It has now been over two weeks since a student-led University of Sheffield activist group occupied the Diamond in opposition against alleged ‘war crimes’. But has the demonstration wielded any tangible results in relation to the obstruction it caused?
The occupation led by Sheffield Action Group (SHAG) took off at the University’s £81m Engineering and Study Hub in the early hours of October 24, swiftly causing it to shut down whilst the protesters remained inside. The students aimed at driving change and raising awareness about the University’s links with conglomerates involved in arms manufacturing. More specifically, they were targeting Rolls Royce, BAE systems, Boeing, Airbus, GKN, Qinetiq, and General Electric Aviation.
🚨 WE HAVE OCCUPIED THE DIAMOND!
UoS must cut ties with the arms companies Rolls Royce, BAE Systems and Boeing.
❌No war criminals on campus or in careers fairs ❌ pic.twitter.com/0jSc7bT2KL
— Sheffield Action Group (@sheffaction) October 24, 2022
Their claim is that the University is enabling these companies’ involvement in ongoing conflicts around the world, outlining Palestine, Saudi Arabia and Yemen as places of particular interest, and are demanding the University cancel all contracts with them.
One of the student occupiers said: “The University of Sheffield is complicit in war crimes. By accepting money from these murder factories, the University is endorsing an industry that is directly causing the deaths of millions of people.”
To support their demands, the group has alluded to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests sent by Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) to 76 UK universities in 2020. The inquiries highlighted that 11 of those universities have received £190m from several arms-related companies since 2013. Amongst these, the University of Sheffield topped the list, having received close to £47m, with 72% of it coming from Rolls-Royce alone.
The protesters underlined the fact that the car manufacturer is involved in producing the jet engines used by BAE systems in fighter jets used against civilians in the conflicts.
While a different case can be made for every single company highlighted by the protesters, with different degrees of involvement and culpability for each of them, it is important to pick apart the dynamic of the University’s relationship with its main source of funding surrounding this topic.
The long-standing partnership between Rolls Royce and the University has been a big part of engineering students’ education journey, as well as a significant driver in graduate employment, with the company often recruiting alumni as soon as they get their diplomas. Amongst a variety of other programs and opportunities, the company’s University Technology Centre (UTC) in Control, Monitoring and Systems Engineering, established in 1993, has provided students with dozens of research and new system-developing opportunities.
The question, then, revolves around the degree to which the University should be held accountable for the car manufacturer’s different business ventures. It’s undeniable that the University’s involvement is a few steps removed from how certain of the company’s products are used in warfare which, combined with its importance for the engineering department, somewhat undermines the protesters’ claims.
Another student studying in an engineering-related course, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “It’s all just a bit annoying. Students aren’t really the ones involved in what they’re saying, and these companies play a big part in our careers.”
If this argument still sounds somewhat like pulling strings, try and swap the University, as an institution, with charities such as the British Lung Foundation and Asthma + Lung UK, who have also had long-standing relationships with Rolls Royce. It would be somewhat of a stretch to say they are involved, or even complicit, in war crimes.
This doesn’t mean, of course, that the University is beyond reproach for its relationship with Rolls Royce and other companies, only that it doesn’t necessarily make the University involved in the bombing of civilians.
In fact, if anything, the University’s handling of the protests, via its failure to engage with the criticism they posed, only serves to reinforce the group’s argument. In an email sent out to students across all departments, Matt Marshall, the Deputy Vice-President for Education, made clear the University was in contact with the protesters in order to achieve some common ground. He said: “We are in contact with the occupiers and we hope that the situation is resolved as soon as possible.”
However, multiple statements from SHAG have alluded to the fact that Mr Marshall had refused to answer any of their emails. In fact, when briefed on the writing of this piece, the University declined to comment despite being given the right to reply numerous times.
Not only has the University refused to engage with its student body, but a video posted on Twitter by the protesting group showcases the moment in which High Court officers warned the students as to the impending use of force to run them out of the building, ending the occupation in the early afternoon of October 28.
🚨 UNI THREATENS VIOLENCE TO EVICT US
High Court officers have evicted the occupation of the Diamond with threats of force while the Uni refuses to even meet with us
This heavy handed authoritarianism must be denounced and must not distract from our demand: Arms off campus now! pic.twitter.com/3ue8dQ3AjU
— Sheffield Action Group (@sheffaction) October 28, 2022
Despite being unable to do anything other than forcing BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, and Boeing to not attend the careers fair on October 26 and raising awareness of their concerns, the protesters still seem to be in high spirits with its results.
A spokesperson for the group said: “Although it’s deeply disappointing the University did not engage with us, we are happy with how the occupation went. Significantly more students are now aware of our institution’s links to murderous arms companies, and we hope they will join us in calling for these ties to end.”
While resorting to court action to end the occupation is to be expected, doing so without even trying to negotiate with the protesters, while telling every other student they had been doing just that, only goes to show the University’s willingness to sweep these concerns under the rug.
Hence, regardless of how one wishes to understand the degree of the University’s complicity in the claims made by the protesters, undermining and quelling the students’ right to protest in such a way should not be tolerated.
Image credits: Sheffield Action Group