By 106 votes to 71 delegates at the annual conference of the lecturers' union Natfhe put the spotlight again on relations between universities in Britain and Israel, writes Donald MacLeod
They backed an academic boycott of lecturers and colleges that refused to disassociate themselves from "Israeli apartheid policies".
They also put the union in the spotlight. It is not only Israel's fervent supporters who find the term apartheid objectionable and there are many supporters of the Palestinians who argue that such a boycott is wrong or tends to penalise the sort of liberal academics who are at least willing to talk to their counterparts on the other side of the wall.
The issue raises passions on both sides. Some see the boycott as anti-semitic in effect, if not intention. No British universities boycott China because of its human rights violations.
Others point to support for the devastating anti-Hamas boycott of the Palestinian state by the US and Europe as double standards among their opponents.
Often individuals' complex views get polarised. Paul Mackey, the union's general secretary, spoke out against what he felt were bullying tactics by the pro-Israel lobby, but urged delegates to oppose the boycott. "This isn't the motion and this isn't the way," he told the conference in Blackpool.
Natfhe is about to merge with the Association of University Teachers, which last year went through a firestorm of criticism for passing a similar boycott motion at its annual conference.
But if academics in the UK have a role, what should it be?
