In December 2003, just after the capture of Saddam Hussein, The Daily Princetonian interviewed several University professors to understand their opinions of the situation.
Now, almost one year later, the conflict in Iraq has become one of the most discussed issues in the nation on the eve of a presidential election.
Senior writer Josh Brodie went back to several of the same people to discuss what they thought about the progress made and challenges encountered over the last 10 months in Iraq.
The following questions were asked:
1. What do you think of the state of the Iraqi government; to what extent has a meaningful transfer of power occurred, and to what extent is the United States still bearing the brunt of the burden of running this country?
2. How has the past year's worth of Iraq policy affected the political climate in the United States; why has this particular issue become so important to political campaigns; who seems to be getting a boost from the situation in Iraq, and who is being hit?
3. Where do you see Iraq in 5 years; what will our commitment look like; what will the government there look like; how big a part of American politics will it be?
Here are their responses, edited for length:
Politics Professor:
Robert George
1. My impression is that the government of Iraq is perceived as legitimate by most Iraqis and most foreign governments. It is increasingly exercising political authority. Of course, the U.S. led coalition forces are still critical to the struggle against Ba'athist and radical Islamicist insurgents. It is in everyone's interest that these insurgents be defeated soon so that all foreign forces can leave Iraq. It is also important to build the Iraqi army into a force that is both effective and respectful of the rule of law and, when the day comes, democracy.
2. The troubling success in some significant areas of Iraq of antidemocratic insurgents, together with the continuing loss of American and other lives, has made the American public very anxious. The Kerry campaign and the Democrats have exploited the "mess" in Iraq quite effectively, I believe. The Bush administration plainly did not anticipate the difficulties that would be faced in bringing order and the rule of law to Iraq after effecting regime change. The problem for Kerry is that he has not been able to articulate a clear and consistent position on Iraq — whether we should have gone in, and whether we should now get out. Before some audiences he presents himself as Joe Lieberman; before others he is Howard Dean. This is hurting him.
3. It is difficult to say. I don't expect large numbers of American soldiers to still be in Iraq five years from now. What I don't know is whether there will be a functioning democracy there or an autocratic (perhaps even theocratic) regime. Of course, it is not out of the question that Iraq will break up into three separate entities, though I would not predict that. Like all Americans, I hope that the Iraqi government will securely establish the rule of law, and that a successful set of elections next year will provide the foundation for a sustainable democracy. It would be wonderful not only for the people of Iraq, but for the entire Middle East. Oremus.
Wilson School Dean:
Anne-Marie Slaughter
1. I think there's been a meaningful transfer of power, yes. I think Iraqis are much more in control of their own affairs . . . including the security area.
[However,] I think Americans have made mistake after mistake and we are playing catch up in a a situation that is getting worse.
My overall view is that if we had been properly prepared at the end of formal military hostilities and prevented the country's infrastructure from being destroyed by looters and if we'd learned the lessons of Bosnia in terms of how to reconstruct a state after conflict, we could have actually put Iraq back on its feet and gained popular support much more quickly, but we basically had too little too late and we've made some tremendous mistakes in judgment and we're paying for it.
2. I think the question is less about what we should do in Iraq at the moment and, frankly, less about whether we should have gone in in the first place, than whether the handling of Iraq demonstrates that the president is a competent leader in the war on terror, or whether his foreign policy judgment overall should be questioned.
And each campaign is framing that question differently. For the President, he wants voters to see this as his taking the fight to the enemy and being proactive in defense of the United States.
The Kerry campaign wants this to be seen as evidence that the President is not capable of building the types of alliances and leading other countries that will be necessary for burdensharing and also longtime success.
Yes, I think we are at the outset of a new era in foreign affairs where we face a critical set of challenges and in which America's entire role in the world is in question. This election is going to determine how well we can defend ourselves and how well we can lead.
3. The first thing I'd say is that it's impossible to predict.
I think the best-case scenario is that there is a stable government that is at least minimally-rights regarding, one that respects the human rights of its citizens.
There will certainly be U.S. troops in the region, whether [they will be] in Iraq or not is not clear . . . in the same way we've had significant troops in Europe.
The worst-case scenario is that Iraq is not a country . . . that the current borders and population of Iraq no longer exist.
Dean Slaughter stressed that, in addition to the situation in Iraq, there are several other very important issues relevant to this election.
Bioethics Professor:
Peter Singer
1. I think there has been some transfer of power, but [the question is] to whom? Certainly not to [representatives] elected by the Iraqi people. [Instead, there has been] transfer of power from the U.S. to a subgroup of Iraqis who are acceptable to the U.S. You can't say we have a government that represents Iraqis at this stage . . .
If the U.S. handpicks a number of Iraqis . . . and says "'you run the country"' . . . and [then goes] handsoff . . . then you could say the government is running the country, but it is irrelevant because they're the people the U.S. wants to be running the country, not Iraqis. I don't know if [the current government is] who Iraqis want, nobody knows.
2. What surprised me is that there are still so many people who want to trust Bush with another term after he's created a disaster in Iraq and miscalculated in so many ways. With [his suggestions of] "Mission Accomplished" [in May 2003] and with [his administration's suggestions] that you could go there and it would be relatively simple to bring about democracy, there have clearly been miscalculations. [Facts have turned out] contrary to statements made by Bush and Cheney at the time.
Whatever you thought initially, they've clearly made mistakes . . . The situation in Iraq is far more complex than Bush has described it, so it is not surprising that Americans have a false picture of what' going on in Iraq.
3. [I have] no idea . . . there are too many things that are possible.
One possibility is that it will be like Afghanistan is now . . . an American symbolic government but with pockets of resistance. Another is that America will have pulled out. Maybe there will be an Islamic government like in Iran supported by the Shiite majority. Or, perhaps, there will be a de facto partition of the areas [along religious lines].
An ongoing civil war would be a tragedy but is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.
The war in Iraq severely damaged the credibility of the United States and I don't know how long that will play out for. There's an enormous lot of work to be done in rebuilding relationships with European allies and the rest of the world. It remains to be shown that the United States is prepared to be a global citizen rather than a global dictator, which is the image a lot of the world has gotten from this episode.
Read More
GSG approves audit, delays budget approval after ‘insufferable’ meeting
Nikki HanThe final Graduate Student Government (GSG) meeting for the semester lasted more than an hour and a half when discussions over the proposed budget for the next year and a proposed Student Life Fee of $100 turned controversial.
The final Graduate Student Government (GSG) meeting for the semester lasted more than an hour and a half when discussions over the proposed budget for the next year and a proposed Student Life Fee of $100 turned controversial.
Effort to restore chapel’s pews slowly progresses
Ben GoldstonHead carpenter Jim Sullivan has been restoring the Chapel pews over the last year. The dry atmosphere of the Chapel has warped the wooden pews over the years.
Head carpenter Jim Sullivan has been restoring the Chapel pews over the last year. The dry atmosphere of the Chapel has warped the wooden pews over the years.
Metals, molecules, and medicine: chemical biology’s influence on health and sustainability
Aanya KaseraChemistry professor Chris Chang’s lab studies the chemical biology of the elements, specifically examining the roles that copper, iron, and zinc play in biology across all kingdoms of life.
Chemistry professor Chris Chang’s lab studies the chemical biology of the elements, specifically examining the roles that copper, iron, and zinc play in biology across all kingdoms of life.