[Peace-discuss] Important statement

[Dlind49 at aol.com]

Statement on Iraq
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Washington, D.C.
November 13, 2002


As we Catholic Bishops meet here in Washington, our nation, Iraq and the 
world face grave choices about war and peace, about pursuing justice and 
security. These are not only military and political choices, but also moral 
ones because they involve matters of life and death. Traditional Christian 
teaching offers ethical principles and moral criteria that should guide these 
critical choices.

Two months ago, Bishop Wilton Gregory, President of the United States 
Conference of Catholic Bishops, wrote President George Bush to welcome 
efforts to focus the world's attention on Iraq's refusal to comply with 
several United Nations resolutions over the past eleven years, and its 
pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. This letter, which was authorized by 
the U.S. Bishops' Administrative Committee, raised serious questions about 
the moral legitimacy of any preemptive, unilateral use of military force to 
overthrow the government of Iraq. As a body, we make our own the questions 
and concerns raised in Bishop Gregory's letter, taking into account 
developments since then, especially the unanimous action of the U.N. Security 
Council on November 8th. 

We have no illusions about the behavior or intentions of the Iraqi 
government. The Iraqi leadership must cease its internal repression, end its 
threats to its neighbors, stop any support for terrorism, abandon its efforts 
to develop weapons of mass destruction, and destroy all such existing 
weapons. We welcome the fact that the United States has worked to gain new 
action by the UN Security Council to ensure that Iraq meets its obligation to 
disarm. We join others in urging Iraq to comply fully with this latest 
Security Council resolution. We fervently pray that all involved will act to 
ensure that this UN action will not simply be a prelude to war but a way to 
avoid it. 

While we cannot predict what will happen in the coming weeks, we wish to 
reiterate questions of ends and means that may still have to be addressed. We 
offer not definitive conclusions, but rather our serious concerns and 
questions in the hope of helping all of us to reach sound moral judgments. 
People of good will may differ on how to apply just war norms in particular 
cases, especially when events are moving rapidly and the facts are not 
altogether clear. Based on the facts that are known to us, we continue to 
find it difficult to justify the resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear 
and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature. With the Holy 
See and bishops from the Middle East and around the world, we fear that 
resort to war, under present circumstances and in light of current public 
information, would not meet the strict conditions in Catholic teaching for 
overriding the strong presumption against the use of military force.*

Just cause. The Catechism of the Catholic Church limits just cause to cases 
in which "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of 
nations [is] lasting, grave and certain." (#2309) We are deeply concerned 
about recent proposals to expand dramatically traditional limits on just 
cause to include preventive uses of military force to overthrow threatening 
regimes or to deal with weapons of mass destruction. Consistent with the 
proscriptions contained in international law, a distinction should be made 
between efforts to change unacceptable behavior of a government and efforts 
to end that government's existence. 

Legitimate authority. In our judgment, decisions concerning possible war in 
Iraq require compliance with U.S. constitutional imperatives, broad consensus 
within our nation, and some form of international sanction. That is why the 
action by Congress and the UN Security Council are important. As the Holy See 
has indicated, if recourse to force were deemed necessary, this should take 
place within the framework of the United Nations after considering the 
consequences for Iraqi civilians, and regional and global stability. 
(Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, Vatican Secretary for Relations with States, 
9/10/02). 

Probability of success and proportionality. The use of force must have 
"serious prospects for success" and "must not produce evils and disorders 
graver than the evil to be eliminated" (Catechism, #2309). We recognize that 
not taking military action could have its own negative consequences. We are 
concerned, however, that war against Iraq could have unpredictable 
consequences not only for Iraq but for peace and stability elsewhere in the 
Middle East. The use of force might provoke the very kind of attacks that it 
is intended to prevent, could impose terrible new burdens on an already 
long-suffering civilian population, and could lead to wider conflict and 
instability in the region. War against Iraq could also detract from the 
responsibility to help build a just and stable order in Afghanistan and could 
undermine broader efforts to stop terrorism.

Norms governing the conduct of war. The justice of a cause does not lessen 
the moral responsibility to comply with the norms of civilian immunity and 
proportionality. While we recognize improved capability and serious efforts 
to avoid directly targeting civilians in war, the use of military force in 
Iraq could bring incalculable costs for a civilian population that has 
suffered so much from war, repression, and a debilitating embargo. In 
assessing whether "collateral damage" is proportionate, the lives of Iraqi 
men, women and children should be valued as we would the lives of members of 
our own family and citizens of our own country.

Our assessment of these questions leads us to urge that our nation and the 
world continue to pursue actively alternatives to war in the Middle East. It 
is vital that our nation persist in the very frustrating and difficult 
challenges of maintaining broad international support for constructive, 
effective and legitimate ways to contain and deter aggressive Iraqi actions 
and threats. We support effective enforcement of the military embargo and 
maintenance of political sanctions. We reiterate our call for much more 
carefully-focused economic sanctions which do not threaten the lives of 
innocent Iraqi civilians. Addressing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction must 
be matched by broader and stronger non-proliferation measures. Such efforts, 
grounded in the principle of mutual restraint, should include, among other 
things, greater support for programs to safeguard and eliminate weapons of 
mass destruction in all nations, stricter controls on the export of missiles 
and weapons technology, improved enforcement of the biological and chemical 
weapons conventions, and fulfillment of U.S. commitments to pursue good faith 
negotiations on nuclear disarmament under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation 
Treaty.

There are no easy answers. Ultimately, our elected leaders are responsible 
for decisions about national security, but we hope that our moral concerns 
and questions will be considered seriously by our leaders and all citizens. 
We invite others, particularly Catholic lay people -- who have the principal 
responsibility to transform the social order in light of the Gospel -- to 
continue to discern how best to live out their vocation to be "witnesses and 
agents of peace and justice" (Catechism, #2442). As Jesus said, "Blessed are 
the peacemakers" (Mt. 5). 

We pray for all those most likely to be affected by this potential conflict, 
especially the suffering people of Iraq and the men and women who serve in 
our armed forces. We support those who risk their lives in the service of our 
nation. We also support those who seek to exercise their right to 
conscientious objection and selective conscientious objection, as we have 
stated in the past. 

We pray for President Bush and other world leaders that they will find the 
will and the ways to step back from the brink of war with Iraq and work for a 
peace that is just and enduring. We urge them to work with others to fashion 
an effective global response to Iraq's threats that recognizes legitimate 
self defense and conforms to traditional moral limits on the use of military 
force.

____________________

*"Just war teaching has evolved…as an effort to prevent war; only if war 
cannot be rationally avoided, does the teaching then seek to restrict and 
reduce its horrors. It does this by establishing a set of rigorous conditions 
which must be met if the decision to go to war is to be mostly permissible. 
Such a decision, especially today, requires extraordinarily strong reasons 
for overriding the presumption in favor of peace and against war. This is one 
significant reason why valid just-war teaching makes provision for 
conscientious dissent." The Challenge of Peace: God's Promise and Our 
Response (1983), #83. 
November 13, 2002 Copyright © by United States Conference of Catholic Bishops