I Question Mahmoud Khalil about Moving Strategic Student Protests off Campus and to the UN
[Re my piece on Larry Ellison: I should clarify that it’s not clear his takeover of TikTok is a done deal. And should stress: The US government claims it went after TikTok because of (Chinese) foreign influence, but Ellison talks like he's a citizen of Israel, not the US: "A country of our own, defended by all the brave men and women of the IDF. So anything we can do to support them...allowing our state to continue."]
Many thanks to Jonathan Zeitlin and Kelley Lane Lane for video and transcript.
During his remarks to the packed house at Busboys and Poets on Sep 18, Mahmoud Khalil, in conversation with Karen Attiah, said that he wasn’t an “activist” and that he hated protests. I asked:
Sam Husseini: I didn’t expect to hear “I hate protests.” But I somewhat relate to the sentiment in that protests need to be strategic.
A lot of the earlier questions expressed frustration: Where’s the student movement now? I think a strategic mistake was not moving more off campus — especially in the case of Columbia. You’re in New York, the UN is right there.
Today, for example, there were protests in front of the UN. The U.S. cast its sixth veto, and people were calling for the General Assembly to override it. With a two-thirds vote [using Uniting for Peace], you can authorize things like a protection force or sanctions. Roger Waters was there, Craig Mokhiber was there — serious activity is happening, but it’s completely disengaged from students.
Imagine if Columbia students, along with NYU, CUNY, and other universities, converged on the UN. I don’t know if it’s too late — you’ve got the big UN meetings next week. But the point is: you can’t just attack the enemy frontally.
I go to protests in front of the White House all the time. They’re social events, a way to catch up with people I know and love. But real pressure comes when you ask delegations — Ireland, Indonesia, Brazil — to live up to their rhetoric, to do more to stop an ongoing genocide. That’s the kind of strategy protests need.
Was there any discussion about moving more off campus, about being more strategic?
Mahmoud Khalil: I agree, but I must admit there isn’t one united vision for the Palestine movement in this country. It’s fragmented — especially in New York. You have at least three big umbrella groups, but no single shared goal. That’s something we need to solve.
There’s also been co-optation. Unfortunately, the movement here is no longer Palestinian-led in the way it should be.
That said, students at Columbia did work closely with the Harlem community from the start. It wasn’t just about divestment; Columbia is literally displacing Harlem residents. So students were intentional about embedding themselves within citywide struggles.
The problem, then, isn’t just with the student movement — it’s with the Palestine movement in the U.S. more broadly. There’s no unified vision, no clear sense of pressure points. People are tired. Across the world, people protest again and again, but there are no tangible outcomes — just more repression and violence against peaceful protesters.
So the starting point, I believe, is building a unified vision. No matter where you stand on the spectrum of views about Palestine’s future, caring about Palestine itself should be uniting. From there, you can build a stronger movement.
I do agree with you: protests right now often feel ineffective. The positive side, though, is that the movement has already shifted public opinion. For example, polls now show that around 76% of Democrats support Palestinians. That’s a huge change, and long overdue.
I honestly found the response wanting. The protests don’t have to be fully unified to be more strategic. Sometimes different strands can be complementary. I think lack of strategy is a form of co-optation and smart protests still feel very effective. And changes in public opinion have clearly not been enough to stop the genocide, so that’s rather unsatisfying.
Other questions I was considering:
We've clearly seen a wide assault on free speech, but I think using ICE against you was an especially skillful move by Trump to rebrand the Gaza genocide as an immigration issue to pretend to his rightwing base that he is America First rather than Israel First. And I think the Democratic Party is similarly much more comfortable talking immigration than genocide. Are you concerned that the way your case has been treated actually is used to draw attention away from the ongoing genocide?
Craig Murray in “The Curious Case of Mahmoud Khalil” pointed out that you worked in the British Embassy in Lebanon. Can you comment on that?
Added on Oct. 19: Back in June, I noted: “Two min NPR piece on Mahmoud Khalil makes no mention of Gaza, but does have him spouting ‘No Kings’ slogan.”
See:
Thank you Sam, Your continuing focus on the U.N. Uniting for Peace mechanism is the main hope I see. I am working to convince my members of Congress to vote against more weapons -- with pretty good results. But we're so far from succeeding in Congress as a whole. Foreign nations can unite if they're willing to defy the U.S. with whatever financial, diplomatic, or military consequences that brings.
Thank you for this. I'm not an organizer. I don't know strategy. But I know that the absence of a clear demand is the difference between a protest that can have an effect, and a rally. Rallies are necessary and good, but unless there are clear, measurable goals, the action is about the ppl at the rally and the psychological effects of their presence on them and their audience. Demanding power to take actions (preferably a limited number of actions) "or else" seems to be the most 'effective' form of protest. But like I said, I'm not an organizer.