Author: William A. Jacobson

Thanks for your email to President Eisgruber about the American Studies Association’s boycott of Israel. In correspondence with Princeton alumni who have asked about the boycott, President Eisgruber has said,

I share your dismay at the American Studies Association's misguided boycott. Academic boycotts are almost always bad policy--scholarly engagement helps to sustain and build liberal democratic values. For that reason, among others, I believe that Princeton should continue to work constructively with scholars and institutions throughout the world, whether one admires or dislikes the government under which they operate. And, whatever one thinks of boycotts in general, to single out Israel alone is indefensible.

Thank you for your email expressing your concern about the recent vote of the American Studies Association (ASA) to boycott Israeli universities. Please see below my formal statement about this unfortunate action by the ASA.

I am disappointed and concerned that the American Studies Association, invoking the principle of academic freedom, would vote to boycott Israeli academic institutions. Research, teaching, and scholarship flourish through robust exchange of ideas, across borders and among institutions in different parts of the world. Universities and their faculties can often transcend even profound political differences. It is ill-advised to make academic institutions the instrument with which to promote a political agenda by attempting to isolate students and scholars. Boston University cannot support this boycott.

I hope that there will be a serious discussion within our American and New England Studies Program which has an institutional membership in the ASA which, obviously, is funded by the University. This institutional membership does not come with a vote that is exercised by either the program or the University. The poll taken by the ASA represents the votes of individual members of the organization. We are not prepared to suggest (implicitly or explicitly) to faculty members who hold individual memberships (some of which are funded out of professional funds allocated to individual faculty members) how they should vote. That would lead us onto a slippery slope. I do hope the faculty in the American and New England Studies Program will consider whether or not continuing membership in the ASA will create the opportunity for a temperate and thoughtful reconsideration of the wisdom of the boycott.

To: Christopher L. Eisgruber [[email protected]] CC: Martin A. Mbugna, Communications [[email protected]] Mary DeLorenzo, Asst. to the President [[email protected]] Dear President Eisgruber: Princeton University is an Institutional Member of the American Studies Association (ASA), contributing its good name and dues to the ASA, and also funding ASA indirectly through covering the cost of attending the ASA annual meeting. The ASA just adopted an academic boycott of Israel. The American Association of University Professors has rejected academic boycotts of Israel in general, and has rejected the ASA boycott specifically, on grounds of violation of academic freedom. The anti-Israel academic boycott also amounts to discrimination on the basis of national origin as Israeli academics will be subjected to verification procedures not applicable to academics from any other nation. The ASA boycott is pernicious because it includes boycott of programs run by Israeli academic institutions and encourages American academics to police compliance with the boycott. You can find an explantion in my prior post about the boycott.