Should Universities Take a Stand in Political/Ethnic Conflicts?
I
remember when I was a faculty member at a university in an emerging economy many years ago, a major terror attack happened in France. Willing to ascertain “European” or “Western” values, by which that university abode and its modern image — incidentally also the business model of that university — the university management made an announcement through the loudspeakers at 12 noon the next day to invite everyone to hold a minute of silence.
I was in the classroom then teaching a graduate level class. I had Afghani students in class, students from Syria and many displaced ones from Karabakh — they were confused at this statement. Later, an Afghani student asked me why there was no minute of silence for all the Afghani victims of multiple terroristic attacks over there. There were many more on-going conflicts in the world then — Sudan, Yemen and most vividly, the civil wars in Syria and Iraq. Why did the university which was my administrative home (although not an intellectual one) did not condemn unlawful violence in all of these contexts and chose such a public measure in the case of a European country? The explanation that I gave to it then was linked to its organisational mission, public relations and profiling of the university. It wanted to be part of the West. It wanted to “belong to the West” and hence chose public expressions of solidarity towards it and not others. However, the recent developments around Israel/Palestine remind me that the reasons are more universal — universities are political spaces and they operate in a field where public funding, student funding and politics of knowledge are all important if not crucial for the survival of such institutions. Especially in countries where, as history proved, it’s very easy to close universities or start new ones.
There were many more on-going conflicts in the world then — Sudan, Yemen and most vividly, the civil wars in Syria and instability in Iraq. Why did the university which was my administrative home then (although not an intellectual one) did not condemn unlawful violence in all contexts and chose such a public measure in the case of a European country
Why did the executives of Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) in the Netherlands, where I work now, decided not to issue any statements with condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza, even though there is growing evidence of war crimes and the International Court of Justice has found the threat of genocide in Gaza plausible? Even more puzzling, why did Erasmus not condemn Israel but did condemn Russia’s attack on Ukraine?
The Rector Magnificus of EUR gave an extensive interview to Erasmus Magazine in February 2024 on this issue where she took a very personal tone by saying “I should not make political statements” in order to preserve the space for academic debates. But Rector Bredenoord (now the chairwoman of the board of executives), it’s not about individual executives making personal statements, it’s about the institution that is home to thousands of students and hundreds of faculty members and which is adamant in asserting its values of operation, the Erasmian values. What is the plausibility of EUR’s claims to those values when no positions are taken? How can we believe in them, trust EUR’s intention to advance them in good faith? To put things in the context, no other Dutch university, to my knowledge, condemned Israel’s actions. Some even banned any discussion of this issue at campuses, as at Leiden University’s case (see the interview above). The recent violent protests in UvA and across the campuses of the universities in the country are partly to be explained by the anger of the students who feel unheard and unsupported by their institutions.
The International Institute of Social Studies, a faculty within EUR, is an institute that is so closely linked to the Global South, and that is so invested in the subjects of justice, conflict and peace, that not speaking out is remarkable and even implicating for its staff and students. The Rector of ISS did circulate a statement where no position is taken institutionally (the language of the statement is “ISS scholars” have critically analysed and not, for example, “ISS as an institution” critically analysed). There is no appetite to act institutionally, whereas individuals speaking out individually are encouraged. Indeed, during the graduation ceremony at ISS in December 2023, there was an action to voice the protest and read a statement by a group of students and professors. And this action was allowed and even praised at the event as part of what academic freedom. But it’s not enough. Why is this not sufficient?
Acting individually is not sufficient, institutions must act as such — institutions
Not taking a position in the times of the crisis has proven wrong and dangerous throughout history. Universities must be the guides in the times of moral confusion and political indecision. And not only by offering space for a debate, but by stating what they find acceptable and unacceptable. And that requires taking stand. Condemning Russia was easy, there was a consensus engineered through media, political discussions and geopolitics at large. But saying that one cannot condemn Israel because there is polarisation in the society and the university should not contribute to the tensions, is unconvincing. Exactly in the times of crisis, universities must be the enlightened venues where not only discussions take place, but moral positions are ascertained and values are made explicit, however polarised or violent it may be. Edward Said, in one of his essays wrote the following passage. I think it’s good to come back to it often to realise what is and is not important in life.
To enter into the public sphere means, therefore, not to be afraid of controversy or of taking positions. There’s nothing more maddening in our own time than people who say, “Oh no, no, that’s controversial; I don’t want to do it”; or the habitual trimming refrain, “No, no, I can’t sign that because I mean, you know, I may disturb matters and people may think the wrong thing about me.”
The words of Said resound clearly in these times of indiscriminate terror, some would say genocide, the State of Israel commits against Palestinians. And if universities don’t take a clear stand against such violence, what moral authority do they still have? What remains then is market value only perhaps, the business of selling diplomas…