April 15, 2003
Harding Discusses New Building, War in Iraq
Harry Harding has served
as dean of the Elliott School of International Affairs for eight years.
As the school moves to its new location at 1957 E St., NW, and as the
international affairs climate changes every day, Harding responds to
questions about these and other topics.
ByGeorge!: Describe some of the
advantages of teaching and learning in the new facility for the Elliott
School of International Affairs.
Harry Harding: Looking at the University
from the outside, it makes us a lot more visible. This is a very prominent
building on one of the most beautiful streets in Washington. So it puts
us on the map figuratively, as well as literally. We also have considerably
upgraded our facilities for public events. Our new commons is a vast
improvement over the old one in Stuart Hall so that when people come
to the building to listen to speakers or to participate in workshops
and conferences, I think they will be very impressed by what they see.
Internally, I already see some major advantages. Many of our offices,
especially our academic advising and student services offices in the
old building were literally in the basement. The facilities were less
than adequate. Now those same staff have one of the best views in Washington
out their windows and morale has shot up as a result.
Perhaps of longer-term significance is our improved proximity to
one another; we’re now at most two floors apart from each other.
In the past, my office was in a different building than the rest of
the school. The opportunity for collaboration and coordination has vastly
improved (Read more about the new facility).
ByG!: In your eight years as dean,
how has international affairs education changed?
HH: The challenge that I faced was the
need to professionalize the graduate curriculum. There was a time when
students preparing for the civil service or foreign service examinations
could take a good, traditional liberal arts education, do well on that
exam, and then go on to success in a government career. The situation
has changed fundamentally since then.
Today usually less than half of our graduate students in any given year
go on to careers in the public sector. They are equally likely to go
on to careers in the for-profit or non-profit sectors. Increasingly,
jobs are no longer filled by civil service or foreign service examinations
(in fact, there is no civil service examination anymore), but rather
by hiring off of resumes. This is true in the public sector, as well.
Students who simply have two more years of liberal arts education are
not going to be competitive with people who are coming out of professionalized
schools such as law or business. So the main challenge for us has been
to create a professional curriculum at the graduate level. We’ve
done this through a combination of revising teaching methods in our
existing courses, adding a whole curriculum that we call our skills
courses, and replacing the old comprehensive examination with a series
of real-world, capstone policy projects.
With regard to the undergraduate level, I think the idea of a multidisciplinary
liberal arts curriculum is still very appropriate. Having been the graduate
of an undergraduate program of that kind myself, I can testify to the
value it has played in my life. What we have to do now is find ways
to increase student engagement. We can do some of that ourselves by
creating, for example, a series of senior seminars for students with
special honors. We’re also looking forward to cooperating with
the University as it inaugurates a new writing program for freshmen,
sophomores, and juniors.
ByG!: How is the Elliott School
adapting its curriculum to meet the changing nature of world events?
HH: Currently, we are doing more teaching
on the subject of globalization and on the new forms of security in
the post-Cold War era. Adjusting the curriculum to adapt to new
challenges and opportunities and maintaining its dynamism and relevance
is something we will always do. Fortunately, that is something I can
generally rely on my faculty to take care of themselves. They are very
engaged with the policy community in various ways.
ByG!: From an international affairs
perspective, what is your view of the war in Iraq and its short-term
and long-term implications?
HH: As we’re speaking, the issue that
is on everybody’s mind is why the coalition forces are not being
greeted with the enthusiastic reception many people had anticipated.
They are not, at this point on April 1, being greeted as liberators
to the degree many had hoped or anticipated. One possible explanation
is in fact fear. The regime of Saddam Hussein has enough residual power
and is willing to threaten the use of that power in ways that would
discourage people from welcoming coalition forces. However, there’s
also the broader possibility that there are many factors at work
in the war; we see it as a war to disarm a rogue regime and to bring
democracy and freedom to Iraq. The Iraqis may see this as a war in which
a non-Islamic coalition is attacking a Muslim country.
We should remember that many people were surprised with how much determination
the people of the former Soviet Union were willing to fight the German
invasion during World War II. This was also one of the most repressive
regimes on earth and had just gone through the great purges, and yet
Stalin was able to wrap himself in the cloak of nationalism and was
able to mobilize a very effective resistance to the German invasion.
Now obviously, there are many differences, one of which is that we’re
not Nazi Germany and, hopefully, we will be welcomed much more than
the German invaders in the Soviet Union were in the 1940s. But, the
Soviet Union was not mobilizing religion in the same way Saddam Hussein
can do. It will be a very interesting test of what motivates people
in this type of a conflict.
ByG!: The Sigur Center was recently
chosen as one of the seven areas of selective academic excellence by
the University. What does this selection mean for the center, the Elliott
School, and the international affairs community?
HH: We’re very proud of the Sigur
Center. This shows that the Sigur Center has become, without a doubt,
the preeminent university-based center for Asian studies in the Washington
area. The grant from GW will enable the Sigur Center to reach even greater
standards of excellence. One of the distinctive features about the Sigur
Center is that it and other programs at the Elliott School have taken
the lead in redefining the boundaries of world regions in ways that
are more in keeping with contemporary realities as opposed to the traditional
ways of organizing academic communities. When I became dean, the Sigur
Center was actually called the Sigur Center for East Asian Studies and
it focused primarily on China and Northeast Asia. That is a very traditional
way in which universities have organized themselves. But in today’s
world, Asia is increasingly being integrated and as a single region
that includes not only east Asia and Southeast Asia, but also increasingly
South Asia. So the Sigur Center has defined its geographic purview in
this innovative way. This is something that very few schools of international
affairs have done.
I also should acknowledge the outside funds that have enabled us to
create new faculty lines — grants from individual donors, foundations,
and corporations in Japan. By being selected as a center for academic
excellence at GW, the investments of these donors have been recognized
and have had a high rate of return.
Send feedback to: bygeorge@gwu.edu
