Antisemitism at Oxford: A Debate That Revealed a Dark Reality

By Dr. Tim Orr

I have spoken twice at Oxford University, once to a Muslim audience and once to a Christian audience. Being at Oxford, I expected an environment of intellectual honesty and mutual respect. Instead, what I am seeing is antisemitism play out in real-time. According to the Jerusalem Post, during a recent debate at the Oxford Union, a question was posed to participants and pro-Palestinian opponents regarding whether they would have reported Hamas's plans to authorities to prevent the October 7 massacre. According to reports, 75% of those asked indicated they would not have reported such plans.

This debate has sparked significant controversy. Hundreds of academics have written to Lord Hague, the newly elected chancellor of Oxford University, expressing concerns that the debate, which included praise for the October 7 attacks on Israel, may have violated the law. The open letter criticized the "inflammatory rhetoric, aggressive behavior, and intimidation" present during the event.

Jewish students were visibly afraid to attend the debate, and those who did face open hostility. The atmosphere was charged with hatred, making it clear that this wasn’t just about Israel—it was about silencing Jewish voices altogether.

The blatant double standard was impossible to ignore. While insults against Jews were tolerated, any criticism of Palestinian leadership was met with outrage. Haddad’s photos of hostages were trampled, and his pleas for coexistence were dismissed. Meanwhile, those who glorified violence were celebrated. This wasn’t just a debate gone wrong—it was a display of unbridled bigotry.

When Debate Becomes Intimidation

The motion on the table—“Israel is an apartheid genocidal regime”—was incendiary enough. But what shocked me most was the behavior in the room. Three-quarters of the audience voted that they would not have reported Hamas’s plans for the October 7th massacre to authorities. Let that sink in: educated individuals at one of the world’s most prestigious universities said they wouldn’t have tried to stop an act of terror that left over 1,200 Israelis murdered in cold blood.

This wasn’t just a political stance. It was a moral failure on an almost incomprehensible scale. Could you imagine these same people saying they wouldn’t have warned authorities about 9/11? And yet, at Oxford, this was treated as just another opinion.

The atmosphere wasn’t just intellectually dishonest—it was hostile. Jewish students reported feeling too intimidated to attend. Those who did were met with jeers, heckling, and outright bullying. It wasn’t debate; it was a trial, with Jewish voices cast as the accused before an audience that had already reached its verdict.

The Courageous Voices of Reason

The pro-Israel side brought some remarkable speakers: Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of a Hamas co-founder who turned away from terrorism; Natasha Hausdorff, a respected international lawyer; and Yoseph Haddad, an Arab-Israeli advocate for coexistence. Their arguments were clear, factual, and compelling, offering a vision of peace and coexistence that should have inspired thoughtful engagement.

Instead, they were met with relentless hostility. Haddad, who spoke about Arab-Muslim hostages taken by Hamas, brought photos to highlight their plight. Those photos were ripped from his hands and stomped on by attendees. Jewish speakers faced insults, interruptions, and open contempt. Meanwhile, those supporting the motion described the October 7th massacre—where innocent men, women, and children were brutally murdered—as "heroic." This was met with applause.

What kind of intellectual environment allows the glorification of mass murder? What does it say about a university when hatred is tolerated and celebrated? These are questions Oxford and academia, more broadly, must urgently answer.

A Stage for Open Antisemitism

This wasn’t just anti-Israel sentiment—it was outright antisemitism. Outside the Union, protesters chanted, “Zionists are not welcome in Oxford.” Inside, Jewish speakers and students were subjected to insults, intimidation, and a level of hostility that left no doubt about the underlying bigotry.

The debate chair’s actions only made things worse. While insults against Jews were met with silence, Mosab Hassan Yousef was almost ejected for calling out the destructive leadership of Hamas. The double standard was glaring: one side was given free rein to spread hate, while the other was silenced for speaking the truth.

Even the debate’s framing was biased. The motion accused Israel of apartheid and genocide, setting the stage for a one-sided discussion. The president of the Oxford Union, who chaired the debate, openly supported the motion. From start to finish, this wasn’t a debate but an exercise in silencing dissent.

What This Reveals About Society

The events at Oxford are a symptom of a much larger problem. Antisemitism is rebranding itself as social justice, and it’s gaining traction in places that should know better. The argument often goes like this: “We’re not against Jews; we’re against Zionism.” But when chants of “From the river to the sea” are heard alongside cheers for terrorist acts, the mask slips. This isn’t about policy disagreements—it’s about erasing the Jewish state and, by extension, the Jewish people.

This trend isn’t confined to academia. It’s part of a broader societal shift where hatred is normalized under the guise of activism. Institutions that once stood for intellectual rigor and moral clarity are becoming platforms for extremism. The consequences are chilling, not just for Jews but for anyone who values truth and justice.

What Must Be Done

There are two lessons we need to take away from this. First, we must keep telling the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it makes people. The Jewish people have always stood strong in the face of hatred, and this moment is no different. Strength and clarity are essential. If the facts are on our side—and they are—we need to articulate them unapologetically.

Second, we must recognize that change won’t come from these elite bubbles. Increasingly, the masses are waking up to the hypocrisy and double standards of their so-called intellectual leaders. Grassroots movements, social media, and platforms outside the control of these institutions are where real change can happen.

A Call to Action

The events at Oxford are a wake-up call. They show us that antisemitism isn’t a relic of the past—it’s alive and thriving, even in the places we least expect it. But we don’t have to accept this. By standing strong, speaking out, and refusing to back down, we can push back against the tide of hatred. This isn’t just about defending Israel or the Jewish people—it’s about standing for basic human decency. The question is, will we rise to meet this challenge? The answer begins with us.

Tim Orr is a scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant with over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six degrees, including a master’s in Islamic studies from the Islamic College in London. Tim taught Religious Studies for 15 years at Indiana University Columbus and is now a Congregations and Polarization Project research associate at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis. He has spoken at universities, including Oxford University, Imperial College London, the University of Tehran, Islamic College London, and mosques throughout the U.K. His research focuses on American Evangelicalism, Islamic antisemitism, and Islamic feminism, and he has published widely, including articles in Islamic peer-reviewed journals and three books.