Israel: College Responds, Hosts Vigil

Hamas’ Saturday, October 7 attack on the Jewish State plunged the Middle East into chaos, led to thousands (and counting) civilian and military deaths, and has compelled The Daily Mail at least to begin considering the prospect of WWIII. Apart from now-rampant fears of escalation, the conflict between Israel and the Gaza Strip-based terrorist group has inflamed a war of words across the Western world. The war has dragged everyone from students to intellectuals to celebrities and public officials into the fray and certainly has not spared Dartmouth.

As reports rolled in throughout the weekend of Hamas’ atrocities, it remained unclear how or if Dartmouh’s Administration would respond. After all, our colleagues in Cambridge remained tight-lipped throughout the weekend, even as thirty student organizations released a statement supporting the terrorists. Would Dartmouth remember the civilian victims of Hamas’ terrorist savagery with the same eagerness that we prosecute alcohol violations? Would we stand with civilization and order? Or would we equivocate? An air of schizophrenia permeated that weekend: Corners of the American ivory tower stood slack-jawed at the fruits of their rhetoric about ‘resistance to occupation’ and ‘apartheid.’

Thankfully, President Beilock did respond. Her October 10 statement, while not exactly the most timely, expressed concern about the events in Israel: “Like many of you, I watched with growing horror the Hamas attack on Israel this weekend, the escalating violence, and the devastating loss of life, especially among civilians.” The President continued, “Adding to my deep sorrow over the overwhelming human tragedy playing out in Israel and Gaza are the ways in which the war affects Dartmouth’s global community and many of our colleagues, peers, and friends.” 

That the statement only briefly mentioned Hamas, which chose to conduct its attack at the end of the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, was regrettable but not unusual. Harvard President Claudine Gay’s statement on October 9 did little but express how “heartbroken [she was] by the death and destruction unleashed by the attack by Hamas that targeted citizens in Israel this weekend, and by the war in Israel and Gaza now underway.” Although public pressure did (rightfully) force Gay into releasing another, stronger condemnation of Hamas, it is hard to imagine how one could expect more from Ivy League leadership than boilerplate ‘sympathies’ and ‘heartbrokenness’ in response to any crisis.

Indeed, it was not in our College’s public statements that we distinguished ourselves in response to Hamas’ violence but, rather, in the broader campus reaction.

To the Administration’s credit, it took the initiative to sponsor two interdisciplinary ‘forums’ on October 10 and 12 to discuss the conflict. Both events filled Moore’s Filene Auditorium and deployed professors from across the faculty to unpack the horrors from the weekend. Speakers at the Thursday forum included the Eli M. Black Distinguished Professor of Jewish Studies, Susannah Heschel; the Jane and Raphael Bernstein Professor in Asian Studies, Jonathan Smolin; former Egyptian diplomat and Senior Lecturer Ezzedine C. Fishere; and Visiting Professor Bernard Avishai, who is himself an Israeli-American and former West Bank settler.

The most heated moment of the panel came when a student introduced his question with a minutes-long explanation of how Dartmouth hadn’t “condemned” Hamas while the Administration had clearly targeted Russia in its statements at the start of the War in Ukraine. Professor Heschel, visibly nonplussed, responded that Dartmouth’s opposition toward Hamas was so “obvious” that it needed not to be underlined. She further suggested that statements from university presidents about foreign wars might themselves be a waste of time, considering their “reductionism.” Apart from this student’s filibuster, the forum proceeded smoothly, respectfully, and candidly. It even opened with personal reflections from each of the speakers about their heritage and personal connections to the broader religious conflicts in the Middle East.

Indeed, Dartmouth’s Israel programming seemed to have escaped the vitriol and violence that has captured the public square at other universities. At the Hillel- and Chabad-sponsored vigil for Israel, held after the Thursday forum, around 300 students gathered on the Green, where organizers read poems of mourning and tragedy, prayed for the Israel Defense Forces, and sang Hatikvah, the Israeli national anthem. There was no disruption or counter-protest, save for the moment when a Safety and Security officer inspected an unattended backpack. Beilock’s speech was brief, but it unequivocally condemned Hamas. She noted her own Jewish heritage and was on the verge of tears. Senior Vice President and Senior Diversity Officer Shontay Delalue also did not shy away from recognizing Hamas’ evil. Where Dartmouth could have easily failed and joined its counterparts in the Ivy League at the table of moral equivocation, it met the bar and, even, exceeded it.

It is hard to explain just how the College’s response to the Israel-Hamas War has been so extraordinary. The Administration has certainly fumbled in response to tragedy before—forgetting to release a statement on 9/11 but remembering when the Supreme Court voted inconveniently (twice). The Review and our pro-Israel advocacy through the decades certainly isn’t the reason. Nor is the reason a sudden change of heart from the American left that dominates this country’s institutions, including Dartmouth. To deduce that, one need only examine the civil war among congressional Democrats over Israel. No matter the reason, credit is due where credit is due. When the Jewish State was attacked, our College did not back down from addressing the conflict. However improbably, it returned to the model of truthful, respectful, and free academic discourse that it used to uphold. And in the midst of a tragedy like that which the world has experienced in recent weeks, our College’s reaction has been a justification for hope.