Professor Signs Anti-Israel Letter, Draws Strong Student Response

In a move that raised student ire, Erin Stalcup, a departing adjunct professor of English at Yeshiva, signed an open letter to President Obama calling upon him to cease his support of Israel’s “apartheid regime” and her “flagrant violation of international law and UN resolutions.”

The letter, which Stalcup declined to comment upon, boasts the signatures of over 900 academics and likens the state of Israel to the racist regime of South Africa in the 1980’s, comparing their oppression of the black population to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. The letter attacked Israel for its settlements, security fence and treatment of its Arab minorities, and its recent Gaza operation, which it called a “disproportionate and bloody use of excessive force,” and “no act of self-defense, but the dramatic extension of an insidious policy of extermination of a people that refuses to disappear.”

It summarized by contending, “Every one of these acts is a crime against humanity.  In their ensemble, they constitute one of the most massive, ethnocidal atrocities of modern times.”

Though the letter was composed and signed in January, it only reached the attention of the collective YU student body midway through last week – due to one student’s incidental discovery of it on the internet.  Once discovered, it rapidly circulated the student body via word-of-mouth and email, becoming a hot topic of conversation in the cafeteria, classrooms and dormitories of YU.

A past Commentator Student Pulse poll shows that undergraduates are strongly pro-Israel, by any measure.  Over 90% said Israel acted ethically in their Gaza operation, and 93.5% said they “strongly supported” Israel’s recent operation.  More surprisingly, not a single student out of the 153 who responded said they did not support the operation.

Not surprisingly, therefore, student response to the news that a YU professor had signed the letter was overwhelmingly negative. 

Uri Westrich (YC ’09), a former tank driver in the Israeli Defense Forces, termed the letter’s assertions “ludicrous and absurd.”  While acknowledging that Israel is not perfect, the former soldier and current student declared, “I have seen firsthand how the precautions the Israeli Army takes to refrain from harming civilians can very often place IDF soldiers in great danger.” 

Even those who felt that Israel has committed certain wrongs in their treatment of Palestinian people, including during the recent Gaza offensive, felt that such atrocities as the South African oppression of their black population or the holocaust of the Tibetans by the Chinese paled in comparison to Israel’s slight misdeeds.

“I do think that Israel has committed wrongs in their treatment of the Palestinians and I am willing to criticize some of their actions,” Phillip Reich (YC ’11) explained. “Yet it is imperative to remember that the Palestinians are the oppressors and the Israelis are the oppressed, a distinction that is an undisputable reality.  Because this is so, to compare Israel to South Africa is not even possible.”

The letter, imploring Obama to cease his support of Israel, faulted America’s “unquestioning support of Israel” as having fueled the “legitimate anger of the Islamic world [and] supplied the justification for terrorism.”

Max Saltzman, President of the YU Israel Club, was incensed by the letter’s attempt to, in his mind, blame Israel for terrorist attacks on America.  “Terrorism is a crime against innocents,” he maintained. “Under no circumstances can that be validated or justified.”

Though virtually all students disagreed with the content of the letter, students appear to be torn about the appropriate response. Compounding the issue is a delicate balance that YU often strives to strike between academic excellence and religious values.  A few students contended that she should be fired, either for holding views they found repugnant or damaging the university’s name.

Other students argued that, despite the implications of the letter, Yeshiva University should not censor the political views of any of their professors, and feared stifling the faculty’s ability to speak would compromise the academic integrity of the university.

Eitan Novick (YC ’09) argued, “I think it is pretty presumptuous for anyone to think this institution has, or should have, any control over the political beliefs or actions of any professor.  They are entitled to their own opinions, just as we are entitled to ours.”

Novick, who is currently enrolled in one of Professor Stalcup’s classes, went on to assert that “the only relevant question is whether she is performing the job, for which she was hired, to the best of her ability.” 

Most students, however, sought means of censuring the professor short of outright dismissal (particularly before most knew she was leaving due to budget cuts).  At first, several considered purchasing an advertisement in The Commentator urging students to “Divest From Stalcup,” and refrain from signing up for her courses next semester, although they halted their push once they realized she would not be giving any future courses. 

Alexander Fischman, head of YU’s SAIPEC, circulated a petition signed by a number of student leaders calling on President Joel to denounce Prof. Stalcup for her comments. An AIPAC representative, however, successfully pressed Fischman to stop the petition, arguing that the petition would draw more attention to the letter and not result in a useful contribution.