In Nazi Germany academics were one of the professions that had the highest percentage of Nazi Party members. Has anything really changed?
Isabel Feichtner is professor of public law and international economic law at the University of Würzburg and fellow at The New Institute, Hamburg.
Cross-posted from Verfassungsblog
Liebes deutsches Völkerrecht, dear colleagues,
We are not always on the best of terms. Nonetheless, I feel the need to write to you. I know you are busy. You have books to write, conferences to organize, funding applications to finalize and all these emails and requests piling up. Yet, I would appreciate if you could spare a few minutes. Things are not going well for international law these days. I think you do agree. Some of you have been particularly vocal in denouncing the disregard for international law – by politicians who seek to restrict the right to asylum, critique the European human rights regime, question decisions by international courts and, of course, you have called out Trump’s blatant disrespect for the right to self-determination by the inhabitants of Greenland and Gaza.
And yet, most of us have been rather silent – myself included – when it comes to the mounting attacks on human rights and international law in our immediate surroundings, including within the university. The list of disinvitations, cancellations, criminalizations, and repressions against individuals defending the rights of Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem continues to grow. In the past fortnight then, within a couple of days only, two universities – the LMU Munich and the Freie University Berlin – cancelled events featuring Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967.
Isn’t this the moment when we should finally speak up, even if we have not done so before for fear of taking a wrong step in the minefield that is the Israel/Palestine debate? Francesca Albanese is our colleague. The holder of a mandate by the Human Rights Council. A globally well-respected scholar of international law who speaks at universities around the world. Governments treat UN Special Rapporteurs as they treat ambassadors from foreign countries. Never before has UN Special Rapporteur Albanese been disinvited from a university.
Where is our indignation and outrage, dear fellow international lawyers, at her disinvitation from LMU and Freie University? Where is our outcry at the smear campaign against her by politicians and interest groups? Berlin’s minister of science, Ina Czyborra, publicly announced that Albanese’s statements “met all criteria of antisemitism.” Neither did she spell out what these criteria were nor which expressions by Albanese she was referring to. In addition to being defamed as an antisemite, Albanese was compared to politicians from Germany’s extremist right-wing party and accused of glorifying Hamas terror. An article in the “Jüdische Allgemeine” referring to the name of the group of organizers of the LMU event – the “Decolonial Practices Group” – even asked whether ”Decolonial Practices” also entailed massacres like the one on October 7, 2023.
When pressure mounted and Berlin’s mayor, Kai Wegner, intervened, the president of Freie University caved in. President Ziegler cancelled the in-person event and justified this decision with the “present polarization and unpredictable security situation.” Upholding academic freedom only in words, not deeds, he offered the organizers could hold an online event.
Where is our outcry? Some of you have expressed regret about the violation of academic freedom that this incident entails. I thank you for that. Yet, I also have some questions. Why do you feel the need for public caveats, or for critique of the title and concept of the event with Francesca Albanese and Eyal Weizman “Conditions of Life Calculated to Destroy. Legal and Forensic Perspectives on the Ongoing Gaza Genocide” organized by four colleagues – not from international law but from FU’s faculty of philosophy? You “would have preferred a conception of the event which would not have anticipated the outcome of a debate in the title.” I understand that you might have done things differently; but is a statement so urgently needed to defend academic freedom really the right place for quarrels with colleagues about the design of an academic event?
The mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967 is to “investigate Israel’s violations of the principles and bases of international law, international humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967”. This has been the case since the position was created in 1993. Francesca Albanese, in her work, has come to the conclusion that Israel commits genocide against the Palestinians. As international lawyers, we should welcome her to explain her findings. We should listen to her. Then we can ask questions and have a conversation. But we should not try to achieve some “fair balance” by inviting also “the other side.” Do we really want to turn our university debates into yet another mediocre talk show format?
“We distance ourselves from antisemitic positions.” We all have a responsibility to speak out against antisemitism wherever and whenever it occurs. Of course, we do! Yet, in this context, the phrase “We distance ourselves….” can be read to suggest that the Special Rapporteur’s positions are indeed or might be antisemitic. Given the current damage being done by the instrumentalization, including by the far right, of accusations of antisemitism, mere allusions that someone who defends justice and international law might engage in antisemitic acts is reckless. Yesterday, a location in Berlin where Francesca Albanese was scheduled to speak was graffitied with the words “Albanese you are an antisemite.” I trust that as international lawyers, you do not, as some others insidiously do, interpret compliance by Special Rapporteur Albanese with her mandate as inherently antisemitic. We become complicit in this witch hunt if we allow unfounded allegations or even just insinuations of antisemitism to stand without opposing them.
I would like to invite you to watch the conversation with Albanese that the LMU’s Decolonial Practices Group was not allowed to hold at LMU and therefore livestreamed and recorded from another venue. Throughout the conversation, she reminded listeners of Germans’ and Europeans’ responsibility for the Holocaust and other genocides. This responsibility is what motivates and drives her work. She also reminded her audience of the fact that extermination of Jewish life in Germany was not limited to concentration camps and that Jews, even after the war, continued to face severe discrimination and antisemitism in Germany, but also other parts of Europe and the United States (I highly recommend The Brutalist on that latter point). She clearly denounces all violence against civilians. Seldom have I listened to an international lawyer talking with such intelligence and wit, with such ability to explain complex matters in an accessible way, with nuanced judgment, introspection, a willingness to learn and listen, fearlessness and dedication to justice – not just for Palestinians but for all who are victims of oppression.
While our politicians and universities fail to pay respect to a UN Special Rapporteur, we as international lawyers fail a colleague and a luminary in these dark times by not standing up for her against false and unfounded accusations. Most of all, however, we fail our students, broader society and the very idea of human rights, which – if they are to have any meaning – have to serve the powerless. Francesca Albanese will likely be fine without our support; her office will hopefully serve her as a shield. But the time has passed when we could leave the debate on what constitutes antisemitism to others. The time has passed when we could work on human rights, humanitarian law, the use of force, and economic sanctions while refusing to engage with Israel/Palestine.
The moment has come to finally speak out for human rights and against the German state’s complicity in their violation – even if this means losing some friends and funding. The next annual conference of the European Society of International Law is to take place at Freie University in Berlin in September of this year. Its theme is “Reconstructing International Law.” International Law is being dismantled before our eyes, at the universities and in the streets of Berlin as I write this letter. The damage won’t be repaired with conferences and peer-reviewed articles. Let us put aside, for a moment, the unfinished writings and applications and make sure that Francesca Albanese is allowed to speak in Germany!
Yours faithfully, a colleague in international law
A German version of this letter has been published here.
Be the first to comment