Issue
Number 21 - December 19, 2002
Printer
Friendly Version
Note:
The size of the type may be changed by clicking on view at the top of
your browser and selecting "text size". The document will
print in the size you select.
The
writer is the founding President of the W. E. B. Du Bois Foundation,
Inc., honoring his stepfather, and a retired Professor in Journalism
and African-American Studies at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
The unprecedented
victory for the party in power in the recent midterm elections means
war with Iraq is now inevitable - unless an effective, global no-war-with-Iraq
movement emerges. The unexpected unanimity in the United Nations Security
Council vote on the resolution on Iraq will merely delay that war. The
war hawks were not expecting such unity. People of Color in the Americas
and around the world, understanding better than most the true hegemonic
objectives of the U.S. and the UK and their "war against terrorism,"
have a sacred duty and special responsibility. We must join with and
strengthen the already developing European and domestic movement against
war with Iraq. We must be in the front ranks of that struggle, and we
must be prepared to take over the reins of leadership of that struggle
when the full force of modern day, corporate imperialism is unleashed
on that anti-war movement. It is not a position many cherish. But, it
is the only hope for peace in our time.
The pro-Bush/Republican
Party results of the midterm elections together with the passage of
the Congressional bi-partisan resolution giving the Administration the
right to wage war with Iraq if it so chooses, has provided the U.S.
Administration with all the authority it believes it needs. It does
not matter that well less than half of the eligible voters in the country
bothered to vote in the midterm elections. It does not matter what the
Europeans or anyone else thinks. It does not matter that the President
was compelled to go before the United Nations by a justifiable domestic
fear of the possibility of "going it alone". Having decided,
under pressure, to take the matter to the United Nations, President
Bush proceeded to scold the world body for failing in its responsibility
to force implementation of a long list of UN resolutions initially formulated
to punish Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait.
In a demonstration
of supreme arrogance Bush insulted UN Secretary General Kofi Anan and
the leadership of the United Nations Organizations for "not doing
their job." Thus, he ended up having to agree to a resolution far
removed from that demanded in his original presentation. While his address
was applauded by U.S. pundits and government officials alike, the world
leaders understood that because of his threat of U.S. military action
made before the United Nations Organization, whose very reason for being
is to maintain peace in the world, they must act together to stop him.
U.S. Secretary of
State Colin Powell was given the impossible task of selling the US/UK
position to the other thirteen members of the Security Council. After
long and what must have been for Powell torturous meetings and discussions
with the Heads of Delegations of the rotating members of the Security
Council (Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Guinea, Ireland, Mauritius, Mexico,
Norway, Singapore and Syria) and with France, the Russian Federation,
China, and the U.K, the nations with veto power, they all firmly agreed;
they would vote for a resolution that 1) removed any threat of or automatic
military action in the event of Iraqi resistance and 2) guaranteed that
Hans Blitz, leader of UNMOVIC (the United Nations Monitoring, Verification
and Inspection Commission) and Mohammed El Baradei, of the International
Atomic Energy Agency, co-leaders of the inspection teams, would report
back to the UN Security Council in case of a "material breach"
to allow the Security Council to review the alleged breach and decide
on action.
The composition
of the UN Security Council at this juncture is significant: nine developing
(third world) countries of peoples of color, four developed countries
and Singapore (a city-state) and Ireland. In other words a Security
Council overwhelmingly representative of peoples of color. They must
have made it very clear to Colin Powell that no matter what the US could
offer them in the way of money, arms, diplomatic favor and other bribes
in return for their support, they would vote for peace. So, it was not
all just a matter of what France, China or the Russian Federation would
do. Although one would never know it from the coverage provided by the
U.S. media.
As the inspections
take their course without major problems and the threatening rhetoric
continues from the White House, the Pentagon, and in the media, more
and more nations and leaders are clarifying their position. That position
is - any military action against Iraq must be approved by the United
Nations Security Council. While in the US more and more militaristic
news and information of every variety daily fills the TV, the newspapers
and even the National Public Radio, to prepare the American people for
war. This only reveals the determination of the war hawks to press ahead,
regardless of the United Nations action or what the inspectors find
and regardless of the growing anti-war sentiment domestically and throughout
the world.
At the same time
President Bush repeats over and over that the inspectors don't have
to actually find Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. "We know that
they are there. It is the responsibility of Iraq to prove to us it has
no such weapons or programs to build them." In other words, Saddam
must prove a negative! Despite repeated claims by the US and the UK
that they have concrete evidence of the existence of weapons of mass
destruction within Iraq, that evidence has not been turned over to the
inspection teams as requested. Instead, with great fanfare, Britain
releases a report on and much used video material of
repression in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, most of which Amnesty International
released to the world months and months and months ago.
A great challenge
faces the American people. An even greater challenge faces America's
peoples of Color, throughout North America, Central and South America,
and the islands of the Seas. We have an opportunity to join with and
help build a peoples, global peace movement. Such a peoples movement
would encourage leaders from around the world, many of whom have already
expressed their opposition to a war with Iraq, to openly oppose that
war, and thus isolate and defeat the enemies of peace.
David Graham Du
Bois
[email protected]