Just before Thanksgiving, the Cornell Graduate Students United UE Local 300 approved a resolution titled “International Solidarity with the Palestinian Liberation Struggle,” which affirmed, among other things, the Palestinians’ “unequivocal human right to resist oppression by any means necessary.” As a historian, an Israeli and a member of the Cornell community, I find myself bemused and troubled when facing this resolution, and this phrasing in particular, which is now part of the union’s official policy: What, according to the drafters, does “any means necessary” entail? Does it include, for example, the raiding of civilian communities, the torturing, murdering and kidnapping of the young and old, as we saw on the Oct. 7 massacre in 2023, which ignited the horrendous war in Gaza? These were, after all, the most recent ‘means’ that the Palestinian governing leadership in Gaza deemed legitimate and “necessary” in the name of resistance. Indeed, as some may recall — perhaps with regret — this barbaric attack was openly welcomed enthusiastically by some members of our own community.
History provides many more examples of violent ‘resistance’ from Palestinians and their supporters, memorable examples of which include the 1974 Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine raiding a community and children’s school, which resulted in the mass killing and wounding of Israeli civillians (22 of whom children) — “The Ma’alot Massacre”, the massacre of Israeli athletes in the 1972 Munich Olympics, the multiple hijackings of passenger aircrafts, targeting civilians with many cruel suicide attacks in the 1990s and 2000s, endless rockets against civilians and so many other attacks over the years. These are, by definition, acts of terrorism, but were also presented and conceived as acts of resistance by Palestinian leaders and their supporters, and remembered as such to this very day. And so I wonder: What are the drafters’ position about such acts? Are they a legitimate and understandable execution of the Palestinians’ "human right to resist"? If so, what — or who — would be legitimate targets of such resistance? Are all Israelis fair game for violent action? What about Jews who support the existence of a Jewish homeland in its current location? These are some of the serious questions that student members of the union should consider if they decide to participate in such statements that support “any means” of Palestinians’ resistance, especially given the bloody history of such resistance.
In addition to its ethical evasion, the resolution seems to have a problematic relationship with facts. At one point, the resolution nonchalantly cites a fantastical casualty figure with regards to the war in Gaza — claiming that 680,000 people were killed in the strip by Israel since Oct. 7, 2023 — far exceeding even Hamas’s figures, which stand at around 74,000 — a terrible number in itself. The number matters not because suffering is measured in clean numerics but because truth is a prerequisite for judgment. So why make this inflated claim in such an offhanded manner? One can only assume that the CGSU-UE finds this fictitious figure necessary to support their interpretation (presented as a self-evident fact) that what Israel is doing in Gaza constitutes a genocide, rather than fighting a war started by Palestinians — a point that might paint a more complicated story.
The labelling of Israel as a ‘genocidal state’ didn’t start in 2023, but soon after the Hamas massacre of Oct. 7, 2023 this label became commonplace as almost dogma in many circles, especially, although not exclusively, in the humanities and social sciences. This is stated not to excuse Israel’s conduct in this brutal war, but to reject the genocide charge as manipulative and deceitful, often used to delegitimize the very existence of Israel or to brand it as a blood thirsty entity (not a state), that has only brought harm to the region (a very common sentiment, supported by intense propaganda and deeply imbedded distrust and suspicion of Jews).
Consider also the following phrasing in the resolution’s dramatic closing paragraph: “Workers around the world are building power through the belief that we free Palestine and Palestine frees us.” This typical statement is not about Palestinians as human beings who deserve safety, dignity and a political horizon. It is about ‘Palestine’ as a redemptive ideal, an eternal abstract, that holds a glorious and mystical promise to the world. According to this prevailing logic, which has a long and interesting history of its own, Israel comes across as a clog in humanity’s machinery. Remove Israel, so this paragraph may seem to suggest (as, for many, Israel is in the way of a “Free Palestine”), and “liberation” will follow — not only for Palestinians but for humanity at large. Such a marvelous and enticing fantasy.
It should be quite obvious that the insistence on viewing Israel, which is the only Jewish state in the world, home to some 7.5 million Jews (almost half of the world's Jewish population of around 16 million in total), in this manner pushes away any attempt to ever reach peace. Indeed, peace is a word and idea entirely absent from the resolution.
CGSU-UE represents graduate students across Cornell; members are asked to fund it by default upon registration. Such an organization, so closely connected with the University’s very establishment, should not romanticize violence with constant nods to antisemitic tropes, such as linking Israel to “anti-labor interests” and the “ruling class” in the U.S., as the resolution explicitly does.
A resolution by a central union in an institution such as Cornell is expected to do better. Most importantly, graduate students should amplify the desperately needed voice of reason and peace, rather than cheer on further destruction. They also should not echo anti-Jewish prejudice (as in depicting Israel as a singular global obstruction).
A worthy resolution would call for real peace between Israelis and Palestinians, one that ensures a sense of security, justice and respect for both sides, not foster more division and hate, nor side with one party that is clearly not without responsibility to the current tragic moment.
Rhona Burns is a Postdoctoral Associate at the Jewish Studies Program and teaches on Israel and Jewish nationalism. Her forthcoming Hebrew book explores the influences of ideas of social class and status on the emergence of modern Jewish nationalism. She can be reached at rb949@cornell.edu.
The Sun is interested in publishing a broad and diverse set of content from the Cornell and greater Ithaca community. We want to hear what you have to say about this topic or any of our pieces. Here are some guidelines on how to submit. And here’s our email: opinion-editor@cornellsun.com.
