A Statement from the President of the ESC

At times, situations arise on our campus that call for student leaders to issue a statement representing the views of their constituencies. What has concerned me recently is the failure of student leaders to recognize that there are also many situations where the opposite is true.

On Wednesday night I was asked to sign off on a statement condemning President Bollinger's decision to invite Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia. Unfortunately, I was attending class and unable to be present at the formation of that statement. When I finally did view a version of the statement, I was disappointed to find that I disagreed with the majority of language and factual points presented. I could not sign the statement as it currently stood.

When I attempted to raise my concerns, I was informed that statement had already been submitted to Spectator. Even more terrifying was the fact that it had been sent to Spectator with my signature on it. This was startling as I had neither taken part in writing the statement nor had an opportunity to read through it for approval. It is gravely troubling to see that some of our student leaders, who so actively encourage dissent, cannot fathom anyone disagreeing with them.

I agree completely with the students' decision to gather Wednesday morning to discuss the rumored event with President Ahmadinejad and to begin drafting a statement to President Bollinger. The version I saw that morning raised some very important questions; however, President Bollinger addressed them in his statement when the event was announced. Additionally, he invited student leaders representing a broad range of constituencies to meet with him and discuss their concerns in person.

At this point it was clear that the message of the current statement was inappropriate, but the main question was whether it was necessary to issue a statement at all. But, student leaders promised a statement, and dammit, they were going to print one in Spectator. Necessary or not.

Due to the impulsive actions of some, what could have been a wonderful opportunity to engage in a dialogue with our students about the upcoming event turned into a spreading of misinformation. I would like to clear the air about some of the incorrect information I find most crucial.

President Ahmadinejad accepted the invitation to speak on Wednesday afternoon. I repeat: Wednesday afternoon. Immediately upon Ahmadinejad's acceptance, President Bollinger's Office sent an e-mail informing student leaders about the event and inviting them to meet with the President. Students have asked why the University community was not informed when the invitation was extended. We only need to look back to this past weekend to see the rationalization. Examples such as the invitation of Jim Gilchrist or, going back a bit farther, last year's invitation of President Ahmadinejad show with great clarity what is wrong about preannouncement. If you tell people you are trying to do something and then it does not happen, it is all they will talk about. Most students cannot tell you who came to speak on campus last year (Gilchrist aside), but they can tell you who was invited and did not come.

Students have also questioned the ability to arrange a protest given that information regarding this event was not available seven days prior, fitting into the University's protest planning requirements. However, has anyone taken the time to ask their advisor if an exception would be made, or have they all been decrying the "injustice" without any action to support their preaching? Had anyone bothered to stop and check in with their advisors, they would have seen that the University does make exceptions in special situations, a category into which this event certainly falls. The University is making that exception with this event, and an event review for a possible protest was on the schedule before those desiring an opportunity to protest even began their planning.

The haste with which this statement was thrown together did not allow the student leaders time to rationally approach the situation and ask questions they owe their constituency. This was not a moment that required such a statement. President Bollinger quickly responded to the issues each student leader was concerned about. And, to be honest, PrezBo did a pretty damn good job at it too. The statement issued yesterday was done so for the sole purpose of making a statement. This was a situation when our student leaders should have come together to work with the administration to see to students' needs. Instead, we separated the students from the administration even more. The worst part of it was that in the rush to get into Spectator, no one bothered to stop and think.

The author is a senior in the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Sciences majoring in chemical engineering.