Several weeks into the Libyan revolt, with no clear victor of the armed conflict in sight, Cornell professors gave differing opinions on how the United States should proceed.
Prof. Ziad Fahmy, Near Eastern studies, said the U.S. should take active steps by creating a no-fly zone over the region.
"The United States should try to take a lead on creating a no-fly zone," Fahmy said. "It would stabilize the situation much quicker. The sooner this ends, the better."
But Prof. Peter Katzenstein, government, disagreed, arguing that the creation of a no-fly zone would amount to unwanted interference in the conflict.
"The United States has reacted consistently and cautiously," Katzenstein said. "Enforcing a no-fly zone means you have to bomb the region. We can have a respectful distance, giving diplomatic support."
Prof. Nicolas van de Walle, government, agreed that the U.S. should be careful before intervening in the region.
"It would be inconceivable for the United States to interfere unilaterally," van de Walle said.
Van de Walle discouraged American intervention, noting that the U.S. is largely distrusted in the region. He said that imposing a no-fly zone would be ineffective in changing the revolution's outcome.
Prof. David Patel, government, said the Libyan protesters were inspired by the recent revolts in Tunisia and Egypt, calling this propagation a "demonstration effect."
"People saw what was happening and tried the same thing wherever they were," he said.
Patel said that the situation in Libya is different from those in Tunisia and Egypt because Libya has never had "much of a state" in the past.
While Tunisia and Egypt had historical models of democracy to follow after regimes in both countries were overthrown, Libya has no democratic precedent, and therefore faces a more uncertain future, according to Patel.
Patel added that Libya may face added uncertainty due to its unusually young population. Approximately 60 percent of its citizens have never known a ruler other than Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi, who has been in power for 42 years, according to Patel.
"Even if Gaddafi goes, what's going to happen the day after?" he said.
Katzenstein agreed that it was difficult to predict what would happen in Libya.
"In a week, I will be proven wrong, no matter what I say," he said.
Still, Katzenstein said that, regardless of which side is victorious, more bloodshed in the region seems likely.
"The mercenaries and rebels will both fight hard," Katzenstein said. "It will be protracted. But casualty figures will be much higher after someone wins."
Some professors said that they believe the rebels have enough manpower for their revolution to succeed.
"The tide could turn quickly," Patel said. "I could see Gaddafi losing Tripoli by the end of the week."
Patel said the Libyan revolution has significant implications for both the Middle East and for the world, regardless of the outcome.
"Revolutions are processes of people coming to understand what's possible and what's not," Patel said. "Libya is a model of how to fight back for the rest of the world."