The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
[ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] > December 19, 2002 > > > > By Dr. David Graham Du Bois > The unprecedented victory for the party in power in the recent midterm > elections means war with Iraq is now inevitable - unless an effective, > global no-war-with-Iraq movement emerges. The unexpected unanimity in the > United Nations Security Council vote on the resolution on Iraq will merely > delay that war. The war hawks were not expecting such unity. People of > Color in the Americas and around the world, understanding better than most > the true hegemonic objectives of the U.S. and the UK and their "war against > terrorism," have a sacred duty and special responsibility. We must join > with and strengthen the already developing European and domestic movement > against war with Iraq. We must be in the front ranks of that struggle, and > we must be prepared to take over the reins of leadership of that struggle > when the full force of modern day, corporate imperialism is unleashed on > that anti-war movement. It is not a position many cherish. But, it is the > only hope for peace in our time. > The pro-Bush/Republican Party results of the midterm elections together with > the passage of the Congressional bi-partisan resolution giving the > Administration the right to wage war with Iraq if it so chooses, has > provided the U.S. Administration with all the authority it believes it > needs. It does not matter that well less than half of the eligible voters > in the country bothered to vote in the midterm elections. It does not > matter what the Europeans or anyone else thinks. It does not matter that > the President was compelled to go before the United Nations by a > justifiable domestic fear of the possibility of "going it alone". Having > decided, under pressure, to take the matter to the United Nations, > President Bush proceeded to scold the world body for failing in its > responsibility to force implementation of a long list of UN resolutions > initially formulated to punish Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait. > In a demonstration of supreme arrogance Bush insulted UN Secretary General > Kofi Anan and the leadership of the United Nations Organizations for "not > doing their job." Thus, he ended up having to agree to a resolution far > removed from that demanded in his original presentation. While his address > was applauded by U.S. pundits and government officials alike, the world > leaders understood that because of his threat of U.S. military action made > before the United Nations Organization, whose very reason for being is to > maintain peace in the world, they must act together to stop him. > U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was given the impossible task of > selling the US/UK position to the other thirteen members of the Security > Council. After long and what must have been for Powell torturous meetings > and discussions with the Heads of Delegations of the rotating members of > the Security Council (Bulgaria, Cameroon, Columbia, Guinea, Ireland, > Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Singapore and Syria) and with France, the > Russian Federation, China, and the U.K, the nations with veto power, they > all firmly agreed; they would vote for a resolution that 1) removed any > threat of or automatic military action in the event of Iraqi resistance and > 2) guaranteed that Hans Blitz, leader of UNMOVIC (the United Nations > Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission) and Mohammed El > Baradei, of the International Atomic Energy Agency, co-leaders of the > inspection teams, would report back to the UN Security Council in case of a > "material breach" to allow the Security Council to review the alleged > breach and decide on action. > The composition of the UN Security Council at this juncture is significant: > nine developing (third world) countries of peoples of color, four developed > countries and Singapore (a city-state) and Ireland. In other words a > Security Council overwhelmingly representative of peoples of color. They > must have made it very clear to Colin Powell that no matter what the US > could offer them in the way of money, arms, diplomatic favor and other > bribes in return for their support, they would vote for peace. So, it was > not all just a matter of what France, China or the Russian Federation would > do. Although one would never know it from the coverage provided by the U.S. > media. > As the inspections take their course without major problems and the > threatening rhetoric continues from the White House, the Pentagon, and in > the media, more and more nations and leaders are clarifying their position. > That position is - any military action against Iraq must be approved by the > United Nations Security Council. While in the US more and more militaristic > news and information of every variety daily fills the TV, the newspapers > and even the National Public Radio, to prepare the American people for war. > This only reveals the determination of the war hawks to press ahead, > regardless of the United Nations action or what the inspectors find and > regardless of the growing anti-war sentiment domestically and throughout > the world. > At the same time President Bush repeats over and over that the inspectors > don't have to actually find Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. "We know > that they are there. It is the responsibility of Iraq to prove to us it has > no such weapons or programs to build them." In other words, Saddam must > prove a negative! Despite repeated claims by the US and the UK that they > have concrete evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction > within Iraq, that evidence has not been turned over to the inspection teams > as requested. Instead, with great fanfare, Britain releases a report on and > much used video material of > repression in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, most of which Amnesty > International released to the world months and months and months ago. > A great challenge faces the American people. An even greater challenge faces > America's peoples of Color, throughout North America, Central and South > America, and the islands of the Seas. We have an opportunity to join with > and help build a peoples, global peace movement. Such a peoples movement > would encourage leaders from around the world, many of whom have already > expressed their opposition to a war with Iraq, to openly oppose that war, > and thus isolate and defeat the enemies of peace. > _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email email@example.com All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk