Panel discussion features
supporters, opponents of
WHISC, successor to SOA |
 |
 The
Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHISC), successor
organization to the School of the Americas (SOA), was the subject of a
panel discussion on October 20, 2005 featuring supporters and opponents
of the institute. Participating were Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, Peace
and Justice Studies Professor, St. Thomas University; Lee A. Rials,
Public Affairs Officer, WHISC; Brian J. Stefan-Szittai, Program Coordinator,
InterReligious Task Force on Central America; and William H. Willoughby
Jr, Civilian Aide (Ohio) to the Secretary of the Army.
The forum was organized by Christopher Kerr '00,
Campus Ministry Coordinator of Social Justice Initiatives, and moderated
by Andreas Sobisch, Director, Center for Global Education. Click
on audio icon above to access menu for audio streaming of panelists'
opening remarks, the Q&A discussion that followed, and the panelists'
closing remarks.
Sponsoring the event were JCU's Office of Jesuit Mission and Identity, Campus Ministry, Center for Applied Ethics, University Counselling Center, Concentration in Latin American Studies, and the Departments of Political Science and Religious Studies.
|
| See
photo coverage of '05 "Ignatian Family Teach-In" at Fort
Benning--> |
| Click
on audio icon to hear each segment |
 |
Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer
Peace and Justice Studies Professor, St. Thomas University |
 |
Opening remarks |
|
Closing remarks |
 |
Lee A. Rials
Public Affairs Officer, Western Hemisphere Institute for Security
Cooperation |
|
Opening remarks |
|
Closing remarks |
 |
Brian J. Stefan-Szittai
Program Coordinator, InterReligious Task Force on Central America |
|
Opening remarks |
|
Closing remarks |
 |
William H. Willoughby
Jr
Civilian Aide (Ohio) to the Secretary of the Army |
|
Opening remarks |
|
Closing remarks |
| Q&A Discussion |
|
1. How large is the Institute's budget? How much is spent in the US? How much abroad? (Answer: Rials) |
|
2. Has the curriculum changed over the decades, particularly in recent years as a result of the protests? (Answers: Rials, Nelson-Pallmeyer, Willoughby, Nelson-Pallmeyer) |
|
3. If the US trains someone who later commits human rights violations, do we have some responsibility? (Answers: Willoughby, Rials, Nelson-Pallmeyer) |
|
4. Even if it includes "a few bad apples," aren't we better off if the US has a role in training -- under our standards -- the soldiers of other countries in our hemisphere rather than leave it up to their own militaries or someone else's? (Answers: Nelson-Pallmeyer, Willoughby, Nelson-Pallmeyer, Stefan Szittai |
|
5. Is it really possible to separate US foreign policy from the mission of the Institute? What other purpose is there for the US to professionalize the militaries of democratic countries? (Answers: Stefan Szittai, Nelson-Pallmeyer, Rials) |
|
6. If the curriculum hasn't changed, and SOA (School of the Americas) was not responsible for the wrongs its opponents charge it with, why was the name changed? (Answers: Rials, Nelson-Pallmeyer, Willoughby) |
|
7. Is it possible that the US military might have a positive impact on the militaries of even "restricted" democracies, and that therefore it is better to keep the Institute open, with a carefully monitored curriculum? (Answers: Nelson-Pallmeyer, Stefan Szittai) |
| |
Return
to Top |
|
| |
| |
|
