IsraCampus.org

It's a peculiar trait of academia that scientists in many academic fields unrelated to politics are able to dub themselves as "experts" in political science when the theme surrounds the existence of Israel and what sacrifices or guilt the Jewish nation must endure in the interest of "peace," no matter how unrealistic on the ground.

A case in point is Professor David Newman, former head of the Department of Politics and Government, which he was largely responsible for building at Ben Gurion University of the Negev. Newman almost single handedly turned that department into a monolithic department of far leftism and "Post-Zionism," recruiting for this purpose such people as Neve Gordon.

Newman, who actually holds degrees in Geography, has become a political pundit regarding the Israeli-Palestinian dispute in the manner of those academics who branch out from their own respective fields claiming to be political scientists that seem to always find an audience by claiming the fault lies with Israel as a Jewish state. A review of his curriculum vitae perhaps explains why he's done so, if one looks at its timeline.

As mentioned, Newman earned the majority of his academic achievements and reputation abroad, particularly in the UK and in Canada and, in his later years, within the European Union. As one reads of his earlier years in academia one finds nothing particularly negative about Newman's activities concerning Israel and Israeli academia. But as one moves closer to the present, things change.

Of interest are the multiple listings in his c.v. of money he has received as grants for his research and projects that have to do with projecting a sense of Arab victimization or deprivation due to Jewish expansionism, some of it funded by an Israeli government bent on giving up land to the Arabs regardless of consequences on the ground, but also money coming from the overtly anti-Israel Ford Foundation and the European Union which have consistently held to a policy of trying to force the creation of a Palestinian terror state right next to Israel's heart. The Ford Foundation has always funded, even within Israel, Arab NGOs that are consistently against the Jewish state and the EU has openly funded the Palestinian "security services," better known as the terrorists of the Al Aksa Martys Brigade , even more so now for Abbas than it did for Arafat. Both of these contributors who fund Newman were also involved in funding multiple anti-Semitic NGOs at Durban in 2001 where efforts were made to demonize Israel in every way possible.

In listing his research prizes and fellowship, Newman lists in his c.v. the exact dollar amounts each project netted him, a common practice. As the timeline moves forward, we see this geographer breaking new ground and showing just how much extra money he made working to further the cause of the pro-Palestinian cabal that is partly made up of NGO financiers like the Ford Foundation and the EU in particular.

So, what is wrong with promoting one's pocketbook within the academic community? Nothing, unless one wants to also signal his value to political interests abroad who have less-than-savory goals regarding how Israel will ultimately survive the current test of its existence. There's money to be made by Israeli academics who will help foreigners de-legitimize and demonize the Jewish state.

To his credit, Newman recently withdrew from another symposium in the EU in London that was to be another gang of so-called intellectuals discussing obliquely the need to dismantle the Jewish state by promoting a boycott of Israeli academics. He had been scheduled to conduct a "debate" with a member of the Hamas, but had second thoughts. The fact that he had initially agreed is quite noteworthy.

On almost any given day, one can visit the hallowed halls of academia abroad and hear of symposiums on campuses (in many instances funded indirectly from Saudi Arabia or the EU) that discuss the dilemma of the "Zionist" entity, where Israeli academics who believe in post-Zionism speak with glowing support of ending the Jewish character of Israel in favor of a state where Jews play no special role at all. The Arabs at these seminars usually talk about a secular democracy, where they and the Jews will live in complete utopian splendor and Arab terrorism will cease to exist as a result. The Arabs love the Jews, you see, and, after all, this must be possible because the people up on the panel, even the Arab professors who are professional victims too are PhDs and, uh, well, really, really smart. The fact that there are no Arab democracies and they all live under Sharia Law never enters the equation.

Of course, the only difference today is that Israel is already a secular democracy for all its citizens, but it's also a giant home for the world's Jews, and the Jews are armed in self-defense. Israel nevertheless does have affirmative action programs for its Arab citizens, as well. But you'd never guess that from David Newman's perspective or that of his revered colleagues who he gave a platform to at BGU like Neve Gordon, who has acted as a human shield for Arafat in the Mukata after the Passover Massacre and who is virulently opposed to the Jewish state.

Newman is a philo-European. His former academic department even features a Center for European Politics and he stages symposiums in Europe that seem to be sounding boards for other Israeli academics like his venomously anti-Israel close colleague and fellow geographer-playing-political scientist Oren Yiftahel, who always find in their academic careers abroad that everything is Israel's fault.

NGO Monitor has discussed a Newman symposium, held in Florence, Italy, in which he described "how to increase the international profile of Palestinian-Israeli peace building activities; to strengthen the European community's partnership with civil society organizations (NGOs) , in order to expand European involvement in peace building activities; and to amplify the call by Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations to European governments and institutions, for a stronger political effort to revive the peace process between the respective governments." Something that NGO-Monitor, a non-profit that keeps an eye on all these EU sponsored NGO's, says "has reported extensively on how many EU-funded NGOs, including ICAHD, engage in anti-Israel demonizing rather than 'peace building activities.'"

Translate that to mean pandering to the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade providers from the EU for further European meddling in Israeli affairs to create a terror state that has shown its real goal via Arab media, Kassem rockets and terror attacks solely seeking the annihilation of Israel. Besides, it's very profitable for an academic who will dance to the EU's fiddle.

Newman was to participate in a conference in London that allegedly was meant to oppose the boycotting of Israeli academics by the UK and was said to be Israel's representative opposing such an economic boycott. That Newman might actually be opposed to such a boycott is not that surprising; academics that enjoy financial grants and perks within the EU, and particularly the UK, have money to lose as Newman's c.v. demonstrates. However, it's Newman's choices of Israeli academics for the Department of Politics and Government at BGU that cause one dismay.

David Newman claimed he was withdrawing from the London conference because one of his fellow speakers would be a virulent and uncompromising member of Hamas, the terror group whose charter not only calls for the complete expulsion of Jews from all of Israel, but the liquidation of world Jewry as well. Newman did not want to speak alongside him, he says.

It should be noted that these symposia are set up to appear to be superficially balanced, and are designed to feature Israeli leftist shills who will try to present an image of being pro-Israel, but ultimately fall down when faced with the "logic" and victimization claimed by the other side. Thus it is difficult to believe Newman withdrew because of a Hamas big wig on the panel, given his part in actions as an academic who turned his Department of Politics and Government at Ben Gurion University into what could be called "Hamasland." Let's face it, when you are the one making money from the same entities that want to see you boycotted, an academic boycott of Israeli academics is just plain bad for business. Even giving legitimacy to a Hamas terror spokesman might even rile the Israeli taxpayers back home, who technically pay your salary and helped you to create your nouveau academic department.

Perhaps Ilan Pappe, a "historian" turned anti-Israel activist, who even allowed one of his graduate students to fabricate a made up tale of Jewish massacres at Tantura, was not available to be the Israeli shill at this current conference so Newman was thought by its EU Israel haters to be a good far leftist. And we already know about Neve Gordon that Israel academia monitor even has photo of flashing a victory sign next to his former buddy Yasser Arafat for whom Gordon served as a human shield against the IDF. David Newman thought Gordon deserved a tenured faculty position in his department

The question is, should we regard David Newman as just another "starry-eyed peace activist" who can't see the forest for the trees when it comes to the Arabs having no real long term desire for peace with Israel or stopping to kill Jews, or is he an opportunist who continues down the academic path of notoriety abroad as an anti-Israel Israeli who can always rationalize why the Arabs need more, even if it threatens the very existence of Israel and his fellow Israelis?

But Newman's comments about his fellow Jews and Israelis bear some scrutiny as much as his ties to foreign interests. Newman it seems wrote an article in the Jerusalem Post titled, "Women, Mothers and Peace" in which he wrote:

"An excess of peace is always preferrable(sic) to an excess of exclusive patriotism. After all, there is a greater chance that one's children will stay alive, rather than fear the terrorist's bullet. Israelis argue that the responsibility for the deaths of Palestinian children is that of their parents who allow them to be used as cannon fodder and, sometimes even encourage them to throw stones and Molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers.

"Perhaps it is not too far-fetched to compare their behavior with that of the right-wing settler mothers who irresponsibly place their own children on the front line, in the settlements and buses where the chances of a terrorist attack are so high. An excess zeal of patriotism cannot be allowed to take place at the expense of the well-being of our children."

Apparently, David Newman, the geographer, needs a lesson in the geography of Israel. By declaring Israeli self-defense as little more than patriotic zeal and equating the children of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria as victims of their parents patriotic zeal when they send them off to school, he neglects to mention the constant killings by Arabs inside the Green Line as well (it is worthy of notation how the same day his article broke a suicide bomb went off in Hadera killing and wounding Israelis in his geographically-safe-from-Arabs geographically designated area).

Newman also needs a history lesson: Prior to 1948 there were 25 Jewish communities in Gaza and Judea and Samaria that the Arabs overran during the War of Independence. In Gush Etzion the Arabs even herded all the Jews into a pit and slaughtered them (after the Armistice, by the way). Of the families exiled in 1948, many came back after 1967 to retrieve their homes. But Jews are not supposed to do that, a reserved right of the ancestors of only dead Arabs who insist Judea and Samaria be Jew-free plus any Arab be allowed to demographically destroy Israel in a "right of return" inside the Green Line are logical outcomes of "peace" and geography. Just ask the Jews evicted from Gaza two years ago and the recipients of Kassems in Sderot.

Newman, as part of the "Peace camp" of capitulation would have us all believe that parents in Judea and Samaria whose children are murdered by the Arab terrorists (that the peace intelligentsia in Israel even equipped with weapons) are comparable to Arab parents who encourage their children to throw stones and Molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers. Using his knowledge as a geographer, the Jews in Germany perhaps were just as responsible as their murderers for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

========================================

Op-Ed articles appearing on IsraCampus.org are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the opinion of IsraCampus.org