As part of Global Peace and Justice Week, students held an
information panel Wednesday night in Young Hall where three
anti-war speakers shared their views.
The speakers were Susu Attar from the Muslim Public Affairs
Council, Sonali Kolhatkar from KPFK radio and Rosie Baldonado from
the Gabriela Network.
Attar, who has family in Iraq, criticized the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act
for reducing privacy rights and being too vague about what rights
remain uninfringed. She also graphically described the effects of
sanctions on Iraq.
The act gave sweeping new powers to domestic and international
law-enforcement agencies to monitor various communications with
fewer legal checks.
Kolhatkar, an Indian-American Muslim, advocated nonviolence and
accused the United States of being the single largest cause of
suffering in Iraq.
“(The question) “˜what can we do to help?’ has
the assumption that we are doing nothing,” Kolhatkar
said.
Baldonado, who is Filipino, spoke in advocacy of women’s
rights, especially in the Philippines, and said war has devastating
effects on women.
Many students who attended the panel had already made up their
minds against going to war with Iraq for any reason. Shabnam
Jahangiri, an undeclared first-year student, was one.
“They have no logical justification for why they’re
going to war, and they have no explanation for it. (In the) reasons
that they claim we’re going to war, there are so many
contradictions that you can find,” Jahangiri said.
Students for Global Peace and Justice coalesced last year to
protest the war on terrorism. They say the war is a veil to do
things in the government’s best interest.
“The point of this week is to raise awareness of how this
war is really a distraction,” said third-year political
science and international studies student Yousef Tajisar.
Academic Affairs Commissioner Chris Diaz said the
“so-called war on terror” is an important issue for his
office to confront because it uses resources that could potentially
be directed towards education.
Pro-intervention advocate and former Daily Bruin
Viewpoint columnist Andrew Jones expressed concern that the AAC
was using its office to make a minority political statement
unrelated to academic affairs.
“It’s not about education, it never was, and it
certainly isn’t in this case,” Jones said.
Diaz responded to this criticism by saying it wasn’t his
responsibility to provide any particular political view. He added
that all issues are interconnected, and because of this, his
office’s mandate includes opposing the war on terrorism.
“We’re not obligated to organize for the pro-war
side … it’s up to them to put in the effort to
organize,” Diaz said.
Jones said it was wrong for AAC to use student fees to fund a
political agenda supported by what he considered a small minority
of students.
“What makes all of this inappropriate is the question of
context. The first night was impartial, you had both sides
speaking; every other night is beating the anti-war drum,”
Jones said.
The AAC’s funding of anti-war events is in compliance with
UCLA’s student funding policies. Monday’s formal war
debate was sponsored by Diaz’s office, and the AAC paid to
advertise anti-war events on campus this week.
UCLA policy restricts religion-based and politics-based groups
from applying for funding from the Undergraduate Students
Association Council.
However, non-political bodies such as AAC can still fund
political programs from their general budgets.