Young historians don’t want David Petraeus to keynote the annual meeting of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR)

Thanks to everyone who signed the open letter contesting the decision to invite David Petraeus to deliver the keynote lecture at the annual meeting of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR). Much has happened since the letter closed on May 25. The organizers of the letter have created this site to keep signatories and others learning about this controversy informed.

277 scholars have signed an open letter to the SHAFR Council protesting the decision to invite David Petraeus to give the keynote lecture at SHAFR's 2018 annual meeting. The letter upholds principles of free speech and inquiry and acknowledges Petraeus’ right to speak his mind and present at SHAFR panels, but expresses “deep disappointment and dismay” over the decision to grant Petraeus both the honor and SHAFR funds associated with a keynote. The letter was delivered on May 26, 2018, and can be read here.

During the week that it circulated, the letter inspired wide-ranging debate on Twitter and Facebook. On May 30, 2018, the co-chairs of this year’s SHAFR program committee, Professor Jeffrey A. Engel and Professor Katherine C. Epstein, responded to the open letter. They discussed it together with one of the reactions it had inspired on Twitter, an open letter from Professor Aaron O'Connell defending the decision to invite Petraeus. They proposed a four-person roundtable “exploring the history of counter-insurgency in question” as a plenary session. They invited O’Connell and the first two signatories of the petition letter to nominate two panelists apiece to discuss the history of counterinsurgency and Petraeus’s role.

On May 31, 2018, several organizers and signatories of the original open letter responded to SHAFR’s program chairs and executive director, explaining that the proposed roundtable “does not address the concerns in the letter.” Their response was delivered on June 2, 2018, and can be read here.

To this point, the SHAFR Council, to which the initial petition letter was addressed, has received it but has not responded. It is scheduled to discuss the issue during its upcoming meeting during the SHAFR conference.