The issue of believing in one's excellence is archaic.  People tend to praise their actions, usually claiming that they rarely commit mistakes.  Even if they do commit mistakes, the mistakes will be mainly due to the errors of others.

Of course, I'm talking about the Turkish North Republic of Cyprus. The TNRC was created in 1981 on 37% of Cypriot territoriy after the Turkish troops invaded the island in 1974.  No single country, except Turkey, acknowledges the existence of the TNRC.  The country's economic situation is in  bad shape and the country is highly dependent on Turkey.  Nevertheless, when you check out the country's publicity, you see pictures of miserable old people, wearing out-of-fashion clothes, living in houses with no-maintenance, and using old fashioned cars which are, in most countries, out of service.

The most catchy thing in the TNRC's promotion material is a statement which reads: "TNRC, a corner where earth meats heaven."  You then start wondering whether those who promote these slogans actually believe in them.  Now apply this example to any other institution, which tries to promote itself and its policies.

With the American University of Beirut, we feel, both as students and as Alumni, that we have a duty to promote our University.  When the University is in trouble, we look for the positive things and we promote them.  When our reputation is at stake, we give the administration our hand and try to ignore external anti-AUB propaganda.  When we go off campus, we make sure to say that we come from the best university.

Yet, there is a thin line between solidarity in front of others and the internal settlement of accounts.  We expected, at least on the internal level, justifications, explanations and transparency.  Did anyone believe that a certain "magnitude of error" can be "entirely" the fault of a single person's "own doing?"  Of course, not.  We want better answers, in addition to some answers in retrospect.

The trend of "resignation" has become widespread in AUB.  While some resignations are public, others happen on a lower profile.  Some comptroller officers, the Banner 2000 people, and others in different departments "resigned" overnight.  We rarely receive  e-mails about such cases.  Instead, we keep on receiving e-mails to the effect of how to talk, how to walk, and how to act on campus.  After the recent "international incident," the senior administration better start forwarding its e-mails to its own members so they will practice what it preaches.

Financial policies are similarly publicized.  You learn of how the University received money and who donated this money (in last issue's editorial we made sure to highlight such positive points).  You rarely know, however, how this money was spent. The University buys "some property" and the administration "prefers not to mention numbers."  But no, the budget is annually publicized.

In the spring 1998, if some of those who attended the public budget meetings still remember, a sum of money was allocated for the rehabilitation of the running track.  Needless to say the track has not been rehabilitated, and AUB now has a donor whose $11.7  million will lead to the construction of a huge sports center including the renovation of the said track.  No one asked, probably no one remembers, what happened to the money allocated in 1998.  We only cite this minor example to say that transparency in this University is minimal, not to say theatrical.

We are ready to give the administration chances.  We are also ready to defend their actions and to ignore their wrongdoings for the interest of the outlook of this University, but we do not want them to believe that we always believe what they say or to believe that we believe that we are excellent.