The tensions stirred by the calls for Stanford’s divestment from Israel made last year by members of Students Confronting Apartheid by Israel (SCAI) and some ASSU Senators have reemerged. A boycott of Israeli Universities passed in May by the British University and College Union (BUCU) has prompted protest throughout the United States, raising the question — where does Stanford stand?

The New York Times ran a full-page advertisement on Aug. 8, sponsored by the American Jewish Commission (AJC), with a statement by Columbia President Lee Bollinger denouncing the British boycott of Israeli Universities.

The Times ad included a list of almost 300 university presidents who endorsed Bollinger’s statement, which criticized the boycott and the BUCU for “hold[ing] intellectual exchange hostage to the political disagreements of the moment” and stated that “if the British UCU is intent on pursuing its deeply misguided policy, then it should add Columbia to its boycott list, for we do not intend to draw distinctions between our mission and that of the universities you are seeking to punish.”

Notable supporters of the petition included UC-Berkeley President Robert J. Birgeneau, Northwestern President Henry S. Bienen and University of Pennsylvania President Amy Gutmann.

Noticeably absent from the list of signatories, however, was Stanford President John Hennessy.

Jeff Wachtel, special assistant to the President, told The Daily in an email that Hennessy had already signed a similar petition opposing the boycott.

“President Hennessy joined in a much more widely and earlier circulated petition,” Wachtel said, “which includes not just presidents, but also Nobel Prize Winners and other distinguished academics.”

The earlier petition included signatures from Economics Prof. Emeritus Kenneth Arrow, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and other Stanford professors and academics. The petition has over 10,000 signatures and was sponsored by the Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME).

A number presidents who signed the earlier SPME petition were also included on Bollinger’s list, including Gutmann and MIT President Susan Hockfield.

The SPME petition stated that its participants “will regard ourselves as Israeli academics and decline to participate in any activity from which Israeli academics are excluded.”

Though Hennessy has made his opposition to the BUCU’s boycott clear, the recent New York Times ad has sparked debate on campus, with some students arguing that Hennessy should do more to stand up to the academic boycott and others celebrating that Hennessy, while personally opposed to the boycott, is not making an effort to align Stanford with ARC petition.

“We were certainly disappointed to see that President Hennessy did not sign the statement supporting Israeli universities and condemning the boycott,” said Andrew Ehrich ‘09, president of the Jewish Student Association.

Ehrich acknowledged that “the situation in the Middle East is incredibly complex,” but he said that “a fair and final peace can only be reached if all sides reach out to each other.”

“Condemning some of the leading educational and research institutions,” Ehrich added, “serves only to inflame rhetoric and distort the issue.”

Other students students supported Hennessy’s decision to refrain from signing the AJC petition.

“SCAI appreciates President Hennessy’s objectivity regarding the American Jewish Committee’s petition censuring Britain’s University and College Union’s consideration to boycott Israeli academia,” Fadi Quran ‘10, co-president of Students Confronting Apartheid by Israel, said in a statement to The Daily.

Quran acknowledged that SCAI chose to exclude academic boycotts from its campaign, but noted that “we do understand the motivations behind the [BUCU’s] call to deliberate the boycott of Israeli universities.”

Quran said that it was the SCAI’s opinion that their approach, which is “divestment from corporations that directly violate human rights and support oppression in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories [...] is the most appropriate way towards peace therein.”

ASSU Senator Stuart Baimel ‘09 began circulating a petition asking Hennessy to sign the Bollinger statement.

Baimel acknowledged that Hennessy’s signature on the SPME petition was important; however, he reiterated that he would continue efforts petitioning Hennessy to the AJC petition as well.

“There’s a clear difference between the two petitions,” Baimel said. “The SPME is individual — Hennessy personally agrees to boycott the boycott, so to speak.”

“The Bollinger one is more powerful,” Baimel continued, “in that it commits the entire university to boycott the boycott, [and] puts the whole weight of Stanford University in opposition to the BUCU’s attempt to stifle academic debate.”