The topic of the debate was “The Students of Baruch College believe that the U.S. does not play a positive role in the world.” The debate consisted of two students. Sophomores Vadim Partan and Andres Orejuela, of the CUNY Honors College. The two faculty members included two distinguished Baruch professors. Jed Abrahamian earned his bachelor’s and master’s degree from Oxford University. Professor Eric Gander is a graduate of University of Virginia and Northwestern University. The two guest speakers were Jeff Brauml and David Gallagher.
Vadim Partan from the opposition began the debate. His position was “the U.S. does play a positive role in the world.” He stated that the United States is not perfect but it does take an active role in world politics.
Professor Gander spoke shared the same view as Partan. He identified three issues in the debate. First, he asked if the Iraq War is a war of liberation or domination? “This is a war of liberation,” he advocated. Next, he said that the United States is the world’s largest humanitarian.
Lastly, he asked if you made someone this offer: a visa and plane to anywhere in the world, what country do you think he/she would choose? The United States of course.
David Gallagher was the last speaker who spoke from the opposition. He began by saying that when the United States was born in 1776, the founders had an enlightened view of the world. The founders formulated Locke’s ideology that the role of a government should be to protect the life, liberty and happiness of its people. He asked how come the U.S. was not a superpower back in the 18th century? Probably since this country was separated from the rest of the world by the Atlantic Ocean. In the 21st century, this country [U.S.] is moving forward and has been changing the world for the better. “Everyone wants the American Dream,” he stated. After the Cold War, why was there so much animosity directed toward the United States? Gallagher felt is was because the U.S. possessed weapons of mass destruction.
The opposition was met with strong defenders of the motion. Orejuela pointed out all fields where U.S. government claimed to be making progress.
Faculty speaker Abrabamian moderated the debate back to talk about U.S. government policies. After the Cold War ended, the prediction was the world was going to see a clash between the United States and the Western world. This clash, according to Abrabamian, turned out to be between the United States and the rest of the world. He showed a copy of “The Mirror” which featured an article that said that ‘how could 59 million people be so dumb to elect Bush?” He referred to a European poll that asked what countries did the Europeans considered to be a threat to world peace; seventy-nine percent thought the United States was the biggest threat to world peace. Abrabamian also refuted subtly the claims of the opposition that the United States was the biggest contributor of donations to humanitarian programs such as those campaigning AIDS prevention. He revealed that the U.S. funds cannot be used in any institution that mentions the “c-word or the a-word, condoms and abortion.”
Jed Brauml, the supporters’ guest speaker, actually brought with him a paperbook book titled “Why Do People Hate America?” that he said he bought at an airport. Brauml argued that America was critical of France, Germany and Russia for their interest in War in Iraq, because according to the U.S. government, these countries had commercial interests in Iraq. But in present-day Iraq, none of these countries are bidding for building contracts in Iraq. “We were told that there were weapons of mass destruction there. Did we find any? No. Perhaps somebody didn’t use deodorant but that’s about it.”
Brauml accused the United States of global arrogance when before going into Iraq America told the rest of the world “You’re either with us, or against us.” He said there is mass genocide going on in Sudan right now. If America wanted to play a positive role in the world without harboring ulterior motives, the US government would have been in Sudan and intervening there. About Iraq he concluded, “This is a commercial operation, not a political operation.”
After the debate, the floor was open to the audience for comments. Several audience members made thoughtful remarks about the motion. One student pointed out that America was the most active country in destroying the Amazon forests in order to maintain their fuel supply. Another student commented that Professor Gander’s claim that everyone in the foreign world wants to come to America had nothing to do with America’s foreign policy.
The debate successfully offered an insight into the students’ thoughts with Partan and Orejuela appropriately representing the student body. The students present in the audience were allowed to cast their vote by exiting through one of the two doors in the Oak Room — each door representing support and opposition of the motion. “I’m really happy about the turnout of this event. I look forward to continuing holding future debates. Since this was our first debate, I know that there were interpretations. I hope to see more success next time,” commented Liman Cheng, alumni liaison for Sigma Alpha Delta.
is a member of the 
Be the first to comment on this article!