History Professor Gene Garthwaite and Visiting Government Professors Bradley Thayer and Sean Kay discussed the impending war in the Gulf in a lunch lecture and discussion titled "To Bomb or Not to Bomb."
Extra chairs had to be added in the Collis Common Ground to accommodate the more than 150 students, faculty and community members who attended yesterday afternoon's event.
Garthwaite, who has a military background, explained the historical background of the Iraq situation and drew parallels between the 1990-91 Gulf War and the current situation.
The Gulf War objectives were clear -- to rid Kuwait of Iraq -- but there is no clear goal this time, according to Garthwaite. The United States has also lost support of the international coalition that backed the Gulf War initiative, he said.
Currently, only the United Kingdom, Australia and Kuwait support U.S. action against Iraq, he said. In fact, according to Garthwaite, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia will not allow the United States to use bases there as a staging ground for anti-Iraqi action.
Thayer, a former fellow at the Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, presented a framework for analyzing the crisis.
According to Thayer, the current crisis is the result of the Clinton administration's "policy of neglect" and unclear objectives with regards to the Middle East.
If the United States wants Saddam Hussein to give up chemical and biological weapons and stop nuclear acquisitions it must be prepared to pay a high "blood price" since Iraq wants weapons of mass destruction, he said.
Also according to Thayer, the United States has imperfect information as to the location and scope of the Iraqi programs. He compared intelligence gathering to "getting the truth out of the Clinton administration -- its slow and there's a great deal of misinformation."
"Another factor is that any state as advanced as the United States in 1941 is four years away from getting nuclear weapons," said Thayer.
Nevertheless, he criticized the Clinton administration for "threat inflation" and underestimation of the American deterrent capability.
"Foreign policy decisions are designed to please a domestic audience," said Kay, a former fellow for National Strategic Studies at the Department of Defense.
This results in international perceptions of arrogance in U.S. diplomacy, according to Kay. He also criticized the administration for its handling of the Ohio town hall meeting Wednesday night and broadcast live on CNN.
Policy makers had hoped to send a message to the world that the American people were united against Iraq, Kay said. "Instead, they had universal unease and protesters."
Kay said this could make it easier for Hussein to oppose the United States and make him less likely to grant concessions to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, who is visiting Iraq this week.
All three panelists were unsure how to resolve this stand-off and agreed that the best solution would involve the United States backing down and finding other ways of dealing with Iraq.
"Never underestimate the ability of Clinton to change his mind to suit public opinion," Thayer said.
"To Bomb or not to Bomb" was the first event in Flash Points, a program created by the International Programs Advisory Group -- a group dedicated to internationalizing the campus.
The program began with audience members answering a quiz about the Middle East.
