Participants at the debate.
DOHA: The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar (SFS-Q) recently hosted a lively debate on a contentious topic: “This class believes that the United States is justified in using drones to kill American enemies.”
Karine Walther, Assistant Professor, SFS-Q, who organized the event, said the debaters put in great effort into the debate, the topic for which had been given to the teams at the beginning of the year.
“A great deal of preparation went into the debates heard here, as they have diligently learned both sides of a very complex topic,” said Walther.
Arguing for the motion were students from Professor Howe’s Ethics and Conflicts Class. From Walther’s Diplomatic History II class, three students opposed the motion.
After careful deliberation, the panel of judges comprising Gred Nonneman, Dean, SFS-Q, Todd Kent, Assistant Dean, Texas A&M University at Qatar, Dr Jeremy Koons, professor at SFS-Q, and Dr Mehran Kamrava, director of CIRS, ruled that Team Howe, arguing for the motion, best presented their case.
“We had to leave the room for quite some time in order to reach our decision, and this should give an indication of the complexity of the subject. The fact that neither team knew which side of the argument they were going to argue until seconds before is very impressive, and shows the level of preparation both sides went through in looking at both sides of the argument. The entire debate was of a very high standard in terms of the potency of points being made,” said Nonneman.
The audience was also given the opportunity to evaluate the issue and the debate played out in front of them. Pre-debate audience polling saw 71 percent voting against the motion while 29 percent supported it. A poll following the debate saw little change, with 75 percent voting against and 25 percent in favour - which clearly made Team Walther the audience’s favourite.
“We learned a lot about the subject prior to this and even though it’s a somewhat intimidating set-up, I feel we did our best to argue a very difficult position on what is a challenging topic,” said Nikhil Lakhanpal, one of the students. SFS-Q debater and student David Daniel said: “It was certainly a contentious debate, due to the complexity of the topic. However, I think we put forward our argument quite well. Speaking on behalf of all the students who took part, this is why we come to SFS-Q, because we all aspire to be foreign diplomats of the future, and events like this are a great way for us to practice skills that are central to this ambition.”
THE PENINSULA
