The University of Utah has recently entered into a partnership memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Ariel University, an institution located in the West Bank of Israel. While the university describes the agreement as a standard academic exchange, the timing and potential political implications have raised concerns among students and faculty, especially in light of ongoing tensions between Israel and Palestine.
This MOU, which spans a five-year period, outlines a framework for cooperation in various fields. Currently, the only area identified for mutual collaboration is scientific exchange, particularly in data science and artificial intelligence. However, the agreement has not yet been put into action. There is a pending appointment of a liaison to coordinate research and exchanges, a position that, according to Heather King, Associate Director of Public Relations & Communications, has yet to be filled.
King clarified that the MOU was conceived before the escalation of violence from Israel’s major offensive in Gaza but acknowledged that it was still after the significant events following the October 7 Hamas incursion into Israel.
Rachel Hayes-Harb, a linguistics professor at the University of Utah and a member of the Utah chapter of Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FJP), expressed serious reservations about the MOU. Speaking as an individual rather than on behalf of the university, she emphasized the commitment of FJP to supporting students in their resistance efforts. The group seeks to leverage their expertise to effect change in issues related to Palestine.
The FJP also issued a press release criticizing the university’s decision to partner with Ariel University, labeling it as perplexing—especially in light of the current scrutiny of federal funding that such a decision potentially jeopardizes. The press release cited the distress caused by aligning with an establishment that operates under the legal implications tied to ongoing conflicts in the region.
Hayes-Harb questioned the decision-making process at the University of Utah, particularly highlighting the absence of consultation with faculty experts in Middle Eastern studies before signing the MOU. She articulated concerns that this lack of input sends a detrimental message regarding the university’s claim to have faculty recognized as experts.
Contrary to Hayes-Harb’s remarks, the University previously stated that such MOUs typically stem from faculty initiatives based on relationships formed through research, teaching, and mentorship.
The legal ramifications of this partnership have also come under scrutiny. According to the Utah chapter of FJP, the collaboration with Ariel University might violate HB 261, a state law enacted in 2024 that bars educational institutions from engaging in discriminatory practices. The law arose from previous political activities contextually related to the treatment of certain social issues within the state.
Hayes-Harb stressed that similar neutrality standards should be enforced regarding the MOU with Ariel University, indicating that the partnership involves deeply polarizing political issues, affecting various communities both in the U.S. and internationally. She challenged the university’s perceived selective neutrality, suggesting that it tends to marginalize pro-Palestinian positions.
Daniel Aaron, an Associate Professor of Law at the S.J. Quinney College of Law, weighed in on the situation, stating that the University of Utah must adhere to existing federal and state anti-discrimination laws and policies. He acknowledged the complexities in determining whether the partnership with Ariel University could infringe upon the rights of certain students.
Ariel University has stated that it admits Palestinian students, specifically citing “Palestinian and Muslim residents of Israel.” However, there exists an important distinction that can lead to confusion; this language refers primarily to ethnic Palestinians and practicing Muslims with Israeli citizenship rather than Palestinian ID holders, the latter being residents of Palestine. This nuanced distinction may bear implications concerning compliance with HB 261’s anti-discrimination clauses.
Despite the complexities and drawn legal frameworks, Hayes-Harb indicated that, for now, the FJP does not intend to pursue legal action regarding the alleged breach of HB 261. Instead, the organization is working on a petition to request the termination of the MOU.
In light of the situation, Aaron noted the university’s choice to engage with Ariel University can be interpreted as a provocative statement on a highly charged issue. He pointed out that with numerous other universities available for collaboration, choosing Ariel University significantly impacts perceptions regarding the university’s stance on this controversial topic.
As the University of Utah moves forward with the MOU, the ongoing debates among faculty and students underscore the challenges academic institutions face when navigating politically sensitive partnerships. The future of this agreement, its operationalization, and the community response will likely continue to evolve as tensions in the region persist.
image source from：dailyutahchronicle
