James Baker: Divisive, or deserving?

The University's decision to bring James Baker to speak at this year's Commencement may be raising concerns among pro-Israel and Jewish students, but experts say that Baker's political and personal viewpoints should not have kept the University from inviting him.

The Penn Israel Coalition has taken issue with the decision to bring the former U.S. cabinet member and co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group who famously clashed with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in the past and is alleged to have made anti-Semitic remarks.

PIC President and Wharton and College junior Max Schapiro said it is "inappropriate" for Penn to bring in an individual who is "so offensive to so many in this community."

But officials are saying that Baker's political background and past statements should not affect the University's decision to ask him to address the senior class.

"He's been a long-time public servant; . we don't think it's appropriate to deny him the opportunity to serve as a keynote speaker," said Barry Morrison, director of the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that monitors anti-Semitism.

Baker has been criticized for a quote he allegedly made that was published in a 1992 column in The New York Post. In the article, Ed Koch, the former Democratic mayor of New York City, claimed that Baker said, "Fuck the Jews. They didn't vote for us anyway."

Baker and national pro-Israel groups have long been at odds with each other. In 1989, Baker delivered a speech to AIPAC, a pro-Israel lobbying group, in which he said that there was "no greater obstacle to peace" than Israeli settlements.

Still, some say other figures with similar accomplishments and without a history of such controversy should have been more strongly considered.

"There are plenty of speakers whose records don't stir the kind of feelings that have been stirred in these particular students," said Edward Beck, a 1983 alumnus of Penn's Graduate School of Education. "If such a speaker is offensive to Penn students, then that issue should be reexamined."

Beck, president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, added that, at graduation, "you want to go hear an inspiring person. Baker is not considered" to be one.

SPME - made up of academics from universities around the world - is a resource center that informs academics about Middle Eastern affairs.

Others said Baker may not be as anti-Israel as some say.

"I don't think people who have seriously looked at foreign policy issues would see that he's ever taken a position that would put him in [the anti-Israel] camp," said Don Kettl, director of the Fels Institute of Government.

Beyond these Middle East-related concerns, others are pointing to Baker's involvement in the 2000 presidential election as an even greater source of the controversy.

Kettl and Political Science professor Ian Lustick cited Baker's role in the Florida vote, in which he was the crucial figure in having the Supreme Court intervene and prevent a final recount.

"The most controversial thing he has done is to have sabotaged American democracy" in the election, Lustick wrote in an e-mail.

Baker is not the first Commencement speaker to generate heavy debate before even stepping foot on campus.

In 1980, black student groups on campus were successful in protesting the selection of former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) as that year's Commencement speaker.

Moynihan had advised President Richard Nixon to approach race issues with a policy of "benign neglect," a policy widely seen as an abandonment of pro-black national programs. Eventually, Noel Gilroy Annan, a British academic, was chosen instead.

The University has thus far backed its selection of Baker as the 251st Commencement speaker. Penn Trustee and acclaimed journalist Andrea Mitchell, who was involved in the decision to bring in Baker, called him "an esteemed Secretary of State, long praised for his devotion to Middle East peace."

Staff writer Emily Babay contributed reporting to this article.

Comments (12)

Even though I am a liberal Democrat and James Baker is a prominent Republican, I would have greatly preferred Baker as a commencement speaker to Jodi Foster. Baker has a long record of public service from which he can draw in his speech, and he also continues to be a prominent figure in current events, heading up the Iraq Study Group with Lee Hamilton. Baker may not share the same view of politics and current events as me or others on campus, but at least he has the experience to have well-formed views on those topics. That seems like a much better criterion for choosing a speaker than either (a) ideological alignment with the campus or (b) having made a few good films a number of years ago.

The pro-Israel and Jewish students who are disappointed in him as a speaker for his beliefs are ridiculous. GROW UP. you don't always get what you want.

I would actually like him to talk about how settlements are an impediment to peace. It would be nice to have some uncomfortable truth in a commencement speech for once.

Loser. No one always gets what they want but the Jewish students are allowed to protest. Welcome to America its called Free Speech.

The Israelis would have dismantled the setttlemnts years ago if the Palestinians wanted peace BUT they don't want peace rather Israel's destruction. (and in due time Christian Europe's destruction as well). PS The Settlements would have never taken place if the Arabs did not provoke war in the first place.

[QUOTE id="99effd75-59c7-4135-82af-a26f17112d3f"]The pro-Israel and Jewish students who are disappointed in him as a speaker for his beliefs are ridiculous. GROW UP. you don't always get what you want.[/QUOTE] And he's allowed to protest their protesting and vice versa by way of free speech, and the cycle goes on an on. If we all stop invoking the 1st amendment to defend our right to make arguments against one another and and actually address something, we might all get somewhere with our discourse.

Actually, that message was supposed to be addressed to "Law School Student."

I'm happy he's speaking. The fact is that anyone that disagrees with Israel is considered "anti-semetic"-which is a pile of horse dung. The FACT is that the pro-Israel lobby in this country is way to powerful and being a friend of Israel does NOT mean that Israel can do whatever it wants without accountability.

The only thing that makes any of today's uber conservatives even remotely palatable is that they tend to take a rational stance on Israel. Even morons like Bush and Cheney understand that Israel has a right to defend itself against its "palestinian" and Hezbollah neighbors that seek to destroy israel and the Jewish faith. However, James Baker is the horrendous combination of conservative politics of the right-wing, and the anti-semitic beliefs (disguised as pro-palestinian support) of many of the hard-core liberals. Baker is a disastrous choice on many levels. Sure, its perfectly okay to have a speaker who has slightly different opinions than the student body. But a commencement speaker is at the very least to share much of the same view of morality that rational human beings (and penn students) have, as its the speakers duty to inspire the graduating seniors as they venture into the real world. Having an anti-semetic (yet republican) bastard delivering his usual drivel is absolutely not appropriate for this solemn occasion.

Why is a conservative diplomat considered divisive, but a liberal considered deserving? Why do liberals, who presumably believe in free speech, try so hard to squelch the speech of people they don't agree with? Why do we drive on the parkway, and park on the driveway? Perhaps some things are never meant to be understood.

We had additional meetings because we wanted to ensure that the speaker would appeal to a broad base of people I understand the need to cover all bases. But who is the College speaker? Why have we not had a novelist? or a playwright? or a humorist? or a columnist? If writing is so essential to our career in the College, where the hell are the authors? PLEASE. Think of relevance and appeal, and what they really mean for us.

You declare that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely anti-Zionist. And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountaintops, let it echo through the valleys of God s green earth: when people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews. Lecture by Martin Luther King, Harvard University, 1968, quoted in Abraham H. Foxman, Never Again? The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism (San Francisco: Harper, 2003).

Comments are closed for this item.