Quick summary:
• MIT bans pro-Palestine PhD student Prahlad Iyengar from campus and censors his publication without due process.
• Professor Michel DeGraff is barred from teaching a course on Palestine and faces professional retaliation.
• MIT has extensive ties to the Israeli Ministry of Defense and weapons manufacturers like Lockheed Martin.
• Pro-Palestine resolutions gain significant support on campus but face pushback from the administration.
• Activists accuse MIT of hypocrisy in selectively applying its commitment to academic freedom.
• Broader suppression of pro-Palestine activism is mirrored across U.S. universities.
• Activists pledge to continue fighting for Palestine despite institutional retaliation and national trends.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a bastion of technological and academic innovation, is now at the center of a political controversy as it faces accusations of suppressing pro-Palestine activism on its campus. The institution’s actions have drawn criticism for allegedly violating academic freedom and employing severe disciplinary measures against activists. These measures, which include campus bans, censorship of publications, and professional retaliation, are seen by many as a direct response to growing calls for MIT to divest from Israeli military-linked entities.
Two prominent figures have become the focal points of MIT’s actions: PhD student and union steward Prahlad Iyengar and tenured linguistics professor Dr. Michel DeGraff.
Prahlad Iyengar has faced what he describes as an orchestrated campaign of repression. Following his publication of a critique on pacifism in social movements, MIT banned the student-led publication Written Revolution where the piece appeared. Iyengar was banned from campus—his workplace—without due process, denied union representation, and labeled a “student-terrorist.” The administration cited “concern for campus safety” as justification, sparking protests from students and faculty.
For Dr. Michel DeGraff, a distinguished professor of linguistics with over 28 years at MIT, the consequences have been equally severe. After proposing a course titled “Language & Linguistics in Decolonization & Liberation Struggles in Haiti, Palestine & Israel,” DeGraff’s teaching request was denied. His official status at MIT was altered to “Faculty-at-Large,” his annual pay raise was suspended, and his course proposal was permanently blocked. DeGraff, the only Black professor in his department, has accused MIT of undermining academic freedom and targeting him for his pro-Palestine stance.
At the core of the controversy lies MIT’s extensive ties to Israeli institutions, particularly the Israeli Ministry of Defense and weapons manufacturers like Lockheed Martin and Elbit Systems. Activists on campus have compiled documents showing that MIT directly collaborates on projects tied to military technology, including algorithms for drone bombings and surveillance systems used in Gaza.
MIT has been selective in applying moral standards to its partnerships. After the Russia-Ukraine war broke out in 2022, the university severed ties with Russian institutions. Activists argue that MIT should follow the same precedent and divest from Israeli entities engaged in human rights violations.
The pro-Palestine movement at MIT has gained significant traction. In April, the MIT Graduate Student Union passed a resolution with over 70 percent approval, demanding a ceasefire in Gaza and calling for the university to end financial ties with the Israeli military. A similar resolution passed among undergraduates, with 63 percent of voting students supporting divestment.
The MIT Coalition for Palestine, which includes groups like the MIT Coalition Against Apartheid and MIT Alumni for Palestine, has mobilized broad support for these demands. A petition condemning MIT’s punitive measures against activists and calling for protections for academic freedom has garnered over 2,000 signatures.
MIT’s public commitment to academic freedom stands in stark contrast to its actions against pro-Palestine activists. A 2022 report from the university’s Ad Hoc Working Group on Free Expression emphasized the importance of debate and dissent. Yet, when it comes to discussions on Palestine, these principles appear selectively applied.
“Academic freedom disappears when it comes to Palestine,” said Iyengar, reflecting on MIT’s justification for its actions. Critics argue that MIT uses the rhetoric of academic freedom to defend its ties to Israeli entities while silencing dissenting voices on campus.
Dr. DeGraff’s course proposal was dismissed, with administrators reportedly objecting to terms like “colonialism” to describe Israel. DeGraff emphasized the importance of linguistic scholarship in understanding the narratives used to suppress discussions on Palestine.
MIT’s actions mirror a broader pattern across U.S. universities, where pro-Palestine activism is increasingly met with harsh reprisals. Earlier this year, MIT President Sally Kornbluth faced a Congressional hearing alongside other university leaders, accused of tolerating anti-Semitism on campuses. The hearing, driven by right-wing rhetoric, conflated pro-Palestine slogans like “intifada” with calls for violence—a misrepresentation that activists say stifles legitimate discourse.
The suppression of activism is likely to intensify under a Trump administration, which has appointed figures like Elise Stefanik as Ambassador to the United Nations and Mike Huckabee as Ambassador to Israel. Both have expressed extreme anti-Palestinian views, raising concerns about federal-level crackdowns on campus activism.
Despite this, activists like Iyengar and DeGraff remain steadfast. Iyengar has called for continued advocacy for an arms embargo on Israel, pointing to the moral obligation to resist state violence.
The MIT community warns that the suppression of pro-Palestine activism has broader implications for higher education. “If we allow universities to shut down speech, then that’s it,” said Dr. DeGraff. “Not only in this particular case with Palestine and Israel, but in the future, there won’t be much left in higher education in terms of truly open debate and truly open inquiry into truth.”
To sign the petition demanding that the institution end its campaigns of punishment against both Iyengar and DeGraff, click here.
COMMENTS