Israel Studies Editors Reject Calls from Editorial Board members, Scholarly Community
In a message dated 7th May (appended below), the editors of the Israel Studies journal responded to a “letter of dissent” from members of its own editorial board. In it, the editors reject the demands of dissenting board members as an “ultimatum,” and characterize the public discussion around their role in the “Word Crimes” issue of Israel Studies as disrespectful.
“Their marked disrespect for the institutions of the AIS and of the journal, and their insistence on bypassing them, are unacceptable.” (Israel Studies, Editors’ Response)
The editors have yet to respond to letters of concern sent to the AIS and the journal that were signed by more than 180 scholars — of many ideological persuasions — in the field of Israel Studies. These letters raise legitimate questions and concerns in their own right, and they merit a clear response from the editors.
In the absence of clear answers — particularly about the editorial process in the “word crimes” issue — doubts will certainly grow about the ability of the journal and affiliated organizations to sponsor and safeguard the norms under which research on politically contentious topics may take place.
Letter from the Editors of Israel Studies
Dear Colleagues,
We have all been inundated with messages and petitions regarding the Special Issue of Israel Studies (Word Crimes; Reclaiming the Language of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict — Summer 2019). Here is a brief statement from Natan and Ilan along with a link to a fuller response.
We took the Letter of Dissent (circulated to AIS members on May 3) seriously. Our efforts to address the concerns of those who authored and signed the letter, some of whom have served for a long time on our editorial board, were rejected. Solutions we proposed in response to criticism and information we made available to correct the letter’s misconceptions and misrepresentations were ignored, along with the suggestion of serious discussion, consultation, and planning when the Editorial Board is scheduled to meet at the AIS conference at the end of June. Numerous public postings including the one that reached you took the place of conversation and negotiation. The demands in the letter are stated as an ultimatum.
Three initial observations are in order:
- Widespread dissemination of the letter, including to many non-members, was used to pressure the boards of the AIS and the journal to accept the demands immediately, in advance of their meetings at Kinneret College. The authors misrepresent the relationship between the AIS and Israel Studies. Their marked disrespect for the institutions of the AIS and of the journal, and their insistence on bypassing them, are unacceptable.
- The single interpretation the letter asserts for the title “Word Crimes” is misleading and disingenuous.
- Claims that all the authors share a political agenda are patently false. Denigration of the quality of their essays and scholarship is sweeping and exaggerated.
- The journal has been open to debate since the first issue in 1996. This continues to be its sterling commitment.
We invite you to read “Critique of the Special Issue of Israel Studies; The Editors’ Response.”
See: http://in.bgu.ac.il/en/bgi/Site%20Assets/Pages/Journals/response.pdf
Ilan Troen and Natan Aridan
Co-Editors
- information on the journal
