Evelyne Kostanska sent the following issue to the blog:
Mamdouh Shoukri, an Egyptian-born engineer, will become the new president of York University this summer. In doing so he will be the first Muslim appointed as the permanent head of a Canadian university. Read about it in a Toronto Star article titled
Muslim President for York University. "This is Canada. It's a mosaic," Shoukri, 59, was quoted as saying.
Students, both Muslim and non-Muslim, expressed happiness at the appointment. One student,
Adam Hummel of Hillel at York, the centre for Jewish life on campus, indicated that Shoukri's selection was "very Canadian" and expressed hope that Shoukri's appointment would "wipe the slate clean" on the acrimonious tone of Israel-Palestinian debate on campus.
Similar discussions are being conducted in the United States regarding the candidacy of Barack Obama for United States president. Read about it in a New York Times article titled Obama Formally Enters Presidential Race. As some pundits have suggested, if Barack Obama, the son of a white American mother and a Kenyan father, is elected president, this will mean that racism in the United States has come to an end. Many doubt this claim, given the United States long history of racists practices. But what about Canada, and more specifically, what about York University? Does the appointment of of an Egyptrian-born Muslim have the potential to "wipe clean" the history of acrimony on the Israel-Palestinian debate on the York campus? What do historic firsts, like Mamdouh Shoukri and Barack Obama (if he is elected) do for long-standing ethnic, religious or racial controversies in which they represent the historically oppressed Other?
Evelyne Kostanska writes the following in response to the Toronto Star article regarding presidency of Mr. Shoukri:The election of a new president to head York University is going to re-spark debates that have recently catapulted York into fame. While I applaud York’s appointment of Shoukri, the first Muslim to hold the post of University President, I question whether his election was truly as apolitical and credential-driven as university officials claim. As many of us no doubt recall, over the last few years, York has gained notoriety for student driven Palestinian-Israeli conflict. While students have borne the brunt of blame, York’s administration itself has been attacked. Most commonly, critics assert that instead of allowing for freedom of speech and association, the University, in the name of “safety,” has adopted draconian measures – stifling debate, breaking up peaceful rallies, and suspending students.
In addition, though never explicitly stated, York administrators, and particularly Lorna Marsden, have often been accused of siding with its pro-Israel students in an effort to appease its large Jewish student population. As such, is it really merely coincidence that in an effort to shed its reputation of pro-Jewish bias, the University appoints an Arab leader who subscribes to Islam? Call me cynical, but as a former York undergraduate student, I have witnessed 4 long years of false promises and justifications. Most importantly, I worry that President Shoukri’s skills and accomplishments may be belittled if students view his election as a political ploy meant to appease. Furthermore, as York already suffers from a tense political climate, if students view the appointment as threatening, they may become further divided along ethnic and religious lines.
Finally, I wish to point out an additional danger illustrated by the Toronto Star article where this story is found. The report features a quote by a Hillel member, Adam Hummel, where he states that he hopes Shoukri’s election will “wipe the slate clean” in light of York University’s Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While such a desire is admirable and no doubt uttered in good faith, I contend that there is a very real danger any time a proposal to erase history is made. As we discussed in relation to racism, “color-blindness” or appeals to forget the past (based on ideas that things “are better now”) serve to erase the voices and history of the oppressed. We have also seen that ideologies such as those of “color-blindness” are a mere screen for more subtle forms of racism. Similarly, many in the Jewish community decry attempts to “move past” the Holocaust, arguing that it is thorough remembrance of atrocities that we avoid their recurrence. Likewise, I would argue that just as we cannot forget the historical realties of racially motivated violence, so too we should avoid wiping clean the history of Palestinian and Israeli relationships in York. There are better ways to move beyond conflict than resorting to “erasing” the past. While the past may be painful, it is not only a learning experience, but more importantly, it is the lived reality of people who do not deserve to be forgotten.
What do you think?
