Deeming it the “most moral, effective and nonviolent approach” to bringing peace to the Middle East, Students Confronting Apartheid in Israel (SCAI) last night launched its campaign calling on the University to selectively divest from companies with ties to Israel.

The campaign, which comes on the heels of successful efforts in 2005 that prompted Stanford to sever relations with corporations connected to Sudanese government, drew the ire of a number of student and faculty members concerned with the use of “apartheid” in the group’s name and its potential to further polarize student dialogue.

Speaking in front of a crowd of about 150 students, faculty and community members in Tressider Oak West, senior and SCAI President Omar Shakir, a senior, outlined the group’s case for divestment and offered a brief history of Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Shakir presented a five-part divestment approach in which he called for the University Board of Trustees to divest from companies that: support Israel’s military, aid the construction or maintenance of the West Bank “separation fence,” operate on occupied land, assist in the demolition of homes or engage in institutional discrimination. He defended the use of the word “apartheid,” arguing that while the Israeli and South African regimes are different on the surface, their result is the same.

“No one here is saying what is going on is genocide,” he said. “But the systemic discrimination and institutional racism is very clear.”

SCAI’s campaign has put campus Jewish student groups on the defensive, and has fostered a “divisive atmosphere,” said Stanford Israel Alliance Co-President Mishan Araujo, a junior.

“There’s a temptation to use inflammatory rhetoric to get attention, but it comprises a gross misrepresentation and places all the blame on Israel,” Aroujo said. “We recognize that Israel has faults, but both sides need to own up to their mistakes.”

Associate Director for Honors Writing Hilton Obenzinger, who participated on the panel and agrees with SCAI’s stance despite the fact that he is Jewish, admitted as much.

“Apartheid is a buzzword and is very upsetting for those who support Israel,” he said in his closing remarks. “But I think we need to face it. We need to face the hard realities.”

The campus debate represents a microcosm of deliberations both nationally and internationally over divestment campaigns and the use of the word “apartheid” in connection with Israel. Former President Jimmy Carter unleashed a firestorm of controversy when he published a book titled “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” in December.

And previous campus divestment campaigns related to South Africa in the 1980s and Sudan in 2005 both enjoyed widespread support that SCAI is unlikely to find in its fight.

“What separates this from previous divestment efforts is that there is much less — in fact, no prospect — in achieving community consensus toward the goal of divestment,” said Hoover Senior Fellow Larry Diamond. “In the case of South Africa, I think there was a far, far greater consensus on the issues and the moral imperatives.”

While SCAI heralds the decisions of the Presbyterian Church and the Academic Union of Teachers in the United Kingdom to divest from Israel, petitions and campaigns on the issue at universities nationwide have struggled to get off the ground. Divestment efforts at several Ivy League schools and the UC system made headlines in 2002 but failed to produce the desired result.

In a 2002 speech, then-Harvard President Lawrence Summers characterized Harvard’s divestment campaign as “anti-Semitic in effect, if not in intent.”

“Where anti-Semitism and views that are profoundly anti-Israeli have traditionally been the primary preserve of poorly educated right-wing populists,” Summers said, “profoundly anti-Israel views are increasingly finding support in progressive intellectual communities.”

So far, the University has not made clear its views regarding divestment from Israel. For its part, the Office of Student Affairs has been working to “promote discussion that fosters education, learning and understanding through open and respectful dialogue,” according to a statement released by the office yesterday.

“The original Founding Grant composed by Jane and Leland Stanford provides for ‘studies and exercises directed to the cultivation and enlargement of the mind,’” Dean of Students Maureen Powers said in the statement. “It is with this educational goal in mind that we hope to encourage students to share their viewpoints in an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding differences. Without attention to these basic values meaningful dialogue and mutual learning are unlikely to occur.”

To that end, Assistant Dean for Multicultural Education Thom Massey is working to form a committee of students, faculty and staff to brainstorm community programming on issues relating to the Israel/Palestine conflict.

“The committee may choose to broaden its focus, but the emphasis on respectful dialogue will be at the core of this committee’s work,” he said in the Office of Student Affairs statement. “Volunteers should contact me immediately (upglobal.stanford.edu), since the committee will meet for the first time next week.”