New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman outlined his support for U.S. military action in Iraq, and the importance of rebuilding the country, during the Baird Pulitzer Prize Lecture Monday, Sept. 29 in Koury Center. Details...
A three-time recipient of the Pulitzer Prize, Friedman told the audience of 2,000 that his support for the war came after a great deal of personal struggle. Although he did not believe the Bush administration’s claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, he also believed regime change was the best way to secure Iraq’s future.
“I knew that war was no way to midwife democracy in any country, yet I knew that the Iraqi people alone had no chance of standing up against the tyrannical regime of Saddam Hussein,” Friedman said.
Friedman said the status quo in the Middle East resulted in the September 11 terrorist attacks and that “doing nothing was not an option.” He was bolstered in his decision to support the war by letters and emails from young people in the Middle East. “In the end, those voices were probably that one percent that tipped me over….Every column was a struggle, but in the end, I let hope triumph over experience.”
He argued that the Middle East is a fertile recruiting ground for terrorist groups like al Qaeda for several reasons, including illegitimate, unelected leaders, poor education and the deficit of freedom and women’s rights. Osama bin Laden found followers, Friedman said, “among a large pool of young, frustrated, angry, humiliated Arab youth. Always remember that 9/11 was not about the poverty of money. It was about the poverty of dignity.”
Friedman said the leaders of the hijackings were in Europe shortly before the attacks and experienced “cognitive dissonance.” They saw a culture that was thriving yet did not follow Islam. They became enraged and convinced that unleashing terror on America would “level the playing field.”
Friedman called terrorism one of the “three great bubbles” of the 1990s behind the technology bubble and the Enron-corporate governance bubble. He said the real reason we went to war with Iraq was to “burst that bubble” and prevent terrorism from threatening our freedom.
“We invaded Iraq for one reason, because we could,” Friedman said. “We did burst that bubble and everyone in that neighborhood got the message.” The challenge now, he added, is to keep the terrorism bubble from re-inflating. “Because if it re-inflates we will have accomplished nothing at all.”
First, Arab leaders need to support progressive Islamic governments. “We need a war within Islam. We cannot fight the war of ideas with Osama bin Laden. Without that vision there will be no war of ideas within Islam.”
Second, Friedman said we have to be “the very best global citizens we can be.” The U.S. cannot continue to oppose environmental reforms and expect the support of the world against terrorism.
Third, the U.S. must help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which Friedman called “toxic” and a threat to Israel and American interests in the Middle East.
Lastly, America needs to “get back to who we are. Since 9/11, we’ve gotten into the habit of exporting our fears and not our hopes. As a result we are importing everyone else’s back.”
Friedman was critical of the Bush administration’s pre- and post-war planning, which he called “pathetic.” The Iraq the U.S. inherited was more impoverished than we imagined. “Folks, we defeated the Flintstones and we inherited Bedrock,” he said. “We have dug ourselves into a mighty, mighty deep hole.”
How America is viewed will depend on what happens in Iraq. “We have got to get Iraq back. I am an optimist, and I’m still an optimist about Iraq.”
Finally, Friedman said liberals and conservatives must join forces to save Iraq to ensure the safety of future generations. “It’s a long-term project. I supported this war for my grandchildren.”