[casi] Is War Inevitable?

[Noasalira@DELETETHISaol.com]

[ 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 casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk