There are a lot of people making the argument right now that the American Studies Association's boycott of Israeli universities is wrong because it violates academic freedom. This is not, however, the best or even the most important argument against the boycott. A stronger argument would have been, that the ASA boycott is wrong because it is detached from the reality of the facts and history of the region. It is a fact that Israel has made three good faith attempts to end the so-called occupation in this century. In 2000, at Camp David, Prime Minister Barak offered to withdraw from most of the West Bank and all of Gaza, which offer was rejected by Arafat in favor of starting the Second Intifada. In 2005 Israel began a process of unilateral withdrawal, which would have likely continued, had it not been for the election of Hamas in Gaza. In 2008 Prime Minister Olmert again offered to leave most of the West Bank, but Abbas never responded to this offer. For those who, like the ASA, are apparently oblivious to recent history, it's described very well here: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112617/israel-palestine-and-end-two-state-solution
If any one of those overtures had been accepted, there would be no "occupation" today. And the alleged root cause of all evil in the West Bank, settlement construction, would not be ongoing. The allegations that Israel would not allow "some" professors into the West Bank (by which I assume boycott proponents are referring to noted Israel-hater Noam Chomsky) would be moot. Even now, as the ASA took its vote, negotiations are taking place between Israel and the PA -- negotiations that Israel had to bribe the PA, by releasing Palestinian murderers from jail, just to attend. So it is not very clear what, exactly, the ASA would like Israel to do at this point. What is clear is the goal of the BDS movement, at whose behest the ASA acted, and that is, to bring about the end of the world's only Jewish state.
As this issue is being taken up next by the Modern Language Association, and presumably others to come, it would behoove opponents of these boycott motions to speak up about the real reason this boycott is wrong.
As an aside, perhaps it is not surprising that the ASA is oblivious to the facts of recent Israeli history, as the ASA does not even seem to be well aware of the facts of its own existence, and is unable to accurately name its own institutional members. At least three institutions listed by the ASA as members have denied membership in the organization, as is reported here: http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/12/willamette-rejects-israel-boycott-denies-being-institutional-member-of-american-studies-assoc/
