|
|
|
|
|
Opinion by Dr. Frank Chalk,
Department of History
The approach taken at Concordia University by some students and student
groups to prevent Benjamin Netanyahu from speaking on Sept. 9 smacked of
vigilante action and mob justice.
The protesters forced me and other advocates of negotiating with the Palestinians
a two-state solution and withdrawal of settlements from the West Bank and
Gaza to defend the right to speak at Concordia of a politician whose policies
we abhor.
It is good to see students at Concordia involved in contemporary political
issues. A number of the students who protested Netanyahu's talk respected
the principles of peaceful protest and were seen restraining their colleagues
from physical assaults.
But Concordia students should be aware that a few among them take only one
or two courses a year so they can participate in student organizations,
earn salaries for their campus activities, and spread their views. For these
individuals, disruption of education at Concordia and the commercial fabric
of the city of Montreal is just fine. They don't believe in formal education
it just reinforces the global capitalist system.
These students reject dialogue on political issues and refuse to tolerate
views different from their own. They use open forums to divert attention
from the advertised subject to their own shrill agenda. Theirs is the path
of disruptions, intimidation, polarization and violence. They trample on
the Latin origin of the word "university," universitas, meaning
the whole world, by seeking to shrink the focus of the life of the university
to their own narrow view of the top issue of the moment.
In passing legislation permitting student associations to gain accreditation,
Quebec clearly defined a student association as an organization whose
main purposes are to represent students or student associations, and to
promote their interests, particularly respecting teaching, educational methods,
student services, and the administration of the educational institution.
Are Concordia students aware that under the bylaws of the Concordia Student
Union any student at Concordia interested in determining if spending by
the Student Union respects these priorities has the right during normal
office hours to visit the office of the Student Union and request the details
regarding receipts and disbursements of the Student Union and the
matters to which each of them relates, as well as details of its financial
transactions and its credits and liabilities?
With a former Student Union vice-president accused of having defrauded the
CSU of $196,000, and the decision of the CSU to pay the legal expenses of
students and non-students arrested during the riotous behaviour of September
9, this may be an important period for careful scrutiny of the books.
Restoring orderly discourse
Where do we go from here? What can we do at Concordia to restore the civility
and orderly discourse which befits a university?
The intruders committed a serious strategic error. By their aggressive actions,
they advanced Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign to return to the leadership
of Israel's Likud party and to occupy the office of the prime minister.
By their denial of the right of free speech at Concordia University, they
called into question their own commitment to democracy and human rights.
By their blanket assertions that all Zionists are racists and colonialists,
they exhibited their own narrow nationalism and its potential prejudices.
And by their refusal to engage in peaceful protest within the boundaries
of Canadian law they added to the growing number of persons who question
the existence of a pragmatic group with whom advocates of peace can co-operate.
I think that the Jewish students who agreed to sponsor Benjamin Netanyahus
speech at Concordia on Sept. 9 made a mistake. They obviously did not choose
the time of Netanyahus visit, but were offered a speaker. Their timing
was terrible. Their sense of what was appropriate at the beginning of a
new school year, when Concordia needed a period of serious reflection on
how to build bridges towards constructive efforts for peaceful debate on
the Middle East, was flawed.
In my view, we dont need any more victories for either
side like Sept. 9s. We need to work out guidelines for dialogue assuring
civility and mutual respect, and, once that is accomplished, lift the ban
on speakers discussing the Middle East.
A positive next step would be a lecture-dialogue series co-sponsored by
Jewish and Palestinian groups, a series featuring a broad range of Israeli
and Palestinian speakers examining the legitimate aspirations of Palestinians
to emulate the State of Israel in creating their own state and of Israelis
wishing to ensure the emergence of a Palestinian state that respects the
right of Israel to exist securely and to be a Jewish state. A series like
that would show the true face of Concordia University.
|
|
|