While the Dome Room of the Rotunda tends to elicit hushed tones, the hush was quieter than usual on September 18 despite the large audience gathered in the round to watch three men and one woman debate the central question of the Iraq War—whether to keep or withdraw U.S. troops. The audience sat staring at the debaters as they shifted on their stools, looked over their notes, sipped from their sabre-logoed coffee cups, and mentally stretched for the verbal battle about to take place.
Finally, Chas Freeman, the president of the Middle East Policy Council there to argue for withdrawal, broke the silence. “I’m staring into your eyes,” he told one of his opponents. The crowd burst into laughter, relieved that it could breathe again.
No one had told the crowd to be quiet. It just was, perhaps awed both by the camera crew and the ambition of the event. Sponsored by the Miller Center, the debate was the first in a five-part series, meant to fill a void in the national conversation by attempting to swap the soundbites and nasty sniping of cable news with cogent, civilized discussion.
“Keeping troops in Iraq is vital for American national interests in the Middle East” was the question on the table, and though the format was designed “to allow the fullest possible exploration of this complex topic,” it had its kinks. The audience question portion turned out to be a dud, with the debaters taking a few seconds to scoff before going back to rebutting the other side’s arguments.
The debaters—Frederick Kagan and Reuel Gerecht, both of the American Enterprise Institute, on the keep-the-troops side; Freeman and Jessica Mathews of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on the withdraw-the-troops side—seemed well stocked with rhetorical flourishes, which, if not soundbites, were at least hyperbole.
Freeman: “The notion that talking to someone who you don’t agree with is appeasement is absurd. If you don’t talk to the people you disagree with, you’re doing the diplomatic equivalent of unilateral disarmament.” An aging lady in the front row nodded. A gangly young man shook his head woefully.
Much of the disagreement came down to competing versions of what would happen after a U.S. withdrawal. The keep-the-troops supporters contended it would give Iran and Al-Qaeda just what they want—unfettered access to Iraq. The cons argued that Al-Qaeda is a “sideshow,” and if the U.S. withdraws, Iraqis, without us to kick around, will vigorously fight Iran. Neither side would yield on their assumptions.
But before the crowd could ooze into the night, we had to take it from the top. Miller Center Director (and former Virginia governor) Gerald Baliles had apparently botched the intro, and the camera crew had audience members take their seats again.
Baliles repeated his well-rehearsed lines. “Is that a wrap?” he asked. It was.
C-VILLE welcomes news tips from readers. Send them to news@c-ville.com.
