Drake University’s Department of Political Science hosted a panel about recent U.S. airstrikes against Iran in the Cowles Library Reading Room March 3. 

The panelists included professors Kieran Williams, Adrien Halliez, Mary McCarthy, Rachel Paine Caufield, David Skidmore and Debra DeLaet. Panelists addressed different angles of the current situation and audience questions through their unique areas of expertise within the political science field. Audiences wrote questions on index cards and passed them up to the panelists.

The panel opened with a tribute to Sgt. Declan Coady, a Drake student killed in service by Iranian airstrikes in Kuwait last weekend. 

Department head Paine Caufield called for a spirit of curiosity, not judgment, as she opened the panel. 

“We hope that everyone in the room prioritizes civility and respect for divergent viewpoints,” Paine Caufield said. 

Williams believes that Iran’s government is willing to endure a longer conflict even through civilian anti-war sentiment.

“Everyone in the Iranian government is a veteran [of the Iranian Revolution and war with Iraq],” Williams said. “They’re in the mindset of ‘We’ve been through much worse,’ and that’s their main reference point.”

The department has hosted in the past because of geopolitical happenings, including one in 1991 because of the Gulf War, one in 2003 because the U.S. invaded Iraq, and another in 2022 because Russia invaded Ukraine.

“It’s sad that we keep having to have panels like this,” Skidmore said, “but it’s good that we have the opportunity to gather and gain understanding of what’s going on.”

Skidmore pointed out that only hours before the U.S. launched its first attack, both nations’ delegations had been sitting at the negotiating table to discuss a potential new nuclear deal.

“We’re using negotiations as a cover for war,” Skidmore said. “That certainly raises questions about the credibility of the U.S. and its diplomacy and if other countries can trust us to approach negotiations seriously.”

Skidmore said he believes that Trump’s gutting of checks on executive power has been instrumental in allowing him to strike Iran.

“The administration has hollowed out a lot of expertise because the president doesn’t like going through policy,” Skidmore said. “War is the most consequential decision a president can make.”

Skidmore also framed the United States as a predatory hegemon or a rogue superpower.

“Constraints on U.S. action — bellicose, belligerent behavior — such as use of tariffs seem to have fallen away,” Skidmore said. “What’s unique about US hegemony was that it was intertwined with allies that underpinned our power.”

McCarthy, who specializes in Asian politics, framed the conflict in the Middle East as a test of the international system. She believes that China might frame itself as a stabilizing force as the United States “breaks” the system.

DeLaet referred to the United Nations Charter and customary international law principles to address whether U.S. actions are legal under international law.

“The short answer is no,” DeLaet said, adding that the purpose of international law is stability. “Stability sometimes means reinforcing a status quo that not everybody appreciates.

DeLaet said she is also increasingly concerned about whether international law is becoming less relevant as the United States, which was instrumental in forging the liberal international order, defies those norms. 

“We have to ask serious questions about if the order can still stand,” DeLaet said. “When other countries and militant groups … see major powers opting out [of the rules-based order], they will be less inclined to follow whether or not we ourselves live in a powerful country. I’d like to believe that when we see the consequences of diminishment of the rules-based international order, more states will recognize the value in it.”

Halliez approached the subject from the perspective of public opinion, which he said is less relevant nowadays as justification for war. He points to the fact that the president did not garner public support before launching attacks. 

“Public opinion is secondary in what we’re talking about today,” Halliez said. “I do believe the Trump administration is not in tune with political opinion as much as other administrations have been. [Presidential] approval is what matters.”

Halliez demonstrated that Trump’s approval ratings have remained remarkably stable through the tumult of the media cycle, including through the release of the Epstein files and now the attacks on Iran.

Paine Caufield focused on U.S. political institutions, specifically the balance of power between government branches in conducting war. She mentioned several key pieces of legislation, including the War Powers Act of 1973.

“Domestically, what we’re seeing is a pretty heated partisan debate about legal authority,” Paine Caufield said. “The Constitution is not as helpful as we would like on this question — it splits the question to the president and Congress.”

One audience member asked about potential impact on midterms.

“It’s hard for me to say right now if there’s a tangible impact on midterms. I think there could be, but a lot has to happen to keep this front and center in Americans’ minds as we go to the polls,” Paine Caufield answered. 

Jess Larison, a teacher at Winterset High School, attended with a group of social studies students.

“We’ve got some students that are very much worried about what’s going on,” Larison said. “Anything we can do to learn more and maybe ease some of their apprehensions is something that we want to do.” 

Dennis Shaw is another teacher at Winterset High School who attended the panel.

“I thought it was really thought-provoking,” Shaw said. “They [panelists] had a lot of different expertise areas, which is always good to be able to bounce off different perspectives.”

Shaw said he plans to do his own research on certain areas of international law mentioned by DeLaet.

“There’s a lot of distrust of our own government right now. “So much of it comes down to abdication of legislative power.” 

Karen McGregor, a resident of Des Moines who attended the panel, is concerned about the lack of congressional action. 

“We are a democracy. I’m concerned; we need to have our Congress involved in decision-making,” McGregor said. “They need to represent the people of the United States. I don’t see that happening.”

Paine Caufield believes this can be addressed by strengthening Congress’ power. 

“Reinvesting in the idea of a powerful Congress that can genuinely do the job seems to me to be one of the best investments we could be making right now, regardless of who occupies the president’s office,” Paine Caufield said. “If we would like to rebalance some of our U.S. policymaking, think seriously about forging consensus among the American people.”

McGregor finds it most important to keep an open mind about what’s going on.

“I don’t think there’s any answers that came out of this [the panel], but I think continuing to pose the questions and keeping our minds open … is always important,” McGregor said. 

DeLaet closed the panel.

“We have to be discerning critical thinkers, show up to events like this, ask good questions, push all of us, and do [our] own thinking,” DeLaet said. “Please keep investing your time and energy and critical thinking skills. That’s so important to not just rebuild our Congress, but to rebuild our political culture.”