Yesterday, former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright gave the Issam M. Fares Lecture in the Gantcher Center before an enthusiastic audience of students, faculty and alumni. Albright, who at the time of her unanimous confirmation by the Senate was both the first female Secretary of State and the highest-ranking woman in the history of the United States government, gave an interesting and spirited lecture on the past, present, and future of conflict and resolution in the Middle East. An overarching theme was the need for increased diplomacy in managing such conflict.
Albright began with a description of a war that seemed eerily familiar. More than 2,000 years ago, Athens, the superpower of the day, saw the small island of Sicily as a potential threat. Against the wishes of its military commanders, who felt that a larger fighting force should be used and worried that the oppressed Sicilians would unite against their foreign liberators, Athens invaded and soon found a surprising lack of welcome on their arrival. The Greek nation-state was dragged down into what was essentially a bloody sectarian war, paving the way for the rise of Persia, or modern-day Iran.
One would hope that after more than 2,000 years and countless military campaigns, the superpowers would learn not to underestimate the fondness that nations hold for their sovereignty. More broadly, one would hope that leaders today are simply less amorous of military solutions to diplomatic problems. Yet the last few years have seen the ill-advised invasion of a nation conducted with too few troops and under the assumption that American forces would be welcomed by residents; a bloody conflict that has dealt a blow not only to America's fighting force but to its economy and world stature; and the rise of Iran as a major player in the Middle East.
None of these outcomes were desired, and all could have been avoided by a commitment to more aggressive diplomacy in early 2003. Though congressional votes to authorize the use of force in Iraq have haunted some senators on the campaign trail, many of these votes were cast in order to give support to President Bush as he addressed the United Nations and called for the reintroduction of weapons inspectors in Iraq.
While these votes were cast with the assumption and the express assurance of the President that war was both a last resort and a remote possibility (directly before voting to give the President authority to use force, Senator John Kerry said, "In giving the President this authority, I expect him to ... work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements"), the events that followed and the bloody quagmire that faces American troops in Iraq are testament to the unwillingness of the current president to engage in necessary diplomatic relationships.
Until recently, the White House refused to engage diplomatically with Syria or Lebanon - two nations that have a vested interest in the fate of Iraq. The administration also spent precious time refusing to negotiate with North Korea. Ultimately, the President announced that he would begin a dialogue with North Korea's leader, perhaps following the announced departure of British troops from Iraq.
There is hope, however, for the future. Detailing former President George H.W. Bush's address to Tufts in 2002 and his defense of his decision not to invade Baghdad during the first Gulf War, Albright explained that the current war in Iraq is a perfect example of the principle that "young people should listen to their parents." The line drew laughs and enthusiastic applause.
Although the lesson may well be lost on the President, the attendees at this year's Fares Lecture came away with the understanding that diplomatic engagement- particularly with unfriendly nations-is crucial to a successful foreign policy and should be strenuously pursued whenever possible.
