Harvard the Coward

By axing independent scholars, the Ivy League giant shows it's more afraid of backlash than committed to free thought

Harvard has just done what elite institutions across America are now getting very comfortable with, punishing scholars who won't toe the Israel line.

This week, the university quietly removed both Cemal Kafadar and Rosie Bsheer from leadership at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies. No cause. No scandal. Just gone. Buried under a sanitized email from the interim dean. No real explanation was given. Bsheer wasn’t even mentioned. That’s not accidental; it's calculated.

What is happening now is about submission to the Israel school of thought. It’s about silencing programs and individuals who refuse to rubber-stamp sanitized narratives. Middle Eastern Studies departments across the country have long been accused, falsely, of bias or extremism simply for offering perspectives that don’t align with U.S. interests. Now, this pressure is turning into firings, funding threats, and fear.

This isn’t about antisemitism. Anyone who’s honest knows it's about power, how one foreign nation continues to influence the shape and scope of American academia, especially on anything remotely critical of Israeli policies or U.S. support for them.

Harvard, like Columbia last week, folded under pressure. Columbia got threatened with a $400 million freeze from the Trump administration. Their president stepped down, concessions were made, and protests were shut down. Harvard saw that and took notes. They preemptively removed two respected faculty members to keep the heat off.

Let’s call this what it is: cowardice. Harvard didn’t defend its people. It didn’t stand up for open debate or academic freedom. It made a political decision. It prioritized donor comfort and government favor over truth.

And now it sets the tone for every other school in the country.

Bsheer and Kafadar weren’t fringe figures. They aren’t radical, they’re accomplished scholars whose work is grounded in history, politics, and reality, not PR spin. And that’s the real problem. They didn’t cave to pressure. They didn’t turn CMES into another think tank parroting U.S. State Department talking points.

Harvard couldn’t stomach that. Or more accurately, the people holding Harvard’s purse strings couldn’t. And the university chose to keep them happy instead of defending the very idea of independent scholarship.

This article is a slap in the face for Israel, intervening in American society like this. The growing crackdown on pro-Palestinian voices, critical thought on Zionism, and historical accountability is being dressed up as protecting Jewish students, when in reality, it’s about crushing dissent.

If you question Israeli occupation, challenge American foreign policy in the region, bring up the Nakba or Gaza, or even basic facts, you’re marked. This is the academic version of blacklisting.

Harvard's decision sends a message: stay quiet or get out. This isn’t just about two professors. It’s about every future scholar who wants to teach Middle Eastern history with honesty. It’s about every student who wants to speak out on genocide and apartheid without fear. It’s about whether truth still has a place on college campuses in America.

The silence from the broader academic community is embarrassing. Faculty who built careers on “critical thinking” are watching this happen and saying nothing, because they’re afraid, too. And maybe they should be. Because what just happened at Harvard makes it clear: tenure won’t protect you, credentials won’t shield you, and your institution won’t back you when it counts.

The entire point of a university is to interrogate power, not serve it. But that’s exactly what’s happening now. The same Ivy Leagues that used to pride themselves on independence and courage are now looking over their shoulder at every step, checking which way the wind is blowing in Washington and Tel Aviv.

Let me be blunt: if you’re scared to teach Middle East history without filters, you don’t deserve to be in a classroom. And if your institution dumps you the second it gets uncomfortable, then it was never about truth in the first place.

Harvard has lost the plot. It’s acting like a PR firm, not a university. And this isn’t about protecting Jewish students. It’s about defending Israel from criticism. That distinction matters, because weaponizing identity to shut down conversation is a dangerous road. Once you start defining political critique as hate speech, you’ve gutted the idea of free thought altogether.

This is academic censorship, plain and simple, but worse, it's self-censorship enforced by fear, hidden behind polite press releases and bureaucratic silence.

What happened to Bsheer and Kafadar isn’t just sad. It’s a warning. To every scholar. To every student. To anyone who still thinks a university is a place to challenge dominant power structures.

If this is Harvard’s example, the rest will follow. Unless we speak up.

Update 04/14/2025

In a dramatic escalation of its campaign against alleged campus antisemitism, the Trump administration has frozen over $2 billion in federal grants and contracts to Harvard University. The move comes after Harvard firmly rejected a sweeping list of White House demands, which included changes to governance, admissions, and hiring policies—framed by the administration as necessary measures to combat antisemitism and uphold civil rights.

Harvard’s leadership denounced the demands as an unconstitutional overreach. President Alan Garber emphasized the institution’s independence and its commitment to both free expression and the fight against antisemitism, but rejected what he described as government interference violating the First Amendment.

The administration’s letter cited concerns over Harvard’s alleged failure to meet civil rights and "intellectual standards" tied to federal funding, pushing for reforms such as diminished influence for students and junior faculty, mandatory external audits, and federal reporting of students deemed hostile to “American values.” This aligns with Trump’s broader effort to dismantle DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) frameworks and exert direct influence over higher education.

This latest clash mirrors a similar confrontation with Columbia University, where $400 million was withheld until compliance was reached. Harvard, however, is pushing back through legal channels, suggesting a major constitutional test over the federal government's leverage against elite private institutions.

The standoff highlights a profound conflict: between governmental authority to enforce civil rights and institutional autonomy in academia, a flashpoint likely to shape U.S. education policy in the months ahead.