LONDON, 06 March. - (ANA) - The British Society for Middle Eastern Studies demands OU reverse its decision, linking the incident to a wider pattern of censorship of pro-Palestine voices.

 

The British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES) has accused the Open University (OU) of undermining academic freedom by agreeing to drop the term "ancient Palestine" from its teaching materials under pressure from the pro-Israel lobbying group UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI).

 

In an email sent to the university on Thursday, BRISMES’ Committee on Academic Freedom demanded that the OU retract its commitments, reinstate the term where scholars deem it appropriate, and protect its staff from what it describes as political interference.

 

The dispute traces back to the OU’s flagship module titled "Discovering the Arts and Humanities", which references "ancient Palestine" in relation to numerous historical events covered.

 

In December 2025, UKLFI, acting on a complaint from a Jewish student, contacted the OU arguing that the phrase was "problematic" given "contemporary political sensitivities".

 

BRISMES defends the term as a standard, uncontroversial term in historical scholarship for the Roman province at the time, arguing it carries no modern political baggage.

 

The university’s response, signed by Executive Dean of Arts & Social Sciences Professor Adrienne Scullion, conceded the term’s academic validity but pledged revisions to the materials.

 

She also assured UKLFI the university would not be using "ancient Palestine” in future content, again claiming its "problematic" status in today’s context.

 

Dr. Lewis Turner, BRISMES Co-Vice President and Chair of its Committee on Academic Freedom, frames this as more than a terminological spat.

 

"The complaint by UK Lawyers for Israel comes in the context of a widespread clampdown on freedom of expression and academic freedom with regard to Palestine, especially since October 2023", Turner told The New Arab.

 

He warned that the OU’s concessions "risk setting a dangerous precedent that would make external lobbying groups feel empowered to demand that universities change their teaching materials in accordance with their preferred political perspective".

 

The letter invokes the High Education (Freedom of Speech Act) of 2023, which mandates protection for lawful academic expression, including speech that may be deemed controversial by some groups.

 

BRISMES notes the OU’s own 17 February internal statement denying any restriction on academic freedom, yet criticises staff for potentially feeling "unduly pressured by senior management" to comply.

 

It ties the episode to broader patterns of "erasure" amid Israel’s war on Gaza, urging the OU to publish its correspondence with UKLFI and review internal safeguards.

 

Dr. Turner reinforced this legal angle, saying "Academics must be free to use the terminology that they deem appropriate, based on their expertise".

 

He added, "While universities may face particular challenges at times of heightened political sensitivity, it is precisely in such moments that universities must hold firm to their core values and defend academic freedom".

 

UKLFI celebrated the OU’s response as a win against what they claimed was historical distortion, with director Caroline Turner stating it addressed concerns over the "erasure of Jewish history".

 

Yet critics, including BRISMES, decry it as censorship of Palestinian narratives.

 

The Middle Eastern Studies body flagged increased pressure by pro-Israel lobby groups on UK universities, including at Queen Mary University of London which instructed several members of staff to remove materials described as pro-Palestine or anti-Israel.

 

This comes amid attempts by pro-Israel lobby groups to instil the adoption of the controversial IHRA working definition of antisemitism within the UK higher education system, something that critics argue has been used to cast Palestine-related teaching and advocacy as problematic.   - (ANA) -

 

AB/ANA/06 March 2026 - - -