The Los Angeles Times
Monday, November 24, 1997
Strings on Foreign Aid Trouble Colleges
Universities are learning that hefty gifts from abroad can be
mixed blessings. UCLA has tabled Turkey's $1-million
professorship offer because of Armenian opposition.
By KENNETH R. WEISS, Times Education Writer
To UCLA officials in the midst of a $1.2-billion fund-raising
campaign, the Turkish government's offer of $1 million--to
endow a chair in Turkish and Ottoman history--seemed like a
welcome gift.
Then Armenian scholars around the nation learned of the
offer--and complained that there were strings attached.
What did it mean, for instance, that the gift required the
new professor to "maintain close and cordial relations with
academic circles in Turkey"?
To the Armenian scholars, this and other conditions were
intended to dupe the university into helping Turkey spread
propaganda hushing up its role in the massacre of 1 million
Armenians during World War I.
To the Turkish officials who offered to fund the
professorship--and similar ones at six other
universities--the complaints were "nonsense," politically
motivated distortions of innocuous language.
Last month, however, UCLA "indefinitely postponed" acceptance
of the gift to make sure it would not compromise academic
integrity--and to keep the controversy from escalating into
the uproar that followed Princeton University's acceptance of
a gift from Turkey last year.
UCLA's dilemma is a familiar one for America's universities
as they turn to private donors to augment student fees and
government funding. Big donors are not always satisfied just
seeing their names chiseled onto buildings--many want a say
over what goes on inside them as well.
That can be tricky even when the donors are doting alums, as
Yale University discovered when it rejected one graduate's
$20 million--because he restricted it to the study of Western
Civilization--and another's $3 million for a professorship in
gay studies.
But just as Democrats learned with campaign fund-raising, it
becomes even more delicate when the generosity comes from
abroad.
Schools from UC Berkeley to Georgetown University recently
have had to ponder whether to accept multimillion-dollar
offers from overseas, in Berkeley's case on the condition it
name a program after a controversial foreign leader.
"There are more of these opportunities from special interest
groups than you could imagine," said Morton Owen Schapiro,
USC's dean of the College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.
"I cannot think of a bigger sin in higher education than
letting our objectivity be compromised. [But] when facing a
fund-raising goal, it is very easy for a dean to convince
himself . . . that it fits in with the university's mission."
University officials say the challenge is to resist creating
an unneeded program or professorship--perhaps in an obscure
or frivolous subject area--just because a donor dangles funds
for one. But most schools certainly can use more money,
particularly for cash-strapped programs in international
studies.
In UCLA's case, the school already has two endowed chairs in
Armenian specialties--one in history, the other in Near
Eastern languages and cultures--and officials said the
history department was eager to add a Turkish expert. The
school's only Turkish historian, Stanford J. Shaw, is
retired, and has had to be called back to teach a few courses.
At UC's nine campuses, professors' salaries must come
primarily from tax dollars, so they are beholden only to the
public. But outside funds can upgrade the position to an
endowed chair and subsidize research, hire graduate
assistants, pay travel expenses and sponsor lecture
series--extras that can attract a leading scholar to the
professorship.
Funding Pressures
Getting outside money was easier during the Cold War, when
the federal government and nonprofit foundations devoted
millions of dollars to the study of China, Russia and
Southeast Asia, along with other regions considered important
to U.S. interests.
But that funding "has dried up almost completely," said
former Berkeley political scientist Chalmers Johnson,
president of the Japan Policy Research Institute, a San
Diego-based think tank. "With the end of the Cold War,
Americans have become inward-looking and parochial."
The result? Some academic programs have been forced to scale
back, shut down--or find backing elsewhere.
And some foreign powers have been all too happy to help.
One reason: This is where their own sons and daughters are
educated. For all the criticism of America's K-12 public
schools, U.S. colleges and universities still are revered as
the best in the world. Some 450,000 students come from abroad
for higher education here every year. USC alone has more than
4,000 foreign students, about 15% of its enrollment.
But there can be another reason for the generosity: an
attempt to curry favor with the world's only remaining
superpower. Foreign donors often say they simply want to
foster better relations through cultural understanding and
academic cooperation.
Self-interest, however, may play a bigger role, said Johnson,
the former Berkeley political scientist.
"The people giving money are not interested in academics," he
said. "They are interested in legitimacy and buying their way
into the establishment. . . . Whether these are strings or
not, they certainly are golden threads. If you write
something hypercritical, you can expect a call, 'Why in hell
did we give you any money?' "
The Korea Foundation, for instance, has been the target of
academic critics since it was established in the early 1990s
to help struggling programs in Korean studies. Backed by the
South Korean government, it now supplies the majority of
money for Korean studies at U.S. colleges and universities.
It was modeled after the Japan Foundation, which was created
to "promote international cultural exchange" and now doles
out $3.5 million a year to American universities and
scholars. But whereas the Japanese government effort set up
an independent peer-review board to make sure professors did
not feel pressure to do only sympathetic research, the Korea
Foundation did not--prompting some American scholars to
refuse any help from the "South Koreans' Academic Lobby," as
one critic branded it.
Whether a university is receptive to a foreign offer often
hinges on America's attitude toward the country at the moment.
"Six or seven years ago, a Japanese chair in international
trade could have sparked a major controversy," said Michael
Clough of UC Berkeley's Institute for International Studies.
"Today it wouldn't."
Indeed, no less than Harvard University has been running
full-page ads in Japan's English-language Nikkei Weekly
newspaper announcing, "Harvard University is now engaged in
fund-raising activities in Japan" for a new Asian studies
program. The ads invite other Japanese firms to join
corporate sponsors such as Mitsubishi, Sanyo Special Steel
and Nissan Motors.
Earlier this decade, Northwestern University's graduate
school of management accepted $1 million from Tokai Bank of
Japan to set up a chair in international finance.
Berkeley found itself in a brouhaha last December over a
possible $3-million grant to open a center for Chinese
studies, funded by a Taiwanese foundation. The hitch: the
foundation's insistence that the center commemorate Chiang
Ching-kuo, the late president of Taiwan. Chiang once headed a
secret police force during the rule of his father, Chiang
Kai-shek, the Chinese Nationalist leader who took his
government to the island after the communists ousted him from
mainland China.
The issue is volatile in the Bay Area, where Taiwan-born
journalist Henry Y. Liu was killed in his Daly City home in
1984 after writing a critical book about the younger Chiang.
Two Taiwanese gang members were convicted of murdering Liu on
orders from Taiwan's military intelligence chief.
What's more, some faculty members worried that Taiwan might
be trying to influence research on its embattled relationship
with China.
On the other side, some Asian Americans complained that a
generous offer was being unfairly eyed with suspicion because
of the controversy in Washington over allegations of foreign
political fund-raising involving Asians.
Controversy on Campuses
A year later, the fate of the money is unresolved. Berkeley
finally offered to name a program--not a whole center--after
Chiang. But the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation is considering
offering the $3 million instead to Columbia University,
Stanford University or the University of Chicago.
"If we give the grant to Berkeley, it is proper to use our
name," said Hsing-wei Lee, head of the foundation's North
American office in McLean, Va. "I cannot think of a better
name."
Although such proposed donations have spurred debates at
Berkeley, Yale and elsewhere, UCLA's consideration of the
Turkish professorship is just starting to generate
controversy.
The backdrop is a feud that has raged for generations.
Armenians have long tried to bring attention to "the
forgotten genocide" of more than 1 million of their people by
the ruling Ottoman Turks between 1915 and 1923.
The Turkish government vehemently denies the allegations of
genocide, saying the hundreds of thousands of victims were
casualties of war. It thwarted an effort in Congress in 1990
to designate a day of remembrance for the Armenian genocide.
The issue flared at Princeton last year when the school
accepted $750,000 from Turkey for a chair in Turkish studies
and hired a professor, Heath W. Lowry, who had worked for the
government. Lowry even had ghost-written the Turkish
ambassador's official denunciation of one scholar for writing
about the "so-called 'Armenian genocide.' "
A group of 100 scholars and authors led by poet Peter
Balakian, a Colgate professor, signed a petition criticizing
the Turkish government for trying to manipulate an American
university into "fraudulent scholarship." The signers
included Alfred Kazin, Norman Mailer, Arthur Miller, Susan
Sontag, Kurt Vonnegut and William Styron.
Armenian Americans also staged protests at the Princeton Club
in New York City.
The Turk-Armenian tensions reached UCLA last May, when
history professor Richard Hovannisian organized a scholarly
conference on Armenia.
H. Hayret Yalav, the Turkish consul general in Los Angeles,
attended so he could rebut any "Armenian falsifications."
Given that three of Yalav's diplomatic predecessors were
assassinated in Southern California between 1973 and 1982,
his State Department security detail insisted that all 700
conference participants be cleared through metal detectors
and that handbags be searched.
Armenian scholars complained that the security was a form of
intimidation. Yalav, in turn, wrote a protest letter to UCLA
Chancellor Albert Carnesale, denouncing the conference "as a
series of lectures invoking hate, revenge and blood feuds
against the Turks."
Then, on Oct. 10, the Turkish Embassy announced that UCLA had
accepted a $250,000 down payment to create an endowed
professorship, following the University of Chicago, Harvard,
Georgetown, Indiana University, Portland State University and
Princeton in doing so.
Armenian historian Hovannisian said he was shocked to learn
of the decision by his school. He believed that he had been
"intentionally left out of the loop" by the director of
UCLA's center for Near Eastern Studies, who picked up the
check in Washington.
Hovannisian and other Armenian scholars then questioned the
terms of UCLA's agreement with the Turkish government,
suggesting that the conditions would greatly influence who
could be hired to fill the chair.
The agreement limited the search to scholars having "cordial
relations with academic circles in Turkey" and "whose
published works are based upon extensive utilization of
archives and libraries in Turkey."
That wording, Hovannisian complained, guarantees getting
someone sympathetic to the official Turkish stance, because
"anyone who wants to write about the Armenian genocide is
excluded from those archives."
But Aykut Sezgin, a consular officer at the Turkish Embassy
who helped set up the UCLA endowment, said the school will be
free to pick the scholar it wants. Accusations to the
contrary are part of "a propaganda machine to create a false
Turkish image in the minds of Americans," he said.
Consul General Yalav complained that the Armenian view
dominates academic discussions. "What we are asking for is,
'Please, give us an equal voice,' " he said. "This is the
reason we are looking for the chair. Because there is no way
for us to reveal to Californians what really happened. I
challenge the whole Armenian community, let's sit down and
look at the facts."
The debate even spilled onto the floor of Congress this
month. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), a UCLA graduate,
expressed concern about "those who would want to cover up the
history of genocide." Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), who
became active in the Princeton debate, decried "this
unfortunate use of a major prestigious university as a
vehicle of indoctrination by another country."
UCLA's history department had been scheduled to consider the
professorship Oct. 31, but the matter was removed from the
agenda at the last minute and rescheduled for Dec. 5.
"There is reason to be cautious," said department Chairman
Richard von Glahn, "given the previous experience at
Princeton."
It doesn't take a political science professor to sense that
the issue won't go away as the proposed chair goes before von
Glahn's department, the full Academic Senate and officials
all the way up to UC President Richard C. Atkinson.
About a third of the nation's 1 million Armenian Americans
live in Southern California. Some of them called Meredith J.
Khachigian, who last month was named chairwoman of the UC
Board of Regents.
Khachigian, who married into an Armenian American family,
said she was assured by UCLA's Carnesale and UC Provost C.
Judson King that the proposal has been halted until they
"make sure the intellectual integrity is maintained and that
there are no strings attached."
Ted Mitchell, a UCLA vice chancellor who oversees
fund-raising, echoed the sentiment that the university
remains watchful for gift horses with untenable reins.
"Like all other first-rate institutions," he said, "UCLA has
and will continue to refuse gifts that are not aligned with
our priorities or compromise our decisions on what to study,
how to study it or who to hire for faculty."
Controversy at UCLA Over Endowment
The Turkish government has offered UCLA $1 million for a
chair in Turkish and Ottoman history. But the proposed gift
is being reviewed because of complaints that language in the
gift agreement would impair the objectivity of the selected
professor by, in effect, requiring the scholar to take the
Turkish position on controversial issues. Here is a look at
the controversy:
The Holder of the Chair shall be selected. . .upon the basis
of a worldwide search for the most eminent and able scholar
available in the field, with a direct knowledge of Ottoman
and Modern Turkish Studies and whose published works are
based upon extensive utilization of archives and libraries in
Turkey. The holder of this Chair shall possess excellent
communications and interpersonal skills to enable him or her
to attract students, to stimulate interest in the broader
public, to maintain close and cordial relations with academic
circles in Turkey. . .
-- Excerpt from the proposed agreement to establish
The Chair in Ottoman and Turkish History.
Certainly there's nothing wrong with the idea of having an
Ottoman/Turkish studies chair at UCLA. But the way this
particular one is being established raises serious questions
of propriety; because it is funded by a foreign government
with one of the worst human rights records in the world, a
government which persecutes writers and journalists and
oppresses millions of its Kurdish citizens, a government
which promotes official history through its state-sponsored
Turkish Historical Society. The push to establish this chair
is part of a campaign to deny the Armenian Genocide and
distort the role of subject peoples in the Ottoman Empire.
-- Protest letter from Levon Marashlian,
history professor at
Glendale Community College
As you are aware, we have finally been able to establish an
endowment chair at your university in the field of Turkish
History. We hope this development will encourage students to
develop an interest in our land, and inform not only them,
but through them, a wide community about a country so far
away. It is our guiding principle that knowledge of other
countries and cultures leads to international peace,
understanding and cooperation. We are strengthened by the
fact that your institution, as do many others, shares this
approach.
Letter from Turkish Consul General H. Hayret
Yalav
to UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale
Copyright Los Angeles Times