Academic Boycott of South Africa - Comparisons To Academic Boycotts of Israel

Comparisons To Academic Boycotts of Israel

The academic boycott of South Africa is frequently invoked as a model for more recent efforts to organize academic boycotts of Israel.

Some invoke the comparison to claim that an academic boycott of Israel should not be controversial based a misconception that the academic boycott of South Africa was uncontroversial and straightforward. The reality, at the time, was very different. The effort was the subject of significant criticism and contentious debate from diverse segments. Andrew Beckett writes, in the Guardian, on this frequent mistaken comparison:

"In truth, boycotts are blunt weapons. Even the most apparently straightforward and justified ones, on closer inspection, have their controversies and injustices."

Other, such as Hillary and Stephen Rose in Nature, make the comparison and argue for an academic boycott of Israel based on a belief that the academic boycott of South Africa was effective in ending apartheid. George Fink responds to this claim in a letter to Nature:

"The assertion that the boycott of South Africa by the world's academic communities 'was instrumental in ending apartheid in South Africa' is a deception."

The African National Congress, which was the leading anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, has published extensive documentation to support their assertion that the boycott campaign was, indeed, instrumental in ending apartheid.