Aheated debate took place at A.S. Council’s public input meeting last night in light of an upcoming vote on the controversial Students for Justice in Palestine divestment resolution. Approximately 250 people, including students and community members, attended the meeting at the Institute of the Americas, which lasted several hours.
The resolution, presented by SJP, called for a UC-wide financial divestment from General Electric, Northrup Grumman and other companies that SJP believes are profiting from a “non-neutral” and “unethical financial role” in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“The purpose of divesting from corporations profiting from the illegal siege, blockade and occupation of Palestine is to signal to these companies that we, as students of a public institution, do not condone their participation in human rights abuses,” SJP wrote in an official statement to the Guardian, after declining to participate in individual interviews.
“Divestment will cleanse our portfolios of unjust and socially irresponsible investments by withdrawing our institution’s money from American companies that profit from occupation and violence.”
This divestment was first proposed by SJP in the spring of 2010 and indefinitely tabled by the A.S. Campus Affairs Committee after debates between SJP and Tritons for Israel, a group in opposition to the divestment, failed to result in compromise. Following a reintroduction of the resolution in 2011 that once again postponed the vote, A.S. Council made history by voting down the resolution in 2012.
This year, the resolution has reached council once again, released on Sunday of Week 8, and is still facing heated discussion between members of council as well as between campus groups including SJP, TFI, J Street and the Union of Jewish Students.
“I’m here as a student, as a friend and as a fellow classmate,” Eleanor Roosevelt College freshman Matthew Lurie said, during public input last night. “I’m here for peace. However, the divestment bill we are speaking on tonight is not a step in that direction. This bill is the end of cooperation, divisive at its core and in the past … it severs any and all ties that we have.”
Other students spoke in favor of the resolution.
“We, as a public institution, have to take accountability blame for the continuous support for the apartheid occurring abroad,” ERC senior Jennifer Christine Mondonado said during public input. “UCSD sits and colonizes indigenous lands. Israel sits and colonizes indigenous lands in Palestine … respond to your responsibility. Your duty. Divest now.”
In addition to problems surrounding the language of the resolution, there have been issues regarding TFI and SJP group presentations, as well as the resolution’s voting method, which is yet to be decided. However, voting is scheduled to take place at the Week 9 council meeting.
A.S. Council and UJS were especially concerned with the possibility of a secret vote, proposed by Senator Sean Estelle over the weekend, after concerns arose for the safety of council members if an open roll-call vote were to take place.
“For the sake of the mental and/or physical safety of folks, I think that we need to have a serious conversation about having a secret ballot vote,” Arts and Humanities Senator Sean Estelle wrote in an email to A.S. Council. Campuswide Senator Brad Segal said that he opposes a secret vote because it undermines the democratic process.
“As elected officials, we are 100 percent accountable to our constituents for how we vote,” he said.
There were also debates about the timing of TFI and SJP special presentations, previously scheduled to occur at last night’s meeting, after concerns were raised that TFI would not have enough time to prepare a presentation regarding the SJP resolution at the Week 8 meeting.
“We are aware that there is a proposed change in the presentation,” SJP officers wrote in an email to A.S. Council. “We strongly advise the council to reconsider its inconsiderate treatment of our organization and our resolution … Perhaps TFI should work on their time management.”
In response, TFI wrote, “We made the request because unfortunately the language of the resolution was not released until Sunday, and we need more than three days to properly research and analyze the document which has clearly been the result of months of preparation. This document is a direct attack on Israel and the Israeli students on campus … we feel that our request is not unreasonable.”
Following the conflicts, A.S. President Meggie Le called for a senate meeting on Wednesday and finalized the timeline for SJP and TFI presentations, moving both presentations to the Week 9 council meeting with the stipulation that SJP gives its presentation after TFI.
The decision was reached after about 40 minutes of debate, passing by a very close margin. It was also decided that there would be limited public input at next week’s meeting.
