In defense of Rutgers University class of 2014

For this year’s graduating seniors, Rutgers University invited former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to deliver the commencement address. Rice, however, will not be present at the ceremony on May 18, as she announced on Saturday, following weeks of protests led primarily by her would-be audience of seniors.

Rice said she did not want her presence to detract from the importance of the occasion, stating, “Rutgers’ invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the University community at this very special time.”

But distraction is an understatement. 

Students expressed their disdain for her invitation vehemently, staging one of “the largest sit-ins in Rutgers’ history” outside the office of University President Robert L. Barchi, with signs that read “No honors for war criminals” and “RU 4 Humanity?” among others.

It shouldn’t be difficult to ascertain why these students opposed Rice’s invitation to a ceremony that begins their journey into the real world.

As secretary of state during the Bush administration, Rice was heavily involved in the Iraq War, arguably the most controversial war since Vietnam. She helped the Bush administration lie its way to invasion, falsely warning Congress that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was allied with al-Qaida. She was a strong voice in the effort to bring democracy to Iraq by force, which led to eight long, bloody years of war resulting in the deaths of more than 4,000 American troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, while costing the U.S. more than $1 trillion. And still, democracy never truly came to Iraq.

Therefore, Rice — a face consequentially attached to the Iraq War — is not an appropriate person to honor students who had no role in the war, yet still experienced the ramifications. And although Rice would surely not have mentioned Iraq in her speech, it’s unfair to unwrap old scars of a disappointing war effort on the day of commencement.

But were the students justified in driving out Rice — still one of the most influential women in politics of the 21st century — from their commencement ceremony?

The short answer is: of course.

Commencement belongs to the students, not the university board, faculty or anyone else. Students get one college commencement to reward them in a special way for years of working hard towards a degree.

Graduating seniors, then, have a right to express their input on a ceremony that epitomizes their achievements. Who is anyone else to say how they are to celebrate “their” graduation?

Nonetheless, many from the outside still had a lot to say on the Rutgers case. Republican New Jersey State Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini called the protests and Rice’s subsequent withdrawal “appalling and an embarrassment to our state.”

“This is nothing more than a political firestorm fueled by their hatred of an opposing ideology and President George W. Bush in particular. Dr. Rice and the people of New Jersey deserve better,” Angelini said. 

Angelini’s disgust is coupled with the argument that college campuses conventionally should be open to all points of view, and to protest Rice’s speaking at commencement is to protest this very paradigm.

This argument, however, overlooks the significance of commencement as a celebration of the graduates’ educational careers. And let us think about what was going on during this particular graduating class’s earlier educational career.

Most of the students in Rutgers University class of 2014 were in their early years of elementary school during the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, an event that is forever etched in the minds of my generation.

As kids, it was hard for me and others of my generation to grasp exactly what was going on during and after the attacks. 

All we knew in the weeks and months following was that there were people who wanted to destroy our country and homes and kill us for no particular reason. 

We were inevitably afraid of them, and in many cases, hated them. We had to get them before they got us. War was, therefore, deemed necessary. So we watched with pride as our loved ones went overseas to protect us.

As we grew older — becoming more aware of the world and the people in it — the reasons for our involvement in the Iraq War became further muddled. 

It’s obvious now that the threat of Iraq was less severe than Congress had originally anticipated because there were no weapons of mass destruction, contrary to what we previously believed. And later, we learned that our noble invasion neither thinned the terrorist ranks, nor transformed Iraq into the stable democracy we had envisioned.

Instead, the American invasion’s connection to Iraqi civilian casualties further inhibited democracy. The Taliban and al-Qaida used the casualties to fuel their anti-American cause, which subsequently spread across the Arab world. And although Saddam Hussein did fall, there remain millions of refugees in Iraq and omnipresent internal violence in the state.

So, after more than 4,400 American lives lost, 30,000 US service members wounded in action and more than $2 trillion spent, the results were not worth the price. 

Disillusioned youth naturally followed the war that generated the opposite of our expectations. And who could blame them? 

At a young age, my generation helplessly watched an uncompromising war unfold and bring little to nothing in return. It was prominent in the background as we grew up, and it’s nothing to be proud of or repeated. 

As my generation now experiences commencement, students celebrate both their lives up to graduation and also what is to come.

The Iraq War represents for my generation — including the Rutgers University class of 2014 — something that was thrust upon our childhoods unwillingly. 

The consequences of the war do not reflect our actions, nor what we want to achieve, yet they still negatively affected our lives through lost loved ones and lost faith.

While wondering why students were so upset over Rice speaking at their commencement, we must remember that the ceremony celebrates graduating with a hard-earned education and going off to make the world a better place. Such a celebration would be hindered by the presence of a leading speaker associated with a dark part of their lifetime.

Rice’s withdrawal from this particular commencement ceremony wasn’t a result of partisan politics, but rather, accountability for past policy decisions, which, in an essence, is what American democracy is all about.      

Write Nick at njv10@pitt.edu