The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Ian Lustick

Complete coverage

Politics blog: The Red and the Blue

Dershowitz talk met with polarized online reaction

A flyer being distributed before the Dershowitz talk

Amy Gutmann’s remarks at the Dershowitz talk

Political scientists standardly begin their analyses by asking “cui bono?”—“Who benefits?” Now that the brouhaha surrounding the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions conference held at Penn this weekend is passing into memory, we can answer that question. Who benefited from the conference? The answer is surprising: just about everyone.

Since that is an odd outcome in politics, a kind of win-win-win-win-win solution, it is worth examining. First, the BDS movement benefited. It mounted a well-run, well-attended and enthusiastic conference, hosted comfortably, securely and peacefully at a major university. Fierce denunciations of BDS by national and local opponents of the conference triggered front-page, balanced coverage in The Philadelphia Inquirer, and large, and otherwise probably unavailable, donations. Hillel also benefited. A major problem facing Hillel, at Penn and across the nation, is the disinterest of most Jewish students in Israel-oriented activities. Opposition to the BDS conference gave Penn Hillel and its rabbis just the opportunity they have needed to get Jewish students involved with Israel and to attract wider community support and recognition for the work Hillel does with Jewish students and on behalf of Israel.

The Philadelphia-area Jewish community, including the Jewish Community Relations Council and the Jewish Exponent, various Jewish schools and locally based Zionist organizations, all benefited from the opportunity that the BDS conference offered to evoke an increasingly elusive sense of unity on behalf of Israel. Where this unity was not present, in local synagogues and other pluralistic Jewish communities, Jews nonetheless benefited from debates and inquiries into the BDS movement and from study of the questions about Israeli policies that mobilization for or against the BDS movement requires. Of course Jewish Voice for Peace, the most important local Jewish organization involved with the BDS movement, benefited from a substantial rise in its visibility.

To the list of BDS conference beneficiaries we may also add Alan Dershowitz, who can be assumed to have benefited handsomely from his Penn appearance on the eve of the conference; the David Horowitz Freedom Center, which always benefits from opportunities to insult American academics, and The Daily Pennsylvanian, which attracted significant ad revenue and, at least temporarily, a substantial faculty and extra-campus readership. It is worth noting that the University of Pennsylvania itself benefited. Penn, represented by an adroit president, proved that it understands and lives by the values of free inquiry and the contentious search for truth that are the foundations of a liberal arts education.

Finally, it should be noted that Palestinians, who desperately need non-violent and well-informed friends in the world, as well as Israelis, benefited from the conference. Israel is a country in trouble, deep trouble. How deep? So deep that its leaders describe an attack on Iran as perhaps their best option, despite the expectation that it would unleash tens of thousands of missile strikes against Israeli population centers. When a country is in that kind of trouble, non-violent spurs to re-examine its behavior can only be an aid to discovering some way to a better future.

Ian Lustick is the Bess Heyman Chair in Political Science department. His email address is ilustick@sas.upenn.edu.

Comments (33)

Nobody benefits from propaganda festivals where opposing speech is suppressed (see previous dp article) and seeds of hate are planted except for Dr. Lustick who agrees and even promotes the propaganda of the BDS conference. Blaming Israeli behavior for Iranian threats to annihilate her with nuclear weapons captures the outrageousness of Dr. Lustick’s thinking or lack of it. Ever hear of the word Jihad Dr. Lustick?

Even now there is no divestment resolution at the UA. What is Penn BDS waiting for?

Strange times we are in- PennBDS is probably the only authentically “Pro-Israel” group on campus- as long all the others claiming to be continue to encourage Israel supporters to stick their heads in the sand and retreat further into siege mode, isolating themselves from the world except to instigate world war three against Iran, a laughable “threat” in all reality that can barely control its own country and hardly has the capability to develop and deliver the bomb.

I guess as far as Likud supporters are concerned, Iran is at least a good distraction from the occupation…

Penn BDS didn’t plant seeds of hate- go read the comments on the other articles that you mention and you will see that hate has been here long before this conference.

Thank you for this article Dr. Lustick, I was beginning to think no one at this university had any sense left.

Well said professor!

The following article is about the enlightened, liberal left. The enlightened, liberal left acting as is their wont like fascists. The enlightened, liberal left doing their utmost to destroy a good man’s name because he had the nerve to question the left’s beliefs.

This article tells the tale of what is happening here. It tells the tale of the BDS and what they are doing to Israel and, less importantly, to good people like Professor Gur and others who try to speak the truth to the hate-filled and deaf ears of those on the left.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/the-high-price-of-telling-the-truth-about-islam.html

since bds is such a peace-loving friend of israel why hasnt it, and all the other moslem groups, formally recognized israels right to exist. the can be no dialogue when one side declares its desire to wipe out the other. first recognition- then discussion

“Lustick has made an academic career out of bashing Israel and fighting against the war on terror. He speaks frequently before anti-Israel and pro-terror conferences and organizations.
…
In one of those Orwellian ironies, Lustick actually once headed the Association for Israel Studies in the United States. He has never spent much time in Israel, although he claims that nation’s history and politics as a specialty. He is a defender of Israel’s own anti-Israel “New Historians,” who use historic revisionism to promote the agenda of Israel’s enemies. Lustick has spoken favorably of the so-called “One-State Solution” in which Israel will cease to exist altogether.
….
Lustick is almost as anti-American as he is anti-Israel. He may be best known for his expressions of regret that America did not lose more soldiers in the campaign to topple the Taliban in Afghanistan. Denying that terrorism is a valid concept, he deconstructs the term by claiming that activities can be classified as “terrorist” if they encompass any violent “actions and threats” by governmental militaries and even tax collectors, as well as insurgents.””

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/01/05/collaborators-in-the-war-against-the-jews-ian-lustick-by-steven-plaut/

Wow. If you believed these comments, you could almost imagine that the occupied, starving victims (Palestine) were the very definition of “terror”. You could almost imagine that the Palestinians’ most feeble defenders are supreme “terrorists” and traitors.

You can almost smell those commenters’ desperation for some kind of coup in the United States that would allow them to ride on tanks, wearing hoods, and pointing out the “terrorists” and “traitors” to be cleansed out of America’s campuses.

That was Guatemala in the 1980’s, under a heavily Israeli-supported dictatorship. Up to 200,000 were murdered. Do you really want to put on that hood and go after “terrorists” that badly? Are you really serious?

Until you get that power, I certainly hope that strong divestment resolutions will be introduced on campuses, to bolster Palestinian human rights. They sorely need bolstering.

LOL. It’s funny how those occupied, starving “victims” in Palestine seem to be enjoying their 30% GDP growth and tons in aid shipments from Israel and elsewhere, including survival items like Mercedes, hot tubs and flat screens. And it’s amusing how Yassir Arafat, champion of the poor “victim’s” cause cared enough only to ensure that his widow lives in comfort in Paris with her $22M a year. How hypocritical of you to condemn Israel for the Palestinian’s “plight” when their own leaders do nothing to help them. Palestinian human rights only need bolstering from their own leadership.

And what about the human rights of the Sudanese in Darfur? And those of the Buddhists in Southern Thailand who are being slaughtered by the Islamists? I could go on and on. Are you concerned with them too?

Since Dr. Lustick is a professor of the University of Pennsylvania I shall be as respectful as I can, but with all due respect Dr. Lustick simply gets many aspects of the BDS conference and its aftermath wrong. Nobody really won. BDS by libelling the State of Israel as “aparteid” are obviously wrong since Arab Israelis have full equality— they vote for Knesset members, there is an Arab Israeli Supreme Court Judge etc. The current deputy Consul in the Israeli Consulate here in Philadelphia is an Arab Israeli. So there simply is no truth to their claims from the word go. Now by coming to Penn and acting in such a bizarre manner ie. supressing any probing questions at the conference by kicking out a Jewish Exponent reporter and by Ali Abunimah refusing to answer questions about anti-Semitic aspects of the BDS agenda and the banning the film-maker who asked those question from the Conference , BDSers revealed themselves NOT be interested in dialogue or free-speech or academic integrity. By making such a fuss about one DP on-line essay by Dr. Gur they Revealed themselves to be hypocrites. Ali Abunimah heads the Electronic Intifada which does nothing but publish on-line incitement articles about Israel by the thousand! (not that Dr. Gur’s essay was incitement; he merely pointed out obvious Historic precedents to boycotts against Jews during the Nazi era. If anything Dr. Gur did not go far enough since boycotts and economic restrictions on Jews goes back to the Middle-Ages; they are inherently threatening And anti-Semitic that is all Dr. Gur was saying.) By over reacting to the Gur essay by demanding extra security from a non -existent threat The BDS people and their cause are utterly discredited; Despite what Dr. Lustick says they did not benefit but lost any credibility by their own strange behaviour and their own mistaken actions.

It’s laughable for Prof. Lustick to claim Israel is in such deep trouble that it needs a strike on Iran. Its economy is doing well. It wants peace. Its neighbors – Egypt, Syria, are in turmoil, and Jordan Lebanon face huge problems. Its a curious relic of the intense negative focus on this tiny country that it faces more examination than its neighbors – whose problems are far more severe. Many of the problems in Egypt etc. are due to governments whose main strategy for 60 years was to distract from their failings. How? By whipping up hatred for Israel, and the West. The pitfall of that strategy is finally becoming clear. Of course, it has not yet penetrated departments of political science and Middle East Studies across the US.

I think it is ironic that the BDS conference was held this past weekend. While the conference was directing political outrage at Israel, Syrian forces were shelling civilians. The message being sent is that it is ok to kill and abuse Arab populations. The real crime of Israel is not their treatment of the Palestinians but the very existence of Jews in the Middle East. For the majority of Israel’s detractors, the Jewish character of the State is what requires BDS. Boycotss, Divestment, and Sanctions for being Jewish, brings back difficult memories.

Professor Lustick’s credibility/judgement in question?

http://www.hirhome.com/lustick_letter.htm

Only a particularly warped mind can claim that the threats of the fundamentalist Iranian mullahs to destroy Israel, led by an antisemitic hatemonger, are somehow Israel’s fault.
And this guy is a professor at Penn? Oh the shame.

Dr. Lustick is also incorrect when he says that the Jewish community benefited by the BDS conference. The strength and unity if which he speaks were pre-existent because it was already there the Jewish and pro-Israel community ( which includes Christian and other Non-Jews) was able to mobilize their resources in the face of the BDS hate-fest. While it is true that the prevailed BDS did NOT “evoke an increasingly elusive sense of unity on behalf of Israel.” That unity has always and will always exist. That is because of the inherent rightness of their cause; which is at the core of the Jewish faith and of being Pro-American and Pro=Western values.

Everyone wins? Conflict is ubiquitous in political processes, and these conflicts necessarily entail winners and losers. Perhaps Lustick is extraordinarily naive, or perhaps his weak “everyone benefits” piece is just a thin shroud to hide his glee at BDS coming to campus—“hey everyone, I’m just thrilled Israel got bashed in a public forum, but don’t worry-we all benefitted!” This was not an open forum with dialogue to get anyone to reconsider any beliefs; this was dissemination of slanderous speech against an entire nation. By Lustick’s logic, we ought to invite the leading racist “academics” to speak at Penn about white supremacy; maybe they can galvanize the urban studies and African studies departments. Or for that matter, if BDS conferences are so helpful to the Jewish community and Israel (what pretension!) by allowing the them to rally in response to adversity, the converse ought to be true—let’s all support Lustick and the Palestinians by spreading pro-Israel information.

Lastly, I want to address the cheap-shot against Dr. Dershowitz. Dr. Lustik’s remark that “Alan Dershowitz … can be assumed to have benefited handsomely from his Penn appearance” is unworthy of Dr. Lustick. Dr. Dershowitz is a prominent and prolific author and deserves to be compensated for his expertise time and effort. The speakers at the BDS Conference were all paid, some of them are professional Israel haters. Moreover it is ironic that a sentence later Dr. Lustick writes about the David Horowitz Freedom Center“always benefits from the opportunities to insult American academics”; when Dr. Lustick just insulted Dr. Dershowitz , a world renowned Harvard Law School professor. Iknow ome person who did not benefit from the BDS Conference— Dr. Lustick because of this most unfortunate essay.

Few quick points:

Palestinians in occupied territory =/= Arab Israelis. They have no political rights. Settlers attack them. They are dispossessed in their homeland with no state to which they actually belong.

This is not an anti-Semitic issue. This is a non-violent way to pressure Israel into changing how it treats its displaced and disadvantaged minority.

To whoever claimed Palestinians don’t recognize Israel – they have since 1993.

Lustick is actually an expert in the topic. 6 books, countless articles. His CV is accessible online. If anyone should be undermined due to a lack of expertise, it’s Professor Gur. The only commentary from his article was a false analogy between Nazi Germany and those trying to pressure Israel into changing its treatment of Palestinians.

If this movement is so illegitimate why, then, does the world in general see Israel as the world’s greatest threat to peace?

What’s embarrassing to Penn isn’t that it hosted – while still taking an anti-BDS political stance officially – a conference on BDS. What’s embarrassing to Penn is that so many people are attacking their university for hosting such an event. I’m looking at you Professor Gur.

What’s embarrassing to Penn is that a Professor chooses to publish alarmist rhetoric calling students who support holding Israel accountable for its human rights violations modern-day Nazis and the students are okay with it. This is awful behavior coming from a professor.

Social pressure may do enough to silence criticism here at Penn, or even in the United States at large, but eventually Israel, and her unconditional ally – the United States – is going to have to face the fact that the rest of the world absolutely does not see the problem this way. Eventually the United States and Israel will be faced with a situation in which without reform they will face serious legitimacy and security instability internationally.

The best thing Israel can do for itself is to ACTUALLY do something (and not just say it wants to do something) to end its abuses of the Palestinian people – especially those in occupied territory. And the best thing the United States can do for itself is to actually take issue with creation of new and expansion of old Israeli settlements while simultaneously pushing Israel to make itself a true partner for peace in the Middle East.

To those who oppose BDS, what do you suppose Israel should do to really and truly change the situation of Palestinians in the West Bank that will be a true compromise for Israel as well?

TL;DR Criticism of Israel =/= anti-Semitism. Just because you may not agree with BDS doesn’t mean it doesn’t warrant discussion.

The editors have an annoying habit of suppressing my freedom of speech by deleting my posts while keeping up outrageous bs. One person wrote that the threat from iran is laughable so I posted a URL for a youtube video about the threat of Iran and the editor deleted it. Stop censoring opinions, DP.

Here is the URL about the threat of Iran. Look at it before the DP deletes this post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu8GTn01n18

It’s important to separate the issue of a country’s people from the issue of a country’s actions. I haven’t been paying close attention to this story, but isn’t one of the main issues here the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the resulting displacement of people? Religion doesn’t enter consideration for me here; you can disagree with the actions of Israel the country and still like Jews. I feel like a lot of the discussion has ignored this. It wouldn’t matter to me if the same actions were being taken by a predominantly American, Christian, Kurdish, Latvian, Chinese, Buddhist, atheist… any kind of group; I’d still oppose it. I think people take issue with the country, not the people. That said I think the means of the BDS movement are kinda stupid.

C.O.,

This article might help with some of the questions you’ve raised.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-illegal-settlements-myth/

To the poster who claims the Palestinians had 30% GDP growth. There is evidence of such growth anywhere. In fact UN reports have that Palestinian buying power is dropping. Much of their growth in recent years(8-12%) is the result of a property bubble.

To those claiming the conference denied free debate and opposing view, need to explain to me what Alan Dershowitz Campus Watch is for. What about the annual AIPAC conference? There are plenty of pro-Israel organizations and conferences. It’s not like pro-Israeli views are being denied to express themselves.