Harvard adopts controversial IHRA antisemitism definition Harvard's acceptance of IHRA definition settles discrimination case brought by students who said pro-Palestine protests were antisemitic Students from MIT, Harvard University and others rally at a protest encampment on MIT's Kresge Lawn in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on 22 April 2024 (Scott Eisen/Getty Images via AFP) By MEE staff Published date: 22 January 2025 20:07 GMT | Last update: 2 weeks 6 days ago 329 Shares facebook sharing buttontwitter sharing buttonwhatsapp sharing buttonmessenger sharing buttonemail sharing buttonsharethis sharing button Harvard University has agreed to accept the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, after settling a lawsuit from Jewish students who accused other students of harassment during pro-Palestine protests on campus in 2024. The student group, Students Against Antisemitism, filed a complaint in January 2024 in a court in Boston, saying that Harvard was failing to protect them under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a law that prohibits any school from receiving federal funding from discriminating against anyone based on race, colour or national origin. The complaint cited last year's pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war on Gaza as the source of antisemitic rhetoric from other students. Middle East Eye has previously reported on these accusations of antisemitism against pro-Palestinian protesters at US universities, which often conflate support for Palestinian rights with antisemitism. As a part of Harvard's settlement of the case brought by Students Against Antisemitism, the university has agreed to use the IHRA definition of antisemitism when applying its non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Your email "This resolution includes specific, meaningful actions to combat antisemitism, hate and bias on college campuses that illustrate the University’s strong commitment to further protecting their Jewish and Israeli community," Marc Kasowitz of Kasowitz Benson Torres, LLP, from the counsel for Students Against Antisemitism said in a statement. The controversial IHRA definition was formulated in 2004 and published in 2005 by antisemitism expert Kenneth Stern in collaboration with other academics from the American Jewish Committee, a pro-Israel advocacy organisation founded at the beginning of the 20th century and based in New York. Critics say some of the examples provided in the definition conflate antisemitism with criticism of historical policies that led to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 - known to the Palestinians as the Nakba or "catastrophe". The Antisemitism Awareness Act is a full frontal assault on free speech Read More » During the Nakba, hundreds of thousands of indigenous Palestinians were expelled from their homes by Zionist paramilitaries. Critics also say the definition conflates antisemitism with criticism of current Israeli policies against Palestinians, such as human rights abuses and the occupation by Israel. The IHRA definition was adopted by the first Trump administration in 2019, and was reaffirmed by the Biden administration. Harvard also said it would provide training on "combating antisemitism" and that its Office for Community Conduct would incorporate the IHRA definition when reviewing complaints of discrimination. The move by Harvard follows other similar measures implemented by leading US universities to prevent any criticism of Zionism. In August 2024, New York University declared Zionists a "protected class". In response to Israel's war on Gaza that began after the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023, thousands of university students across the US began organising protests against the war. Many of those protests evolved into concerted efforts to call on their institutions to defund any financial stakes in companies profiting from Israel's war, which has killed more than 46,000 Palestinians. In many cases, the protests were met with harsh responses from university administrations, and in some cases police were called in to forcefully remove protesters. Over the past academic year, schools have adopted more forceful measures aimed at curbing any protests against Israel, including issuing new speech guidelines and incorporating surveillance tactics against student organisers.
-
-
-
-
AntisemitismCanada In 2026, Tulsa And Panama Are Courting Canadian Jews As Antisemitism Redefines The Cost Of Staying As antisemitism reaches unprecedented levels across Canada, Jewish families and professionals are quietly reassessing their futures, and some are being actively courted elsewhere. Ron East By: Ron East December 31, 2025 SHARE A growing number of Canadian Jews are exploring relocation options A growing number of Canadian Jews are exploring relocation options as antisemitism intensifies and confidence in public protection erodes. (Image: Illustration.) TORONTO — For generations, Canada sold itself as a country where Jews could thrive without constantly looking over their shoulders. That assumption no longer holds for a growing number of Canadian Jews, particularly in the aftermath of October 7 and the months that followed. What has changed is not only the number of antisemitic incidents. It is the atmosphere. Public hostility has been normalized. Jewish schools, synagogues, and community centres operate under permanent security protocols. Anti-Jewish intimidation is increasingly framed as political expression. Enforcement is inconsistent. Accountability is rare. When Jewish life requires constant risk assessment, mobility stops being a luxury. It becomes a rational act of self-preservation. That reality helps explain why, in 2026, two very different destinations, Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Panama, are appearing with growing frequency in serious conversations among Canadian Jews who have the means and flexibility to move. This is not a panic migration. It is a strategic recalculation. Canada’s new warning lights Jewish Canadians represent a small fraction of the population, yet account for a vastly disproportionate share of reported hate crimes. This is not a perception problem. It is a documented pattern. More troubling than the statistics themselves is the message many Jews hear in response: concern, sympathy, and context, but little deterrence. Protests that spill into harassment are tolerated. Jewish institutions are targeted repeatedly. Antisemitism disguised as antizionism is parsed endlessly rather than confronted directly. The result is a slow erosion of confidence in the state’s willingness or ability to enforce equal protection. When a community moves from assuming it belongs to hoping nothing happens today, the social contract has already been fractured. It is within this context that Tulsa and Panama are not merely attracting attention but actively courting. Lech Le’Tulsa and intentional Jewish welcome Tulsa is not presenting itself as a refuge city. It is presenting itself as a place that wants Jewish life to grow. In 2026, that effort has taken concrete form through Lech Le’Tulsa, a Jewish-focused relocation initiative designed to attract Jewish families, professionals, and entrepreneurs to the Tulsa area. The program combines relocation assistance with intentional community building and access to Jewish infrastructure. The name is deliberate. Lech Lecha, the biblical call to go forth and build a future, is not branding by accident. It speaks directly to a Jewish historical instinct that understands movement not as retreat, but as agency. Lech Le’Tulsa offers what many Canadian Jews increasingly feel is missing at home: A clear signal that Jewish presence is welcomed, not merely accommodated Immediate access to synagogues, schools, and Jewish communal life A civic environment where Jewish identity is not treated as a liability The financial incentives matter, but the social architecture matters more. Tulsa is offering a landing ramp. It is saying, we are prepared for you to arrive. That clarity stands in stark contrast to the ambiguity Canadian Jews experience when their safety concerns are acknowledged but endlessly deferred. Panama and the appeal of optionality Panama represents a different but equally rational response to insecurity. For Canadian Jews with international mobility, Panama offers residency pathways tied to investment, business activity, or long-term economic contribution. It also offers something increasingly valuable: optionality. Panama has an established Jewish community, a comparatively lower cost of living, and an immigration framework that openly courts skilled and capital-carrying residents. For some, it is a permanent relocation. For others, it is a second base, a contingency plan, or a future passport pathway. What matters is not the destination itself, but the logic behind the choice. When Jews seek second options, they are not rejecting diaspora life. They are applying historical lessons. Jewish continuity has always depended on redundancy, resilience, and the ability to move before crisis becomes catastrophe. The Zionist lens Canadians prefer to ignore Zionism does not deny the legitimacy of diaspora life. It insists that Jews must never be dependent on the goodwill of others for safety or equality. That lesson was written in blood long before the modern State of Israel existed. Israel institutionalized it at a national level. Individual Jews apply it on a personal level. When Canadian Jews explore Tulsa or Panama, they are not abandoning Canada in anger. They are responding rationally to warning signs. They are building leverage. They are ensuring their children have options. This is what Zionist consciousness looks like outside Israel. It is quiet, pragmatic, and unsentimental. An indictment Canada should take seriously Tulsa and Panama are not superior societies. They are intentional ones. Tulsa is saying, we want contributors, and we are prepared to integrate them. Panama is saying, we want residents and investment, and we have clear legal pathways. Canada, too often, is saying something else entirely: we are sorry you feel unsafe, but the politics are complicated. A serious country does not treat antisemitism as a public relations challenge. It treats it as a threat to civic order. That requires enforcement, deterrence, and moral clarity, including the willingness to name antisemitism even when it hides behind fashionable political language. Until that happens, Canada should not be surprised when Jews quietly explore exit ramps. The bottom line In 2026, the fact that Tulsa and Panama can plausibly court Canadian Jews is not an oddity. It is a warning. When antisemitism reaches levels that fundamentally alter how Jews calculate their futures, movement becomes strategy. History teaches Jews to act before apologies arrive too late. Canada still has time to reverse this trajectory. But time matters. And Jews, having learned this lesson repeatedly, are no longer inclined to wait.
-
-
-
-
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment