JAABC has been engaging with the University of British Columbia’s Equity and Inclusion Office (EIO) for over a year on its materials on Anti-Jewish Discrimination. Over this year of engagement with the EIO, we have seen many improvements in the Anti-Jewish Discrimination materials that they have been developing. Some of these improvements involve recognizing the ways in which Jews have historically experienced systemic violence and discrimination and the harms experienced by Jews on UBC campuses today. Other improvements have involved the removal of statements that might have contributed to or reinforced harms. We appreciate the good faith and good will that Dr. Arig al Shaibah has brought to our engagements, and we remain committed to further work with the EIO on efforts to make UBC a more inclusive place for Jewish faculty, staff, and students.
One long-standing criticism of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) policies and practices on campuses is that they have not made convincing efforts to account for the particular kinds of harms and wrongs that Jewish members of the academic community experience. We have been pleased to see UBC’s EIO recognize the fundamental fact that EDI principles apply to Jews as a historically, persistently, and systemically marginalized group. We also appreciate the EIO’s support in bringing experts and pedagogues in the history of antisemitism to campus, such as through the Office’s financial support for a recent workshop by Project Shema.
At the same time, the end product still falls short of the mark, from the point of view of equity and inclusion and particularly equity for and inclusion of Jews and Israelis on campus. We see the university as a place where people form, express and debate their views in accordance with academic values. Principles of equity and inclusion guide how members of the academic community treat each other, without otherwise undermining their ability to form and express their own views. The principles that underlie the modern university call for ever-increasing awareness, understanding, and empathy for others. We aspire to extend these to other targeted groups. We expect the same treatment to be extended to members of our community and on this front, the materials fall short.
For example, the materials
- fail to acknowledge the ways in which Zionism – the movement supporting self-determination of the Jewish people in their ancestral home – is being deliberately and openly demonized on our campuses. In particular, the materials fail to call out the practice of misattributing the caricatured views of a political faction to Jewish Zionists throughout the world. Such unfair demonization causes real harm to Jews in our community on campus. Equating a movement for a people’s self-determination with the most extreme expressions of a particular faction would not – and should not – be tolerated for other vulnerable groups on campus. Ignoring this problem when it is directed toward Jews and Israelis falls short of equity, diversity, and inclusion principles.
- treat Zionism differently from the straightforward historical grounding of Palestinians’ struggle for self-determination, in the companion EIO materials on Anti-Arab and Anti-Muslim Discrimination. The Anti-Jewish Discrimination module chooses to allocate substantial attention to anti-Zionist perspectives. The fact that not all Jews are Zionists and that some proponents of Zionism can be criticized is irrelevant to the central task of making clear, with equity and inclusion top of mind, that most Jews are Zionists and that demonizing Zionism in a blanket way is harmful to them.
- underplay that the land of Israel is central to Judaism and to the history of the Jewish people, as understood by a large majority of Jews in Canada and around the world, that Jews are a people with an ancestral and familial connection to the land of Israel.
- fail to acknowledge the historic oppression and systemic violence that Jews have experienced around the world and – critically – how that oppression and violence led to the establishment of the modern state of Israel. The status quo ante for Jews was cataclysmic, and not only in Europe. In the decades since its founding, Israel has continued to rescue and shelter Jews fleeing antisemitic dangers from many parts of the world, such as in Ethiopia and Yemen. A reader who lacked this historical background would not gain this understanding from the materials.
- fail to acknowledge the reality of the physical dangers Jewish community members continue to experience and to recognize their realistic and historically grounded sense of vulnerability. This is a serious shortcoming for an educational resource geared toward equity and inclusion.
- fail to name and call out serious, specific incidents on campus that have led to harms. Such incidents have included anti-Israel property damage, efforts to cancel university courses because of a legitimate scholarly connection to Israel, efforts to cancel Hillel’s lease on campus, efforts to deplatform individual scholars based on their nationality (as Israelis) or their area of study (e.g., Jewish Studies), shaming students in classes and engaging in abuse of podium, and more. Conduct like this would not – and should not – be tolerated for other vulnerable groups on campus. By not specifically calling out these kinds of behaviours, the EIO materials make it too easy for those engaging in anti-Jewish speech and action to continue to do so under the illusion that they are abiding by principles of equity and inclusion.
We are also concerned about the manner in which the term “anti-Palestinian racism,” which appears in the companion modules on Anti-Arab and Anti-Muslim Discrimination, is being introduced. We acknowledge that Palestinians can be and are subject to prejudice, hate, harassment and discrimination on the basis of their identity. However, the inadequate way in which this term is brought forward, without rigorous definition but with the promise of future materials dedicated to the topic, entangles the materials and the Office of Equity and Inclusion in fraught debates that claim that political support for positions not aligned with certain defined pro-Palestinian aspirations may be a form of racism. The deployment of the important concept of racism in a politicized and un-nuanced way risks damaging its broader value and meaning. The introduction of “anti-Palestinian racism” as a concept deserves all the hedging and cautionary language that the materials already readily give to concerns that legitimate academic criticism of Israel might be stifled by fears of accusations of antisemitism.
Jewish students at UBC have also raised concerns directly with the EI Office. These students have also requested us to help amplify their responses to the EIO materials here in our statement, and we are keen to do so. Their concerns are as follows:
- Students were clear that they feel their voices weren’t heard or reflected in the final materials. For example, in their March meeting with UBC’s Associate Vice President, Equity & Inclusion, they shared specific experiences—being excluded from events for identifying as Zionist, encountering antisemitic graffiti and hate symbols near Jewish spaces, and feeling silenced in classroom discussions. None of these realities appear in the module. Instead, the slides focus on abstract generalizations and historical overviews, with little acknowledgment of what Jewish students are actually facing on campus. This disconnect is why some described the resource as reading like a “museum exhibit”—interesting, but detached from their lived experience.
- No mention of October 7: While there’s a passing reference to “the experience of Jews on campus since October 7,” students felt strongly that the terror attack should be named directly. It was the catalyst for the rise in antisemitism and the creation of these materials, and its omission feels significant.
- The “About Judaism” section: Students felt that the current version leans too heavily on statistics and lacks meaningful explanation of Jewish identity and peoplehood. They’re fine with the statistics—but only if paired with context. As it stands, the section feels hollow.
- No definition of antisemitism: The draft doesn’t address the fact that the module never defines antisemitism. Students see this as a foundational issue.
- Missing references to hate symbols: Symbols like the inverted red triangle—used by Hamas and seen on campus—were flagged by students as harmful and should be included in the list of antisemitic imagery. Their absence from both the materials and the JAABC response feels like a missed opportunity to acknowledge real-world examples of harm.
Speaking once again in our own voice as JAABC, the concerns we are raising about the EIO materials are not a call to silence criticism of the actions or policies of the Israeli government. Rather, we are calling for an awareness of how some attacks on Israel, on Zionism, or on members of our community with connections to either, can degrade the academic community we share, and make it difficult or even impossible for many Jews, whether students, faculty, or staff, to participate in this community as our full selves, to experience an equitable workplace and study environment, and to form natural friendships. Jews, including Zionist Jews, deserve to be recognized and welcomed on campus in the same way that other equity-seeking groups deserve to be recognized and welcomed. This is the very thing that principles of equity and inclusion should seek to foster. Equity, diversity, and inclusion principles in a university context must reflect and embody the values of tolerance, humility, and open inquiry that underpin our academic mission.
JAABC is mindful that there are those, especially in the United States, who are using the experience of Jews on campuses since October 7, 2023 as a cudgel to attack the university and the foundational role it plays within a society committed to free and open inquiry, equality, and liberal democratic values. We stand against those efforts. Instrumentalizing antisemitism for illiberal, undemocratic ends does not make Jews safer. It undermines the principles and freedoms on which our safety and robust academic inquiry and community depend. At the same time, UBC needs to do much more to articulate to its community how certain kinds of actions and discourse can do real harm to Jewish people on campus, and undermine basic principles of equity and inclusion.
Finally, educational resources on antisemitism are no substitute for meaningful action by University leadership to counter antisemitism. We appreciate the EIO’s willingness to engage with us, and now call on President Bacon and the University administration to do more, as peer institutions have done (see, e.g, the University of Toronto and Harvard University), to ensure that Jewish community members are not only safe on campus, but are welcomed and able to learn, work, and thrive. We stand ready to work with the UBC administration.