Founded in 1955, the institution in eastern Libya was heavily damaged during battles between jihadist groups and forces led by military commander Khalifa Haftar between 2014 and 2016, after the uprising that toppled longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi.

University president Ezzedin Younis Eddressi said in an interview that around 90 percent of the campus complex had been destroyed during the conflict and that explosives had been planted across the grounds when jihadist groups controlled the city. He also said rare manuscripts dating back centuries were looted but later recovered.

Despite the destruction, classes continued during the worst years of the fighting using alternative facilities across Benghazi, with schools shared between schoolchildren in the morning and university students in the afternoon, according to the administration.

Nearly 70,000 students now attend the university, still using temporary facilities while a new campus—covering about 600 hectares—is expected to open in the coming months. The reconstruction has been overseen by Libya’s Reconstruction Fund, which is headed by Belgacem Haftar, son of Khalifa Haftar.

Students and graduates interviewed by AFP described gradual improvements in security and infrastructure. Maryam Alrefadi, a graduate who now teaches French online, said the city had regained stability and opportunities compared to the conflict years, while current students said conditions had improved significantly despite lingering economic challenges.

Ayesha Al-Mogassbi, a 19-year-old student, said earlier years were marked by shortages and instability but added that students now aim for broader opportunities and development. Others noted that students from across Libya, including Tripoli, are studying together, reflecting a sense of national cohesion despite the country’s political divisions.

Libya remains split between rival administrations in the east and west, though university officials emphasized plans to maintain open access and international academic partnerships as part of long-term rebuilding efforts.

Educators and policymakers are increasingly examining how schools can balance academic performance with broader developmental goals as education systems adapt to changing social and economic demands.

While standardized assessments and examination results remain key measures of educational success, many teachers argue that learning outcomes cannot be fully captured through test scores alone.

Growing attention is being directed toward critical thinking, communication skills, problem-solving abilities and emotional development as essential components of modern education.Supporters of a broader educational approach contend that students face a rapidly evolving environment shaped by technological change, economic uncertainty and increasing access to information.

In such conditions, they argue, schools must equip young people with skills that extend beyond traditional subject knowledge.Educational researchers have also highlighted the importance of adaptability and lifelong learning.

As labor markets evolve and career paths become less predictable, students may need to update their skills repeatedly throughout their lives.

This has led some institutions to place greater emphasis on independent learning and analytical thinking.At the same time, educators caution against abandoning academic rigor.

Core competencies in literacy, numeracy and subject-specific knowledge continue to form the foundation of educational achievement. Many school leaders argue that the challenge is not choosing between academic excellence and personal development but integrating both objectives effectively.

The debate reflects broader questions about the purpose of education in contemporary society.

As governments, schools and communities seek to prepare students for future challenges, discussions are increasingly focused on how education can support both intellectual achievement and personal growth.

Phenyo Tanka’s experience in the labour market highlights a broader challenge facing Botswana as policymakers seek to reduce the country’s long-standing dependence on the diamond sector and create employment opportunities across a more diversified economy.

Tanka, 39, graduated with a degree in agriculture in 2011, entering the workforce with qualifications in a field widely viewed as important to economic diversification efforts. More than a decade later, she says she has been unable to secure employment in the sector despite submitting numerous applications for positions related to her studies.

Her situation illustrates the difficulties faced by some graduates attempting to translate academic qualifications into formal employment opportunities in sectors that have yet to generate sufficient jobs to absorb skilled workers.

Botswana is internationally recognised for the role diamonds have played in transforming its economy since independence. Revenue generated by the mining industry has supported infrastructure development, public services and economic growth over several decades.

At the same time, policymakers have repeatedly identified economic diversification as a national priority aimed at reducing vulnerability to fluctuations in commodity markets and creating broader employment opportunities.Against that backdrop, agriculture has frequently been cited as one of the sectors with potential to contribute to economic expansion beyond mining.

However, Tanka’s experience reflects the challenges that can emerge when employment creation does not keep pace with educational attainment and workforce participation.After graduating in agriculture in 2011, Tanka sought employment in the field she had studied. According to her account, repeated applications failed to result in a job offer, leaving her outside the sector despite her qualifications.

The prolonged search for work eventually led her to pursue self-employment opportunities rather than continue relying exclusively on formal recruitment processes. While she has not secured a position in agriculture, she has continued to explore ways to generate income independently.

Today, Tanka operates a small business producing and selling homemade cakes. The venture represents an entrepreneurial response to limited employment opportunities and reflects a broader trend in which individuals seek alternative income sources through small-scale enterprise when formal jobs are difficult to obtain.

Her ambitions extend beyond her current business activities. Tanka said she hopes to establish a toilet paper manufacturing operation, signalling an interest in expanding into light industrial production and building a larger commercial enterprise.The transition from university graduate to entrepreneur was not part of her original career plan.

However, after years of unsuccessful job searches, self-employment has become her primary economic activity.Tanka said her entrepreneurial goals are also shaped by personal considerations, particularly her desire to provide an example for her children.“I have two girls and I want them to know that they can also be independent, as ladies,” she said.

Her comments reflect a focus on economic self-sufficiency and the role entrepreneurship can play in creating opportunities when conventional employment pathways prove difficult to access.The experience of graduates such as Tanka continues to draw attention to the relationship between education, labour market demand and economic diversification.

While higher education provides skills and qualifications, employment outcomes ultimately depend on the capacity of industries and businesses to create positions that match those skills.In economies seeking to broaden their productive base, the challenge often extends beyond training workers.

It also involves fostering investment, supporting business development and creating conditions in which new sectors can generate sustainable employment opportunities.For Botswana, efforts to diversify economic activity beyond diamonds have been a recurring policy objective.

The country’s development strategy has frequently emphasised expanding activity in sectors capable of contributing to growth, employment and economic resilience.Tanka’s experience provides a personal perspective on that broader economic challenge.

Despite obtaining a university degree in a sector considered important to diversification efforts, she has remained unable to secure employment in her field since graduating in 2011.Yet her response has not been to withdraw from economic activity.

Instead, she has pursued entrepreneurship through her cake business while planning future ventures that could potentially create additional income streams.More than a decade after completing her studies, she continues to seek opportunities to build a sustainable livelihood. Her efforts underscore the realities faced by some graduates navigating labour markets where the availability of skilled employment remains limited relative to demand.

As Botswana continues to pursue economic diversification, experiences such as Tanka’s highlight the importance of translating policy objectives into employment opportunities capable of absorbing qualified workers and supporting broader economic participation.

For Tanka, that process remains personal as well as economic. While her search for employment in agriculture has yet to yield results, she continues to pursue business opportunities and invest in plans she hopes will provide both financial independence and an example for the next generation.

“I have two girls and I want them to know that they can also be independent, as ladies,” she said.

The growing use of generative artificial intelligence in university classrooms is reshaping how educators approach writing instruction, with some professors warning that widespread reliance on AI-generated prose risks weakening students’ critical thinking, creative development and capacity for sustained intellectual effort.

The debate has become increasingly prominent at leading academic institutions as students gain access to large language models capable of producing essays, stories and analytical writing in seconds. While universities continue to refine policies governing AI use, instructors across disciplines are confronting practical questions about authorship, learning and the purpose of writing itself.

One fiction-writing professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology described those tensions through experiences teaching undergraduate creative writing workshops since 2017. Many students entering the program, the instructor said, come from science and engineering backgrounds and have little prior experience with fiction writing or peer critique.

At the beginning of each semester, students are instructed to read workshop submissions multiple times, identify strengths and weaknesses, and provide detailed written feedback. The process is designed not simply to improve stories but to expose students to the vulnerability and uncertainty inherent in creative work.“Good writing feels good to read; bad writing feels bad,” the instructor wrote, describing fiction workshops as environments where qualitative judgment must nevertheless be defended through close textual analysis.

Creative writing workshops have historically relied on direct engagement between authors and readers. Participants critique narrative structure, characterization, language and emotional resonance while authors defend or reconsider their choices. The process can be psychologically demanding because criticism of the text often feels inseparable from criticism of the writer’s thoughts, experiences or ability to communicate.

For students accustomed to quantitative disciplines with definitive answers and formal methodologies, the ambiguity of fiction writing can be especially difficult. Unlike mathematics or engineering problems, literary quality cannot be measured through objective formulas.The emergence of generative AI has introduced a new complication into that educational dynamic.

According to the professor, AI-generated fiction often exhibits polished grammar, coherent structure and stylistic consistency while lacking the deeper imperfections associated with genuine intellectual struggle or personal expression.The instructor described AI prose as “perfectly mediocre,” arguing that such writing frequently imitates the surface characteristics of literary fiction without reflecting authentic thought or lived experience.

The critique echoes broader concerns among writers, academics and publishers regarding the growing volume of AI-generated content entering educational and creative spaces. Critics argue that while large language models can reproduce stylistic patterns drawn from enormous datasets, they do not independently experience emotion, intention or reflection.

The professor compared AI-generated prose to “simulacra of thought,” arguing that readers often sense an underlying emptiness even when technical quality appears strong.By contrast, student writing — despite awkward phrasing, structural inconsistency or undeveloped ideas was described as evidence of active thinking taking shape through language. “The prose stumbles,” the professor wrote, “in a way reminiscent of a foal learning how to walk.”

The issue became directly confrontational during a recent fiction workshop after the instructor concluded that two submitted stories had been generated primarily through AI tools. According to the account, the stories appeared unusually polished for inexperienced writers, with tidy narrative arcs and formulaic metaphors that lacked individual context or perspective.The workshop was halted before discussion proceeded.

Rather than imposing punishment, the instructor used the incident to initiate a broader conversation about the role of writing in education and the motivations behind AI use.One student reportedly admitted using AI out of fear that classmates would judge her writing negatively.

Another said he had ideas for a story but did not know how to begin writing independently. Other students questioned whether using AI differed fundamentally from receiving editorial assistance or technological support.The discussion reflected a growing uncertainty within higher education regarding where institutions should draw distinctions between assistance, collaboration and authorship.

Universities worldwide have struggled to establish consistent AI policies as generative tools rapidly evolve. Some institutions prohibit AI-generated submissions outright, while others permit limited use for brainstorming, editing or research support. Many policies remain provisional as educators assess both opportunities and risks associated with the technology.

The professor argued that writing serves a developmental function extending beyond the production of finished text. “Writing isn’t just the production of sentences,” the instructor told students. “It’s the training of endurance by way of sustained attention.”That argument aligns with broader academic concerns about cognitive offloading — the transfer of intellectual effort from humans to automated systems.

Several recent studies have explored whether extensive reliance on generative AI affects memory, persistence, analytical reasoning or executive functioning.A preliminary 2025 study conducted by the MIT Media Lab reportedly found lower neural connectivity among participants using ChatGPT-assisted essay writing compared with participants writing independently.

Additional non-peer-reviewed studies cited by the professor raised concerns about diminished persistence and weakened independent problem-solving among high-frequency AI users.While many findings remain preliminary, researchers increasingly warn that overreliance on generative systems could reduce engagement with cognitively demanding tasks that historically contributed to intellectual development.

The professor situated those concerns within a longer historical pattern of technological anxiety. Critics have historically warned that innovations ranging from the printing press to the telephone would damage attention spans, social cohesion or intellectual capacity.

The instructor referenced 16th-century scholar Conrad Gessner, who warned about an overabundance of books, as well as 19th-century fears surrounding telecommunication technologies.Nevertheless, the professor argued that the current moment differs because generative AI directly imitates human language production rather than merely accelerating communication or access to information.

The instructor also drew parallels to George Orwell’s 1946 essay Confessions of a Book Reviewer, in which Orwell described the intellectual exhaustion caused by industrialized literary criticism disconnected from authentic engagement with texts.According to the professor, AI-generated writing risks creating a similar detachment by allowing students to perform the appearance of thought without undergoing the mental process required to generate original ideas.

The response in the classroom has since shifted. Following the AI incident, workshop discussions reportedly became more focused on frustration, uncertainty and the difficulties involved in translating abstract thought into language.

Rather than treating those struggles as evidence of failure, the professor now frames them as central to intellectual growth and creative development. The workshop, the instructor argued, functions properly only when there is an identifiable human consciousness behind the work being discussed.“This is a pedagogical position, not a moral or technical one,” the professor wrote.

The concern, according to the instructor, is not that AI will eliminate writers or make fiction workshops obsolete. Instead, the greater risk lies in students becoming accustomed to bypassing the friction traditionally required to develop voice, judgment and independent thinking.“What my students and I now guard,” the professor wrote, “isn’t a boundary against machines so much as a sanctuary for authorship.”

Motwani’s remarks come at a time of intense scrutiny over the political radicalization of students across American campuses — particularly following the explosion of pro-Hamas demonstrations in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks in Israel. Drawing from her own experience as a foreign student in the United States, she noted the vulnerability international students often face upon arrival.

“I came to the US as a foreign student. In the first year, most of us were lonely and struggled to find a community,” she shared. “It’s very easy for well-organized and well-funded campus groups to rope you in and give you an instant ‘community.’ There is a constant flow of free food, entertainment, and excitement. What anti-Israel campus groups are doing is a systematic luring of lonely foreign students into their ‘movement’… Once caught, the foreign students often find purpose thinking they’re helping ‘oppressed’ people.”

Motwani emphasized that the near-instant mobilization of anti-Israel protests after October 7 was not organic but meticulously orchestrated — and that many such groups trace their funding roots to Qatari-linked entities.

Qatar’s Expanding Influence Campaign

The timing of Motwani’s warning coincides with growing international concern over Qatar’s covert operations to shape political narratives, particularly through soft power mechanisms. Israeli intelligence officials are currently probing the possibility that Qatari actors are orchestrating a wave of disinformation targeting Israel-Egypt relations.

A recent online campaign portrayed Egypt’s military buildup in Sinai as a violation of its peace treaty with Israel — despite the fact that many visuals used in the posts were traced back to 2018 military drills. “Fake Reporter,” an Israeli civil society organization, confirmed a significant spike in misinformation across social media platforms depicting Egypt as a growing threat.

This apparent attempt to sow distrust between Israel and Egypt — long-time peace partners — is suspected to be part of a larger Qatari strategy to weaken Cairo’s standing as a regional mediator, especially in Gaza-related negotiations.

But this isn’t an isolated incident.

A Global Web of Qatari Influence

From funding elite U.S. universities to lobbying Western politicians, Qatar’s influence infrastructure is expansive — and increasingly scrutinized.

In higher education alone, Qatar has donated $4.7 billion to American institutions between 2001 and 2021. Universities like Georgetown, Cornell, and Carnegie Mellon have opened satellite campuses in Doha, often under contracts that grant significant editorial or academic influence to Qatari stakeholders. Texas A&M received over $400 million in Qatari funding and is now in the process of exiting Qatar, facing diplomatic backlash.

A 2020 ISGAP study highlighted a correlation between Qatari funding and the rise of pro-Palestinian — and in many cases, anti-Israel — activism across American campuses.

This education-based influence is just one aspect. Qatar also wields diplomatic, media, financial, and sports-based soft power globally. It has invested billions in European firms, funded politicians and think tanks in Washington D.C., and cultivated public goodwill in the U.S. through pandemic-era aid packages. Its ownership of Al Jazeera — accused of promoting Islamist narratives — further bolsters its reach.

In the Middle East, Qatar’s role in supporting radical groups under the guise of humanitarian aid is well documented. It remains a major funder of Hamas and continues to press for direct involvement in Gaza’s reconstruction and aid delivery post-conflict.

Recent media investigations and security analyses suggest that Qatari “charities” are often conduits for funding extremist ideologies. The Eid Charity and other Qatari foundations have been linked to Brotherhood-aligned networks in India, Syria, and elsewhere — often with destabilizing consequences.

Why Universities Must Act Now

For thought leaders like Asha Jadeja Motwani, this is no longer just an issue of free speech or student activism — it’s a matter of national security and ideological integrity.

“Qatari money doesn’t come free,” she warns. “It brings with it a worldview — one that is at odds with democratic values, academic freedom, and even basic human rights. If we want to protect the integrity of our institutions, the first step is to sever these financial pipelines.”

Motwani’s call resonates with a growing chorus of voices demanding transparency in foreign donations to universities and greater accountability in how such funds are used.

As campuses continue to grapple with ideological polarization and rising antisemitism, the question isn’t just about what students believe — but who is funding their belief systems.

The answer, increasingly, points back to Doha.