Illustrative: Pro-Hamas Columbia University students march in front of pro-Israel demonstrators on Oct. 7, 2024, the one-year anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel. Photo: Roy De La Cruz via Reuters Connect

A controversial resolution that the American Historical Association (AHA) recently passed to accuse Israel of “scholasticide” stands to marginalize its Jewish members and promotes falsehoods about the Jewish state, the Anti-Defamation League argued in an open letter that was issued on Thursday.

The missive comes amid a flutter of debate set off by the resolution, passed earlier this month, which spuriously charged that Israel waged “an intentional effort to comprehensively destroy the Palestinian education” system during its war with Hamas in Gaza. The resolution cited damages sustained by education institutions and loss of life, but rather than describing those misfortunes as inevitable consequences of a protracted war that the Hamas terrorist group started by launching a surprise massacre of Israeli civilians on Oct. 7, 2023, it argued that Israel’s aim was to murder educators and erase Palestinian history and culture.

In Thursday’s letter, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) rejected the AHA’s claims as injurious to the Jewish community — its “framing perpetuates harmful biases and reinforces narratives that marginalize Jewish voices,” it said — as well as to AHA’s mission to be a scholarly organization that does not, as a rule, promote partisan politics. Choosing to do so now by weighing in on an issue which divides not only the academic community but also the broader world, it said, will only reduce AHA to being just another manufacturer of ideological conformity.

“The AHA has been a respected source for evidence-based, nonpartisan historical perspectives for more than a century. Associating with such a resolution risks diminishing the trust of policymakers, journalists, and the public,” the ADL said. “‘Scholasticide’ refers to the intentional mass destruction of an educational system. There is no evidence of this intent by Israel in Gaza or elsewhere. The destruction of institutions, including educational ones, is an unfortunate byproduct of war, exacerbated when terror groups like Hamas embed their operations within school buildings.”

It continued, “As academia faces increased scrutiny, this resolution provides ammunition to critics who accuse scholarly organizations of partisanship. The AHA has been exemplary in defending academic freedom and resisting political incursions into curricular decisions. Endorsing this resolution would undermine these efforts, as well as other initiatives that directly align with the AHA’s mission.”

The letter concluded with the ADL’s urging the AHA Council, a governing body within the organization, to veto the resolution to ensure it “remains a welcoming, inclusive, and intellectually rigorous space for all historians.”

Other organizations and scholars have called on the American Historical Association, founded in 1884 by Herbert Baxter Adams and which today counts 43,000 people as members, to disengage its leadership from their assault on Israel or seek productive ways of contributing to the public debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Let us put aside the impropriety of a professional organization interposing itself officially into a political matter best left to the individual judgement of America’s citizens,” said the National Association of Scholars (NAS), a higher education nonprofit which promotes academic freedom and the restoration of rigorous liberal arts programs. “Hamas is responsible for the consequences of its aggression against Israel, and the ‘Scholasticide’ resolution is the more disgraceful for its unwillingness to state forthrightly Hamas’s culpability for the indeed lamentable destruction of Gaza’s educational infrastructure.”

Writing for Compact Magazine, Harvard University history professor James Hankins, argued that the resolution contains exaggerations and omits from its consideration the putative presence of Hamas collaborators within Gazan higher education — at, for example, the Islamic University of Gaza — as well as the use of universities for “military purposes.” A better resolution, he continued, would have urged Palestinian universities to “build trust” with Israel by denouncing Hamas.

“That sort of resolution American academics might legitimately support,” Hanks wrote, adding that there is “insufficient evidence” to support AHA’s claims.

The AHA is not the first professional association for academics to endorse partisan attacks on Israel.

In August, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) issued a statement which endorsed academic boycotts, a seismic decision which overturned decades of policy and cleared the way for scholar-activists to escalate their efforts to purge the university of Zionism and educational partnerships with Israel.

The previous year, members of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) overwhelmingly voted to approve a resolution calling for a full academic boycott of Israeli academic institutions. With the resolution’s approval, the AAA, established in 1902 and based in Arlington, Virginia, became the first major academic professional association to endorse the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel since the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) did in 2022.

This latest incident involving the American Historical Association could undermine its internal cohesion, the ADL said in Thursday’s letter.

“There are loud voices advocating for this resolution, but we know there are also many members who are deeply troubled and alienated by it, including those who feel afraid to speak out against it,” the organization concluded. “Failing to veto this resolution would further marginalize these voices and push many historians into silence and out of the association.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.