NTNU rector Torbjørn Digernes has asked the board not to vote for a boycott of Israel. He has also said that he is “saddened” by some of the criticism directed against him. Yet let us look as his “form” so far:
1. Digernes has endorsed and possibly also financed a seminar-series which has been: a) organized by the same individuals who stood behind the call for boycott b) had as its primary objective to prepare the ground for the debate concerning boycott, which the NTNU board of directors wil take on November 12th c) so critical of Israel that it might as well have been offered by the Norwegian Palestine Committee.
2. Digernes has thus politicized his university, thrusting it into the forefront of a political campaign against the one country on earth with which Norway already has “strained” relations, thereby demeaning NTNU staff and students by dividing them into two political camps.
3. Digernes has avoided open debate by refusing to speak to, for instance, Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post. He primarily makes himself known through the university newspaper – Universitetsavisa – which can hardly be expected to function as a critical voice.
It appears quite obvious that this goes far beyond the NTNU board merely deciding, on November 12th, whether or not to boycott Israel. Rector Digernes cannot merely wash his hands of the situation at which he himself has had such an obviously active hand.
What we need to discuss now is to what extent Torbjørn Digernes has behave properly as an NTNU rector. If he has not, he ought to resign.
Yet who in Norway has the political courage to go up against the Palestine-lobby, which has the power and influence to enroll the rector of NTNU in its campaign in the first place?
So when Mr. Digernes publicly puts forward that he is opposed to the boycott, that is wrong as well? You cannot have it two ways.
I grant you half a point there.