One day after 31 student organizations at Harvard University published a letter on social media claiming Israel is “entirely responsible” for Hamas terrorists’ murder of 900 Israelis, Jewish student leaders and alumni condemned the university’s handling of the incident and called for a stronger response from Harvard’s administration. 

Harvard President Claudine Gay and other university leaders said in a Monday night statement that the school is “heartbroken by the death and destruction unleashed by the attack by Hamas.” But Jacob Miller, the president of the student board at Harvard Hillel and a former editorial fellow at Jewish Insider, called Harvard’s response a “weak statement [that] fails to capture the gravity of the moment.” He called for the university to “unequivocally condemn these terror attacks, a step they have been unwilling to take thus far.”

“It’s completely wrong to blame Israel for these types of attacks,” Miller told JI on Monday afternoon. “Clearly Israel is not responsible for attacks against its own civilians and it’s also deeply offensive to the Jewish community. I would say it’s antisemitic to blame Israel.” 

Two letters from Harvard students and alumni directly call on the university’s leadership to condemn the anti-Israel statement released by the student organizations, who called themselves the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Groups (PSG). 

One, organized by Harvard Hillel and Harvard Chabad, was signed by more than 2,000 people as of Monday night. “The statement signed by the Palestine Solidarity Committee and dozens of other student groups blaming Israel for the aforementioned attacks is completely wrong and deeply offensive,” the letter states. “There are no justifications for acts of terror as we have seen in the past days. We call on all the student groups who co-signed the statement to retract their signatures from the offensive letter.” 

Signatories include former NBC Universal President Noah Oppenheim, businessman and philanthropist George Rohr, former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, former U.S. solicitor general Seth Waxman, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Hadar President Ethan Tucker and novelists Dara Horn and Allegra Goodman. 

The Harvard chapter of alumni group Alums for Campus Fairness (ACF), is demanding in a letter set to be released today that the school’s leadership directly condemn the anti-Israel statement released by the student organizations. 

“It’s time for the administration to step up and make a statement,” Naomi Steinberg, a 1988 Harvard graduate who spearheaded the counter letter through ACF, told JI.  “Our strategy is completely alum-based to put pressure on the administration.” 

Steinberg’s daughter, Alana, who graduated from Harvard in 2018, added, “The silence is deafening. In not saying anything they are making a statement.” 

The alumni letter, which is addressed to President Gay, states that “ACF-Harvard holds Hamas and Iran fully responsible for this premeditated day of savagery, which will live in infamy. More Jews were murdered on October 7, 2023, than on any single day since the Holocaust. Hamas has killed and kidnapped babies, raped women, and paraded mutilated bodies of Israelis through the streets of Gaza, often accompanied by celebrations.”

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by JI, goes on to call the joint statement from Harvard student groups “shameful and replete with lies and should be rejected by fair-minded and informed people.” A Harvard spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on Monday.

“As pro-Israel alumni, ACF stands with Jewish students and faculty on Harvard’s campus during this difficult time. We call on President Gay, the Board of Overseers, and all Harvard administration and faculty to unequivocally support the Jewish and Israeli members of the Harvard community during the difficult days ahead.” 

“We believe that now is the time for the university to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which would place the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Groups’ statement well within the definition of antisemitism, and would give the university even more grounds for condemnation,” the statement concludes. 

The statement from Harvard’s administration, which came after pressure from several prominent alumni, including members of the U.S. House and Senate, did not condemn or mention the letter from the student groups. 

The student letter, titled “Joint Statement by Harvard Palestine Solidarity Groups on the Situation in Palestine,” was signed by 31 student organizations, including the Ivy League’s affiliate of Amnesty International. It condemned Israel, claiming Hamas’ attack “did not happen in a vacuum,” and that the Israeli government has forced Palestinians to live in an “open-air prison for over two decades.” 

“We, the undersigned student organizations, hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence,” the letter reads. “The apartheid regime is the only one to blame.” 

The letter continued, “Today, the Palestinian ordeal enters into uncharted territory. The coming days will require a firm stand against retaliation. We call on the Harvard community to take action to stop the ongoing annihilation of Palestinians.”

Signatories to the letter include the African American Resistance Organization, the Harvard Islamic Society and Harvard Jews for Liberation.

The statement from Harvard’s administration, which came more than 24 hours after the student letter, said the university has “heard an interest from many in understanding more clearly what has been happening in Israel and Gaza.” 

It also said the school has “no illusion that Harvard alone can readily bridge the widely different views of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but we are hopeful that, as a community devoted to learning, we can take steps that will draw on our common humanity and shared values in order to modulate rather than amplify the deep-seated divisions and animosities so distressingly evident in the wider world.” 

Naomi Steinberg told JI that “ACF-Harvard rejects the equivocating statement made by the Harvard administration, which attempts to draw a moral equivalency between Hamas terrorism and Israel’s defensive operations. The statement blatantly ignores and fails to condemn simple facts, among which are: that Hamas has slaughtered, raped, and taken innocent civilians hostage and is using them as pawns on the international stage.” 

“The administration must clearly and unequivocally condemn Hamas as an antisemitic terrorist organization in order to protect Harvard’s Jewish and pro-Israel students, as well as denounce the statement made by PSG,” Steinberg said. 

On Sunday night, more than 100 students gathered at Harvard Hillel to mourn Israeli victims.  

A vigil for “all civilian lives lost and in solidarity with Palestine” is planned for Tuesday night at the university. 

The letter from the student groups sparked almost immediate scrutiny, including from Lawrence Summers, who served as Harvard president from 2001-2006. “In nearly 50 years of @Harvard affiliation, I have never been as disillusioned and alienated as I am today,” Summers wrote on X on Monday.

Summers, who was the Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton and advised former President Barack Obama, wrote, “The silence from Harvard’s leadership, so far, coupled with a vocal and widely reported student groups’ statement blaming Israel solely, has allowed Harvard to appear at best neutral towards acts of terror against the Jewish state of Israel.”

“Instead, Harvard is being defined by the morally unconscionable statement apparently coming from two dozen student groups blaming all the violence on Israel,” he wrote, adding, “I am sickened.”

Lawmakers who attended Harvard also expressed disappointment in the school’s lack of response. 

Immediately after the Harvard administration released its statement, Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) tweeted, “Harvard’s leadership has failed. The president and deans refuse to denounce the antisemitism of Harvard student groups. Instead of moral clarity and courage, they offer word salad approved by committee. I am ashamed of my alma mater.” 

Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) wrote on X,  “Terrorism is never justified nor someone else’s fault. As hundreds of Israelis and others, including several Americans, remain kidnapped, injured, or dead, the 31 Harvard organizations that signed a letter holding Israel ‘entirely responsible’ for Hamas’ barbarous terrorism should be condemned, as should Harvard leadership for whom silence is complicity.” He added, “I cannot recall a moment when I’ve been more embarrassed by my alma mater.”

Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who graduated from Harvard in 2006, also condemned the letter and called on Harvard to respond. 

“It is abhorrent and heinous that Harvard student groups are blaming Israel for Hamas’ barbaric terrorist attacks that have killed over 700 Israelis,” Stefanik tweeted. “Any voice that excuses the slaughter of innocent women and children has chosen the side of evil and terrorism.

“I am calling on the leadership of Harvard to immediately publicly condemn these vile anti-Semitic statements.”

Jason Furman, head of the U.S. National Economic Council under the Obama administration, wrote on X that the letter is “getting global attention and the sentiments it expresses are egregious.”

“Blaming the victims for the slaughter of hundreds of civilians,” Furman continued. “Absolving the perpetrators of any agency. This is morally ignorant and painful for other members of the community.” 

Political scientist Ian Bremmer posted on X that he “can’t imagine who would want to identify with such a group.” “Harvard parents — talk to your educated kids about this.” 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who attended Harvard Law School, wrote, “What the hell is wrong with Harvard?”

At a Monday pro-Israel rally on the Boston Common, former Harvard Hillel director Rabbi Jonah Steinberg called out his former workplace. “We do not want to see crimson in this city become blood on the hands of those student groups who have signed on to such a despicable letter,” said Steinebrg, who is now the regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in New England.

At universities around the U.S., Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapters released statements similar to the Harvard student group letter, but with far fewer student groups signing on. National SJP called for a Day of Resistance on Thursday at colleges including Penn State, New York University and University of Virginia The group also praised Hamas’ “surprise operation against the Zionist enemy which disrupted the very foundation of Zionist settler society.” 

Jewish Insider’s Capitol Hill reporter Marc Rod contributed reporting. 

Bill de Blasio, the former mayor of New York City, wasn’t sure what to expect when, a week ago, he met with a diverse group of students at Harvard Law School to defend his long-held belief that progressive values are compatible with, if not contingent upon, maintaining support for Israel.

The topic of the event was sure to be met with at least some resistance, particularly on a campus like that of Harvard University, where instances of anti-Israel activism have drawn national scrutiny in recent months.

But de Blasio said he was largely encouraged by the response to his talk, billed as “The Progressive Case for Israel” and held in a classroom at Harvard’s Wasserstein Hall on Tuesday, Feb. 28. “We had a real dialogue, and folks were struck by that,” de Blasio told Jewish Insider in a recent interview. “There was actually a sustained discussion.”

Even as the tenor of the discussion “was at times heated” and “at times a little tense,” he acknowledged, “it was still civil in the scheme of things.”

“I heard views I would call left-wing, views I would call right-wing, views I would call pro-Israel and views I would call pro-Palestine,” de Blasio recounted. “I heard a range in the course of an hour, and no one left the room, no one walked out. People stuck with it. I actually saw some hope in that.”

De Blasio, who recently concluded a semester-long fellowship at Harvard, was asked to speak at the university by the Alliance for Israel at Harvard and the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association, which co-hosted the event.

“Bill de Blasio served for two terms as mayor of New York City, which has the highest Jewish population of any city across the globe,” Marc Heinrich and Ari Spitzer, co-presidents of the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association, wrote in a joint email to JI. “We were honored to co-host Mayor de Blasio and hear him speak to the greater Harvard Law School community about how New York’s Jewish community impacted his core values as a public servant.”

As a veteran Democrat who built strong relationships with Orthodox Jewish leaders in Brooklyn while in office, de Blasio, 61, said he was eager to reflect on such experiences at the Harvard event. “I talked about meeting Holocaust survivors, and, very powerfully, one woman who showed me and my family the tattoo on her arm from Auschwitz,” he said, recalling “a shock of recognition that the violence associated with antisemitism was so real and so recent and, horribly, continuing all over the world.”

“That’s one of the reasons that, to me, we cannot underestimate for a moment the challenges Jewish people face in this world, and why the State of Israel is absolutely needed as a refuge,” de Blasio insisted. “That does not negate other legitimate issues that need to be addressed, and it certainly doesn’t negate the valid concerns of Palestinians. But my central thesis is, progressives are supposed to stand up for oppressed peoples.”

The invitation to speak at Harvard, de Blasio elaborated, was also an opportunity to “dispel” what he described as “a horrible stereotype that suggests that some vast number of progressives are not supportive of the State of Israel.”

“I think that’s just absolutely inaccurate and based on no evidence, and I think it’s important to bear witness,” he added. “There’s a lot of us who support the State of Israel. Many of us don’t agree with the Netanyahu government, but we support the State of Israel.”

Speaking with JI, de Blasio emphasized that he is troubled by the direction of Israel’s right-wing governing coalition led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose effort to advance a controversial judicial overhaul has drawn mass protests across the Jewish state. “I think the actions of the Netanyahu government are extremely worrisome,” he said. “I am worried about the future of democracy in Israel.”

He clarified, however, that such concerns, which have recently been echoed by a growing number of Democratic leaders, are consistent with a pro-Israel outlook. “You can still love Israel and support the State of Israel but acknowledge it has a democracy problem,” he said, “just like I love America and acknowledge my own country has a democracy problem.”

“The notion that sometimes people are accused of antisemitism if they disagree with the current Israeli government is obviously outlandish and needs to be called out,” de Blasio added. “That came up in the dialogue, and I said, ‘I know so many leaders who are deeply respectful of the Jewish experience and happen to disagree with the Israeli government, and there’s no contradiction.’ I think that has to be understood better.”

Last summer, de Blasio raised some eyebrows when he dropped his support for AIPAC during a brief run for an open congressional seat in Lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn. His objection to the pro-Israel lobbying group, which he had long defended, was that its political arm had recently targeted a fellow progressive Democrat, Nina Turner, in a Cleveland-area House primary. 

During that election, Jewish voters in Cleveland had expressed reservations over Turner’s approach to Israel, which drew attack ads from pro-Israel groups including a super PAC affiliated with AIPAC.

In an interview with JI last June, de Blasio defended his decision to denounce AIPAC, noting that he did not agree with all of Turner’s Middle East policy positions but remained loyal to her as a friend. The New York Democrat, who visited Israel during his second year as mayor, maintained that he “can simultaneously be a very proud progressive and a very proud supporter of Israel,” adding, “I don’t see any contradiction.”

The recent event at Harvard was, in many ways, a continuation of that argument, as he reiterated his support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and underscored his opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, among other things.

His remarks came days before Harvard’s Arab Conference, where an outspoken supporter of BDS who has been accused of antisemitism, the former Women’s March leader Linda Sarsour, delivered a keynote address in which she exhorted students to protest “apartheid” Israel. The consulting giant McKinsey & Company, which sponsored the event, announced on Monday that it had “stepped away” from the conference after learning that one speaker, whom it did not identify by name, “had a history of antisemitic comments.”

The weekend speech from Sarsour followed other examples in which debates over Israel have stirred controversy at Harvard. Last year, the editorial board of its student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, endorsed the BDS movement, drawing a sharp rebuke from the student president of Harvard Hillel, among others.  (The paper’s news team covered the Blasio event last week.) In 2016, third-year law student Husam El-Qoulaq, invoked an antisemitism trope during a question-and-answer period at an event with former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

In January, meanwhile, the Harvard Kennedy School said it would grant a fellowship to the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth, after the school’s dean had reportedly vetoed its initial offer amid concerns over Roth’s apparent hostility to Israel.

“I think, in academia, it’s important to respect and hear a diversity of voices,” de Blasio said of the Roth dustup. “That’s my only comment on that.”

As a visiting fellow at the Institute of Politics at the Harvard Kennedy School and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health this past semester, de Blasio said he had been invited to speak with Jewish and Muslim groups but never had the chance to engage with students together, as he did last week.

“It’s great to speak to people of different viewpoints separately, but it’s especially powerful to bring everyone in the room and be like, ‘let’s hash it out,’” he told JI. “I don’t mean that’s like, you know, kumbaya. I don’t mean it’s going to be easy. But if we’re not devoted to that kind of open dialogue and having the tough conversations, then we are accepting of an absolutely unacceptable status quo.”

During the question-and-answer session of the discussion, de Blasio, who is now a visiting fellow at New York University and American University in Washington, D.C., said he heard from both Palestinian and Muslim students who voiced what he characterized as “very real concerns” about the content of his argument.

“What I tried to do was listen and give them the chance to get their whole statement or question out, even if I disagreed with some elements of it, and answer as someone who respects the Muslim community,” he explained. “Beginning with the atmosphere of, I believe, respect and willingness to listen, doesn’t mean watering down my views. But I do think encouraging dialogue, being willing to take tough questions, is valuable unto itself.”

One student attendee, Ben, a second-year law student at Harvard who declined to share his last name, affirmed the former mayor’s assessment in an email shared with JI. “I couldn’t get over the diverse perspectives that we got to hear from: Israelis, Jewish progressives, right-wing evangelicals, pro-Palestine activists,” he said in a message sent to the Harvard Jewish Law Students Association after the event. “It was intense, exciting and thought-provoking.”

De Blasio, for his part, said he considers it a minor if ultimately meaningful achievement that the conversation did not devolve into a shouting match or result in a walk-out.

“This is a microcosm of what we have to do for our country and for the Middle Eastern region in general,” he suggested. “It was a very, very small, localized first step at Harvard, but it was better than never being in the room together.”