"I didn't choose to be a professor of finance in order to become a youth guide, but since October 7 I realized that maybe this was my vocation," says Professor Ephraim Benmelech from Northwestern University in Chicago. "For many of the students, the university is their home. And in recent months, as the pro-Palestinian protests intensified, many of the Jewish students felt persecuted. It is mental abuse to make people feel unwanted in their own home. So, I told the students: 'Call me whenever you want, may it be day or night, at any time, even on Shabbat.'"
Benmelech, 53, is a professor of Finance at The Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, and made headlines in Israel in September, when the Prime Minister's Office offered him the job to replace Bank of Israel Governor, Professor Amir Yaron. "Since October," he says, "I have become the face of Jewish pride on campus." In addition to helping students, he organized a conference in solidarity with Israel with the participation of dozens of senior economists, including Nobel Prize winner Alvin Roth. He also co-chaired the President’s Advisory Committee on Preventing Antisemitism and Hate, created in November by university president Michael Schill, who is Jewish.
The idyll came to an end eary last month, when the Jewish Advisory Committee members announced their resignation. "We are unable to continue to serve Northwestern University as members of the President's Advisory Committee on Preventing Antisemitism and Hate at this crucial moment with antisemitism so present at Northwestern in public view for the past week," they wrote in a letter. The resignation is another step in the criticism of the pro-Israeli academics on the university's handling of the pro-Palestinian protesters, who blur the line between anti-Israelism and antisemitism, and make Jewish students feel unsafe.
What happened on your campus on October 7?
"Our campus was relatively quiet, and I was proud of it. We didn't have any manifestations of violence, unlike Columbia, Harvard, MIT or the University of Pennsylvania, and Schill, our president, had not (yet been) called before Congress to testify. And yet there were several lecturers who incited, mainly on their Twitter accounts, and Schill did not immediately issue a statement on behalf of the university against antisemitism, although on other issues, such as Black Lives Matter following the death of George Floyd at the hands of policemen, the university did issue statements. Since he is a new president, he preferred to commit to the 'Chicago principles'."
What are the 'Chicago Principles'?
"These are a set of guiding principles issued at the University of Chicago in the 1960s by a committee under the chairmanship of the Jewish jurist Harry Kalven, which determines that a university should not advocate political and social positions since it cannot reach a collective position. In the committee's report there is a clever, almost genius statement: 'The university is a community of scholars. There is no mechanism by which it can reach a collective position without inhibiting that full freedom of dissent on which it thrives. It cannot insist that all of its members favor a given view of social policy', wrote the committee. Therefore, the university should not take institutional positions on political issues.
"But behind these principles stands the notion that the university does not exist as an institution. As an economist who deals with theoretical questions, one of the major questions we ask is 'what is the purpose of society', so in terms of Kalven's report - there is no society, there is only a collection of individuals."
It's the university's full right to act like that, isn't it? Why does this upset you?
"Because Northwestern always released statements about everything, and only now it decided that it was not in favor of statements. I told Schill: 'You started adopting the Chicago principles on October 8.' I also told him that if this was his worldview, he should have brought it to the Senate for a decision. By the way, we later found citations of his, from the time he was president of the University of Oregon, showing he did issue political statements. I rebuked him on that."
Weren't you afraid?
"Universities are flat, non-hierarchical organizations. I am allowed to criticize the president; and besides, I wasn't alone on this: together with a group of researchers, mainly economists, such as Professor Joel Mokyr and Economics Professor Martin Eichenbaum, we put pressure on the president, and after a week he released a qualified statement, and so did the deans. Kellogg's dean issued a wonderful statement supporting Israel and its right to defend itself."
And that was it?
"Absolutely not, there were hard feelings among Jewish students, and there were of course other events and protests. One day Schil called me and said he wanted to create a committee on preventing antisemitism and Islamophobia, asking me to co-chair it with a non-Jew faculty member. I immediately said yes and started selecting members. Many suggested that I choose experts on antisemitism and Jewish history, but it was clear to me that these were not the people I would select."
Why not selecting antisemitism experts?
"Because I didn't want the committee to have a theoretical discussion about how to define antisemitism, but rather to deal with practical things. I also know that many researchers who engage in antisemitism in universities do not identify with Israel, even if they are Jewish, so I knew what I was avoiding. I wanted to bring in people who could say: Anti-Zionism is the modern antisemitism', rather than someone who is an expert on antisemitism in the early Middle Ages but calls for a boycott of Israel."
But anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism are not the same as antisemitism.
"I see it as antisemitism. Precisely for this reason, I didn't want to go into theoretical definition of antisemitism or arrest those who think that the State of Israel should not exist; these would have been futile discussions. My proposal was to make decisions as a society that wishes to live together, to understand that there are things that should not be said, and to conclude that there are things that should not be done. The statement 'Zionism is racism' offends 70% of Jews, therefore the university does not have to decide that it's antisemitism, but it does have to prevent it."
How do you differentiate antisemitism and anti-Zionism from criticism of Israeli policy?
"If they start criticizing the policies of the Israeli government, then we have achieved quite a lot, because criticizing the government means that you acknowledge Israel's government and its right to exist. But the new antisemitism's slogan is not 'two states for two peoples', but rather 'the Zionists must go' and 'from the river to the sea'. If the demonstrations were about one politician or another, there would not have been such outrage among the Jewish community.
"It's true that not all the demonstrators are antisemitic, and there are many who are confused, but it doesn't matter that much, because the transition from statements to violence is quick, and when there's an unrestrained crowd, with no power or authority limiting it, then there is a great chance of escalation."
And what about freedom of speech?
"Society is not built only on laws and enforcement, but also on the desire of people to live together, work together and create together. That's why I don't share personal stories about my military service, although I am not ashamed of it; on the contrary, I'm happy that I served in Lebanon, but I don't want to annoy others. Just as no one will approach a Muslim with a pig or burn a Quran. In terms of the law, if your neighbor is observing shiva in his house you are allowed to play loud music, but it seems more appropriate to be thoughtful of him."
It sounds like something an economist would say, not a philosopher.
"Economists and lawyers want to have institutions that encourage growth, unlike other departments in social sciences, which ideology goes against the institutions, having a Marxist worldview. They are simply irresponsible and engage in incitement. This is part of the academy that is being revealed now. They think that in order to make a change you have to be radical, but our goal is to unite, and for the sake of unity, we sometimes compromise."
'The peace that was achieved scares me'
Benmelech was born in Jerusalem, studied at the Bnei Akiva Yeshiva Nativ Meir, and served in the IDF as a paratrooper officer. He earned his B.A. degree in economics and business administration, and M.B.A. in business administration from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and his Ph.D. in Finance from the University of Chicago under the guidance of Nobel Prize laureate Douglas Diamond. Today he lives in Chicago with his wife Shikma and their four children. He defines himself as religious, although he is not strict about wearing a kippah.
He began his professional career as an economist at the Israeli Ministry of Finance. In 2005 he joined the department of economics at Harvard University, and in 2009 he was appointed associate professor. Three years later he moved to Kellogg and has been there ever since. His main research interests involved credit markets, financial crises and, in recent years, also economics of terrorism and applied corporate finance.
Northwestern is considered one of the 10 best universities in the United States, and its economics department is one of the five best in the world. Despite the criticism that Benmelech has, he is an enthusiastic patriot of the university, saying "I really like Northwestern and am proud of it."
Like other leading American universities, the enrollment of Jewish students in Northwestern increased only in the 1960s. "Until the 1950s, local aristocrats, rich family members, were more likely to get accepted," explains Benmelech. But the social climate has changed a lot since then, he clarifies, emphasizing that the last four university's presidents, including the current one, are Jewish.
And yet, between the closed past and the containing present, a scarring episode occurred for Chicago Jews - in the 1970s, Arthur Butz, a professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University, and sometime after he received tenure, he published his book titled "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century," in which he tried to provide evidence that the Holocaust did not take place, rejecting the claim that so many Jews were exterminated in concentration camps, says Benmelech. "He is one of the worst Holocaust deniers."
How did the university deal with it?
"The university was afraid his dismissal would entail a lawsuit, and thus would turn Butz into some kind of hero, so instead, they allowed him to stay as long as he expressed his views outside of the classroom, and another faculty member will always be present in his class. Moreover, the university implemented a policy, unique to Butz, according to which if he teaches a course that is required for graduation or any degree program, another section of that course must be offered at the same time so that no student ever has to enroll in one of his classes. Of course he hasn't been promoted. The university also stated that it was appalled by his words."
How was it received in the Jewish community?
"To this day, I meet Jews in Chicago communities who still hold it against Northwestern." It's been almost 50 years since then, and once again many Jews feel that Northwestern has abandoned them. What started as a quiet protest, moved up a gear in April following the attempt to dismantle the protest camp at Columbia University. On April 17, an encampment was also set up at Northwestern, where "signs depicted the university's president with devil horns - an image that the editor of 'Der Stürmer' would have been proud of," says Benmelech. "There were also signs displaying a crossed-out Star of David, calls for intifada, chanting slogans like 'Zionists are colonialists, conquerors, Nazis', 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free', and the inscription 'Death to Israel' was sprayed on Kellogg's building. Moreover, Jewish students reported that protesters were stalking them, and strangers were entering the dormitories, and more."
What did the committee do at this point?
"The Zionist Jewish members were determined to issue a harsh statement, but others said they wanted to issue a statement condemning antisemitism and Islamophobia. We rejected that, we are of course against Islamophobia, but the protest was purely antisemitic. As things heated up at the committee, I said that if they didn't come up with a wording that condemned antisemitism, I would rather not sign the statement."
"At the same time, we learned that the university's president negotiated with the protesters, without consulting the committee. According to the agreement the protesters should remove the tents, but they will be allowed to carry Palestinian symbols; there will be more transparency over the university's investments; the university will provide full cost of attendance for five Palestinian undergraduates per year; and the university will establish a special house for Palestinians' activities (similar to Hillel organization). I have no problem with that, but this is a surrender agreement."
Why is this a surrender agreement?
"Because people violated the rules formulated by the university itself. The university tried to regulate a demonstration policy, according to which demonstrations will be limited to locations far from classrooms, they must be approved in advance, the use of sound amplification requires school permission; however, the demonstrators violated all these rules with no one being punished. About 300 of the most radical rabble-rousers arrived on campus, and no one was suspended from the university, and there were no consequences for their actions."
Maybe this was the best way to get some quiet, to calm the spirits.
"In the short term, you are right - the president got some peace and quiet. Fact is that other universities are also trying to reach such agreements, because it is tempting to buy this peace. But this quiet is not absolute, and that scares me. In a few weeks, school year ends and the presidents of the universities just want the grass to look greener to donors and parents. But the important question is: What will happen next year? What will happen when students decide to protest against something else? What will happen after a new U.S. president be elected? What will happen if they say they don't want to have exams? What will happen if they don't want Israeli students to get admitted? Or they wish to exclude studies of a certain topic?
"A university is an institution, it flourishes when people don't think alike, but it doesn't have police and army. If you convey the message that when something disturbs the students, the university will give in to all their demands, what will happen in the future?"
'Judaism that comes down to Latkes'
His work in the committee to combat antisemitism lasted about four months and provided Benmelech a profound understanding of the rift that Jewish students face. "The mother of a certain student called me up, telling me that her daughter did not feel safe, so I invited her over; my wife served her a bowl of kneidlach soup and we were having a heart-to-heart conversation. She said, 'All my life I participated in social and environmental struggles, standing there holding signs, and now I am under social pressure to join other Jews and go to a pro-Palestinian camp, and because I don't go, all my social connections are destroyed."
"As far as I'm concerned, this is the biggest crisis here. People have gone through a very painful process. Their friends demand that they condemn Israel, and if they share a post on social media that involves the suffering in Israel, they will be cancelled."
There are quite a few Jews in the pro-Palestinian protests, even those who are connected to their Judaism.
"True, and in my opinion they are wrong. Someone showed me a video of an alternative [Passover] Seder in which they sang 'Dayenu', and I think they don't know what they are singing about. The last verse of 'Dayenu' reads: Ilu natan lanu et haTorah ve'lo hichnisanu l'Eretz Yisrael (If He had given us the Torah and had not brought us into the land of Israel), so when they sing 'Dayenu', they are actually saying that they belong to this land. There is no Judaism without Zion, a religious Jew prays three times a day: "And may our eyes see your return to Zion." The Jewish protesters are the type I call 'Latkes Jews', they have a Jewish identity, but it all comes down to eating latkes."
Did you manage to deal with issues of Islamophobia during your tenure as chairman of the committee?
"Yes, there were people who criticized me for that, telling me 'now is not the right time,' but it is not a zero-sum game, and there is definitely an anti-Muslim bias in the United States. I went to dinner together with the Muslim students at the university president's house, some of them didn't want to meet me, because they knew I served in the IDF. But during the conversation they told me that they were strict about eating Halal , and at the university they do serve Halal at the cafeteria, but they don't make sure to use different utensils, to avoid their food getting mixed with the other food. So, I told them that I could relate to that as a person who eats kosher, and I knew exactly what there were talking about; so, I took care of it. They also said that it was difficult for them to take exams during Ramadan, so I talked to the Rector's office, arranging for Muslim students to have exams at 9 p.m., after they break the fast."
Speaking of showing sensitivity - the situation in Gaza now must also be very difficult for Arab students in general, and Palestinians in particular.
"A disaster happened to the Palestinian people as well, and I regret the death of innocent people, but I also think that the IDF had no other choice. We need agents of change at the university to calm things down, and that is the role of the faculty. There are people who are constantly stirring up things on campus, adding fuel to the fire instead of calming things down. If we could come out with a joint statement of Palestinians, Israelis, Jews and Muslims and unite against extremism, it would be possible to calm things down. But there is a structural problem in universities - in the Humanities, Social sciences, History, and Political science faculties, they hold critical theories, which mean that you change the world by destroying it."
And your resignation is not considered as 'adding fuel to the fire'?
"We need to have empathy for others, but we were in great pain just as much. I am not a 'serial resignee', and I believe in being a responsible adult. But I wanted to lead a change, and as soon as I realized that the committee was limited, I didn't agree to stay there serving as a fig leaf."
But now the Jews are left without an official address they can turn to within the university.
"Our struggle is not over. On the contrary, it has just begun. We will make sure to punish those who deserve it. We have taken off our gloves. I am a man of peace, not of strife, but if we have to, we will also know how to act as people of strife."