A country with over 4 million internally displaced people (IDPs), a possible pending free trade agreement with the United States, and one of the most bio-diverse and resource rich nations on the planet, Colombia is both a gem of natural beauty and enigma of complex social problems.

An upcoming event at AU this Friday the 8^th at 2pm in the Battelle Atrium, sponsored by AU’s PorColombia club, AWOL, and CASJ discusses just this subject, along with the present opportunities and challenges for the United States and Colombia.

Not everyone is in agreement whether the free trade agreement will benefit Colombia. Proponents see the agreement as an opportunity to increase trade, cultural exchanges, and prosperity. Opponents concern themselves with the social impacts on small farmers and human rights, as well as who the trade and prosperity will truly benefit.

Some, such as the Latin America Trade Coalition, and several prominent Senators, have suggested passing the FTA would benefit the United States economically with jobs and export earnings.

Those opposed to the agreement have cited continued violence and human rights violations, despite a decrease in labor union assassinations. Indeed, the recent murder of three IDP leaders attempting to return to their lands, all within 24 hours, suggests problems persist.

Though the Obama administration has cut military and economic aid to a total of 467 million dollars, a 20% decrease on 2009 levels, Obama, other politicians, and a number of corporations have been lobbying for the passage of the US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

In a country where 1% of the population controls 45% of the territory, that has the 8^th highest GINI co-efficient (that’s income inequality) in the world, and the US embassy has estimated paramilitary groups control 10% of the country, the challenges faced in restoring land to its rightful owners are formidable.

The FTA, which would eliminate tariffs on imports US (government-subsidized) agricultural goods, would disproportionately impact Colombian small farmers, forcing many to sell their land, be forced off by large agro-businesses, or grow the only crop left profitable to them: coca.

Both Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and President Obama are different from their predecessors in many ways, but the question whether they find a way to cooperate and benefit both countries and peoples.

The event will be this Friday the 8^th; the panel portion will last from 2-3, followed by a half hour for questions and answers. Confirmed speakers include Gimena Sanchez, WOLA’s Senior Andes Associate, and Charo Mina Rojas, an Afro-Colombian and Advocacy Advisor at Proceso de Comunidades Negras. Following the panel, there will be a reception with food and drinks, and will include representatives from many AU clubs and DC NGOs that focus on Colombia and Latin American issues.

The event is sponsored by AU’s own AU PorColombia, AWOL, the AU Fair Trade Student Association, and CASJ. For more information, please email me, Mike Lally, at ml0832a@american.edu.

“We can’t pick the facts of the world, but we can choose how we react to them.”

That was the message on Monday from Washington Hebrew Congregation’s Senior Rabbi Bruce Lustig. Here at American University, he and Akbar Ahmed—Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United Kingdom—discussed ways to help improve Jewish-Muslim relations.

So what does it mean to choose how we react to the facts of the world? We can’t make hatred go away—we have no control over that—but we have complete control over our response to it.

Ambassador Ahmed encouraged the crowd to act humbly, instead of speaking in terms of an “us” and a “you,” which creates tension by creating an “other.”

Rabbi Lustig and Ambassador Ahmed have worked closely together since the tragedies of September 11^th, 2001. They created the first Abrahamic Summit here in Washington, D.C.  The duo also collaborated together to start a 9/11 Unity Walk, which has become an annual interfaith walk down Massachusetts Avenue, incorporating all the city’s major religious denominations. It’s all about breaking down the walls of the “other.”

And it’s a unique time to start breaking down these walls. Islam is being demonized like never before, and anti-Semitism is as prevalent as ever. We need an army of peacemakers who can go out into the world and start an interfaith dialogue; Ahmed and Lustig are perfect prototypes for us to turn to. Perhaps the most eloquent moment of the entire evening was when Rabbi Lustig referenced the Qur’an, saying, “The pen and the ink are much stronger than the sword.”

This is a message to us. No matter what religion, race, or ethnicity, we all are members of the larger human race. To paraphrase an old Hasidic Jewish tale, the only difference between the east and west is one step. Take the step to turn around and face to the west if you’re leaning to the east, or vice versa, and you will have made the quintessential step in seeing the other side right in the eyes. Then reach out, shake hands, and create peace with your fellow brothers.

Photo by Jonathan Hayden. From left to right: Rabbi Lustig, ABC News correspondent John Donovan, and Ambassador Ahmed.

The University Center–consisting of Mary Graydon Center and Butler Pavilion–apparently has a theft problem. On October 7th AWOL received an email from Scott Jones, University Center Director of Operations, addressed to “Student Organization Leaders.” Jones detailed a smorgasbord of furniture stolen during “the past few weeks.” From the email:

10 Market Place Bar Stools                total replacement cost is $3,475
1 Tavern Booth seat                        total replacement cost is $941.30
30 Butler Board Room Chairs                total replacement cost is $2,400

1 Tavern high table                        total replacement cost is $495

It’s obviously unclear whether this is a series of isolated furniture-napping incidents, or the work of a single dedicated thief who just really needs some new chairs for their boardroom and doesn’t want to pay $80 a pop. But regardless, the University Center wants its furniture back! More from Jones:

The University Center is asking for your assistance in the return of these items.   If the individuals responsible wish to return the items, the University Center will accept these items returned by October 18, 2010 with no questions asked.   After the amnesty period, individuals found in possession of any University Center property will be subject to the Student Conduct Code.

To personally provide information regarding the location of the missing items or to make arrangements for their return, please contact Scott Jones, Director of Operations, University Center.   Mr. Jones can be reached by emailing sejones@american.edu or phone at 202-885-3934.  Information can also be provided anonymously to the Public Safety tips form online (http://www.american.edu/finance/publicsafety/tips.cfm).  The University Center appreciates your assistance in our efforts to maintain the facility and its inventory.

More photos below, courtesy of Scott Jones.

I was in Dupont Circle a few weeks ago when one of my friends began to giggle and nudged me, directing my attention to a group across the street. I looked them up and down, trying to figure out what I was supposed to find amusing. They appeared to be college freshmen and were all wearing the same t-shirt. I was perplexed–gaggles of freshmen in matching t-shirts aren’t uncommon sights during Welcome Week–what was supposed to be funny? The shirts said “Service Wonk.” Naturally, I thought the shirts were unintentionally dirty (wank?) and gave it a chuckle. At the time I chalked it up to a nonsensical Freshman Service Experience campaign and forgot about it.

Three short weeks later, it has proven itself to be so much more.

Earlier this week AWOL reported that the Wonk campaign, a marketing plan to attract prospective students, will cost American University $675,000. That’s far from the drop in the bucket I had originally thought. It was the front page story on the websites of both AU and The Eagle for almost a week. The “Service Wonk” shirts I first saw have diversified: there are Green Wonks, Athletic Wonks, Greek Wonks–the list goes on. Wonk is unavoidable. It even has a promotional video.

One of the most glaring problems with the campaign is the word itself. The university defines “wonk” by citing urbandictionary.com:

Wonk: Noun – An expert in a field, typically someone who is fairly young and very intelligent.

According to materials provided by Terry Flannery, Executive Director of University Communications and Marketing, the Wonk marketing team considered implications of other definitions. The word is slang for the drug ketamine in the United Kingdom, and meant homosexual in 1940s Australia. Both of these variations can be found at urbandictionary.com.

The copy of Webster’s Dictionary sitting on my bookshelf adds another side to the story. It gives two definitions:

Wonk: n. (Slang) 1, an obsessive student; grind. 2, (Offensive) an unattractive person.

Shouldn’t AU’s hired marketing team, whose slogan is “Intelligent Marketing for Higher Education,” have checked a dictionary?

Then there’s the money. The wonk campaign will cost an estimated $675,000 over two fiscal years. That’s enough to send six students to AU free of charge for four years. Enough to buy every undergraduate student at AU a copy of Webster’s Classic Reference Library Dictionary at $110 each. Enough to adopt 2,700 pandas through the World Wildlife Fund’s most expensive ($250) panda adoption package and give the 2,700 included “Giant Plush Pandas” to disadvantaged DC children. Enough to donate $675,000 to District of Columbia public schools. Enough to pay for 460 students to take a plane trip around the world or to pay for even more students’ round trip study abroad plane tickets. Enough to ease the burdens of many students’ debts and pay off their college loans. I could go on. The list could be its own column. The point is, this cost a substantial amount of university money–money that could have been put to better use.

While railing on the campaign is easy, it is also easy to forget that there were many, many smart well-meaning people that put it together and still defend it wholeheartedly. People that truly believe that it was the right thing to do with $675,000 and that it will work. Watching the promotional video is difficult. Over and over, Wonk’s creators tell the camera about their earnest hard work over the past two years. They talk about the planning involved and the results they hope their idea will bring. It is as though they have invented a flying car. Yet somehow the result of all this hard work is simply, “Wonk.”

The promotional video quotes Sonya Grier, marketing professor in the Kogod School of Business. She says, “Universities are businesses that operate in increasingly competitive global markets.” Herein lies the campaign’s biggest misunderstanding. A university is an institute of higher education, not a fast food chain. A good university should sell itself on the basis of intelligent students, great professors, and outstanding learning environments, not its name recognition or four-letter catchphrase. AU is not hurting for applicants and I’m skeptical whether the Wonk campaign will improve the quality of the school’s applicant pool.

Despite myriad groaning around campus, it appears that wonk is here to stay, with an estimated $350,000 still to be spent in this fiscal year and seemingly no plans to stop anytime soon. In the words of the campaign’s promotional video, “Wonk? Really?”

Returning students arrived on campus this fall to three major new developments at American University. First, a big ol’ new building to house the School of International Service. Second, “American Wonks“–a high-powered marketing campaign designed to highlight the passionate intellectualism of AU students. And third, a campus community saturated with various objections to the “Wonk” campaign (go to the comments section of this article for a sampling) for its supposed folly or wastefulness.

We picked up on a rumor that American University had spent $4 million on costs associated with the Wonk campaign. AWOL’s Peter Harrison did some digging and found that the rumor, it seems, is not true. Teresa Flannery, AU’s Executive Director of Communications and Marketing, emailed us a breakdown of Wonk-related expenses, which are expected to total $675,000. Here’s what she sent:

To date:

FY09
225,000                Baseline stakeholder study with 12 different audiences to set baseline and identify positioning

FY10
100,000                For items including:

Additional copywriting capacity
Wonk characters and work by Nate Beeler commissioned for campaign and American magazine
Creative testing
Linguistics study (term or words that sound like it in the languages spoken in countries where our students and faculty come from)
Thirty-five trademark applications for variations in selected categories
urls in various forms
Grassroots activity by student teams
Campus launch – direct costs (less than one wash post ad) for t-shirts, tents, food, presentations and events (e.g., student presentations, luncheons, teas, Celebrate AU)

Still to come later this fiscal year:

200,000                Create 2011 Welcome Center/Experience that integrates the brand messages in the creative
150,000                Estimated cost KNOW/WONK in fall graduate student recruitment advertising

Then there are the hundreds of communications (colleges and schools, admissions (71 alone in that unit), alumni that will incorporate the concept into existing materials. No new costs, but our internal team will be dedicated to producing these in house.

It’s not $4 million, but $675,000 is a significant chunk of money nonetheless. So American University students, what do you think? Was your dough well-spent on “Wonk”? Give us your take in the comments.

Photo: A bunch of wonks-to-be at American University’s graduation in 2006. (Flickr/Laura Padgett)