Last week, the University formally announced that Michael Oren, the Israeli ambassador to the United States, will deliver the keynote address at the 2010 commencement exercises. Although under different circumstances he could have been a fascinating speaker to bring to the campus, Mr. Oren is a divisive and inappropriate choice for keynote speaker at commencement, and we disapprove of the University's decision to grant someone of his polarity on this campus that honor. For the administration, Mr. Oren's invitation constitutes at best naiveté and at worst disregard concerning the reality of the range of student political orientation on this campus. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a hotly contested political issue, one that inspires students with serious positions on the topic to fervently defend and promote their views.

That reality is visible at most events concerning the conflict. During last semester's joint appearance of Justice Richard Goldstone, who headed the United Nations fact-finding mission following the 2008 Israeli incursion, and former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold, several students interrupted Mr. Gold's speech in silent protest. Despite the disrespect of some students, that thought-provoking forum was exactly the type of event that this university should host-and in such a context, we are certain that Mr. Oren would have been an excellent choice for speaker.

However, commencement is a time to bring the University together in celebration of the achievements of the graduating class. Commencement is not a forum for academic or political debate.

Already, many students are expressing anger toward the University regarding the choice of keynote speaker, and Mr. Oren's address will almost undoubtedly inspire some form of protest at the ceremony, permanently marring the 2010 exercises.

We are pleased with the University's choices for honorary degree recipients overall. All of them, including Mr. Oren, are accomplished individuals who are most deserving of honorary degrees from this University.

Despite his credentials and whatever the content of his speech may be, Mr. Oren remains a polarizing choice for keynote speaker, and commencement simply remains an incorrect format for predictable controversy on this level. The University's decision to offer Mr. Oren that coveted speaking position at commencement ultimately reflects its overlooking of the needs of its diverse student body. The arrangements with Mr. Oren may already be finalized, but we urge the administration to prevent further insensitivity and, foremost, to prioritize students.