[Peace-discuss] Politics against the war

[C. G. Estabrook]

[It's remarkably difficult to use the majority opposition to this
disgusting war to stop the administration. In our "democracy," policy is
largely insulated from politics. Even the massive opposition to the
Vietnam war didn't displace many members of congress -- they eventually
changed their votes, under pressure.  We need to increase the pressure
against the supporters of this war.  The following, about House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi, is from the San Francisco Guardian.  --CGE]

	Opinion
	by Stephan Zunes
	To challenge Pelosi

ON JAN. 12, Bay Area congressional representatives Lynn Woolsey, Barbara
Lee, Pete Stark, and Sam Farr joined Democratic colleagues from across the
country in signing a letter to President George W. Bush calling for the
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco)
was notably absent from the list of signatories.

Despite the growing death toll of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians and
November's citywide referendum -- in which a resounding 63 percent of San
Francisco voters approved a measure calling for the withdrawal of U.S.
forces from Iraq -- Pelosi refuses to reconsider her strident support for
the war and occupation.

Unlike Rep. Tom Lantos and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Pelosi didn't vote in
October 2002 to authorize Bush to invade Iraq. Since then, however,
despite raising some concerns regarding the way the Bush administration
has handled certain aspects of the occupation, she has been a steadfast
defender of the U.S. takeover of that oil-rich country and the Bush
administration's rationalizations for the war.

For example, in December 2002, as independent strategic analysts were
arguing that the evidence strongly suggested that Iraq had rid itself of
its chemical and biological weapons some years earlier, Pelosi
categorically declared on NBC's Meet the Press that "Saddam Hussein
certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There's no question about
that."

In response to those who argued that Iraq wasn't a threat to the United
States and that United Nations inspectors should have been allowed to
complete their mission to confirm that Iraq had indeed disarmed as
required, Pelosi went on record in March 2003 as saying that "reliance by
the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone"
couldn't "adequately protect the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq."

This made it extremely difficult for Democrats in this past fall's
election campaign to accuse the Bush administration of exaggerating the
danger posed by Iraq when their own leader in the House of Representatives
was doing the same thing.

As a counter to those who argued that the war has been a diversion of
critical personnel, money, and intelligence from the battle against
al-Qaeda terrorists, Pelosi also went on record declaring that the U.S.
invasion of Iraq was "part of the ongoing global war on terrorism." As
recently as this past September, despite a Central Intelligence Agency
report to the contrary, Pelosi also went on record claiming that Hussein
allowed terrorists linked to al-Qaeda to use Baghdad "as a base of
operations to coordinate the movement of people, money, and supplies."

Such assertions proved costly to the Democrats in the election: exit polls
showed that 80 percent of those who believed the war in Iraq was part of
the war on terrorism voted for Bush.

As long as hawks like Pelosi remain in the Democratic Party's leadership,
it will be extremely difficult for Democrats to regain their congressional
majority, much less stop the war.

Yet San Francisco voters have the power to change this. One need only
think back to 1970, when 9th District congressmember Jeffrey Cohelan -- a
liberal incumbent who nevertheless supported the Vietnam War -- was
defeated in the Democratic primary by antiwar challenger Ron Dellums. This
rare loss by an incumbent in his own party's primary sent shock waves
nationally, leading scores of previously hesitant congressional Democrats
to finally go on record against the war.

A primary defeat of their House leader would be even more significant,
perhaps finally forcing Democrats nationally to show some backbone.
Perhaps it's time, then, for those of us in the 8th District to seriously
consider organizing a serious effort to unseat Pelosi in 2006.

Stephen Zunes is a professor of politics at the University of San
Francisco and the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the
Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003).

<http://www.sfbg.com/39/17/x_oped.html>

	###