Minouche Shafik and Columbia Protests

The Media Line Staff

06/03/2024

Al-Masry Al-Youm, Egypt, May 19

In times of distress, an individual’s true nature is revealed. History has known many men and women who forged their legacies in such moments. It saddens me when a name becomes synonymous with disgrace or suggests a lack of understanding and awareness of the complexities around us. There is no doubt that the harrowing scenes of bloodshed and destruction had reached the office of Columbia University’s president, Minouche Shafik. So why, then, did she adopt such a shameful stance? Initially, I refrained from writing about it, considering the situation part of a larger Western and American propaganda apparatus capable of distorting the truth. However, what transpired with Shafik, whose parents hail from Egypt, was alarming. Two days ago, the College of Arts and Sciences at Columbia University passed a no-confidence motion against President Shafik. The resolution accused her of violating “the basic requirements of academic freedom and shared governance” and partaking in “an unprecedented assault on students’ rights.” Despite its symbolic nature, the motion underscored the imperative to stand up for a people facing systematic oppression and displacement by a powerful occupying military force. On campus, Shafik has faced substantial backlash for her recent testimony before a congressional committee, where she vowed to penalize faculty members who expressed anti-Israel views, some of which were labeled anti-Semitic. The no-confidence vote was submitted by the campus chapter of the American Association of University Professors, a professional organization representing faculty. Of the 709 professors who voted, 65% supported the resolution, while 29% opposed it, and 6% abstained. The resolution particularly condemned Dr. Shafik’s decision to call the police to remove a pro-Palestinian student encampment, even after the University’s Executive Committee unanimously advised against it. She falsely claimed that the students posed a clear and present danger to the university’s essential functions, whereas they were peaceful. President Shafik has been in the spotlight since April 17 due to her statements before the US House of Representatives and her actions against demonstrators to dispel allegations of “anti-Semitism” against her and her administration. This led to a wave of criticism and calls for her resignation. Unlike other university presidents before her, who were open about recognizing freedom of expression, Shafik denied many such principles during her hearing. Shafik notably omitted any mention of freedom of expression or the peaceful nature of demonstrations. Instead, from her initial remarks, she committed unequivocally to combating all forms of anti-Israel activity. In contrast, the presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania had previously refrained from condemning student protests supporting the Palestinian cause and criticizing Israeli actions. While I refrain from declaring that Shafik received her just deserts, evidently she has faced the consequences of her actions, and the rest remains to be seen. —Abdel Latif El-Menawy (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)