Protests and occupations are a necessary component of change and progress, but long-term structural change also requires dialogue, compromise and a willingness to build things together. This is why we, a group of mid-career EUR women academics and staff, wanted to create a forum for a critical and open discussion and a forward-going momentum for concrete commitments to change at our university in the wake of the Occupy EUR protests - culminating in the Round Table event of December 15.
Written by Ginie Servant-Miklos, Katharina Bauer, Constanze Binder, Marieke de Wal
Agreement with the cause
All four of us are deeply concerned about the climate crisis and committed to social justice. We chose a career in academia because we wanted to create positive change for a fairer and more sustainable world through our research and education practices. Several of us have a history of social justice and climate activism, including participation in protest. Therefore, we supported the cause and peaceful methods of Occupy EUR. Some of us participated in the occupation of the Sanders building, in what was a peaceful, cozy, and constructive atmosphere. We were shocked and angry about the intervention of the riot police, which prompted two of us to initiate an Open Letter, with a group of colleagues, condemning the CvB’s decision and calling for the respect of academic freedom on campus and the immediate start of an open and direct dialogue among the EUR community.
A narrow window of opportunity
In the days following the occupation and intervention, there was confusion and hurt within the EUR community. The CvB was perceived as too slow to take the measure of the impact of their actions on their staff and students, too hesitant to issue an apology, and too reserved in that apology. Their attempts to bring Occupy EUR students to the negotiation table the day after the police round-up only increased tensions. In response, the Occupy EUR students and some staff, who were shocked, hurt, and understandably angry, called for the resignation of the CvB. This created a confrontational situation where neither party was willing to enter into a real dialogue.
At the same time, Occupy EUR achieved something momentous: the protest shifted the overton window for policy-making on campus significantly towards change. In the organizing team of the debate two core motivations met: on the one hand, seeing the urgent need to enable a real open and critical dialogue where all members of the EUR community could meet at eye level, to give a strong sign that our university is a place where critical thinking is encouraged and the freedom to voice criticism in the light of the urgent societal challenges we face, must be respected and fostered. On the other hand, seeing that a narrow window of opportunity for change and progress within our university was now open and that we should get concrete commitments for change before the holidays closed down the momentum. The combination of these two motivations unleashed a powerful dynamic and helped us get things moving so quickly. The EUR is our community, all four of us have been at this university for a decade or more, and we felt that we owed it to our community to emphasize that the university should be a safe space for peaceful discussions and critical voices in times of societal change (the core goal of the Open Letter) and to seize the opportunity for long-needed change towards a really sustainable and impact driven university.
Nine days to bring a divided community together
A week after the occupation, the four of us met with colleagues from ESL and DIT, and produced a plan for a round table discussion that could bring dialogue between different parties within the EUR community. Although we aimed to bring the CvB to the table on our terms by setting pre-conditions for dialogue (to which the CvB responded), and co-create the space for dialogue with the Occupy EUR students, we also understood that the EUR community is more diverse than just administrators and protesters - there is a rainbow of perspectives on academic freedom and sustainability among our staff and students, who deserve a fair and respectful hearing of their views, within the limits of mutual respect and scientific discourse (e.g. we took an early stand against platforming climate deniers).
Such an event would normally take weeks to organise: we did this in nine days. Hundreds of e-mails, dozens of phone calls and meetings… plans were made and changed up until the very last moment. We are grateful for the patience of our speakers in the light of organisational hick-ups given the time pressure, and to everybody who participated in organising, for their rapid reactivity and willingness to make time for this.
Only the start of the dialogue
We tried our best to inform and include the Occupy EUR students every step of the way. This was not easy - communication was choppy, despite our best efforts. We were not able to meet with them face-to-face, so everything was done via signal messaging, which is not an easy way to build trust. In the end, Occupy EUR decided not to participate in the round table as a group. We respect that decision, and were grateful to the students from Occupy EUR who nonetheless came to the Round Table on their own behalf.
The Round Table was respectful, emotional, and honest. The entire CvB and quite a number of senior management were present, as well as a range of students, some of which supported Occupy EUR, others who opposed the occupation. The range of viewpoints at the table was as diverse as we had hoped. This was a good start to a true dialogue, the likes of which we have not seen on this campus before.
However, we feel that the commitments made by the CvB at the Round Table were too modest for the scale of the challenge ahead. The four of us strongly believe that this university needs more than an SDG dashboard to make this university truly impact-driven. Transparency is a pre-condition for debate and action, not a substitute for action itself. We will continue to remind the CvB to live up to its promises to green up in 2023, with concrete debates, proposals and action-plans. We also want to further support the demands for better working conditions and accessibility - not only in the sense of accessible building, but in a much broader sense including (financial) accessibility of education. To continue the dialogue and put Erasmian Values into action we would really like help and support from the entire EUR community, to include all of our different positions, cherishing our disagreements as a strength in jointly moving forward. We need to create spaces for critique and controversy nourishing a movement for concrete action both centrally, and within the different faculties. After all, EUR belongs to all of us.
If you are interested in contributing to keep the momentum going, please e-mail dit@eur.nl