For her final assignment before receiving her sociology degree at the University of Leeds, Danielle Greyman decided to write about Hamas’s abusive rule in Gaza. Her research taught her something that was indeed worth knowing:

Despite my assignment not being about Israel, the feedback I received from my grader was almost entirely attacking me for not blaming Israel. I was given a failing grade of 35. I know students who have written their essays drunk, at 2 am the night before they were due, and who still received a 50. The grader and university were saying my essay had absolutely no academic merit whatsoever.

I was shocked, and decided to research the grader, Claudia Radiven. I had never spoken to her, never had a class with her, and never interacted with her. Yet, I found I was blocked by her on Twitter. This is enough for me to believe the anonymity of marking was breached. I quickly created a new Twitter [account] to research her. I found tweets showing her support for Hamas, condemning Israel for actions that never happened, and just outright anti-Semitism.

To date, the University of Leeds has still not apologized or even acknowledged the discrimination that took place. Claudia Radiven is now the head of the module that this assignment was for, despite her irregular marking.

I did not get to continue into postgraduate study. I didn’t attend my graduation ceremony. . . . And I have been told by numerous Jewish sociologists that the field is so tainted by anti-Semitism that I should avoid it.

Last Sunday marked the eighth anniversary of a Saudi-led alliance’s intervention in the Yemeni civil war, intended to defeat the Iran-backed Houthi militia that had overthrown the previous government. In the wake of the rapprochement between Riyadh and Tehran, diplomats are hoping that the talks between the Saudis and the Houthis—which have been ongoing since last summer—will finally succeed in ending the war. To Nadwa Al-Dawsari, such an outcome seems highly unlikely:

The Houthis’ military gains have allowed them to dictate the path of international diplomacy in Yemen. They know Saudi Arabia is desperate to extricate itself and the international community wants the Yemen problem to go away. They do not recognize and refuse to negotiate with the [Riyadh-supported] Presidential Leadership Council or other Yemeni factions that they cast as “Saudi mercenaries.”

Indeed, even as the Houthis were making progress in talks with the Saudis, the rebel group continued to expand its recruitment, mobilization, and stockpiling of arms during last year’s truce as Iran significantly increased its weapons shipments. The group also carried out a series of attacks. . . . On March 23, the Houthis conducted a military drill close to the Saudi border to remind the Saudis of “the cost of no agreement and further concessions.”

The Houthis are still part and parcel of Iran’s so-called “axis of resistance.” With the Houthis gaining international political recognition, . . . Iran will have a greater chance to expand its influence in Yemen with the blessing of Western powers. The international community is eager for a “success story” in Yemen, even if that means a sham political settlement that will likely see the civil war continue. A deal with the Houthis is Saudi Arabia’s desperate plea to wash its hands of Yemen, but in the long term it could very well position Iran to threaten regional and international security. More importantly, it might set Yemen on a course of protracted conflict that will create vast ungoverned spaces.

Meanwhile, tensions in Yemen between Saudi Arabia and its ostensible ally, the United Arab Emirates, are rising, while the Houthis are developing the capability to launch missiles at Israel or to block a crucial Middle Eastern maritime chokepoint in the Red Sea.