LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Rutgers faculty calls on union boards to withdraw statements on Israel-Hamas War
We are writing to object to statements issued by the executive board of the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union and the Rutgers American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers.
After Hamas' October 7 massacre of 1,200 innocent people, mostly civilians, both unions released statements that we consider to be flawed on factual, political and moral grounds. These statements have angered and alienated a large portion of the members of both unions, as well as members of the larger Rutgers community. To maintain their claims to represent their memberships, we ask both unions to withdraw these statements.
In response to the Hamas massacres, the executive board of the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union, representing approximately 3,000 faculty, endorsed a statement from a radical anti-Israel group, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP). JVP, taking the extreme position that Israel should no longer exist as a Jewish state, promotes one-sided propaganda to delegitimize Israel.
JVP's statement about October 7 touched only briefly on the massacres and, instead, focused on Israel's response. The statement falsely and outrageously described that response as "genocidal." Using an age-old antisemitic trope, it accused Israel of having brought about the terrorist attacks on its own citizens. It made no mention of widely acknowledged legal and moral differences between deliberately targeting civilians, which Hamas does, and accidentally killing civilians in wartime, which Israel has done.
As problematic as the statement endorsed by the lecturers' union was, the undemocratic procedure leading to the endorsement was also especially regrettable. The executive board of the adjunct faculty did not consult its membership before making its decision, and it ignored suggestions to follow a more moderate path, such as endorsing the statement of the national American Association of University Professors. It has also ignored calls to withdraw or change its statement.
The full-time faculty union at Rutgers has likewise let down its membership with its own statement. In late October, the executive council announced that it was considering a statement and convened a Zoom "office hours" session for members to discuss a draft. The draft was badly one-sided, omitting or misstating the nature of the conflict in significant ways and prescribing political and military policies aligned with Hamas' goals.
Among the flaws: The draft statement, endorsing a letter by a self-selected group of Rutgers professors critical of University President Jonathan Holloway's heartfelt concern for the lives lost on the October 7 massacre, spoke of a "crisis in Gaza" but not in Israel. It also failed to mention Hamas or terrorism.
It also waded into foreign policy, calling on President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to broker a ceasefire in the war without conditioning the ceasefire on either Hamas' release of some 240 innocent hostages or on the surrender of Hamas' leaders.
Almost every single union member who spoke at the Zoom "office hours" meeting on October 25 criticized the statement on these and other grounds. Members urged the executive council either to discard it or to modify it significantly. They proposed specific revisions to address the shortcomings. Executive committee leaders promised attendees that their criticisms would be taken into account. But, several days later, the executive committee issued a statement that was virtually unchanged from the controversial draft.
They had made six revisions, largely cosmetic ones. The final statement retained the implicit endorsement of the anti-Holloway letter and a call for a ceasefire that was not explicitly conditioned to the release of hostages or on bringing Hamas leaders to justice.
The union has every right and even a duty to weigh in on matters of academic freedom and the campus climate. But it should not be issuing statements on geopolitics and foreign policy, especially when it is obvious that no consensus among the membership exists on the issues.
Rather than follow the reasonable and decent path of confining its statements to areas where consensus exists, the unions took stands that they knew stood in opposition to many members' views. For the sake of comity, and to retain its claim to faithfully represent its members, the union leadership should withdraw these statements.
David Greenberg is a professor in the Department of History and the Department of Journalism and Media Studies at Rutgers University—New Brunswick.
Martha Greenblatt is a distinguished professor in the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University—New Brunswick.
Cynthia Saltzman is a lecturer in the Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice at Rutgers University—Camden.
This letter is also written on behalf of the faculty of Rutgers Jewish Faculty, Administration, and Staff (Rutgers JFAS).
*Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 900 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following day's publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
