That the four students (“we are not here on behalf of Free Palestine Maastricht”) wanted to share their stories, was not – as they should have done – announced to the University Council beforehand. But nobody felt that this was a problem. University Council chairman Teun Dekker did say that there are rules. One of them is that there will not be a discussion.
Classroom
The Executive Board recently issued a statement regarding the conflict in the Middle East. It condemns “all acts leading to civilian casualties”. Why will the Executive Board not choose one side, the foursome ask during the public round, why will UM not take a clear stance against Israel, against genocide? “That is the role of the university, isn’t it? The Executive Board’s neutral position creates an unsafe spaces in the classroom.” Palestinians and Arabs are feeling all alone at UM, ‘left out in the cold’, one student says. She is worried about their well-being.
Debate
“I know that you are not satisfied with it [the statement, ed.] and I have previously tried to explain why we issued it the way we did”, says president Rianne Letschert. In the statement, the Executive Board calls for dialogue “to ensure that this tragic situation does not divide us”. That is, she now repeats, the role of the university in “this kind of situation. We, as an institute, will not take one side. We will facilitate academic debate.” Such a meeting, to enter into a dialogue, is being set up. When it will take place and what the programme will look like, is not clear, but UM spokesperson Koen Augustijn previously said that it should include “all voices” being heard, as long as there is no appeal for hatred, violence, antisemitism or discrimination.
Instagram
This is certainly not the first time for the Executive Board to have pro-Palestinian students voice their worries. “UM is [has been, ed.] talking to various groups that are expressing themselves about the conflict,” the spokesperson reacted when asked. This is “almost always” about the extent to which the feelings of others are being considered, because “words and images can have so much ‘connotation’”. For example, there will be a talk with student organisation Free Palestine Maastricht (FPM) about their Instagram message on the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October, Augustijn confirms. This attack is described in the message as “a staggering answer by the Palestinian resistance to the continuous violence by Zionism and the Israeli settlement”.
FPM has since then removed this statement (initiated by Students for Justice in Palestine Netherlands, SJP, a coalition of pro-Palestinian student organisations) from its own Instagram page “due to lack of understanding, accusations and decontextualization with which we as a group and the movement as a whole were confronted,” they said to Observant. “We do not praise the death of civilians, wherever that may happen, nor do we extenuate it.” The statement, however, is still on the SJP page, including a hashtag with the controversial slogan ‘From the river to the sea’.
Damages
Back to the University Council meeting on Wednesday 22 November. The speakers want to know why UM “censors” certain meetings. “Nothing has been censored,” Letschert answers, “but we must ensure that it is safe for everybody in the community.” What she was not happy about, by the way, was the graffiti on walls of UM buildings, besmirching of walls in toilets, and damaging classrooms. “Well, damaging, that might be a bit harsh, but it no longer looked like a decent classroom. This cannot be tolerated.”
Dilemma
Sharon Anyango (University Council member on behalf of the academic staff) would like to say something, “I received a pro-Palestinian petition in my mailbox, but I don’t know what to do with it”. She is struggling with the various roles that she plays. What if she were to sign it? Is she doing that as a ‘private person’, as a University Council member, or as a lecturer? “You are free to sign it,” University Council chairman Teun Dekker emphasises. President Letschert agrees, who also recognises the dilemma: “I have a different role now as president than I had when I was a professor of International Law; back then, I was much more outspoken. Now I am more reluctant.”
Wendy Degens/ Peter Doorakkers