[Peace-discuss] Iraq: Where Things Stand (fwd)

[patton paul]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 26 Nov 2002 18:57:40 -0000
From: "Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org" <moveon-help at list.moveon.org>
To: Dr. Paul Patton <ppatton at uiuc.edu>
Subject: Iraq: Where Things Stand

Dear MoveOn member,

Over the last month, things have gotten more complicated for those of
us who are concerned about a war on Iraq.  There have been elections,
changes in rhetoric at the White House, a new resolution at the UN,
and most recently the entry of weapons inspectors into Iraq.  There is
good news and bad news; we have some triumphs to celebrate and serious
hurdles to confront.

Below, we share our understanding of where things stand on the war
with Iraq.

THE ELECTION AND CONGRESS

There's no getting around the great disappointment of Election 2002,
and it's certain that President Bush will attempt to portray the
election as an endorsement of the Iraq war plan.  But the fact
remains that not a single candidate lost because he or she voted
against the war.  And in several cases, when candidates came out
against the war they made significant gains in the polls.  So, while
the talk about Iraq certainly distracted from a discussion of the
economy and other critical issues, the repercussions of the vote may
be to strengthen Democrats' spines rather than embolden Republicans.

The election of Nancy Pelosi to the position of House Minority Leader
is a terrific sign that Democrats are paying attention.  Pelosi's
opposition to Bush's war resolution comes from her long tenure on the
House Intelligence committee -- she knows as much as anyone in
Congress about the actual dangers we face.

It's very unlikely that Congress will vote on the war again, but there
is still great value in working with Congress on this issue.  Of the
133 Representatives who voted against the Iraq resolution, most are
still concerned about the war and willing to work on it.  Stay tuned
for upcoming ways of engaging Congress in fighting this war.

THE SHAPE OF THE OPPOSITION

One of the big pieces of good news is that the opposition to this war
remains quite broad, even after the new UN resolution and the war
vote.  At the grassroots level, folks still have a tremendous amount
of energy and passion to devote to stopping it.  Leaders who have been
involved in the peace or disarmament movements for the last thirty
years say that there is more energy now than they've seen in decades.

We also have a whole host of organizational allies.

Religious and church groups are getting fired up -- the leaders of
President Bush's own denomination issued a statement saying, "It is
inconceivable that Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior and the Prince of
Peace, would support this proposed attack."  Catholic bishops have
also been speaking up.  Members of the religious community who work on
foreign policy issues say this groundswell is unprecedented in its
size, speed, and unanimity.

Just as importantly, unions and labor groups are beginning to mobilize
against the war.  Dozens of local and state-level unions representing
hundreds of thousands of workers have passed anti-war resolutions.
And AFL-CIO President John Sweeney sent a letter to Congress before
the war vote asking them to consider some very serious questions about
the coming conflict.  In the struggle against the Vietnam war, it took
years for organized labor to come on board, but already we have the
strong support of some of that community.

The community of veterans is also getting fired up about the war on
Iraq.  A number of veterans of Gulf War I have started Veterans for
Common Sense, a group which advocates the diplomatic resolution of the
current conflict.  Like many current military leaders, veterans are
deeply concerned about the safety of the soldiers who will serve in
this conflict -- especially after the poor treatment of the over
200,000 vets who applied for health help after the first Gulf War.

In a number of other constituencies, from Muslim groups to academia,
more and more folks are turning out against the war.  The opposition
is diverse, broad, and deep.

THE UN RESOLUTION
[This section aided by the analysis of the Friends Committee on
National Legislation.]

On November 8, the United Nations passed resolution 1441, which called
for full Iraqi compliance with the resumption of weapons inspections.
While many people see the resolution as a concession by France and the
other states that make up the Security Council, we believe it is not
entirely negative.

First, it appears that the US engaged in good faith with the UN
process -- in other words, that US diplomats didn't rely on twisting
arms to get what they wanted, and that they made very significant
compromises out of respect for the institution.  Remember how back in
July the President was very clear that he did not intend to go through
the UN?  The fact that the United States has engaged in such a deep
way with the UN is a great step forward for those of us who care about
global institutions and law.

Second, the resolution doesn't provide a blank check for war -- in
fact, the understanding of most of the diplomats at the table is that
the US will have to return to the UN to get explicit authority for a
military strike, which will be difficult.  US Ambassador to the UN
John Negroponte said after the resolution passed that "there is no
automaticity" -- that breaking the terms of the agreement does not
automatically signal a war.  That's a huge step forward from the
resolution originally brought to the UN in October.

Finally, there's a real possibility that the in-depth inspections
which were launched on Monday may offer an alternative to war.  Given
the serious political risk involved in invading and taking over Iraq,
the Bush Administration may choose to respect the international
inspections process rather than drawing the anger of allies at home
and abroad and going it alone.

High-ranking members of the Bush Administration will continue to claim
that the resolution gives them the authority for war if Iraq shirks
its obligations.  But a basic reading of the text itself makes clear
that this is not the case.  Over the next month, we will need to make
sure that our elected representatives push President Bush to continue
to work within the United Nations and the realm of international law.

THE MONTHS AHEAD

Tomorrow's MoveOn Peace Bulletin will focus on the future.  You can
subscribe at:

http://peace.moveon.org/bulletin.php3

Over the next month, various constituencies will continue to make
their voices heard about the war on Iraq and the alternatives raised
above.  We will be there as events unfold, and we intend to continue
to offer you the most strategic actions we can find for calling an end
to this thoughtless and dangerous rush to war.

Stay tuned.

Sincerely,
--Eli Pariser
  International Campaigns Director, MoveOn.org
  November 26, 2002

__________

You can help decide the direction of MoveOn.org by
participating in the discussion forum at:
http://www.actionforum.com/forum/index.html?forum_id=223

This is a message from MoveOn.org.
To remove yourself from this list, please visit
our subscription management page at:
http://moveon.org/s?i=918-483317-lf1Etz8BVnXWI5C0nmKaCA