Han van der Maas | If political right discovers the boycott tool, academic freedom is really in danger
Why should collaborations with scientists in Israel actually be boycotted by Dutch universities, Han van der Maas wonders. “That this would have any effect on the war is a gross self-aggrandisement. On the Israeli government, such an action makes no impression whatsoever.”
The FNV is pushing for an academic boycott of individual researchers in Israel. In particular, its list of collaborations to be investigated includes personal ERC and Horizon Europe projects. These projects are not the initiative of countries or universities, but of individual researchers collaborating internationally. They do include the signatures of university presidents, but these are formalities.
Nevertheless, according to the FNV, the UvA should drop out of these projects, because these researchers are guilty ‘by association’. The fact that, according to Maya Wind, their university or company has been involved in military projects, even if they were not personally involved, is sufficient reason to withdraw from these projects.
In doing so, those projects in Israel are not terminated, but the European funding for the Dutch part is returned to Europe and replaced by UvA funds (or the relevant AIO/postdoc is fired). The only symbolic effect is that Israel cannot then claim to cooperate with the UvA. That this would have any effect on the war is a gross self-aggrandisement. On the Israeli government, such an action makes no impression whatsoever. That Wilders, leader of the largest party in the Netherlands, visits Israel all the more. But when it comes to Wilders, the radical left sticks its head in the sand. The UvA administration is the real enemy.
Reading further through the FNV’s list, it strikes me that the content of the research does not matter either. And why do the personal views of the researchers involved play no role? Isn't maintaining links with progressive academics in countries where human rights are seriously violated also of value? Does this not leave these academics out in the cold, and increase polarisation? Already, Israeli academics complain of international exclusion from conferences and journal publications. Do we really think that exclusion will make them more critical of Israeli government policies? That goes against everything we know about ingroup-outgroup mechanisms.
I also wonder if we want another commission to impose research restrictions. Where does this stop? Suppose I do research on malaria, funded by an NGO, together with researchers from Sudan attached to a university that also offers courses to the military? Or work with Indonesian colleagues on educational innovation through an agreement between two universities? Can I obtain any funding at all to collaborate with academics from countries where serious human rights violations take place?
I see an even bigger threat. If the right discovers the boycott tool, academic freedom will be in real danger. Where the American left started by cancelling textbooks in which the western perspective was too central, the American right has taken over. Thousands of books disliked by the right have now been banned from school libraries.
I fear the same for the UvA. ‘Guilty by association’ is a dangerous weapon in the hands of the radical right. There is already fuss about the committee assessing research collaborations because it would not be composed democratically. Thank goodness because otherwise a third of its members would have ties to the PVV. Suppose we had to submit every international collaboration to a PVV-led committee. Anthropological research in Islamic countries could then be forgotten. In every large-scale international investigation, one can find a partner who can be related to a human rights violation in the recent past. This committee is a great danger to academic freedom.
On another serious note, why am I not invited for this committee?
