“We, as academics, are kind of the last bastion of independent critical thinking in Israel, and these boycotts are defunding us, demoralizing us, silencing us,” Dr. Ofek Riemer told The Jerusalem Post on Monday.
Reimer is an assistant professor at the Ben-Gurion Research Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.
The Post reached out to Reimer after he posted on Instagram about being rejected from an academic conference last month. The rejection letter explained that priority was given to submissions that aligned with the conference’s theme. However, Reimer felt this was odd, as his paper did fit the theme. He, therefore, decided to ask the organizers for clarification.
Two weeks later, he received a detailed response. The organizers acknowledged that the rejection had not been based on the quality or relevance of his submission, but instead on their own interpretation of the conference sponsor’s policy regarding institutional cooperation with Israeli universities. They admitted this was a mistake and re-invited him. Reimer accepted.
However, less than a month later, he was informed that the conference board concluded that they could not accommodate his participation in person because of security concerns.
![An Israeli flag [Ilustrative]](https://images.jpost.com/image/upload/f_auto,fl_lossy/c_fill,g_faces:center,h_537,w_822/438338)
In part, Reimer told the Post that he understands the reticence of academic institutions to host Israeli academics. He relayed how, in June 2024, during an exchange in Germany, anti-Israel protesters “zoomed in” on him.
“They picked up on me, and they published this open letter to the president of the university with a very detailed resume of what I did. My involvement with Israeli intelligence and so on. But my hosts were very resolved on hosting me.”
“And then I realized what a headache it was for hosts, for organizers, and so on. So, if you can have an American scholar write the chapter on Israeli intelligence, and not invite them to a workshop or a conference when writing a book together, then it’s less of a headache. Just to not get in trouble, not with students, not with faculty, colleagues, protest movements, security risks, and so on. Avoid stones being thrown at the classroom, and conference panels being disrupted by protesters - you just don’t invite the Israelis.”
Last year, Reimer’s workshop at Leiden University in the Netherlands was canceled because two colleagues raised doubts that it was an institutional cooperation rather than an individual-based cooperation.
It's not possible to exclude Israeli scholars in questions of warfare and intelligence
He referred to this phenomenon as “the silent boycott.”
“Invitations not being extended, talks being canceled, allegedly for some kind of a bureaucratic reason like security concerns,” he said.
Other associations were far more direct with their rejections, such as the Institute for European Intelligence & Security (IEIS), Reimer continued.
“I’m part of the intelligence section, or I submit to the intelligence section,” he explained. “I know that it’s led by two very politically active scholars. And they just rejected two of my submissions. They didn’t even cite a reason like the small association in the Netherlands that rejected me.”
He said that hostility towards Israeli academics is especially prevalent from European institutions, while relations with American bodies are relatively stable.
Despite intentions to push Israeli voices and scholars out of international academic narratives, Reimer says it is not possible to “shun Israeli scholars if you’re studying conflict warfare, intelligence, and so on.”
“We’re kind of the laboratory of the world in that regard,” he said. “In intelligence studies, and Israeli and international studies, Israeli voices cannot really be ignored and dismissed because this is what people are writing about now.”
“I would like to see more cooperation between Israeli scholars and other international scholars, which is something that we see less of.”
Reimer said that the attempts to de-platform him – even though he bases a lot of his research on the intelligence and policy failures of the current government – has actually made him feel closer to his Israeli identity.
“I’m starting to identify as Israeli first and not as an academic. I think I even told them that they’re putting us between a rock and a hard place,” he said.
“We, as academics, are kind of the last bastion of independent critical thinking in Israel. Academia is supposed to be critical of whoever is in power.”
'It's demoralizing us, it's silencing us'
“And this boycott is just killing it, because it’s defunding us, it’s demoralizing us, it’s silencing us. And it is providing us with fewer venues to voice, to express our ideas, to exchange our ideas with each other.”
Reimer thinks a change in government could improve the standing of Israeli academia in the international arena.
However, he believes that this government and the “way it handled the war [has] created damages that will be long-lasting.”
“But I think it’s possible. I would say our best friend in the world today is Germany, which is such a major power in funding Israeli academia and in collaborations with Israeli scholars, but also in setting the agenda for the rest of Europe.”
Reimer’s resounding message is: “Don’t boycott Israeli scholars. It’s counterproductive.”
“If you want to boycott Israel, it’s your right,” he explained.
“But don’t use your academic position and resources to advance your personal politics. I say this as someone who is highly critical of the current Israeli government. Like nearly 60% of Israelis, I regard it as disastrous. I believe it should face criticism and pressure to change its policies. Yet harming Israeli academia doesn’t do that. We are already facing attempts by the government to delegitimize, defund, and politically capture academia.
“We [academics] play a critical role in educating students in democratic values and in doing science that helps keep Israel both democratic and secure. Boycotting us depowers those who challenge illiberal and authoritarian trends.”