Log File For Chat Room 1

Arslanova: Hello everybody, Ekaterinburg is here

Fearon: I'm here.

Zasseev: Hello, students and colleagues, nice spring morning in Vladikavkaz :)

Subochev: Moscow's here too.

Kiselev: Yaroslavl is on the line.

Borisova: Hello from Yakut State University!

Ukhanova: Petrazovodsk is here.

Komissarov: Hallo, prof. Fearon and student, Cheliabinsk is here

Sosina: Hello everybody

Gadzaov: Students from Vladikavkaz are presnt here!

kkuhns: Let's start with North Ossetia.

Zasseev: What do you think about collateral positions of Iran and Iraq in connection with Iranian nuclear program? Don’t you think that the USA and Iran bluff when threatening?

Zasseev: Question from students who will represent Iraq at the conference

Fearon: I'm not sure you what you mean when asking about the positions of Iran and Iraq on the Iranian nuclear program ...

Fearon: I do think that, as you may be suggesting, the US is "bluffing" in the sense that it is unlikely that the US will use force in a big way on this matter if at all. But this is just a guess.

kkuhns: Thank you, next question from Yaroslavl.

Kiselev: (Zerikhina, Ratmanova) Dear professor Fearon, can we consider the situation in modern Iraq as the state of Civil war? What strategy , to your mind, could be mere effective to end the civil war in Iraq? What could be the role of international community in peace building in Iraq?

Fearon: I think that there is definitely a civil war going on in Iraq, and that this has been the case not just since ...

Fearon: the bombing in Samarra a few weeks ago, but at least since the US handed over formal power to the Iraqis in June 2004. The insurgency is a civil war because it is aimed not just at US troops but at changing or shaping the Iraqi government and its policies ...

Fearon: When we talk about the question of "civil war" in Iraq these days, it really should be posed as whether one kind of civil war is going to escalate into, or be joined by, another form of civil war, involving greater mobilization of sectarian communities. ...

Fearon: I think that we are going to see gradual increase in fighting and formation of neighborhood based militias, and that things in Iraq will look more and more like the war in Lebanon in the 1970s and 80s. ...

Fearon: As to strategies for ending it, I have no brilliant solution. I think there is a power vacuum, and that power vacuums usually take time to fill and the process is usually bloody, whether we like it or not. ...

Fearon: the US is not going to suddenly increase its forces in the country enough to quell the gradual growth of militias, and without out doing this I don't see much that will stop that gradual growth.

kkuhns: Thank you. Next question from Ekaterinburg.

Kiselev: Dear professor Fearon! Thank you for your detailed explanation.

Danilova: Question from Ural state University, Ekaterinburg. Mr Fearon how do you see further cooperation of the USA and Turkey in the Middle East? Thank you.

Fearon: I have no expertise on US-Turkish relations. There are some very important common interests that I expect will keep the US and Turkey on basically good terms despite some obvious and serious recent frictions concerning Iraq. There is potential for serious conflict with respect to policy on the Kurds in Iraq ...

Fearon: but even here I don't see any strong interest for the US administration, at least at present, to break with the view that Iraq should remain a unified state (break up would be very threatening to turkey).

kkuhns: Thank you, next question from Moscow.

Subochev: Moscow: Does the current US administration have any doctrine of military intervention? Where and under what conditions are the US ready to intervene?

Fearon: I don't think the Bush administration can be said to have any doctrine at all at this point. They are totally invested in Iraq, and this is drawing almost all resources that could possibly be used for intervention anywhere. So we can't have a doctrine of intervention when there is no serious possibility of intervening with force anywhere else while the Iraq war continues. ...

Fearon: Talk of intervention in Iran is about airstrikes, which I suppose are still possible to some degree, but I am hoping that it is so obvious that using these in that (or most other) cases would be counterproductive that even the Bush administration will be able to figure out that it is not a good idea.

kkuhns: Thank you, next question from Chelyabinsk.

Komissarov: 'The U.N. is, in its essence, its member states - U.N. can only do what the member states allow it to do '. The different countries have its interests, therefore various decisions are accepted for a very long time or not accepted in general. From here a question: whether the structure of the United Nations and Security Council should change to avoid bureaucratic delays? If yes, in what kind you see the United Nations in the future?

Fearon: It would be great to have major UN reform, particularly at the level of Security Council, and ...

Fearon: in my opinion, of the General Assembly (which I think should have a weighted voting rule to deal with the enormous inequity involved in giving tiny states with 50,000 people the same weight as states with hundreds of millions). ...

Fearon: But we have just been through a round of intense efforts to get major structural reforms at the UN, with very little success, and certainly not ...

Fearon: at the level of the SC or the GA. I guess I don't see any major change ...

Fearon: happening at the UN until a major power, and in particular the US, threatens to leave entirely if major reform is not enacted. This is not a project the current admin would take on, but it may happen in the future.

kkuhns: Thank you. Next question from Yakutia.

Borisova: Dr. Fearon, on your mind in which sircumstances may humanitarian intervention be adopted as universal international law, and what to do with the sovereighty

Fearon: It is nice to talk about humanitarian intervention as a universal law, but what is the point if there is no mechanism for adjudication or enforcement of such a law? The disgraceful case of SC and UN and world community inaction on the killing in Darfur suggests that such a law would merely be an exercise in hypocrisy.

kkuhns: Thank you. Next question, Petrozavodsk

Ukhanova: Dear Professor. You were talking about Iraqi civil war where neighboring military troops is likely to appear changing the character of the war. What do you think about spoilers? Could you bring some examples of policy of double standards regarding to them when some believes that this fraction is a spoiler and others do not? Will the opinion of peacekeepers be the crucial in making such statement or not? Thank you.

Fearon: I guess the most natural candidates for "spoilers" in the Iraq example would be the Sunni insurgent groups, who have been fighting for a while now. I would view the current escalation, or extension, or violence to militia based violence in Baghdad and ...

kkuhns: While Prof. Fearon is answering the question, let me ask if there are any other universities present, other than the ones I have called on (NOSU, YarSU, USU, MHSE, SUSU, YakSU, PSU)?

Fearon: other major cities as a different sort of thing from what is normally discussed under the heading of "spoilers." This is more a matter of general anarchy and insecurity, and competition for power in the new government ...

Fearon: leading to militarization and mobilization of armed groups in a lot of local communities. ...

Fearon: Without a quite massive international intervention, I don't see what help peacekeepers could be in this case. No peacekeeping force in the last 15 years has ever been ...

Fearon: strong enough to deal with what is happening in Iraq now.

kkuhns: Thank you. My apologies for our late start, but I don't think we will have a chance to make another round of universities....

Fearon: I can go on abit long if you like.

kkuhns: Therefore, if I can suggest that we try something different, may i ask Prof. Fearon to post a question for all of you, maybe something related ot what is happening in Russia.

kkuhns: Okay Jim if you don't mind going a bit later, then i can start the round again, or you could ask a question. Please let me know.

Fearon: Ok. What do you all think of President Putin's suggestions that foreign election monitoring groups are a Western/US plot to subvert democracy or his regime in Russia?

kkuhns: One answer from each universiity, please. Don't be shy!!!!

kkuhns: Any answers please? From instructors as well?

Fearon: If that is too controversial, I can take more questions.

kkuhns: Okay, maybe they are too shy. Let's try another question from Ekaterinburg.

Danilova: USU. I our opinion the situation in Ukraine and Georgia show us that those presidents who are supported by the USA usually have not very good relations with russia. We do not think about subverting democracy it is more likely the guestion of world political influence.

Subochev: Moscow: The processes that are going on in Russian politics could be metaphorized by a word "Lukashenkization". Since current regime is based more and more upon electoral manipulation so naturally it sees any efforts to make elections transparent as erosion of its base.

kkuhns: EKATERINBURG please post your second question.

Louismongkol: From USU; Dear Professor Fearon, is it possible to conclude that, on the one hand, the US do support terrorism and seperatism in some cases, for example, in Kosovo, on the other hand, the US turn a blind eye to some cases, like Chechnya, Basque or North Ireland, where the level of violence is the same?

kkuhns: Thank you for the answers. Anyone else? Don't be shy!!!

Kiselev: (Palatnikov)He ment I think double standards which apply elections monitoring groups because criteria of democratic elections attributed to Russia are more serious than to other countries in the world.

kkuhns: Thanks Louismongkol for your question.

Komissarov: I think, that president Putin is afraid, that behind them there are special forces which wish to destabilize and weaken Russia

Fearon: RE Louismongkol's question: Good question. I think if I were Condi Rice or someone like that I could make a reasonable case that there are no major double standards in US positions on the cases you mention. ...

Fearon: However, in general, I think it is certainly true that US foreign policy is reasonably accused of applying many double standards. This is kind of ...

Golikova: (Yakut State University)Ms. Fearon, how you estimate democracy in Russia?

Borisova: Dr. Fearon, whether there is a necessity of the control of activity the UN on the side of regional organizations?

Fearon: inevitable given the complexity of the all the interests at play in foreign policy. But that doesn't excuse it in many cases. ...

kkuhns: HOLD QUESTIONS. We are answering question from USU.

Fearon: A particularly difficult area in this respect for US foreign policy these days concerns democracy promotion.

Fearon: REgarding democracy in Russia, you all are in a far better position to judge than I, but ...

Louismongkol: Thank you very much. To answer your question, from my point of view, in different societies we share different value of "Democracy". From western point of view, President Putin is not quite right, but I think Russian may have their own value of what should be the most suitable pattern of "Democracy" to their society. Take an example of Singapore or Malaysia, and you will see that these countries in some point share the same sense of Democracy.

kkuhns: Thank you. Two last questions. ONE question from Yakutia, then last question from Vladikavkaz (chosen at random).

Tebiev: Let's imagine that American people - simple citizens are against of their country's intervention into any non-stable region. What is the probability for nation to make government cancel the decision to attack?

Fearon: from over here it looks to me like the comment about Lukashenka-ization was right on target. (Piecemeal undermining of competitive politics.)

Fearon: Re Tebiev: The way representative democracy works is not that the government makes every decision in accord with what the public opinion polls favor. Rather, the idea is that every X years (4 here) you can toss the government out if overall you don't like its performance.

kkuhns: Another university, chosen at random...... Petrozavodsk.

kkuhns: Petrozavodsk, please post a qustion.

kkuhns: Okay, well we have run out of time. My sincerest apologies for my technical troubles earlier. Thanks to Prof. Fearon for answering some very interesting questions.

Komissarov: Thank you very much, prof. Fearon

Fearon: Thanks for a very stimulating hour.

kkuhns: Please join me in thanks Professor Fearon for his time.

Zasseev: thank you, Professor Fearon

Kiselev: Dear colleagues ! Thank you for interesting discussion.

Danilova: Thenk you very much to Mr Fearon , Kkuhns and everybody from Ural State Univeiversity

Sosina: Dear prof Fearon, great thanks not only for you answers, but for you question also

Tebiev: Spasibo, Professor! :-)

Subochev: Professor, thank you very much! Thanks Kate!

Louismongkol: Thank you very much!

kkuhns: thanks Jim. Glad you found it stimulating. We enjoy your participation.

Kozyreva: Thank you Professor Fearon

Gadzaov: Thank you for the interesting conversation! Bujnig from NOSU!

Komissarov: Bye everyone

Borisova: Thanks, dr. Fearon!

Golikova: See you 26 of aprile.

kkuhns: Good-bye everyone. thanks for participating.