On October 7th, 2023, Israel invaded the Gaza Strip, a territory of Palestine which is home to many Arab, non-Jewish people. Since then, more than 35,000 Palestinians have been killed, the majority of them women and children (Presse, AFP, 2024). As a result, widespread protests on college campuses across the United States and abroad have emerged. Today, many of these protestors are against what they consider genocide in the Gaza Strip, but for a number of reasons- including what history has proved time and time again to be true, colleges have been forced to adopt policies either limiting or shutting down these demonstrator’s protests on school property.

At Columbia University, 230 protestors were arrested. Similarly, at the City College of New York, over 150 protestors were detained. The University of Southern California had to cancel graduation ceremonies amid protests, which the university’s administration called a safety concern. All in all, by late April 2024, almost 1600 protestors had been arrested at just about 30 colleges (Haque, 2024). Police officers assigned to break up the protests have used tactics such as physical force and mass arrests (Bogel-burroughs, Blinder, and Bohra 2024).

Arrests on Different College Campuses as of Late April. (Haque, 2024)

How do protestors come into conflict with university administration? While the administration of these universities’ may believe in the importance of freedom of speech on college campuses, they also have good reason to worry that protests may be disruptive to the learning environment. At Columbia, protestors occupied Hamilton Hall, trapping many employees inside the building and making it unusable (Otterman 2024). Administrators may worry that similar events will transpire at their university.

The situation is tense, and controversial, but it is by no means new. These recent demonstrations on college campuses across the United States harken back to a very similar set of political demonstrations on college campuses during the 1960s. While college administrations and protest leaders were unprepared for the conflict that took place between universities, their students, their staff, and their faculty, today, we can look to the past to try to learn what paths these groups can take to try to balance focus on academics with student involvement in political activism in the most harmonious way.

As Kellie C. Sorey and Dennis Gregory note, while student unrest in American college campuses dates back to the early 1800s, the first large, riveting, nationally-coordinated set of college campuses protests were in the 1960s, following the invention of the television. Furthermore, prior to 1960, the International Student Conference lifted its ban on any debate or demonstration related to non-campus issues. Therefore, in the 1960s, student coordinators and college administrators then both had to deal with a novel, complicated, and shaky situation unlike anything that had been seen in the decades before. Within the decade, protests, which were typically related to the Civil Rights movement, the Vietnam War, or nuclear testing, turned from mostly non-violent and cooperative to disruptive and often violent by the middle of the decade. (Sorey and Gregory 2010)

University administrators alongside local and state police typically reacted to this disruption with acts of force. They gassed and beat students, released attack dogs on them, and threw ammonia and burning cigarettes on demonstrators in an attempt to discourage protest. Some public groups spoke out in support of these protests, which in turn increased hostility within the general American community. Additionally, acts of violence perpetrated by police against civilians often encouraged even moderate protestors to join in on the violence (Sorey and Gregory 2010). This suggests a very important lesson. Violence and acts of force should only be used with great restraint. The alternative may be that violence is used without restraint, preventing an academic or political conversation from occurring. Since it is the goal of the university and the protestors to foster dialogue and communication around key political issues, violence done by either group runs the risk of undermining their interest. It is necessary that neither party engage in violence, because as history has shown, one party committing acts of violence against another will result in retaliation.

Kent State Shooting. (Kent State Shooting)

The May 4th, 1970 shooting at Kent State University is a good example of this. In this tragedy, the National Guard of the state of Ohio shot and killed four students at Kent State University. It’s possible but unclear whether they were acting out of self-defense (Lewis and Hensley). While we can’t blame others for what may have been a lapse in judgment by the national guard, if the protestors hadn’t been using force during the protest, or if Americans didn’t expect protests to turn violent quickly, it’s possible the National Guard would not have been called in. The issue would’ve been avoided.

For this reason, we can learn from the past that any kind of violence encourages escalation. Protest organizers and administrations should try and keep protests as peaceful as possible.

An in-depth source analysis can be found here: Guide for Deeper Learning and Source Analysis: How Protests Are Handled on U.S. College Campuses.

Bibliography

Bogel-burroughs, Nicholas, Alan Blinder, and Neelam Bohra. “‘Decisions under Fire’: Campuses Try a Mix of Tactics as Protests Grow.” The New York Times, April 27, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/27/us/college-protests-police-response.html. 

Haque, Jennah. “Students Pitched Tents For Gaza On at Least 100 US College Campuses.” Bloomberg.com, April 26, 2024. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-college-pro-palestine-protests-map/. 

Kent State Shooting. n.d. Britannica . https://cdn.britannica.com/13/194513-050-20E302E4/Ohio-National-Guardsmen-Commons-Kent-Taylor-Hall-May-4-1970.jpg. 

Lewis, Jerry M, and Thomas R Hensley. “The May 4 Shootings at Kent State University: The Search for Historical Accuracy.” Kent State University. Accessed May 17, 2024. https://www.kent.edu/may-4-historical-accuracy. 

Otterman, Sharon. “An inside Look at the Student Takeover of Columbia’s Hamilton Hall.” The New York Times, May 8, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/nyregion/columbia-hamilton-hall-protests.html. 

Presse, AFP – Agence France. “Health Ministry in Hamas-Run Gaza Says War Death Toll at 35,303.” Barron’s, May 17, 2024. https://www.barrons.com/news/health-ministry-in-hamas-run-gaza-says-war-death-toll-at-35-303-eaa5abf6. 

Sorey, Kellie C. “Protests in the Sixties.” Educational Foundations & Leadership Faculty Publications, 2010. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=efl_fac_pubs. 

I decided it would be best to first learn about the current issue of how protests are handled on United States college campuses. I looked mainly to mainstream news sources for information on the topic of Israel-Hamas war protests on college campuses. I then noticed the connection between that and the protests of the 1960s and began looking for a historical account of the situation. I found one Tier 1 and one Tier 2 source for that. The search terms I used included “1960s”, “university”, “college”, “protests”, “unrest”, and “response.” I thought those worked well because they brought me to a lot of useful sources.

Source Analysis

I consider the article by Bogel-Burroughs and others a Tier II source due to its even-handed, well-researched, and detailed account of the situation. However, I used it like a Tier III source. I only took information related to general responses from some colleges. I know I can trust the New York Times to report accurate information given its widespread acclaim and credibility. 

I believe the article from Bloomberg is a Tier III source. It only contains short statistical information related to how many people were arrested. It’s a few weeks out of date, but it gives a good account of information about the scale of the situation.Therefore, I concluded I can trust Bloomberg to report the facts accurately. Also, these facts are largely compiled from other reputable sources.

The article on the Kent State shootings is a bit more tricky. I consider it a Tier II source. While it is published by Kent State, the authors were professors who shared their names and therefore probably wanted to keep the article neutral and accurate. If they didn’t, they’d risk their reputation. It is also very detailed and didn’t avoid representing many diverse opinions. 

I thought that the article in the New York Times by Sharon Otterman about Hamilton Hall was written to stir up emotions against the protestors. However, I decided it was usable because I only used it to show that there was some disruption to the status quo as a result of the protestors. And I only cited facts contained in the article. It’s either a Tier III or Tier IV source.

The article in Barron’s was very easy to use, because it is from a reputable source and reports the facts in a short format. I consider it a Tier III source. 

The article by Kellie Sorey is a Tier I source. It’s a balanced, thorough, and well-researched account of the history of college campuses in America. I also found it off of Google Scholar. For these reasons, it was very useful.

The Britannica source was only used because it stored one image which clearly exists. Britannica is also a very well-trusted encyclopedia.

I found from reading articles on the protests today that there is some bias in mainstream news sources. Right-leaning newspapers like the Wall Street Journal seemed to be more supportive of the protestors. On the other hand, more left-leaning newspapers like the New York Times seemed to be against them. They wrote more discouraging articles like the one by Otterman. I believe this may be because the sitting U.S. president is a Democrat.

Following 33 years of ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, Hamas invaded Israel on October 7th 2023. 1500 Hamas fighters swarmed in and rockets were set off beginning at 6am, leading to the death of 1200 people. Hamas fought with Israel over territorial disputes, political motivations, and Israeli blockade and occupation. They wanted to establish an independent Palestinian state, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. Israel’s occupation involves military rule, settlement expansion, and restrictions on the movement of Palestinians. Their settlements, considered illegal under international law, have expanded over the years, further complicating efforts to reach a solution in war. This blockade in the Gaza strip severely restricts the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza, leading to economic hardship and crises. Hamas also aimed to gain political leverage and support from Palestinians which is the reasoning behind their invasions to demonstrate commitment and relevance. The conflict between Israel and Palestine, aggravated by territorial disputes, political motivations, and the blockade in Gaza, has led to ongoing violence highlighting the complex nature of the situation.

Heres a quick timeline overview:

1990:

Ongoing peace talks to settle the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

Aimed to find a resolution to the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Negotiations focused on key issues such as borders, settlements, refugees, and the status of Jerusalem.

1995:

Prime Minister of Israel, Yitzhak Rabin, assassinated by an Israeli man named Yigal Amir on November 4 in Tel Aviv.

Rabin’s assassination deeply impacted the region and the peace process.

Rabin was a key figure in the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations and a proponent of the Oslo Accords.

Assassination led to widespread shock and outrage.

Several attacks carried out by Palestinian groups such as Hamas followed, targeting Israeli civilians and security forces.

1993: Oslo Accords:

Landmark agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

Facilitated by Norwegian diplomats and mediated by the United States.

Included mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO.

Established the Palestinian Authority (PA) as an interim self-governing body in parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Provided a framework for future negotiations on key issues such as borders, settlements, and the status of Jerusalem.

Represented a significant breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian relations.

2014: Gaza War commences:

Conflict erupted between Israel and Hamas.

Started with clashes between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants, including rocket attacks from Gaza and Israeli airstrikes.

Resulted in significant casualties and widespread destruction, particularly in Gaza.

Lasted 50 days and ended with an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire agreement.

Highlighted ongoing tensions and violence between Israel and Hamas, hindering efforts for lasting peace.

Additional timeline content:

•The Second Intifada (2000 – 2005): Israeli political leader, Ariel Sharon, visited the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif which led to violent demonstrations, marking the beginning of a second intifada.

•The Passover Massacre (March 2002): A terrorist attack killed 30 people at a Passover celebration, and the Israeli military reoccupied portions of the West Bank.

•Israeli West Bank Barrier (June 2002): Israel started to construct a security barrier in the West Bank to protect themselves from terrorist attacks; the wall impedes Palestinian movement and commerce.

•Israeli Withdraw from Gaza and Hamas Gain Control (2005 – 2007): Israel began a unilateral withdrawal of military forces from the Gaza Strip, and Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in 2007.

•Israel Attacks the Gaza Strip (2008): Israel launched nearly eight hundred rockets, attacking the Gaza Strip.

•Operation Protective Edge (2014): Israel invaded the Gaza Strip and killed about two thousand Gazans; war ended after a cease-fire was reached among the US, Israel, and other regional powers.

•Recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel (2017): U.S. President Donald Trump formally recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, instigating protests and violence throughout East Jerusalem, Gaza, and other regions.

•2021 Israel-Hamas Crisis (2021): Evictions of Palestinians in East Jerusalem and clashes at al-Aqsa Mosque sparked conflict between Israel and Hamas. Over two hundred people in Gaza were killed.

•2022 Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (2022): Israel launched a counterterrorism operation in the West Bank in response to attacks by Palestinians against Jewish Israelis, the deadliest year since 2005.

Why did Hamas invade Israel?

Territorial Disputes: One of the primary reasons for the Hamas attacks is the ongoing conflict over territory and land. Hamas seeks to establish an independent Palestinian state, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, which are currently under Israeli control.

Israeli Occupation and Blockade: Israel’s occupation involves military rule, settlement expansion, and restrictions on the movement of Palestinians. Their settlements in the West Bank, considered illegal under international law, have expanded over the years, further complicating efforts to reach a solution in war. The blockade of the Gaza strip severely restricts the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza, leading to economic hardship and crises.

Political Motivations: Hamas aims to gain political leverage and support from the Palestinians by presenting itself as a resistance movement against Israeli occupation. Launching attacks against Israel helps Hamas demonstrate their commitment to this cause and to maintain its relevance among Palestinians.

Original Slideshow:

Sources:

• https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-44124396?sa=D&scrlybrkr=6c7974ff – This source is from BBC, a very reliable and popular news source, and the whole page seems to contain legitimate and trustworthy information
• https://www.cbsnews.com/news/map-images-israel-gaza-strip-hamas/ – CBS news is another reliable and widely used news source and is relatively biased when it comes to political stories
• https://www.britannica.com/event/Israel-Hamas-War – Britannica is a very trustworthy database that contains high quality information about current events. There are also lots of hyperlinks in the article, meaning that the source has solid evidence to back up their writing. 
• https://prospect.org/world/2024-03-20-what-really-happened-on-october-7/ – The American Prospect is a legitimate news source, even though it can skew left. The pictures are cited well, and there are links in the article that reference outside sources. Media Bias and Fact Checking websites discern that this source is highly factual. 
• https://www.csis.org/analysis/why-hamas-attacked-when-it-did – The news source is legitimate and reliable, and the author of the article is established and has done many other trustworthy articles in the past. There are also lots of links and citations, showing that their writing is backed up by good evidence.