In recent years, American universities have been no strangers to tackling political issues — either the killing of George Floydor the Black Lives Matter movement, or the war in Ukraine.
These discussions generally took place without significant objections. However, the Israel-Hamas conflict has brought a unique set of challenges to college campuses where students and administrators struggle to balance principles of free speech, international politics, and local public safety.
Last week, Harvard University found itself at the center of controversy following the recent Hamas attack on Israel. Pro-Palestinian student groups at Harvard issued a statement blaming the conflict on Israel’s “apartheid regime.”
Some of the students spoke anonymously to GBH out of fear for their safety.
“The initial statement included what was missing in many other statements that came out immediately after everything that was happening in Gaza, which was that it had to incorporate the events that happened in the 75 years of oppression that the Israeli Zionist state put in place. The Palestinians have passed,” said a Palestinian woman at Harvard.
This controversy did not come without consequences. Palestinians and pro-Palestinian voices on campus have faced harassment.
“It was very scary and it was very horrible to see that Harvard let Palestinians and pro-Palestinian voices on their campus get away with it,” the woman said.
Harvard’s lack of direct condemnation of the students’ views sparked a backlash from alumni, donors and public figures, including former Harvard President Larry Summers. Last week, Summers went above and beyond a message on social media criticizing administrators for the delay in condemning the pro-Palestinian statement.
“In almost 50 years @Harvard I have never been more disillusioned and alienated than I am today,” Summers wrote.
On Wednesday, a conservative, pro-Israel group sponsored a van to circle Harvard Yard, displaying large images of students billed as “Harvard’s Top Antisemites.”
In a video In a statement Thursday night, Harvard President Claudine Gay condemned such stunts, saying: “We have a choice. We can fan the flames of division and hatred that roil the world, or we can try to be a force for something. different and better”.
Gay also condemned terrorism and then reinforced the university’s commitment to free speech.
“This commitment extends even to views that many of us find unacceptable, even outrageous,” he said.
The Israel-Hamas conflict has sparked nationwide debate on college campuses, with pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel groups holding vigils and counter-demonstrations from the University of Washington in Seattle to Columbia University in New York, where administrators have closed Upper West Side campuses to the public. .
As tensions escalate, some powerful, wealthy donors are threatening to pull funding from schools that do not publicly defend Israel. Others pretend. On Monday, The Wexner Foundation, a nonprofit that promotes Jewish and Israeli leadership, announced it would cut ties with Harvard over the university’s response to the Hamas raid.
Free speech advocates argue that universities should not feel compelled to take sides.
“I condemn terrorism myself, but the problem is that universities should not do that because universities should be an environment in which students, professors and others feel free to express their opinions,” said Geoffrey Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago. . “Students and faculty should have the right to say, ‘Well, terrorism is justified in some cases.’
In 2014, after students protested invitations to controversial speakers and some colleges withdrew those invitations, Stone helped develop what became known as Chicago principles — a “general commitment to free, robust and unfettered debate.”
Since then, more than 70 colleges and universities across the country they have adopted the Chicago Schools, including Princeton, Purdue, Georgetown and Virginia Tech, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
“When we wrote them, there was no intention that anyone else would adopt them,” Stone said. “His main point was simply to reiterate, in no uncertain terms, the University of Chicago’s longstanding policy since its founding regarding the necessity of free speech on campus and the right of individuals, students, faculty, and so forth to they speak their mind without the university interfering.”
Notably, Harvard has not adopted them.
In Harvard Yard before a Shabbat event on campus, pro-Israel students expressed concerns about the lack of moral clarity amid the violence in the Middle East.
“When Russia invaded Ukraine, there was a Ukrainian flag in the yard,” recalls Harvard Hillel freshman Charlie Covit. “There was no doubt. There was absolute moral clarity. And not seeing that here when Jews are being killed is, I think, disappointing.”
Covit said he wants the university to refrain from making statements on every issue.
“Once you set the precedent of talking openly about Russia and Ukraine, talking about Black Lives Matter, issues that I agree with the administration on, then it’s a very big disappointment when it comes to killing Jews, either we don’t see anything or it’s going to take more time,” he said.
Harvard declined to comment for this story.
While some groups that originally signed the statement blaming Israel for the Hamas attacks have since apologized and withdrawn their signatures, the issues surrounding the Israel-Hamas conflict have not been resolved.
Demonstrations are planned across the country throughout the week.
GBH’s Esteban Bustillos contributed to this story.