When xenophobic graffiti appeared in a bathroom at São Paulo’s Pontifical Catholic University (PUC) on March 18, declaring “Time to clean up RI (International Relations). PUC is not for Arabs. The PUC is ours. The rectory is ours,” the university’s response was swift but superficial.
The racist message was covered with paint, and a note of repudiation was issued to the academic community of the Brazilian university. Yet beneath this veneer of condemnation lies a troubling pattern that mirrors the climate of persecution against pro-Palestinian activism sweeping universities across the United States.
The graffiti targeted the International Relations department, which has only one professor of Arab origin, Reginaldo Nasser, a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights.
But rather than launching a thorough investigation into the xenophobic attack, the university instead turned its scrutiny toward Nasser and his colleague, Bruno Huberman, a Jewish professor who also supports Palestine.
Both now face accusations of anti-Semitism in what appears to be a coordinated effort to silence pro-Palestinian voices on campus.
A global pattern of suppression
Professor Bruno Huberman, who has witnessed similar dynamics in the UK and US, sees Brazil’s situation as part of a broader international campaign.
“It was quite predictable that this would happen in Brazil,” he explains. “What’s shocking to me is that PUC is being the gateway for promoting censorship through the manipulation of the definition of anti-Semitism.”
This manipulation centres on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which critics argue has been weaponised to silence legitimate criticism of Israeli policies.
The definition has been adopted by the PUC’s maintaining foundation, the São Paulo Foundation, following pressure from Israeli lobby groups, including CONIB (Confederation of Jewish Organizations in Brazil) and its affiliated institutions, such as the São Paulo Jewish Federation (FISESP) and the lobby organisation StandWithUs Brazil.
The parallels with American universities are striking. Just as US campuses have seen professors dismissed and students disciplined for pro-Palestinian activism, Brazilian institutions are now implementing similar mechanisms of control, albeit on a smaller scale, for now.
“I see the main targets as politicians, journalists, and the university environment — both professors and students,” Huberman observes. “This consequently provokes an important limitation of academic freedom and freedom of expression.”
Targeting academic excellence and the weaponisation of anti-Semitism
The case becomes more troubling when considering the academic achievements of those being targeted. The Santiago Dantas Program, a prestigious Master’s in International Relations offered jointly by PUC, UNESP, and UNICAMP, is now threatened with termination after 23 years of operation.
Professor Nasser, who has been at PUC for 35 years, points out the suspicious timing: “For 23 years I never heard this [financial concerns], because at this specific moment, now, the undergraduate International Relations course has 580 enrolled students who pay 4,600 reais [812 dollars]. Nine of those 580 students would easily pay for the scholarships awarded by the programme [to students].”
Could the programme’s success be part of the problem? Nasser has supervised two theses that won national awards as Brazil’s best dissertations, both on Palestinian issues. Bruno Huberman’s 2021 thesis and Isabela Agostinelli’s 2023 work both examined Palestinian questions, drawing unwanted attention to the programme’s critical scholarship on Middle Eastern affairs.
“I believe this success is one of the problems,” Nasser reflects. “I started to think that this success is one of the problems. All our publications are public. We have 30, 40 students, from undergraduates, master’s, doctoral, and professors. This is what drew attention.”
Huberman’s case exemplifies how accusations of anti-Semitism are being deployed not to protect Jewish people but to shield Israel from criticism.
“Various Jewish intellectuals have been framed under this definition of anti-Semitism here in Brazil, most notably Breno Altman. But worldwide, there are various cases, including dismissals of professors who are Jewish, pro-Palestine,” Huberman notes.
“Consequently, Jews become more vulnerable to true anti-Semitism because of this definition, and then when real anti-Semitism offences occur, many will neglect it,” he explains.
“This creates quite nefarious consequences, which in turn provoke an increase in real anti-Semitism at the same time.”
Anonymous accusations, predetermined questions
Even before the graffiti, Nasser and Huberman were investigated by the university under accusations of anti-Semitism.
The investigation itself reveals the predetermined nature of the persecution. Nasser describes how he and Huberman were summoned for questioning by the São Paulo Foundation through a newly created “ethics and integrity” sector that nobody knew existed.
“The communication was made by phone, then by email… It was very vague, very generic,” he recalls. “There was no statement, no text, nothing. [all based on] an anonymous complaint.”
The questions asked during the investigation followed international patterns, focusing on support for Hamas and views on “from the river to the sea” — standardised inquiries that suggest external coordination.
“These are questions, all predetermined, which indicates the presence of a lobby in this,” Nasser observes.
A climate of fear and self-censorship
While professors like Huberman refuse to self-censor, the climate of intimidation is having its intended effect on others.
“I see great fear among students of being penalised and punished by São Paulo Foundation, of being expelled from the university because of this definition of anti-Semitism,” Huberman reports.
“I see a very strong reaction from the faculty against this definition… but there must be cases where [professors are afraid].”
This atmosphere of fear extends beyond formal accusations.
“Racist actions, racist attitudes are not only growing, but offenders are also becoming more confident, since there is nothing to repress them,” Nasser observes.
The crackdown at PUC occurs within a context of broader attacks on academic freedom and research funding in Brazil. The São Paulo Foundation has already cut all research funding within PUC, while federal research funding remains inadequate.
“This reveals a whole neoliberal tendency, of austerity, of fiscal control,” Huberman explains, noting that PUC reported a surplus of 33 million reais last fiscal year while claiming financial difficulties justify cutting programmes.
The international dimension cannot be ignored. As Huberman suggests, “probably the global Israeli lobby is investing a lot of money in this here in Brazil because Brazil is a global south actor that, if it comes to a harder political position concerning Israel and Palestine, can provoke transformations.”
Resistance and the road ahead
Despite the pressure, pro-Palestinian voices at PUC refuse to be silenced. Students continue their activism, following the example of their American counterparts, while committed faculty maintain their critical scholarship.
“Those who commit to the Palestinian question have not bent to this. They have maintained their actions, their activities, and I believe this is very important in this moment,” Nasser affirms.
The battle at PUC represents more than a local academic dispute — it’s part of a global campaign to suppress criticism of Israeli policies through the manipulation of anti-Semitism definitions.
As universities worldwide face similar pressures, the courage of scholars like Nasser and Huberman in defending academic freedom becomes increasingly vital.
Their struggle serves as both a warning and an inspiration for academic communities everywhere facing similar attempts to weaponise accusations of anti-Semitism against legitimate scholarly inquiry and peaceful activism.
The question now is whether Brazil’s academic institutions will succumb to this international pressure or stand firm in defence of the critical thinking and academic freedom that form the foundation of genuine university education.
The answer may well determine the future of intellectual freedom in Brazilian higher education.
Raphael Tsavkko Garcia is a Brazilian journalist whose work has been featured in outlets such as Al Jazeera, Foreign Policy, and Newsweek
Follow him on X: @Tsavkko
