The University of Utah signed a partnership memorandum of understanding (MOU) last month with Ariel University, an Israeli institution located in the West Bank. While university officials describe the agreement as a routine academic exchange, some students and faculty have raised concerns about its timing and potential political implications amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine.
MOU
Ariel University is an Israeli institution located on the West Bank, an area designated by the UN as one of two disconnected sections of Palestine, the other being Gaza. The university exists as part of a settlement, illegal under UN law. Israel claims this region as part of Israel and seeks to occupy it through the establishment of such settlements.
The MOU itself is a single page, stating that “cooperation and development of activities may extend to any fields and subjects in which the two institutions may identify shared interests.” The only identified field for mutual cooperation at this time is scientific exchange in fields such as data science and AI.
The agreement has not yet been implemented. Specifically, the MOU calls for the appointment of a liaison tasked with coordinating research and exchanges.
In a statement to the Chronicle, Associate Director of Public Relations & Communications Heather King said the U’s liaison “has not been identified yet,” and that the timeline and job duties of a liaison have not yet been determined.
King said this five-year agreement was conceived “before Israel launched its major offensive in Gaza,” still conceivably after the October 7 Hamas incursion into Israel.
Faculty response
Rachel Hayes-Harb, a linguistics professor at the U and member of the Utah chapter of Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FJP), discussed the MOU as a private individual and not on behalf of the University.
Hayes-Harb described the U’s chapter of FJP as “a group of faculty that care deeply about issues related to Palestine. We’re committed to supporting the students in their resistance. One of the big opportunities for FJP is that we’re educators. We can use our expertise both in the Middle East, we can leverage the expertise of the U faculty to effect change.”
A press release from the U chapter of the FJP stated, “Partnering with an illegal settler university built and run by the same people perpetrating what President Randall correctly called a ‘genocide’ in 2024 is a mystifying decision on the part of University of Utah leadership, especially under current conditions of intense scrutiny of federal funding, which this decision puts at risk.”
Hayes-Harb declined to speculate on the U’s motives in signing the MOU, but did question the U’s decision-making process, namely the lack of faculty input.
“I think the message it sends to the U community is given that, to my knowledge, none of our experts on the Middle East were consulted, [the decision] undermines the University’s goal of having a faculty who is seen as ‘experts.’”
This contrasts with the U’s original statement, that “MOUs usually are initiated by faculty as a result of relationships they have developed around the world in their research, teaching and mentorship activities.”
Legal implications
Utah FJP specifically claimed any partnership with Ariel University represents a breach of HB 261, a state law passed in 2024 that “prohibits an institution of higher education, the public education system and a governmental employer from taking certain actions and engaging in discriminatory practices.”
The law addressed overt political activities by university staff, including voicing support for transgender individuals following the passage of bathroom bills in that same legislative session. A neutrality guide for Utah institutions of higher education stated institutions like the U “[do] not take positions on political, social or cultural controversies, public debates or flashpoint moments.”
Hayes-Harb said the same restrictions should apply to any partnership with Ariel University.
“The U is willing to engage in deeply political issues,” Hayes-Harb said. “This issue is so controversial in the U.S., internationally, among the Israeli people. This is NOT a neutral political issue, and given our directive to be neutral, it certainly appears that the neutrality demanded really only targets pro-Palestinian positions.”
Associate Professor of Law at the S.J. Quinney College of Law, Daniel Aaron, provided input.
“First, the U is bound by federal and state anti-discrimination laws as well as by university policy,” Aaron said. He indicated further research would be necessary to determine if Ariel University, and therefore the partnership, bars certain categories of students.
According to a BBC article, the university “closes admissions to Palestinians in the West Bank.”
“At minimum, it seems the university could be running afoul of anti-discrimination law, as joint programming could be closed to particular groups of students based on a protected characteristic,” Aaron said.
Ariel University and the U both claim Ariel admits Palestinian students, specifically “Palestinian and Muslim residents of Israel.” Semantically, this language refers to ethnic Palestinians and practicing Muslims who hold Israeli citizenship as opposed to Palestinian ID holders, who are residents of Palestine. The distinction could have implications under HB 261’s anti-discrimination provisions.
While Hayes-Harb said FJP has no current plans to pursue legal action over the alleged HB 261 violation, the organization is currently circulating a petition to terminate the MOU.
“Though the U had hundreds if not thousands of universities it could establish a new partnership with, its choice here could be construed, and is often being construed, as sending a message on a controversial topic,” Aaron said.
Editor’s note, July 1, 12:07 p.m. • A quote from Daniel Aaron was removed at his request to avoid misrepresenting his expertise. The article has been updated accordingly.
