Vol. 30, No.4                                                      March 26, 2006

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE . . .

In the most recent of her endless stream of "contract updates," our Dear Leader, PSC president Barbara Bowen, made a startling promise: She will start a campaign "to set a different political and economic agenda . . . once this contract is settled."

In other words---the Dear Leader believes that the 15% of its budget the PSC spends on non-union related political and international questions isn't enough, and envisions devoting even more resources to her future global crusades. The Patriot Returns has some questions to help all union members determine the precise nature of what the Dear Leader has described as her "understanding of global politics."

. . . ISRAEL NEEDS NO ENEMIES

One obvious element of the Dear Leader's "understand of global politics": an increasingly noticeable anti-Israel bent that surely will not help the PSC win favor with New York politicians, of either party.

October 2001: The Dear Leader is one of 12 "principal members" who found a group opposing a U.S. military strike against the Taliban, called New York City Labor Against the War (NYCLAW). The Dear Leader also casts the sole negative vote among 38 vice presidents of the AFT on an AFT resolution expressing support for the U.S. effort to oust the Taliban. Along with PSC "International Committee" chair Renate Bridenthal, . . . the Dear Leader signs a public letter alleging, "The United States and its allies have already inflicted widespread suffering on innocent people in . . . Israel and the Occupied Territories."

April 2002: Renate Bridenthal---whose "International Committee" chairmanship designated her the PSC's chief foreign policy spokesperson---signs a public statement concluding, "Only by joining in solidarity with the victims of U.S. military power can we in the rich countries defend whatever universal values we claim to cherish." At the time, the only U.S. combat forces in operation were in Afghanistan. Neither Bridenthal nor the Dear Leader have since explained how "joining in solidarity" with the Taliban would have advanced "universal values."

July 2002: Bridenthal signs a public statement asserting, "The U.S. bears a special responsibility for the current tragic impasse [in the Middle East], by virtue of our massive economic and military support for the Israeli government: $500 per Israeli citizen per year. Our country has an extraordinary leverage on Israeli policy, if only our government would dare to use it."

Spring 2003: According to reports filed with the US Department of Labor, the PSC donates $1000 to the parent organization of NYCLAW.

Spring 2004: According to reports filed with the US Department of Labor, the PSC doubles its NYCLAW contribution, to $2000.

March 2004: The Dear Leader names NYCLAW a "Friend of CUNY." This move comes just after NYCLAW proposes that all labor bodies (1) demand "the right of all Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and land"; (2) "demand an end to U.S. military and economic support for Israeli Apartheid"; and (3) "divest all labor investments in Israeli Apartheid."

April 2004: With the Dear Leader as one of its 12 founding "principal members," NYCLAW teams with a Palestinian right-of-return group called Al-Awda New York to create "Labor for Palestine," which urges full divestment from Israel and compares Israel to apartheid-era South Africa.

April 2005: TAUWP  (a PSC sister union) calls on the University of Wisconsin to divest from companies doing defense business with Israel; a British union, the AUT, announces a boycott of two Israeli universities. The PSC takes no public position against either proposal.

May 2005: Under pressure from CUNY faculty as to her surprising timidity on the boycott issue, the Dear Leader rationalizes her silence with excuses that sound as if they came from a third grader.

February 2006: "International Committee" chair Bridenthal announces a PSC conference to explore the relationship between such international developments as U.S. military aid to Israel and CUNY profs' contract woes. Labor for Palestine schedules a "New York-Regional Conference on Divestment," with NYCLAW working to develop divestment strategies in the US labor movement.

March 2006: The Dear Leader issues the e-mail referenced above, promising to increase ideological mobilizations if and when she signs a contract. The New Caucus e-mails the CUNY community saying that those who object to the PSC's spending union dues on anti-Israel groups like NYCLAW believe in a "conservative political agenda."

It's hard to miss the patterns here. (1) Since 2001, the PSC has associated with elements in the extreme fringe of the anti-Israel movement; (2) the Dear Leader really seems to believe that part of her "global" campaign to get a better contract involves championing an anti-Israel foreign policy.

TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE DEAR LEADER:

1.) Do you believe that the PSC's financial contributions to anti-Israel groups will enhance the union's standing with state and city Democratic Party leaders on whose support CUNY relies?

2.) Were you, as a founder of NYCLAW, aware of the creation of Labor for Palestine when you designated NYCLAW a "Friend of CUNY"?

3.) Did you endorse NYCLAW's April 2004 proposal regarding Israel? Do you and the New Caucus endorse the proposal now?

4.) If you have endorsed the NYCLAW proposal, what steps have you taken to promote divestment in "Israeli Apartheid"? If you do not plan to endorse the NYCLAW proposal, are you, and the entire PSC, complicit in "Israel's War on the Palestinian people"---as the NYCLAW statement describes opponents of divestment?

5.) Will the PSC, through its International and/or Solidarity Committees, be engaged or involved with the proposed LFP/NYCLAW "New-York Regional Conference on Divestment"?

6.) Will you provide a complete and candid accounting of your support for such anti-Israel groups as NYCLAW, LFP, and Al-Awda beyond the union dues that you already transferred to these organizations?

7.) Since Al-Awda continues to support boycotts of Israeli academics, will you once and for all take an open stand against such boycotts, as the Anti-Defamation League has urged labor leaders to do?

8.) Given the historic part that the City University has played in providing higher education for generations of Jewish New Yorkers, and the prominent roles that Jewish faculty, students and staff have played in its intellectual and institutional life, do you and the New Caucus still consider NYCLAW to be a true "Friend of CUNY"?

9.) Do you and the New Caucus endorse the 2005 call of your Wisconsin sister union to divest from companies doing business with the Israeli Defense Forces?

10.) Given your oft-stated claims of "openness" and "democracy," will you formally poll the membership before transferring any more PSC dues money to anti-Israel organizations?

THE MESSAGE . . .

The issue is not the merits of the anti-Israel musings from key New Caucus leaders. The question is a pragmatic one: given political and social conditions in New York City and New York State, who could possibly believe that embracing radical anti-Israel efforts will improve the PSC's bargaining position in Albany or Gracie Mansion? The Dear Leader believes that it will, and promises to do more if and when we get a contract. Does a majority of the CUNY faculty agree with her?

Sharad Karkhanis, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus

Forthcoming issues of The Patriot may be accessed at http://www.patriotreturns.com/.
Archived editions are available at http://www.patriotreturns.com/archive.htm.