A noticeably small but growing number of college administrators have released statements regarding the Israel-Hamas war, denouncing “violence, hate, and prejudice in all forms,” offering support to the campus community, and encouraging “mutual respect.” The vast majority, though, have refrained from responding at all. Some of those who spoke up drew accusations that the statements didn’t get at the severity of the issue. Those administrators who said nothing have been accused of remaining “neutral” on unnecessary violence.
Much of the backlash on social media has also addressed numerous statements from student groups protesting the war and supporting Palestinians. Critics called on colleges to denounce the statements, some of which placed blame on the Israeli government for ongoing violence.
In recent years, colleges have increasingly taken direct stances on hot-button issues like abortion or systemic racism. Following protests over the murder of George Floyd, administrators and presidents denounced structural racism and detailed plans to enhance diversity on their campuses. Colleges took a similar steadfast response after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision.
Many of those responses were met with criticism from conservative leaders, who argued that it was not a college’s role to take a side or that such responses inadvertently censor those on campus with different views.
The violence in the Middle East that began Saturday with Hamas’s surprise attack on Israel, though — which came after decades of strife between both sides — has drawn a more-neutral response from significantly fewer colleges. After four days of deadly attacks and retaliation from Hamas militant groups and Israeli forces, just 14 colleges had responded to the violence, according to an unscientific tally by The Chronicle. And many of the responses walked a thin line concerning the increasingly complicated conflict — they called for all-around peace and encouraged members of the campus community to not only support one another, but also respect differing opinions.
“Violence, discrimination or harassment against any member of the Jewish, Israeli, Palestinian, Arab or Muslim communities will not be tolerated at GW,” Ellen M. Granberg, president of George Washington University, said in a campuswide statement. “We are all a part of a shared community, and this is an important moment for us to come together. In the days ahead, I urge you to show compassion, patience and support for one another.”
We must not allow our opinions, grief or anger about the conflict to spill over into abusive behavior or harassment of anyone — civility remains a core value of our academic community.
Ana Mari Cauce, president of the University of Washington, acknowledged the hundreds of civilians who have either been killed or taken hostage in Israel, mentioning an alumnus who was reportedly killed in the violence.
“And at a time when we have seen increased acts of antisemitism and anti-Muslim and anti-Arab violence, I want to reiterate that we must not allow our opinions, grief or anger about the conflict to spill over into abusive behavior or harassment of anyone — civility remains a core value of our academic community,” Cauce said. “Any instances of harassment, discrimination or violence based on someone’s religion or nationality only hinders efforts to achieve peace in this region and beyond and will not be tolerated here.”
Yascha Mounk, an international affairs professor at the Johns Hopkins University, called out the university for not responding to the war despite its previous messages about divisive issues, such as abortion.
“I actually think universities should not be in the business of issuing these kinds of statements,” Mounk wrote in a post on X. “But since they do issue statements about all kinds of events all of the time, it sends a very clear message if they then happen to fall silent when the victims are Jews.”
On Tuesday, Ron Daniels, president of Johns Hopkins, released a statement addressing the war.
“As has been true in other moments of mass horror on the world stage, we know that amid the hideous violence and devastating loss of life, we will see acts of courage and kindness and moments of examination and reflection by people directly engulfed by the conflict, those on our campuses and in our communities, and those around the globe who share the belief that wanton violence and religious hatred is repugnant and indefensible,” Daniels wrote.
Some colleges that did issue statements also drew criticism that they were too impartial, and didn’t convey the severity of the conflict. Brian G. Keating, a physics professor at the University of California at San Diego, posted about the college’s response, which referred to the war as “the ongoing conflict in Israel and Palestine.”
“Actually, though it’s a low bar, several of the Ivy League universities have released statements superior to the morally vapid, both-sidism description of ‘the ongoing conflict in Israel and Palestine’ released by @UCSanDiego,” Keating wrote.
The university later changed the language in its statement to address the “attack against Israel.”
At some colleges, the debates have become especially combative. On Saturday, a group of more than 30 student organizations at Harvard University released a joint statement saying the group holds “the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.” The document, which was initially written by the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee and co-signed by several other groups, called out Israeli officials for the harsh conditions Palestinians have faced.
“The apartheid regime is the only one to blame,” the statement reads. “Israeli violence has structured every aspect of Palestinian existence for 75 years. From systematized land seizures to routine air strikes, arbitrary detentions to military checkpoints, and enforced family separations to targeted killings, Palestinians have been forced to live in a state of death, both slow and sudden.”
The statement quickly faced backlash from Harvard alumni, faculty, campus groups, and some federal lawmakers, with some also calling out the university for not immediately responding. Rep. Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, posted on X Tuesday, calling on Harvard to respond to the student groups.
“It’s time for @Harvard to take a stand and denounce these student organizations and the terrorists they support,” Stefanik wrote. Her press office didn’t return requests for her to elaborate.
Lawrence H. Summers, the former president of Harvard and former U.S. treasury secretary, also took to X, saying he felt “disillusioned and alienated” by the situation. Summers, a professor in the university’s School of Government, criticized Harvard as well, saying that the university appeared “at best neutral towards acts of terror against the Jewish state of Israel.” Summers pointed to other times when Harvard administrators released statements on world issues, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine or the murder of George Floyd.
“Harvard is being defined by the morally unconscionable statement apparently coming from two dozen student groups blaming all the violence on Israel,” Summers wrote. “I am sickened. I cannot fathom the Administration’s failure to disassociate the University and condemn this statement.”
Later that night, the university released a statement signed by Claudine Gay, Harvard’s president, and several other administrators and deans. The response did not directly address the student organizations, but rather took on a neutral stance regarding the war.
It pledged to support the campus community while also providing resources to “deepen our knowledge of the unfolding events and their broader implications for the region and the world.” The statement also called on students, faculty, and staff to hold a mutual respect for one another.
We will all be well served in such a difficult moment by rhetoric that aims to illuminate and not inflame.
“Especially at such a time, we want to emphasize our commitment to fostering an environment of dialogue and empathy appealing to one another’s thoughtfulness and goodwill in a time of unimaginable loss and sorrow,” the statement read.
On Tuesday afternoon and following continued criticism, Gay released an additional response directly addressing the Harvard student groups’ statement. “Let me also state, on this matter as on others, that while our students have the right to speak for themselves, no student group — not even 30 student groups — speaks for Harvard University or its leadership,” the president clarified.
“We will all be well served in such a difficult moment by rhetoric that aims to illuminate and not inflame,” she added.
Throughout the week, student groups at several other colleges posted on social media to protest the violence and encourage followers to “stand with Palestine.” The statements were met with similar backlash, including from Republican leaders of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and the Workforce. Rep. Virginia Foxx, the committee’s chairwoman, and Rep. Burgess Owens, who chairs a subcommittee focused on higher ed, released a statement Tuesday condemning “the numerous statements issued by student groups at universities across the nation in support of the savage terrorist group Hamas’ atrocities and attributing responsibility for the murder, rape, and mutilation of its own citizens to Israel.”
“While it is the right of all Americans — including students — to speak, it is also the right and duty of all leaders to speak loudly in response to evil rearing its head,” the statement continued. “Too many colleges require lock-step discipleship behind woke policies and politics. Sadly, the university system has been captured by anti-American and illiberal ideology that is developing and feeding a hatred of Jews.”
Whether colleges should weigh in on controversial topics has been widely debated in recent years. Some say that a college taking a stance on a certain issue suppresses the campus community’s academic freedoms. Others argue that releasing a statement is a form of free speech itself — institutions should be able to take a side. And to some, staying silent conveys a message: that colleges do or don’t support a certain stance.
Over the past year, some colleges have formally adopted as a policy aspects of the Kalven Report, a document written in 1967 by a University of Chicago faculty committee stating that institutions should remain mostly neutral on social and political debates. The report states that, in order for a college to stay true to its academic purpose, it should encourage the “widest diversity of views.” The academic community is widely divided on the report’s sentiments, The Chronicle has reported, and the decision of whether to take a side has only become more complex.
Those on either side of the debate about colleges remaining apolitical seem to come to a similar conclusion — it’s only getting more complicated as issues that directly impact college campuses become more politically polarizing. The Kalven Report, and its recent resurgence in relevance, grew out of a time when the country was deeply divided on a number of issues, many of which directly impacted college campuses. At the same time, campuses are increasingly diverse, putting more pressure on administrators to be as welcoming as possible.
“You cannot escape politics,” Brian Rosenberg, a visiting professor in the Harvard Graduate School of Education and president emeritus of Macalester College, told The Chronicle in December. “Your choice is to act as if you have no stake in those arguments or you can have a little more courage and actively engage in those debates.”
By Tuesday afternoon, four days after Hamas militants invaded Israel, at least six other colleges began to speak up.
