Deep Blade Archive
Cutting through the machinations and
effects of the U.S. empire
2003 Archive
Archive of 2003 War Resources
Archive of 1991 Gulf War Articles
911 Archive
Going to War
by Doug Allen
Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator who
does not care about the welfare of the people of Iraq or
neighboring countries. In fact, many of us in the peace
movement feel more strongly about this than do policy makers in
Washington. We questioned why Washington, the military, and
certain corporations provided biological and chemical weapons
and military and financial aid to Saddam Hussein and continue
to supply similar dictators and violators of human rights in
the Middle East and throughout the world.
As we prepare for war, the key points of
discussion should be to assess the real threats to the United
States and the best way to deal with the crisis with Iraq.
Saddam Hussein and Iraq are a threat, but they are not an
immediate threat to the United States, and they do not rank at
the top of the major threats. This, of course, should lead to a
serious examination of why President Bush is so obsessed with
Saddam Hussein and Iraq, usually to the exclusion of more
important issues and threats. I believe such an examination
involves the focus of powerful interests on controlling oil,
the personal history of the Bush family, the need to deflect
attention from the economy and other issues, and the
inappropriate use of real concerns about 9/11 and terrorism to
mute dissent and unify the country around self-serving
patriotic slogans.
Consistent with all polls in the U.S., we
are most threatened by our economic crisis. States face their
worst economic crisis since World War II. Citizens live under
real insecurity and even terror. Poverty, unemployment and lack
of decent jobs, lack of healthcare and increasingly expensive
healthcare, lack of funds for education, and increasing
financial burdens on local communities to provide basic
necessities are far greater threats to our security and
well-being than are threats posed by Iraq. The multibillion
dollar weapons industry, selling profitable dangerous weapons
to brutal regimes, thrives on instability, conflict, and war.
The lack of environmental priorities, making us increasingly
dependent on foreign oil, increases threats to our security.
The huge increase in Iraq war spending will exacerbate our
present economic crises.
In addition, there are numerous, other
foreign threats to the United States and the world far greater
than Iraq. Foremost is al-Quaeda and the worldwide “war
on terrorism.” Despite unsubstantiated slogans and
charges, there is no evidence linking Iraq with 9/11, and there
are no solid links between Saddam Hussein and al-Quaeda. By
contrast, there are al-Quaeda links elsewhere that are being
marginalized because of the obsession with Iraq. Without going
through the threats posed by North Korea, terrorism and
conflict in the Middle East, certain forms of militant
religious fundamentalism, the Indian-Pakistani conflict
(1,000,000 troops massed on the border and both sides with
nuclear weapons), and many other threatening examples, let me
just emphasize one point. There are many unstable and
dictatorial regimes, some of which already possess nuclear
weapons (unlike Iraq) and some of which possess far more
biological and chemical weapons than Iraq, but Washington is
inappropriately obsessed with Iraq to the detriment of local,
state, and national interests.
We should have no illusions about Saddam
Hussein and his regime. But we must be aware of an essential
fact ignored in the obsessive focus by the current
administration in Washington and the mass media on the evil
dictator: He is far from unique. There are other Saddam
Husseins throughout the world with similar or worse violations
of human rights, histories of terrorism, and genocidal
policies. Saddam Hussein has killed thousands of innocent
Iraqis. Several regimes in Africa have killed two million
innocent civilians. Many other regimes, including a number of
Arab allies, are guilty of gross human rights violations,
torture and executions, and encouraging terrorism. Indeed, with
the obsession on Saddam Hussein, the U.S.-imposed embargo has
led to the death of over 500,000 innocent Iraqi children,
according to the United Nations.
Finally, war should be a last resort.
Since Iraq is far from unique and does not pose an imminent
threat or even the greatest threat to the security of the
United States, we should explore other diplomatic alternatives
including supporting U.N. weapons inspectors in strengthening
their role and doing their jobs in the most effective manner.
The long-range consequences of war for the people of Maine and
the U.S., as well as for Iraqis and people of the region, are
unpredictable and very threatening: the likely destabilization
and possible overthrow of many governments in the region; the
likely increase in terrorism at home and abroad; the likely
escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the volatile
destabilization of Iraq with Shia uprisings in the South
(possibly linked with Islamic militants in Iran), Kurdish
uprisings in the North (possibly linked with Kurds in Turkey
and demands for a separate Kurdistan), and the permanent
stationing of many thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and the
expenditure of many billions of dollars trying to impose
foreign order on the chaos; and the devastating economic
consequences for our already fragile local, state, and national
economies.
For all of these reasons, it makes sense
to oppose preemptive and largely U.S. unilateral moves toward
war. We must work with others to explore alternatives for
resolving the serious crisis with Iraq.
Doug Allen
February 2003
February 2003
