Beyond the quad in U.S.–Israel relations and higher education: Mark A. Raiderby Mark Raider This fall, America’s universities will welcome nearly 19.5 million students. Shaped by political polarization, campus debates over U.S.–Israel relations will challenge core values of civil discourse, forcing higher education to face a defining crisis of purpose. In fact, this volatile environment renders academic engagement with Israel Studies indispensable. Far from a niche subfield, Israel Studies touches the bedrock of American civic life, serving as a test case for understanding a modern republican state subject to intense societal pressures. When universities shy away from complex subjects, they abdicate their responsibility to equip students with evidence-based tools needed for a turbulent world.
The stakes of this mission were highlighted by a recent international conference at the University of Cincinnati. Organized by the UC Israel Initiative — a faculty-led project supported by the administration and an advisory board — “Shifting Paradigms, New Horizons: The Abraham Accords, U.S.–Israel Relations, and the Future of the Middle East” proved universities can serve as intellectual laboratories rather than retreating from controversy. A central strength of the conference was its commitment to intellectual pluralism. Participants spanned the political spectrum, including former Israel Deputy Prime Minister Yossi Beilin, Palestinian negotiator Hiba Husseini, diplomats Daniel B. Shapiro, John Rakolta Jr., and Zeev Boker, and former U.S. Sen. Rob Portman and U.S. Rep. Greg Landsman. Operating in the shadow of hostilities in the West Bank, Gaza, and elsewhere, the event highlighted the profound challenges facing open campus inquiry. Organizers navigated cool indifference and internal pushback as well as disinformation campaigns by Students for Justice in Palestine, the Young Democratic Socialists of America, and the Cincinnati Palestine Solidarity Coalition. Escalating online threats prompted heavy police security, and a local institutional partner abruptly withdrew at the eleventh hour. Rather than yielding, UC’s administration stepped in to secure facilities, absorb security costs, and guarantee the event’s execution. The distance between the conference’s mission and its detractors proved stark. Protesters dismissed Israeli peace advocates as “war criminals” and Palestinian scholars as “traitors,” embracing an “anti-normalization” stance akin to the 1967 Khartoum Conference’s “three no’s” — no peace, no recognition, no negotiations — utterly out of step with today’s geopolitical reality. While criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic, demonstrators crossed the line into overt hostility. Agitators led chants of “Free Palestine until the Zionists are f--king dead,” banged on registration windows, photographed and intimidated attendees, and disrupted proceedings. I was personally chased across campus by a group waving a Palestinian flag, shouting slurs, and calling out “Jewish money from New York.” Nevertheless, the conference established UC as a profile in institutional courage. Campus leadership showed resolve where other universities have faltered, proving it’s possible to withstand pressure by insisting difficult topics be met with rigorous scholarship rather than silence. Senior UC officers hosted plenaries alongside supportive faculty colleagues. When hostility subverts academic freedom, universities must draw a red line. Education is a powerful antidote to dogmatism; faculty have an obligation to reject ideological echo chambers and replace slogans with substance. Exploring U.S. engagement in the Middle East, including today’s multilateral Abraham Accords, encourages students to analyze how economic integration and pragmatic statesmanship build bridges where traditional power politics stall. Ultimately, these are essential civics lessons. International diplomacy requires sitting across the table from adversaries; campus health requires listening across ideological divides. American democracy depends on the marketplace of ideas and a citizenry capable of problem-solving. By treating the study of U.S.–Israel relations as a touchstone of civic education, American universities can transform hostility into a testament that open inquiry remains democracy’s best defense and truest hope for peace. |