The New York Sun delves into the composition of the committee appointed by Columbia University president Lee Bollinger to investigate charges of anti—Semitism and harrassment. The results are very, very discouraging:

Mr. Bollinger has, at the most important crisis of his tenure at Columbia, truckled to his employees in the faculty, permitting them, in effect, to investigate themselves. One can speculate about why he has chosen this course. No doubt he is aware that the president of a university can lose a faculty, meaning lose its confidence and lose any effective authority in his office. Perhaps he is seeking to avoid this fate and hold onto his job.

Good luck. Certainly the members of the Bollinger committee fail to generate confidence. One of them, Farah Jasmine Griffin, a professor of English and comparative literature, actually signed the petition calling for an end for American military aid to Israel and for Columbia to divest from companies that sell arms and military hardware to Israel. Mr. Bollinger himself called the divestment petition "both grotesque and offensive," which leads one to wonder why he would appoint Ms. Griffin to this committee.

Another committee member, Mark Mazower, a professor of history, has made the classic blunder of blaming the Jews for anti—Semitism: "If [Prime Minister] Sharon is seriously concerned about anti—Semitism, there is no one better placed than he to do something about it by changing his Government's policies towards the Palestinians," he wrote at one point. In another article, he compared Israel's occupation of the West Bank with Nazi Germany's occupation of Eastern Europe because both are doomed to failure. Mr. Mazower, in other words, is over his head.

The other members include a dean, Lisa Anderson, who supported the appointment to the faculty of Rashid Khalidi, one of the professors most hostile to Israel. Another, Ira Katznelson, is a professor of political science who, the Columbia Spectator reported, railed against the Bush administration at the notorious teach—in where Professor Nicholas De Genova expressed his hope that America would encounter a "million Mogadishus." The last is a professor, Jean Howard, who is vice provost for "diversity initiatives" and who signed a petition against the occupation of Iraq.

It's not merely the membership of this committee that gives us doubts but its mandate. It will take up merely "classroom experiences." Mr. Bollinger promises that the committee "will not investigate anyone's political or scholarly beliefs and will not review departments or curricula." This suggests that if, say, Professor Joseph Massad's "scholarly belief" is that Israel is a racist state that doesn't have a right to exist as a Jewish state, or if another professor, Hamid Dabashi, wants to write about how Israelis have a "bone deep" "vulgarity of character," or if Mr. Khalidi wants to fulminate about how a small group of Jews controls American foreign policy, the committee won't or can't do anything about it.

The Sun goes on to warn that Columbia University could well end up losing the support of its community, including many donors, if it persists in detaching itself from fundamental concepts like truth and responsibility.

Lawrence Summers dealt with the same type of scandalous issues at Harvard University, bravely dealt with them in a forthright manner, by giving a well—reasoned speech opposing divestment, anti—Semitism in academia, and by showing a willingness to lose "distinguished" professors like Cornel West, who spent the university's dime by participating in rap music ventures and spewing agitprop instead of educating his students.

The difference : Summers is a bold, visionary and brilliant leader who achieved great success in the worlds of commerce and government; Bollinger is a functionary of a campus world which rewards those who can ruffle the fewest feathers among the faculty—students and academic reputation be damned. Bollinger is no Summers.

Ed Lasky   12 10 04