Last year, the university signed an agreement with Palo Alto Networks to help deliver its master of digital communication course at its Queenstown campus, planned to begin next year.
But the move was criticised by various groups, including Otago Staff for Palestine, Otago Students for Justice in Palestine and the Otago University Students’ Association, who were concerned about the firm’s reported ties to the IDF through its owner and contracts.
This led the university to commission a review into Palo Alto Networks, led by University of Waikato Prof Alexander Gillespie. He produced a wide-ranging report.
He is a law professor with expertise in international law and has advised government and international organisations.
‘‘There is no substantive evidence that suggests that the University of Otago should end its relationship with Palo Alto Networks (Pan),’’ the report said.
‘‘Ending this relationship would be contrary to both the university’s own policy and legislative direction for institutional neutrality.
‘‘It would place the university at risk and has the strong potential to damage relationships which go well beyond that with Pan.’’
In May, Otago Staff for Palestine published a piece saying the Israeli military establishment was Pan’s ‘‘strategic core’’.
‘‘While the company’s HQ is in Santa Clara, California, Pan trades in the image of a battle-tested cyber defence firm with links to the notorious IDF unit 8200, or cyberwar division,’’ the piece said.
Prof Gillespie’s report said ‘‘in fact, based on external indicators and subsequent communications with the author, the contrary appears to be correct; Pan appears to be a reputable company’’.
‘‘If the university chooses to continue its relationship with Pan, I recommend that it informally reviews their working relationship before the start of the course next year and formally review it at the end of the first year.
‘‘Both sides need to speak freely about their relationship.
‘‘Clear goals, standards and expectations must be recorded. Trust must be rebuilt.’’
The report also said some entities, governments and sectors were taking an increasingly dim view of those who sanctioned or boycotted Israel.
‘‘Overseas, although not yet at the federal level, at least 38 individual states in the United States ... now have anti-boycott measures, with the clear warning ‘if you boycott against Israel, we will boycott against you’, with comparable counter-measures.’’
It noted, too, the conflict in Gaza remained an ongoing issue and the university should be planning on how to manage a long-term concern, with some issues requiring advance planning.
‘‘If the International Court of Justice does find that Israel has violated the Genocide Convention, significant steps may be recommended.’’
Prof Gillespie approached Palo Alto representatives, who denied all ties to the IDF and said:
‘‘Israel is recognised globally as a primary hub for top-tier cybersecurity talent.
‘‘While we frequently acquire commercial companies founded by military veterans, this is a direct reflection of the regional talent pool, not a mechanism of state integration.
‘‘Acquiring these commercial entities does not constitute support for, or evidence of, operational integration with, any military.’’
It is understood the report will be discussed by OUSA and various pro-Palestine action groups next week.
A University of Otago representative declined to give the cost of the report, saying it was ‘‘commercially sensitive’’.
‘‘As noted in the vice-chancellor’s cover note attached to the report, a new process for the development and review of academic partnership agreements is under way.
‘‘As this review is yet to be completed, this independent review of the partnership agreement between the University of Otago and Palo Alto Networks was commissioned and is now complete.’’
