Carleton University President Roseann Runte silences students
On 3 February 2009, President Roseann O'Reilly Runte and other officials from the high administration presented Carleton University's new strategic plan, a 21-page document dubbed Defining Dreams. Following the presentation, an open forum was held to allow members of the university community to enter into a dialogue with the president. Two students chose to ask the president about the boycott of Israeli academic institutions and, specifically, why she has taken a position against the boycott without any form of consultation with the university community. As the video below shows, both students had their microphones turned off by the President's minders. (The video has been edited to show the relevant moments. The full video is available here.)
Earlier in the session, President Runte spoke about how universities are about producing people with "wisdom" and knowledge "that is ethical and has moral value". In light of her silencing of campus activists, rejection of an open debate over a pressing human rights issue, and banning of the Israeli Aparheid Week Poster without due process and no proper explanation, one wonders what terms such as "wisdom" and "ethical" mean in the President's mind. A video clip is shown here.
Flagrant misrepresentation of the record
At 4:28 in the first video, President Runte states that "receiving letters that are anonymous from students, demanding responses by 5pm, saying that the administration must come out and discuss certain things, is not the kind of civil, respectful behaviour that we should have in a university." Runte's claims about the letters are flagrantly false. The letter in question was sent via e-mail a week in advance of the requested reply date (i.e., sent on 23 January with a requested reply date of 30 January). The deadline for a reply was imposed because previous attempts at discussing the boycott issue did not meet with cooperation from the administration. Moreover, the letter was not anonymous, as Runte claims, but was signed by SAIA, a known campus group, with a reply address. The full letter to Runte is provided below.
Meeting with President Runte
In the video, President Runte requests that the students meet with her in private to discuss the demand for a debate on the boycott of Israeli academic institutions. The meeting between SAIA members and Runte eventually took place on 17 February. Unsurprisingly, Runte refused to consider the request for a debate. Developments around SAIA's request for a debate are tracked here.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SAIA Carleton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >
Date: Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Subject: Call for debate: Carleton's position on the academic boycott of Israel
To: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Dear President Runte,
Please see attached our formal request for a debate on Carleton's position on the institutional boycott of Israeli Universities (full text is also included at the bottom of this email).
For more context, please see Charlatan article below.
http://www.charlatan.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21266&Itemid=152
Looking forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton
***
From: SAIA Carleton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >
Date: Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Subject: Call for debate: Carleton's position on the academic boycott of Israel
To: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Dear President Runte,
Please see attached our formal request for a debate on Carleton's position on the institutional boycott of Israeli Universities (full text is also included at the bottom of this email).
For more context, please see Charlatan article below.
http://www.charlatan.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21266&Itemid=152
Looking forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton
***
Dear President Runte,
On January 13, 2009 you sent a presidential letter to the Carleton community asserting that if the president of a University has "a personal opinion, he or she should not use the position of president to give it expression and weight lest it be implied that this [personal] position was one adopted by the institution as a whole." Despite this cautionary note to yourself, you proceeded in that same letter to condemn what you termed as "intellectual boycotts". Considering the recent upsurge in discussion over the institutional boycott of Israeli universities, and your unequivocal condemnation of the academic boycott of Israel on August 16, 2007, we understand this statement to be a reaffirmation of your previous position.
We are astonished that you used Carleton's presidential office to take this personal anti-boycott stand just days after the deliberate Israeli aerial bombardment of the Islamic University of Gaza and despite the fact that 55 Carleton University professors had two days prior urged you to condemn this unprecedented attack on the academy of an occupied, besieged, and impoverished population. You chose to remain silent about this attack and you failed to acknowledge the concerns about this assault expressed to you by large numbers of your colleagues--our professors. We find this extremely disconcerting.
We realize that you may be unaware that Israel calls its own multifaceted policy of separation towards Palestinians in the occupied territories Hafrada -- the Hebrew equivalent to the Afrikaans word Apartheid. Perhaps you are also unaware that academic boycott is a justice-oriented intervention undertaken by civil society which met with notable success in ending institutionalized racism in Apartheid South Africa.
In your letter to the Carleton community you wrote "university leaders must vigilantly defend both freedom of expression and civil behavior." Yet the deliberate targeting of a university is anything but civil. It is a war crime under international law, and as such, it should be condemned on a moral and legal level. It also stands in clear contrast with the autonomy of universities and the principle of academic freedom.
While we disagree with the position that you took, we are in full support of your vision of the University as a "space which encourages peaceful exchange and dialogue." Guided both by this principle as well as the principle of institutional accountability, Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton calls for a public debate for the Carleton community on the question of the academic boycott of Israel. Such a debate will allow members of the Carleton community to form their own opinion and advise what the most responsible stance for Carleton University should be on this vitally important topic.
We have included a proposed format below, but are open to alternative formats. We anticipate that you will recognize the need for more open and inclusive decision-making on this matter and that you will participate in the debate. Please let us know by Friday, January 30 at 5:00 p.m. if you will participate so that we can start working together on logistics. Should we not receive a reply by this time, we will assume that you consider your position taken on behalf of Carleton University to be beyond consultation.
Sincerely,
Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >
Proposed Debate Format
1) Introductions: Moderator
2) Opening statement on Administration's position: President Roseanne Runte (5 minutes)
3) Opening statement on Students Against Israeli Apartheid's (SAIA) position: Member of SAIA Carleton (5 minutes)
4) Debater #1 speaking for/against* the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
5) Debater #2 speaking against/for the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
6) Debater #3 speaking against/for the academic boycott of Israel: (10 – 15 minutes)
7) Debater #4 speaking for/against the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
8) Facilitated question and answer period from the audience**: (30 minutes)
* We propose a coin toss to determine the order in which the debaters will speak. Debaters 1 and 4 will represent the same side, as will debaters 2 and 3.
** Considering that the main purpose of this debate is to provide an open forum for members of the Carleton community to hear both sides of this issue, we propose that this debate be held in a large auditorium on campus.
On January 13, 2009 you sent a presidential letter to the Carleton community asserting that if the president of a University has "a personal opinion, he or she should not use the position of president to give it expression and weight lest it be implied that this [personal] position was one adopted by the institution as a whole." Despite this cautionary note to yourself, you proceeded in that same letter to condemn what you termed as "intellectual boycotts". Considering the recent upsurge in discussion over the institutional boycott of Israeli universities, and your unequivocal condemnation of the academic boycott of Israel on August 16, 2007, we understand this statement to be a reaffirmation of your previous position.
We are astonished that you used Carleton's presidential office to take this personal anti-boycott stand just days after the deliberate Israeli aerial bombardment of the Islamic University of Gaza and despite the fact that 55 Carleton University professors had two days prior urged you to condemn this unprecedented attack on the academy of an occupied, besieged, and impoverished population. You chose to remain silent about this attack and you failed to acknowledge the concerns about this assault expressed to you by large numbers of your colleagues--our professors. We find this extremely disconcerting.
We realize that you may be unaware that Israel calls its own multifaceted policy of separation towards Palestinians in the occupied territories Hafrada -- the Hebrew equivalent to the Afrikaans word Apartheid. Perhaps you are also unaware that academic boycott is a justice-oriented intervention undertaken by civil society which met with notable success in ending institutionalized racism in Apartheid South Africa.
In your letter to the Carleton community you wrote "university leaders must vigilantly defend both freedom of expression and civil behavior." Yet the deliberate targeting of a university is anything but civil. It is a war crime under international law, and as such, it should be condemned on a moral and legal level. It also stands in clear contrast with the autonomy of universities and the principle of academic freedom.
While we disagree with the position that you took, we are in full support of your vision of the University as a "space which encourages peaceful exchange and dialogue." Guided both by this principle as well as the principle of institutional accountability, Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton calls for a public debate for the Carleton community on the question of the academic boycott of Israel. Such a debate will allow members of the Carleton community to form their own opinion and advise what the most responsible stance for Carleton University should be on this vitally important topic.
We have included a proposed format below, but are open to alternative formats. We anticipate that you will recognize the need for more open and inclusive decision-making on this matter and that you will participate in the debate. Please let us know by Friday, January 30 at 5:00 p.m. if you will participate so that we can start working together on logistics. Should we not receive a reply by this time, we will assume that you consider your position taken on behalf of Carleton University to be beyond consultation.
Sincerely,
Students Against Israeli Apartheid: Carleton < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >
Proposed Debate Format
1) Introductions: Moderator
2) Opening statement on Administration's position: President Roseanne Runte (5 minutes)
3) Opening statement on Students Against Israeli Apartheid's (SAIA) position: Member of SAIA Carleton (5 minutes)
4) Debater #1 speaking for/against* the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
5) Debater #2 speaking against/for the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
6) Debater #3 speaking against/for the academic boycott of Israel: (10 – 15 minutes)
7) Debater #4 speaking for/against the academic boycott of Israel: (10 - 15 Minutes)
8) Facilitated question and answer period from the audience**: (30 minutes)
* We propose a coin toss to determine the order in which the debaters will speak. Debaters 1 and 4 will represent the same side, as will debaters 2 and 3.
** Considering that the main purpose of this debate is to provide an open forum for members of the Carleton community to hear both sides of this issue, we propose that this debate be held in a large auditorium on campus.
