Why I am Opposed to War with Iraq

The New York-based Campaign for Peace and Democracy (CPD) is circulating a statement entitled "We Oppose both Saddam Hussein and the US War on Iraq: a call for a new, democratic US foreign policy." As the title suggests, the statement offers an important take on the war in Iraq, while stating a comprehensive position on U.S. foreign policy. The statement, along with a list of initial signers, may be found on the ZNet website (this list will be periodically updated). The statement with initial signers will be published as a two-page advertisement in the Nation, 1/6/03, which comes out December 19. As space and finances allow, there will be publication in other newspapers, magazines, websites, blimps, etc. Meantime, it is whizzing around the Internet, has already gotten 800 signers, and the numbers are increasing rapidly. Initial signers other than historians (see below) include: Medea Benjamin, Barbara Ehrenreich, Daniel Ellsberg, John Leonard, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Katha Pollitt, Edward Said, Alan Sokal, Naomi Weisstein, Cornel West.

This statement is not intended to be by, or limited to, historians. As it happens, however, historians are involved. CPD co-director Thomas Harrison is a high school history teacher; co-director Joanne Landy has an MA in history from Berkeley. Although I am not an officer of the Campaign, I support this effort and have been distributing the statement to many, including fellow historians. Historian signers so far (partial list) include: Rosalyn Baxandall, SUNY College at Old Westbury; Laura Lee Downs, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences; Melvyn Dubofsky, SUNY Binghamton; Ellen Carol DuBois, UCLA; Linda Gordon, NYU; Temma Kaplan; Robin D.G. Kelley, NYU; Nelson Lichtenstein, UC Santa Barbara; Peter Rachleff, Macalester; David Roediger, Illinois; James Weinstein; Barbara Winslow, Brooklyn College, CUNY; Howard Zinn. More are of course welcome.

WE OPPOSE BOTH SADDAM HUSSEIN AND THE U.S. WAR ON IRAQ:
A CALL FOR A NEW, DEMOCRATIC U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

Joanne Landy, Thomas Harrison, Jennifer Scarlott, Co-Directors,
Campaign for Peace and Democracy

We oppose the impending U.S.-led war on Iraq, which threatens to inflict vast suffering and destruction, while exacerbating rather than resolving threats to regional and global peace. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who should be removed from power, both for the good of the Iraqi people and for the security of neighboring countries. However, it is up to the Iraqi people themselves to oust Saddam Hussein, dismantle his police state regime, and democratize their country. People in the United States can be of immense help in this effort--not by supporting military intervention, but by building a strong peace movement and working to ensure that our government pursues a consistently democratic and just foreign policy.

We do not believe that the goal of the approaching war against Iraq is to bring democracy to the Iraqis, nor that it will produce this result. Instead, the Bush Administration’s aim is to expand and solidify U.S. predominance in the Middle East, at the cost of tens of thousands of civilian lives if necessary. This war is about U.S. political, military and economic power, about seizing control of oilfields and about strengthening the United States as the enforcer of an inhumane global status quo. That is why we are opposed to war against Iraq, whether waged unilaterally by Washington or by the UN Security Council, unaccountable to the UN General Assembly and bullied and bribed into endorsing the war.

The U.S. military may have the ability to destroy Saddam Hussein, but the United States cannot promote democracy in the Muslim world and peace in the Middle East, nor can it deal with the threat posed to all of us by terrorist networks such as Al Qaeda, and by weapons of mass destruction, by pursuing its current policies. Indeed, the U.S. could address these problems only by doing the opposite of what it is doing today -- that is, by:

-Renouncing the use of military intervention to extend and consolidate U.S. imperial power, and withdrawing U.S. troops from the Middle East.

-Ending its support for corrupt and authoritarian regimes, e.g. Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and Egypt.

-Opposing, and ending U.S. complicity in, all forms of terrorism worldwide -- not just by Al Qaeda, Palestinian suicide bombers and Chechen hostage takers, but also by Colombian paramilitaries, the Israeli military in the Occupied Territories and Russian counterinsurgency forces in Chechnya.

-Ending the cruel sanctions on Iraq, which inflict massive harm on the civilian population.

-Supporting the right of national self-determination for all peoples in the Middle East, including the Kurds, Palestinians and Israeli Jews. Ending one-sided support for Israel in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

-Taking unilateral steps toward renouncing weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, and vigorously promoting international disarmament treaties.

-Abandoning IMF/World Bank economic policies that bring mass misery to people in large parts of the world. Initiating a major foreign aid program directed at popular rather than corporate needs.

A U.S. government that carried out these policies would be in a position to honestly and consistently foster democracy in the Middle East and elsewhere. It could encourage democratic forces (not unrepresentative cliques, but genuinely popular parties and movements) in Iraq, Iran and Syria, as well as Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Turkey. Some of these forces exist today, others have yet to arise, but all would flower if nurtured by a new U.S. foreign policy.

These initiatives, taken together, would constitute a truly democratic foreign policy. Only such a policy could begin to reverse the mistrust and outright hatred felt by so much of the world’s population toward the U.S. At the same time, it would weaken the power of dictatorships and the appeal of terrorism and reactionary religious fundamentalism. Though nothing the United States can do would decisively undermine these elements right away, over time a new U.S. foreign policy would drastically undercut their power and influence.

The Administration’s frantic and flagrantly dishonest efforts to portray Saddam Hussein as an imminent military threat to people in this country and to the inhabitants of other Middle Eastern countries lack credibility. Saddam Hussein is a killer and serial aggressor who would doubtless like nothing better than to wreak vengeance on the U.S. and to dominate the Gulf Region. But there is no reason to believe he is suicidal or insane. Considerable evidence suggests that Saddam Hussein is much weaker militarily than he was before the Gulf War and that he is still some distance from being able to manufacture nuclear weapons. But most important, unlike Al Qaeda, he has a state and a position of power to protect; he knows that any Iraqi act of aggression now against the U.S. or his neighbors would bring about his total destruction. As even CIA Director George Tenet has pointed out, it is precisely the certainty of a war to the finish against his regime that would provide Saddam Hussein with the incentive he now lacks to use whatever weapons he has against the U.S. and its allies.

Weapons of mass destruction endanger us all and must be eliminated. But a war against Iraq is not the answer. War threatens massive harm to Iraqi civilians, will add to the ranks of terrorists throughout the Muslim world, and will encourage international bullies to pursue further acts of aggression. Everyone is legitimately concerned about terrorism; however, the path to genuine security involves promoting democracy, social justice and respect for the right of self-determination, along with disarmament, weapons-free-zones, and inspections. Of all the countries in the world, the United States possesses by far the most powerful arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. If the U.S. were to initiate a democratic foreign policy and take serious steps toward disarmament, it would be able to encourage global disarmament as well as regional demilitarization in the Middle East.

The Bush Administration has used the alleged Iraqi military danger to justify an alarming new doctrine of preemptive war. In the National Security Strategy, publicly released on September 20, 2002, the Bush Administration asserted that the U.S. has the right to attack any country that might be a potential threat, not merely in response to an act of military aggression. Much of the world sees this doctrine for what it is: the proclamation of an undisguised U.S. global imperium.

Ordinary Iraqis, and people everywhere, need to know that there is another America, made up of those who both recognize the urgent need for democratic change in the Middle East and reject our government’s militaristic and imperial foreign policy. By signing this statement we declare our intention to work for a new democratic U.S. foreign policy. That means helping to rein in the war-makers and building the most powerful antiwar movement possible, and at the same time forging links of solidarity and concrete support for democratic forces in Iraq and throughout the Middle East.

We refuse to accept the inevitability of war on Iraq despite the enormous military juggernaut that has been put in place, and we declare our commitment to work with others in this country and abroad to avert it. And if war should start, we will do all in our power to end it immediately.

List of signers in formation. Affiliations for identification only
Michael Albert, ZNet/Z Magazine
Stanley Aronowitz, Professional Staff Congress, AFT, NYC
Rosalyn Baxandall, SUNY at Old Westbury
Mel Bienenfeld, NYC
Richard J. Brown, MD- Physicians for a National Health Program-NY
C. Carr, Village Voice
Ramón Castellblanch, SF State Univ
Margaret W. Crane, The Write Formula
Richard Deats, Fellowship magazine
Melinda Downey, New Politics
Laura Lee Downs, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales
Karen Durbin, writer
Barbara Ehrenreich, writer
Daniel Ellsberg
Carlos R. Espinosa, architect
Sam Farber, Brooklyn Coll, CUNY
John Feffer, writer
Barry Finger, New Paltz NY
Thomas Harrison, Campaign for Peace and Democracy
Doug Henwood, Left Business Observer
Judith Hempfling
William F., Henning, Jr., CWA Local 1180
Michael Hirsch, New Politics
Marianne Jackson, Rescue Health Care NY
Julius and Phyllis Jacobson, New Politics
Robin D.G. Kelley, NYU
Joanne Landy, Campaign for Peace and Democracy
Jesse Lemisch, John Jay Coll of Criminal Justice, CUNY
John Leonard
Sue Leonard
Rabbi Michael Lerner, TIKKUN Magazine
Nelson Lichtenstein, UC Santa Barbara
Martha Livingston, SUNY Coll at Old Westbury
Betty Reid Mandell, Bridgewater State Coll
Marvin Mandell, Curry Coll
Selma Marks, NYC
David McReynolds, War Resisters League
Carol Miller, Public Health Activist
John M. Miller, War Resisters League
Ros Petchesky, WEDO (Women's Environment & Development Organization)
Katha Pollitt, The Nation
Omar Qureshi
Adolph Reed, Jr., New School Univ
Sonia Jaffe Robbins, Network of East-West Women
Leonard Rodberg, Queens Coll
Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive
Edward Said, Columbia Univ
Charles Scarlott, Tucson AZ
Jennifer Scarlott, Campaign for Peace and Democracy
Stephen R. Shalom, William Paterson Univ
Ann Snitow, Network of East-West Women
Sid and Sandy Socolar, NYC
Alan Sokal, New York University
Bernard Tuchman, NYC
Judith Podore Ward, NYC
Lois Weiner, New Jersey City Univ
James Weinstein, founding editor, In These Times
Naomi Weisstein, SUNY Buffalo
Cornel West, Princeton Univ
Reginald Wilson, American Council on Education
Arnold Jacob Wolf, Rabbi Emeritus, K.A.M. Isaiah Israel Congregation, Chicago
Kent Worcester, Marymount Manhattan College
Howard Zinn, historian