As the Concordia Student Union (CSU) prepares to present its newly-approved Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) mandate to the Concordia University Board of Governors (BOG), some students are doubtful that the university will divest.
“Obviously, I’m happy [with the result of the SGM], but ultimately, I think it is important to keep our heads and realize that what we voted on isn’t an action in itself, but it’s a mandate for the CSU to bring up to the board of governors,” said Laurent Cardinal, a political science and philosophy double major. “I think that escalation in the face of administrative roadblocks is potentially on the horizon.”
On Jan. 29, the two BDS motions passed with a landslide majority of 885 to 58 in a direct-to-question vote that bypassed any debate. They will be presented to the BOG during its next meeting on Feb. 6.
CSU External Affairs & Mobilization Coordinator Danna Ballantyne believes that it might take some time for the BOG to see eye-to-eye with Concordia’s undergraduate student body.
“I think the board of governors has been actively ignoring these student demands in every capacity since they first started being raised in the ‘90s, and they have had ample opportunity to have open discourse with student leaders about this for many years,” she said. “So, I don’t have high hopes that they will do so right away, but I think that this step is the first of many of adding pressure and lobbying them to act in a way that is in accordance with what the students want.”
Ballantyne thinks the large turnout at the SGM was the greenlight the CSU needed to lay more pressure on the BOG.
“We didn’t have a clear way of knowing where the students stood apart from having seen the strikes and many protests on campus, so having an actual tangible number to be able to go back to is really beneficial in the ability to do my job,” she said.
Ballantyne remains confident the BOG will eventually agree to the students’ demands to divest.
“The university has [divested] before, such as with fossil fuels,” she said.
“They were able to find alternatives that didn’t damage students’ opportunities and academic careers, and I believe wholeheartedly that they will be able to do the same for weapons manufacturers who [are involved in] apartheid, genocide, and human rights violations.”
However, some students do not think that the SGM vote holds enough weight to lead to concrete changes.
“More escalation is necessary than just passing a motion,” said recreation and leisure studies major Sylvia Mondestin, who is a member of Concordia’s Revolution Communist Party. “Hopefully, the leadership of this movement will realize that these symbolic gestures aren’t actually going to liberate Palestine.”
Concordia University President and Vice-Chancellor Graham Carr issued a statement on Jan. 30 opposing the CSU’s motions, stating that “such campaigns are contrary to the value of academic freedom upon which all universities are founded.”
After the SGM, some students expressed that they felt that democracy was not served.
Once the two motions were presented, Chairperson Mya Walmsley opened the floor for debate. Coun. Ali Salman immediately motioned to call the question and obtained the necessary two-thirds vote, ceasing the debate. This upset some students, such as CSU Councillor and Chabad Concordia President Chana Leah Natanblut, who had prepared comments for the debate.
“I really feel that this is the student union and Concordia silencing the people on campus. This BDS motion does not take into [consideration] other people such as the Kurds, such as the Druze, and such as the many Arab Muslims that are living within Israel, Arab Israelis, as well as Jewish people, and Christians,” she said.
Even though Natanblut praised Walmsley on how well they conducted the SGM, she felt that the opposition was badly treated by the majority.
“We were laughed at, we were jeered at, and that is not okay,” Natanblut said.
At the SGM, both sides threw insults at each other during the counting of the votes.
BDS motions co-signer Dave Plant also expressed his thoughts on the two motions going directly to a vote.
“In a perfect world, we would be able to have a solid back-and-forth debate. But unfortunately, due to people’s extremely passionate interest in this, it’s too difficult when this is a direct democratic process,” said Plant. “[The SGM] was overall done well and played by the rules, even though I would have liked to have seen a bit of debate.”