Tune in next week for more.
Blog Page 1830
5 Minute Tute: The Death of Bin Laden
What will the impact of bin Laden’s death be for al-Qaida?
Al-Qaida affiliates and other militants inspired by bin Laden will no doubt seek to mount attacks in revenge for his ‘martyrdom’. If they can, they will seek out targets in the US mainland; if not, they will be targeting US interests globally or US allies. In Pakistan and Afghanistan, there is a heightened risk of militant attacks, especially in view of the violation of Pakistani sovereignty in the operation. Bin Laden had long ceased to be an operational leader — rather a continuing icon and inspiration of anti-US defiance—as attacks on the al-Qaida leadership had removed most senior and middle managers. Instead, al-Qaida affiliates, particularly in Yemen and the Maghreb have taken up the mantle, leading to a more diffuse ‘franchise’ less able to mount attacks of the scale and complexity of September 11, 2001. Bin Laden’s surviving deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, does not have the same charisma. Therefore, bin Laden’s demise will demoralise the al-Qaida network, at a time when its violent ideology is being seriously challenged by the largely peaceful and non-religious agenda of the ‘Arab spring’.
What are the implications for the ISAF mission in Afghanistan?
Since al-Qaida’s presence in Afghanistan is very limited and its links with the Taliban durable and extensive, bin Laden’s absence will have little effect on the operational capacity of either group. However, since destroying the al-Qaida network and the elimination of bin Laden were central leitmotifs of the US presence, the Abbottabad operation will help politically underpin the Obama administration’s ambitious military withdrawal timetable. Yet in order to secure Washington’s strategic interests, the US military will still maintain a long-term presence in Afghanistan.
So are there potential repercussions for US relations with Pakistan?
The discovery that bin Laden was using a safe house less than one kilometre from Pakistan’s military academy in Abbottabad, which is only 50 kilometres from the capital Islamabad, bolsters claims frequently made by senior US officials, that senior al-Qaida and Taliban leaders have found sanctuary in Pakistan. Suspicion in Washington that Pakistan’s military and security agencies were aware of bin Laden’s whereabouts will strain bilateral ties.
Will bin Laden’s death boost Barack Obama’s presidency?
The bin Laden operation will cause Obama’s approval numbers to surge; unlike, for example, the rise in public support for former President Bush following the capture of Saddam Hussein in 2003, Obama’s recovery is more likely to endure. Saddam’s capture bolstered Bush’s image in areas where he was already then-perceived as strong (particularly national security); bin Laden’s death bolsters Obama precisely where he is weakest (national security, leadership). Indeed, the president’s opponents in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and potential presidential challengers immediately hailed the operation and most gave Obama a share of personal credit.
The rise of the SlutWalks
Four months ago a Toronto policeman was advising a group of law students on personal safety. ‘I think we’re beating around the bush here,’ he said. It was January, and ten women had turned up to Michael Sanguinetti’s health and safety workshop. ‘I’ve been told I’m not supposed to say this,’ he added, but went and said it anyway. ‘Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised.’
The result was that Sanguinetti’s remarks sparked an international response. On facebook and twitter, women signed up in thousands to add their voices to an increasingly angry pool of dissent. They decided to take to the streets in protest: first in Toronto, last month, then Boston, last week, with planned marches in over twenty other US states together with Argentina, Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Sweden. It is called SlutWalking – and it is coming to Cardiff and London.
There are two interesting points to note on the rise of the SlutWalks. Sanguinetti is not alone in thinking that women who dress like ‘sluts’ invite sexual aggression. It is shocking that a figure of authority would use a word like ‘slut’ in the first place – a bit like a British policeman choosing the word ‘faggot’ for ‘homosexual’ or shortening ‘Pakistani’ to ‘Paki’.
But there is no doubt that Sanguinetti spoke for a growing number of people who think that women who appear to be sexually available ‘bring it on themselves’. If we start to think like that it is difficult to draw a line. Is a woman on a night out dressed like a slut if she shows just a bit of cleavage, or bare legs, or does it have to be a generous helping of both? Does a woman deserve what’s coming to her if she drinks more than 3, or 5, or 7 units of alcohol?
It sounds ridiculous to talk of a culture of blame around women. But there has been a recent backlash in the naming of the accused in rape cases, where public sympathy has shifted towards men who are falsely accused over the women who have very truthfully been assaulted. Never mind that in 2008 only 6.5% of rapes reported to the police resulted in a conviction, or that up to 95% of cases may never be reported at all.
But there is also a wider issue surrounding the SlutWalks. It is bad enough that their organisers talk in woolly terms of female ‘empowerment’ and ‘emancipation’, as if women possess a great ‘feminine’ power just waiting to be recalled. The fact is that attempts to reclaim the word ‘slut’ – in the same way as ‘nigger’ or, to some extent, ‘Paki’ – will just not work. This is because women are still unsure if it is a positive thing to be what a ‘slut’ stands for.
It is interesting that this news came in the same week that MP Nadine Dorries said teenage girls should be taught the value of abstinence. Politicians seem to live in a world where girls are either having rampant teen sex and getting pregnant or where they should be be kept off sex altogether. Being proud to be a slut won’t be enough. The problem is finding the balance.
Rejecting the nuclear option
When, in May 2010, Caroline Lucas was elected as MP for Brighton Pavilion, it was a watershed mark for the Green Party. Never before had her party – which had been doggedly campaigning for around 20 years – played a part in mainstream British politics. This event followed a trend which had seen green issues gradually become hugely prevalent in politics. They have now become a necessity in the manifestos of all the main national parties.
Before we got down to the gritty business of parliamentary politics, however, I asked the leader of the Green Party to trace the history of her beliefs. “I first became interested in green issues through the anti-nuclear movement,” she told me. “In the mid-80s I was very involved in CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament), which is where I became politically aware of the risks associated with nuclear weapons, and by extension, nuclear power.”
She cites one book in particular as having greatly influenced her views – “the critical moment really was reading a book called ‘Seeing Green’ by Jonathon Porritt, which I read in 1986. It was a real light-bulb moment; he analysed the environmental impacts of the way we live today, but also made very strong political recommendations for how to change it. It made complete sense.”
So it would be fair to say, then, that Lucas’s awakening to environmental issues stemmed from both intellectual roots, and from more active involvement in the campaigning side of the movement. Both sides of her character, moreover, are still very much visible today. When she speaks about policy, for instance, Lucas reveals an incredible articulacy and intelligence. Yet when she is asked about her current views on nuclear power her passion and zeal are still manifest.
“The idea that we need nuclear power in this country is utterly misguided and can’t be supported by the facts,” she states firmly. “My argument about nuclear power is that it is unsafe, uneconomical, and more than anything, unnecessary… It is just one of the most expensive ways you can imagine of getting our emissions down and keeping our lights on.”
George Monbiot, author of ‘Heat: How We Can Stop the Planet Burning’ and leading columnist on The Guardian, has recently come out in favour of nuclear power. As one of the highest-profile ‘greens’ in the country, he has attacked nuclear energy for years, arguing along very similar lines to Lucas. Oddly enough, it was in the aftermath of the Fukushima crisis in Japan that Monbiot did a U-turn and decided that he was wholly in favour of nuclear energy, claiming that the anti-nuclear lobby had for years been advancing arguments which were “ungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged, and wildly wrong”.
These types of accusations, coming from a man who has been so staunchly and publicly anti-nuclear in the past, are surely damaging to the cause? Caroline Lucas takes a more intellectual approach this time: “In a sense he [Monbiot] is presenting us with an alternative, asking us whether we want climate change or nuclear power – but that is a false question. If you don’t have nuclear power, it does not mean you are locked into fossil fuels.” Lucas believes that the key to reducing emissions is in energy efficiency and energy conservation; “it might not sound very exciting, but actually it could make a massive difference”.
This might sound reminiscent of the old green movement, which seemed more concerned with reaction than progress, but Lucas is forward-thinking, and the Green Party’s policies seem to reflect her progressive attitude. “Technology” and “investment” are words which recur constantly in her speeches. In particular, her attitude towards big business is a million miles from the latent distrust and negativity of some of the older relics of the green movement.
“The private sector has an enormously important role to play,” she argues, “when it comes to being positive in this transition to a low-carbon economy.” While she admits that often it is ‘big business’ that hinders progress and reform, she believes this opposition is misguided – “the irony is that a transition to a greener economy is likely to be good for business, good for jobs, and good for the economy more generally.”
It seems, however, that at the moment this message is falling upon deaf ears in parliament. Lucas told me that she is frustrated with a coalition that came into power promising to form the greenest government ever, and yet has until now only delivered “a catalogue of missed opportunities and negative policies”. She cites the scrapping of the Sustainable Development Commission, cuts to the feed-in tariffs for the solar power industry, and the ineffectual nature of the promised Green Investment Bank as reasons for her disappointment.
“The biggest tragedy of all is that the government at the moment seems to think that environmental action is somehow in contradiction to a positive economy, whereas we would argue that if you want a strong and stable economy, the best way to do it is precisely through investing in green technologies.”
Getting this message across is one of her main priorities in parliament at the moment. As the government deliberates over whether or not to build a new fleet of nuclear power stations, moreover, Lucas is determined to see the money put towards the development of renewable energies. It seems, however, for the time being as though the circumstances are against her.
Aside from green issues, Caroline Lucas has recently been particularly vocal in debates over parliamentary reform. The Green Party was, perhaps unsurprisingly, in favour of AV. When I conducted this interview, the referendum of 5th May was still far from a foregone conclusion. Lucas’s warning is perhaps more ominous and poignant now than it was when she voiced it a few weeks ago – “my fear is that a ‘No’ vote will be interpreted by the government as meaning that the public don’t want any kind of electoral or constitutional reform, and it will set back the case for that reform by at least a generation”.
On 5th May we may well have also set the Green Party back from achieving the parliamentary recognition that they perhaps feel they deserve. Nonetheless under the leadership of Caroline Lucas the party has come far, and there is no reason to believe it won’t continue to progress from here.
Kukui runs out of Juice
Kukui has announced that after three years at the forefront of Oxford’s clubbing scene, it is closing down.
An event on their Facebook page reading “The end is nigh, Kukui is closing up shop” extinguished the final hopes of Kukui-lovers across Oxford.
The club has been a favourite with Oxford students since its launch in September 2008. The closing party on Saturday was advertised as a “closing down sale. Everything must go.”
When Cherwell asked why the club has decided to close down, Kukui representatives declined to respond. However, the declining popularity of their “Juice” student nights on Tuesdays coincided with Camera’s launch of Blues Tuesdays.
An inside source also conjectured, “after the mid-week student nights lost momentum, despite the immense popularity of weekend events such as Passport to Paradise on Saturdays, the operation was simply not economically viable given the high rent the proprietors were paying for the lease of the property.”
Lucy Crane, a diehard Teddy Hall Kukui fan, grieved its loss. She said, “What am I going to do now without the entertainment of the glowing pufferfish after I realise all the fit boys in the club have girlfriends?”
However, another student’s Facebook read “VIP in Kukui is a bit like sitting in Sudan’s airport lounge, not a surprise it’s closing.”
DJ Tony Nanton, who frequently plays at Kukui Oxford and their sister club Kukui Bournemouth, expressed his anguish over the closing of the club. He said, “we need a phoenix from these ashes. Kukui has allowed me to play the tracks that other DJs and clubs haven’t had the bottle to.
“I remember years ago when I first wanted to play Low by Lil Jon and the Eastside Boyz, and the manager told me there was no way I could do that, it would clear the floor. On Saturday night at the closing event I dropped that song and had to laugh when I saw the very same guy on the dancefloor and he looked over and gave me a humorous nod.
“That’s what Kukui did, they pushed boundaries. It’s a shame to see them closing for business.”
Varsity Events, who claim to “run all your favourite nights out in Oxford,” switched lanes to promoting Camera on
Tuesdays shortly before Kukui annnounced its closure. They officially announced they would host a “Pimms Party at Blues” at Camera Tuesdays on Tuesday 3rd May.
Advertisements for the event read, “With Juice coming to an end last term after a decade of keeping Oxford students suitably lubricated on a Tuesday night, we’re happy to announce we are now working with Camera!”
Dom Conte, company director of Varsity Events, told Cherwell, “Varsity Events have a long relationship with the management of Camera, and after Hilary decided that we could provide a better experience for our avid clubbers by moving our Tuesday to Camera.”
By the end of Hilary term, Varsity Events reportedly had only three reps actively working on Kukui promotions across the entire university.
A Varsity promoter commented, “it’s hard to push people to go to Kukui on a Tuesday when you yourself would rather go to Camera. With three Camera reps and more than 30 Exeter students at Camera last Tuesday, it’s safe to say our college love it there.”
A student from St. Hildas said, “Camera is easily my favourite club in Oxford. Coming from London, where the night life is remarkably different, I found Camera to be the closest to what I’m used to; classy appearance, sophisticated people, friendly staff and good music.”
Varsity Events have been making efforts to appeal to the same market. Their event last Saturday advertised, “Get set for the launch party for our brand new Saturday student night! To celebrate this occasion we’re bringing down a very special DJ from London! Finally – a taste of London in Oxford!”
Our inside source labelled it the “curse of No. 42 Park End street. A similar thing happened to Ocean and Collins when they were forced to shut.” Ocean and Collins described itself as “Oxford’s sexiest nightclub” with nights given innuendo-ridden titles such as “Foreplay” and “Glamourpuss”.
It is unknown at present whether another entertainment venue will open to continue the tradition at No. 42.
Review: Pygmalion – The Magdalen Garden Show
Pygmalion bills itself as a ‘Romantic Comedy’. Indeed, it has many of the ingredients for one; struggling heroine, her two potential male counterparts (equally unsuitable and unattractive in their own way), the social minefield of post-Edwardian London as the backdrop… However, the ideas which drive the play are prosaic and philosophical, dictating the existence of tensions far greater than those suggested by the rather facetious premise of a romantic comedy. The energy with which Ashley Wheeler and Philippa Baines’ production approaches these tensions invigorates a script which leans towards the theoretical rather than the dramatic.
As the press preview began with Mr Doolittle (Oliver Johnson) gleefully propounding his existence near the bottom of the social ladder -’I’m undeservin’, and I mean to go on bein’ undeservin’’- it immediately appeared that elaborate characterisation is all the sugar-coating needed to engage an audience with the bitter concepts of class prejudice and female independence. Well before the performance date, this scene already enjoys a contrast between the mannerisms of Doolittle and his daughter Eliza (Ella Waldman), and the inhabitants of Higgins’ (Dylan Townley) household. Higgins and Pickering (Alex Mills) watch with a mixture of sardonic amusement and round-eyed incredulity respectively as Doolittle gesticulates his way through his speech, while a reassuringly demure Mrs Pearce (Lily Levinson) provides a foil for Eliza, who wipes her nose on her sleeve with gusto seconds after arriving onstage.
Waldman’s performance promises to be all the better for forsaking any attempt to prettify Eliza; her expressions hint at the existence of the same ‘Eliza’ throughout, perhaps most in evidence during Higgins’ phonetics lesson, in which the letters of the alphabet come out in a constipated fury, as much at odds with her metamorphosis as with the meaninglessness of the letter sounds. The venom with which she purses her lips as Doolittle departs reappears in full force when she reflects on the bitterness of her situation, or rather her lack of one, as the social veneer Higgins has grafted onto her prevents her from earning her own living, while her economic status demands it. When Mrs Higgins (Rebekah Diamond) despairingly remarks that ‘talking about our insides’ or ‘outsides’ is simply unbearable during tea, she encapsulates the chief problem in Pygmalion; can either of the two facets of the play ever be truly separated or altered to an extent where one no longer poses a detriment to the other?
Certainly, the jangling, heart-in-mouth, physically cringing portrayal of Freddie’s attachment to Eliza by Sam Plumb contributes to a reassuring sense of love’s independence of the play’s more intellectual concerns; love even permeates the post-ball clash with Higgins, though Townley achieves an appropriate level of obliviousness. However it is an undeniable presence, rather than the order of the day; in this production of Pygmalion it is no more reassuring than Pickering’s attempts to pacify Eliza –’I promise you I won’t let Higgins drag you round the room by your hair!’
It is this sensitivity to the multi-dimensionality of the characters which makes this production exciting. I arrived with misgivings about its suitability as a garden show, which precludes easy conjuring up of the distinctive London aesthetic from which it is impossible to divorce the text, but these were instantly eclipsed (if not resolved) by committed and engaging performances all-round, indicative of a truly exciting production come third week.
A PhilThe mix-up
Students have criticized the university administration responsible for the theology preliminary examinations caused by a mix-up with the Church history paper.
Cherwell can confirm that a theology paper entitled ‘Church History’ had already been seen by some candidates in their collections at the beginning of the term.
A University spokesman explained how the mix-up came about. “A re-sit paper was prepared [in Trinity last year] for a single candidate but the candidate withdrew so the paper wasn’t used. However it was been published online with the rest of the this year’s papers.”
Pembroke student Andris Rudzitis recounted his experience, stating “The Church history paper was almost identical to Trinity term 2011. The questions were almost verbatim to last years Trinity exam. Some people at other colleges had already seen that paper and answered three of the nine optional questions on the paper, so they had a massive advantage.”
When asked about the cause of the mix up a University spokesperson said “The person who set the exam did not realise that last year’s paper had been published online and had been seen in collections”
However, the University press office emphasized the University’s commitment to ensuring examinations were conducted fairly. “The University wants to ensure that the examination system is fair and does not disadvantage any group. Any concerns are raised with the Proctors, who are the University officers responsible for overseeing the conduct of examinations.”
To counterract potential discrepancies in results, the University discounted the paper entirely. “The Church History paper was set aside by the Proctors who authorised that the Prelims could be marked on the basis of the remaining two papers.”
“The candidates were also given the option to sit another Church History paper, but the latter option was declined by all the candidates concerned.”
A spokesman for the University said “We want to apologise for any distress caused by this mistake, but the action we took ensured that, overall, the examination was fair.”
Despite being given the resit the paper, one student complained that because the marks for the Greek exam were not calibrated to come in line with other essay-based papers, the average overall mark could be significantly boosted for single-honour Theologians. “This resulted in a high amount of distinctions for straight theologians, and thus was a disadvantage to those doing joint honours which doesn’t include Greek.”
Rudzitis referred Cherwell to examination results from previous years pointing out that the Church History paper usually has a higher average score than the other papers which may have resulted in the average score for single honour Theology students markedly lower this year.
The Edgar Wind Society
The Edgar Wind Society is the University’s only Art and Art History society, named after Oxford’s very first professor in the History of Art who taught here from 1955-1957. We were only formed two years ago but have been growing quite rapidly since. We aim to put on a wide range of events such as speakers, discussion panels, film screenings, exhibition tours and much more, open to all members of the University irrespective of what they study. The inevitable stress and hectic schedule that comes with Oxford life means that for many people, unfortunately, an interest in art can get left behind. We hope that by providing a range of diverse and interesting resources we will enable students to continue to enjoy and learn about art.
Notable past Speakers at the Edgar Wind have included Charles Saumerez Smith (chief executive of the Royal Academy and former director of the National Portrait Gallery) and Sam Thorne (Associate Editor of Frieze) to name but a few. We aim to invite speakers touching on all areas of visual culture. Artist Dominic Johnson, for example, gave a talk on performance art and body modification, and last term Neil Hadfield(former effects animator for Disney, Warner Brothers and the BBC) delivered a talk on the history of 20th century animation. One of our most recent speakers was Carol Jacobi, a Pre-Raphaelites expert who gave an exciting talk tailored to coincide with the Ashmolean’s exhibition. I’m afraid I wouldn’t be able to tell you who my dream speaker would be as there are so many possibilities. For some reason Amy Childs from ‘The Only Way is Essex’ seems to spring to mind almost immediately, but I really don’t think she would make for great art historical discussion.
In Hilary we released the first issue of our new publication, The Edgar Wind Journal, which looked at at the topics of materiality and temporality, and we are now working on the Trinity issue which is themed ‘Art & Obsecnity’. We hope to work more with other art organizations in Oxford, such as Modern Art Oxford with whom we hosted our first event of the year and also a film screening as part of the OUFF Film Festival. In terms of speakers we will be looking to invite figures from different spectra of the arts industries (media figures, artists and curators) to give an insight into what a career in the arts might entail.
Naturally the Society extends from the History of Art department having been set up originally by its students, and we are actively supported by the Faculty. At the same time, there is no direct link between what we do as a Society and what the University teaches. Our primary aim is to put on events that people find interesting and enjoyable, aside from what they might be studying.
People would be surprised just how many subjects Art History feeds into and we really hope to encourage all University members to get involved with The Edgar Wind Society. To hear about events or get more involved you can sign up to our mailing list via GroupSpaces or by emailing us as [email protected]
Above all we hope to remain innovative, constantly coming up with new ideas for ways through which people’s experience of art and the history of art can be broadened. On the 2ndst of February, for example, we collaborated with the Oxford Art Movement and students from the Ruskin to put on an exhibition entitled ‘The Sublime & The Grotesque’. We’ve also recently set up The Edgar Wind Blog which features news, articles and reviews of Art events both inside and outside of Oxford.
Don swears on oath that Rafsanjani hired assistance
A senior Oxford don has sworn an affidavit that Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani, son of the former President of Iran, hired assistance for his application to study at Oxford.
Professor Sheikholeslami, Fellow of Wadham, swore on oath that the current Professor of Persian Studies had asked a graduate student to assist Rafsanjani’s application to Oxford, in exchange for a sum of money.
Sheikholeslami plans to return his Oxford MA degree in protest at the University’s handling of the Rafsanjani case, which has already sparked an urgent review into the graduate admission process.
The complaints of senior academics in December 2010 that University rules had been broken to admit Rafsanjani to the Oriental Faculty prompted an internal investigation.
Though the investigation was formally closed in April, academics are now calling for the case to be re-opened, in light of Prof Sheikholeslami’s new evidence.
Sheikholeslami swore an oath that, in his belief, Rafsanjani’s admission was “highly discriminatory” and “smacking of favouritism”.
Sheikholeslami was invited to appear before the North enquiry, where he said that Rafsanjani’s academic background had “no relevance” to his proposed field of study at the Oriental Faculty and that in his opinion “[Rafsanjani] was not qualified to be admitted to Oxford.”
Sheikholselami told the North enquiry that Rafsanjani’s academic referees were “of no value” as they were “without exception [written by] underlings working for his father’s institute” who bore “no relation to the candidate’s academic background.”
Sheikhoeslami informed the enquiry that he had received credible information that Rafsanjani “hired the services of Mr Mohammad Javad Ardalan to prepare his application”.
Ardalan is a graduate student who was admitted for study in 2007 at the Oriental Institute.
Further to the evidence he gave to the North enquiry, Sheikholeslami has sworn on affidavit that Professor Herzig, the current Professor of Persian Studies, “ordered” Ardalan to help prepare Rafsanjani’s application and doctoral thesis proposal.
Sheikholeslami tells how “on 26th March 2011, at 3pm, I was visited by Mr Mohammad Javad Ardalan at Wadham College.” Sheikholeslami swore on oath that during this visit, Ardalan said he was asked by Herzig to assist Rafsanjani, and that he had met Rafsanjani at the Randolph Hotel to discuss the work he would do and the money he would be paid.
The work involved downloading the relevant application form and helping to fill in the form, as well as “prepar[ing] the [thesis] proposal” for Rafsanjani. This was all to be done in English, which Prof Sheikholeslami noted was “of crucial importance” as Sheikholeslami “knew that [Rafsanjani] did not have the minimum requisite level of English mandated at Oxford”.
Mr Kaveh Moussavi, an Associate Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies in Oxford, who filed the original allegations against Rafsanjani, said, “I have maintained all along that Rafsanjani paid to get into Oxford and that the internal rules [were] subverted by University insiders.” Moussavi wrote to the Vice-Chancellor on Sunday, submitting new evidence, and asking him to reopen the investigation.
Moussavi claims that the investigation was flawed, as “North found no evidence of payments because he did not have the power to look at the bank statements of Ardalan and Rafsanjani. Nor did he know that Edmund Herzig had instructed Ardalan to help Rafsanjani. I have given the Vice-Chancellor the evidence.”
Sheikholeslami said, “If the University plans to continue its secrecy, we have no alternative but to open the investigation. It will save the University’s reputation without stating that the results of the previous one have been buried.”
Dr Homa Katouzian, who had assessed Rafsanjani’s application for study at Oxford, maintains that “I did not know that Mr Hashemi was Mr Rafsanjani’s son when I assessed his application, but it would not have made an iota of difference to my academic judgment even if I had known this. We cannot doubt the integrity of our applicants without obvious cause, and so, assuming that the allegation is true, there was no way in which this could have been known to me at the time.”
Rafsanjani said to Cherwell, “These baseless allegations were brought against me before Christmas and investigated very thoroughly by Sir Peter North and the outcome was that he found not [sic] basis for these allegations. I received my admission from Oxford through a process of 7-9 months when [sic] my proposal was received, examined and analysed by more than one Professor.”
Herzig told Cherwell, “This matter, including my role in it, was the subject of a University investigation earlier this year. I have no comment to make beyond what is in the statements issued by the University Press Office.”
A spokesperson from the University Press Office reiterated that the investigation “found no basis for the University to institute formal proceedings against [Rafsanjani]” and that “those involved have categorically denied any impropriety.”
Professor Sheikholeslami, Emeritus Fellow of Wadham, swore on oath that the current Professor of Persian Studies had asked a graduate student to make an arrangement with Rafsanjani, whereby the graduate would assist with Rafsanjani’s application to Oxford, in exchange for sum of money paid to the graduate by Rafsanjani.
Sheikholeslami plans to return his Oxford MA degree in protest at the University’s handling of the Rafsanjani case, which has already sparked an urgent review into the graduate admission process.
The complaints of senior academics in December 2010 that University rules had been broken to admit Rafsanjani to the Oriental Faculty prompted an internal investigation. Though the investigation was formally closed in April, academics are now calling for the case to be re-opened, in light of Prof Sheikholeslami’s new evidence.
Sheikholeslami swore an oath that, in his belief, Rafsanjani’s admission was “highly discriminatory” and “smacking of favouritism”.Sheikholeslami was invited to appear before the North enquiry, where he said that Rafsanjani’s academic background had “no relevance” to his proposed field of study at the Oriental Faculty and that in his opinion “[Rafsanjani] was not qualified to be admitted to Oxford.”
Sheikholselami told the North enquiry that Rafsanjani’s academic referees were “of no value” as they were “without exception [written by] underlings working for his father’s institute” who bore “no relation to the candidate’s academic background.”
Sheikhoeslami informed the enquiry that he had received credible information that Rafsanjani hired the services of an Oxford graduate student to prepare his application.
Further to the evidence he gave to the North enquiry, Sheikholeslami has sworn on affidavit that Professor Herzig, the current Professor of Persian Studies, “ordered” this student to help prepare Rafsanjani’s application and doctoral thesis proposal. Sheikholeslami tells how “on 26th March 2011, at 3pm, I was visited by [the student in question].”
Sheikholeslami swore on oath that during this visit, the graduate student said he was asked by Herzig to assist Rafsanjani, and that he had met Rafsanjani at the Randolph Hotel to discuss the work he would do and the money he would be paid. The work involved downloading the relevant application form and helping to fill in the form, as well as “prepar[ing] the [thesis] proposal” for Rafsanjani.
This was all to be done in English, which Prof Sheikholeslami noted was “of crucial importance” as Sheikholeslami “knew that [Rafsanjani] did not have the minimum requisite level of English mandated at Oxford”.
The graduate student was contacted by Cherwell, but was not available for comment.
Kaveh Moussavi, an Associate Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies in Oxford, who filed the original allegations against Rafsanjani, said, “I have maintained all along that Rafsanjani paid to get into Oxford and that the internal rules [were] subverted by University insiders.” Moussavi wrote to the Vice-Chancellor on Sunday, submitting new evidence, and asking him to reopen the investigation.
Moussavi claims that the investigation was flawed, as “North found no evidence of payments because he did not have the power to look at bank statements. Nor did he know that Edmund Herzig had instructed [the graduate student] to help Rafsanjani. I have given the Vice-Chancellor the evidence.”
Sheikholeslami said, “If the University plans to continue its secrecy, we have no alternative but to open the investigation. It will save the University’s reputation without stating that the results of the previous one have been buried.”
Dr Homa Katouzian, who had assessed Rafsanjani’s application for study at Oxford, maintains that “I did not know that Mr Hashemi was Mr Rafsanjani’s son when I assessed his application, but it would not have made an iota of difference to my academic judgment even if I had known this.We cannot doubt the integrity of our applicants without obvious cause, and so, assuming that the allegation is true, there was no way in which this could have been known to me at the time.”
Rafsanjani said to Cherwell, “These baseless allegations were brought against me before Christmas and investigated very thoroughly by Sir Peter North and the outcome was that he found not [sic] basis for these allegations. I received my admission from Oxford through a process of 7-9 months when my proposal was received, examined and analysed by more than one Professor.”
Herzig told Cherwell, “This matter, including my role in it, was the subject of a University investigation earlier this year. I have no comment to make beyond what is in the statements issued by the University Press Office.”
A spokesperson from the University Press Office reiterated that the investigation “found no basis for the University to institute formal proceedings against [Rafsanjani]” and that “those involved have categorically denied any impropriety.”
The punter’s guide to procrastination
The sun is out, collections are over, and the prospect of prelims, mods or finals has not yet set in – for those of us who consider delusion to be our best friend that is. In my bid to wear off Trinity Term Stress – yes it does warrant capitalisation – punting has become my latest obsession. I’ve done it twice in the space of one week, and I just can’t get enough. What I did notice however was the lack of suitable music pumping out of my fellow punters’ iPod speakers. Here, then is the perfect playlist for those of you who like to take distraction during Trinity term very, very seriously. I like to call it the Punter’s Guide to Procrastination. Lean back on those bright blue cushions, and let yourself be lulled into a false sense of security by the soothing melody of music intertwined with the sound of water lapping against your punt.
So first up is a song perfectly suited for those initial wobbly moments in the punt, people are scrambling to their seats and someone has reluctantly volunteered to do the actual punting. D’ebruit’s Suave remix to Jamie Woon’s ‘Lady Luck‘ will quickly put you in the mood for exploration along the Cherwell river. The percussive insistence of this song, with its catchy handclaps and sampled bongo beats will get your energy levels peaking faster than any Tesco brand Red Bull rip-off. Just make sure you turn the bass down on this one as I nearly broke my speakers and burst my eardrums the first time I listened to it – don’t say you weren’t warned.
As giddy excitement is replaced by a slightly premature self-satisfaction and you glide peacefully down the river, why not accompany the pleasant change of mood with a real summer chill-out track: ‘Millionaire’ by Kelis ft Andre 3000. This noughties classic needs no introduction and I challenge you not to bob your head uncontrollably to the beat whilst wistfully remembering the days when Kelis’ enchanting voice was enough to get her press coverage.
You’ve reached a dip in energy levels, the initial excitement at being the first to punt has really and truly disappeared. And whilst the fun mood has not been entirely deflated, no one else has volunteered to pick up that scarily long metal pole. So as you sit, being gently dragged downstream by the powers that be. I urge you to play ‘Albatross’ by Wild Beasts – the perfect track for wallowing in one’s own self-pity. I might as well take this opportunity to plug the fact that we’ll be reviewing their new album Smother in this Friday’s issue and if you’re super keen, its available to stream on Guardian right now, so get on it (once you’ve finished punting of course).
To bring you back from the brink of depression, and prevent you from jumping into the – somewhat shallow – river I suggest you pump out Starslinger’s rework of ‘Elizabeth Fraser’ as loud as possible. Weird name I know but this electro resurrection of Cocteau Twins’ ethereal sound really hits the spot with its hip hop cum dream pop influences, you’ll be shimmying hard enough to get the boat rocking. Even if you won’t know how to classify this song, you’ll sure as hell enjoy it, just make sure no one is standing up…
Finally then, to round up the afternoon’s punting I suggest going back to basics. This will be particular popular for those of you who don’t enjoy electronoise or whatever the cool kids are calling it these days. I offer you none other than Ray Lamontagne’s stunning ‘All the Wild Horses‘. His gravely yet seamless voice will be the perfect exit song for you and your mates as you regain dry land. The combination of strings and Ray’s unforgettable vocals might make for quite an emotional end to your fun day on the river. Still you’ll have beaten off another day’s work and if that doesn’t spark tears of joy (or disguised tears of panic) then I don’t know what will.
Over and Out.