Introduction to the Controversy
Columbia University adopted a controversial definition of antisemitism as part of its ongoing negotiations with the Trump administration to restore over $400 million of frozen research money. Acting Columbia University President Claire Shipman announced that the university will follow the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)’s definition of antisemitism, which generally defines it as “hatred toward Jews.” Shipman said Columbia will also partner with the Anti-Defamation League, which supports Israel and combats antisemitism, as part of the new measures designed to mitigate antisemitism.
The Definition and Its Criticisms
The definition has been criticized by leading civil and human rights groups — including Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, the ACLU, and B’Tselem, Israel’s largest human rights group — for improperly conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The definition states “targeting the state of Israel” is antisemitic. The U.S. State Department and several European countries have adopted the IHRA’s definition, which also includes a series of examples designed to help guide implementation. The IHRA qualifies its definition by saying criticism “similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”
Criticisms from Human Rights Groups
HRW, in a 2023 letter signed by over 100 civil society groups, said that while the text of the definition appears to draw a line between anti-Israeli and antisemitic speech, the implementation of it has almost always aimed to suppress any criticism of Israel and its military. “In practice, however, the IHRA definition has often been used to wrongly label criticism of Israel as antisemitic, and thus chill and sometimes suppress, non-violent protest, activism and speech critical of Israel and/or Zionism, including in the US and Europe,” the letter read.
The Main Drafter’s Concerns
The main drafter of the IHRA definition, Kenneth Stern, also said the definition he wrote causes harm. “The purpose was to take a temperature, not to create a blunt instrument to label anyone an antisemite,” Stern wrote in a 2022 statement. “Sadly, the definition hasn’t been used in the ways intended.” Critics say some of the examples the IHRA provides, including “applying double standards” to Israel, make it difficult to talk about Israel human rights abuses merely because there are worse abuses happening around the world.
Adoption and Impact
Around 350 universities around the world have adopted the IHRA definition in some capacity. Shipman said the move followed input from experts and the Jewish community. “After deep consultation with our Jewish community, and many friends and experts outside of our institution, we are taking some important additional steps,” Shipman wrote. In February, a coalition of nearly 200 Columbia faculty members advocated for the university to adopt the definition, arguing it was a necessary step to address antisemitism on campus.
Partnership with the Anti-Defamation League
Columbia will also partner with the Anti-Defamation League and hire Title VI and Title VII coordinators as part of the changes, intended to prove the university’s commitment to Jewish community members. Barnard College, an all-women school affiliated with Columbia, announced similar commitments earlier this month, though it did not adopt the IHRA definition.
Political Context
The Trump administration has made addressing antisemitism at Columbia a major factor in negotiations to restore federal funding, and the Trump administration previously referenced the IHRA definition in a letter of demands it sent to Columbia in March. The demands, some of which Columbia subsequently agreed to, came a year after pro-Palestinian protests and student-led encampments at Columbia made national headlines. Protests and clashes with the police continue to happen on campus, though with less frequency.
Criticisms of Political Motivations
Critics of Republicans’ efforts say Trump is using the term as a political cudgel to wield against universities. “We object to the weaponization of antisemitism,” a coalition of Jewish faculty members at Columbia wrote in April 2024. “And we advocate for a campus where all students, Jewish, Palestinian, and all others, can learn and thrive in a climate of open, honest inquiry and rigorous debate.”
Conclusion
The adoption of the IHRA definition by Columbia University marks a significant step in the ongoing debate about antisemitism and free speech on campus. While the university claims the move is necessary to address antisemitism, critics argue that it will stifle criticism of Israel and chill free speech. The controversy surrounding the definition and its implementation will likely continue to be a major issue in the coming months and years.
FAQs
Q: What is the IHRA definition of antisemitism?
A: The IHRA definition of antisemitism is a definition adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance that defines antisemitism as “hatred toward Jews” and includes examples of antisemitic behavior, such as targeting the state of Israel.
Q: Why has the IHRA definition been criticized?
A: The IHRA definition has been criticized for improperly conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism and for being used to suppress criticism of Israel and its military.
Q: How many universities have adopted the IHRA definition?
A: Around 350 universities around the world have adopted the IHRA definition in some capacity.
Q: What is the Trump administration’s role in the adoption of the IHRA definition by Columbia University?
A: The Trump administration has made addressing antisemitism at Columbia a major factor in negotiations to restore federal funding and has referenced the IHRA definition in a letter of demands sent to Columbia.
Q: What are the concerns about the implementation of the IHRA definition?
A: Critics are concerned that the implementation of the IHRA definition will stifle criticism of Israel and chill free speech on campus, and that it will be used to label legitimate criticism of Israel as antisemitic.
