Frank Wright, International Journalist, Presents in Lifelong Learning Program

He encouraged people to learn about international affairs because people around the world are more current and informed than most Americans, even in developing countries: “I was on assignment in the Middle East, and while in Cairo, I was wandering around the marketplace and got to talking to a small business man in one of the little shops. He knew a great deal about international happenings and our foreign policy. So I asked him, ‘why do you know so much about us?’

"And he said simply, ‘You are the Big Elephant. You are either doing something for us or to us. We NEED to know about you, and we make judgments about you.’ Now this man was not part of the Egyptian elite, and he was not as educated as we are in this room. And he is not unusual in the world. Everywhere I’ve gone I’ve met everyday people – farmers, workers, church lay people, people at risk from the church and government -- who know more about us than we do. . . . It's a big mistake, because we are all interdependent, so we need to catch up or we will be in 'deep yogurt.'"

The Changing Definitions of Terrorism

Wright, following the Great Decisions Briefing Book, explored the changing definitions of terrorism and the history thus far of the process of blacklisting specific countries and applying sanctions -- as opposed to engaging in dialog and negotiation, especially in the context of Iran and Cuba. The Briefing Book supplied information on the changing definitions of terrorism and state-sponsored terrorism, beginning with the terroristes of the French Revolution and following through to the present. A 1988 U.S. Army study came up with 100 meanings in different contexts, and different agencies in the U.S. government have various working definitions even today, as do the many governments of the world and the United Nations.

A Terrorism Research Think Tank accurately summed up the muddiness of the "terrorism" debate: "There are three perspectives of terrorism: the terrorist's, the victim's, and the gneral public's. Terrorists.... believe that they are legitimate combatants, fighting for what they believe in, by whatever means possible. A victim of the terrorist act sees the terrorist as a criminal with no regard to human life. The general public's view is the most unstable," being influenced by political and emotional perspectives of the conflict. To some countries, the 1945 atom bombings or unintended killings of civilians from bombings in Iraq have been seen as "state-sponsored" terrorism, while the United States would not view these actions this way. However, the U.S. might consider some injuries to Americans in Iraq by individuals associated with Iraq or the bombing of the airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland by Libyian terrorists as being state-sponsored terrorism.

Effectiveness of Blacklisting and Sanctions Versus Dialog and Negotiation

Wrigth explained that because terrorism definitions are so hard to pin down, a similar vagueness occurs in the blacklisting of states considered to sponsor terrorism toward the United States. The choice of countries to be on or off the list is fraught with intense political discourse and lobbying. The results of blacklisting are unclear as well, while negotiation and dialog (with access to a mixed tool box of positive incentives and negative sanction/consequences) have demonstrated over time a better record of success in achieving positive progress toward improved relations.

Thus a policy of talking with the enemy has proven to be more effective than a policiy of refusing to talk with the enemy. North Korea proved a good case in point, with considerable more success through the former than the latter.

The Class Participants Played a Part

After audience members gained a deeper understanding of the history of foreign relations with Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and Lybia, they had a chance to pepper Wright with questions and discuss policy options and queries. For each policy proposal, a PRO and CON response was offered by the book to consider and talk about. For example: "Forgo the practice of formally listing states as sponsors of terrorism and simply deal with them on a case-by-case basis as merited by their international behavior."

PRO: "Rogue nations can always be punished or isolated or deprived of financing, as needed, for their bad deeds, but blanket blacklisting creates unnecessary diplomatic rancor and accomplishes little else."

CON: "In a democracy such as the U.S., boasting powerful overseas economic interests, commercial or pragmatic considerations can too easily triumph over moral principle. The official listing is a stiffener against that sort of flexibility."

A sample of one of the accompanying questions was: "Should it weigh in the balance one way or the other if nationalist organizations -- such as Hamas and Hezbollah -- that the U.S. defines as 'terrorist' also function, quite literally in the case of Hamas, as government entities?"

In addition to these questions and the presentation, the Briefing Book offered a list of readings and resources for more indepth study.

Wright, the First in a Four-Part Great Decisions Class

Wright’s presentation and discussion was the first in the 4-part series of the 2008 Great Decisions educational class offered by the Alumnae Association through its Lifelong Learning Program. Each class works individually, though it complements the others in the sequence. The cost of the booklet is $17, and registration for each class is $10. The upcoming program will be in April 2008 on Latin America, with two more to be offered in the fall. One may pick and choose among the four classes, since one class is not a prerequisite for the others. For more information on the Great Decisions Classes, click here.

Related Links:
Lifelong Learning's GREAT DECISION CLASSES
Lifelong Learning's Exciting Programs