“We wish to offer space for a fact-based and respectful academic debate.”

Joël Mesot, the Spring Semester has just ended and was perceived publicly as turbulent for Swiss universities. How did you find it?
In addition to all the good things that come with working at ETH, two topics in particular have preoccupied me: the financial challenges and, of course, the protests at all universities triggered by the situation in the Middle East, which have moved me greatly and, above all, worried me.

What exactly is causing you concern?
I am deeply shocked by the immense suffering caused by the violence on both sides, in Israel and Palestine. My thoughts are therefore first and foremost with all those individuals affected by the conflict: both the victims of the Hamas terror attack and their relatives, and the people in Gaza who are suffering enormously from the armed conflict and the disastrous humanitarian situation. I greatly hope that the opposing parties find a way out of this spiral of violence as soon as possible.

To what extent does this situation affect our university?
There are people at ETH who are directly affected by the conflict. They study, research and work in our community and are currently in emotional distress and anxious about their friends, families and the future of their home country. I wish all of them much strength at this difficult time. I am also concerned about the radicalisation confronting ETH Zurich: a very small, largely external faction is using the university as a platform and placing radical demands on us that we simply cannot accept – for instance, because they fundamentally call into question academic freedom. All we can do as a university is contribute to a fact-based debate to create an environment that also enables contentious perspectives to be discussed in a respectful manner.

Why does ETH Zurich say no to calls for a boycott of Israeli universities or a moratorium on all scientific contacts with Israeli researchers?
An academic boycott would diametrically oppose our principle of freedom of research and is out of the question. Particularly when political and diplomatic channels are blocked, academic cooperation serves as a bridge that we ought to leave intact. However, we are absolutely aware of the problematic aspects of academic cooperation. For instance, we are already being very careful when it comes to “dual use” – i.e. the possible military use of scientific results. We have clear processes in place and in-house experts at the export control office who review and decline critical projects and collaboration if necessary.

But is it not the duty of a university to permit critical debates about the situation in Gaza and not simply prohibit them?
A truly critical debate by all means. This has been taking place in various disciplines at ETH on an academic basis for years. As an international university with people from more than 120 nations, it is our duty to ensure a climate of mutual respect and listening. It is therefore not acceptable when other perspectives and opinions are no longer permitted or individual ETH members no longer feel welcome. We do not in any way tolerate racism, antisemitism and prejudice on the grounds of religion or origin. What we want is a constructive dialogue.

But the protestors claim that they are being denied precisely this dialogue by ETH.
The Executive Board was and is always open to dialogue and offered this to the demonstrators immediately after the first occupation. But we will not allow the conditions for this to be dictated to us by a faction that continues to present itself anonymously. A dialogue involves listening to one another, accepting other viewpoints and speaking in one’s own name.

Police in front of and inside the ETH Main Building – does that really correspond to the values of ETH?
The protests in the main hall may have been organised with peaceful intent, but they were not approved, proceeded to cause disruption and were perceived by many as aggressive and threatening. We consequently assumed our duty of care towards all employees and students and acted accordingly.

But surely the issue can’t simply be banished from the campus?
No, banishing is by no means the objective. On the contrary, we need to address the issue and create space for a fact-based and respectful academic debate, even if this is very challenging against a background of escalating violence. The Executive Board is seeking dialogue with all involved and affected ETH members and has already held many discussions with the individuals and factions concerned. In addition, we have decided to offer all interested ETH members a discussion event on the issue to take place this week.

If the dividing lines are so entrenched, is it still at all possible to have controversial discussions at an academic level?
This academic discussion was and is still possible within the ETH community. I wish to underline that the vast majority adhere to the rules of academic discourse and mutual respect. I do not doubt that this will also be the case on Friday at our discussion event.

The Executive Board has said that ETH does not offer any platform for political activism. Should our members act entirely non-politically?
There is some feedback showing that our position on this point may have been misinterpreted. We clearly do not all share the same understanding of “political activism”. Politically controversial issues may continue to be discussed at ETH. And we must also contend with public headwinds in areas in which our scientific expertise is essential.

So when does political engagement come to an end?
It ceases to be a question of academic discourse once it is only a matter of asserting one’s own position without allowing other arguments and points of view. Academic freedom is also no basis for such behaviour. ETH Zurich offers no platform for this, as we and our members would otherwise become purely political actors and lose credibility as scientists.

Individual research fields such as urban studies and investigations of the colonial past have come under media pressure in connection with the Palestine conflict. Some members of ETH Zurich also research in such areas. What is the position of the Executive Board here?
We will always conduct research in areas viewed critically by the public. We have to tolerate such resistance. But there is one thing we have to be absolutely clear about: ETH Zurich will never allow itself to be dictated to from outside about the research it engages in. This is crucial and even set out in the ETH Act. We defend this freedom of research vehemently. But freedom also entails responsibility: we must all adhere to the rules of academic discourse, as otherwise we will be shooting ourselves in the foot and provoking encroachments of this crucial freedom.