Ben Sigel

My confidence in Harvard leadership’s ability and will to confront anti-semitism and the demonization of Israel continues to decline. Unfortunately, it is becoming ever clearer why Harvard ranks first on anti- semitism, even as it ranks last on upholding free speech. Confronting anti-semitism does not mean punishing offensive speech as some suggest. Free speech is sacrosanct in a university. But effective leadership does involve assuring the appropriateness of speech made by the university and its subunits and it means encouraging speech that counters prejudice and balances debate. The executive board of Harvard’s Center for Middle East Studies, acting for the Center, not in their individual capacities, has endorsed a statement demonizing Israel. cmes.fas.harvard.edu/news/me… There is nothing wrong with anyone in the University taking this position or any other position. That is academic freedom. It should not be possible and would not be possible if race or gender issues were involved, for a center that proudly uses the Harvard name to support research and debate to take a position that so many see as prejudiced. I note Edward Said’s intellectual heir, Rashid Khalidi, who many see as anti-semitic has been invited twice since October 7 to speak at the University. Everyone should be free to speak or invite speakers. I also note with disappointment, but not actually surprise, that to my knowledge Harvard has not had speakers like Dennis Ross or Bret Stephens who take pro-Israel positions. With all the rhetoric about open dialogue and debate, it is remarkable that in Harvard College there is no yet announced dialogue or debate on any Middle East or diversity related issue. Nor am I aware, even after the events of last fall, of any new initiatives directed at education on anti-semitism or the Holocaust. There has been no public discussion of Harvard’s past collaboration with German Nazi controlled universities, Jewish quotas or the more recent discrimination against Israeli students. We have disbanded one task force on anti-semitism without result and announced another in a way that the Biden Administration’s envoy for anti-semitism labeled an “unforced error.” And as January ends, still no constituting or charging of the new task force. My life experience is that task forces on subjects of concern are most often formed as an alternative to moral leadership rather than a way to bring it about. I hope I will be proven wrong. Harvard interim president Alan Garber has a powerful intellect and a strong moral compass. I hope he will not let an excessive desire for comity prevent him from acting with strength and clarity. I cannot think of a worse stretch in Harvard history than the last few months. I have no doubt that all members of the Corporation are deeply devoted to Harvard. As the institution’s ultimate fiduciaries, I hope they will take appropriate accountability and enable a restoration of confidence. The challenges are real but resolvable. Harvard is blessed with an extraordinary collection of students, faculty and staff and abundant resources. The mission of seeking truth and educating leaders has never been more important. This is a moment for wisdom and boldness.