Many Jewish staff in Scottish universities reject IHRA definition of antisemitism
But he contrasts 'some Jewish people' who support the definition with 'some people' who dispute it. In fact, many Jewish staff at the university and across Scotland reject the IHRA definition, and we have come together as the Scottish Universities Jewish Staff Network. We oppose the genocide committed by Israel against Palestine and wish to do so without – as the IHRA would imply – being labelled antisemites. Not in our name.Prof Philip WadlerOn behalf of the Scottish Universities Jewish Staff Network
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Should US, Trump recognize a Palestinian state? Tell us
Greene's Republican Party has historically stood with Israel, but continued reports of starvation and civilian suffering are peeling away supporters, such as the United Kingdom, which announced it would recognize Palestine as a country if Israel doesn't improve conditions for noncombatants. But outspoken allies of Israel, from the president to the creator of a culture-defining comedy, say we should remember the horrific surprise attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, that kicked off the war and killed 1,200 Israelis, a majority of them civilians. Of the 251 hostages taken on that day, there are 50 still in captivity. Actor and comedian Jerry Seinfeld has made a statement about living briefly in the Jewish state and the heartbreak he felt over the Oct. 7 atrocities, saying, "I will stand with Israel." President Donald Trump, meanwhile, recently said recognizing Palestine as a nation and similar pressure on Israel amount to "rewarding Hamas." 'Every ounce of food': Trump presses Israel on starvation in Gaza; 'children look very hungry' What is the US doing in Israel, Gaza? In terms of actions to stop the humanitarian crisis, the United States pressured Israel to allow aid after it cut off deliveries in March by the United Nations and other groups for 11 weeks because Israeli officials said Hamas was seizing food. The U.N. said those renewed deliveries were a "drop in the ocean" of what was urgently needed. Now $30 million in U.S. aid is to be delivered through a controversial private, for-profit U.S. and Israel-backed contractor, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Critics say GHF is not getting enough food to people, who are being killed as they try to get help from the aid sites. People are starving in Gaza. Why are we so comfortable just letting that happen? | Opinion Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is set to travel to Israel on July 31, Thursday, to address the humanitarian crisis. Witkoff called off the most recent efforts to broker a ceasefire deal on July 24, saying Hamas showed "a lack of desire." Should the US do more to help Palestinians? Should celebrities be weighing in? Now we're asking you, our readers, if you think the U.S. government is taking the right actions in terms of Israel and Gaza. And who do you think should be weighing in on the argument? Fill out our form below or send us an email to forum@ with the subject line "Forum Gaza." We'll pick a collection of responses to share in a follow-up post. Here are some questions to help you respond: Does the U.S. have a responsibility to do more to end the hunger crisis in Gaza? Why or why not? Is it helpful to have celebrities and other people not involved with foreign policy weigh in? Or does it distract? Why or why not? How would the recognition of a Palestinian state change the situation? What factors about the war in Gaza are not being covered enough in the news? Joel Burgess is a Voices editor for the USA TODAY Network.
The National
13 hours ago
- The National
Expert debunks peers' bid to stop UK recognising Palestine as a state
On Thursday, around 40 members of the unelected second chamber wrote to Attorney General Richard Hermer, suggesting that the criteria for recognising Palestine had not been met under the Montevideo Convention – a Pan-American treaty signed in 1933. The Convention, signed by 17 signatories in the Americas, set out four key criteria for statehood. The UK was not a signatory. Richard McNeil-Willson, who lectures in the Islamic and Middle Eastern studies department at Edinburgh University, said that the interpretation was 'not only ludicrous' by a 'cynical' interpretation of the treaty. READ MORE: Ipso defends chair for publicly opposing recognition of Palestine And, Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie said it was 'deplorable' that peers were trying to use legal technicalities while a genocide is underway. The criteria under the Montevideo Convention sets out that a state must have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government and capacity to enter into relations with other states. But, McNeil-Willson explained there are several issues with that argument, adding that it was a 'spoiler attempt' to stop Palestinians from having 'basic rights'. 'It's very bizarre that this has been focused on by the 43 peers and signatories who essentially put forward these arguments that Palestine doesn't meet any of the four criteria," he said. 'You can look at this from a technical point of view, the letter of the law, and you can say, well clearly Palestine has a permanent population. 'It also has borders, and it has borders that are internationally recognised, and they are recognised under the International Court of Justice.' (Image: Supplied) McNeil-Willson noted the claims that this applies as there isn't a functioning government in Palestine, there have been no elections for decades, and Hamas is a terrorist organisation, falls short. 'The [Montevideo Convention] doesn't care what kind of government is in place, if it's a democratic organisation, they wouldn't care if it's non-democratic authoritarian – that doesn't stop it from being recognised as a state,' he added. 'Equally, the idea that it's a terrorist organisation – if you look at contemporary international relations, the recognition of the Taliban as a government in Afghanistan, despite it being previously seen by the US and lots of Europe as a terrorist organisation. 'Then there's the HTS [Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham] in Syria which is now being recognised as the legitimate government of Syria, that doesn't change Syria's righteousness as a state. None of these ideas make any sense.' McNeil-Willson added that under the interpretation put forward by the peers in the letter, the 147 states that have already recognised Palestine, including Mexico, Brazil, and Chile, who also signed the Montevideo Convention, are already in violation of international law. READ MORE: 'Keir' name goes extinct after Starmer comes to power 'The arguments they're putting forward – that the population isn't permanent, the borders aren't recognised – are a direct result of Israel's genocide, of its bombing and its invasion,' he added. 'It's not only ludicrous, it's a very cynical view of the conflict that in no way takes Israel's role into account.' He added: 'To Israel, the existence of Palestine is a threat. To Palestinians, it's simply a way of proclaiming basic human rights that should be granted to them.' Scottish Greens co-leader Harvie said that recognition of Palestine as a state is 'long overdue'. 'It must be just the first step of many toward achieving peace, security and justice for the Palestinian people,' he added. 'To seek legal technicalities to block progress is deplorable. We should completely reject the idea that Palestine should be denied statehood because of factors which are entirely the result of Israel's occupation and illegal settlements over many years. 'The current genocide must end, the occupation must end, and the international community must finally take action against the state of Israel for its dehumanisation of Palestinians and hold war criminals accountable.' We previously told how Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the UK Government would follow France's lead and officially recognise Palestinian statehood in September if Israel and Hamas do not agree to a ceasefire.
The Herald Scotland
14 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
John Swinney issues 'freedom of speech' warning at Festival
Mr Swinney was speaking at the Edinburgh International Festival's headquarters days after Jewish performers claimed their Fringe shows had been cancelled by venues who cited safety concerns raised by staff. Read more: The First Minister, who praised the 'glorious diversity' of Scotland in his speech at The Hub venue, stressed the importance of performers having the ability to 'challenge us, to ask us tough questions, and to force us to look at things from different perspectives.' He added: 'Culture that helps us to understand ourselves, to understand each other and to understand the world around about us.' Mr Swinney, who said he wanted to ensure Scotland was a country of 'robust debate and inquiry,' later launched a new defence of Edinburgh-based investment firm Baillie Gifford, one of the key corporate backers of both the EIF and the Fringe. Pro-Palestine campaigners have called for the both events to sever their links with the firm, which is said to have more than £60m worth of investments in a defence giant which has worked with state-owned arms companies in Israel. In his speech, Mr Swinney admitted global conflict was 'redrawing the world order', and said years of economic stagnation and austerity in the UK had left people disillusioned and alienated, and expression concern at how new technology had left people 'much more exposed to disinformation and harmful material.' He added: 'I want to ensure that Scotland's culture sector continues to bring people together for many generations to come. 'I know that, just like the government, this sector has faced significant and prolonged financial pressures. 'You've been squeezed by rising costs, by new restrictions on the freedom of movement in Europe, by job losses during the pandemic and too many other challenges to mention. I know also that freedom of expression is under greater and greater attack, both at home and around the world. 'I want to ensure that Scotland – the birthplace of the enlightenment – remains a country of robust debate and inquiry. 'I firmly believe that art and culture must be able to challenge us, to ask us tough questions, and to force us to look at things from different perspectives. 'And yes, it must at times be allowed to shock and to offend us. It can also heal us. So let me be absolutely clear – as First Minister I will always protect freedom of speech in our country. 'It is not the First Minister's job to tell you what to create – nor would I ever seek to do so.' Mr Swinney was later asked about controversy over the cancellation of Fringe shows by Jewish performers Rachel Creeger and Philip Simon, and the renewed calls for Baillie Gifford to be dropped by festivals. He said: "What I make a pitch for is an atmosphere of tolerance and respect for other people's opinions. If we all have respect for each other's opinions then we will be able to enable everyone to express their opinions. "I believe in freedom of speech and that we should be tolerant of others. "I feel our society is healthier where we have an expression of views respectively and courteously, so all of us are able to do so on all subjects, but particularly on the issues of the greatest sensitivity. "I want there to be freedom of expression and I want people to be able to air their views. "Some of the ability to do that and the creation of opportunities to do so comes through the sponsorship that is offered by organisations like Baillie Gifford. "My view hasn't changed from what I said before. I think Baillie Gifford has an important contribution to make as one organisation to the offer of philanthropic support for the arts."
