What Happened?
As previously reported, the University of Otago has confirmed a partnership with Palo Alto Networks (PANW), a cybersecurity company that has been accused of having “deep links to the Israeli government” by Otago Staff for Palestine (OSP). The partnership is intended to develop a Masters in Digital Technology for the new Queenstown campus. However, after backlash from students and staff, the partnership is now “under review”, according to a 1000 word letter written by Vice-Chancellor Grant Robertson to the OUSA Executive on the 30th of April. The letter has since been shared with Critic Te Ārohi.
At the end of his super fucking long letter, Grant said he understood the “concerns” that the OUSA Executive and “some students” have about “the situation in Gaza”, which he shared at a “personal level”.
Predating the announcement was the OUSA Executive’s statement on the 24th of April. “The OUSA Executive stands with staff and students against the Uni’s partnership with an Israeli cyber-security company,” the statement read. The statement condemned the partnership for two main reasons: the first being that PANW was “based in Tel Aviv, Israel” with “connections to the Israeli Defence Force” and being the “biggest company on the Israeli stock exchange”, and the second being that PANW had signed a “$250 million contract linked to the Netanyahu-led government”.
Critic understands US-based PANW operates its largest research facility outside of the US in Tel Aviv, Israel. PANW itself was founded by now retired American-Israeli Nir Zuk, who is understood to be a veteran of the Israeli Defence Unit 8200. Unit 8200 is responsible for signal intelligence and cybersecurity. Unit 8200 has been heavily scrutinised for mass surveillance of Palestinians, and utilising AI-driven targeting systems like “Lavender” to identify bomb strikes in Gaza.
PANW recently was named as a technology partner for a contract with an unnamed major Israeli customer. Some analysts speculate that the major customer is the Israeli government, due to the contract being described as supplying cyber and information security services for “critical network infrastructure” in Israel; being valued at around $140-290 million NZD. PANW is a dual-listed public company on both the NASDAQ, and more recently, on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE). It is the most valuable company on the TASE at a $133 billion USD market cap. PANW described listing on the TASE as indicative of their “commitment to the local tech ecosystem” in a statement given to Reuters.
In what appears to be a further catalyst for the review alongside the Exec’s statement, Otago Staff for Palestine were asked to prepare a dossier for the Vice-Chancellor about PANW following a meeting on the 13th of April. Olivier Jutel, member of OSP, told Critic that the work, titled “Palo Alto Networks: The Key to the Israeli Military-to-Tech-to-Military Pipeline”, was passed over to Grant on the 22nd. “The cyber-security sector is deeply interwoven with the national security mission of Israel,” the dossier reads, describing a recent report by the The Times of Israel that quoted Defense Ministry Director Amir Baram describing the transition of Israel from a “cyber-nation into a true defence tech nation.”
Additionally, the dossier notes Netenyahu’s desire for Israel to become a “Super Sparta”, and that defence tech has buoyed the Israeli economy, “enabling” and “supporting” Israel’s acts in the Gaza genocide, with PANW at the “forefront”. OSP intends to hold a forum regarding the dossier and Palo Alto partnership in the Main Common Room on the 19th of May, 12pm. According to Olivier, the forum will serve as an “important teaching moment for thinking about the technology supply chain and its connection to occupation and genocide.”
Grant’s Letter and The Exec’s Statement
In terms of the actual letter regarding the review, Grant first noted that PANW is the largest cybersecurity company in the world, and they’re already pretty connected to our institutions. “[PANW] provides services all over the globe, including here in New Zealand,” the letter reads, acknowledging PANW’s partnership with the Network for Learning to provide cybersecurity for “most schools” in New Zealand. Additionally, NZ-based cybersecurity providers the Uni contracts with use PANW’s services, which is “the case in almost every university” and other sectors in Aotearoa. Despite these existing connections, the OUSA Executive maintained their concerns that Otago students “may be actively recruited to this world of espionage and cyberwar”, and that assurances “made to staff are not sufficient”. Broadly, the Exec felt a partnership with a company “directly involved in developing weapons to carrying out genocide” was not something the OUSA Exec was “comfortable” with.
“This partnership [...] is explicitly about ‘creating a pipeline from the classroom to the frontlines of cybersecurity’”, the Exec statement reads, referencing a prior statement from PANW regarding the partnership. “Our university is celebrating this quote [...] cyber defence is an area cut through with spies and military contractors, and furthermore rife with ideologically zionist and unethical values.” However, Grant maintained that cybersecurity and defence is something that should be taught at the University. “We all literally rely on it every single day,” Grant wrote. “There are a huge number of vacancies and opportunities related to cybersecurity and we would be negligent in our role if we did not provide opportunities in this subject area.”
Additionally, the letter explained that the Master’s programme has been designed to be an “industry relevant” qualification. This explanation is against the backdrop of the OUSA Exec indicating their opposition to “a private tech company” having a high level of involvement in a public academic institution. In response, Grant explained that the PANW agreement is to support curriculum development and group projects, provide guest speakers and industry opportunities for students, but the University retains control over “all content and delivery” for the programmes. “To put it another way, the curriculum is Otago’s not Palo Alto’s or any other technology company,” the letter continues.
“We are mindful of not dictating to academics what they teach or who they work with [...] I want to be absolutely clear; no academic would ever be forced to teach something that they did not want to,” the letter continues. “The role of critic and conscience of society is an important one and is expressed every day by staff at the University, and supported by me as Vice-Chancellor.”
Grant also outlined the “due diligence” done in the partnership, which identified PANW’s founder as an Israeli national. The University was aware that Zuk, “like most Israeli nationals”, had served in the military, and they knew of the research facility PANW had in Tel Aviv. Due diligence did not find “direct links” between PANW and the Israeli Defence Force. Additionally, at the time when the agreement was being finalised, a “search” was made of the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions movement (BDS) and “related websites” and there was “no mention of Palo Alto as a target of those campaigns.”
The OUSA Executive’s post acknowledged that the partnership was made “before some of these developments and other contracts were signed”, which was why they were “backing calls by staff, academics, and students” to now withdraw and “recognise these developments change the nature” of the PANW partnership. Grant seemed to confirm this line of reasoning: PANW’s listing on the stock exchange and the “recent contract with an unknown party” for cybersecurity for critical infrastructure in Israel both happened “well after the agreement was finalised.”
Furthermore, Grant referenced the fact that the Uni is looking to partner with more “non-university” organisations, such as “iwi, industry and non-governmental groups” — part of efforts to keep the Uni’s curriculums industry relevant. The stickler is that the Uni doesn’t have a set of guidelines to govern those kinds of partnerships, but they do for ethical procurement and policy. Grant said that he’s asked Deputy Vice-Chancellor External Engagement Professor Jessica Palmer to lead the charge to get that sorted, which will include “consultation across the University”. Palmer has briefed the University Senate about it already. Good things take time, so “acknowledging events that have taken place since this partnership was agreed”, Grant said that he had decided to “review” the partnership.
Grant said the review will include looking at material prepared by the Staff for Palestine Group, responses from Palo Alto to concerns that have been raised, and getting some external advice. He will look to complete this review “as soon as possible.”
