Statement in Solidarity with Colleagues Affected by the Executive Order on Banning People from Entry to the USISA Baltimore, 22-26 February 2017
1. Februar 2017
Dear Colleagues,
As every year, we were looking forward to discussions with researchers around the globe at the International Studies Association (ISA). However, given the current political developments in the US, we are convinced that we cannot proceed as in the previous years. The Executive Order (EO) policies enacted by the White House target innocent individuals, including academics who are on the ISA programme. At the same time, they undermine fundamental norms of democracy, the rule of law and human rights. They thus impact directly on the right to academic freedom and scholarly practice.
Deep concerns have already been raised by various political leaders, such as Angela Merkel. In the academia, a number of statements have been written – or are in the process of being drafted – in order to protest this situation. In reaction to these, the ISA Executive Committee has adopted the Statement Regarding Executive Order on Travel Ban[1]. Yet, in addition, with our statement we wish to address the following three questions:
- What are practical consequences of the EO for attending the ISA 2017 in Baltimore?
- What are the political issues, i.e. how should the ISA respond to the travel ban?
- What are future implications, i.e. which steps should ISA take with regards to subsequent conferences?
1) What are practical consequences of the EO for attending the ISA 2017 in Baltimore?
We regard two issues as fundamentally important regarding the question of whether to participate in this year’s ISA or not: solidarity and personal security.
- On the one hand, it is absolutely necessary to demonstrate solidarity with all those who are directly affected by these Executive Orders. On the other hand, we need to take these political circumstances seriously and consider whether it is possible to take personal safety for granted. Travelling to or within the country without facing tough controls by state agencies that can even lead to unmonitored detention and various types of harassment, cannot be guaranteed under current circumstances.
- We’re not convinced that it is possible to have “the opportunity to discuss how to move forward as an Association in this changed reality” (ISA Governing Council statement, 29/1/17)
- …in the absence of many of our colleagues not able or willing to attend under these circumstances,
- …in the absence of a diversity of academics from around the globe, which is caused by the executive order, and
- …in an atmosphere of anxiety, repression and hatred in which academic freedom is no longer secure.
- In light of the above, we do not believe that a simple absence – that is, a boycott – is enough to show our solidarity. Some additional actions are required in the short- and medium term.
- We are convinced that participation would merely reinforce the US government’s narrative that its policies only target security issues, but not the very principles of democracy. Thus, our protest needs to be addressed to a broader audience within and outside of the academic community. We therefore ask for your ideas about alternative future venues and opportunities where we can safely and in the presence of unrestrained academic freedom carry out our academic debate.
We therefore demand that ISA sets up the technical infrastructure that allows all physically absent people to communicate their perspective during the roundtables and panels. We further call for the possibility to refund costs in case people either cannot or do not want to travel to the US.
2) What are the political issues, i.e. how should the ISA respond to the travel ban?
- Like many others[2] we do not agree with the position taken in the ISA Governing Council statement which claims that the travel ban is a “policy issue” on which the ISA cannot take a “partisan stand”.[3]
- Rather, we consider this to be a fundamental question of democracy, of human rights, an issue concerning the rule of law and ultimately an issue of academic freedom on which the ISA can and should comment.
We therefore demand that the ISA participate with clear demands to protest, as they have done in previous cases (compare ISA statements on academic freedom in light of Turkish academics being imprisoned in 2016) based on their policies as a non-profit organization that “do not exclude the ability of the association to advocate for its membership related to the exercise of academic freedoms and responsibilities.” (ISA Articles on Public Advocacy and Public Policy Activity)
3) What are future implications, i.e. which steps should ISA take with regards to subsequent conferences?
While no one can be sure whether the travel ban will be upheld in the long term, we are afraid that under the current US Administration the USA is not a safe country to travel to for many of our colleagues.
Therefore, to warrant a safe environment in order to realize the right to free academic practice, we demand that the ISA Governing Council consider the possibility of re-locating the ISA 2018 and 2019 conferences outside of the US (for similar actions compare e.g. ICA).
If you support this statement and wish to sign, please reply to glob-gov"AT"wiso.uni-hamburg.de.
Prof. Antje Wiener PhD (formerly: ISA GC Member-at-large; Section Chair: ENMISA; currently: Member of IO-ExecCom)
Dr. Maren Hofius
Dr. Philip Liste
Jan Wilkens, MSc
Dr. Sassan Gholiagha
Prof. Dr. Tanja A. Börzel (formerly: ISA Program Chair)
Prof. Dr. Thomas Risse
Prof. Dr. Stephan Stetter (Spokesperson IR section, German Political Science Association)
Carmen Wunderlich
Prof. Dr Christoph Meyer
Prof. Dr. Diana Panke
Prof. Dr. Oliver Kessler
Sebastian Schindler
Stefan Wallaschek
Gregor Hofmann
Dr. Thorsten Thiel
Prof. Dr. Dvora Yanow
Ilyas Saliba
Dr. Cornelia Ulbert
Friederike Kuntz
Dr. Kirsten Selbmann-Lobbdey
Prof. Dr. Andreas M. Bock
Dr. Charlotte Dany
Prof. Rianne Mahon
Prof. Jan Aart Scholte
Anahita Arian
Jan Busse
Dr. Frank Gadinger
Prof. Jacqui True
Prof. Dr. Aram Ziai
Chris Tenove, PhD
Dr. Markus Fraundorfer
Prof. Vincent Della Sala
Dr. Klaus Jacob
Prof. Dr. Simon Koschut
Dr. Axel Heck
Leon Valentin Schettler
Prof. Dr. Ursula Schröder
Lisa van Hoof-Maurer
Prof. Wolfram Kaiser
Prof. Holly Oberle
Maren Koß
Dr. Matthew Stephen
Prof. Dr. Manfred G. Lieb
Prof. Dr. Kai Michael Kenkel
Dr. Daniel Jacob
Wiebke Wemheuer-Vogelaar
Uwe Kotzel
Christian Ederer
Dr Martin Steinfeld
Prof. Dr. Mathias Albert
Prof. Raymond D. Duvall
Associate Prof. Eric Grynaviski
Dr. Mark Kersten
Prof. Richard Ned Lebow
Dr. Hannes Hansen-Magnusson
Luisa Linke-Behrens
Dr Meera Sabaratnam
Prof. Dr. Michael Zürn
Dr Felix Berenskoetter
Amentahru Wahlrab, Ph.D.
Prof. Dr. Markus-Michael Müller
Shannon Brincat
Associate Prof. Jennifer Mitzen
Prof. Dr. Andreas Vasilache
Prof. Peter R. Schrott, PhD
Dr. Maria Herminia Tavares de Almeida
Caroline Kärger
Dr. Louise Wiuff Moe
Colleen Bell, PhD (Region President & Region Program Chair)
Prof. Dr. Solveig Richter
Dr. Lisbeth Zimmermann
Prof. Dr. Anna Geis
Dr Sarah B. K. von Billerbeck
Dr Filippo Dionigi
Ana Karen Negrete García
Nicola Nymalm, PhD
Dr. André Bank
If you support this statement and wish to sign, please reply to glob-gov"AT"wiso.uni-hamburg.de.
[1] For details, see: http://www.isanet.org/News/ID/5411/ISA-Statement-Regarding-Executive-Order-on-Travel-Ban
[2] Compare Charli Carpenter’s Minerva Blog entry: (e.g. http://duckofminerva.com/2017/01/how-should-the-international-studies-association-protect-its-international-members.html; https://goo.gl/forms/mqZXvtZdoyWjEC7H2); the joint statement drafted by Robert Keohane and signed by more than 150 ISA members which was sent to the ISA Governing Council on 31st January; and numerous other interventions.
[3] For details, see: http://www.isanet.org/News/ID/5409/Announcement-to-ISA-Convention-Registrants.