University of Toronto gets it right

An academic conference at the University of Toronto is to go ahead, against calls from some members of the local Jewish community for it not to do so, because of the AUT boycott policy:

The University of Toronto says it will not cancel a psychiatry conference to be co-hosted by British academics who are members of a group that boycotted two Israeli universities last month.

In a statement posted on U of T's website, vice-president and provost Vivek Goel said that while he does not agree with the boycott by Britain's Association of University Teachers (AUT), cancelling the May 27-28 conference, to be co-hosted by the University of Manchester's psychiatry department, would be hypocritical.

"We do not agree with the boycott action by the British academics," Goel said. "Furthermore, the university does not agree that as a result we should cancel this important academic event or bar our Manchester co-hosts from participating - that would be another blow to academic freedom. Two wrongs don't make a right."
.....
Goel said the U of T conference, which will address issues about trauma and global health, has nothing to do with the issues raised by the AUT three weeks ago and that all academics, including Israeli ones, are welcome to attend.

He also emphasized this is not an AUT conference, and that the Manchester professors just happen to be part of the union. (The six participating Manchester academics have reportedly gone on record as saying they do not support the boycott.)

Read the rest. The decision to proceed with the conference is, in my view, correct. The boycott, so long as there is one, should be opposed by criticizing it, undermining it, breaking it, engaging in academic exchanges of every kind with Israeli universities and academics, and (should it have to come to this) mass resignations from the AUT; not by randomly targeting members of the AUT for a policy they may or may not agree with. That just falls in with the boycotting logic to which those of us trying to uphold norms of academic freedom are opposed.

In this connection see Statute 5 of the International Council for Science:

In pursuing its objectives in respect of the rights and responsibilities of scientist [sic], ICSU, as an international non-governmental body, shall observe and actively uphold the principle of the universality of science (my italics). This principle entails freedom of association and expression, access to data and information, and freedom of communication and movement in connection with international scientific activities, without any discrimination on the basis of such factors as citizenship, religion, creed, political stance, ethnic origin, race, colour, language, age or sex. ICSU shall recognize and respect the independence of the internal science policies of its National Scientific Members. ICSU shall not permit any of its activities to be disturbed by statements or actions of a polictical nature.