PEN America, the free-speech organization, is facing a deepening internal crisis following the resignation of its president, novelist Dinaw Mengestu. The departure occurred hours after the organization published an article detailing the exclusion and isolation reported by Jewish and Israeli writers in the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks on Israel. This event highlights a widening ideological divide within the organization, pitting traditional free-expression advocacy against a segment of the literary community that views the defense of Zionism and Israel as incompatible with its broader political goals.
The conflict centers on whether reporting on the experiences of one group—in this case, Jewish and Israeli authors—implicitly undermines the rights of others, specifically pro-Palestinian activists. Mengestu, who had served as president for seven months, argued in internal communications that the PEN America article could be weaponized to support legislation targeting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He maintained that as a free-expression organization, PEN’s mandate is to protect the right to boycott, rather than provide fuel for state-level legislative efforts that often restrict such actions for government contractors.
The Internal Fault Line at PEN America
The tension at PEN America is not new; it follows years of organizational instability regarding the conflict in Gaza. In 2024, the organization experienced significant turmoil when prominent writers, including Naomi Klein and Michelle Alexander, demanded that the group adopt a harder stance against Israel, specifically calling for the use of the term “genocide” to describe the war in Gaza. These demands led to the cancellation of the 2024 World Voices Festival and the annual literary awards, as numerous authors withdrew in protest. The organization’s long-time CEO, Suzanne Nossel, who had presided over a five-fold increase in revenue during her decade-long tenure, ultimately stepped down in October 2024.
When co-CEOs Summer Lopez and Clarisse Rosaz Shariyf took their interim roles permanent in February 2025, they initiated a “listening tour” to address the concerns of members. Many authors reported a “chilled environment” for literature involving Jewish themes or characters. The resulting article, which took a year to produce, gathered testimonials from figures like literary agent Deborah Harris, who reported an inability to sell works by Israeli authors in the current American market. The report also cited a Jewish Book Council hotline, which has received 350 self-reported complaints of antisemitic, literature-related incidents over the past two years.
Conflicting Interpretations of Free Expression
The publication of these testimonials ignited immediate controversy. While the article attempted to balance its findings by noting the “dire consequences” faced by Palestinian and pro-Palestinian writers—including harassment and detention—critics within the staff and the broader literary community viewed the report as a departure from the organization’s mission. Some former staff members, such as Allison Lee, the former head of the Los Angeles office, argued that the article required a level of “contextualization” for Jewish writers that is not afforded to other groups whose speech is suppressed.
Conversely, supporters of the article, including former PEN president Andrew Solomon, argue that the organization must defend writers regardless of their identity or political views. Solomon, who has been active in humanitarian efforts in Ukraine, stated that defending the rights of Israeli writers is consistent with the organization’s foundational principles. The organization’s leadership has stood by the article, emphasizing that PEN America maintains a distinction between opposing organized efforts to silence speech and defending an individual’s right to engage in boycotts.
Organizational Future and Strategic Uncertainty
The resignation of Mengestu leaves the leadership of PEN America in a precarious position. The organization has attempted to balance its commitment to free speech with the demands of a vocal constituency that views the group’s historical neutrality as insufficient. In an effort to maintain its broad membership base, PEN America has invested heavily in supporting Palestinian artists, with insiders reporting that the group has spent up to $500,000 on such initiatives. However, these efforts have not prevented the internal friction that ultimately led to the recent leadership vacancy.
The path forward for PEN America remains unclear. The board of directors, which does not exercise direct editorial control over staff publications but has recently begun reviewing potentially controversial content in advance, must now select a successor who can navigate these competing ideological pressures. As the organization looks to move past the immediate fallout of this week’s resignation, it continues to confront the challenge of maintaining its role as a defender of global free expression in a climate where discourse on Israel and Palestine has become increasingly polarized.
Updates regarding the search for a new president and any potential policy shifts will be provided by the PEN America board of directors in future communications. Members and observers are encouraged to monitor the organization’s official channels for further developments on this ongoing internal transition.