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]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] here is to kinder interpretations of those who fight for human rights

Dear Tony,

I think this was more about feelings, although
it centred on the sanctions and the war. Roger's
message was a diplomatic plea for people who fight
for human rights to judge one another kindly. You
are saying the same now. It was my message that
was perhaps too strong. Please forgive me. I
didn't mean to judge CASI or anyone else.

Your point is well taken. But I see it a
little differently as to cause and effect: to be
fair, it wasn't Dirk who had 'reprimanded' Gabriel,
it was the other way round. There was even the
suggestion of Saddam apologists and holocaust
deniers. It was this suggestion that prompted me
to respond.

There was also Rahul whose feeling had been hurt
by an unfair attack: "Hypocrisy, thy name is Rahul
Mahajan!" was the title of an article posted to

Of course, the argument against the sanctions has
been lost, as you point out. But the fight against
the injustice that was committed is just beginning.
As I see it, it's not the way the sanctions ended,
but the pretext by which they were maintained and
the devastation they caused. Still, I won't discuss
this on CASI. The sanctions have become sensitive
issue, it seems - not only on CASI.

Yes, Martin Luther King was criticized, but he
didn't give up - neither did Rosa Parks...

Still, I don't think there will be arguments or
disagreements on CASI about the sanctions.

May CASI flourish in whatever form it chooses to take,


-------------Original Message-------------
>From Wed Jun 11 05:39:16 2003
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 03:10:21 EDT
Subject: Re: [casi] here is to kinder interpretations of those who fight
human rig...

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
cowardly way to american will and condoning, defacto, a rebirth of
colonialism, i have read and appreciated but not engaged others in their
about the
ignominious ending of sanctions, for they had a clearer and earlier

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
     i consider sanctions, however and wherever instituted, as an  immoral
form of domination that is a defining pillar of colonialism, and , to my
senses and as stated by roger and others, an insidious method of waging
more efficient, more deadly-- witness the loss in toto of a whole
of iraqis.
    factually, the ending of sanctions does fulfill the stated aims of
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
nations, and within a truculent occupation- is reprehensible. although
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
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
as our
emotions are honest, but i do not join in his reprimand of casi and
their contributions to my thought and sanity have been substantial indeed,

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
whether sanctions were manifest or not. they mattered to the extent that
served as the issue, surely a canard, used cynically by the united states
bludgeon the united nations into codifying the occupation. the united
committed suicide albeit assisted. yes, in my illusion, i needed  the
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
    now i see some internescine dissension when addressing this issue, but
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

basic philosophies and methods of protests were common within and among
although often frustrating, such disagreements were in fact quite useful
crystallizing and articulating issues. i accept a role for all. it is
for example to remember a historical fact from that time. martin luther
his southern christian leadership conference(sclc) were criticized, often
quite   harshly, by other civil rights and anti-war groups for their basic
.   i wish and hope that casi will continue.
    i trust our humanity.

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]