In the battle against terrorism, the United States needs to add more allies to its buddy list after invading Iraq without world approval, said a nationally recognized political scientist on Wednesday.

“If you continue jamming your thumbs in the eyes of friends, you’ll find that one day they’ll say ‘no,’ ” said James Scott, who has had his work published in more than 35 journals.

Tackling the issue of American foreign policy after Sept. 11, 2001, Scott painted a picture of potential national vulnerability assuming the United States continues to act with a “we can do it on our own” mentality.

The 75-minute presentation focused mainly around the United States’ decision to invade Iraq, which in doing so, derailed the central mission of the Bush administration: battling terrorism by dismantling Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.

Recently, the issue of foreign policy has jumped to the forefront as numerous current and former high ranking White House officials have testified before a panel investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Among the panel’s findings: the Bush administration had information that revealed, in part, Al-Qaeda’s plans before the terrorist attacks actually occurred, and the White House’s manipulation of raw data to help support the invasion of Iraq.

Scott, who said his partisanship was, “Indepublicrat,” after his speech, focused on three philosophical topics: “The way you do it ought to be multilaterally; what you are against ought to be the threat of terror; and what you ought to be for is the spread of democracy,” Scott said.

The theme throughout his speech, called “The Perils of Bombing Alone,” was the current Bush’s administration decision to act in Iraq alone, unilaterally, instead of multilaterally with more universal approval.

The problem with unilateralism, international relations studies reveal, is that those opposing nations will group together and rebel. Such is the case in history, especially when that unilateral-acting country is the hegemon, or the country who has the power and desire to lead the world through military and/or economics.

“What happens to the hegemons who bomb alone?” Scott asked, citing the Roman Empire and Great Britain during its economic height as examples. “They breed resentment and trigger efforts by other countries to balance things again. Unilateralism only hastens that process.”

To slow that process, Scott suggested the Bush administration remember to consult, compromise and coordinate foreign policy plans with the international community.

“Doing it along means doing it less effectively,” said Scott, the political science department chair at Indiana State University.

Dismantling terrorism does not necessarily come from military spending – a line item Scott said the United States will spend more than every other country in the world, combined – but rather improving social and economical environments in countries where terrorist organizations recruit unemployed men by boosting worldwide financial aid.

A visiting scholars grant funded by the university from state-appropriated dollars paid for Scott’s visit here. The grants, ranging from $500-$1,000, bring 10-12 experts to campus an academic year

“He had the same school of thought as me,” said Casey Taylor, a sophomore political science major, one of around 50 faculty and students present. “But he knows a whole more about it.”