I am saddened that my final week of graduate school at MIT is marked by a series of events leading to the suspension of colleagues and a deep rift between campus communities. At the same time, I feel lucky to leverage my unique perspective into this critical moment.

The campus atmosphere has been tumultuous all year, best exemplified by the February suspension of the student group, the Coalition Against Apartheid, around Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations. The university claimed the Coalition Against Apartheid held an unpermitted protest, contradicting MIT policy.

In response, coalition affiliates distributed a pamphlet featuring speeches and letters reminiscent of Dr. King’s activism, highlighting the paradox of celebrating activism while suppressing it. The texts referenced Dr. King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” to discuss just laws and unjust laws, drawing on his rhetoric to argue that sometimes, unjust laws (such as parading without a permit) need to be broken because speaking up is the right thing to do.

The crux of the tension is this – something disruptive is happening in the world, and many students, having learned in their MIT courses that activism is vital for change, feel compelled to keep “all eyes on Rafah.”

The university president, meanwhile, aims to “make sure that members of the MIT community can work, learn, and do their research on campus without disruption.” This conflict is exacerbated by MIT’s research involvement in developing military drones for the Israeli army, possibly affecting civilians abroad.

The student protesters at the Gaza solidarity encampment are among the brightest on campus, capable of articulating the complex socio-economic and geopolitical issues underpinning the conflict, as well as presenting data about the carbon footprint and human rights violations associated with the destruction of cities and the biosphere.

The camp itself demonstrates the students’ ability to organize and manage complex projects. As is true around the country, many of the protestors are Jewish students, members of groups such as IfNotNow, Jewish Voice for Peace, and the MIT Jews for Ceasefire. One of the first events at the encampment was a Passover seder, a beautiful moment symbolizing MIT’s values of diversity and community.

The students took to tents because they want MIT to divest from its ties to the Israeli military, and for the right to influence the institute’s response to current events. Their calls echo those that highlight the contradiction between MIT’s sustainability curriculum and degrees and its continued financial support of fossil fuel infrastructure. With Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holding multiple MIT degrees, the students believe MIT’s voice could influence the situation in Gaza.

Their mode of protest drew inspiration from anti-apartheid campus activism in the 1980s, wherein students built shanties to make racial injustice in South Africa physically personal and present on campus, asserting that the global issue was linked to domestic investments and activities.

Continuing to enable injustice is a choice, protestors said, and choices can be changed. In response, many universities wrote new policies to preclude tents or physical structures as acceptable forms of free speech, which today are being operationalized to clear encampments and suppress student expression. These policies, today’s protestors charge, are unjust laws.

As the academic year ends, the university’s decision to clear the encampment and suspend students without a clear process reflects poorly on its commitment to academic freedom and transparency. The selection and timing of student suspensions has been obscure, hasty, and in violation of MIT protocol, whereas the repercussions of suspension are immediate and grave – students have lost access to housing, meal plans, funding, residency status, and the ability to attend the last week of classes or graduate.

Over a hundred faculty members have petitioned for due process for the suspended students, emphasizing that such ethical standards are the foundation of US law.

It is true that the protests can be distracting. But it is equally distracting to avoid the truth, and go about with finals as if news of state troopers beating teenaged students and reports of an ever-increasing death toll in Gaza aren’t filtering through our social media feeds and newspaper headlines.

If we can’t talk about this on university campuses, where can we? Sweeping the issue under the rug by removing the encampment and its organizers doesn’t solve the issue. MIT has taught me the importance of peaceful advocacy and democratic expression on campuses. History favors those who call for peace, and I urge MIT to stand with Gaza and reconsider its investments and policies.

Hazel O’Neil is a masters in city planning degree candidate at MIT.