University of Manchester Students’ Union Executive has written an open letter to University of Nottingham Students’ Union Executive asking them why they haven’t defended political freedoms on their campus.
An Open Letter to Nottingham Students’ Union Executive
When activists at the University of Nottingham decided to inject some politics onto their campus and protest against the Israeli Apertheid Wall, campus security called the Police who arrested one activist. The response of the University and the Police was appaling. However, even worse, the Students’ Union did nothing to defend its membership. Below is a copy of the letter sent by UMSU to Nottingham in protest.
Dear Executive Members, Nottingham Students’ Union
We are writing to express our concerns regarding an incident involving Students at Nothingham University on the 04/12/07.
Given the sacrosanct nature of freedom of assembly in facilitating the right of students to be politically active on any campus across the country, and the implied responsibility student unions have in supporting students ability to engage freely and without hinderence in pursuit of their causes, it is vital that we, as representatives of student bodies, ensure that any infringements are condemned and these basic rights asserted.
It is in the spirit of defending the rights of Students to engage in political activity that we, the executive of Manchester Students Union write to you.
It is our belief that if students are attacked in one part of the country, as a student movement we have an obligation to stand in solidarity with those attacked. In this case it appears that Nothingham Students have had their basic democratic rights attacked, and any future student actions undermined.
Students from Nothingham University excerised their right to protest against the Apartheid Israeli Wall currently being constructed in the Occupied territories. Those students used their right to engage in political activity to legitimately raise awareness of this situation and illustrated how the wall is creating an obstacle to the development of a lasting peace.
The fact that University Security Guards were deployed by the authorities with the expressed objective to illegitimately shut down this student action stands as an affront to all basic principles of student autonomy.
If this was not bad enough, the involvement of the police on a student campus threatening the arrest of students in their own university raising awareness on an issue would be more akin to the response of Mugabe’s Zimbawe or the military in Burma.
We ask that you take this issue seriously, and affirm the freedom of students to engage in political activity on campus. In addition, we would hope that the Students’ Union take the issue up with the University authority and point out that across the country students have engaged in similar actions without the violent response of the authorities.
If we can be of any assistance in helping you to assert these basic student rights then please get in touch and we will offer all the solidarity and support necessary to challenge these unacceptable infringements.
In solidarity,
University of Manchester Students’ Union Executive.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9134.shtml
Statement, Various undersigned, 29 November 2007
Editor’s Note: The following statement was issued by participants in the July 2007 Madrid meeting on a one-state solution and the November 2007 London Conference.
For decades, efforts to bring about a two-state solution in historic Palestine have failed to provide justice and peace for the Palestinian and Israeli Jewish peoples, or to offer a genuine process leading towards them.
The two-state solution ignores the physical and political realities on the ground, and presumes a false parity in power and moral claims between a colonized and occupied people on the one hand and a colonizing state and military occupier on the other. It is predicated on the unjust premise that peace can be achieved by granting limited national rights to Palestinians living in the areas occupied in 1967, while denying the rights of Palestinians inside the 1948 borders and in the Diaspora. Thus, the two-state solution condemns Palestinian citizens of Israel to permanent second-class status within their homeland, in a racist state that denies their rights by enacting laws that privilege Jews constitutionally, legally, politically, socially and culturally. Moreover, the two-state solution denies Palestinian refugees their internationally recognized right of return.
The two-state solution entrenches and formalizes a policy of unequal separation on a land that has become ever more integrated territorially and economically. All the international efforts to implement a two-state solution cannot conceal the fact that a Palestinian state is not viable, and that Palestinian and Israeli Jewish independence in separate states cannot resolve fundamental injustices, the acknowledgment and redress of which are at the core of any just solution.
In light of these stark realities, we affirm our commitment to a democratic solution that will offer a just, and thus enduring, peace in a single state based on the following principles:
* The historic land of Palestine belongs to all who live in it and to those who were expelled or exiled from it since 1948, regardless of religion, ethnicity, national origin or current citizenship status;
* Any system of government must be founded on the principle of equality in civil, political, social and cultural rights for all citizens. Power must be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all people in the diversity of their identities;
* There must be just redress for the devastating effects of decades of Zionist colonization in the pre- and post-state period, including the abrogation of all laws, and ending all policies, practices and systems of military and civil control that oppress and discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, religion or national origin;
* The recognition of the diverse character of the society, encompassing distinct religious, linguistic and cultural traditions, and national experiences;
* The creation of a non-sectarian state that does not privilege the rights of one ethnic or religious group over another and that respects the separation of state from all organized religion;
* The implementation of the Right of Return for Palestinian refugees in accordance with UN Resolution 194 is a fundamental requirement for justice, and a benchmark of the respect for equality;
* The creation of a transparent and nondiscriminatory immigration policy;
* The recognition of the historic connections between the diverse communities inside the new, democratic state and their respective fellow communities outside;
* In articulating the specific contours of such a solution, those who have been historically excluded from decision-making — especially the Palestinian Diaspora and its refugees, and Palestinians inside Israel — must play a central role;
* The establishment of legal and institutional frameworks for justice and reconciliation.
The struggle for justice and liberation must be accompanied by a clear, compelling and moral vision of the destination — a solution in which all people who share a belief in equality can see a future for themselves and others. We call for the widest possible discussion, research and action to advance a unitary, democratic solution and bring it to fruition.
Madrid and London, 2007
Signed:
Ali Abunimah
Naseer Aruri
Omar Barghouti
Oren Ben-Dor
George Bisharat
Haim Bresheeth
Jonathan Cook
Ghazi Falah
Leila Farsakh
Islah Jad
Joseph Massad
Ilan Pappe
Carlos Prieto del Campo
Nadim Rouhana
The London One State Group