Fear and loathing in Nijmegen
A relatively quiet city in Gelderland, one of the Netherlands’ eastern provinces. Home to football club NEC Nijmegen which now proudly, and somewhat unexpectedly, ranks among the top teams in the Dutch league. The setting of the internationally popular Vierdaagse, a hiking event which lasts four days in July. The city where you will find the iconic Nijmegen Bridge, that strategic structure the Allies captured during Operation Market Garden in 1944 – the city of Nijmegen paid a heavy price, as described by military historian Antony Beevor in his book Arnhem: the Battle for the Bridges, 1944. But Nijmegen also is the location where you will find one of the Dutch centers for academic teaching and learning, Radboud University, of which Radboudumc – its academic hospital – is part. And Radboudumc is the focus of this post.
An academic hospital makes a statement
Why Radboudumc, you may ask? Well, because the hospital canceled an event organized by an Israeli scholar employed in the Netherlands. Why did they do this? Because she invited Amit Frenkel, head of Soroka Medical Center’s Intensive Care unit, the largest hospital in Israel’s south, to speak about the medical response in case of large-scale terror attacks. That meant, of course, that Amit Frenkel would speak about Soroka’s response on October 7th – and that is what Radboudumc did not like. In their clarification for refusing to host Amit Frenkel and the organization that invited him, Radboudumc argued that the topic itself was certainly important. However, because Frenkel would discuss Soroka’s response in the context of October 7th, it meant that he would touch upon the broader tragedy of the war between Israel and Hamas. Therefore, it was impossible to approach this topic in a politically neutral manner.
The hospital’s reply and refusal to host Amit Frenkel, who has treated Gazan patients as well, has led to a wave of indignation and criticism, while pro-Palestinian activists, naturally, have praised the decision. Dutch daily De Telegraaf has reported that Radboudumc’s decision will be adopted by academic hospitals in Leiden and Amsterdam. So, let me try to tackle this latest spectacle of political neutrality.
Political neutrality: really?
First of all, the topic is important. There have been other terror attacks which caused multiple casualties in the past – September 11, 2001, the Madrid train bombings in 2004, the July 2005 bombings in the United Kingdom, and several terror attacks in France. All of these attacks were mass casualty events, which means that first responders have to react in a certain way and hospitals will have to apply triage and organize and communicate very efficiently, as they work to absorb wave after wave of casualties. Therefore, Frenkel’s lecture is important in an academic sense as well, as his insights and explanations in terms of procedures used by Soroka on October 7th could provide valuable information of use to other physicians, for instance in the Netherlands. Soroka Medical Center is a massive hospital that serves the entire Israeli south. If you have ever volunteered with Magen David Adom in the south, you will have noticed that nearly all cases, whether in the Otef or the Negev, will be taken straight to Soroka. And on October 7th, it absorbed waves of casualties without respite, while simultaneously being in the rocket fire zone targeted by Hamas. The way medical professionals dealt with this situation could be useful to the wider medical community. Moreover, the response to such a mass casualty event might be useful in other difficult scenarios as well, for instance, in case of an environmental disaster, such as mass floodings – the Netherlands suffered from such an environmental disaster in the province of Zeeland in 1953. But, yes, the attack was carried out by Hamas, together with PIJ and some smaller factions. The word “Hamas” might be mentioned by Frenkel, and that is what Radboud UMC feared. So, the benefit of gaining useful knowledge was scrapped, in order to please some pro-Palestinian activists who are determined to introduce politics into everything that involves an Israeli. Bravo.
Radboudumc, however, has not acted in isolation. It is part of Radboud University, where anti-Israel sentiments run particularly high. There have been multiple reports of Jewish and Israeli students feeling unsafe since October 7th. Campus protests are a regular fixture, calls for boycotting Israel and Israeli academic institutions have been loud and have even garnered some success, even though the activists comprise a relatively small portion of the student body and academic staff. On its website Radboud University proudly lists all of the academic partnerships the institution has to offer. But in two cases cooperation has been suspended until further notice: it concerns Russia and Israel.
Based on this information, it would seem that Radboud University’s desire for peace carries the day, which is why these countries have been boycotted. But the reality is quite different. First of all, Russia was sanctioned by the Dutch government after it invaded Ukraine. Because of this and the urgent call from the then-Dutch minister of Education, Welfare and Science, Radboud decided to suspend its partnerships with Russian academic institutions. Would Radboud have made this decision if the call had not come from The Hague? I have my doubts, especially considering the fact that Radboud did not suspend its partnerships after the actions of pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine – who were actively supported by Russian military elements – nor after Russia had annexed the Crimean peninsula in 2014. In the case of Israel, it decided to suspend partnerships with Israeli institutions without a recommendation from the Dutch Education Ministry. On the contrary, it decided to buckle in the face of pressure from students, activists, and parts of its academic staff. Also, you will be happy to know that partnerships with two other countries continue to this day: China and Indonesia. The treatment of Uyghurs does not seem to be an issue for anyone at Radboud, students and staff alike, and in the case of Indonesia there are two long-running conflicts that continue to this day, ever since the Netherlands gave up control of the Dutch East Indies, a part of its former colonial empire and Indonesia’s predecessor. In this case, the Indonesian state’s conflict with the Republik Maluku Selatan (RMS) – which claims the islands of the South Moluccas for its own state – and West Papua – called Irian Jaya in Indonesia – do not seem to have any effect on Radboud at all. Despite the fact that the RMS government in exile has been based in the Netherlands since 1966 and Dutch citizens of West Papuan descent still try to raise awareness of the plight of their fellow countrymen, Radboud has no issue cooperating with Indonesian institutions. Sometimes, politics do not matter, apparently.
Selective freedom of expression
Another issue would be freedom of expression. Criticism of the current Israeli government – more than valid in my opinion – certain Israeli policies, and the need for Palestinian input in academia, is not a problem. After all, academia should be an arena where you could hold debates, even if they might be heated sometimes, as it provides the opportunity to reach new insights and perhaps provides an opportunity for two sides to understand each other better and to come to some understandings, even if they might disagree in general. And freedom of expression is certainly provided to pro-Palestinian activists. Campus protests have been a regular fixture on Dutch campuses. On some occasions, these have turned violent, as “activists” trashed a number of the University of Amsterdam’s faculty buildings in 2024. In the case of Amsterdam, pro-Palestinian slogans have been accompanied by such wonderful and empty statements, such as “defund the police.” Just imagine if they would have their way. Where would they go if, in the worst case, they would at some point in their lives be robbed or assaulted by someone? Where would they turn? Or perhaps they aspire to create some sort of Hobbesian world where everyone fights one another all the time. Anyway, none of these protesters have had to pay for the damages they have caused, yet Amsterdam’s municipal workers, who have to get up before the crack of dawn, had to clean up the mess they had left behind.
In addition, many Dutch and Palestinian voices in support of the Palestinian cause have been given a platform at Dutch academic institutions. Numerous Dutch physicians who have worked with Palestinian colleagues in Gaza or work or have worked for NGOs operating in Gaza have held lectures, where they have decried the damage to and pressure on Gaza’s healthcare system. Palestinian medical students can raise awareness about personal tragedies and discuss the dire situation in Gaza. All these voices tend to be exclusively critical of Israel, as they neglect to mention the role of Hamas and the fact that it embeds itself in the Strip’s infrastructure, as well as under it. They have held sit-ins for Gaza, walkouts for Gaza, and demanded that hospital boards sever all ties with Israeli hospitals, which would terminate research programs that could provide medical solutions for patients worldwide – yes, information that could be accessible to Palestinian physicians as well. And, yes, several examples have shown that awareness events have been hosted on hospital grounds. I would imagine that any pro-Palestinian event taking place on Radboudumc’s grounds would not be an issue at all for its board, despite the fact that this would be political. But that is the point: these events would probably not be disrupted. But a pro-Israel event has been disrupted at Radboud University in the past, which is probably why the board decided to cancel Amit Frenkel’s lecture. It has nothing to do with a pacifist stance, it is born out of fear.
Take October 2024, when a pro-Palestinian – I would say anti-Israel – event was organized by one of Radboud University’s social geographers, Harry Pettit. He had invited Samidoun activist Mohammed Khatib to hold a lecture on campus grounds. Did Radboud University prohibit Khatib from giving his lecture? Yes and no. Yes, but only because the Dutch government had prohibited him from entering the Netherlands. In addition, Khatib still held his lecture via a video call and the university did not cancel Pettit’s little anti-Israel gathering.
Fast forward to March 2025. The freedom of expression would be tested when well-known pro-Israel Syrian activist Rawan Osman would hold a lecture on Radboud University’s campus grounds – Radboudumc claimed they were unable to host her. If Harry Pettit could hold his little gathering in the name of freedom of expression, then Osman’s voice should be heard as well. Wrong. Because that is the issue with most of the extreme pro-Palestinian activists: they do not want to hear the other side. In my opinion, pro-Palestinian would mean that you disagree with pro-Israel voices or voices sympathetic to Israel, but that you are willing to debate them. But this is why I refer to certain activists as anti-Israel, as their stance implies that anything Israeli or supportive of Israel should be banned. Osman’s talk was disrupted several times. She was allowed to finish her speech, but was harassed outside on her way to a car that escorted her from campus. Pettit had attended a protest against her outside the hall, while wearing a face mask, and went on to praise these “righteous” students who had disrupted her.
So, no, Radboudumc’s flimsy excuse does not pass the test of credibility. It is a clear case of freedom of expression for one, but nor for the other. And it is quite clear that it fears disruption by certain activists, if Frenkel would be allowed to hold his lecture. It is a testament of caving in to fear, not some lofty statements about neutrality. It is the sacrifice of sharing academic research on the altar of political activism.
And about Mr. Pettit: he has both disputed and excused Hamas’ atrocities on October 7th, has branded anyone who disagrees with him or criticizes his statements, whole or in part, as “genocide supporters,” dismissed and ridiculed grievances of Jewish and Israeli students on campus, and called for Israel to be dismantled. When asked what would happen to Israelis, he simply stated that the Palestinians would have to decide what to do with them. This is rich: some academician in Nijmegen is willing to aid in the destruction of Israel, but once his goal is achieved refuses to take any responsibility for the fate of Israelis. What if this meant that a return to some sort of degradation, humiliation, and random pogroms associated with dhimmitude would be established? Or the overwhelming majority would be kicked out or slaughtered, while some token number of people would be allowed to stay? In addition, what would happen to Israeli Druze and Israel’s Arab population? In such a scenario, I would fear the worst, but that does not matter to Pettit. And, in the case of my paternal family members, does that mean that they would have to return to the “warm and loving embrace” of Iraq? Wait, perhaps they would have to “go back to Poland.” Of course, none of this is a concern for a social geographer who became an “expert” on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict overnight.
Hypocrisy masquerading as neutrality
It is a sad reality and I feel sorry that Dutch hospital doors are shut in Amit Frenkel’s face in such a harsh way. Mr. Pettit applauded Radboud’s decision and took aim at Dutch journalist Wierd Duk, when he stated that he would host Frenkel. Pettit has stated that he has been vilified on social media, which is something that should be condemned, of course. Yet, it then surprises me that he has no issue vilifying a Dutch journalist he clearly hates, by comparing him to Joseph Goebbels.
In addition, Soroka offers valuable medical services to Israeli citizens in the south, both Jewish and Arab. It is a place where patients are brought in for treatment by ambulance teams, both Jewish and Arab, who are then treated by nurses and doctors, who are also both Jewish and Arab. These medical professionals do their work diligently and serve their community on a daily basis. And on October 7th they performed under high pressure and during the war between Israel and Iran, Soroka suffered a direct impact from an Iranian ballistic missile. Finally, Soroka is where many hostages were treated, after they had been released in deals. And hostages that were rescued, such as Farhan al-Qadi, were received and treated as well.
Radboudumc’s decision exposes its fear of anti-Israel activists who have drawn a line in the sand: no Israelis will be hosted on their watch. Radboud University could have offered an alternative by hosting Frenkel on their grounds, but they remain silent. So much for the free discussion of academic knowledge.
