Rahel Helmhart contributed to this dispatch. 

Tuesday afternoon last week, one couldn’t avoid hearing the chants, claps and drums from the small square right in front of the Harmonie Complex at the University of Groningen (RUG). About 150 protesters, bystanders and a couple of policemen had joined a small encampment of around ten tents set up the night before. The small square showcased cardboards, flags and other signs mourning the victims of war amidst the ongoing conflict in Gaza. A statue of Groningen alumnus Aletta Jacobs, the first woman to attend university in the Netherlands, was wrapped in Palestine flags. On the side of the scene, a large banner reinforced the protest’s main motto in solidarity with the Palestinian people: ‘Boycott, Divest! We will not stop, we will not rest!’ 

The encampment has been in place for two weeks now, hosting events, protests, speeches and music around the clock. The camp is open to visitors and journalists, offers donation-based food, a small library, and a medical tent. On day fourteen, it hosted students, volunteers, and even parents with young children who continue to stand up for their cause. “The main reason we are here is to show solidarity with the people in Gaza”, a media spokesperson told JURIST. The protesters’ further demands are depicted on a large banner and shared on social media: ‘Disclose, Boycott, Divest’. The demands are directed at the university’s board ─ to disclose all sources of funding, to boycott all companies and institutions with ties and investments to Israel’s military and lastly to divest and cut ties with all Israeli educational institutions. This, according to the protesters, should send a signal to Israel’s government that its military operation has lost support in Europe. To date, the Israeli military strategy has cost the lives of 35,000 people in Gaza. “It is impossible and a sign of neoliberal thinking to deny the political power that the RUG has ─ how do you teach us all these concepts and expect that we do not use them?”, says one protester. In doing so, the activists follow and show solidarity with international examples, most notably university protest camps in the US and Canada weeks prior. All the while, the camp formally distances itself from all forms of antisemitism on its Instagram page. While setting up the proclaimed “anti-zionist zone”, the encampment formerly distances itself from antisemitism. “We need to fight antisemitism and racism everywhere and there has to be a political solution”, a speaker declares during the protest.

The camp organizers closely cooperate with protests across the country, some of which had escalated after police intervention and property damage was reported. The most notable example of a protest that led to police intervention took place in Amsterdam just days before the encampment in Groningen started. At the protest at the University of Amsterdam, student activists expressed the same demands, but the protests did not remain peaceful and led to the arrest of 120 protesters as violence broke out. This reflects concerns over the safety of protesters and the fear of getting arrested or expelled, which is why many protestors in Groningen have chosen to cover their faces.

The assigned media spokesperson of the encampment emphasized in an interview with JURIST that this was a last resort for students to ensure their voices were heard. It is the result of months-long research into the university’s ties to Israeli companies and universities. The organizers initially tried to host several events within university facilities, however according to the encampment’s spokesperson they were canceled for ‘bureaucratic reasons’ at the ‘last minute’, which in the eyes of the encampment amounts to ‘censorship’.  This supposedly shows a double standard when compared to how pro-Ukraine protests and events were treated by the University board, which as a reaction had cut all ties to Russian educational institutions last year. Moreover, the media spokesperson strongly condemned the violence in Amsterdam and did not take the peaceful nature of Groningen’s protest for granted ─  at the time of our interview, only one protestor had been arrested after an altercation with a bypasser during the night. According to the University newspaper, the following night a group of youths also harassed the protesters. Upon request of the University to keep the protest safe, the encampment includes an emergency exit, so everyone can leave in case of a potentially dangerous situation as has been seen in other Dutch cities.  

While the encampment’s demands and purpose have been clearly communicated to the University and the public, ambiguity remains about how the University can amplify student voices while boycotting and divesting from other educational institutions. This question has not been addressed by the encampment, and few protestors have been willing or able to respond.

Prior to the encampment the University had been in contact with the protestors and had organized several rounds of negotiations in which the demands and ties to Israeli companies and universities were discussed. Having had the opportunity to hear the impressions and reflections on this from both sides it is evident that the negotiations were not enough to satisfy the students’ demands but also left the University with little means to continue working on possible solutions that would avoid a boycott of Israeli companies and universities all together. Since the unsatisfactory outcome the encampment has refused to negotiate further and will continue to protest, raise awareness, and reinforce its demands in front of the University building. 

“The safety of our students, our scientists, and our university is our main interest”, Elies Wempe, the RUG’s press officer, told JURIST on the phone. That is the shared interest between the protesters and the University ─ to keep them safe from altercations with the police or other groups. She notes that some university staff ─ including herself ─ had previously been doxxed, ultimately leading to the university’s reluctance in not disclosing individual ties to Israeli institutions in fear for the safety of the people involved. The information about the RUG’s sources of funding however is publicly available and easy to access. Moreover, the reason why many protest-related events had been canceled was because the organizers appeared to be in no affiliation with the University, which is against the University Code. In response to the double standard criticism that the RUG does not break ties the same way it did during last year’s pro-Ukrainian protests, she replied, that, in contrast, there is no Dutch law that would force the RUG to do so and that the University continues to have a strong trust in academic diplomacy. As to the likelihood of the demands being fulfilled, she declined a comment. 

Although offers to negotiate further with the RUG have been declined by the protesters, who feel like their voices haven’t been heard by the University, both parties seem to be clear in their positions and accept each others’ limitations. Even though negotiations failed, communication channels are still open. What is clear is that academic dialogue must be kept alive, especially in a polarized conflict like this one. However, peaceful protest and dialogue in a bid to stop the killing of thousands of civilians, may it be in whatever context, should always be possible and welcomed in a democratic academic environment.