A group of experts clashed Tuesday night at a panel discussion over the best way to resolve the bellicose tension between the United States and Iraq.
The panel, comprised of Associate Professor of Political Science Peter Feaver, Associate Research Professor of Religion Ebrahim Moosa and Chuck Fager, director of the Quaker House in Fayetteville, N.C., debated "Ways to Resolve Conflict" Tuesday night before an audience of 40 to 50 students, faculty and staff.
Moosa began the event, outlining three major points pertaining to conflict resolution. "The goals and ends of conflict resolution must be to achieve some form of justice," Moosa said. "There must be equity in the theater of justice," he said, adding that justice cannot be applied selectively. Moosa's third point was that those who facilitate conflict resolution can never own the process. "The credibility of brokers is vital," he said.
Feaver followed Moosa's remarks with a description of concrete possibilities for Iraq's future: either the United States and the rest of the world will learn to live with the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program or Iraq will disarm.
"Iraq could do it by voluntarily submitting to inspection," said Feaver, adding that this option is unlikely. "The other way [Saddam Hussein] could disarm is he can be toppled by force."
Fager's introductory remarks clarified the Quakers' pacifist perspective on war. He outlined the Quaker transformation from nonresistance-living their lives as though war were obsolete-to proactive thought on how to get rid of the problem of war.
"We get things done," Fager said of the American mindset. "Quakers began to think this way about peace. War was a problem."
Feaver argued in favor of a regime change in Iraq while Fager said the United States has overstepped its role in world affairs. "Our government has set out essentially to run the world. The first step to a really positive outcome would be to rethink that objective," he said.
Moosa also touched upon the United States' arrogance in the international system. "The world is in mortal threat with the United States being allowed to strut around like a colossus," Moosa said.
Feaver pointed out that all of the post-Saddam problems that many Americans fear in a war, such as control of weapons of mass destruction and ethnic conflict, will still be present when Saddam dies. "We are left with the fact that he will die at some point," Feaver said. "Weapons of mass destruction are more easily rounded up and destroyed if U.S. forces are on the ground in Iraq."
Feaver made a similar argument for the possibility of ethnic warfare. "It will be easier to squelch the bloodbath if there are U.S. and multilateral forces in place."
While recognizing that the Iraqi people would welcome a regime change, Moosa reemphasized one of his points for conflict resolution, the credibility of brokers.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.