The undergraduate student government will vote Tuesday night on a resolution calling for the University of California to divest from several American companies that some say profit from human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza.
A similar resolution went before last year’s Undergraduate Students Association Council in late February. After nine hours of public comment and three hours of debate, councilmembers voted down the resolution with a 5-7-0 secret ballot vote.
Omar Zahzah, the president of Students for Justice in Palestine and a graduate student in comparative literature, said that after February’s failed resolution, group members sought student input to create what they think is an improved resolution.
Based on student feedback, the group broadened the resolution’s language to show how the issues facing Palestine affect additional communities, Zahzah said.
Another change the group made was adding a clause that says the purpose of the resolution is not to condemn Israel for alleged human rights violations, but instead to end the University’s investment in companies that support enterprises leading to actions some say are illegal.
Fifteen student groups co-sponsored the resolution with Students for Justice in Palestine, and 14 additional organizations endorsed the document’s content.
Some students said they felt the length and content of last year’s public comments did not allow for a productive conversation during the meeting.
Omer Hit, vice president of Bruins for Israel, said he thinks last year’s resolution caused more harm than help because it isolated different communities on campus.
“Within the realm of USAC, (voting on) a divestment resolution is a lose-lose situation,” said Hit, a third-year neuroscience student.
Some professors disagree about the constructiveness of conversations started on campus about divestment.
Vinay Lal, a professor in the history department and signatory on the resolution, said he thinks the drafters of the new resolution used more precise language this year to show how American companies selling their products in Israel and occupied territories affect the people living in the West Bank and Gaza.
“The people who have written up this resolution have done their homework,” Lal said.
While he said he disagrees with some aspects of the boycott, divestment and sanction movement, such as that the movement calls for academics to refrain from research in Israel and the occupied territories, Lal said he thinks UCLA’s current resolution shows that many communities on campus care about the issue.
Anthropology Professor Joseph Manson, however, said he opposes the new resolution as he opposed the resolution last year. Manson wrote a letter voicing his opposition to the boycott, divestment and sanction movement, which a student read aloud during public comments in February.
Though he said he thinks the language used in the new resolution is less inflammatory than last year, the current resolution is more disingenuous than last year’s. He said he thinks the public will still see this resolution – if it passes – as a victory for the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, despite the group’s wording changes.
“If voted yes, the caveats in language would be immediately forgotten,” Manson said. “It would be perceived as another university government condemning Israel.”
Councilmembers changed logistical procedures for the upcoming meeting in response to last year’s debate, including limiting outside media access, shortening public comment to three and a half hours and only allowing community members with a valid BruinCard to attend.
After public comment, Students for Justice in Palestine and Bruins for Israel will each give a 15-minute special presentation to present arguments for and against the resolution, respectively, said Avinoam Baral, USAC president.
Though divestment has been a contentious issue at UCLA, discussions of the movement extend beyond Westwood.
Judea Pearl, an Israeli-born professor in the computer science department, said he thinks voting on this resolution turns a localized conflict into a global issue and makes campus a political battleground. He added that he thinks the resolution likens council to a courtroom that can decree judgment.
“(The opposing side) is the prosecutor, the judge (while) offering the indictment and sentence and execution,” he said.
But some other professors said they think the students are pushing for a worthwhile cause. David Palumbo-Liu, a professor of comparative literature at Stanford University, said in an email statement that he thinks the resolution’s call for divesting from companies some say are involved in an illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is a legitimate claim found in other student-initiated divestment resolutions.
Stanford’s undergraduate student government failed to pass a similar resolution in 2013.
Several UC campuses, including Berkeley, Irvine, Riverside and Santa Cruz, have passed similar divestment resolutions calling for the UC Board of Regents to divest from companies like Boeing, Caterpillar Inc., General Electric, Hewlett-Packard and United Technologies. UC Davis’s undergraduate student body voted down a divestment resolution last May.
The UC Regents’ policy states it will only divest from foreign governments or companies if the United States federal government finds a government is committing acts of genocide.
The resolution comes at a time of transition for this year’s council.
Devin Murphy, former USAC president, stepped down from his position Friday, saying he felt the stress of his position and negative campus climate had taken a toll on his physical, mental and emotional health.
Murphy posted a statement on his Facebook Friday stating he thinks divestment is inevitable and that UCLA has a moral obligation to not receive funding based off the oppression of Palestinians.
In line with the USAC constitution, Baral stepped into the position of president Friday night, leaving the office of internal vice president vacant. The USAC president does not typically vote on action items, except in the case of a tie.
Eytan Davidovits, Bruins for Israel president, said he thinks USAC should table the resolution until both sides of the debate can compromise and create a joint resolution.
Though some councilmembers have discussed pushing back the vote until the internal vice president seat is filled, Zahzah said he feels postponing would be disrespectful to the research and campaign efforts of those who worked to get the resolution to the council table in recent weeks.
USAC will vote on the resolution at its next meeting Tuesday at 7 p.m. in the Ackerman Grand Ballroom.
“Another change the group made was adding a clause that says the purpose of the resolution is not to condemn Israel for alleged human rights violations, but instead to end the University’s investment in companies that support enterprises leading to actions some say are illegal.”
Well, I’m glad SJP has stopped pretending to care about human rights and moved on to being cops. Too bad they are extremely selective about which illegal actions they have a problem with.
If this resolution is truly in opposition of “illegal actions”, then it should divest from all companies and student organizations that work with Palestine, which is an entity guilty of war crimes. Let’s start with SJP.