 |
An Alternative to War for Defeating Saddam Hussein
A Religious Initiative
In November 2002, the U.N. Security Council decided that Iraq
was in "material breach" of previous resolutions but gave
Iraq "a final chance to comply with its disarmament obligations."
Since then, the threat of military force has been decisive in getting
inspectors back into Iraq, putting pressure on Saddam finally to
comply, and in building an international consensus for the disarmament
of Iraq. The Security Council also "warned Iraq that it will
face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations
of its obligations" if it did not comply.
Yet those "serious consequences" need not be war against
the people of Iraq. The consequences should mean further and more
serious actions against Saddam Hussein and his regime, rather than
a devastating attack on the people of Iraq.
On February 18, 2003, a delegation of U.S. church leaders, accompanied
by colleagues from the United Kingdom and the worldwide Anglican
Communion, met with Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Secretary
of State for International Development, Clare Short, to discuss
alternatives to war. The following elements of a "third way"
— an alternative to war — were developed from those
discussions and subsequent conversations among the U.S. delegation.
- Remove Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party from power.
The Bush administration and the antiwar movement are agreed on
one thing — Saddam Hussein is a brutal and dangerous dictator.
Virtually nobody has sympathy for him, either in the West or in
the Arab world, but everyone has great sympathy for the Iraqi
people who have already suffered greatly from war, a decade of
sanctions, and the corrupt and violent regime of Saddam Hussein.
So let's separate Saddam from the Iraqi people. Target him, but
protect them.
As urged by Human Rights Watch and others, the U.N. Security Council
should establish an international tribunal to indict Saddam and
his top officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Indicting Saddam would send a clear signal to the world that he
has no future. It would set into motion both internal and external
forces that might remove him from power. It would make it clear
that no solution to this conflict will include Saddam or his supporters
staying in power. Morton Halperin pointed out, "As we have
seen in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, such tribunals can discredit and
even destroy criminal regimes." Focusing on Saddam and not
the Iraqi people would clearly demonstrate that the United States'
sole interest is in changing his regime and disarming his weapons
rather than in harming the Iraqi people. It would cause world
opinion to coalesce against Saddam's regime rather than against
a U.S.-led war, as is now happening.
- Enforce coercive disarmament.
- Military enforcement. Removing Saddam must be coupled with
greatly intensified inspections to fully enforce all U.N.
Security Council resolutions that relate to Iraq since the
1991 Gulf war. Inspections have shown progress — the
agreement by Iraq to destroy its Al Samoud-2 missiles is significant.
But rather than simply increasing the number of inspectors,
inspections must be conducted more aggressively and on a much
broader scale. The existing U.S. military deployment should
be restructured as a multinational force with a U.N. mandate
to support and enforce inspections. The force would accompany
inspectors to conduct extremely intrusive inspections, be
authorized to enter any site, retaliate against any interference,
and destroy any weapons of mass destruction that it found.
A more coercive inspections regimen should also include the
unrestricted use of spy planes and expanded no-fly and no-drive
zones.
- Strengthen the arms embargo. The current system for preventing
Iraq from acquiring prohibited weapons must be strengthened
by a more effective monitoring system and the installation
of advanced detection technology on Iraq's borders. At present
there is no international monitoring of commercial crossings
into Iraq from Jordan, Syria, Turkey, and other neighboring
states. The use of advanced monitoring and scanning technology
along with sanctions assistance missions on the borders would
significantly improve the capability to monitor borders and
prevent illegal arms shipments.
- Foster a democratic Iraq.
The United Nations should begin immediately to plan for a post-Saddam
Iraq, administered temporarily by the U.N. and backed by an international
armed force, rather than a U.S. military occupation. An American
viceroy in an occupied Iraq is the wrong solution. A true democratic
opposition must be identified and developed, rather than simply
identifying forces who would contribute to a U.S. invasion. An
internationally directed post-Saddam administration could assist
Iraqis in initiating a constitutional process leading to democratic
elections.
- Organize a massive humanitarian effort now for the people
of Iraq.
The 1991 Gulf war, the following decade of sanctions, and the
corrupt regime of Saddam Hussein have caused immense suffering
for the people of Iraq. In recent days, U.N. humanitarian agencies
have begun evacuating personnel in light of an impending war.
Rather than waiting until after a war, U.N. and nongovernmental
relief agencies should significantly expand efforts now to provide
food, medical supplies, and other humanitarian assistance to the
people of Iraq. Focusing on the suffering of the Iraqi people,
and immediately trying to relieve it, will further help to protect
them from being the unintended targets of war. It also helps to
further isolate Saddam Hussein from the Iraqi people by contrasting
the world's humanitarian concern with Saddam's indifference toward
his own people. Humanitarian aid deliveries must be protected,
if necessary, by a U.N. force under Security Council mandate.
- Recommit to a "Roadmap to Peace" in the Middle
East.
The road to peace in the Middle East leads not through Baghdad,
but through Jerusalem. The United States, United Kingdom, and
other European Union nations must address a root cause of Middle
East conflict by committing to a peace plan resulting in a two-state
solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine. It should
guarantee a Palestinian state by 2005 while guaranteeing the safety
and security of Israel. This would show the clear political and
moral link between the deeply rooted and unresolved Middle East
crisis and the larger war on terrorism, including the Iraq issue.
- Reinvigorate and sustain the "war against terrorism."
The international campaign against terrorism has succeeded in
identifying and apprehending suspects, freezing financial assets,
and isolating terror networks — most recently with the arrest
of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. But it is in danger of being disrupted,
both by acrimony and by lack of attention, as the world focuses
on the impending conflict with Iraq. Most significant, a war against
Iraq will fuel anti-American animosity in the Arab world, where
cooperation in the war on terror is most needed.
This six-point plan, An Alternative
to War for Defeating Saddam Hussein, is supported by the members
of the U.S. religious delegation that met with Prime Minister Blair
on February 18, 2003: Jim Wallis, Executive Director and Editor-in-Chief
of Sojourner; John Bryson Chane, Episcopal Bishop of Washington,
D.C.; Clifton Kirkpatrick, Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church
USA; Melvin Talbert, Ecumenical Officer of the United Methodist
Council of Bishops and Dan Weiss, Immediate Past General Secretary
of the American Baptist Churches in the USA.
For more information, visit www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=action.speak_out
|
