[Peace-discuss] Fw: Ramos-Horta: War for Peace?

Wed Feb 26 23:43:51 CST 2003

Thanks, Margaret for transmitting this disturbing  and preposterous  
article.

Ramos-Horta is, and has been, unstable. He also seems confused and  
ignorant. I've noticed it before. To have faith in the democratic and  
humanitarian impulses of George Bush et al. seems sufficient evidence  
of it. He seems to have forgotten that the USA supported Suharto,  
oppressors and colonizers of East Timor for many years. He seems  
oblivious of the slaughter that may ensue from war in Iraq; he seems  
happy to sacrifice those people for his faith in Bush.

His winning of the Nobel Peace Prize signifies nothing; Henry K. got it  
too.

He doesn't notice that E. Timor was occupied by the Indonesians; that  
is not the case in Iraq. But this is a detail.

Furthermore, is he advocating that the US attack Israel, or Turkey, or  
..., who have been equally oppressive? Is the U.S. the liberator of  
Columbia? Other examples could be cited.

I wonder who put him up to this; I have my suspicions.

Mort Brussel

On Wednesday, Feb 26, 2003, at 21:54 US/Central, Margaret E. Kosal  
wrote:

> From NY Times ... if i recall correctly, Ramos-Horta was in exhile for  
> the majority of the bombings ...
> hmmm ....
> thoughts?  comments? deconstructions?
>
> War for Peace? It Worked in My Country
> February 25, 2003
> By JOSÉ RAMOS-HORTA
>
> DILI, East Timor
> I often find myself counting how many of us are left in
> this world. One recent morning my two surviving brothers
> and I had coffee together. And I found myself counting
> again. We were seven brothers and five sisters, another
> large family in this tiny Catholic country.
> One brother died when he was a baby. Antonio, our oldest
> brother, died in 1992 of lack of medical care. Three other
> siblings were murdered in our country's long conflict with
> Indonesia. One, a younger sister, Maria Ortencia, died on
> Dec. 19, 1978, killed by a rocket fired from a OV-10 Bronco
> aircraft, which the United States had sold to Indonesia.
> She was buried on a majestic mountaintop and her grave was
> tended by the humble people of the area for 20 years.
> Early in September of last year, I went through the
> heart-wrenching process of unearthing the improvised grave
> of our sister, whom I last saw when she was 18. As her body
> was exhumed, I noticed that the back of her head and one
> side of her face had been blown off. She must have died
> instantly. We reburied our sister in the cemetery in the
> capital, Dili. Two other siblings who were killed, our
> brothers Nuno and Guilherme, were executed by Indonesian
> soldiers in 1977. With little information on the area where
> they were killed and disposed of, we have no hope of
> recovering their bodies for a dignified burial.
> There is hardly a family in my country that has not lost a
> loved one. Many families were entirely wiped out during the
> decades of occupation by Indonesia and the war of
> resistance against it. The United States and other Western
> nations contributed to this tragedy. Some bear a direct
> responsibility because they helped Indonesia by providing
> military aid. Others were accomplices through indifference
> and silence. But all redeemed themselves. In 1999, a global
> peacekeeping force helped East Timor secure its
> independence and protect its people. It is now a free
> nation.
> But I still acutely remember the suffering and misery
> brought about by war. It would certainly be a better world
> if war were not necessary. Yet I also remember the
> desperation and anger I felt when the rest of the world
> chose to ignore the tragedy that was drowning my people. We
> begged a foreign power to free us from oppression, by force
> if necessary.
> So I follow with some consternation the debate on Iraq in
> the United Nations Security Council and in NATO. I am
> unimpressed by the grandstanding of certain European
> leaders. Their actions undermine the only truly effective
> means of pressure on the Iraqi dictator: the threat of the
> use of force.
> Critics of the United States give no credit to the Bush
> administration's aggressive strategy, even though it is the
> real reason that Iraq has allowed weapons inspectors to
> return and why Baghdad is cooperating a bit more, if it
> indeed is at all.
> The antiwar demonstrations are truly noble. I know that
> differences of opinion and public debate over issues like
> war and peace are vital. We enjoy the right to demonstrate
> and express opinions today because East Timor is an
> independent democracy - something we didn't have during a
> 25-year reign of terror. Fortunately for all of us, the age
> of globalization has meant that citizens have a greater say
> in almost every major issue.
> But if the antiwar movement dissuades the United States and
> its allies from going to war with Iraq, it will have
> contributed to the peace of the dead. Saddam Hussein will
> emerge victorious and ever more defiant. What has been
> accomplished so far will unravel. Containment is doomed to
> fail. We cannot forget that despots protected by their own
> elaborate security apparatus are still able to make
> decisions.
> Saddam Hussein has dragged his people into at least two
> wars. He has used chemical weapons on them. He has killed
> hundreds of thousands of people and tortured and oppressed
> countless others. So why, in all of these demonstrations,
> did I not see one single banner or hear one speech calling
> for the end of human rights abuses in Iraq, the removal of
> the dictator and freedom for the Iraqis and the Kurdish
> people? If we are going to demonstrate and exert pressure,
> shouldn't it be focused on the real villain, with the goal
> of getting him to surrender his weapons of mass destruction
> and resign from power? To neglect this reality, in favor of
> simplistic and irrational anti-Americanism, is obfuscating
> the true debate on war and peace.
> I agree that the Bush administration must give more time to
> the weapons inspectors to fulfill their mandate. The United
> States is an unchallenged world power and will survive its
> enemies. It can afford to be a little more patient. Kofi
> Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations, has
> proved himself to be a strong mediator and no friend of
> dictators. He and a group of world leaders should use this
> time to persuade Saddam Hussein to resign and go into
> exile. In turn, Saddam Hussein could be credited with
> preventing another war and sparing his people. But even
> this approach will not work without the continued threat of
> force.
> Abandoning such a threat would be perilous. Yes, the
> antiwar movement would be able to claim its own victory in
> preventing a war. But it would have to accept that it also
> helped keep a ruthless dictator in power and explain itself
> to the tens of thousands of his victims.
> History has shown that the use of force is often the
> necessary price of liberation. A respected Kosovar
> intellectual once told me how he felt when the world
> finally interceded in his country: "I am a pacifist. But I
> was happy, I felt liberated, when I saw NATO bombs
> falling."
> José Ramos-Horta, East Timor's minister of foreign affairs
> and cooperation, shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 1996.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/25/opinion/ 
> 25HORT.html?ex=1047317386&ei=1&en=472b688b6ce61488
>
> Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
Morton K. Brussel
2003 George Huff Drive
Urbana, Illinois, 61801-6203
Tel. 217 337-0118

Preferred email: brussel at uiuc.edu