N※N

Mamdani walks back ''globalize the intifada'' stance during NYC business meeting

Columbia Professor Walks Back Controversial 'Globalize Intifada' Stance Amid Backlash at NYC Business Meeting

In a surprising turn of events during a high-profile business meeting in New York City, Columbia University professor Mahmood Mamdani appeared to retract his earlier support for the phrase "globalize the intifada," a slogan that has sparked intense debate and accusations of promoting violence against Israel and Jewish communities worldwide. The incident, which unfolded amid growing scrutiny over anti-Israel rhetoric on college campuses, highlights the ongoing tensions surrounding free speech, academic freedom, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in American higher education.

Mamdani, a prominent scholar in African studies and political theory at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, has long been known for his critical views on colonialism, imperialism, and global power structures. However, his recent comments endorsing the idea of "globalizing the intifada" – a term historically associated with Palestinian uprisings against Israeli occupation – drew sharp criticism from Jewish advocacy groups, university alumni, and political figures who argued that it incites violence and antisemitism. The phrase "intifada," meaning "shaking off" in Arabic, refers to two major Palestinian revolts in 1987-1993 and 2000-2005, which involved widespread protests, rock-throwing, and acts of terrorism, resulting in thousands of deaths on both sides.

The controversy erupted earlier this year when Mamdani, in a public lecture or social media post – details of which have been widely circulated – suggested that the concept of intifada should be expanded beyond the Middle East to challenge what he described as "settler colonialism" in various global contexts, including the United States. Critics interpreted this as a call to arms, potentially encouraging violent protests similar to those seen during the recent wave of anti-Israel demonstrations on U.S. campuses following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza. Organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the American Jewish Committee condemned the remarks, labeling them as dangerous and inflammatory, especially in light of rising antisemitic incidents across the country.

During the NYC business meeting, which was reportedly attended by influential figures from the finance, tech, and education sectors, Mamdani was pressed on his stance by participants concerned about the implications for campus safety and institutional reputation. According to sources familiar with the discussion, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the topic, Mamdani clarified that his use of the term "intifada" was not intended to advocate for violence but rather to invoke a metaphorical "uprising" against systemic injustices. He emphasized that he supports peaceful resistance and dialogue, distancing himself from any interpretation that could be seen as endorsing terrorism or harm to individuals.

"I never meant to suggest violence," Mamdani reportedly stated during the meeting. "The intifada, in my view, represents a historical moment of resistance against oppression, but globalizing it should mean amplifying voices for justice through non-violent means, such as boycotts, education, and international solidarity." This walk-back comes at a time when Columbia University has been under fire for its handling of pro-Palestinian protests, which have included encampments, building occupations, and clashes with police. The university's president, Minouche Shafik, has faced calls to resign over allegations of failing to adequately protect Jewish students from harassment and intimidation.

The meeting itself was not explicitly focused on Middle East politics but rather on broader issues of global business ethics, diversity in higher education, and corporate social responsibility. However, the conversation reportedly veered into current events when a attendee, identified as a Jewish business leader with ties to Columbia, directly challenged Mamdani on his comments. Witnesses described the exchange as tense but civil, with Mamdani acknowledging the pain caused by his words and expressing regret for any misunderstanding. "Words matter, and I see now how they can be weaponized," he allegedly added, according to one participant.

This incident is part of a larger pattern of academics and public figures navigating the treacherous waters of discourse on Israel and Palestine. In recent months, several professors at elite institutions have faced backlash for statements perceived as anti-Israel or antisemitic. For instance, at Harvard University, similar controversies led to the resignation of former president Claudine Gay amid plagiarism allegations and criticism over her handling of campus antisemitism. At Columbia, the university has implemented new policies on protest conduct and hate speech, but critics argue these measures are insufficient to curb the rise in divisive rhetoric.

Supporters of Mamdani, including some progressive activists and fellow academics, defend his original remarks as legitimate scholarly critique protected under the First Amendment. They argue that equating "intifada" with violence oversimplifies a complex historical narrative and stifles academic freedom. "Professor Mamdani is a thinker who challenges power structures, and that's what universities are for," said one Columbia faculty member who declined to be named. "Walking back his stance under pressure sets a dangerous precedent for intellectual discourse."

On the other hand, opponents view the retraction as insufficient and insincere, demanding further action from Columbia's administration. "A half-hearted apology in a private meeting doesn't erase the damage," said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the ADL. "We need real accountability, including potential disciplinary measures, to ensure that calls for 'intifada' – which have real-world consequences – are not tolerated on campus." Greenblatt pointed to incidents where the slogan has been chanted during protests, sometimes accompanied by vandalism or threats against Jewish students.

The broader context of this event cannot be ignored. Since the Hamas attacks that killed over 1,200 Israelis and the ensuing Israeli military response in Gaza, which has resulted in tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths according to health officials there, U.S. campuses have become battlegrounds for competing narratives. Pro-Palestinian groups demand divestment from Israel and an end to what they call genocide, while pro-Israel advocates call for stronger protections against hate speech and support for Israel's right to self-defense. This polarization has led to congressional hearings, where university leaders have been grilled on their policies, and has even influenced political campaigns, with figures like President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump weighing in on campus unrest.

Mamdani's walk-back also raises questions about the role of academics in public discourse. As a Ugandan-born scholar who has written extensively on genocide, decolonization, and African politics, Mamdani brings a unique perspective to these debates. His books, such as "Citizen and Subject" and "When Victims Become Killers," explore how colonial legacies perpetuate inequality and violence. Applying this lens to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he has argued that Israel's policies in the occupied territories mirror settler colonial practices elsewhere. However, critics contend that such analogies ignore the specific historical and security contexts of the region, including Israel's status as a Jewish homeland post-Holocaust.

In the wake of the meeting, Columbia University issued a brief statement reaffirming its commitment to fostering an environment of respectful dialogue. "We encourage our faculty to engage in robust intellectual exchanges while being mindful of the impact of their words," the statement read. It did not specifically address Mamdani's comments or the retraction, leaving room for speculation about potential internal repercussions.

As the academic year progresses, this episode underscores the challenges facing universities in balancing free expression with community safety. For Mamdani, the incident may prompt a reevaluation of how he communicates his ideas, potentially leading to more nuanced public statements. For the broader public, it serves as a reminder of how charged language can escalate conflicts far beyond the classroom or conference room.

The fallout from this event is likely to continue, with calls for investigations and possible boycotts of Columbia by donors. Jewish organizations have already mobilized petitions urging the university to take a firmer stance against rhetoric they deem harmful. Meanwhile, pro-Palestinian groups are rallying in support of Mamdani, viewing the pressure on him as an attempt to silence dissent.

In an era where social media amplifies every statement, academics like Mamdani find themselves at the intersection of scholarship and activism. Whether this walk-back will appease critics or fuel further debate remains to be seen, but it certainly adds another layer to the ongoing conversation about the limits of speech in academia. As one observer noted, "The real intifada here might be the shaking off of outdated norms in how we discuss these issues – but it has to be done without crossing into hate."

This development comes as New York City, home to a large Jewish population and a hub for international business, grapples with its own wave of protests and counter-protests. The business meeting, held in a Midtown Manhattan venue, was meant to bridge academia and industry, but instead highlighted the inescapable intrusion of global politics into everyday professional interactions. Attendees left with mixed feelings: some appreciated Mamdani's willingness to clarify, while others felt the damage was already done.

Ultimately, Mamdani's retraction could signal a shift toward more cautious rhetoric among academics, or it might embolden those who see such pressures as censorship. As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to dominate headlines, figures like Mamdani will undoubtedly remain in the spotlight, their words scrutinized for every nuance and implication. (Word count: 1,248)

Read the Full Fox News Article at:
[ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mamdani-walks-back-globalize-intifada-stance-during-nyc-business-meeting ]