Student Speak: Sarah Morgan '09
Sarah Morgan '09 is the former co-editor-in-chief of The Bulletin, Barnard's student-run biweekly magazine. And, naturally, she's politically aware and knowledgeable about many global issues. In December, Sarah was one of a handful of American college students and Iraqi refugees currently studying in Cairo, Egypt, who were invited to participate in a satellite debate about the war in Iraq.. The program, A Face-to-Face Discussion between Iraq and America: When Will Peace Return?, was a production of the Japanese television network NHK.
As a political science major with Arabic language skills and a deeply-rooted personal interest in Middle Eastern politics and culture, and as a campus leader, Sarah was recommended to NHK by President Judith Shapiro, Provost Elizabeth Boylan, and members of the faculty. The debate presented the student with a unique opportunity to learn from and contribute to a dialogue about the conflict. Understanding that her position as a supporter of the war is dramatically different from most of her peers, and realizing that she would be facing people who have fled their country to escape a war she believes in, Sarah also knew that the discussion would be both a challenge and a chance to help reconcile conflicting perspectives.
Sarah participated in the taping in the Reuters studio in New York City on December 23; the program aired on Japanese TV on January 3rd.
What is your perspective on the Iraq War?
I consider myself a supporter of the Iraq War. I support further engagement in Iraq and think that immediate withdrawal would be disastrous for the Iraqi people and the region as a whole.
Did you feel well-prepared for the discussion?
I did. I follow both western and non-western news, and I also had just finished Professor Sheri Berman's colloquium "Making Democracy Work" last semester; the final section focused on Iraq. I went in with some statistics that I thought would be helpful. Also, my father is a political refugee from Iran and a political science professor, so I felt that I understood some aspects of what the Iraqi participants are going through as refugees. I have a strong personal interest and connection to the Middle East.
The day before the taping, we had individual pre-interviews with the producers — basically a simulation of what kind of questions to expect the next day. It was not intense but I did start to feel concerned about the possibility that the four anti-Iraq War U.S. students and the eight Iraqis in Cairo might gang up against the four pro-Iraq War U.S. students.
What topics or perspectives in the discussion were surprising to you?
One thing that was surprising to me was that almost all of the Iraqi participants said that Iraq was better under Saddam.
I suppose this wasn't entirely surprising, considering the makeup of the panelists, and I understood that neither side was truly representative of either country. For us, since support or not of the Iraq War is not a 50-50 split among Americans, our 4-4 ratio was not an accurate portrayal. On the Iraqi side, five of the students were Sunni, including one Kurd, and only three students were Shiite, which is an imbalanced representation of Iraq (where the Sunni minority had been in power over the Shiite majority under Saddam). Also, although we weren't given a clear sense of what stage of studies each student was in, all eight Iraqis had been able to continue their studies as refugees in Egypt, which is a different situation than that of the Iraqis who remain in Iraq and other Iraqi refugees. I am sure that NHK had a tough time getting a balanced panel of Iraqi refugees willing to speak on a tough and personal subject.
Also, I was surprised when some of the participants in Cairo reiterated that they thought that as soon as the U.S. leaves, there will be legitimate free and fair elections and democracy in Iraq. Interestingly, it was never questioned that the new form of government will be a full-fledged democracy, but it was also never mentioned that under Saddam, when Iraqi national soccer players were dismembered for losing a game, democracy was a long-lost hope.
Were you made to feel defensive about the situation in Iraq? Did you feel responsible?
For the most part, I didn't feel defensive. It didn't turn ugly on the American side and I only felt defensive when the Iraqi students were outwardly attacking us. When one of the Iraqis called the U.S. Army an army of destruction and of criminals, I wanted to respond. When I finally had the opportunity, I told them that, to me, that is a generalization and I don't think it's fair; I cited humanitarian efforts and the U.S. Army's role in aid worldwide. I am not a hotheaded blind nationalist, in fact my father—as someone who has adopted America as his home, who is Iranian, and who is Baha'i—has raised me to think of myself as a citizen of the world, with a duty to all people.
As a student representing the U.S., I felt responsible for the situation in Iraq throughout the discussion. I feel that because the U.S. government did this, it is our responsibility to stay.
Were there any issues that you feel were overlooked, that would have made the discussion more balanced or interesting?
I expected that the invasion would come up, but I had hoped it wouldn't. I think that focusing on that topic took away from what the Japanese station was trying to accomplish — which was discussing what should be done about Iraq now. Discussing the invasion itself was not as useful in gaining perspective on how best to move forward.
Did you come away from the experience with any strong impressions that have affected your perspective on Iraq and the war, or you personally?
I came away from the experience with a better understanding of the Iraqi perspective of wanting the U.S. to leave, but it did not change my own perspective that Iraq will be a failed state and a hotbed for terrorist organizations and civil war if the U.S. leaves. At one point, one of the anti-Iraq War U.S. participants tried to explain that both sides of the U.S. debate care deeply about the future of Iraq, the betterment of life for the Iraqi people, and the hope for the eventual return of the participants in Cairo to Iraq, but the Iraqi participants seemed to perceive the war as Iraq versus the United States. That was extremely disheartening because it made me realize the depth of misunderstanding of this country's policies by the Iraqi refugee population.
The experience left me with two hopeful thoughts. One, that our experience may have opened a new model for more face-to-face interactions and peaceful dialogues between Iraqi and American students. Second, since the filming was done for an outside audience, it may be that the international community needs to see the misconceptions and misunderstandings between the two perspectives, in order to become more mobilized. If what comes out of this discussion are more experiments in dialogue like this one and more international concern and participation in the rebuilding of Iraq, I would consider the discussion highly successful.
Personally, I have been considering pursuing a Masters in International Affairs after I graduate next year. But participating in this discussion sparked an interest in going to Iraq as a volunteer with the State Department, if I can pass the Foreign Service Exam right out of college.
—Alyssa Vine
|
