Student protest movements in America are often messy and divisive, but they tend to be on the right side of history. If President Joe Biden doesn’t take the anti-war protests more seriously, he is likely to end up on the wrong side of history and the November election as well.
From the Vietnam War and civil rights movements in the 1960s to the anti-apartheid protests of the 1980s and Black Lives Matter in 2020, these efforts sought to tackle the role of U.S. institutions and government in perpetuating injustices.
Many might detest their methodology, and we should all clearly oppose violence or hate speech within their ranks, but the broad causes are just and historically vindicated.
These protests will be vindicated too. America’s young people are not alone in opposing continued U.S. support of Israel’s actions in Gaza. A Gallup poll released in March showed that 55% of Americans today disapprove of it — a shift from the beginning of the war, when most Americans wanted the U.S. government to robustly support Israel’s war efforts.
For those who ask why students aren’t protesting Hamas, it’s because these institutions aren’t supporting or helping finance the terrorist group.
Across the country, student groups are specifically targeting their colleges and universities, where they expect their influence will be greatest, calling on them to divest funds from corporations and businesses that support Israel’s military action. Specific calls to action vary, from divesting from any companies and institutions linked to Israel to any companies linked to arms manufacturing generally.
This approach most closely echoes the protests against South Africa’s apartheid government, which are credited with pushing 155 universities to divest from companies that supported or profited from apartheid and the U.S. government to enact a divestment policy as well.
But student demands today face more obstacles. Opposition to Israeli government action is far more polarizing than opposition to the South African apartheid regime was then. Political support for Israel within the U.S. system is so strong that it has secured laws in more than 30 states that prohibit state governments from doing business with companies that promote divestment from Israel.
This could prove a real challenge for educational institutions even if they are open to protester demands. University administrators are already facing loud criticism from Republican political leaders in Washington who are calling on some to resign. Navigating the divide between free speech and hate speech is particularly fraught in light of the history of antisemitism in our country and beyond.
Institutions across New York City have seen major protests, providing easy access for journalists as well as outsiders fueling tempers on both sides.
Officials at Columbia University and New York University called in the police to break up encampments, leading to hundreds of arrests, which only seemed to stoke the fire. On Tuesday, dozens of protesters occupied a building at Columbia, and hundreds of heavily armed NYPD officers stormed the hall that night to clear it. Yale, Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Tulane and Tufts are also seeing significant encampments and protests, and protesters have been arrested in more than 20 states so far.
University of Arizona campus police dispersed protests on Wednesday with chemical irritant munitions, and University of California, Los Angeles administrators asked the police to intervene after 200 counterprotesters stormed the pro-Palestinian encampment, leading to violent clashes.
Riot police arrested 90 students at Dartmouth College within hours of the start of a peaceful demonstration, leading guest speaker Josh Paul to cancel a panel discussion in which he and I were to discuss — of all things — democratic dissent.
While most of the protesters across the country appear to be peaceful, it’s a ripe space for agitators, particularly those who hope to soil public perceptions of the protests for political gain. But observers should not let the extreme actors or detractors cloud the important message these students are trying to send: The situation in Gaza is inhumane and untenable, and those in a position to do something about it must act.
No one expects university officials to be able to end the war, and no one denies Israel’s right to defend itself. But it’s reasonable to expect a thoughtful conversation about whether these universities can do more to ensure they aren’t helping perpetuate disproportionate civilian harm.
Northwestern University and Brown University have each offered thoughtful paths forward. Northwestern forged an agreement with student protesters to allow them to petition the school for changes in how the university invests its money in exchange for removing their tents and ending the demonstrations. Officials at Brown have agreed to a timeline for discussions with students of their demands and to hold a vote of university leadership on whether to divest thereafter. The students have agreed in return to dismantle their encampment.
Other universities would be smart to take a similar approach, agreeing to meet the students with greater transparency and dialogue instead of with force.
Student activists might learn from this experience too. Otherwise, like the Vietnam protests of 1968, these demonstrations could help usher in a president far less sensitive to their concerns.
Elizabeth Shackelford is the Magro Family Distinguished Visitor in International Affairs at Dartmouth College and a foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune. She was previously a U.S. diplomat and is the author of “The Dissent Channel: American Diplomacy in a Dishonest Age.”
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
