Dutch Parliament deplores anti-Semitism on university campuses

“I have been hearing for years that Jewish students don’t feel safe at universities and that universities are lax in taking action,” said MP Ulysse Ellian (VVD) in a debate about anti-Semitism held last week.

Other MPs agreed. Mirjam Bikker (ChristenUnie) said: “I hear stories about students who don’t wear a kippah or a Star of David anymore, who avoid certain universities, have dropped out, or are afraid to say their family members live in Israel.” 

Although the debate went beyond education, anti-semitism on university campuses was a major topic. “It is intolerable for Jewish students to feel ostracised at universities," said Maikel Boon (PVV).

Poison
“Anti-Semitism is a terrible poison,” agreed Stephan van Baarle (Denk). “Hating someone or treating them unequally just because they are Jewish is something that must be severely condemned, especially considering the Holocaust is a stain in our past. These recent anti-Semitic incidents are unacceptable.” 

Van Baarle went on to draw attention to Islamophobia and questioned certain parties’ motivations. “According to far-right parties, anti-Semitism is a logical outgrowth of immigration from Islamic countries. For PVV, anti-Semitism is just a stick to beat Muslims with.” He underlined that the fight against anti-Semitism must not be equated with the fight for equal rights for Palestinians.

Differences aside, there was consensus on anti-Semitism. Outgoing Minister of Education Robbert Dijkgraaf equally condemned it. “Anti-Semitism is a great evil and an evil that has been rearing its ugly head again lately. This hurts us all. The number of anti-Semitic incidents is growing in higher education institutions too, which is unacceptable and pains me deeply.”

Intimidated
Dijkgraaf has had wide-ranging talks with Jewish organisations, schoolchildren, students, teachers and education administrators about this topic. “We were disturbed by the examples shared with us,” he said. “Jewish school pupils are being taunted, intimidated and greeted with the Hitler salute in the hallways. Teachers have to go through classrooms in the mornings to remove swastikas from desks and whiteboards. Not to mention the teachers and staff who are afraid to display their Jewish identity.”

The question is what he can do as a minister, apart from convene discussions and speak out. “Institutions are responsible for providing a safe learning and working environment for their students and staff”, the minister pointed out. “They have security policies to do that. They have their own institutional rules.” He called for an open academic climate “in which students feel free to express themselves, even if their opinions don’t coincide with those of the instructor or the majority of students.”

The parties understood but found the minister's positioning meagre. Bikker: “I can’t help thinking of the Jewish student who is afraid to attend lectures and go to her graduation ceremony because she told people her family is in Israel.” What kind of institutional rules would constitute an appropriate response to such a thing?

The minister replied that maybe institutional rules should be tightened. “And, in all fairness, I think institutions are also still searching”. 

Lame
“Searching for what?” scoffed Caroline van der Plas (BBB). “Lame”, is how she summed it up. To her, the solution would be simple: ban demonstrations. “Put up a poster: no screeching, no shouting, no loud chanting, no face coverings. That will keep them out in the first place. How hard is that? Just tell them to scram!”

“I agree with Ms van der Plas one hundred percent,” Dijkgraaf replied. “Eradicating anti-Semitism is just non-negotiable, so it shouldn't be allowed, simple as that.”

“We are dealing with a very small population of Jewish students,” observed Frans Timmermans (GroenLinks-PvdA). “They are particularly vulnerable right now. I assess that institutions are not yet sufficiently equipped to contend with this specific situation.” 

However, he added, students tend to demonstrate. He did so himself. “Action must be taken if students feel unsafe, but barring discussions and even confrontations at higher education institutions does not seem like a viable way forward to me.” Dijkgraaf acknowledged this. “That’s a different debate: how to broach fraught issues.”

Motions
So, what does the House of Representatives want? A variety of motions were put forward. Diederik van Dijk (SGP) proposed the government make agreements with higher education institutions to tighten building access so that activists cannot simply walk in.

BBB proposed institutions to require identification “for as long as needed”. Students would then have to present their student ID cards “so that individuals who have no affiliation of any sort with the education institution can be refused entry to buildings”. 

The vote was held late Thursday night, just before the House broke for its May recess. Both motions passed.