"He is a lover of his country who rebukes and does not excuse its sins." --Frederick Douglass
I am going to march on the United Nations on Saturday to protest the war, as I have done in Washington and in New York twice before. I invite you to join me.
Perhaps you don't want to march because you believe Saddam needs to be removed from power, by force if necessary, for the following reasons:
- Saddam is a dangerous madman who is close to acquiring nuclear weapons.
- Connections between Iraq and Al-Qaeda suggest that unless removed from power, Saddam would continue to fund and arm terrorists who may strike us at home, here in New York, anywhere in the United States, or at our friends in Israel. If he was armed with biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons, this could be the ultimate nightmare.
- Iraq has repeatedly defied the United Nations' demands to disarm, and the UN's threats must be backed by real force if it is to maintain its integrity as a keeper of international law.
I, for one, believe all of this, and I am still marching on Saturday. Let me tell you why.
War will not make Americans safer. Not in the long run, and certainly not in the short run. In the short run, open war could invite more terrorism, provoking "sleeper cells" and desperate people who feel that guerrilla war and attacking civilians is the only way to strike at the U.S. In the long run, another war in Iraq will add more fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism that got us to September 11th. Every Iraqi civilian casualty is more propaganda ammo for recruiting terrorists. Every broken bridge, every road turned to rubble, every factory leveled by bombs - smart or not - disrupts lives, creates chaos in the economy, and ultimately, angers Iraqis and muslims throughout the Middle
East.
The war would continue a long history of American hypocrisy. The real cause of the war, and the ultimate cause of all our involvement with the Middle East since the 1940's is oil. We are a nation of energy hogs and we must have stability in the region or our economy goes sour (witness the 70s oil crisis). The more acquiescent the regime, the better. In this pursuit, the US government and American (and British) oil companies have an alliance with a long history of removing popularly elected governments and replacing them with dictators that will play ball with us.
We claim to have the interests of the Iraqi people at heart, but the last war we waged in their country caused far more suffering there than it allieved, especially amongst poor civilians. The depleted uranium shells we used caused a 600% increase in leukemia. The UN sanctions imposed since 1990 have probably killed 300,000 Iraqi children (not 1 million as some claim -- see here) Meanwhile Saddam and his cronies (the ones he hasn't killed himself) remain in power.
As for the claim that the UN must enforce its resolutions or lose legitimacy, I say that treating it as a US-controlled puppet is a much faster way to delegitimize the UN. Half the security council opposes the war (and believes that the UN can keep Saddam under control through a continued presence in Iraq). Strong-arming our "allies" only increases resentment abroad. Why is America is seen so differently abroad than at home? Not because of jealousy, it's because they literally see a different America - the international media simply report more of the ugly side of America than is reported here. The tone of US mainstream media is consistently, unquestioningly patriotic, while abroad the news does not downplay things that might make us look bad, like civilian casualties.
So I'm marching - even though I believe that Saddam probably needs to be removed from power by force. I actually believe in "America the Liberator", the myth that Bush is hiding behind - that the US is "the last best hope of Earth", and it is our duty to protect the oppressed when they cannot protect themselves. That's why I can't stand to see that ideal sapped of all its moral strength when the oil companies get their buddy old pal from Texas to put on the Captain America cape and do their dirty work. My problem is that America the Liberator only shows up to protect and to serve when her cash flow is threatened, and then doesn't stick around to make sure that things are better than how she found it.
Just two examples taken from many:
- Lebanon, 1957. The CIA rigs an election to defeat the Muslim govt. Revolution and civil war break out the next year, which Eisenhower puts down by sending the Marines. Civil war again in 1975, and lasts 16 years. In 1983, Reagan sends in the Marines again, and a truck bomb kills 200 of them in their barracks in Beirut.
Q: Why did we interfere in the election?
"In Lebanon in 1957, the CIA supported Christian parties with U.S. government money and donations by American oil companies that wanted to insure a friendly government in Lebanon." - NYT, March 31 1997
Hm. oil companies?
- Iran, 1953. A CIA coup deposes democratically-elected Mussadegh, and installs the Shah. American arms and training help the "reign of terror" under his police state. The people revolt in 1979, and kick out the Shah. The Iranian hostage crisis occurs when the US harbors the Shah; 53 US diplomats are held for over a year, until Reagan defeats Carter and pays $8 billion for their release.
Q: Why didn't we like Mussadegh's democratically elected government, even though Iranians loved him?
"By the end of 1952, it had become clear that the Mossadeq government was incapable of reaching an oil settlement with interested Western countries". --CIA report
That's right: oil. This is the very first sentence from the CIA's own report on the coup, leaked in 2000 to the NYT. You can read for yourself. Mussadegh was trying to gain control of his country's own oil industry, whose profits were going to US and British companies.
Is this what Bush has in mind when he calls for "nation building"?
After WWII, the Marshall plan was *really* about nation building. We helped Germany transform itself into a country so democratic that this year, its leader got re-elected by criticizing the US for its non-democratic interference in other nations. It makes we wonder whether there isn't some deep racism at work here, as we really commit to raising our Western European enemies out of the dirt, but we're happy to let the rest of the world rot so long as they keep the cash flowing. Today, we spend only 0.1% of our GDP on foreign aid, and 3-5% on the military. And half of the 0.1% is actually military aid, most of which goes to Israel and Egypt.
In short: the war is strategically misguided, ethically wrong, politically untactful, and takes us further down the same road that led to the crumbling of the Towers, which I watched from my roof with a feeling of disbelief and horror. I asked myself that day, "What have we done as a nation that inspired so much hatred in those men who were willing to die just to make a point?" Because that's what 9/11 was all about - a symbolic act of defiance, a desperate (and bitterly cruel) bid for attention. That day started me thinking and learning about what America as a nation has done to deserve this, even if no single soul in those towers, or anywhere else on Earth, could ever possibly deserve that fate. And I am protesting on Saturday to say that we have not learned anything at all, based on the rhetoric and actions of the President. Since the birth of this country, we have struggled with hypocrisy, with our conflicting political and economic desires: to be free and just, but also to be rich. With slavery, with the subjugation of the Indians, with interference in Latin America and then the Middle East, we have repeatedly lost our honor as we scrambled to fill our wallets. I am deeply shamed by this legacy, and I am marching on Saturday to say "Not on my watch!"
One final note: In China, I would be arrested for the equivalent of this email. In Iraq, I would be killed. In America, my only fear is that I'll be ignored. If we're complacent, there's no point in having these freedoms we're supposedly fighting for.
Adam
----
"Further Reading"
---
Info about the March:
Date: Saturday, Feb 15
Time: Noon
Location: 1st Ave @ 49th St (Near the UN)
See http://www.unitedforpeace.org/
NYC has denied the organizers of the march a permit to march, but granted a permit for a stationary rally. The organizers are appealling, so stay tuned. See http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/11/nyregion/11MARC.html