RUG Staff Statement, 17 May 2024
We, members of staff at the University of Groningen, express solidarity with the student encampment that began on Monday, May 13th, in response to the University's lack of a condemnation of the genocide in Gaza and lack of transparency regarding its ties to Israeli institutions. Representing various faculties and services, we stand behind the students' non-negotiable demands to disclose, divest, and boycott institutions complicit in the ongoing genocide in Palestine. In light of the nationwide tightening of protest rules, we urge the Board of the University to consider the risks to the students' safety from police violence, privacy infringement, and intimidation that constrains fundamental freedoms. We are appalled at the reactions of the University of Amsterdam and Utrecht University's Boards to similar encampments, and we remind the University of Groningen's Board that in the face of genocide, taking a political stance is inevitable and not taking one amounts to complicity. We show full support to our students' right to protest, as well as to fundamental freedoms, such as the freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, and academic freedom.
Since October 2023, over 35,000 civilians have been killed in Gaza, of which 14,500 were children. Educational facilities, hospitals and other types of infrastructure supporting civilian life have been destroyed or severely damaged. Not nearly enough humanitarian aid is allowed in and famine is imminent if not already occurring. Reports by the United Nations' Human Rights Council identify Israel’s policies in its onslaught on Gaza as consistent with the threshold of genocide.
Across the world, student activism has always been part and parcel of movements for justice and systemic change. Today, student encampments across the Netherlands, including in Groningen, urge their educational institutions to critically examine their ties and investments to companies and institutions participating and/or profiting from the ongoing genocide on the Palestinian people. Through these encampments, they demonstrate their agency, solidarity, critical thinking, and social awareness: qualities that any university should value and nourish. The students thereby employ and sharpen the critical educational resources that should be at the heart of every educational endeavor.
Worryingly, instead of hearing their demands, the Boards of Dutch Universities have repeatedly reacted dismissively, disproportionately, or by outright incurring violence. In Utrecht and Amsterdam, horrifying scenes of police violence - including police in riot gear and the bulldozing of protest areas - have unfolded, not only representing unprecedented levels of backlash, but also putting the safety of the students at risk, injuring students, and intimidating many protesters. Simultaneously, a nationwide tightening of protest rules has occurred, and the University of Groningen has devised its own house rules for protests on University grounds, despite the lack of approval from the University Council and pushback from the Groninger Studentenbond. The tightening of these protest rules, both nationally and locally with University of Groningen's recent installation of 12 cameras on the Broerplein, must be seen in the context of the pro-Palestine student movement.
We refuse to be complicit. We are concerned about the risks to the students' safety from police violence, violations of privacy, and intimidation that constrains fundamental freedoms. We all remember too well the appalling scenes of police brutality against our students and staff just a few months ago to repress the protests that ensued from the dismissal of our colleague Susanne Täuber. We strongly urge the Board to learn from its mistakes and do better this time around. To mitigate the aforementioned risks, the Board of the University of Groningen must not only avoid escalating its response to the student encampment, it must also productively address their demands as well as adopt a broader attitude of transparency and a culture of protection.
Following multiple cases in which our fellow staff members found themselves intimidated for speaking about the ongoing genocide, we find the current procedures for protecting the voices of students and staff insufficient, the University's protest house rules unacceptable, and the installation of cameras without prior data management transparency dangerous. Colleagues pointed out that they feel unsafe speaking out in support of Palestine (even signing a petition or an open letter) for fear of repercussions. In and of itself, this is a concerning symptom of the climate our academic community finds itself in. This should profoundly worry us, for when a university ceases to be a place of free-thinking, it ceases to perform its function in society. We furthermore reject the University's insinuation that the pro-Palestine movement creates unsafety for Jewish students and staff. This claim ignores the pivotal role played by Jewish voices within the movement. As such, we strongly urge the University not to weaponize antisemitism and not to conflate it with legitimate criticism of Israel's politics.
In this atmosphere of intimidation, with academic freedom at risk, we, staff members of the University of Groningen, strongly endorse the student encampment, which draws attention to the injustice and scholasticide happening in Palestine despite the risks: fearing suspensions, repercussions, infringements of privacy, and/or unfair detainments. We would like to stress that the encampment is not an isolated event, but the culmination of months of conversations and petitions. In previous conversations with students and staff following the cancellation of events surrounding Israeli Apartheid Week, the Board has acted dismissively and has not been forthright in negotiations. An open letter asking to take a stance against the ongoing educide in Gaza, which collected 91 signatures among RUG staff, has not been taken sufficiently seriously. The statement that was put out by the Board on May 10th regarding the University's ties with Israel is wholly insufficient: it does not disclose pertinent ties and does not respond to the demands made by students and staff. Regrettably, all interactions that occurred in previous months on this issue clearly indicate the unwillingness of the Board to engage in a constructive dialogue with its students and staff. This is why we feel that today it is no longer time for conversations to occur behind closed doors. Instead, we urge the Board of the University to take a public stance, similar to how it did in previous situations, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Today, as back then, the idea that the University can remain 'apolitical' is a myth, a myth that is used to censure dissident voices. Not taking a moral and political stance, however, means complicity in genocide and apartheid. We support the students' decision not to negotiate their demands with the Board. These demands remain clear: disclose, divest, and boycott.
As history unfolds, the student encampment at the University of Groningen is a space that facilitates a productive exchange of knowledge, mutual education through lectures and a small library, creativity, and the non-violent, informed freedom of expression. This is, we believe, what the University of Groningen should represent for its current and prospective students.
Our position and demands, therefore, are the following:
We support and reiterate the student encampment's demands: disclose, boycott, divest. We also support their non-negotiation policy, given the Board's proven unwillingness to dialogue so far.
We demand that the University takes a clear stance regarding the genocide of Palestinian people, Israel's violation of international law and its apartheid regime, as well as the ongoing Palestinian scholasticide.
We demand no police intervention and we express our willingness to stand in solidarity with the students if the police were to intervene.
We demand the establishment of clear and efficient protocols to protect students and staff members in unsafe situations.
We demand transparency regarding recent surveillance decisions (such as the installation of cameras on the Broerplein) and an examination of the legality of such matters.
We demand the repeal of the new restrictive protest rules.
We demand that the University stops conflating antizionism and antisemitism and stops insinuating that the pro-Palestine movement creates unsafety for Jewish students and staff.