analysisIsrael News

Israeli universities are overrun with political bias

Why has Israel not followed in the footsteps of the Trump administration and reined in the university administrations? 

Demonstrators protest calling to end the war in Gaza at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem on May 28, 2024. Photo by Yoatan Sindel/Flash90.
Demonstrators protest calling to end the war in Gaza at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem on May 28, 2024. Photo by Yoatan Sindel/Flash90.
Shimon Sherman
Shimon Sherman is a columnist covering global security, Middle Eastern affairs, and geopolitical developments. His reporting provides in-depth analysis on topics such as the resurgence of ISIS, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, judicial reforms in Israel, and the evolving landscape of militant groups in Syria and Iraq. With a focus on investigative journalism and expert interviews, his work offers critical insights into the most pressing issues shaping international relations and security.

“The upcoming week, during which the Arab-Palestinian community marks the Nakba, is particularly sensitive. Therefore, we find it important to remind everyone how delicate the shared fabric of respectful relations within our community is,” reads a letter from the administration of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem sent out in July to all students and staff.

This was but one out of dozens of letters sent out by the administrations of Israel’s top universities, all promoting a very particular ideological narrative. “Clearly, the vast majority of academics are on the left politically,” Ofir Haivry, vice president of the Herzl Institute and the longest-serving member of Israel’s Council for Higher Education, told JNS.  

Dr. Eli Rohn, a former professor at Ben-Gurion University’s Department of Software and Information Systems Engineering and a prominent member of Professors for a Stronger Israel, told JNS, “You have an insider system where entire departments pick out their people according to ideological parameters. If you are suspected of being center or right-wing, you won’t have a future in these departments. If a professor doesn’t seem sufficiently ideologically pure, he won’t get tenure.”

Avrum Tomer, a researcher of education policy at the Kohelet Policy Forum and head of HaDor HaBa–Parents for Choice in Education, told JNS. “There is a well-known phenomenon of right-wingers ‘coming out of the closet’ only after they have achieved tenure. But they need thick skin to survive quite a few years in the system as stragglers before that.”

Tomer said that progressive bias is not equally distributed in the universities and that different departments have significantly different ideological profiles. “Progressive bias in academia exists only in the faculties of social sciences and humanities, and not in the exact sciences,” he explained. 

While the American right has turned the battle over university bias into a defining front of its culture war, a similar ideological tilt has taken shape in Israeli academia with relatively little public attention. Despite growing signs of left-wing dominance across Israeli university faculties, there has been little policy response, in sharp contrast to the Trump administration’s high-profile campaigns against campus political orthodoxy in the United States

In Israel, university administrations have grown increasingly emboldened, often weighing in on contentious political issues while invoking “academic independence” as a shield against criticism or oversight.

The universities in question are largely public institutions, with 50-75% of their budgets coming from taxpayers. Despite this reality, university administrators have felt no need to remain politically neutral or at least not to criticize the policies of the very government funding their institutions. 

“In the last several years, a permission structure has been created that has painted the government as not just right-wing but anti-democratic, and that has allowed all kinds of statements to be made in public that would normally never have been acceptable,” Haivry said. “This is the reason university administrators feel entitled to make such statements publicly. The presidents have been trained to see themselves as beyond reproach and beyond any sanction.”

Judicial reform

Nowhere has the growing assertiveness of university administrations been more evident than in their reaction to the government’s proposed changes to the judiciary. In the very first weeks of the judicial overhaul, university administrators began issuing statements against judicial reform in Israel, thereby not only reacting to the public outcry but actively setting the left-wing dogma on this issue. 

“As those entrusted with the research and education of the future generations of the State of Israel, we warn you that the proposed reform of the legal system could deal a fatal blow to the Israeli academy,” the heads of Israel’s universities wrote in a statement in January 2023.

“This might manifest itself as a brain drain, and in faculty members hesitating to join our ranks; that students, research students, post-doctoral students, and international colleagues will not come to Israel; that our access to international research funds will be limited; that foreign industries will withdraw themselves from cooperating with Israeli academia; and we will be excluded from the international research and educational community,” they continued.

The letter was co-signed by the heads of Bar-Ilan University, Tel Aviv University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, the Technion, Ariel University, the University of Haifa, the Weizmann Institute and the Open University. 

In an anonymous vote (which included most Tel Aviv University professors) in support of the president’s statement on judicial reform, 68 faculty members supported the motion, two abstained and one faculty member opposed, underlining the ideological distribution of the academic staff. 

While recognizing that perhaps such blatant violations of “academic neutrality” are problematic, university administrations have justified themselves by claiming that “as a rule, the university does not take political positions.” However, the issues that they do comment on transcend politics and are rather issues of “fundamental values in a democratic state.”

In a recent letter, the rector and president of Hebrew University wrote that “when these values are at risk, we do take a public stand. As a public institution, we are obligated to defend the core democratic values of the state.” In the letter, rector Tamir Sheafer and president Asher Cohen identified one such core value as preventing “changes to the judicial system.”

“The separation of powers is a fundamental pillar of Western democratic governance. Due to the immense importance of this principle, we believe that changes to the structure of the separation of powers must not be made without broad consensus within the political and public systems. Rapid and unilateral changes to the constitutional framework, without such broad agreement, are dangerous,” the letter reads. 

“The attack on the judiciary is a subject that universities must speak on even more than they do right now,” Dr. Itai Ater, a professor of Economics at Tel Aviv University, head of the Israeli Economists’ Forum for Democracy and one of the leaders of Academics for Israeli Democracy, told JNS.

The actions of university administrators after the government made clear its intention to fire the director of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, Ronen Bar, serve as another example of academic political activism.

After an order by the Israeli Supreme Court to freeze the firing until a preliminary hearing could be held to establish the authority of the Cabinet to dismiss Bar, leading members of the coalition, such as Justice Minister Yariv Levin, said the government should move forward despite the court freeze. Levin said it was self-evident that Bar served under the prime minister and that the court was overstepping its authority in issuing the order.

In response, nine presidents of Israel’s top universities issued a statement saying they would “use any means available if the government acted in opposition to the Supreme Court’s orders.”

In their statement, they specifically expanded the possible causes for noncompliance beyond the issue of Ronen Bar to any disagreement between the government and the Supreme Court.

“If the government does not comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling on the matter of the head of the Shin Bet, on the matter of the dismissal of the legal advisor to the government, or any other matter, we will act to shut down the university. As far as I understand, other universities will do the same,” Tel Aviv University’s president Ariel Porat wrote in a letter to faculty and students. 

While most faculty and students ignored or placidly supported the administration’s actions, there was also some pushback.  Professor Binyamin Brown from the Department of Jewish Thought at the Hebrew University said that the call to strike constituted an attempt by the administration to dictate his political views.

“No president, rector, dean, faculty head, or any other figure can force me to think like them, let alone fight their battles for them when I do not share their positions. It is time for you to understand that employees are not slaves, and professors are not vassals who must fight for their masters at the top. Faculty members fight for principles they believe in—only those,” Brown wrote in a statement to his colleagues.

He continued, “A faculty union has the right to call for a professional strike—not a political or ideological one, even if its leaders believe it is a fight ‘for the soul of the country’ or ‘for Israeli democracy.’ Therefore, if an illegal strike is declared, I will hold my classes as usual and inform students that the material is required for their exams.”

War, hostages and campus protests

While judicial reform catalyzed the abandonment of “academic neutrality” in Israel, Oct. 7, 2023, and the war in Gaza turned academic political activism into an everyday occurrence. In the public debate over the balance between the need to destroy Hamas and return the hostages, the administration has come down squarely on the side of prioritizing the hostages. 

The universities have characterized any opposing position as fundamentally in violation of their “supreme moral obligation.”  They have also encouraged student union strikes to support hostage deals, calling it part of their “policy of inclusion.”

Tel Aviv University has canceled classes to facilitat “strikes.” Ater confirmed that much of the activism is being instigated by the university faculty. “There has been a lot of faculty involved in protesting the things the IDF is doing in Gaza,” he said.

The Hebrew University’s president put it most clearly in a statement in September of 2024. In the statement, the university administration demanded “that the government make the abductee deal a top priority and sign a deal now! We cannot continue to abandon our people to the hands of murderers. Even at painful prices, we must do everything to return the 101 kidnapped people who are still in Gaza.”

In addition to calls for hostage deals, several universities also facilitated student protests that featured extremist rhetoric that arguably incited violence.

While American conservatives have been on a crusade against anti-Israel demonstrations on their campuses, the same phenomenon on a smaller scale went barely opposed in Israel’s universities. A mere six months after Oct. 7, chants of  “In spirit and blood, we will redeem Al-Aqsa,” and “There is no solution except the expulsion of the occupier,” were heard on the campuses of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

The protests featured flags of the PLO government. Hebrew University did not seek any disciplinary action against the students. In a similar case, students at Tel-Aviv University staged a commemoration for the Nakba last May with posters like “Get out of Gaza and Rafah” and “No democracy with occupation.”

The university again failed to act. In a rare exception, a student group at Haifa University was suspended throughout the semester last month after they staged a sit-in to commemorate Gazan children killed in the war. 

In addition to anti-Israel student protests, the universities have also shielded professors who have made pro-terror statements. Professor Shalhoub-Kyvorkian, a “feminist scholar” at the Hebrew University Faculty of Law, was recorded on the Makdisi Street podcast saying, “It’s time to abolish Zionism. It can’t continue, it’s criminal. Only by abolishing Zionism can we continue.”

Shalhoub-Kyvorkian continued, saying, “They will use any lie. They started with babies, they continued with rape, and they will continue with a million other lies. We stopped believing them, I hope the world stops believing them.”

In response, the Hebrew University initially suspended her but quickly reinstated her after she clarified that “as a feminist researcher she believes all victims and does not doubt their words… and she does not deny that on Oct. 7 there were cases of rape.”

She did not retract her position on any of her other points. When Israeli police moved to detain her on suspicion of incitement to terrorism, the Hebrew University called for “Professor Shalhoub-Kyvorkian to be released from detention immediately.” Shalhoub-Kyvorkia has since retired from her position at the university.  

Oversight in academia

Beyond intervention in broader political issues, the University administrations have also sought to shield themselves from oversight. “There should be no political influence in what we teach or what we research. Any political intervention is dangerous. There is state funding, and we cannot ignore that. We can’t do anything that we want. That doesn’t mean we should have political intervention in what we’re doing,” Ater explained.

Following October 7th, several bills were proposed in Knesset to rein in pro-terror speech on campuses. The most prominent bill introduced in December 2024 was sponsored by MK Ofir Katz of the Likud Party, who also heads the coalition whip’s office. The bill empowers university administrators to immediately dismiss professors deemed to have “incited terrorism” or denied Israel’s status as a Jewish and democratic state, without severance pay. It also includes provisions for cutting public funding to institutions found non-compliant.

MK Hanoch Milwidsky (Likud) proposed an amendment slashing 10% of public funding to any university allowing “enemy flags” (e.g., PLO flags) on campus during demonstrations.

The universities decried these bills as “populist.” Tel Aviv University rector, Prof. Mark Steiff, claimed the bill was “using the guise of legitimate defense against terrorism,  to challenge the independence of Israeli universities, subject them to political interests, and threaten to severely and unprecedentedly undermine their functioning and scientific endeavors.”

The rector further actively called on students to join a protest in opposition to the bill and said that the University would cancel classes to facilitate the students’ presence. 

HU president Cohen echoed these sentiments in his statement. “It is clear that this is a draconian and McCarthyist proposal, is part of a campaign of incitement against faculty members. It undermines the fundamental principles upon which the academic system is based, such as freedom of thought and freedom of expression,” he said.

“The administration of the Hebrew University and the senior academic staff association at the university are united in categorical opposition to this amendment to the law. We also declare that even if it passes, we have no intention of cooperating with it,” he added. 

When asked about the bill, Ater misrepresented the law as blocking “any speech the government thinks is unpatriotic.”

In the context of these multiple acts of insubordination and borderline insurrection, the question remains as to why more pressure is not brought to bear on the universities. If 50-75% of their budget comes from the government, doesn’t that leave the coalition with enormous leverage to enforce academic neutrality? Why has Israel not followed in the footsteps of the Trump administration and reined in the university administrations? 

The key reason the Israeli government has not moved to defund its major universities, despite recurring friction, lies in the structural autonomy granted to these institutions.

The Planning and Budgeting Committee (PBC), operating under the Council for Higher Education, insulates academic institutions from direct political interference, making it legally and administratively difficult for the government to impose punitive funding cuts.

“The Council for Higher Education and the PBC are both largely taken over by people of the left and persuasions who are actively interested in perpetuating the current system and not letting additional oversight into the running of higher education in Israel from outside political camps,” Rohn explained.

The PBC is a leftover of the 1970s Rabin administration. The seven-member committee has sole authority over the allocation of public funds to higher education institutions. The four representatives of the universities that sit on the committee have an automatic majority on the PBC, allowing them full financial independence. There are no representatives of the government or the Knesset on the committee.

“There is no doubt that the combination of demanding public budgets, alongside a complete disconnection from the public interest, demanding complete autonomy, and the absence of any accountability leads to the worst of all worlds,” Tomer said.

Haivry said that in his view, this system is largely facilitated by political cowardice. “The process for changing the mechanism by which the money is allocated is very simple for the government. However, no Israeli government has ever dared to change it. They are afraid of an open war with the universities. The government is being weak by choice, and this is emboldening the University presidents to be so political,” Haivry said.

Haivry further said that the universities have employed their powers on the budgeting committee to prevent other institutions from opening that might present a challenge to their monopoly on academic authority.

“They have used their authority on the budgeting councils and the Council of Higher Education to crack down against competition and to secure their position as the only valid representatives of democratic thought. Many times, these efforts have been to the detriment of Israel’s educational needs,” Haivry said

Rohn said that in his view, the lack of reform in the budgeting committees is not the product of a lack of political will but rather a broken legal system. According to Rohn, any move to reform the budget allocation mechanism would likely face immediate legal challenges, potentially reaching the High Court, and would be framed by critics as an attack on academic freedom.

“The current system is being closely guarded by the high court, which has already set several precedents on the issue of ‘academic freedom’. Any action on this issue would automatically trigger a massive legal battle,” Rohn said.

Ater confirmed Rohn’s suspicion, saying, “The Education minister tried to push some candidates to the Council of Higher Education, and we petitioned the Supreme Court, and they stopped it. We have been very successful in stopping and delaying changes the government has tried to make in academia.”

Beyond the legal hurdles, Israeli universities have made clear that any infringement on their control over funding would lead to mass protests, strikes, and social action. 

Despite the widespread political bias in the universities, they have not succeeded in promulgating their ideology. While US academics have successfully raised a generation of Americans steeped in the ideology of the left, Israel’s younger generation is trending in the opposite direction. 

According to a poll by the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI), 73% of Israelis in the 18-24 age group identify as politically right-wing. “The student body in Israel is fundamentally tending more to the right than the faculty. The students are older, the forming role that the University serves in the United States is done by the army in Israel, so there are a lot fewer ideologically influenced by the university experience,” Haivry concluded.

Topics