It has been reported that Stephen Hawking, the renowned and equally brilliant physicist who authored the bestseller, "A Brief History of Time", has decided to withdraw from the upcoming Presidential Conference in Israel. The Conference attracts some of the most prominent, brilliant and influential people in the world, and is hosted by Shimon Peres, Israel's Nobel Peace Prize winning President. The reason for Hawking's withdrawal is not due to his failing health, which some had reported, but rather due to his protest of Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people. Overnight Hawking has become the most notable academic to boycott the State of Israel, and in turn given credence to a movement which singles out Israel for impropriety in a region awash with moral depravity. According to a statement, Hawking's decision was based on advice from Palestinian academics who advised him to "respect" the boycott. It appears as though 'respect' is very subjective for Hawking, since his 'respect' does not apply to the myriad Israeli academics, as well as Shimon Peres, who have worked tirelessly to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians. It is nothing less than a shameful decision.
I don't deny that Israel is imperfect. I will not deny that Israel has and continues to commit wrongs against the Palestinian people. The occupation has probably done more harm to Israel's standing in the world than nearly all other Israeli policies combined. We should work hard to end it, through diplomacy and peaceful engagement, creating a long lasting and just agreement, that will last for generations. But boycotting the entire State of Israel and cutting off communication to a State which is home to the only democracy in the Middle East? Is Israel is so terrible that Hawking cannot acknowledge that women, minorities, and homosexuals are afforded more rights in Israel than in any other country in the Middle East or that Israel is a country where freedom of speech allows you to criticize government policy freely, freedoms which don't exist in any other country in the region? What about the fact that Arab women, Muslim and Christian, are allowed to pursue an education, dress how they see fit, and serve in Parliament, all of which can be elusive in every other Arab country?
Maybe Hawking missed those facts. I understand where Hawking is coming from. He is taking a bold stand against oppression and bigotry wherever it may lay, right? He should applaud himself. Too many people stand by idly while others are denied their freedoms. But if Hawking is going to boycott Israel, why stop there? In fact, there is a whole laundry list of countries for Hawking to display his noble and courageous beliefs!
Let's start with Russia. In 2012, Hawking accepted a $3 million prize for his work with black holes from a foundation founded by Russian billionaire Yuri Milner. Milner does business and pays taxes in Russia as well as maintaining contacts with the Russian government. Thus, Hawking should take a bold and courageous stand and return the prize money. Why you ask? Russia maintains a close relationship with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and has provided weapons and money to the Syrian regime. In fact, Russia has vetoed 3 UN resolutions condemning Assad's brutal crackdown, including vetoing a resolution which plainly condemned Assad's behavior. So while 70,000 (and counting) Syrians have been murdered, Russia has not only sat by watching, but has buttressed a regime which recently used chemical weapons on its own people. But, if that doesn't bother Hawking, then he should look at the lack of press freedom in Russia. According to Reporters Without Borders, Russia ranks 148 out of 179 in the Press Freedom Index. Russian ranks among the worst in prosecuting murders of journalists, and according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, there have been 54 journalists killed since 1992, which ranks just ahead of the 48 killed during the same period in Somalia. Maybe Hawking should take a stand against the rampant election fraud that took place during Russia's most recent election, or the brutal crackdown that followed. Maybe he should complain about the imprisonment of Russian government opposition like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who has been declared a prisoner of conscience by Amnesty International and has been imprisoned on flimsy charges since 2005. Maybe Hawking should condition his acceptance of Yuri Milner's prize money on the immediate cessation of the trial of Alexei Navalny, an opposition blogger currently facing 10 years in prison. Or maybe not.
How about China? In 2006, Hawking visited China for a conference with hundreds of physicists, speaking to an audience of thousands in Beijing's Great Hall of the People. The speech occurred right in Tiananmen Square where hundreds, and maybe thousands of civilians were murdered by government forces less than 20 years earlier. China imposes a brutal occupation on the people of Tibet, who have protested by self immolating themselves. In 2012, according to Human Rights Watch, 72 Tibetans lit themselves on fire to protest China's rule. China is also a good friend of Russia in the UN. Not only has Russia vetoed three UN resolutions condemning the Syrian regime, but China has joined suit, stating, in defense of its veto, that the resolution was "seriously problematic, with uneven content that is intended to put pressure on only one party". I'm sure the Syrian people would agree. What about the unbearable conditions that Chinese workers must endure, resulting in rampant suicides, which protest the miserable hours and non-existent pay? But if that doesn't bother Hawking, then he should send a nice note to Liu Xiaobo, who is imprisoned for supporting human rights, or speak to Chen Guangchen, a blind activist, who escaped China to come to the United States out of fear for his life.
But if Hawking really wants to take a stand and show some courage, there is one other country that he should boycott, a country which honored Hawking with the Presidential Medal of Freedom; the great United States of America. If Hawking wishes to support human rights everywhere, then how about he take a trip to Guantanamo Bay where detainees are being force fed through their noses because of hunger strikes, undertaken to protest being indefinitely detained without trial. Hawking can talk to a man named Khaled El-Masri, a German citizen, who was mistakenly believed to be a terrorist suspect. El-Masri was held by the CIA for four months, tortured and sodomized, and left on the side of the road. Hawking should express his outrage at the invasion of Iraq, which has now killed at least, and likely more, than 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians. He can even visit Iraq and see the aftermath of the invasion, which has resulted in a huge upsurge in birth defects and deformities, which some have attributed to depleted uranium and white phosphorous used by the United States. And if Hawking chooses to boycott America because of its decision to invade Iraq, then he might want to stay away from his home in England, since it was England who came to the aid of the United States, partnering in the invasion of Iraq. The list goes on.
This movement, to boycott Israel, is a staple of many Palestinian activists as well as those on the far-left fringes of the political spectrum. The movement is loud, but its truculence is the movement's only real asset. There is simply no substance or veracity to any of the movement's charges, which is the main reason it has gained almost no traction in the United States. The biggest proponents of the movement are likely to be found in the Middle East, in which numerous countries do not allow those with Israeli (Jewish Israeli) passports and where the Arab League began boycotting Jewish businesses nearly seven decades ago. It is not fair to call the movement or Stephen Hawking anti-Semitic, but there are certainly elements of the movement whose motivations are dubious at best.
What is so upsetting about Hawking's decision is that it only harms the peace process. A boycott establishes the idea that one side bears responsibility and blame for a set of circumstances, thus establishing Israel as the sole contributor to the plight of the Palestinian people. Hawking appears to have discarded the roles that Arab countries have played in this conflict, refusing to recognize the existence of Israel while perpetuating a cycle of enmity between the two sides. Do the Palestinians bear no blame? Is indiscriminately killing civilians through suicide attacks targeting buses, restaurants, and night clubs not an impediment to peace? Is firing rockets, in an attempt to terrorize and injure as many civilians as possible, something that does not warrant condemnation? The only way to end this conflict is through negotiation and an acceptance of the other's right to exist; two states living peacefully side by side. And as reports surface that Russia is supplying the Syrian regime with advanced cruise missiles, as more and more civilians die every day, Stephen Hawking is nowhere to be found.
