Coming
in October
From AK Press
Today's
Stories
September 17, 2003
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
September 16, 2003
Rosemary and Walt Brasch
An
Ill Wind: Hurricane Isabel and the Lack of Homeland Security
Robert Fisk
Powell
in Baghdad
Kurt Nimmo
Imperial Sociopaths
M. Shahid Alam
The Dialectics
of Terror
Ron Jacobs
Exile at Gunpoint
Christopher Brauchli
Bush's War on Wages
Al Krebs
Stop Calling Them "Farm Subsidies"; It's Corporate
Welfare
Patrick Cockburn
The
Iraq Wreck
Website of the Day
From Occupied Palestine
September 15, 2003
Stan Goff
It Was
the Oil; It Is Like Vietnam
Robert Fisk
A Hail of Bullets, a Trail of Dead
Writers Bloc
We
Are Winning: a Report from Cancun
James T. Phillips
Does George Bush Cry?
Elaine Cassel
The Troublesome Bill of Rights
Cynthia McKinney
A Message to the People of New York City
Matthew Behrens
Sunday Morning Coming Down: Reflections on Johnny Cash
Uri Avnery
Assassinating
Arafat
Hammond Guthrie
Celling Out the Alarm
Website of the Day
Arnold and the Egg
Recent
Stories
September 13 / 14, 2003
Michael Neumann
Anti-Americanism:
Too Much of a Good Thing?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Anatomy of a Swindle
Gary Leupp
The Matrix of Ignorance
Ron Jacobs
Reagan's America
Brian Cloughley
Up to a Point, Lord Rumsfeld
William S. Lind
Making Mesopotamia a Terrorist Magnet
Werther
A Modest Proposal for the Pentagon
Dave Lindorff
Friendly Fire Will Doom the Occupation
Toni Solo
Fiction and Reality in Colombia: The Trial of the Bogota Three
Elaine Cassel
Juries and the Death Penalty
Mickey Z.
A Parable for Cancun
Jeffrey Sommers
Issam Nashashibi: a Life Dedicated to the Palestinian Cause
David Vest
Driving in No Direction (with a Glimpse of Johnny Cash)
Michael Yates
The Minstrel Show
Jesse Walker
Adios, Johnny Cash
Adam Engel
Something Killer
Poets' Basement
Cash, Albert, Curtis, Linhart
Website of the Weekend
Local Harvest
September 12, 2003
Writers Block
Todos
Somos Lee: Protest and Death in Cancun
Laura Carlsen
A Knife to the Heart: WTO Kills Farmers
Dave Lindorff
The Meaning of Sept. 11
Elaine Cassel
Bush at Quantico
Linda S. Heard
British
Entrance Exams
John Chuckman
The First Two Years of Insanity
Doug Giebel
Ending America as We Know It
Mokhiber / Weissman
The Blank Check Military
Subcomandante Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Website of the Day
A Woman in Baghdad
September 11, 2003
Robert Fisk
A Grandiose
Folly
Roger Burbach
State Terrorism and 9/11: 1973 and 2001
Jonathan Franklin
The Pinochet Files
Niranjan Ramakrishnan
Postcards to the President
Norman Solomon
The Political Capital of 9/11
Saul Landau
The Chilean Coup: the Other, Almost Forgotten 9/11
Stew Albert
What Goes Around
Website of the Day
The Sights and Sounds of a Coup
The Great Alejandro Escavedo Needs Your Help!
September 10, 2003
John Ross
Cancun
Reality Show: Will It Turn Into a Tropical Seattle?
Zoltan Grossman
The General Who Would be President: Was Wesley Clark Also Unprepared
for the Postwar Bloodbath?
Tim Llewellyn
At the Gates of Hell
Christopher Brauchli
Turn the Paige: the Bush Education Deception
Lee Sustar
Bring the Troops Home, Now!
Elaine Cassel
McCain-Feingold in Trouble: Scalia Hogs the Debate
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Hammond Guthrie
When All Was Said and Done
Website of the Day
Fact Checking Colin Powell
September 9, 2003
William A. Cook
Eating
Humble Pie
Robert Jensen / Rahul
Mahajan
Bush
Speech: a Shell Game on the American Electorate
Bill Glahn
A Kinder, Gentler RIAA?
Janet Kauffman
A Dirty River Runs Beneath It
Chris Floyd
Strange Attractors: White House Bawds Breed New Terror
Bridget Gibson
A Helping of Crow with Those Fries?
Robert Fisk
Thugs
in Business Suit: Meet the New Iraqi Strongman
Website of the Day
Pot TV International
September 8, 2003
David Lindorff
The
Bush Speech: Spinning a Fiasco
Robert Jensen
Through the Eyes of Foreigners: the US Political Crisis
Gila Svirsky
Of
Dialogue and Assassination: Off Their Heads
Bob Fitrakis
Demonstration Democracy
Kurt Nimmo
Bush and the Echo Chamber: Globalizing the Whirlwind
Sean Carter
Thou Shalt Not Campaign from the Bench
Uri Avnery
Betrayal
at Camp David
Website of the Day
Rabbis v. the Patriot Act
September 6 / 7, 2003
Neve Gordon
Strategic
Abuse: Outsourcing Human Rights Violations
Gary Leupp
Shiites
Humiliate Bush
Saul Landau
Fidel
and The Prince
Denis Halliday
Of Sanctions and Bombings: the UN Failed the People of Iraq
John Feffer
Hexangonal Headache: N. Korea Talks Were a Disaster
Ron Jacobs
The Stage of History
M. Shahid Alam
Pakistan "Recognizes" Israel
Laura Carlson
The Militarization of the Americas
Elaine Cassel
The Forgotten Prisoners of Guantanamo
James T. Phillips
The Mumbo-Jumbo War
Bill Glahn
RIAA Watch: Slumlords of the Internet
Walter A. Davis
Living in Death's Dream Kingdom
Adam Engel
Midnight's Inner Children
Poets' Basement
Stein, Guthrie and Albert
Book of the Weekend
It Became Necessary to Destroy the Planet in Order to Save It
by Khalil Bendib
September 5, 2003
Brian Cloughley
Bush's
Stacked Deck: Why Doesn't the Commander-in-Chief Visit the Wounded?
Col. Dan Smith
Iraq
as Black Hole
Phyllis Bennis
A Return
to the UN?
Dr. Susan Block
Exxxtreme Ashcroft
Dave Lindorff
Courage and the Democrats
Abe Bonowitz
Reflections on the "Matyrdom" of Paul Hill
Robert Fisk
We Were
Warned About This Chaos
Website of the Day
New York Comic Book Museum
September 4, 2003
Stan Goff
The Bush
Folly: Between Iraq and a Hard Place
John Ross
Mexico's
Hopes for Democracy Hit Dead-End
Harvey Wasserman
Bush to New Yorkers: Drop Dead
Adam Federman
McCain's
Grim Vision: Waging a War That's Already Been Lost
Aluf Benn
Sharon Saved from Threat of Peace
W. John Green
Colombia's Dirty War
Joanne Mariner
Truth,
Justice and Reconciliation in Latin America
Website of the Day
Califoracle
September 3, 2003
Virginia Tilley
Hyperpower
in a Sinkhole
Davey D
A Hip
Hop Perspective on the Cali Recall
Emrah Göker
Conscripting Turkey: Imperial Mercenaries Wanted
John Stanton
The US is a Power, But Not Super
Brian Cloughley
The
Pentagon's Bungled PsyOps Plan
Dan Bacher
Another Big Salmon Kill
Elaine Cassel
Prosecutors Weep' Ninth Circuit Overturns 127 Death Sentences
Uri Avnery
First
of All This Wall Must Fall
Website of the Day
Art Attack!
September 2, 2003
Robert Fisk
Bush's
Occupational Fantasies Lead Iraq Toward Civil War
Kurt Nimmo
Rouind Up the Usual Suspects: the Iman Ali Mosque Bombing
Robert Jensen / Rahul Mahajan
Iraqi Liberation, Bush Style
Elaine Cassel
Innocent But Guilty: When Prosecutors are Dead Wrong
Jason Leopold
Ghosts
in the Machines: the Business of Counting Votes
Dave Lindorff
Dems in 2004: Perfect Storm or Same Old Doldrums?
Paul de Rooij
Predictable
Propaganda: Four Monts of US Occupation
Website of the Day
Laughing Squid
August 30 / Sept. 1,
2003
Alexander Cockburn
Handmaiden
in Babylon: Annan, Vieiera de Mello and the Decline and Fall
of the UN
Saul Landau
Schwarzenegger
and Cuban Migration
Standard Schaefer
Who
Benefited from the Tech Bubble: an Interview with Michael Hudson
Gary Leupp
Mel Gibson's Christ on Trial
William S. Lind
Send the Neocons to Baghdad
Augustin Velloso
Aznar: Spain's Super Lackey
Jorge Mariscal
The Smearing of Cruz Bustamante
John Ross
A NAFTA for Energy? The US Looks to Suck Up Mexico's Power
Mickey Z.
War is a Racket: The Wisdom of Gen. Smedley Butler
Elaine Cassel
Ashcroft's Traveling Patriot Show Isn't Winning Many Converts
Stan Cox
Pirates of the Caribbean: the WTO Comes to Cancun
Tom and Judy Turnipseed
Take Back Your Time Day
Adam Engel
The Red Badge of Knowledge: a Review of TDY
Adam Engel
An Eye on Intelligence: an Interview with Douglas Valentine
Susan Davis
Northfork,
an Accidental Review
Nicholas Rowe
Dance
and the Occupation
Mark Zepezauer
Operation
Candor
Poets' Basement
Albert, Guthrie and Hamod
Website of the Weekend
Downhill
Battle
Congratulations
to CounterPuncher Gilad Atzmon! BBC Names EXILE Top Jazz CD
August 29, 2003
Lenni Brenner
God
and the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party
Brian Cloughley
When in Doubt, Lie Your Head Off
Alice Slater
Bush Nuclear Policy is a Recipe for National Insecurity
David Krieger
What Victory?
Marjorie Cohn
The Thin Blue Line: How the US Occupation of Iraq Imperils International
Law
Richard Glen Boire
Saying Yes to Drugs!
Bister, Estrin and Jacobs
Howard Dean, the Progressive Anti-War Candidate? Some Vermonters
Give Their Views
Website of the Day
DirtyBush
Hot Stories
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
William Blum
Myth
and Denial in the War on Terrorism
Standard Schaefer
Experimental Casinos: DARPA and the War Economy
Uzma
Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War:
What America Says Does Not Go
Paul de Rooij
Arrogant
Propaganda
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
September
17, 2003
Occupational Hazards
The
Terrible Truth About Iraq
By TIMOTHY J. FREEMAN
A Great and Noble
Thing?
When will America face up to the terrible
truth about the invasion and occupation of Iraq? Every day the
casualties mount. The number of American soldiers killed since
Bush declared victory now outnumber those killed in the invasion
itself. For every one soldier that comes home in a body bag at
least another ten come home horribly wounded. If the first Gulf
War gives us any indication, many times more will come home with
devastating illness, most likely caused by our own depleted uranium
weapons. On top of that of course there is the astronomical cost
of the war and the occupation--some hundred billion dollars already
gone and a billion a week and counting.
And what do we get for this tremendous
sacrifice? In Iraq we get the daily humiliation and devastation
wreaked upon the Iraqi people. Of course the Bush Administration
and the American media are not at all interested in the numbers,
but we can be sure that the number of innocent Iraqi citizens
killed is already many times more than the number of innocents
lost on September 11, 2001. It seems most Americans couldn't
care less about that or the fact that Iraq had absolutely nothing
to do with 911. With such completely unprovoked slaughter, it
should be no surprise our troops are greeted with bombs and bullets
instead of carpets of rose petals and jasmine. One thing we can
be sure of: our sacrifice has not brought freedom and democracy
to Iraq. We've set up a puppet government operating under our
military dictatorship, a dictatorship which, unlike the previous
one, has not been able to provide any semblance of order. The
Iraqi people are faced with daily critical shortages of basic
necessities and must live in constant fear, not only of being
'accidently' shot up and killed by our troops, but now even of
being blown up in front of their holy places by bombs of unknown
origin. No, it's not freedom and democracy our great sacrifice
has brought to Iraq--it's terror; and thus, it's a seething hatred
our sacrifice has earned, not only in Iraq but all across the
Islamic world. Our sacrifice has certainly not made us any safer,
it's only poured gasoline on the fire that is the problem of
terrorism and thus made the whole world a much more dangerous
place.
All around the world our sacrifice has
earned not respect and admiration, but fear and enmity. All the
sympathy and good will that came after 911 has evaporated. In
the eyes of the world America's standing has never been lower
than it is today, just two years after millions around the world
expressed their sympathy and solidarity with America. The reason
for this is that the rest of the world can see what America,
blinded by a shallow patriotism, has been unable to face. Bush's
poll numbers have been dropping and now stand at the lowest point
since before 911; and yet the reason for this has to do more
with the failing economy that the war and occupation of Iraq.
According to polls last week, some 60 to 70% of Americans still
think we were justified in invading Iraq. Apparently, the majority
of Americans still agree with Paul Bremer, who recently referred
to the invasion and occupation of Iraq as a "great and noble
thing." [1] Now Bush has asked for another 87 billion to
burn upon this funeral pyre and Congress will no doubt comply.
And if some estimates that it will likely take 3-5 more years
(at a billion a week) are accurate, then this is still obviously
only the tip of the iceberg.
The terrible truth that America cannot
face is that the whole thing was never justified in the first
place and is thus certainly not a "great and noble thing."
If the invasion of Iraq was not justified, then our continued
occupation of Iraq can only make things worse. Of course it is
a terrible, terrible thing to subject the Iraqi people to the
horror they have been subjected to if the war was never justified
to begin with. Of course it is a truly terrible thing (and thus
a mockery of the slogan--"support the troops") to send
our troops into this nightmare if the war was never justified
to begin with. Certainly the majority of Americans can recognize
what a terrible thing this war and occupation are if the whole
thing was never justified to begin with.
Despite unprecedented protests around
the world prior to the invasion of Iraq, protests which included
respected statesmen, philosophers, and religious leaders including
the Pope in Rome and the Archbishop of Canterbury among many
other religious leaders, America, as a nation, never adequately
examined the case for war against Iraq. Despite ample evidence
that the Administration's whole case for war proved to be based
on lies and distortions and never amounted in the first place
to anything more than a fig leaf for the neo-con agenda, Americans
have not been able to face the terrible truth. America can never
hope to even begin to try to set things right until she faces
the terrible truth. As a nation we can never begin to really
confront the problem of terrorism until we face the truth about
America and this war and occupation of Iraq.
Why the War was Unjust
What is it that would justify war, if
indeed anything ever justifies it? There is a long tradition
in the history of Western Philosophy that is concerned with this
philosophical question. [2] The principles that are the result
of this 2000 year quest were key elements of both the UN Charter
and the Charter of the International Military Tribunal used at
Nuremberg. There are a number of different ways of summarizing
the basic principles that are the result of this tradition of
just war theory, but the one principle that is always the starting
point is that of just cause. The only just cause recognized by
international law has meant self-defense, either on behalf of
oneself or an ally. A pre-emptive strike may be considered justified,
but only if it comes in response to an imminent threat, and that
means a real and certain danger of attack. To launch a pre-emptive
strike based on anything less than an imminent threat amounts
to an initiation of a war of aggression and is thus a violation
of international law and a crime against peace--a war crime according
to the Nuremberg Charter. [3] If it is just for any nation to
strike pre- emptively against any nation just because they might
be a threat in some undetermined future, then any war could be
justified and any hope of stability and peace in the world is
lost.
The Bush Administration has made a number
of different attempts to provide a just cause for attacking Iraq.
The one that stands out the most, that is perhaps what has led
most Americans to still believe it was justified, is the attempt
to link Iraq with 911. If there really was any evidence at all
that Saddam Hussein had indeed masterminded or provided assistance
to the hijackers there would have been an obvious case for self
defense and there is little doubt the United States would have
gotten UN authorization for a military response. Only the most
dedicated pacifist would have not found just cause to attack
Iraq. But there was never any connection between Iraq and 911.
Intelligence analysts and Middle-East experts had long pointed
out that there was no connection between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, and
it was well known that there was long-standing mutual hatred
between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. [4] There were no
Iraqi's--not one--among the hijackers that were identified as
responsible for 911. And yet the majority of the American people
still believe that Iraq was somehow behind the attack against
America. Most of our troops in Iraq still think they are there
as a response to 911. In his address to the American people the
other night, Bush mentioned 911 at least a dozen times and referred
to Iraq as the "central front" in the war on terrorism.
And yet no connection has ever been established between any of
the hijackers and Iraq. It has all been a monstrous distortion.
When will Americans wake up and face the truth that Iraq was
not a part of 911?
The other major deception the Administration
used to provide a just cause was the idea that Iraq was indeed
an imminent threat to the United States. Here the means of that
distortion was the relentless allegations, exemplified most in
the lead up to war in Bush's State of the Union address and Secretary
Powell's presentation before the United Nations, that Iraq possessed
weapons of mass destruction. What the American people never understood
was that possessing weapons of mass destruction was never, in
itself, an imminent threat and enough to constitute just cause
for war. If it were, then any number of countries would have
just cause to attack the United States, which undeniably sits
upon the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. For
Iraq to have been an imminent threat it would have to have been
demonstrated that it not only possessed weapons of mass destruction,
but that it also had the delivery systems, as well as the intent
and likelihood to use such weapons in the imminent future. Even
if Iraq did have some weapons of mass destruction as well as
the delivery systems, it never made sense that Iraq would have
used them in a first strike against either the United States,
or even Israel, as such a strike would surely have resulted in
Iraq's obliteration. Sitting on the second largest oil reserves
in the world it never made sense that Saddam Hussein was a suicidal
terrorist. He might have once been a brutal dictator, but that's
not the same thing as a suicidal terrorist even if Americans
were never quite able to see the difference. In any case, the
UN weapons inspectors, as well as intelligence analysts and Middle-East
experts, were adamant before the war that Iraq's weapons program
had pretty much been completely dismantled, and that if it did
have any remaining weapons of mass destruction, they would most
likely have been for deterrence only. [5] Iraq was thus not an
imminent threat even if there were some weapons of mass destruction.
Now we know that the inspectors and experts were right all along
and that Iraq really didn't even have any weapons of mass destruction,
not to mention the delivery systems or the likelihood of intent.
Now we know the Bush Administration ignored the conclusions of
the inspectors and their own intelligence analysts, and used
distortions and, even in one now infamous case, forged documents
to suggest that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. When will
Americans wake up and face the truth that Iraq was never an imminent
threat?
It should also be noted that the Administration
tried to use as a just cause for attacking Iraq the enforcement
of UN resolution 1441 calling for Iraq to submit to UN weapons
inspectors and disarm. In the first place, one of the other principles
of just war theory is that of right authority, and it was quite
clear from the beginning that the United States did not have
the authority to enforce a UN resolution. According to the UN
Charter, which the United States has signed and is bound by Congress
to uphold, only the UN Security Council has such authority. But
now we know that it is all a moot point anyway, for as Hans Blix,
the former UN disarmament chief in Iraq, has recently commented:
"I'm inclined to think that the Iraqi statement that they
destroyed all the biological and chemical weapons, which they
had in the summer of 1991 may well be the truth." [6] It
turns out that Iraq may well have been in compliance with the
UN resolution all along. In any case, the Bush Administration
certainly denied the UN inspectors the chance to complete their
work of determining whether or not Iraq was in compliance.
Without either an imminent threat from
Iraq or a connection to the attack against America on 911, the
Bush Administration has been forced to invent some new just cause
not previously recognized by just war theory and international
law. One strategy along this line is evident in recent statements
from the Administration that the reason for our attack was not
that Iraq had any weapons of mass destruction, or that they even
had an active program of building weapons of mass destruction,
but simply to prevent them from resuming such a program in the
future. This line of thought is not just a response to the failure
to find weapons of mass destruction or a link to Al-Qaeda, but
has been there all along. It was not just the 16 words concerning
the forged documents in Bush's State of the Union address that
was so disturbing. In that speech Bush simply dismissed the notion
that we need to wait for an imminent threat: "Some have
said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when
have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely
putting us on notice before they strike?" [7] Capitalizing
yet again on the fear and hysteria generated by 911, Bush led
America into a clear violation of international law.
Underlying those remarks is, of course,
the whole doctrine of "pre-emptive strike," announced
by the Bush Administration in September of 2002 as the New National
Security Strategy. [8] This strategy, as Chomsky has recently
observed, amounts to preventive, not pre-emptive war: "Whatever
the justifications for pre- emptive war might be, they do not
hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted
by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate
an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term 'preventive'
is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the 'supreme
crime' condemned at Nuremberg." [9] It is easy to see why
such a war was condemned at Nuremberg at the end of the most
devastating war the world had yet known. The doctrine of preventive
war is simply a recipe for endless war and thus a crime against
peace. When this doctrine was first drawn up by Paul Wolfowitz
in 1991, it is not at all hard to understand why it was so quickly
rejected by the first President Bush. But after 911, the neo-cons
saw their opportunity and made it the official doctrine of the
United States foreign policy. It's simply shameful that the fear
generated by 911 blinded Congress and the American people to
the truth about this doctrine. Before the war broke out, Wendell
Berry summed up this doctrine as "a childish hypocrisy"
that had assumed "the dignity of a nation's foreign policy"
and I doubt anyone could have put it any better.[10]
There is finally one remaining justification
for the war that the Administration has trotted out, and this
one came only late, after the war had already begun, and after
it started to become apparent that there might not be any discovery
of weapons of mass destruction. If this had been the only justification
for the war all along its hard to imagine that the American people
would ever have supported such a venture. If Bush had stood there
during the State of the Union and made no mention of 911, the
war on terrorism, the "25,000 liters of anthrax," the
"38,000 liters of botulinum," the "500 tons of
sarin, mustard, and VX nerve agent," the "aluminum
tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production," if he had
stood there and made no mention of any of this, and said instead
that we need to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein, at
a cost of billions and billions of taxpayer dollars, not to mention
the lives of many good young Americans, all just to--get this--bring
democracy to the Middle East, I think there is no question that
he would have been hauled off right then and there to the nearest
insane asylum. And yet, once we set aside the childish hypocrisy
of preventive war, and now that its clear that there was no connection
between Iraq and 911, no weapons of mass destruction and no imminent
threat, that's all that we are left with as a justification for
the terror we've inflicted upon the Iraqi people and the tremendous
sacrifice asked of the American people.
This justification is, of course, a truly
abhorrent hypocrisy by an Administration that, on the one hand,
is the direct heir of past administrations that supported the
most brutal dictatorships, and, on the other hand, has only shown
contempt for democracy in the international community as well
as here at home. Nevertheless, as so many Americans think the
war was justified just to get rid of the evil Saddam Hussein,
it might perhaps be worthwhile to pause and consider for a moment,
purely as a philosophical question, whether it would make sense
to extend the notion of just cause for war to include the idea
of removing a brutal dictator in order to install a democracy.
Another important principle of just war
theory is that of last resort. This principle holds that war
must be absolutely a last resort, all peaceful means of dealing
with the problem must be exhausted before resorting to war. The
idea behind this principle is, once again, to try to set the
conditions for war at an appropriately high enough level that
a world at peace can become a real possibility. Not exhausting
all peaceful means is a crime against peace and thus a war crime.
In a world community that is becoming ever more tightly connected
there are peaceful means of responding to brutality. In addition
to being a violation of the UN and Nuremberg Charters and thus
a violation of international law, it degrades democracy to abandon
the principles of self-defense and last resort and find in democracy
a justification for a war of aggression.
In the case of Saddam Hussein, there
is no question that he was a brutal dictator. However, most of
that brutality, which the American people have been constantly
reminded of over the last few years--that he gassed his own people
for example--happened while he was supported by our government.
Without that support, and with the presence of the UN and the
focus of international attention, it was becoming increasingly
difficult for Saddam Hussein to act as he pleased. The point
is that there were peaceful means available for dealing with
the problem of Saddam Hussein. Iraq was certainly far less a
threat to its neighbors, and Saddam Hussein far more constrained
within his own country as a result of the pressure of the international
community. It was certainly not the case that the United States
had exhausted all peaceful means of dealing with the problem
of Saddam Hussein. There is every indication that the Bush Administration,
rather than doing everything in their power to avoid war and
find a peaceful solution, did in fact everything in their power
to avoid a peaceful solution and find a reason for war.
It is so transparently obvious to so
many here at home and around the world why the Bush Administration
went to such extremes to find a reason for war and avoid a peaceful
solution. Two years after 911, billions of dollars later, thousands
of lives lost, and Americans are not really any safer--but we
do now have a pipeline across Afghanistan and control of that
vast resource beneath the sands of Iraq. Another important principle
of the just war is right intention. Even if there were a just
cause, that cause would be undermined if there were really an
ulterior motive behind the war. With no real justification for
war it is hard to deny that the intention all along was control
of oil and a strategic foothold in the Middle East. It was certainly
revealing during that NPR interview in which Bremer referred
to that "great and noble thing" when he also referred
to "our oil" in Iraq.
It is obvious to so many, but not yet
to the majority of Americans, that all the justifications for
war provided by the Bush Administration were never anything more
than a cover for the neo-con agenda outlined in the Project for
the New American Century. [11] The war against Iraq had been
planned long before 911 and the Bush Administration simply callously
used that terrible tragedy to mislead Congress and the American
people into supporting a war of aggression.
Finally, there is the principle that
if all other conditions are met, a war might be considered just,
yet only if there is a strong likelihood that it will lead to
an emergent peace rather than leading to a cycle of endless war.
One day soon I imagine the American people are just going to
wish that they had listened to all the voices of protest against
the war and that we had never invaded Iraq. They'll realize that
we never had it so good when we had Saddam constrained and UN
inspectors crawling all over Iraq. Now the future is darker for
all of us as the prospects for peace are dim at best. It was
a crime against peace to launch a war of aggression against Iraq.
The Bush Administration has not taken
one step in the right direction in facing the problem of terrorism.
Quite to the contrary, they have used the problem of terrorism
to push through a reckless agenda that has only compounded the
problem of terrorism. In inciting a hatred of America throughout
the Islamic world many times over what had already existed, the
Bush Administration has just about practically guaranteed that
America will experience more terrible days like 911.
It is only another of the Bush Administration's
"weapons of mass deception" to suggest that Iraq is
the central front of the war on terrorism. The terrible truth
is that, since the war was unjust to begin with, the resistance
to the occupation forces in Iraq cannot really properly be understood
as terrorism. A Middle East scholar has recently observed: "Like
most Americans, I am deeply distressed at the attacks on U.S.
soldiers. However, the Fourth Geneva Convention--to which the
United States is a signatory--is quite clear that a people under
foreign military occupation have the right to militarily engage
armed uniformed occupation forces."[12] The central front
of the war on terrorism will always be right here at home in
the United States of America. It is only in confronting the policies
that have engendered so much hatred of the US throughout the
Islamic world that we have any hope of putting an end to the
problem of terrorism. Initiating a war of aggression is not only
a war crime, in this case in particular, it is also a disastrous
blunder in responding to the problem of terrorism.
An Indictment of America
The terrible truth is that the war on
Iraq is an indictment of America. That indictment begins, of
course, with the Bush Administration and the neo-con agenda that
has taken over the levers of government in Washington. But the
indictment certainly does not stop there. This disastrous war
is perhaps an indictment of the Republican Party itself. They
brought us Mr. Bush and the neo- cons. They were the loudest
voices clamoring for war. They should never be trusted to lead
the nation again. But the indictment goes even beyond the Republican
Party as there were many Democrats as well who fell in line in
the march over this abyss. There were so many millions of voices
including many respected statesmen and religious leaders who
spoke out strongly and cogently against the war that any member
of Congress that did not heed the call for caution and conscience
should never be trusted with power again.
The indictment, however, certainly does
not stop with government. That America was led into an unjust
war is surely an indictment of the media as well--the nightly
network news programs, the newspapers, the radio talk show hosts,
the Washington pundits, all who so shamelessly cheered on the
march to war and did their best to silence an adequate discussion
about the justice of war and the case for war against Iraq. Some,
which think of themselves--and in one particularly well-known
egregious case--as "fair and balanced," have to be
more honestly considered as only the most blatant propaganda
apparatus, a tool of a political party and a governing administration
which clearly have now led America into a disaster.
Let's not forget the military establishment.
One thing this war proves is that the nation with the most powerful
military in the world cannot be trusted with that power. What
has to be questioned now is the whole military culture that has
had such a pervasive influence in shaping American culture. The
military knows plenty about the value of courage in war but apparently
nothing about moral courage. One simply has to follow orders--the
call of conscience, the voice of dissent is just forbidden. This
undoubtedly has had a powerful impact on the shallow patriotism
that blinded America to the terrible truth about this war. Support
the troops? I feel so badly for those brave young men and women
who had no idea what they were signing up for, who never imagined
their country would send them into an unjust war and force them
to kill innocent men, women and children. Those that don't come
back in body bags, horribly wounded, or sick from depleted uranium,
will still be scarred for life when they find out the terrible
truth about the war. This war will turn out to be some recruitment
poster. For the military establishment and culture it may turn
out to be worse than Vietnam.
This indictment goes deep down into the
fabric of American culture. It's an indictment of the perverse
American preoccupation with entertainment and sports. These are
fine expressions of a healthy culture, but when they become forms
of escapism which distract the people from adequately examining
issues of the gravest importance, then they are easily degraded.
The war on Iraq has soiled and disgraced everything about American
culture which served to distract the nation from a sufficient
discussion about the war.
That so many Americans were so easily
misled by lies and distortions is surely an indictment of our
entire educational system. It has long been recognized that education
is the key to democracy, but rarely if ever has it dawned upon
Americans just what sort of education is that key. When the politicians
and pundits go on and on about education it's clear that they
think the underlying purpose of education is simply to gain some
scientific or technical knowledge and the skills to find a job
and make money. That's all fine and good, but it's not the key
to democracy. All the success in business and scientific and
technological advancement cannot save democracy when its crumbling
from within. Perhaps democracy is a foolish idea to begin with.
Certainly there have been great philosophers, beginning with
Plato, who thought so. Plato thought it no better than mob rule
to trust the ignorant masses. That Bush is even President--that
the Republicans have had such power and influence at all--seems
to be a confirmation of Plato's indictment. The only defense
of democracy against Plato's indictment has always only rested
upon the hope that the people can become in some measure wise.
It's only an education that stresses the development of philosophical
questioning and critical thinking skills that can be the best
hope of saving democracy from the dustbin of history.
This indictment goes all the way down,
deep down to the very soul of America. Perhaps most of all, the
war on Iraq is an indictment of the religious life or spirituality
of America. If it were not for prominent religious leaders who
did speak out so strongly against the war, I would almost be
tempted to suggest it was an indictment of Christianity itself.
I don't pretend to know whether God exists or not; but I cannot
imagine a God blessing America after America has committed such
a grave injustice. I remember during the 2000 election campaign
hearing some Republican politician going on about how America
is such a "profoundly spiritual nation." Well, if only
her spirituality were at all profound then maybe we'd have something.
One thing seems to be made crystalline clear by this war--the
whole question of whether God exists or not has got to be the
most overrated and irrelevant question in human history. So many
Americans express such a devout faith in God, yet that faith
did not keep them from supporting an unjust war and thus becoming
agents of injustice. I cannot imagine a loving God caring one
bit about "faith" if that faith couldn't prevent such
injustice.
As a nation we failed to adequately have
a discussion about the justice of war and the case for war against
Iraq. We remained blinded by a myth about America--that God blessed
America and thus America was just. Too confident that we were
on the side of justice, we turned our back on justice and have
done irreparable harm to the soul of the nation.
What Now?
We have some dark days ahead, that's
for sure. What can we do to begin to set things right? What do
we do about Iraq? There is obviously no easy answer here. We've
created a real mess in Iraq and certainly it would be irresponsible
to just abandon the place to chaos and a civil war. But we cannot
continue as an illegitimate occupying force and have any hope
of bringing peace, security, and freedom to the Iraqi people,
to say the least about making any headway in dealing with the
problem of terrorism.
We certainly bear a heavy responsibility
for the rebuilding of Iraq. But it is absolutely absurd for American
companies to profit from this effort. There is a rather remarkable
weblog written by a young Iraqi woman living in Baghdad. An eloquent
writer, she demonstrates better command of written English than
most Americans seem to be capable of. All of America should read
her blog for a first- hand account of the reality of what we
have done in Iraq. She tells a story about a cousin of hers that
is a civil engineer.[13] This man was responsible for rebuilding
some thirty or so of the bridges bombed in the first Gulf War.
He got his team together and they did a study and put in a bid
to rebuild one of the bridges blown up in the recent invasion.
His bid came to something like 300,000 dollars. Well they didn't
get the bid. Of course, it went to an American company. Now I
don't know if there is any truth to this story or not. Someone
sure ought to check it out. But, according to her story, the
winning bid came to 50 million dollars! 50 million dollars! We're
spending a billion a week, and Bush just asked for another 87
billion of taxpayer dollars--and Dick Cheney's Halliburton was
handed the contract to rebuild Iraq. Bush gave huge tax cuts
to his corporate backers, destroyed Iraq on the orders of Cheney
and the other neo-cons, and now gives Halliburton the contract
to rebuild Iraq. This scenario is so completely beyond absurd--a
real test to see just how completely blinded and asleep the American
people can be.
At the very least, no American company
should be allowed to profit from Iraq, especially one with close
ties to the Bush Administration. If they really went to war to
"liberate" Iraq, then they should prove it by relinquishing
any designs on profiting from either the rebuilding or that vast
reserve of oil. America should have to pay the Iraqi people to
rebuild their own country. Thanks to us they have a lot of experience
in that regard and don't need Halliburton to do the job.
It seems to me there is no solution to
the problem of Iraq without first facing the terrible truth that
we should never have initiated this war of aggression in the
first place. Certainly, those responsible in Washington need
to be held accountable.
There is not much hope of dealing with
the problem of terrorism until we really begin to address the
underlying causes of terrorism. Americans have been manipulated
by fear and led down a path that will only make the problem of
terrorism much worse.
Perhaps our only hope is in abandoning
forever the politics of fear, abandoning forever the economics
of inequity, abandoning forever the course of unilateral military
domination, abandoning forever the doctrine of preventive war,
and for once really embracing the goals of peace and justice,
not just for Americans, but for everyone.
Now that, truly, would be a great and
noble thing.
Timothy J. Freeman is Adjunct Professor of Philosophy. The University
of Hawaii--Hilo. He can be reached at: freeman@hawaii.edu
1. National Public Radio, Morning
Edition, August 26, 2003.
2. A brief summary of just war theory
can be found in An Encyclopedia of War and Ethics, Donald A.
Wells, editor, pgs. 255-259. For an online summary go to The Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy . For just war theory in the Catechism
of the Catholic Church go
here.
3. Charter
of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Article
6 (a).
4. See, for example, Stephen Zunes, "Seven Reasons to
Oppose a U.S. Invasion of Iraq," Foreign Policy in Focus,
August 2002.
5. See, for example, this statement by
the Veterans Intelligence Professionals
for Sanity, February 7, 2003.
6. Hans Blix, Agence
France Presse, September 9, 2003.
7. President George W. Bush, State
of the Union Address, January, 28, 2003.
8. U.S.
National Security Strategy, Electronic Journal of the Department
of State, Volume 7, Number 4, December 2002.
9. Noam Chomsky, "Preventive
War 'the Supreme Crime," Le Monde diplomatique, August,
2003.
10. Wendell Berry, "A
Citizen's Response to the National Security Strategy of the United
States of America," The New York Times, February 9,
2003.
11. The
Project for the New American Century. See Bernard Weiner,
"How We Got Into This Imperial
Pickle: A PNAC Primer."
12. Stephen Zunes, "Bush's
Speech: The War in Iraq is Not Over and Neither Are the Lies
to Justify It," September 8, 2003.
13. Baghdad
Burning, August 28, 2003.
Weekend
Edition Features for Sept. 13 / 14, 2003
Michael Neumann
Anti-Americanism:
Too Much of a Good Thing?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Anatomy of a Swindle
Gary Leupp
The Matrix of Ignorance
Ron Jacobs
Reagan's America
Brian Cloughley
Up to a Point, Lord Rumsfeld
William S. Lind
Making Mesopotamia a Terrorist Magnet
Werther
A Modest Proposal for the Pentagon
Dave Lindorff
Friendly Fire Will Doom the Occupation
Toni Solo
Fiction and Reality in Colombia: The Trial of the Bogota Three
Elaine Cassel
Juries and the Death Penalty
Mickey Z.
A Parable for Cancun
Jeffrey Sommers
Issam Nashashibi: a Life Dedicated to the Palestinian Cause
David Vest
Driving in No Direction (with a Glimpse of Johnny Cash)
Michael Yates
The Minstrel Show
Jesse Walker
Adios, Johnny Cash
Adam Engel
Something Killer
Poets' Basement
Cash, Albert, Curtis, Linhart
Website of the Weekend
Local Harvest
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|