FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT
NEW YORK – Alexander Stille arrives on foot at Columbia University, where he teaches journalism. «It is clear that the situation has been tense for months: on the one hand students frustrated by the humanitarian tragedy in Gaza, with demonstrations on campus that from time to time exceed the limits of peaceful protest and with moments of discomfort and hostility for some Jewish students. AND a conflict between conflicting values: the right to protest and free speech and the right of students not to feel under fire, and this is very subjective. Furthermore, it becomes much more complicated to manage due to politicians ready to exploit everything.”
In what sense is it subjective?
«At Columbia, around 20% of the students are Jewish and among the teachers the percentage is even higher, ten times the percentage of Jews in the American population: it cannot be said that it is an environment hostile to Jews. But it is subjective whether walking past protesters chanting “Intifada” is threatening and creates a sense of insecurity. I personally don’t feel it, but maybe others do. Furthermore, on a campus easily reachable by 8 million people via metro, the moment a political situation flares up, groups with revolutionary ambitions arrive and place themselves inside, if they can, or outside the gates. And they are much more extremist: many of the videos and incidents in which Jewish people felt insulted occurred outside, not inside among students. But the general public doesn’t see this distinction.”
And all this happens in a particular political context.
«The American right has universities under its sights and is ready to pounce on any episode to discredit them. It is convenient for the right that in states where it governs it has eliminated entire programs on racism and forms of injustice from the curriculum. A couple of months ago the presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania were torn to pieces by the congressional committee that, at least in words, investigates anti-Semitism on campuses, and then forced to resign: they gave very generic, cautious answers , not convincing, even if the question was poorly posed (for example, MP Elise Stefanik asked whether, when students call for the genocide of the Jews, this is against university rules; but in reality they did not call for the genocide of the Jews , they shouted “Intifada”, so it’s an interpretation). Very often what is reported about the situation here is exaggerated and false: some Italian friends, professors, were amazed by how peaceful both the pro-Palestine and pro-Israel demonstrations were, which did not disturb each other. They told me: “Wow, if it happened at Sapienza there would be clashes and brawls.” Yesterday a senator said that he needed the National Guard to restore order, but here it seemed like a spring picnic. It must be remembered that many students in the camp are left-wing Jews offended by Netanyahu’s policies and the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians.”
Are there pro-Hamas students?
“I do not know. But what I hear and see are not pro-Hamas slogans. It is clear that “from the river to the sea” can be perceived as a Hamas slogan for the annihilation of the State of Israel or as the affirmation of a State in which Arabs and Jews live together in equality. I doubt that these young students make the distinction, they repeat a slogan that is popular. I don’t know if there’s a sophisticated debate behind it. But demonstrations are like that. What is complicated is the relationship between the people outside and the students inside, generally they are different things but there are borderline moments, it happens that they sing in sync. But in my opinion the main problem is that we are all pawns on a chessboard in a bigger game. If my colleagues vote on President Shafik’s censure motion, is it a victory for freedom of expression and academic freedom or are we weakening it in a difficult fight with Republicans in Congress? I do not know”.
