Statements from the president seem to blur the lines between
fact and assumption, while at the same time vilifying the Iraqi
people. There are however, several distinct facts and a number
of assumptions ““ all of which clearly point to the lack of
any real justification for a war on Iraq.
It is a fact that Saddam Hussein, and thus his regime, is
tyrannical, and is generally disliked and even despised by most of
the world. He invaded Kuwait in early August, 1990, and was
reported to have used chemical weapons against Kurdish rebels 14
years ago.Â
But the assumption that Iraq, in it’s currently battered
state, possesses chemical weapons, or that it even has the
capability to produce a nuclear arsenal, is a complete conjecture.
We cannot know whether these assumptions are true until the weapons
inspectors in Iraq have completed their examination.
Even proving these scenarios would not establish Iraq as a clear
and present threat. The fact that Iraq has a tyrannical government
hardly constitutes ground for an attack ““ Saudi Arabia also
has one which is kept in power by the United States. The fact that
a Kurdish minority was massacred in Iraq also can’t be seen
as justification for a war ““ especially since we remained
silent when thousands of Iraqi and Turkish Kurds were
slaughtered.
Equally disturbing is the State Department’s use of Sept.
11, 2001 as a rallying cry for action against Iraq. Before that
tragic event, there was no fervent talk of attacking Iraq ““
why would Sept. 11 change the situation?
No concrete evidence has been exposed to directly link Iraq with
the attacks on the World Trade Center. Could it be that the Bush
administration has and continues to use the fear created by the
attacks to provide justification for a war that has no reasonable
rationalization?Â
It may be that Iraq possesses or at least has the capacity to
produce weapons of mass destruction. But possession of weapons
alone cannot be the sole reason for justifying war. Israel has
nuclear weapons. Pakistan and India both possess known arsenals of
nuclear weapons and have even come quite close to using them
““ their regimes are either highly unstable or could become
unstable.
Surely we would not attack those countries. And surely we
cannot exclude our country, the largest possessor of nuclear
weapons from the list, especially since our nation is the only one
which has used a nuclear bomb in war, annihilating thousands of
civilians.
This American double standard is apparent in the United Nations
as well. A preemptive attack on Iraq, especially when Iraq has
taken no aggressive action against any other nation, would
constitute a violation of the United Nations charter and the United
States would be in violation of several provisions, including
Article 2, Section 4, which states, “All members shall
refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of
force against the territorial integrity or political independence
of any state…”
It is convenient for us to use the United Nations to garner
international support for military action, and still ignore the
fact that the same military assault may violate the principles we
value and perpetuate.
Moreover, the talk of the impending war with Iraq has raised
concerns about American casualties. Why should we send our soldiers
to a foreign country to die for a cause we aren’t sure will
work? After all, we failed to instate democracy recently in
Afghanistan and previously, in Iran.
More importantly, however, is the concern for the people of
Iraq, who have asked for nothing but peace yet received only
hardship, death and misery from both their leader and from the
West. As Hussein forced his nation through two successive
conflicts, the world punished his innocents. Sanctions imposed on
the nation have destroyed Iraq’s ability to feed its people
and repair it’s infrastructure, and thus have denied the
people of Iraq any ability to uplift themselves and call for their
liberation. A war on this country will effectively stifle an
entire generation of Iraqis.
A war on Iraq has no legal grounds, is morally indefensible, and
will be politically disastrous. As the majority of students on
this campus stand with me, let us together, through dialogue and
discussion, search for a better resolution. The need for war is not
as pressing as the Bush administration would have us
believe. Let us use other options that are available to allow
us to reach compromise and understanding.