Weak leadership at Duke University is emboldening BDS and fueling antisemitism

Duke University stands at a crossroads. It can either stand up for truth and justice or allow itself to be complicit in the rise of antisemitism on its campus.

By BEN STONE DECEMBER 9, 2024 02:03

COMMITTEE CHAIR Rep. Virginia Foxx speaks at a US House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing on pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses, on Capitol Hill in May. The Protect Economic Freedom Act aims to cut federal funding to colleges and universities engaging in boycotts of Israel. (photo credit: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/Reuters)

On November 7, 2024, the Duke Divest Coalition (DDC) filed a petition with Duke University’s Advisory Committee on Investment Responsibility (ACIR) demanding that Duke divest from “all companies and entities that support or profit from Israeli apartheid.” This inflammatory language, echoing the rhetoric of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, is designed to delegitimize Israel, the world’s only Jewish state. 

The response from Duke’s ACIR? Weak, ambiguous, and alarmingly open to entertaining the baseless accusations of apartheid and genocide. Instead of dismissing the petition outright for what it is – a biased and discriminatory attack against Israel and Jewish students – the ACIR has chosen to deliberate on it, lending credibility to a campaign rooted in antisemitism.The federal and state response 

Fortunately, some leaders outside academia are taking a stronger stance. On November 27, Representatives Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) introduced the bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act, which aims to cut federal funding to colleges and universities that engage in non-expressive commercial boycotts of Israel. 

“Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community,” said Gottheimer. 

Indeed, with antisemitism on United States campuses skyrocketing since the October 7 massacre in Israel, this legislation is a timely and necessary intervention. Nearly 75% of Jewish students have reported experiencing or witnessing antisemitism in recent months. 

Duke University, which received $649 million in federal funding in FY21 (financial year 2021), would face serious financial consequences if it capitulated to the DDC’s demands. North Carolina’s own anti-BDS legislation, House Bill 161, further complicates matters. Signed into law in 2017, it prohibits the state from doing business with companies that boycott Israel. Should Duke sever ties with Israeli entities or their partners, it risks violating this law, inviting potential sanctions from the state government. 

Duke University (credit: PIXABAY)

BDS: A movement of delegitimization 

The BDS movement is not a peaceful campaign for Palestinian rights. Its co-founder, Omar Barghouti, has openly admitted that the goal is the “dismantling of Israel.” The movement perpetuates the lie that Israel is a colonial apartheid state committing genocide – a narrative that is not only false but dangerously inflammatory.

Consider the facts: The Arab population in Israel and the Palestinian territories has grown from 1.9 million in 1947 to over 5.5 million today. In Israel, 30% of physicians are Arab. These are not the demographics of a population subject to genocide or apartheid. Yet the BDS movement and its supporters at Duke propagate these falsehoods, fueling hatred and violence against Jews worldwide. 

Duke’s failure to uphold its mission 

---

---

Duke University’s mission statement emphasizes the development of students as leaders committed to high ethical standards. Yet, by allowing groups such as DDC and Duke Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) to dominate campus discourse with antisemitic rhetoric and actions, the university is failing to live up to its own values. 

On November 19, a group of masked protesters disrupted a lecture by former Israeli attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit. Instead of engaging in civil discourse, they resorted to noise and harassment, violating Duke’s policies on protests and free speech. 

The university’s response? A mild email from Provost Alec Gallimore reminding students of the importance of “civil discourse.” Duke SJP’s response to this email? A dismissive social media post: “Yeah I’m not reading all that... Anyways, free Palestine.” 

This blatant disregard for university policies and values underscores the group’s contempt for dialogue and respect – a contempt that Duke’s administration appears unwilling to confront. 

The ACIR’s complicity 

The ACIR’s decision to seriously consider the DDC’s petition is a dangerous misstep. By entertaining the notion that Israel is guilty of apartheid and genocide, the ACIR has legitimized the very propaganda that fuels antisemitism. The committee’s own guidelines require that divestment recommendations be based on broad and deep support within the Duke community and concern activities deemed morally abhorrent. 

If the ACIR is genuinely concerned about morality, it should reject the DDC’s petition outright. There is no broad consensus within the international community, let alone at Duke, that Israel is an apartheid state. In fact, such claims trivialize the suffering of victims of real apartheid and genocide, such as those in Darfur; and during the Holocaust. 

The broader implications 

What the ACIR fails to grasp – or chooses to ignore – is that allowing these false accusations to gain traction on campus endangers Jewish students and faculty. Since October 7, antisemitic incidents have surged worldwide, from violent protests in Montreal to deadly attacks in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The rhetoric used by BDS supporters is not harmless; it incites violence. 

When asked if it had considered the safety of Jewish and Israeli students, the ACIR’s response was telling. It cited a study showing that both Jewish and Muslim students have felt fearful since October 7, effectively equating antisemitism with Islamophobia. This false equivalence minimizes the unique and pervasive threat faced by Jewish students – a threat underscored by the fact that Jews, who make up just 2% of the US population, are the targets of 68% of religion-based hate crimes. 

The path forward 

Duke’s leadership must act decisively. The university president has the final say on whether to accept the ACIR’s recommendations. He must reject any move toward divestment from Israeli companies and reaffirm Duke’s commitment to fostering a safe and inclusive environment for all students, including its Jewish community. 

Universities such as Brown have set a precedent by rejecting BDS resolutions. Duke must follow suit. Capitulating to the demands of groups like DDC and SJP would not only violate state and federal laws but also betray the university’s mission and values. 

The ACIR should have dismissed the DDC’s petition as the discriminatory antisemitic propaganda that it is. Instead, it has given a platform to those who seek to delegitimize Israel and endanger Jewish students. 

Duke University stands at a crossroads. 

It can either stand up for truth and justice or allow itself to be complicit in the rise of antisemitism on its campus. The choice is clear. Now is the time for Duke’s leadership to demonstrate moral courage and ethics – not just for the sake of its Jewish students but for the sake of its own integrity as an institution of higher learning.

The writer was a CAMERA on Campus fellow at Duke University in 2020/21. He now works at start-ups in New York City.