Dear all,
I have for long debated about responding or not responding to these emails. A part of me prevented me from speaking: like Giulio, I am an Italian national and I refuse to have my indignation for what happened be associated to my nationality. It seems to me that most of the answers to these emails and concerns also came from Italian scholars.
For long this forum has been used to send CFPs (I did it myself and find it extremely useful to reach colleagues worldwide) and request access to papers that we may not have through our institutions.
As a researcher that has herself been in the Middle East and not always in the safest situations for study/research I feel that this tragic event cannot, and should not, be left 'unattended' and not addressed 'critically' (whatever being critical means). I happily signed the petition promoted by Giulio's supervisors. I thank them for that draft and for taking some steps towards justice for Giulio and all those who have been abducted, tortured or even killed because they are part of some opposition groups in Egypt. But this is not only about Egypt and AlSisi's dictatorship, and this is not only about a white man going to do international research.
My question is, what does it mean to be free? What does it mean to be critical at this point? As Pyper puts it, what happened has much broader implications for higher education and research both within and beyond the UK. My question pivots around the role of research and our institutions. Can the researcher be safe and critical? In order to think and act critically, are there mechanisms that we can put in place to safeguard academic freedom without risking lives? How can we protect ourselves? And how should we be protected?
I wish you all a great Sunday.
Best wishes,
Diana