Final Response from Organizers to President Tilghman and Dean Slaughter

Dear President Tilghman and Dean Slaughter,

Thank you for replying so promptly to our letter of concern. Before explaining why we feel that our letter has been mis-represented in your replies to us, as well as in the article that appeared in the Daily Princetonian on Monday, October 17th, I wish to make a few rectifications. Miguel Balsa and Dominique Reese should not appear in any way associated with the letter. Likewise, six people who did not originally figure in the copy that was sent to you should appear as signatories: Professor Bruce Western of the Sociology Department, Professor Arcadio Díaz Quiñones from the Department of Spanish and Portuguese, Professor Stanley J. Stein from the History Department and Professor Martin R.Scherzinger, Lecturer in the Council of the Humanities and Music. The other two are students, Sindhu Revuluri and Syon Bhanot. We sincerely apologise for those mistakes, which were entirely our fault.

As for the manner in which the letter was misunderstood and misrepresented, we would like – as authors of the letter - to make a few clarifications.

The letter was not so much concerned with the question of balance regarding the choice of high-profile speakers, as it was with the fact that the University is inviting speakers for prestigious occasions who - almost exclusively - represent positions of current and former governments. Our dissatisfaction does not only arise from Princeton’s favour or disfavour towards sides of the political aisle. The letter addresses the fact that the University repeatedly extends its endorsement to high-profile speakers, regardless of whether or not they have records of deceiving the United Nations and the world public; of advocating illegal wars and sanctions and, in some cases, of perpetrating mass murder of civilians. The institutional endorsement of certain speakers (Condoleezza Rice, Anthony Zinni and Colin Powell were mentioned, but the list is longer and includes those on the “opposite side” of the politcal spectrum) is not only a disgrace, but a shame to all Princetonians. This practice cannot – we would like to emphasize this – be ‘balanced’ by invitations to the likes of Ralph Nader or Ellie Wiesel. The practice itself should be reconsidered.

In her speech at Princeton on September 30th, Condoleezza Rice defended the use of violence in Iraq and elsewhere in a manner that is in violation of international codes of conduct, laws, treaties, and human rights. She was nonetheless praised for her “extraordinary journey” and her “commitment to public service,” and it was stated that her career “exemplifies” the University’s values. Bestowing such endorsement on the individual’s personal achievement, University administrators, acting in an official capacity, succeed in separating Rice the drafter of illegal policy, from Rice the public servant, while tactically claiming that only the latter is being celebrated. But such a separation is in fact impossible. It is a fundamental contradiction to “serve the nation and all nations” by promoting policies that have destroyed cities, cultural and historical legacies, the environment, and thousands of innocent human lives. Needless to say, such policies have in the past been supported by representatives of all political affiliations. All criticisms of our letter based on the political aisle question are therefore rendered groundless.

As Professor Cornel West stated, “University officials should not conflate the speaker with the school’s values. The attitude of the University toward a guest speaker should be, ‘We are here to engage in a dialogue with you. Period.’” We find it difficult to accept a state of affairs in which any time people from the U.S. government come to speak, university officials heap unqualified praise on them as individuals. This always transforms high-profile talks into celebrations of “long and honourable careers,” instead of using these talks to generate a much needed debate over policy and practices. These institutional endorsement policies need to be discussed publicly and hopefully revised at Princeton.

Sincerely,

Aleksandar Donev

Tim Hambourger

Danilo Mandic

Fernando Montero

Stephanie Wavle

This letter was privately sent, on October 22, 2005, to President Tilghman and Dean Slaughter.