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 ]
my friends,
i have for sometime now been quarrelling within myself about the sanctions
issue. quite aside from condemning the united nations for acquiescing in a most
cowardly way to american will and condoning, defacto, a rebirth of
colonialism, i have read and appreciated but not engaged others in their angst about the
ignominious ending of sanctions, for they had a clearer and earlier resolution
of the issue than i. perhaps i envied the clarity with which they saw the
issue. i was angry at myself because i could not resolve my struggle with it.
i consider sanctions, however and wherever instituted, as an immoral
form of domination that is a defining pillar of colonialism, and , to my simple
senses and as stated by roger and others, an insidious method of waging war--
more efficient, more deadly-- witness the loss in toto of a whole generation
of iraqis.
factually, the ending of sanctions does fulfill the stated aims of casi.
no one would argue that the way they ended- after a war (one is tempted to
redundantly say illegal, immoral, cruel etc), after the perfidy of the united
nations, and within a truculent occupation- is reprehensible. although this
ending did not justify the means by which it was achieved, casi as an
organization, it seems to me, was left little choice but to acknowledge the fact that
sanctions have ended.
i support rahul's thesis and understand dirk's frustration and the
emotions that drove him to point correctly to our recalcitrance. his as well as our
emotions are honest, but i do not join in his reprimand of casi and gabriel.
their contributions to my thought and sanity have been substantial indeed, and
i am thankful.
realistically, all our arguments about sanctions lost most of their
significance the moment the us/uk escalated their aggression and occupied iraq. i
am not so simple as to think that now it mattered at all to the united states
whether sanctions were manifest or not. they mattered to the extent that they
served as the issue, surely a canard, used cynically by the united states to
bludgeon the united nations into codifying the occupation. the united nations
committed suicide albeit assisted. yes, in my illusion, i needed the united
nations to stand up and, counter to the logic of its history, reject the
resolution and condemn the war and the occupation. that of course would not occur.
now i see some internescine dissension when addressing this issue, but i
am not dismayed by it. i lived through the 60's when the two overarching
issues were civil rights and the vietnam war. vigorous arguments on crossover,
basic philosophies and methods of protests were common within and among groups.
although often frustrating, such disagreements were in fact quite useful in
crystallizing and articulating issues. i accept a role for all. it is important
for example to remember a historical fact from that time. martin luther king and
his southern christian leadership conference(sclc) were criticized, often
quite harshly, by other civil rights and anti-war groups for their basic
philosophy
. i wish and hope that casi will continue.
i trust our humanity.
tony
_______________________________________________
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 casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk