Newsletter 23/11/24

Welcome to the first edition of the SOAS Spirit Newsletter! 

This Newsletter will be coming to you bi-termly, approximately half way through each half-term. In it you’ll find everything, from what’s going on around campus, to breaking news, and updates to previously published stories. 

Our new team of Staff Writers, led by Senior Staff Writer Jacob Winter, are in charge of making sure all that is worth knowing is known; in this term’s issue that includes Justin Welby’s resignation, the JCR turned Prayer Room and SOAS’s appearance on University Challenge, as well as, of course, the return of Trump. 

Thank you all for subscribing. As our first round of subscribers, you are also, to some degree, our guinea pigs for how we roll this out, and therefore any feedback is much appreciated! Our aim is to keep the student body as informed and aware as possible, and being limited to our four print copies a year didn’t seem good enough for how much takes place in and beyond our campus. Hopefully this newsletter is a step toward having more regular and reliable news and media coverage accessible to the whole SOAS community. 

Happy reading! 

Anger over Lack of Prayer Spaces at SOAS

Anisah Mahamoud, Deputy Editor, BA International Relations

The SOAS JCR, a space traditionally designated for socialising and study, has recently been repurposed for women’s Jummah prayers on Friday from 12-3pm. However, this decision has raised concerns over democratic consultation, space suitability and the broader needs of the student body. The JCR, which falls under the Student Union, is intended to serve the general needs of all students yet the decision to host Jummah prayers was made without any formal consultation with the wider student body. Furthermore, Hamayal Zaid, Co-President for Equality & Liberation, was not included in the discussion - which raises questions about the democratic process behind such decisions. This has led some students to argue that the space, as an SU facility, should not be repurposed without the broader input and consent of the student community it serves. 

Further to the issue of undemocratic decision making, is the fact that the JCR’s physical environment is ill-suited for prayer. There is no designated Wudu (ablution) area, which is a key requirement for performing prayer. Additionally, the furniture placed around the room makes it difficult to arrange the space in a way that facilitates prayer. The lack of blinds or other privacy measures means the room is visible and lacks privacy for the women praying from those passing by. The lack of a suitable prayer space for Muslim women at SOAS highlights a pressing need for a dedicated and appropriate facility. The current use of the JCR for Jummah prayer does not provide the necessary conditions for worship, including privacy, cleanliness, and space. Muslim women at SOAS require a safe, private, and comfortable environment for prayer, one that meets their religious needs and allows them to practise their faith with dignity.

The situation raises broader questions about how student spaces at SOAS are managed and who gets to decide how they are used. The JCR, as a common room space meant for the collective use of all students, has been at the heart of debates about student autonomy, religious rights, and the importance of ensuring that all students' needs are met equitably.

This controversy underscores the wider issue of space allocation at SOAS, and the importance of ensuring that facilities meet the diverse needs of the student body. A more formal and transparent process is needed to ensure that spaces are used effectively and equitably. There is a growing call for the university and the SU to provide a dedicated prayer space for Muslim women that is properly equipped, private, and conducive to prayer. The need for such a space has become increasingly urgent, and it is essential that the university addresses this lack of provision for the benefit of all its students.

Valiant SOAS fall to St Edmund Hall 

Barty Roberts, Editor-in-Chief, BA Politics and International Relations

On Monday 11th November, SOAS appeared on University Challenge for the first time in six years. The SOAS team were defeated by St Edmund Hall, Oxford by 195 points to 155. The SOAS team was captained by Tom Hasler, BSc Development Economics who was joined by  Janet Delves, MA History of Art and Archaeology, Ella Dorn BA Chinese and Linguistics and Cameron Lambert, BA Global Development. 

St Edmund quickly established a 20 point lead but were pegged back to 35 all after a good display from SOAS in a round that consisted of naming the flags of countries who have recently elected their first female Head of State or Government. Controversy arose when the host, Amol Rajan, refused to accept the SOAS answer of St ‘Kittis’ and Nevis in place of St Kitts and Nevis. 

The match remained close throughout with the score being tied at 110 all with less than ten minutes left to play. St Edmund Hall, however, established their dominance in the last five minutes scoring an unanswered 35 points that took them to victory. 

SOAS has had a mixed history on University Challenge. This year marks our seventh entirety into the competition. We have had little success of note but in 2014 SOAS reached the semi-finals - our best ever result. 

SOAS’ University Challenge dream remains alive this year though as by scoring more than 125 points we have been entered into a ‘best-loser’ playoff versus Durham on the 25th November. The question remains, can this year’s SOAS team go one better than our semi-finalists of 2014? 

Archbishop of Canterbury Resigns over Historic Child Abuse Scandal

Jacob Winter, Senior Staff Writer, BA Politics and International Relations

Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, has resigned over allegations of mishandling abuse allegations against Church of England barrister John Smyth. Smyth, who died in 2018, is alleged to have physically and sexually abused 130 boys in Britain, Zimbabwe and South Africa since the 1970s. Welby is accused of having been aware of these allegations since as early as 2013.

In his resignation letter, Welby stated that, “The Makin Review has exposed the long-maintained conspiracy of silence about the heinous abuses of John Smyth. When I was informed in 2013 and told that police had been notified, I believed wrongly that an appropriate resolution would follow. It is very clear that I must take personal and institutional responsibility for the long and retraumatizing period between 2013 and 2024. 

It is my duty to honour my constitutional and church responsibilities, so exact timings will be decided once a review of necessary obligations has been completed, including those in England and in the Anglican Communion. I hope this decision makes clear how seriously the Church of England understands the need for change and our profound commitment to creating a safer church. As I step down I do so in sorrow with all victims and survivors of abuse.”

Welby had been facing increasing demands for his resignation since the publishing of the Makin Report, alleging that the Church of England was fully complicit in Smyth’s abuse, with complaints about Smyth being known to the church as early as the 1980s. The report claimed that between 120-150 people were abused by Smyth during his time in boys schools and christian camps in England, Zimbabwe and South Africa, with eight boys receiving a total of 14,000 belt lashes from Smyth. Smyth was also accused of being involved in the death of a 16 year old boy in Zimbabwe in 1992, drowned in a camp where boys were encouraged by Smyth to swim naked. Smyth died before he was ever brought to justice.

Smyth had been a barrister for the church, and de facto ran the Irwene Camps, Church of England summer schools attended by many major church figures, including Welby, and it was through his management of Church schools and summer camps that allowed him to abuse young boys. Smyth had also been the lawyer of reactionary social campaigner Mary Whitehouse, who campaigned against sex education in schools and the decriminalisation of homosexuality .

Welby had initially rejected calls to resign, but after several of Smyth’s victims and the General Synod of the Church of England had called for it, as well as on advice of the Archbishop of York, Welby made the decision to step down. The Smyth case had united previously separate factions in the church, with both conservative and liberal figures in the church uniting in calling for Welby’s resignation.

Smyth’s own children have spoken to the news over the allegations against their father, with one of his sons claiming that he was a “master manipulator.” 

The resignation has, according to some figures like Observer columnist Andrew Anthony, exposed fundamental divisions within the Church of England, and has put the long decline of the Church’s relevance in British life into perspective. 

Trump's New Team

Arthur Searle, Staff Writer, BSc Politics, Philosophy and Economics

President-elect Donald Trump has announced his cabinet picks, generating controversy with each selection. Commentators suggest his choices reflect a strategy to upend the political establishment, a central promise of his campaign that resonated with many supporters. Trump has also prioritised loyalty, choosing close allies to fill key roles. Additionally, he plans to create a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to streamline bureaucracy. With Republican control of both the Senate and likely the House, Trump is well-positioned to push his agenda through Congress.

Susie Wiles, Trump’s campaign manager and trusted advisor, has been selected as Chief of Staff. Wiles, the first woman to hold this role, is expected to enforce discipline within the White House. She has been quoted as saying “The clown car can’t come into the White House at will".

In a more controversial move, former Congressman Matt Gaetz was nominated as Attorney General. This position, which oversees law enforcement and legal policy on contentious issues such as abortion and civil rights, is pivotal to shaping Trump’s vision for the country. However, Gaetz’s selection comes shortly after his resignation from Congress days before an ethics report was to be published on his allegations of sexual misconduct with a minor and illicit drug use. He withdrew his nomination for the role due to this controversy on the 21st of November, claiming that it was “becoming a distraction” for the incoming Trump administration.

Todd Blanche has been chosen as "Border Czar," responsible for directing immigration policy. Blanche has pledged "shock and awe" in implementing mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, a key campaign promise. Trump has vowed to back these efforts using the military, a proposal that has alarmed civil rights organisations and immigration advocates.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been nominated for Health Secretary, a choice that has sparked widespread concern. Kennedy, a known vaccine sceptic, has faced criticism for promoting discredited theories linking vaccines to autism. Despite his controversial views, Kennedy claims his goal is to empower parents with better information rather than restrict vaccine access. Kennedy, nephew of former President John F. Kennedy and son of similarly-assassinated Robert F. Kennedy Sr., initially ran for the Democratic nomination for President, and then ran as an independent, before withdrawing from the race and endorsing Trump.

Mike Huckabee, a staunch supporter of illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, has been nominated as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. His history of dismissing Palestinian identity and support for settlements has disappointed Muslim voters who backed Trump, hoping for progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Huckabee’s nomination casts doubt on the possibility of a US-supported settlement in the region.

Finally, Trump has announced the creation of a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), aimed at reducing bureaucracy and cutting government costs. Tech billionaire Elon Musk, a major donor to Trump’s campaign, and biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who ran against Trump in the Republican primaries, will serve as advisors to the department. The initiative reflects Trump's commitment to streamlining government operations but has been met with scepticism about its feasibility, and it has been suggested it is less about efficiency and instead about cost-cutting.

Haka in the Halls: Māori MP shakes New Zealand Parliament in Fiery Protest 

Su Waddy, Staff Writer, BA Politics and International Relations

On November 15th, New Zealand’s Parliament was electrified by an extraordinary act of protest by Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke. The youngest MP in the chamber tore a copy of a controversial bill, and led a Haka in protest. The Haka is an ancient Māori chant—an enduring symbol of pride and resistance. This has been seen as more than just a one-off protest, but  a motivating assertion of Māori sovereignty, shaking the very foundation of a government seen as intent upon erasing Indigenous rights. 

On November 19th, 420,000 protesters flooded Wellington in a Hikoi, a traditional Māori march for justice. Their dissent echoed a fierce rejection of the libertarian ACT Party’s divisive bill to reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi. 

The bill, spearheaded by David Seymour, claims to eliminate ‘division by race’, yet is seen as an  attempt to strip Māori of their hard-fought rights and sovereignty. Protestors argue the bill dismisses decades of Māori grievances, and historical injustice, and that its proponents paint a thinly veiled narrative of racism, cloaked in the language of ‘equality’. At the heart of this issue lies the Treaty of Waitangi, a document signed in 1840 between Māori chiefs and the British Crown. Often described as a ‘living document’, it intended towards safeguarding Māori rights whilst accommodating British governance.

The treaty was written in two languages, in order to facilitate its writing, however the two versions have fundamentally different meanings. In the English, Māori supposedly ceded sovereignty entirely. In the Māori version, the chiefs retained “rangatiratanga” - self-determination. According to some commentators, this disparity has fueled nearly two centuries of betrayal and struggle as Māori rights are systematically undermined, lands expropriated, and cultural practices suppressed. 

The latest moves from the coalition government are criticised as reading more like a steady erosion of protections for Indigenous Māori people than a protection of equality. Earlier in February, the Māori Health Authority was abolished. Following this, Māori input in environmental decision-making has also been stripped away. The ACT Party’s bill is considered the latest attempt in a campaign to legislate away Māori protections via parliamentary manoeuvre. Though the bill is unlikely to pass, some fear the damage may already be done. By even entertaining this legislation, the government has invoked dangerous social divisions. Protests are no longer just about the one bill; they are a fierce backlash against a government felt to be increasingly hostile towards Māori existence.