Back to the Security
Council:
The Bush Administration Remains Eager for War
by David Krieger*, February 26, 2003
US polling indicates that only a third of the
American public would support a war against Iraq without United
Nations approval, while a large majority would support such a
war with UN backing.
Most likely on the basis of these polls, the Bush
administration has now gone back to the UN Security Council with
another resolution seeking war against Iraq. The resolution, co-sponsored
by the UK and Spain, is a call to war under Chapter VII, which
contains the use of force provisions of the United Nations Charter.
In essence, the resolution is an attempt to turn
some details of the reporting requirements under Resolution 1441,
and a dispute over the actual range of a short-range Iraqi missile,
into an authorization to bomb the Iraqis, remove Saddam Hussein
from power and occupy Iraq. The resolution concludes that “Iraq
has failed to take the final opportunity afforded to it in Resolution
1441 (2002).”
An alternative proposal has been submitted to the
Security Council by France, Germany and Russia, which calls for
more in-depth and reinforced inspections. It finds that “the
conditions for using force against Iraq are not fulfilled,”
and that “inspections have just reached their full pace…are
functioning without hindrance…[and] have already produced
results.”
The two proposals offer vastly different alternative
outcomes. The US/UK/Spain resolution is an authorization for US
military action against Iraq. The French/German/Russian proposal
seeks to maintain the peace and achieve “the verifiable
disarmament of Iraq.”
The world awaits the result of the Security Council’s
decision, which is likely to come in the next two weeks. If nine
of the fifteen members of the Security Council vote for the US
resolution and none of the permanent members of the Council exercises
its veto power, the United States will set loose the dogs of war
on Iraq.
Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney all seem so eager to
get on with the war they have been anticipating and working toward
for years. They will undoubtedly be doing everything within their
power, and probably much that is beyond their actual authority,
to coerce other members of the Security Council to vote for their
resolution.
Not since Vietnam have US leaders been so eager
to prosecute a war where someone else’s children will die
and be used to kill the children of another nation. If they “succeed”
in getting the votes in the Security Council, we will again witness
the awesome power of the US military machine that consumes half
the money Congress votes to spend each year.
Even if the Bush administration fails to get the
necessary votes in the Security Council, it is still possible
that it will follow through with its threats to proceed to war
with a “coalition of the willing.” This would dramatically
divide the US population, wreak havoc on the system of international
law that has existed since World War II, and undoubtedly increase
the hatred and violence directed against the United States and
its citizens.
A US-led war against Iraq would be a tragedy not
only for the people of Iraq, but for the world. The greatest tragedy,
however, may be that at this pivotal moment in world history,
the US should have leadership that is so militaristic and myopic,
missing an extraordinary opportunity to fight for justice and
democracy by working with the international community instead
of against it.
It has never been more important for the
American people to wake up, stand up and act to exercise their
combined “veto power” on the threatened actions of
this war-hungry and dangerous administration by stating an unequivocal
and resounding No to the proposed war.
*David Krieger is president of the Nuclear Age
Peace Foundation. He is the editor of Hope in a Dark Time, Reflections
on Humanity’s Future (Capra Press, 2003).
|