The glib ambassador

Much of the rhetoric used by both sides of the Ishmael Khaldi affair at the University of Edinburgh last week - first at the protest and then in the slew of statements and comments which followed - has been imbued with no uncertain amount of hyperbole. The protesters refer to Israel as ‘an apartheid state’ and to its foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman as a ‘Nazi’, while the event’s organisers have been quick to label the demonstrators ‘antisemitic’ and ‘undemocratic’.

But without wading into that vicious argument, The Journal notes that one reaction to Thursday’s turmoil stands out as a beacon of glibness. Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador in London, told an newspaper in his home country that “these attempts to suppress [Mr Khaldi’s] freedom of speech come as no surprise - once more, a British university views this intimidating mob-rule as acceptable.”

It would appear that Israel’s most senior diplomat in Britain feels that this country’s university administrators are too tolerant of campus protests. Clearly, he feels that student activism in Britain goes too far. He is wrong. If Britain’s universities and students’ unions are permissive of energetic demonstrations on campus, that should be cause for pride. The tradition of campaigning young people is not unique to Britain, but it is as vibrant here as it is anywhere.

The point in question here is not whether the conduct of the Edinburgh protest was appropriate or not, but rather the weary resignation with which Ambassador Prosor seems to sigh “once more”. In previous editorials, this newspaper has condemned violence at student protests in London. But we have also stood by our belief in the right to peaceful protest, and we do so now.

The events at Appleton Tower were not violent, and they were not destructive: it is a great shame that Mr Khaldi was unable to speak, and that there could not have been a more bilateral debate - but it is not the case that the protesters broke any laws or crossed an invisible line marking what is ‘acceptable’. On an issue clouded by bloodshed and terror, we - and Ambassador Prosor - should be thankful for acts of protest which do not involve suicide bombs or attacks on blockade-busting flotillas.

Furthermore, the ambassador should acknowledge that activism comes in many forms - from invading the stage and waving flags to sending a senior policy advisor abroad on what one organiser referred to as “a PR drive”.

One of Ambassador Prosor’s previous appointments within his government saw him oversee Israel’s policy on ‘strategic affairs, counter-terrorism and nuclear disarmament’. He has been at the sharp end of the spear in terms of Israeli foreign policy. Now, however, as one of his country’s most senior officials abroad, he is responsible for a rather more softly-softly type of interaction. Perhaps he should adopt a more diplomatic approach next time he feels the need to attack his host nation’s campaigning traditions.