|
CounterPunch
November
26, 2002
This Mad, Limitless
War
by WAYNE SAUNDERS
It has become a fundamental act of self-control
to calmly deconstruct the policies of Bush & Co. without
losing contol of one's temper.
I refer to the limitless "War on
Terror" that has no borders, that has neither victory nor
defeat within its grasp, that has many points of entry, yet no
intended exit, and that continues to strip away at civil liberties
at every turn. The sheer psychic bombardment that can result
from turning on the news or from opening a newspaper can be overwhelming.
I find that sooner or later the 'fight or flight' response kicks
in, and as anyone knows, when we're angry or scared, we easily
lose our focus. Maybe that's the idea.
As a project, this war was likely hatched
within the minds of some very angry men. But their anger surely
pre-dates Sept. 11, 2001. In fact, plans to re-make the post-cold
war world by creating a global Pax Americana have firm roots
planted in the administration of Bush the Elder.
A couple of months ago, Scotland's Sunday
Herald discovered an updated version. "Rebuilding America's
Defences: Strategies, Forces and Resources For a New Century",
is a document published by the Project for the New American Century,
a neo-conservative think-tank. It lists a series of ambitious
and ominous schemes for US global domination, including targeting
Iran and China for regime change, establishing total control
of both outer space and cyberspace, and developing new and exotic
biological weaponry.
It also outlines a pre-mediated plan
to attack Iraq as a means to establish a more permanent role
in the Persian Gulf regardless of whether or not Saddam Hussein
survives. The authors of this document were none other than Dick
Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz, and yet
it was penned in September 2000, at least three months before
they ascended to power under dubious circumstances. A war cabinet
in waiting.
Al Queda and the terrorist attacks has
afforded these recycled Reaganites the means to engage their
hubris, and the evidence is borne out by the precipice on which
we are now perched. The launching of this grand undertaking has
in short order morphed into a neo-imperial war against much of
the world, an unprecedented armada of arrogance. With $46 billion
added to the military budget, since 9-11, one can imagine reluctant
Pentagon planners having hissy fits trying to keep track of where
everybody is and what the hell they're all doing out there with
all that hardware.
Remember War in Afghanistan? Far from
over, I keep reading, with frequent attacks against US bases.
The new War on Iraq is now delayed by a born-again UN arms inspections
regime that was bound for trouble before the team boarded their
plane. As if dealing with Saddam's minions is not enough, they
must also deal with a challenge from Washington aimed at undermining
the entire process, including the launching of a smear campaign
against chief inspector, the respected Dr. Hans Blix. It's worth
recalling that the UN route was only given new life back in August,
and only due to the private pleas to Bush by Colin Powell, a
wounded hawk who is the least hawkish of a very hawkish flock.
At any rate, the pieces of the global
game of risk continue to fall into place, as intended. Astute
observers speculate that if all goes well, war on Iraq may serve
as a coveted strategic beach head to move against Iran, and perhaps
the ungrateful House of Saud as well. Then there's Africa, where,
even as a new Somalian incursion is planned (redux version);
the first salvos have been fired on Yemen via sky drone.
Should we soon expect Volkswagen-size
shells to pound the shores of Lebanon once again, and cruise
missiles to reign down upon Syria's evil doers, in one glorious
imperial leap back towards the Stone Age? All of which is far
more likely than a US signature on the Kyoto Accord, the land
mines treaty, or the International Criminal Court. Indeed it's
easier to imagine US planes bombing Kashmir in search of al Queda
cells and the taped voice of Osama, than to envision the United
States blessing a renewal of talks banning biological and chemical
weapons.
Meanwhile, pushed to the back pages is
America's "drug war" in Colombia which continues unabated,
as does the Philippines "training" engagement in pursuit
of a band of a couple of hundred criminals.
The incessant beating of all these war
drums has predictably summoned the usual media hawks, firmly
ensconced throughout the free press. Tuning into a CNN White
House report, one easily gets the feeling that pronouncements
from the Oval Office are to be treated as sacrosanct edicts handed
on down from the benevolent and sincere sons of Enron and Exxon.
Given a history suffused with slime and skullduggery it is patently
absurd to always first give Bush & Co., the benefit of doubt.
So, outside the bounds of conventional
piety, there is growing dissent against Bush's response to 9-11.
It is deep enough, or at least heartfelt enough as to bring hundreds
of thousands of Americans into the streets in defiance. But this
time round, the anti-war faction extends straight across the
political landscape, covering everyone from former generals to
the anarcho kid with orange hair, while staking a fair degree
of popular turf in between. There is a popular undercurrent,
a gut level feeling amongst a sizeable portion of the population
that an unprovoked invasion of Iraq has to be one of the dumbest
ideas in a generation (or three). It will blow back at the United
States and the West in ways we can only imagine. Everyone knows
it. And yet they proceed.
As do the media hawks. Here, two points
of departure are worth highlighting. One is the uncanny willingness
to blame one man and his nasty regime for all of Iraq's woes
while accepting carte blanche the ever-shifting sands that serve
as arguments to justify the making of war on the long suffering
Iraqi people. This requires stuffing inconvenient historical
facts down the memory hole and allotting zero, in any, responsibility
for past, present and planned actions towards Iraq on the part
of the West, lead by the United States and Britain.
Here in Canada, readers of The Globe
and Mail are familiar with the simple-minded ramblings of Margaret
Wente. In her Oct. 8 column she questions the figure of a half
million dead Iraqi children from western imposed sanctions, by
claiming it comes straight from the Iraqi government and therefore
is pure propaganda. She asserts that "it's Mr. Hussein who
bears most of the responsibility for the malnutrition (and no
doubt deaths) of Iraqi children in the past decade." She
goes on to catalog Saddam's atrocities (while ignoring the crucial
US support during the worst of his crimes), along with his initial
rejection and further manipulation of the oil for food program,
and labels the peace movement a bunch of "useful idiots"
in service of the Butcher of Baghdad.
Fortunately, the UNICEF President in
Toronto felt obliged to type a corrective letter to The Globe
the following day. David Agnew explained that the figure of 500,000
dead Iraqi children came from an exhaustive UNICEF study that
had unfettered door to door access and the full cooperation of
the Iraqi government. UNICEF concluded both western imposed sanctions
and Iraqi government mismanagement caused the deaths. Yet Wente's
piece leaves the impression that we, the benevolent democracies
have only been trying to help the Iraqi people.
Hogwash. She didn't even consult one
of two former UN humanitarian coordinators, Denis Halliday, or
Hans Von Sponeck, both of whom resigned in protest against the
inhumanity of the sanctions in 1997 and 2000 respectively. Nor
did she cite Prof. Richard Garfield of Columbia University who
conducted a separate study of the same demographic age group
by relying on various independent statistical sources and surveys
along with comparative public health data from other countries.
He came up with an estimate of 400,000 probable deaths of under-five
children from August 1991 to June 2002.
Then there are those recent, partially
released Pentagon documents showing a deliberate policy during
the 1991 bombing campaign to target Iraq's infrastructure, including
its water supplies, and the predictable consequences of mass
disease and suffering.
Perhaps an essay by Joy Gordon entitled,"Cool
War: Economic Sanctions as a weapon of mass destruction,"
in the November Harper's may help clear the confused minds of
many a pro-war pundit. Gordon presents reams of evidence of a
clear and distinct pattern by the United States inside the Security
Council 661 Committee, of having "consistently thwarted
Iraq from satisfying its most basic humanitarian needs, using
sanctions as a deadly weapon." The administration of these
comprehensive sanctions is mostly under the radar of public scrutiny
and therefore required three years of research, requiring Gordon
to acquire confidential UN documents on the condition of source
anonymity. In the name of tenuous security concerns, billions
worth of water purification systems, sewage pipes, medicines,
hospital equipment, electricity and communications infrastructure,
oil field equipment, dialysis dental and fire-fighting equipment,
milk and yogurt equipment, flour, printing equipment for schools
has been blocked or held up. The list is legion. Moreover, she
clearly demonstrates that the US has deliberately impeded the
much-trumpeted oil for food program and therefore "has put
in place a device that will systematically cause enormous human
damage in Iraq."
True, evil Saddam has exploited these
sanctions of mass destruction in any way he can, assuring that
he and his loyal elite is well taken care. So perhaps even more
poignant is a study conducted by the Select Committee on International
Development of the British House of Commons (1/27/00), which
concluded, "a sanctions regime which relies on the good
faith of Saddam Hussein is fundamentally flawed." Yes, the
sanctions regime has allowed the tyrant to tighten his iron grip
on power, all predictable and knowable consequences of our own
actions.
The United States, Britain and the West
in general bare a heavy moral responsibility for this punitive
and collective punishment. Blocking weapons transfers and potential
components to Iraq is certainly in keeping with post Gulf War
UN resolutions. But given the imposed methods and conditions,
even if Mahatma Ghandi were their leader, there would still be
immense suffering and deprivation visited upon the Iraqi people.
The second point of departure is the
international peace movement that has quickly arisen in response
to the threat of war with Iraq. Here are some recent highlights:
in August 3,000 protesters were tear-gassed in Portland, Oregon
protesting a visit by Bush. Then 400,000 Londoners hit the streets
on Sept. 27 objecting to Tony Blair's status as America's poodle.
Millions have demonstrated in Italy. On Oct. 6, tens of thousands
marched against the war in Washington and all across the United
States. Students have walked out of classes in California, others
have occupied the offices of Congress, and scores have been arrested
for blocking federal buildings in San Francisco and the UN. Millions
of Americans have written to Congress. Still thousands more have
finally begun to hit the pavement in Canada to resist America's
request for troops.
The largest American demonstration since
the Vietnam era occurred on Oct. 26 with 100,000 marching in
Washington and 75,000 in San Francisco. As a little test, I thought
I'd monitor the coverage that Saturday on NBC. So I eagerly awaited
the end of the football game, anxious to watch my American friends
exercise their right to dissent. And I can happily report that
there was no detectable bias whatsoever on their evening news.
No downplaying of the numbers of protesters, and no dissing of
their attire or hair. Why? Because there was no mention of the
rallies, that's why. A march that lasted hours and circled the
White House was completely, utterly ignored! What on earth are
we up against? Even in totalitarian Saddam-land, the Iraq news
agency reports on "protesting families" outside prisons.
Oh my. I could go on, but I think I'm
losing my temper.
Wayne Saunders
(Canada) is a freelance writer. He can be reached at planetway@netscape.net.
Yesterday's Features
Norman Finkelstein
Counterfeit
Courage:
Reflections on Political Correctness in Germany
Jeffrey St. Clair
Adios
Jay Hair
A Corporate Flunky Passes On
Rep. Cynthia McKinney
Bush
and International Law
The Global Stick-Up
Dave Patton
Making Them Sweat
The Wal-Mart Action
Vincenzo Gonzalez
Life as a Political Prisoner in Colombia
Robert Jensen
Bush Puts a Contract Out on Federal Jobs
Ramzi Kysia
Malnutrition in Iraq
Bernard Weiner
Shining Our Light on the Shadow Forces
Anis Shivani
Joan of Arc Meets Che's Spirit
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- CounterPunch Special:
The Persecution of Gershon Legman by Susan Davis: Smut, the Post Office, Commies
and the FBI;
- Reeling Democrats: Is Pelosi the Answer?
- Gandhi v. Hitler: the Secret Race for the Nobel
Prize;
- Sullying Mario Savio's
Memory;
- Lynching Then and Now;
- Earn While You Learn: Chris Whittle and Child Labor;
The Case of the Pompous
Professor;
- The Class Struggle in
Boston: All that
Effort, But What Did They Get?
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, 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
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
November 23,
2002
Susan Davis
Now About
That Big Stick
Caoimhe Butterly
I Was
Shot While Escorting Jenin's School Children
Kurt Nimmo
Bush &
the Canadians
Chris Floyd
Rough Beast
Slouching
Francis Boyle
On Behalf
of Iraq's 4.5 Million Children
Dave Marsh
Spirit
in the Light
Behzad Yaghmaian
The Rebirth
of Student Protest in Iran
Mark Hand
Dr. Alterman,
I Presume
Ralph Nader
Back Alley
Loan Sharks
Elaine Cassel
The Shameful
Treatment of John Malvo
Adam Engel
& Ian Harvey
Poets'
Basement
Resources:
100s of Links
About 9/11
CounterPunch:
Complete
Coverage of 9/11 and Its Aftermath
Five
Days That
Shook The World:
Seattle and Beyond
By
Alexander Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Photos by Allan Sekula
(Click Here to Order from CounterPunch
Online at 20% Off Amazon.com's price!)
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|