In the latest disturbing display of antisemitic academic bias, the Oxford Union voted overwhelmingly in favor of the inflammatory motion that “Israel is an apartheid state responsible for the genocide of Palestinians.” With a vote tally of 278 to 59, the result not only raises serious questions about the integrity of the debate but also reflects a growing trend of anti-Israel sentiment cloaked in the veneer of intellectual discourse.

The debate featured prominent defenders of Israel, including journalist Jonathan Sacerdoti, Arab-Israeli activist Yoseph Haddad, and former Hamas member turned Israeli spy Mosab Hassan Yousef. Opposing them were activists like Norman Finkelstein and Mohammed El-Kurd, figures well-known for their strident, often incendiary, anti-Israel rhetoric. Despite the participation of credible voices defending Israel, the vote’s outcome demonstrated an alarming predisposition against the Jewish state.

As the debate unfolded, it became clear that the event was less about fostering meaningful dialogue and more about pandering to preexisting biases. Yoseph Haddad, who has devoted his life to bridging divides between Jews and Arabs, was physically removed from the stage after an altercation with attendees who heckled and shouted him down. The vitriol Haddad faced epitomized the toxic atmosphere in the room.

Adding to the disgrace, Mosab Hassan Yousef revealed during the debate that 75% of participants indicated that had they known about it, they would not have reported Hamas plans for the October 7 massacre, where more than 1,200 Israelis were brutally murdered. This horrifying statistic underscores the moral decay infecting spaces like the Oxford Union, where support for human rights appears to be selectively applied.

Outside the debate, hundreds of protesters gathered, waving Palestinian flags and chanting slogans that blurred the line between criticism of Israel and outright antisemitism. Their actions amplified the toxic environment, effectively turning what should have been a civil exchange into a spectacle of hostility and hate.

The motion itself, laden with terms like “apartheid” and “genocide,” is not just misleading—it is a grotesque distortion of reality. These accusations have been debunked by countless legal and historical experts, yet they were presented without challenge, demonstrating a shocking lack of intellectual rigor and fairness.

The Oxford Union has long been a symbol of free thought and robust discussion, but this event was anything but. It served instead as a platform for propaganda, giving credibility to a motion that vilifies Israel without context or nuance. This was not a vote for justice—it was a vote for prejudice disguised as principle.

To see an esteemed institution like Oxford become a mouthpiece for such dangerous rhetoric is deeply disheartening. The result reflects not a thoughtful critique of Israel, but an environment poisoned by groupthink and a troubling willingness to condone narratives that embolden extremism.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)