Follow us on Instagram
Try our free mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

Panel discusses rebuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan

A three-member panel discussed the reconstruction efforts in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan in Frist Campus Center yesterday afternoon.

The members of the panel were Robert Finn, GS '78, former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan and visiting professor in Near Eastern studies, Julie Taylor, NES instructor, and Nicholas Guyatt, history lecturer.

ADVERTISEMENT

The event was sponsored by the Global Issues Forum.

Finn said though there has been progress in reconstructing Afghanistan, problems remain.

Roads are being built, a primitive communications system is being established and warlords who were governing many provinces are slowly giving up power.

"This government is very slowly beginning to govern more and more of the country," he said. "Are there still problems? Lots. Will these continue to be problems? Yes."

Finn said several steps still need to be taken to restore the government to democracy, including the construction of a large highway, the formation of an ethnically-balanced national army and an increase in the size of the police force.

In Iraq, Finn said there has been a lot of progress contrary to popular opinion.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tiger hand holding out heart
Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince’. Donate now »

Princeton history professor Julie Taylor emphasized incorporating Shiite clerics into the Iraqi reconstruction process. Otherwise the process is not democratic enough, she said.

"Currently we are working to have the constitution drawn up by appointed officials instead of elected officials, who would most likely be Shiite clerics," she said.

Guyatt questioned America's motivation for invading Iraq and its unilateral approach to foreign affairs. He said that until weapons of mass destruction are found, the Bush administration's explanation for invading Iraq will not be satisfactory.

But he also challenged pacifists, arguing that though weapons of mass destruction are still missing, they are still not fully justified in their position.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

"If they were saying no on war, what were they saying yes to? A yes to Iraq under sanctions and Saddam seems to maybe be a worse Iraq," he said.