logo
‘Censorship': over 115 scholars condemn cancellation of Harvard journal issue on Palestine

‘Censorship': over 115 scholars condemn cancellation of Harvard journal issue on Palestine

The Guardian2 days ago
More than 115 education scholars have condemned the cancellation of an entire issue of an academic journal dedicated to Palestine by a Harvard University publisher as 'censorship'.
In an open letter published on Thursday, the scholars denounced the abrupt scrapping of a special issue of the Harvard Educational Review – which was first revealed by the Guardian in July – as an 'attempt to silence the academic examination of the genocide, starvation and dehumanisation of Palestinian people by the state of Israel and its allies.'
The writers note that the issue's censorship is also an example of 'anti-Palestinian discrimination, obstructing the dissemination of knowledge on Palestine at the height of the genocide in Gaza'.
The special issue of the prestigious education journal was planned six months into Israel's war in Gaza to tackle questions about the education of Palestinians, education about Palestine and Palestinians, and related debates in schools and colleges in the US, as the Guardian previously reported.
'The field of education has an important role to play in supporting students, educators, and policymakers in contextualizing what has been happening in Gaza,' the journal's editors wrote in their call for abstracts – which came against the backdrop of the devastation of Gaza's educational infrastructure, including the shuttering of hundreds of schools and destruction of all of the territory's universities.
More than a year later, the special issue was just about ready – all articles had been edited, contracts with most authors had been finalized, and the issue had been advertised at academic conferences and on the back cover of the previous one. But late in the process, the Harvard Education Publishing Group, a division of the Harvard Graduate School of Education which publishes the journal, demanded that all articles be submitted to a 'risk assessment' review by Harvard's general counsel – an unprecedented demand.
When the authors protested, the publisher responded by abruptly cancelling the issue altogether. In an email obtained by the Guardian, the group's executive director, Jessica Fiorillo, cited what she described as an inadequate review process and the need for 'considerable copy editing' as well as a 'lack of internal alignment' about the special issue. She said that the decision was not 'due to censorship of a particular viewpoint nor does it connect to matters of academic freedom'.
The authors and editors flatly rejected that characterization, telling the Guardian that the cancellation set a dangerous precedent and was an example of what many scholars have come to refer to as the 'Palestine exception' to academic freedom.
'The decision by HEPG to abandon their own institutional mission – as well as the responsibilities that their world-leading stature demands – is scholasticide in action,' the dozens of scholars who signed the recent letter also wrote, using a term coined by Palestinian scholars to describe Israel's 'deliberate and systematic destruction' of Palestine's educational system.
'It is unconscionable that HEPG have chosen to publicly frame their cancellation of the special issue as a matter of academic quality, while omitting key publicly-reported facts that point to censorship.'
Arathi Sriprakash, a professor of sociology and education at the University of Oxford and one of the letter's signatories, told the Guardian that the special issue's cancellation has mobilised so many education scholars 'precisely because we recognise the grave consequences of such threats to academic freedom and academic integrity'.
'The ongoing genocidal violence in Gaza has involved the physical destruction of the entire higher education system there, and now in many education institutions around the world there are active attempts to shut down learning about what's happening altogether. As educationalists, we have to remain steadfast in our commitment to the pursuit of knowledge and learning without fear or threat.'
The ordeal around the special Palestine issue played out against the backdrop of the Trump administration's crackdown on US higher education institutions' autonomy on the basis of combating alleged antisemitism on campuses.
Harvard is the only university that has sued the administration in response to it cutting billions of dollars in federal funds and other punishing measures it has unleashed on universities. But internally, Harvard has pre-empted many of the administration's demands, including by demoting scholars, scrapping initiatives giving space to Palestinian narratives and adopting a controversial definition of antisemitism that critics say is antithetical to academic inquiry.
In conversations with the Harvard Educational Review editors, the journal's publisher acknowledged that it was seeking legal review of the articles out of fears that their publication would prompt antisemitism claims, an editor at the journal said.
Harvard is reportedly close to finalizing a settlement with the Trump administration along the lines of those reached by other top universities.
Thea Abu El-Haj, a Palestinian-American anthropologist of education at Barnard College and one of 21 contributors to the cancelled special issue, criticized the university's handling of the matter as yet another sign of institutional capitulation.
'If the universities – or in this case a university press – are not willing to stand up for what is core to their mission, I don't know what they're doing,' she told the Guardian last month. 'What's the point?'
A spokesperson for the Harvard Graduate School of Education did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the latest letter but in an earlier statement to the Guardian wrote that the publisher 'remains deeply committed to our robust editorial process'.
Last month, the free speech group PEN America also condemned the special issue's cancellation as a 'blatant assault on academic freedom'.
'Canceling an entire issue so close to publication is highly unusual, virtually unheard of,' Kristen Shahverdian, the program director for the group's Campus Free Speech initiative, said in a statement.
'Silencing these scholarly voices robs academics, students, and the public of the opportunity to engage with their insights. It also sends a chilling message in the context of the Trump administration's unrelenting pressure on Harvard University and mounting political interference in higher education, including efforts that target scholarship on Palestine.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

No ceasefire, no deal - Wetin Alaska summit mean for Trump, Putin and Ukraine
No ceasefire, no deal - Wetin Alaska summit mean for Trump, Putin and Ukraine

BBC News

time11 minutes ago

  • BBC News

No ceasefire, no deal - Wetin Alaska summit mean for Trump, Putin and Ukraine

US President Donald Trump and im Russian padi Vladimir Putin comot for Alaska witout any agreement to ceasefire for Ukraine. Afta almost three-hour meeting, di leaders deliva joint statement to di media bifor dem comot witout ansa to kwesions. Make we look wetin dis one mean for di US and Russian leaders as well as wetin go happun next for di war for Ukraine. Meeting spoil Trump image as dealmaker "Deal no dey until deal dey," Donald Trump tok early for im post-summit remarks for Anchorage. Na roundabout way to agree say afta several hours of tok, no deal. No ceasefire. Notin beta dey to report. Di president say dat e and Vladimir Putin make "some great progress", but wit little details about wetin dat be, e dey left for di world to imagine. "We no get dia," e later say, bifor e comot di room witout taking any questions from di hundreds of reporters wey gada. Trump travel long way to only produce such bad meeting, even if America European allies and Ukrainian officials fit dey relieved, e no offer unilateral concessions or agreements wey fit help future negotiations. For di man who like to tout imsef as peacemaker and dealmaker, e be like say Trump go comot Alaska wit notin. E also get no indications say future summit wey go include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky dey come, Putin "next time for Moscow" tok about dia next meeting. While Trump get less at stake during dis negotiations dan Ukraine or Russia, e go still put dent for im domestic and international prestige afta e don earlier promise say dis meeting get only 25% chance of failure. Wetin dey more, di president gatz suffer di standing silent as Putin start off di press-conference wey no get extensive opening remarks. E dey different from di normal routine for di Oval Office, wen di US president dey incharge while im foreign padi go dey look wit no comment. While Alaska na American territory, Putin feel at home like wetin be "Russian America" bifor dem sell dem give US for di 19th Century. Di big kwesion now wey reporters no get chance ask Trump for Friday na weda e go decide to impose im new sanctions on Russia as punishment. Di president partially address for friendly manner for one Fox News interview bifor e fly out wia e tok say e go consider di move "maybe in two weeks, three weeks". But as di president promise "serious consequences" if Russia no move towards ceasefire, such unspecific ansa fit bring more kwesion dan ansa. Putin get im moment for di global spotlight Wen "press conference" no be press conference? Wen kwesions no dey. Surprise dey di hall wen President Putin and Trump comot for di podium as soon as dem deliva dia statements wit no kwesion. Members of di Russian delegation, too, comot for di room quickly and dem no ansa any of di kwesions wey journalists dey ask dem. Clear signs say wen e come to di war for Ukraine, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump still get major difference of opinion. Donald Trump bin dey push for Russian ceasefire. Vladimir Putin no give am. E get veri different vibe earlier fordo day. President Trump bin roll out di red carpet for Vladimir Putin, as e treat di Kremlin leader as honoured guest. Today di Russian president gte im moment for di geo-political limelight, sharing di stage wit di leader of di world most powerful kontri. But how Trump go react to wetin happun? E still neva manage to beg Putin to end Russia war for Ukraine. Bifor, e go threaten tougher approach to Russia, wit ultimatums, deadlines and warnings of more sanctions if Moscow ignore calls for ceasefire. E neva follow through. Relief from Ukraine - but fear for wetin next Wetin just happun for Anchorage fit no dey interesting for many, but for Kyiv dem go get relief say deal no dey announced wey go cost Ukraine territory. Pipo for Ukraine go also know say all dia key deals wit Russia don end, so even if one dey announced for Anchorage, dem no go dey sure. Ukrainians go dey on standby. Howeva, dat joint appearance for front of di media Vladimir Putin yet again speak of di "root causes" of di conflict and say only if dem comot dem bifor lasting peace go dey. E mean say e dey determined to pursue di original objective of im "special military operation" - wey be to scatta Ukraine as independent state. Three-and-a-half years of Western efforts don fail to make Putin change im mind, and dat also include di Alaska summit. Di uncertainty wey kontinue afta di meeting also dey worry. Wetin go happun next? Russia attacks go kontinue? Di past few months see different Western deadlines wey come and go witout consequences, and threats wey dem neva carry out. Ukrainians see dis as invitation for Putin to kontinue im attacks. Additional reports by: North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher, Vitaliy Shevchenko, Russia Editor BBC Monitoring, Steve Rosenberg, Russia editor

Body language expert reveals Trump and Putin's key giveaways from their Alaska summit
Body language expert reveals Trump and Putin's key giveaways from their Alaska summit

Sky News

time11 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Body language expert reveals Trump and Putin's key giveaways from their Alaska summit

Hand pats, manspreading and tell-tale signs of discontent - there was plenty on display in the body language of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin to show who had the upper hand in their Ukraine negotiations, an expert has told Sky News. All eyes were on the two world leaders as they met on the red carpet at the Elmendorf-Richardson military base in Alaska, and again as they emerged a few hours later from their much-anticipated summit. While at first it was all "genuine smiles", when the leaders emerged from their private meeting, the lack of a deal was written all over Trump 's face, according to body language expert and psychologist Dr Peter Collett. Even in their very first handshake, there was plenty to be analysed in terms of body language, Dr Collett says. Putin was the first to extend his hand, showing "his enthusiasm, delight" and "commitment" to the occasion. But within the handshake itself were no less than five "hand pats", Dr Collett adds, which offer more insight. "During the handshakes, we also see several pats," the expert says. Putin got the first, with his "rather tentative and much less dramatic than those produced by Trump". By contrast, Trump's hand pats were a "status reminder" and "his way of telling Putin that he's the man in charge". At one stage, the US president allowed his Russian counterpart to pat his hand. Although this allowed Putin to place his hand on top, seemingly asserting his dominance, this signature move of Trump's actually allows him to "flex his muscles", Dr Collett says. "One of the reasons Trump makes a habit of doing this is that it allows him to flex his bicep and pull the other [person] towards him." Importantly, he also got the last hand pat of the interaction, Dr Collett adds. "That's what we find with high-dominance individuals, particularly politicians, they always want to have the last touch." Putin wins on manspreading Once the pair were sat down in front of the cameras, it was Putin who appeared more dominant, which he achieved through a wider "manspread" than his American counterpart. The term manspreading first emerged on social media in 2013 when it was used to describe men on public transport who encroach on adjacent seats by spreading their legs wide apart. "Highly dominant men tend to spread their thighs wide apart," Dr Collett says. "If you look at the angle between them, when we compare Trump and Putin, we find Putin with a much wider spread, in other words, displaying much greater dominance." During the news conference, Putin's dominance was also conveyed in his posture, Dr Collett adds. "In spite of their difference in height, Putin, although he's very short, sits upright, ramrod, looking very confident, whereas poor old Trump is crumpled and turned inwards." This could reflect him having "a lot on his mind that's bothering him", the expert suggests. Hand behind back shows dominance As the two leaders moved around the military base, Trump made a point of placing his hand behind Putin's back. Traditionally, a show of chivalry, in this context, it was another power play, Dr Collett says. "It looks like an expression of politeness, but in fact it's a dominance display, because it's the person who's in power, who's superior, calling the shots. "They're guiding the other individual through the space. And that's exactly what we see here… Trump gets his hand behind Putin and guides him through the next phase of the meeting." Genuine smiles Despite the repeated, thinly veiled attempts to appear the most powerful, both leaders had "genuine smiles" for each other, particularly when they first met, according to Dr Collett. "What's interesting is the high degree of smiling," he says. "It's a very serious, sombre occasion and yet they find time to smile and display their pleasure - not only at meeting each other but about the whole exercise." The smiles were genuine because they "evolve naturally" and "involved both sides of the face", Dr Collett explains. "They enlist those special little muscles around the eye, which are an indication of genuine pleasure," he says. Whereas later on, during the news conference, after the pair failed to negotiate a ceasefire, Trump offered Putin a "fake, flashbulb" smile, evidencing his disdain. All in the eyes - and the mouth After the two-and-a-half-hour meeting behind closed doors, Trump's dissatisfaction over the lack of a deal was clear in his body language, Dr Collett says. He tried to assert what psychologists refer to as "visual dominance" by avoiding Putin's gaze. 👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈 This technique is often used by "high-status individuals" to assert power - but it could also be a defence mechanism to "remove the negative stimulus" from the situation, Dr Collett suggests. "Trump hasn't succeeded in getting a real concession from Putin on this occasion. He's looking away because he doesn't want to be reminded of the individual who's failing to give something he can take to the American public and the world and say, 'hey look, this is what I succeeded in doing'." The shape of Trump's mouth is another tell-tale sign of his discontent. He pursed his lips on several occasions, which denotes "self-restraint", while his "oxbow mouth" showed his vulnerability, according to Dr Collett. "Politicians are quite fond of using this particular mouth posture because they think it makes them look determined," he says. But the tensed chin is a "fascinating giveaway", he adds. "It's almost as though they believe consciously that somebody is going to punch them on the chin. So when you see politicians doing that mouth posture, it's quite often because they're feeling vulnerable because they feel the need to protect themselves. "And that's my feeling - Trump was full of promise, but he came away with nothing, and we find that revealed in his little mouth postures".

A stealth bomber, a shouting match and an awkward moment for Putin: Everything you missed
A stealth bomber, a shouting match and an awkward moment for Putin: Everything you missed

Telegraph

time11 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

A stealth bomber, a shouting match and an awkward moment for Putin: Everything you missed

Vladimir Putin winced as he realised, at least momentarily, that he was not in control. No number of Russian agents armed with bulletproof suitcases could shield him from being pelted by the sorts of questions he had managed to avoid since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine. Sitting next to Donald Trump in front of a blue wall emblazoned with 'pursuing peace' ahead of their high-level talks in Alaska, the Russian despot was in unfamiliar territory. As one reporter shouted: 'Mr Putin, will you break your ceasefire?' it was clear he was not in a cocoon of Kremlin mouthpiece Russian media, but surrounded by US journalists determined to hold him to account. His wry smile evaporated into one of alarm. He looked pleadingly to the left and furrowed his brow. 'Will you commit to not killing any more civilians?' another reporter yelled. Putin put his hands to his mouth and appeared to say something, before the press were swiftly removed. The moment was a brief but stark reminder to the Russian leader that while Mr Trump may have rolled the red carpet out for him, he is a man with an International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest and on the sanctions lists of most Western governments. After the room descended into a chaotic shouting match, the gaggle of reporters were ushered out. It was then that Putin, Mr Trump and their advisers began highly-anticipated closed-door talks. Less than an hour before, Putin had been met with a warm welcome as he stepped onto US soil for the first time in a decade. At 11.08am local time, after Mr Trump had already descended the steps of Air Force One, Putin finally ventured out of his own aircraft and walked briskly down the stairs to join the US leader. In a meeting such as this, every fine detail will have been negotiated – including which leader steps out of their aircraft first. With grey skies and Alaskan mountains setting the scene behind them, the two men walked down respective red carpets and joined one another at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. In an overt display of warmth that was quickly criticised by US media, Mr Trump grinned and applauded as he waited for Putin to join him. When the two were finally face-to-face, they engaged in a lengthy handshake as they exchanged pleasantries. The images were some of the most extraordinary in recent diplomatic history. In the 42 months since Russia launched its full-scale war in Ukraine, every Western leader has refused to meet Putin. Yet here was Mr Trump welcoming him. Standing on the red carpet, having descended the steps of Air Force One a fraction before Putin, Mr Trump applauded the approaching Russian leader before shaking his hand and clasping his arm. As the two men turned and walked towards a podium that read 'Alaska 2025', a five-ship formation flypast of a B-2 bomber flanked by F-22 Raptor fighters flew above their heads. The spectacle appeared to take the Russian president by surprise, as he stopped momentarily to get a proper view of the planes overhead. Standing on the raised platform quickly erected for this photo-op, the two men stood with their arms by their sides, both looking awkwardly rigid. It was then that US journalists began firing the first of many questions at the Russian leader. 'Did you underestimate Ukraine?', one reporter shouted. Another asked if he would stop killing Ukrainian civilians. Putin pointed at his ear, suggesting that he could not hear. It was at this moment that an apparent last-minute offer was made for the Russian president to ride to the summit venue alongside Mr Trump in the Beast, the US presidential limousine. The two leaders had been due to be picked up separately on the tarmac after arriving on their respective flights. Putin's 'Aurus' limousine, complete with Russian number plates and a flag on its bonnet, had been waiting to ferry him to the talks. But they both slipped into the eight-ton armoured car with only two security officials accompanying them in the front, raising suspicions in US media about the conversations that were had on the short drive across the military base. As the car drove away, cameras captured Putin sporting a beaming smile and waving his hand to the crowds. The ensuing chaotic press conference was held in the moments before the official talks, marking the first time that the leaders had come together for a face-to-face for a bilateral meeting in six years. Mr Trump was flanked by Steve Witkoff, the Middle East envoy who has previously negotiated with Putin, and Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state. Mr Rubio greeted Putin with a stern handshake, but appeared far more jovial with Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, with whom he has been holding regular phone calls. While Mr Trump had initially planned to carry out discussions one-on-one, the president's team announced that the meeting had been changed to a three-on-three just hours before the meeting was set to take place. The meeting lasted around three hours, half of the time that had been touted by Russian media outlets ahead of the gathering. It was reported that a lunch between Putin and Mr Trump had also been cancelled, suggesting that their talks had gone badly. The world's media was summoned to a press conference, with one question looming: would the US president appear alone? If the meeting had gone poorly, Mr Trump had declared, he would not stand side-by-side with Putin and brief the press. But as the seats in the auditorium filled up, two podiums remained on stage, and a Russian speaker soundchecked the lectern reserved for Putin. If the Russian leader had appeared slightly untethered at the beginning of the day, he was now back in control. It was Putin, not Mr Trump, who began the press conference, a detail that even the Trump-loyal network, Fox News labelled as 'really stunning'. Putin said he wanted the war to end but that he was worried about Kyiv and European capitals 'throwing a spanner in the works'. No details of a ceasefire were provided, but Putin did offer Mr Trump something that he wanted: recognition that the war would not have started if he were president in 2022. 'Today when President Trump said that if he was the president back then there would be no war and I'm quite sure that it would indeed be so,' the Russian president said, translated to English for reporters in Alaska. Mr Trump, stood at his presidential lectern, stared straight back, offering the slightest nods of approval in response. For months, the US president has been telling anyone who would listen that he believes that the Russian army would not have invaded Ukraine if he had beaten Joe Biden and retained his place in the White House for a second consecutive term. His Russian counterpart's willingness to acknowledge the dubious claim served as the vindication that the US president had been seeking. It was an olive branch from Moscow reminiscent of their last meeting in Helsinki in 2018, when Putin, standing beside Mr Trump at a joint press conference, insisted that Russia had not interfered in his election victory. Mr Trump described his counterpart's missive as 'profound', before heralding the talks as 'productive'. However, he admitted that sticking points remained, 'one the most significant'. He did not elaborate on what that was. The press conference ended with no questions but a mischievous aside from Putin that appeared to blindside Mr Trump. 'Next time in Moscow,' Putin said, breaking into English for full effect. 'Ooh, that's an interesting one,' Mr Trump replied. 'I don't know. I'll get a little heat on that one, but I could see it possibly happening.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store