Kaffiyeh and Gown

The quagmire in the Middle East is too frequently reduced to symbols, and one symbol has come to represent the Palestinian cause more than anything else: Yasser Arafat. His military fatigues, enormous eyes, and scraggly beard have made him an internationally identifiable figure. His most recognizable attribute, of course, is the black-and-white-patterned Palestinian kaffiyeh he wears atop his head. The powerful image has been harnessed as a sign of solidarity with the Palestinians around the world.

To show their support, some Columbia students who have organized pro-Palestinian protests in the past are planning to wear Palestinian kaffiyehs to graduation next month.

There are an infinite number of nuances to the intractable political, military, and humanitarian problems of the Middle East, and reducing them to the slogans and signs used during campus protests is bad enough. The situation does not need further reduction to a single visual image that can be interpreted any number of ways. Nobody at graduation will know whether a kaffiyeh wearer supports armed Palestinian resistance or simply identifies with a stateless nation. For a symbol that is meant to express a political opinion, it embodies a shameless dearth of content.

Content is, after all, essential to the discussion of any issue on campus. A real debate is predicated on dialogue, in which representatives of different positions communicate with each other. The recent activism on this campus regarding the Middle East has been characterized by a breakdown of that dialogue. Civility has utterly eroded to the point where people of each position are unwilling to hear out their opponents. Because students will be listening to speeches in their commencement robes, they will be unable to engage in a debate in any real sense with protesters defiantly crowned with a kaffiyeh.

The study of ideas--the basic university experience--naturally lends itself to political debate, particularly at Columbia, which is a historically political campus. But there can be no debate with a flagrant display of this symbol. There will be no opportunity for the opposition to respond with an argument. In fact, the symbol itself lacks an argument.

The willingness of students and professors to bring their insight and ingenuity to bear on questions like the Middle East is what makes college campuses--and Columbia in particular--a remarkable place for the discussion of ideas. Classrooms and other academic forums for debate are unique in America as an unrestricted space for free speech and should be fostered.

But graduation is not a forum for political debate. The realm of discussion should not extend to commencement, which, at its best, it is an apolitical and ecumenical event that unites students of all persuasions from around the University. At graduation they come together to celebrate their academic achievements. It defies political affiliation because, by its very nature, it is meant to unify the students and salute the academic work they have just completed.

The realm of the political should end at commencement, but few issues divide a loosely-bound group as viciously as the Middle East. This issue polarizes people on this campus vehemently and almost evenly. It sets off emotions in nearly everybody who has a position (and by proxy, often those who do not). The question provokes tremendous ire from people on both sides of the debate, and there is no reason to promote such vitriol and hatred at University Commencement.

The protesters have expressed concern that administrators will try to stop them from wearing kaffiyehs if they catch wind of this plan. Despite the foolishness of the plan itself, the administration would only exacerbate the problem by trying to intervene. Columbians are well within their rights to wear or say what they want at graduation as long as they do not disrupt the proceedings. Any move by the University to stifle students' freedom of speech would be akin to the kaffiyeh plan itself, because it would inhibit the discussions of ideas. If pro-Palestinian activists want to make a statement, they should be allowed to, even if it is to the exclusion of the other point of view.

Kaffiyeh-wearing students can expect pro-Israel students to mount a counterprotest by wearing Israeli flags. But if students at the University really believe in the free discussion of ideas, they will refrain from any symbolic statement at commencement. If students want to engage difficult questions in honest discussions, they will wear the traditional graduation garb--cap and gown. That cap, after all, repesents the ideals of academic debate that respects a real dialectic; it stands in opposition to the kaffiyeh of dogmatic symbolism.

Adam B. Kushner is a Columbia College junior majoring in ancient studies.