Jacob, and the hands are the hands of Esau,” said Isaac when he was going to bestow the all-important blessings to his son and heir apparent. Jacob is forever represented by the soft voice of the Torah, of wisdom, reason and ethics. Esau, however, is not symbolized by the voice but by the violent hands that strike out and hurt others.
Jewish heroes have always been the peaceful giants of philosophy, wisdom, ethics and morals. Violent murderers are the antithesis of everything we stand for.
I feel that there is a danger today, when our heroes are our Israel Defense Forces soldiers, pilots and naval officers, as they surely should be. They are superheroes of body and soul. Every time a young man or woman puts on a Tzahal uniform, they put their lives on the line. They are prepared to give their lives to defend our homeland and our people. The most secular kibbutznik becomes a tzaddik, the holy of holies, when he makes that courageous commitment.
In fact, the Sheloh—Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz (1558-1628)—wrote that at the holiest moment of the year, on Yom Kippur, at the very climax of the Neilah service when we shout out Shema Yisrael (“Hear O Israel”), we should have in mind to give our life for God, Al Kiddush Hashem “to sanctify his name,” and it will be considered as if we actually did.
Those courageous chayalim make that pledge daily. And far too many have sacrificed their lives in the current war against terror. So it is entirely appropriate that they should be our superheroes. But the inherent danger here is that our children and the younger generation idealize war and military action, heroic though it may be. These wars of defense are a regrettable necessity in our neck of the woods. And today, sadly, Jews everywhere need to be able to defend themselves.
While we honor, cherish and admire our chayalim, they themselves would much rather be at their desktops, in the library or the yeshivah instead of on the front lines.
We dare not forget who we really are, the children of Jacob, B’nai Yisrael. Jacob is our eternal role model. Esau is the antithesis of everything we stand for.
Yes, believe it or not, Jews are pacifists. We are peace-loving people despite the scandalously libelous claims of genocide against us. Our enemies at the United Nations won’t acknowledge it, but it’s who we are.
Yes, we need the IDF, and we need it to be strong and fearless. But that is an unfortunate necessity, not an ideal.
Rabbi Zvi Kogan was a faithful scion of Jacob. His life was cut short by the hands of Esau. Perhaps the appropriate response to this tragedy would be to emulate his ways and enhance our own observance of this sacred ideal or to encourage another to embrace it.
May the voice of Jacob forever drown out and overpower the tumultuous, blood-stained hands of Esau. And may our reluctant warriors be able to go home and resume their gentle lives in peace and security.
The post The Voice of Jacob first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Unable to Destroy Israel Militarily, Its Enemies Resort to Lawfare
An exterior view of the International Criminal Court in the Hague, Netherlands, March 31, 2021. Photo: REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw
JNS.org – Jerusalem has decided to appeal the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to issue warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant. Israel submitted an announcement to the ICC on Wednesday regarding its intention, along with a demand to delay the warrants’ implementation.
In its decision, the ICC said there were reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Gallant were criminally responsible for acts including murder, persecution and starvation as weapons of war as part of a “widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza.”
Netanyahu has called the accusation a “modern Dreyfus trial.”
Once again, the Jews have been placed in the docket, this time as antisemites seek to punish Israel on trumped-up charges of “genocide” against the Palestinian people, he said.
Netanyahu met in Jerusalem on Wednesday with U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who updated him on the efforts he is advancing in Congress against the ICC and countries that cooperate with it.
Amb. Alan Baker, director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs and the head of the Global Law Forum, told JNS that practically, “assuming states agree to honor the arrest warrants, despite their being inherently invalid and ultra vires [running against] the ICC statute, they could theoretically try to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they enter their territory.”
In a statement published on Wednesday, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office said Jerusalem’s notice of appeal “shows in detail to what degree the decision to issue the arrest warrants was baseless and without any factual or legal foundation whatsoever.”
Israel denies the authority of the ICC and the legitimacy of the warrants issued against the prime minister and the former defense minister, the statement continued.
Should the court reject the appeal, it will underscore to Israel’s friends in the United States and elsewhere the ICC’s bias against the Jewish state, it added.
The court lacks jurisdiction in the case for several reasons.
First, Israel is not a party to the Rome Statute that established the court, and second because Israel has its own independent, robust judiciary. Third, Palestine is not a state and does not meet the criteria for statehood under international law.
By calling for the arrest of Israel’s leaders, the ICC is violating the Rome Statute, which clearly states that complementarity is the crucial factor in such a decision.
Since Israel has a robust judicial system, it is unnecessary and unlawful for the ICC to involve itself in Israel’s internal matters, and by doing so the court breaches its foundational principles.
Furthermore, as a recent Wall Street Journal editorial noted, “The charge of deliberate starvation is absurd. Israel has facilitated the transfer of more than 57,000 aid trucks and 1.1 million tons of aid [into Gaza], even though Hamas’s rampant theft means Israel is provisioning its battlefield enemy, something the law can’t require.”
The warrant also, absurdly, calls for the arrest of Hamas leader Ibrahim al-Masri, otherwise known as Mohammed Deif, whom Israel and Hamas both say was killed in an Israeli airstrike in July.
By naming him together with Israel’s leaders and thereby feigning even-handedness, the ICC has only demonstrated morally repugnant equivalence.
The Wall Street Journal also highlighted the case of Alice Wairimu Nderitu, the U.N. Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. After she declared that the war against Hamas does not meet the qualifications for genocide, the United Nations announced that her contract will not be renewed, though it has denied the two things are linked.
According to Nderitu, the term “genocide” encapsulates the Holocaust, the Hutus’ mass murder of Tutsis in Rwanda, the Serbian attacks on Bosnian Muslims and the killings being carried out in Sudan.
“As a legal matter, establishing a pattern of violence as a genocide requires demonstrating intent. Israel’s campaign of self-defense doesn’t qualify,” the Journal‘s editorial noted.
The court’s baseless case against Israel’s leaders, coupled with Nderitu’s dismissal, demonstrates that the ICC is abusing the law for political means.
Several world leaders, including President Joe Biden, have harshly criticized the ICC decision.
Biden stated on Thursday evening that warrants were “outrageous.”
Rep. Mike Waltz, tapped by President-elect Donald Trump as National Security Advisor, tweeted, “The ICC has no credibility and these allegations have been refuted by the U.S. government. Israel has lawfully defended its people & borders from genocidal terrorists. You can expect a strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC & UN come January.”
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has invited Netanyahu to visit his country, assuring him he faces no risk of arrest.
While ambiguous at first, France has declared it will not enforce the warrants as Israel is not a signatory to the ICC.
Some analysts have questioned whether France’s decision was linked to the ceasefire announced Wednesday between Hezbollah and Israel.
Famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz has announced he is assembling a “dream team” to defend Israel in The Hague.
This support is crucial because so much of the international community has fallen for the widespread anti-Israel propaganda.
Hala Rharrit, a former U.S. State Department diplomat who has made her anti-Israel opinions well known, said in an Al-Jazeera interview that most of the world is feeling that “finally, finally, there is a sense that the international community is taking action, far little too late.”
She said that in the State Department, “secretly, many American diplomats are celebrating this.”
Rharrit resigned in April in protest over Biden’s support for Israel.
Several world leaders have condoned the ICC decision.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the ICC warrants “courageous.”
European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said, “The states that signed the Rome convention are obliged to implement the decision of the court. It’s not optional.”
Some experts have questioned whether the warrant and its implications could prevent civilized nations from fighting terrorism.
“If this progresses to a large-scale issuance of arrest warrants for a wider range of military people and politicians, it could certainly serve as a warning to states involved in fighting terror,” said Amb. Baker.
“But this issue is more of a blatant Israel-directed issue and would not necessarily be used against other states fighting terror,” he added.
According to Natasha Hausdorff, legal director of UK Lawyers for Israel Charitable Trust, “Every phrase of every sentence” in the court’s warrant “was in fact false.”
In a conversation with Matt Frei of Leading Britain’s Conversation (LBC), Hausdorff provided a stinging rebuke to the ICC. “One example is that in furtherance of this allegation of starvation, the prosecutor relied on a report that suggested that famine might come to parts of the Gaza Strip,” she said.
“That report was subsequently debunked by a Famine Review Committee report that indicated it had been based on insufficient or incomplete information and it drew implausible conclusions,” she said.
“The overall conclusion of that process and also from the press release the court put out on Thursday is that they have made that determination to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant on the basis of this slew of false information,” she said.
Should Israel be approaching this challenge differently?
According to Baker, Israel needs to show the countries that are party to the ICC statute “that the issuance of the warrants is ultra vires the terms of the statute since the ICC cannot exercise jurisdiction in the territory of a non-state entity that has no sovereign territory.”
He added that it is “widely acknowledged that no state of Palestine exists, and the fact that the Palestinian leadership has manipulated the United Nations and ICC to treat them as if they are a state doesn’t alter the basic legal and political fact that there is no state of Palestine. Hence the ICC cannot be given jurisdiction by a non-state, and cannot issue arrest warrants.”
“Also,” he said, “as Israel is not a party to the ICC statute, its senior officials enjoy state and diplomatic immunity and thus cannot be arrested.”
The post Unable to Destroy Israel Militarily, Its Enemies Resort to Lawfare first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login