In a move that has set student and faculty email lists abuzz with angry chatter even before most students have returned to campus, Donald H. Rumsfeld will be joining the Hoover Institution as a distinguished visiting fellow, the University announced Sept. 7.

It is still unclear when the former secretary of defense will begin the appointment, and when — if ever — he will set foot on the Farm. But the news regarding the man who oversaw the nation’s response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has sparked a growing student and faculty backlash — including talk of a mock trial for war crimes, calls for a resolution in the Faculty Senate condemning the appointment and an online petition, with 1,305 signatures at press time.

The debate has spurred political activism rare at Stanford and broaches such topics as campus partisanship, academic freedom and the nature of the relationship between the University and Hoover. The questions currently asked may preview the looming dispute if and when U.S. Secretary of State and former Provost Condoleezza Rice returns to Stanford, a move she has said in numerous interviews she intends to make.

Task force role

According to Hoover Director John Raisian, Rumsfeld will serve on a task force pertaining to national security, ideology and terrorism in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

“I am pleased that he will spend time during the coming year in thinking, writing and advising on important matters of public policy,” Raisan said in a statement. “I have asked Don to join the distinguished group of scholars that will pursue new insights on the direction of thinking that the United States might consider going forward. I am delighted that he will participate in the deliberations of our task force.”

Rumsfeld’s ties to Hoover, the conservative-leaning think tank, are numerous. In the past, he has served as a member of the Hoover Board of Overseers and as a member of the executive committee of the board.

The Hoover Institution has not yet set a timetable for Rumsfeld’s appointment to begin, Hoover Public Affairs Manager Michele Horaney said; no other members of the task force have been named. It is expected to convene infrequently, with members meeting from time to time then going back to other endeavors. Rumsfeld is expected to begin work on his memoirs, having met with several New York publishing houses during the summer.

Hoover is aware of the comments in opposition to the appointment, Horaney said, “but the appointment has already been made.” Rumsfeld’s position will consist entirely of work for the task force, and he will not teach classes.

Growing opposition

Many other prominent conservatives, including former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and General John Abizaid, the former commander of U.S. Central Command, have been named to fellowships at Hoover with little fanfare. But the appointment of Rumsfeld — whose actions during the buildup to and waging of the Iraq war are considered particularly egregious and distasteful by many students and faculty — has struck a particular political nerve.

“Many Stanford faculty are outraged by this appointment of a war monger and torture facilitator into any part of the University environment, even if the Hoover Institute is not directly connected with the University,” said emeritus professor of psychology Philip Zimbardo, whose recent book “The Lucifer Effect” holds the former defense secretary directly responsible for the torture and abuse of detainees in military prisons such as Abu Ghraib. “The perception of the world is that [Hoover] is part of Stanford, a very visibly erect part of our beloved campus. We value truth, justice, peace and respect for human dignity — principles which this former Secretary of War has consistently violated.”

The unofficial platform of the faculty opposition, an email sent by English Prof. Robert Polhemus entitled “Ten reasons why the appointment of Donald Rumsfeld to the Hoover Institution at Stanford as a Senior Fellow is sad, ridiculous and contemptible,” has widely circulated and garnered more than 40 responses from like-minded faculty overnight, Polhemus said. The email, which condemns Rumsfeld for his “arrogance, failure and incompetence,” expresses worry that Stanford’s affiliation with Hoover will damage the University’s reputation and differentiates Rumsfeld from Gingrich or Rice by his lack of “intellectual and academic experience and/or some measure of achievement.”

“It [the appointment] really struck me the wrong way,” Polhemus said. “The University should not be supporting a guy like this.”

Relationship with Hoover called into question

The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace has been a fixture on the Stanford campus since former U.S. president Herbert Hoover (Class of 1895) donated a founding endowment of $50,000 in 1919. Its charter, which was approved by the University Board of Trustees, calls for the study of the forces behind modern political and economic change. But beginning with the tenure of former director Glenn Campbell, the think-tank has emerged as a prominent voice in conservative politics, sometimes at odds with Stanford’s more liberal faculty and student body.

Tension first reached a peak during the mid-1980s when a student and faculty revolt effectively derailed plans to place the Ronald Reagan Presidential library on campus. Relations have since improved, Polhemus said, characterizing Raisian’s tenure as Hoover director as one of compromise and good feelings.

“But a line was crossed with appointment of Rumsfeld: he doesn’t have any previous academic background,” Polhumus said, adding, “We should really reconsider Hoover’s relationship with Stanford at this point.”

There are no concrete proposals for what a different relationship would look like, but history suggests it could involve “normal academic governance,” with appointments requiring the approval of the University’s academic committees. That phrase was invoked during the Reagan library debate in 1984 and dismissed by Hoover fellows by chants of “nag, nag, nag.”

Such a reconsideration is not in the University administration’s plans.

“The University is a place of free expression of ideas, and there are some ideas that generate controversy, but that’s not a reason not to have those ideas expressed,” said Jeff Wachtel, special assistant to President John Hennessy. Appointments and fellowships such as Rumsfeld’s are the prerogative of individual institutions and departments, Wachtel said, adding that the questions regarding the relationship between the University and Hoover are unfounded.

“Whenever there are controversial appointments, that question always gets asked,” he said. “One controversial appointment should not be the basis in which you would change a long-standing relationship. It’s not going to change the kind of relationship the University has with Hoover.”

Nonetheless, the growing student and faculty opposition movement aims to make its position known and its feelings heard. Plans are in the works for a campus-wide collaborative protest against the appointment, said Sam Dubal ‘08, who founded the “Rumsfeld — You Are not Welcome at Stanford!” group on Facebook.

“It was necessary for students to be able to organize to express their collective shock, disgust and anger with the arrival of a war criminal on Stanford’s campus,” said Dubal, adding that politically inclined student groups such as the Coalition for Justice in the Middle East, the Stanford Anti-War Coalition, Muslim Student Awareness Network and Amnesty International are likely to mobilize against the appointment. As of press time, the group boasted 220 members.

The conservative minority

Not all students are speaking out against Rumsfeld or his new affiliation with Hoover. The University’s Republicans, the minority on campus and often the sole conservatives in lopsided political debates in class discussions, have called for respect of Rumsfeld’s position as a prominent politician. Some have attempted to appeal to a sense of academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas, despite ideological disagreements with Stanford’s liberal majority.

“I would expect Stanford students to be respectful of those they disagree with — especially when it is someone within the mainstream of American politics — but, then again, these are also the same students who tried to physically obstruct President Bush from attending a meeting at Hoover in April of 2006,” said Carl Kelm ‘09, the incoming president of the Stanford College Republicans. “So I can’t say I’m completely shocked [at the opposition].”