The need for fact-based, good-faith discussion and exchange to address our most challenging policy issues has never been greater. My Hub Canada op-ed notes that universities should be ideally suited for a leading role, yet in recent months, the drumbeat of intolerance has undermined their ability to do so. Last week, the well-documented rise of antisemitism and anti-Zionism on North American campuses hit home as I was conducting a global exchange that brought together students from five continents representing a remarkably diverse array of religious, political, and technical backgrounds.
For the past 12 years, I’ve led an intensive global technology law course jointly conducted by three universities: the University of Ottawa, the University of Haifa, and Bocconi University in Milan. This year’s course was hosted exclusively in Canada and included visits from current and former government ministers, Supreme Court justices, ambassadors, privacy commissioners, and regulators. The students developed a deep understanding of the complexities of modern digital policies, such as AI regulation and privacy protection.
I wish I could say that technology law was the only focus, but it wasn’t. For the first time, safety precautions kept the course schedule offline, classroom locations remained secret, and guest visits required heightened security reviews.
To top it off, just days after the course commenced, the union representing University of Ottawa professors—my union—narrowly voted to support a boycott, divest, and sanction motion targeting Israeli institutions that, if implemented, could have the effect of banning the Haifa students. Over the course of three hours, colleagues repeatedly cut short debates on child care, union dues, and even the motion itself while claiming a moral and legal obligation to boycott Israeli universities.
I experienced this not as ineffectual virtue signalling, but rather as a real-world destructive policy that would limit academic freedom and the chance for students to learn from each other away from the heat of social media posts that are too often missing both facts and context.
The Ottawa motion is hardly the first of its kind. Indeed, last spring’s campus encampments have seemingly been replaced by faculty motions that place long-standing commitments to institutional neutrality at risk, fuel campus divisions, and reinforce the repeated reports about antisemitism and anti-Zionism that have left many faculty and students ostracized, fearful, and silenced.
Canadian university presidents acknowledged the antisemitism problem last year before government committees, and to their credit, many have acted. The University of Toronto recently released a comprehensive antisemitism policy that notes that “actions directed at individual members of our community because they are Jewish or Israeli, or identify as Zionist, can be harassment, discrimination, and/or violate law or policy.” McGill University cut ties with its student union after days of protests that included acts of vandalism, intimidation, and obstruction. Queen’s University rejected divestment demands, citing the need to maintain institutional neutrality to fully support the academic freedom of its entire community.
These steps are long overdue, as Canadian universities have been playing catch-up in addressing the rise of antisemitism. Universities Australia, which represents 39 of the largest universities in Australia, has adopted a sector-wide definition of antisemitism that closely aligns with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition after a government report found an “urgent need for reform” in order to protect Jewish students and professors on campus. U.S. universities, facing heightened political pressure, have also prioritized the issue, and at long last, many are enforcing the law and campus codes on student conduct.
There is still more work to be done since antisemitism concerns are still too often dismissed with callous disregard for the rights of Jewish and Zionist students. Comments and weak responses that would be roundly condemned if the targets involved women, Indigenous students, or BIPOC students have somehow become acceptable as the goal of equality on campus for some includes a glaring exception. Challenging these disturbing developments requires a renewed commitment to institutional neutrality, adoption of clear policies to define antisemitism, and leadership that prioritizes academic freedom for all.
If the Ottawa union vote was the low point of the course, the highlight was meeting with Amit Ganish, an Israeli law student who survived the Hamas attack on the Nova Music Festival on October 7, 2023, by dodging bullets and hiding in a bush for nine hours. After her emotional testimony, the law students began engaging with each other in a manner that made it virtually impossible to distinguish between nationality or religion.
We need more of this form of exchange and the opportunity to learn from one another. Universities can lead the way, but only with a clear commitment to campus equality and by rejecting the demands for institutional boycotts.
Universities, meant for open debate, are facing challenges. My Hub Canada piece highlights growing intolerance hindering crucial discussions. Last week, witnessing rising antisemitism firsthand during a global exchange was disheartening. It felt like trying to maintain control in a high-speed round of Drift Hunters, constantly adjusting to stay on track amidst unexpected curves. Students tackled complex digital policy issues, from AI to privacy.
Thank you for sharing this thoughtful reflection on the challenges facing universities today. Your experience with the global technology law course highlights both the potential for meaningful cross-cultural exchange and the real-world impact of rising campus tensions. It’s concerning to hear about the safety precautions and the union’s boycott motion, which seem to undermine the open dialogue universities should foster. The steps taken by institutions like the University of Toronto and McGill are encouraging, but your point about the need for consistent policies and a renewed commitment to institutional neutrality really resonates. Amit’s story and the students’ engagement afterward are a powerful reminder of what’s possible when we prioritize understanding over division. Thanks for shedding light on this important issue.
Make no peace with evil.
These antisemetic animals have to be crushed and the only way to do this is through strong leadership, which Canada has nothing resembling this. We need our own Trump.
The ones demanding “tolerance-or-else!” are the most intolerant of all creatures. If you have read anything Conrad Black or listened to Dr. Jordan Peterson on the subject, the time for niceities is long over.
Academia is the root inculcation of antisemitism. It is the hotbed of the leftist hive-mind. Change the culture in schools, K to PhD, and you win.
We HAVE existing laws to deal with this, but the police are utter cowards:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-no-municipal-bylaw-will-calm-the-anti-israel-rabble
High time for the pathetic Canada to grow a pair and deal with this!
Banyak pilihan permainan seru di Tuak88, jadi nggak monoton.
Shan, good for you for saying the quiet part out loud but yes it is obvious the only hope Israel’s genocide apologists have left is for an authoritarian regime to crush dissent and silence free speech like what we are seeing attempted south of the border. I think it might be too late for that though. You’re seeing pretty much the entire world awaken to the reality of what is happening. And Trump is doing a wonderful job of discrediting the Right through massive taxes uh I mean tariffs, shredding the constitution, and rampant eye-popping corruption. It is almost like he is a closet Liberal double-agent. He sure did his best to help the natural governing party up here. I don’t think they could have done it this time without him. But when your intellectual bright lights are convicted felons like Conrad Black and obvious grifters like Peterson, stupidity is not an unlikely explanation either for the Conservative clown show we are all witnessing. One thing is for sure, Poilievre is nowhere near as annoying when he is sitting in the bleachers and not smirking and name-calling on the floor. This time-out was well deserved. Maybe he should not have brought cookies to the agitators blocking streets and harassing his constituents. Of course that is not the kind of public disorder, Conservatives want to crush…because you know rank hypocrisy.
I think you misunderstood me. Trump is the free speech saviour, not the other way around. Liberals and Democrats are the censoring clowns.
Important discussion here about balancing free speech and tolerance on campuses. The diversity in your global exchange shows why these conversations matter. For presentations on complex topics like this, AI PowerPoint could help organize ideas clearly while saving time. Your point about fact-based dialogue is spot on these days.