• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

Professor Applebee (left) and other faculty attend an anti-war teach-in in April. The Iraq war st

Photo

Students gathered in Bruin Plaza on March 5 to protest increased student fees and the pending war

Though waged thousands of miles away, the war in Iraq did not leave UCLA untouched. Even before the first air strikes, many students protested against the war, while others demonstrated in support of President Bush and U.S. troops.

The war fueled debates along Bruin Walk and sparked rallies on campus and around Los Angeles. Though the subject aroused powerful emotions on campus, its effects on teaching at the university were often felt more strongly outside the lecture halls.

Out of the classroom, faculty members, many of whom opposed the war, were active in teach-ins and in the campus Academic Senate. While faculty activities that could be classified as pro-war were rare, special courses and panels were held to bring debate onto campus.

One of the most visible ways faculty members involved themselves in the war came in mid-April, when the Academic Senate voted, nearly a month after fighting began, to oppose the war.

One of the faculty members who wrote the anti-war resolution, sociology professor Maurice Zeitlin, said he believes the American public is not adequately informed on Washington’s foreign policy.

The war presented a problem to professors in determining what their responsibilities as faculty members are, he added.

The resolution, which addressed the controversy of the war, became controversial itself, angering many who supported the president and military effort.

Clifford Brunk, vice chairman of the UCLA Academic Senate, said the resolution, which was approved “quite late,” had its largest impact outside UCLA, especially among people who disagreed with the Senate’s vote.

The resolution was not the only way Zeitlin addressed the war as a professor. He also incorporated it into his coursework when he thought it was relevant.

For example, during a lesson on counterfactual reasoning, which requires students to imagine likely scenarios if important conditions in real life change, Zeitlin asked his students to speculate what would happen if the United States makes unilateralism and pre-emption foundations of its foreign policy.

History professor Gabriel Piterberg, who participated in two anti-war teach-ins, said they provided a better format for professors to engage in contentious topics.

“It’s controversial to deal with these issues in class. These forums are designed especially for this purpose,” he said.

Not all activity on campus was based on opposition to the war. In early April, an event billed as a “pro-liberation” teach-in presented cases in favor of invading Iraq. Though no UCLA faculty were panel members, speakers included L. Paul Bremer, who is now the top civilian administrator in Iraq.

In March, UCLA hosted two panel discussions to bring expert debate on Iraq and the North Korean crisis to campus. The Iraq discussion featured arguments opposing and favoring intervention, and the North Korea event included analysis from several scholars, including UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale, who is a nuclear security expert.

During spring quarter, the war and related issues became the focus of an honors class created specifically to bring foreign policy debates into the classroom.

“The class was designed to show the changes and processes that have occurred in American foreign policy since 9-11,” said political science professor Steven Spiegel, who teaches the course with political science professor Geoffrey Garrett.

The instructors hoped the class, which featured weekly guest lectures and was open to the general public, would inform students and others not majoring in political science or related subjects.

“What we designed is a class with a public lecture component to fit people who may not have a very clear background,” Spiegel said.

However, the war was not a pervasive issue in many classes that did not focus on political or social issues. One cause cited for this is the short duration of the conflict.

“It came and went,” Brunk said.

Vietnam, on the other hand, “took literally years and years to form on campus,” he added.

With reports from Menaka Fernando, Daily Bruin Staff.