Reunion 2007 Dispatch: Tragic Mistakes on the Road to War

The United States could have avoided many of the mistakes it made in Iraq had it listened more closely to academics and others with expertise in Middle East affairs, according to Ilan Peleg, Charles A. Dana Professor of Social Science and acting chair of Lafayette’s international affairs program.

• Reunion articles, photo slideshows, and a video are available on the alumni web site.

Speaking to a riveted gathering of visiting alumni on campus Friday morning for Reunion Weekend, Peleg dissected the current situation in a Reunion College speech titled “The Iraq War: A Perfect Failure or a Reasonable Gamble?”

In his analysis, the former part of the title held more truth than the latter.

The U.S. has managed to create a Vietnam-like quagmire while alienating the rest of the world in the process, the professor said. Moreover, the White House sold a war intended to be retaliation for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that in fact is being fought against a country that had no connection to that event.

“We went into Iraq without understanding the community, the culture,” Peleg said. “Who actually won the Iraq War? For the most part, unfortunately, our very worst enemies won the war in Iraq.”

To that end, Peleg delineated five different parties – the U.S. not among them – who have gained the most from the war:

• Iran: “Easily, I think, the biggest winner of the war. They did not fight the war, but they won the war.” Among Iran’s major victories: the elimination of its hated enemy Saddam Hussein; an expansion westward, including control of a sizeable swath of southern Iraq; the growth of its nuclear capability; and a tilt in the balance of power in its favor.
• Al-Qaeda: “The invasion of Iraq in many ways saved Al-Qaeda.” The terrorist organization and its Sept. 11 architect Osama bin-Laden now have a staging area for terrorists, who have been pouring in from Chechnya, Algeria, and other countries. Veterans of the conflict are returning home and establishing new Al-Qaeda cells. Peleg said President Bush failed to understand something his father did during the Persian Gulf War of 1991 – that if the U.S. overthrew the Iraqi government, it would be in charge of an area it could not control.
• Radical Shiites, most notably cleric Muqtada al-Sadr: “He’s the single most powerful man in Iraq, with 60,000 fighters who are willing and able to do anything he asks.” Al-Sadr also has the advantage of being backed by Iran.
• Other world powers like Russia and China: After the end of the Cold War, the U.S. was by far the most powerful nation in the world militarily, economically, and culturally, but “Iraq actually stopped the momentum we had going for us.”
• Other Arab dictators: “In effect we have given a reprieve in the process of democratization to these other leaders,” most notably Egypt, which had been under pressure to install a democracy before the war began. “In Iraq we made a judgment that we have more important things to attend to.”

As for solutions to the conflict, Peleg suggested that Iraq would need to be partitioned to keep the endlessly warring factions apart, though he acknowledged that this minority view is not a popular one and the war will continue for some time regardless.

And as for a diagnosis of what caused the U.S. to enter Iraq without thinking through the consequences, Peleg said the Bush administration was a victim of its own hubris. He said the war’s architects have “all the confidence, often based on a lack of knowledge and no real interest in exploring knowledge.”

Matt Thomases ’62 asked what the U.S. could do now.

“Let’s not go back,” he said. “How do we get ourselves out of this mess?”

“You have to think about how to disengage,” Peleg said before outlining his idea about partitioning the country. “Unfortunately, I think Iraq will continue to be a hotbed for terrorists.”