There comes a time when we must truly examine what lies beneath the surface of our activism, when we must examine whether the knowledge or understanding of a situation that gives us a platform on which to operate as an activist is really that sound.
Currently, students and faculty have planned a day of non-cooperation today to protest the war in Iraq by not showing up to class, while simultaneously holding rallies, teach ins hosted by professors and a slew of other events across campus to speak out against the war.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion on the matter; that's what makes this country great. However, recently a string of Viewpoints that have collectively given us a snapshot of the logic and rationale of the "non-cooperationists" gives reason to be concerned.
On Tuesday, Gabe Frumkin wrote in his Viewpoint, "Protesting a dubious war" (April 17) how students should be compelled to join in the day of non-cooperation because of the apparent reality that "our military's continued occupation [of Iraq] does not appear to be limiting the size and scope of the ever-expanding civil war," and as such, "it seems difficult to defend" continuing the occupation.
Frumkin argues that "It's hard to view our involvement at this point as anything but a destabilizing influence in the region and world" and states how it seems "foolish" for the public, including the students here at Tufts, not call for an immediate end to the war. Frumkin seems to asserts that our soldiers are serving overseas, holding back the most dangerous and widespread terrorist insurgency in the world "for nothing."
I am struck by the ignorance of this view. More than 3,300 U.S. soldiers have given their lives over the past four years to beat back what has become a key battleground for global terrorism, uncovering networks that extend deeper and wider than ever previously thought. Over 3,300 of this country's men and women, many the same age as students at this university, have died fighting to stop the Middle East from becoming totally destabilized.
These troops have given their lives to stabilize a tormented region of the world while simultaneously uncovering key intelligence that may well be the reason that there has not yet been a major terrorist attack in this country. I am not saying that the Bush Administration has been perfect in its implementation of policies, nor has it done a great job with its international PR campaign, but make no mistake about it, our presence in Iraq is one of an enabler, one of a helping hand, and one of a concerned third party looking to bring stability, in whatever form that may be, to a region that has been plagued with turmoil and tension.
To say that we are the entity de-stabilizing the entire Middle East, and how that compels us to not go to class, is downright wrong. I find it hard to believe that somehow we are more damaging to the region than Iran, whose long-term economic situation is so bleak that if an oil war with Iraq should ensue when we left, it would be to the Iranians like blessed rain to the dessert.
In fact, I would submit we are the one thing keeping Iran from totally destabilizing the region; understand, however, that attacking Iran would be a mistake. What we are doing now - just allowing our boats to cruise around the Persian Gulf while we help rebuild Iraq - is enough to keep the Iranians from carrying out any attack.
Iran has been a proven state sponsor of Hezbollah and other terror forces throughout the region, sporting its influence in this summer's past conflict between Lebanon and Israel. The United States has the power to, and will, help reverse the past trends of instability in the region.
To say that the United States finds itself in "an ever-expanding civil war," when sectarian violence is beginning to plateau in Iraq, when the surge, something that I was totally against when introduced a few months ago but is actually beginning to work, is a fallacy.
In Baghdad the surge has caused a spike in casualties, but, at the same time, it has driven the greatest agitators of the situation out into the suburbs, away from Baghdad and into the open where they have nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.
In Baghdad, now with breathing room, the Iraqi government can look to strengthen its rule of law (albeit while recovering from last week's blast inside the Iraqi parliament) and train its own security forces so we can look to phase out troops and resort to supporting the Middle East not through force but rather through the bank by developing economies, strengthening commerce and stabilizing nations throughout the region.
If after reading this Viewpoint you still feel strongly that the day of non-cooperation is well-founded, will change people's views and will be a positive force on this campus, then I hope the weather cooperates with you. My Viewpoint has a cap at 1,000 words - there is no way I can totally summarize this incredibly complex situation in just this little space.
I simply ask that before anyone engages in non-cooperation on a day when prospective students and their families come to Tufts and judge us with the most scrutiny they ever will during the school year, do some digging and some thinking; educate yourself and know the facts of the situation about what is going on in the Middle East. Don't just arbitrarily act on this campus without thinking rationally about it for yourself.
And most importantly, as Mr. Frumkin seems to forget, judging from his plea to act because "it would mean the world to me", remember that this is about more than just you. Realize the gravity and scope of this war and act accordingly.
Theodore Minch is a freshman who has not yet declared a major.
