home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links / feedback

 

New Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively to Subscribers: Labor's Historic No to Bush's War: Joann Wypijewski reports; Who is Barry Rubin? Inside the Israeli Pro-War Lobby; What's Next for the Peace Movement? Elected Greens in Oregon Push for Impeachment; Dirty Bombs: the Legacy of Depleted Uranium. Remember, the CounterPunch website is supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide web audience is soaring, with more than 60,000 visitors a day. This is inspiring news, but the work involved also compels us to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now!

Or Call Toll Free 1-800-840 3683 or write CounterPunch, PO BOX 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Recent Stories

April 9, 2003

Doug Lummis
Saving Private Lynch: Hollywood and War

Susan Davis
The New York Times and the Peace Movement

David Vest
Smoking Gun? You're Watching It

John Chuckman
America's Sovereign Right to Do as It Damn Well Pleases

Akiva Eldar
Gary Bauer and AIPAC: an Unholy Alliance with the Christian Right

Ray Hanania
Suicide Bombers without the Suicide: Racism, Hypocrisy and the War on Iraq

David Lindorff
Secret Bechtel Docs Reveal: Yes, the War Is About Oil

Steve Perry
War Web Log 4/9

 

April 8, 2003

David Lindorff
Killing the Messengers: It Doesn't Matter If It's Deliberate or Accidental

Richard Lichtman
Dr. Phil in the Trenches

John Brown
Why Uncle Ben Hasn't Sold Uncle Sam: a Former Foreign Service Staffer on Bush's Policy Failures

Ben Terrall
Report from the Oakland Docks: "The Cops Had No Reason to Open Up on Them"

Jason Leopold
FERC and Wall Street: Conversations May Have Violated Federal Law

Anthony Gancarski
Conyers Heeds the Call on Perle

Linda Heard
Journalists Die, the Networks Lie, Iraqis Ask "Why?"

Ahmad Faruqui
Wallowing in Hypocrisy

Wallace Gagne
Baghdad Babble

Harry Browne
Report from the Protests at the Bush/Blair Summit

Larry Kearney
I Understand There's a Boy in a Baghdad Hospital

Steve Perry
War Web Log 4/8

M. Shahid Alam
The Israelization of America

 

April 7, 2003

Todd Chretien
Wooden Bullets & Grenades: Oakland Cops Attack Peace Protesters and Dock Workers

David N. Gibbs
Spying, Secrecy and the University: The CIA is Back on Campus

Harry Browne
War and Peace Summit a Royal Farce

Gideon Levy
America is Not a Role Model

Diane Christian
A Scene from an Obscene War

Jules Rabin
Remembering Deir Yassin

James Davis
Oddsmaking in Dublin: Will Bush Shake Gerry's Hand?

Robert Fisk
The Twisted Language of War

Patrick Cockburn
Slaughter on the Road to Dibagah

John Mackay
War and Art

Seth Sandronsky
Wars and the Color Line

Steve Perry
War Web Log 4/7

 

April 5, 2003

Alexander Cockburn
The Iraqi Humanitarian Relief is in Shambles

Anne Gwynne
A Drowning in Salem

Uri Avnery
Roadmap to Nowhere

Chris Floyd
Hell for Leather: Bombs, Bullets, Bibles and Bush

William Cook
Would You Have Sent Your Son (or Daughter) Off to War If...

Gila Svirsky
A Busy Day for Bulldozers

Mike Ferner
Back from Baghdad: What Next for the Peace Movement?

Joanne Mariner
Civilian Deaths and Official Apologies

John Stanton
Bush Takes His Killing Orders from the Lord

Romi Mahajan
Learning to Count the Dead

Aluf Benn
After Iraq, US Vows to Deal with Other Mideast Regimes

Mary Ellen Peterson
Gay Marine Refuses to Fight

William MacDougall
Country Music and the Crimes of Patriotism

Ron Jacobs
War and Occupation

Bernie Pattison
Aborigines and the Different God

Mark Engler
Iraq War as Arms Expo

Adam Engel
Li'l Box of Love: a Novelini

Poets' Basement
Tripp, Albert, Katz

Jeffrey St. Clair
Flesh and Its Discontents: the Paintings of Lucian Freud

Norman Madarasz
Canada and the War

 

April 4, 2003

Anthony Gancarski
Colin Powell's Shame

John Chuckman
Was Einstein Right About Israel?

David Krieger
The Meaning of Victory

Tom Gorman
The Mantra of the Troops: Support or Treason?

Adam Federman
The Absence of War

Vijay Prashad
There Are No More Arguments

Tom Stephens
The End of the Innocence

Mickey Z.
Makes Me Sic (Sic): Copy Editing Bush Speak

Pierre Tristam
War Coverage: a Dishonest Reality Show

Hammond Guthrie
The Deadly Mihrab

Steve Perry
War Web Log 04/04

 

April 3, 2003

Uri Avnery
A Crooked Mirror: Presstitution and the Theater of Operations

David Vest
Can You Hear the Silence?

Anthony Gancarski
Colin Powell Telemarketer

David Lindorff
Takoma: the Dolphin Who Refused to Fight

Michael Roberts
War, Debts and Deficits

Ramzy Baroud
Now That Iraqis Are Being Killed Is Israel Any More Secure?

Jo Wilding
From Baghdad with Tears

Anton Antonowicz
Cluster Bombs on Babylon

Alison Weir
Israel, We Won't Forget Rachel Corrie

Bruce Jackson
Hating Wolf Blitzer's Voice

Eliot Katz
War's First Week

Steve Perry
War Web Log 04/03

 

Hot Stories

Paul de Rooij
Arrogant Propaganda

Gore Vidal
The Erosion of the American Dream

Francis Boyle
Impeach Bush: A Draft Resolution

Click Here for More Stories.


Burn Your Sweatshop Clothes!
Buy Union Made Apparel!

Subscribe Online


Search CounterPunch

 

April 10, 2003

What Can the World Do?

Uniting for Peace

By JEREMY BRECHER

Despite the presence of U.S. troops in the center of Baghdad, does the world remain powerless to stop the ongoing invasion? The answer is no. Under a procedure called "Uniting for Peace," the UN General Assembly can demand an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal. The global peace movement should consider demanding such an action, and support efforts already underway in the UN to enact such a resolution.

When Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal in 1956, Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt and began advancing on the Suez Canal. President Dwight D. Eisenhower demanded that the invasion stop. Resolutions in the UN Security Council called for a ceasefire--but Britain and France vetoed them. Then the United States appealed to the General Assembly and proposed a resolution calling for a ceasefire and a withdrawal of forces. The General Assembly held an emergency session and passed the resolution. Britain and France withdrew from Egypt within a week.

The appeal to the General Assembly was made under a procedure called "Uniting for Peace" (UfP). This procedure was adopted by the Security Council so that the UN can act even if the Security Council is stalemated by vetoes. Resolution 377 provides that, if there is a "threat to peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression" and the permanent members of the Security Council do not agree on action, the General Assembly can meet immediately and recommend collective measures to UN members to "maintain or restore international peace and security." The "Uniting for Peace" mechanism has been used ten times, most frequently on the initiative of the United States to overcome vetoes or the threat of a veto by the Soviet Union during the cold war.

The Security Council is effectively stalemated between the U.S. and the UK on one side and global public opinion and most governments in the world, including France and Russia, on the other. The U.S. would undoubtedly use its veto should the Security Council attempt to condemn and halt its aggression. But the U.S. has no veto in the General Assembly.

Lawyers at the Center for Constitutional Rights drafted a proposed UfP resolution that governments can submit to the General Assembly. Such a resolution would declare that military action without a Security Council resolution authorizing such action and in the absence of an act or threat of aggression is contrary to the UN Charter and international law.

A General Assembly resolution will not in itself stop the war. General Assembly actions may not be legally binding. Besides, the Bush administration has already shown it is willing to defy the UN and international law. Nonetheless, such a resolution would be a major blow to the Bush administration--as its campaign to prevent a General Assembly session indicates. What, then, is the purpose of such a resolution?

First, a UfP resolution will intensify the fear of global isolation among the U.S. public and elite. Such fears will play a significant role in turning them not only against the Iraq war but more generally against the Bush administration policy of pre-emptive war and global domination.

Second, a UfP resolution will provide a heightened legitimacy to all the actions of the global peace movement. All its actions in every country will become not merely the expression of an opinion but efforts to implement the decision of the world's highest authority.

Third, a UfP resolution will lay the basis for future UN action; both regarding Iraq and more broadly, that can circumvent the U.S. veto. It can thus provide the starting point for reconstituting the UN as the voice of the world.

Finally, a worldwide campaign for UfP provides the global peace movement--the world's "other superpower"--two valuable opportunities:

* It provides a great focus for struggle in the streets and in the political arena.

* It will allow the movement to show its global clout.

Supporters of the UfP resolution include a range of civil society organizations in addition to the Center for Constitutional Rights and Greenpeace such as Britain's Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, religious groups, and international women's organizations, including MADRE, Women of Color Resource Center, Center for Women's Global Leadership, and the International Women's Human Rights Law Clinic.

The UfP also offers a vehicle into the formal political process, where parliaments can demand that their governments support UfP. The Russian Duma, for example, recently passed a resolution calling for General Assembly intervention in Iraq; so did the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs of Thailand. Political parties provide another arena: the Czech Republic's governing Social Democratic party, whose government has waffled on the war, just voted nearly unanimously to condemn it. (The motion was sponsored by Czech UN Ambassador Jan Kavan, who happens also to be current President of the UN General Assembly.)

The peace movement should take the UfP resolution at least as seriously as the Bush administration does. Wide public advocacy will help governments overcome their probable reluctance to take such a step. While the fate of a resolution is uncertain, even the threat of such global condemnation may help push the Bush administration to pay greater attention to civilian casualties, accelerate the delivery of humanitarian relief, or respond more favorably to calls for a more central role for the UN in post-war Iraq.

Jeremy Brecher is a historian and the author of twelve books including STRIKE! and GLOBALIZATION FROM BELOW. He can be reached at: jbrecher@igc.org.

Information on Uniting for Peace based on "A U.N. Alternative to War: 'Uniting for Peace" by Michael Ratner, Center for Constitutional Rights and Jules Lobel, University of Pittsburgh Law School.

Today's Features

Doug Lummis
Saving Private Lynch: Hollywood and War

Susan Davis
The New York Times and the Peace Movement

David Vest
Smoking Gun? You're Watching It

John Chuckman
America's Sovereign Right to Do as It Damn Well Pleases

Akiva Eldar
Gary Bauer and AIPAC: an Unholy Alliance with the Christian Right

Ray Hanania
Suicide Bombers without the Suicide: Racism, Hypocrisy and the War on Iraq

David Lindorff
Secret Bechtel Docs Reveal: Yes, the War Is About Oil

Steve Perry
War Web Log 4/9

 

Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!

home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links /