Participants
- Margaret Warner
-
Margaret Warner
Senior Correspondent, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer
Margaret Warner is one of three senior correspondents joining Jim Lehrer on PBS's nightly news program, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.
Ms. Warner also is one of four co-anchors of America Abroad, a new hour-long radio program devoted to foreign affairs that airs on 90 public radio stations through Public Radio International (PRI).
She joined The NewsHour in 1993 after an award-winning career in print journalism focusing on foreign affairs and domestic politics. She spent ten years at Newsweek first as a political and campaign correspondent, then as a White House reporter, and finally as chief diplomatic correspondent during four tumultuous years that saw the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the first Gulf War. Previously, she was a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, the San Diego Union and The Concord (N.H.) Monitor. - Frederick W. Kagan
-
Frederick W. Kagan
Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
Frederick W. Kagan is a resident scholar in defense and security policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. He is the author of Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq, a report by the Iraq Planning Group at AEI. His most recent book is Finding the Target: The Transformation of American Military Policy (Encounter Books, 2006).
Previously an associate professor of military history at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Mr. Kagan is the author of The End of the Old Order: Napoleon and Europe, 18011805 (Da Capo, 2006) and co-author of While America Sleeps: Self-Delusion, Military Weakness, and the Threat to Peace Today (St. Martin's Press, 2000). A contributing editor at The Weekly Standard, he has also written numerous articles on defense and foreign policy issues for Foreign Affairs, the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Policy Review, Commentary magazine, Parameters, and other periodicals. - Ambassador Chas. W. Freeman, Jr.
-
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr.
President, Middle East Policy Council
Before becoming President of the Middle East Policy Council in 1997, Ambassador Freeman served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs (199394), earning the Pentagon's highest public service awards for participating in designing a NATO-centered post-Cold War European security system and reestablishing defense and military relations with China. He was U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs while the U.S. mediated Namibian independence from South Africa and Cuban troop withdrawal from Angola.
Ambassador Freeman served as Deputy Chief of Mission and Charg้ d'Affaires in the American embassies in both Bangkok (198486) and Beijing (198184). He was Director for Chinese Affairs at the State Department (197981), and the principal American interpreter during President Nixon's 1972 China visit. He has also served in India.
Ambassador Freeman is the author of The Diplomat's Dictionary (Revised Edition) and Arts of Power, both published by the United States Institute of Peace in 1997. - Reuel Marc Gerecht
-
Reuel Marc Gerecht
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Since September 11, 2001, Middle East affairs expert Reuel Marc Gerecht has focused on Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, as well as on terrorism and intelligence. He is the author of Know Thine Enemy: A Spy's Journey into Revolutionary Iran (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1997) and The Islamic Paradox: Shiite Clerics, Sunni Fundamentalists, and the Coming of Arab Democracy (AEI Press, 2004). He is a contributing editor for The Weekly Standard and a correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly, as well as a frequent contributor to publications including the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, International Herald Tribune, The New Republic, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, and the Middle East Quarterly. Mr. Gerecht formerly served as Director of the Middle East Initiative for the Project for the New American Century, and as a Middle East specialist in the Central Intelligence Agency. - Jessica Tuchman Mathews
-
Jessica Tuchman Mathews
President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Jessica Mathews became President of the Carnegie Endowment in 1997. She has experience working in the Executive and Legislative branches, nonprofit management and research, and journalism.
Ms. Mathews was a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (199397), directing its Washington program. She was the founding Vice President and Director of Research at the World Resources Institute (198293), an internationally known center for policy research on environmental and natural-resource management issues.
As a member of the Washington Post's editorial board (198082), she covered issues including energy, environment, science, technology, arms control, and health. She later became a weekly Post columnist, whose column appeared in the International Herald Tribune.
Ms. Mathews was Director of the Office of Global Issues of the National Security Council (197779), focusing on nuclear proliferation, conventional arms sales policy, chemical and biological warfare, and human rights. In 1993, she returned to government as Deputy to the Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs.
|
VIDEOS
Introduction of Debaters(01:02)
On September 18, 2007, the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia hosted the premiere debate in its National Discussion and Debate Series. The topic was whether keeping U.S. troops in Iraq was vital to American national interests in the Middle East. The event was moderated by Margaret Warner, senior correspondent for PBS's The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. The following clip shows Ms. Warner's introductions of the four debaters.
Frederick Kagan opening remarks(04:52)
Dr. Frederick W. Kagan, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and one of the principle architects of the troop "surge" in Iraq, delivers the first of four opening statements. Kagan argues that al Qaida in Iraq is largely tied into the global al Qaida network and must be defeated in Iraq. If the U.S. fails to defeat al Qaida in Iraq, there is the danger of more terrorism and greater instability in the region. Al Qaida also views Iraq as the central front in the War on Terror. Jessica Mathews opening remarks(04:58)
Jessica Tuchman Mathews, President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, delivers the second opening statement, and the first against the resolution. Ms. Mathews argues that many U.S. policymakers are mistakenly viewing Iraq from the lens of the U.S. war effort. We need to see Iraq in terms of their own culture and history. We will see that what is going on in Iraq is typical of any place where a political vacuum has been created, which occurred when Saddam Hussein was removed from power. Al Qaida in Iraq is just a sideshow to the larger political struggle in Iraq. There is no military solution in Iraq; only a political solution. Reuel Marc Gerecht opening remarks(05:02)
Reuel Marc Gerecht, former Middle East expert for the CIA and Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, gives the second opening statement in favor of the resolution. Mr. Gerecht criticizes former U.S. military commanders for seeking a "light footprint" in Iraq which led to internal strife and increased division among Iraqis. Al Qaida in Iraq is a major force and must be defeated. They would see U.S. withdrawal and defeat as a major victory for their cause. Mr. Gerecht also focuses on Iran's efforts to radicalize Shiite elements in Iraq. But there is reason for hope now that Gen. Petraeus has a counterinsurgency strategy. The U.S. will be in Iraq for a long time and Mr. Gerecht argues that that's a good thing. Chas Freeman opening remarks(05:00)
Chas Freeman, President of the Middle East Policy Council and former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, delivers the final opening statement against the resolution. Amb. Freeman says Iraq is militarily occupied by the U.S. and politically occupied by Iran. He cites a series of polls indicating Iraqi citizens' dislike of U.S. troops in their country. He agrees that it's important to defeat Al Qaida in Iraq and to prevent Iranian influence, but he argues the most effective way to achieve this is to redeploy U.S. troops outside Iraq.
Will U.S. and Iran go to war over Iraq?(02:46)
There is agreement within the panel that the U.S. and Iran are fighting a proxy war in Iraq. Where will this lead? Is this a precursor to direct military conflict between Washington and Tehran? Is there a way to shape U.S. engagement in Iraq to make this more or less likely? Respondents: Mathews and Gerecht. How long should U.S. troops stay in Iraq?(02:18)
President Bush said the U.S. would be engaged in Iraq militarily, economically, and politically for a considerable length of time. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has spoken about a long and enduring presence in Iraq. Is this in America's best interests? What is your vision for the U.S. role in Iraq five years from now? Respondents: Gerecht, Freeman. How can the U.S. measure success in Iraq?(05:01)
What can U.S. policymakers look at to determine when it is best to get out of Iraq? Are these political benchmarks unrealistic? What are the measures that the American public and our own leaders can look toward to indicate when it is safe or wise for U.S. troops to come home? Respondents: Kagan, Freeman, Mathews, Gerecht. Can U.S. military meet other global challenges?(02:57)
What would keeping 125,000-135,000 troops in Iraq after late-2008 do America's ability to deal with other military challenges around the world? To what extent should that consideration be driving our decisions about what to do with U.S. troops in Iraq? What are the likely challenges the U.S. faces on the horizon that they would have a difficult time dealing with militarily if they maintain the current force posture in Iraq for the next 18 months to two years? Respondents: Kagan, Freeman.
Should U.S. engage diplomatically with Iran?(03:39)
Can Iraq be stabilized as long as the U.S. and Iran are on the brink of war? Respondents: Mathews, Kagan, Gerecht. Will Iraq be pro-American?(03:33)
Is a stable Iraq necessarily a pro-American Iraq? Respondents: Mathews, Gerecht, Freeman, Kagan.
Closing argument, Reuel Gerecht(02:01)
In the closing statement for the "pro" side, Mr. Gerecht argues that the U.S. needs to stand the ground and remain in Iraq until the job is done. He looks back to the 1990s when the general disposition was to downplay Islamic extremism. The U.S. ignored the growth of Osama bin Laden and al Qaida; we bent over backwards to try to hold talks with Iran; we failed to respond strongly to terrorist acts in the 1990s. Ultimately, progress did not happen. The main question is, do you believe the threat of Islamic extremism is real? Some Americans believe that you can just move away from this issue and it will go away. There is no way we can walk away from Iraq without it being a major defeat to the U.S. and a major victory for Islamic extremists worldwide. Closing argument, Chas Freeman(01:59)
If we continue with our current policy in Iraq, there will continue to be ethnic cleansing and displacement of Iraqi civilians, death of American troops, and a decline in America's leadership internationally and our ability to deal with threats elsewhere. We will continue to feed hatred that will increase American enemies. If, however, we can play on the fears of Iraq's neighbors that they might be dragged into a larger regional war if we withdraw, or implicated in the anarchy that will result in Iraq, then we will have a basis to conduct a regional deal that allows us to leave Iraq with some honor. The biggest losers in that case would be al Qaida, its recruitment efforts, and Iran.
Liberal bias on college campuses may prevent fair debate(02:47)
Having a debate on Iraq at the University of Virginia may be a bad idea because college campuses tend to have a liberal bias, particularly the student body. This kind of debate also has the danger of turning into a debate over vague, idealistic values as opposed to the more important issues of military tactics. The war in Iraq was a broad maneuver in larger Middle East strategy by Bush that has gone wrong and is dragging out. But our interests and the world's interest in peace may be hurt by withdrawing. Going into Iraq a mistake(00:56)
We should have never been in Iraq in the first place.
WHITE PAPER
MILLER CENTER FORUM
STUDENT LESSON PLANS
|