British Museum chief defends Jewish Culture Month postponement amid free speech row

The director of the British Museum has defended the decision to postpone a Jewish Culture Month lecture after warnings that organised protesters planned to disrupt the event, insisting the move was intended to protect debate rather than suppress it.

Nicholas Cullinan said the museum had faced a difficult balancing act after receiving intelligence suggesting that a significant proportion of ticket holders intended to interrupt the talk on Ancient Israel and Judah, which had been due to take place last week.

The lecture, delivered by Dr Paul Collins, the museum’s keeper of Middle East collections, was postponed less than 24 hours before it was scheduled to begin.

The decision sparked criticism from politicians, historians and Jewish community figures, with some accusing the museum of bowing to pressure and undermining the aims of the UK’s inaugural Jewish Culture Month.

In a statement published by the museum and first reported by The Guardian, Cullinan said the event had become “a flashpoint in a wider national argument about protest, intimidation and the limits of free expression”.

He added: “The event was not cancelled. It was postponed. That distinction matters.”

The British Museum said it had received “credible information” indicating that between a quarter and a half of those registered to attend were intending to disrupt proceedings.

A campaign against the event had been organised by Jewish Artists for Palestine, a network of anti-Zionist Jewish creatives, who argued that publicly funded institutions should host a wider range of perspectives on Israel and Palestine.

Defending the museum’s decision, Cullinan said: “The British Museum, like every major public institution, is accustomed to protest. Indeed, protest is a healthy feature of democratic life.

“But there is a fundamental difference between protest outside an event and organised disruption within it, intended to silence and overwhelm, especially at such an understandably difficult moment for the Jewish community in the UK.”

He rejected claims that postponing the lecture represented a retreat from free expression.

“Freedom of expression does not require institutions to provide a platform for disruption,” he said.

“Nor does it require organisers to knowingly place speakers, audiences or visitors in circumstances where a legitimate event cannot proceed safely and respectfully.”

Cullinan said the museum had responsibilities both to the speaker and to visitors attending the event, including school groups expected to be in the building at the time.

“The curator delivering it had a right to do so without organised attempts to silence them,” he said. “Balancing those responsibilities is not censorship; it is stewardship.”

The row drew intervention from Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who argued that postponing the lecture ran counter to the purpose of Jewish Culture Month and called on the government to ensure the event could proceed.

Historians Simon Schama and Simon Sebag Montefiore were also among those critical of the museum’s decision.

Cullinan said the broader challenge facing cultural institutions extended beyond a single event.

“Across Britain, cultural institutions increasingly find themselves caught between opposing political pressures,” he said.

“The temptation is to interpret every operational decision through the lens of ideology. Yet not every decision is political. Sometimes it is simply an attempt to preserve the conditions under which genuine debate can occur.”

The lecture is expected to be rescheduled later this month and will also be live-streamed. The museum said the event would go ahead with a larger audience and under conditions that would allow attendees to hear the presentation without disruption.

The controversy comes during the UK’s first Jewish Culture Month, a nationwide programme of events celebrating Jewish history, heritage and creativity.