Scofflaw Diplomacy

Scofflaw Diplomacy Matthew Evangelista The last decade has not been an easy one for the peace movement in the United States. The end of the Cold War saw many of its key goals achieved—reductions in nuclear weapons; withdrawal of Soviet and American troops from central Europe and substantial cuts in conventional weaponry; the end of the Soviet war in Afghanistan and US military intervention in Nicaragua; the demise of com munist rule and the promise of democracy in Eastern Europe and Russia. Yet subsequent challenges divided the movement—if we can still speak of it in those terms—with erstwhile allies taking opposing positions on US policy. Some former opponents of US intervention in Central America, for example, endorsed send ing the marines to reinstate the ousted presi dent of Haiti, Jean Bertrand Aristide, whereas others suspected US motives and balked at the use of military power even to right such an obvious injustice. Some critics of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization who had protest ed against the alliance’s deployments of US Jack Sherman nuclear missiles in Europe in the 1980s came, a decade later, to support the expansion of munities of Iraq, destroying thousands of vil Kuwait in 1990. The USSR backed UN mous cost—especially in the long term—to NATO right up to- Russia’s borders in the lages and displacing or killing tens of thou Security Council resolutions intended to the civilian population. In combination with interest of stability and democracy. Others sands of people—many of them attacked induce Iraq’s withdrawal. Gorbachev, whose the punishing sanctions regime, the toll on continued to see NATO as part of the problem with chemical weapons, which the Iraqi rhetoric and ideas often drew upon those of innocent civilians over the decade since the rather than the solution and wished it would forces also used against the Iranian army. A the peace movement, advocated a nonviolent Gulf War has been devastating. go the way of the Warsaw Pact and cease to UN-brokered ceasefire ended the war with approach, at least to start. Thus, the Soviet Perhaps most disturbing to the peace move exist. Many peace activists who in the past Iran, but Hussein hardly paused to catch his Union, a major supplier of weapons to Iraq, ment was not only that the economic sanc had steadfastly opposed bloated US military breath. In August 1990, he ordered an inva endorsed the US proposal for a UN-spon tions—intended as a nonviolent alternative to budgets found themselves calling for the sion of neighboring Kuwait, ostensibly in sored arms embargo. Then it supported an war—failed to secure Iraq’s withdrawal from United States t& use its air forces to bomb response to a dispute over oil production. overall trade embargo with a naval blockade Kuwait. Pursued tenaciously by the United Serbian targets in Bosnia and Kosovo, and to Once Iraqi forces had overwhelmed Kuwait’s of Iraq’s oil tankers. When Iraq still refused States, long after Iraq’s defeat, and exploited send ground troops to halt the genocidal limited defenses, Hussein declared the coun to withdraw its forces from Kuwait, the for propaganda purposes by Hussein, the sanc actions of Slobodan Milosevic. Others found try’s annexation while his troops carried out a Security Council issued Resolution 678 tions wrought terrible damage on the weakest, the bombing-for-peace approach unaccept brutal occupation in which Kuwaiti citizens authorizing the use of “all necessary means” most innocent members of Iraqi society. able, especially when carried out by the and foreign guestworkers (Palestinians, to reverse the Iraqi invasion, a transparent Does the peace movement then deserve NATO alliance in the face of opposition from Indians, and others) suffered qjike. euphemism for military force. Iraq was blame for the dangerous mess that Iraq has key members of the United Nations Security The peacemakers’ toolkit—negotiations, given until January 15, 1991 to comply. The become? Hardly. If Saddam Hussein is a Council. arms control treaties, conflict resolution—did Soviet Union joined the three other perma monster, as hardly anyone would doubt, the No issue has been more troubling for sup not seem very effective in dealing with nent members of the Council who voted in United States is in many respects his Dr. porters of peace than Iraq. As a new genera Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Those techniques favor of the resolution—the United States, Frankenstein. Viewing Iraq as a secular bul tion of activists emerges to protest the Bush were developed in the context of a superpow Britain, and France—while China abstained. wark against Iran’s Islamic revolution, the US administration’s rush to war, it would do well er nuclear rivalry, which, as British historian The USSR, through its special envoy Evgenii government encouraged its aggressive actions to reflect upon the problems that the Iraq situ and disarmament activist E.P. Thompson Primakov, a Middle East specialist who had against the Ayatollahs’ regime. For years US ation has posed for the peace movement over famously put it, was mainly about itself. known Saddam Hussein for years, tried to and other Western companies knowingly sold the years. The traditional approaches pursued Neither the United States nor the Soviet persuade Iraq to face realty and withdraw. Iraq the components that enabled Hussein's by peace activists have not proved very suc Union intended to attack each other (although But Hussein would not even do his “friend” scientists to pursue development of chemical, cessful: nonviolent resolution of disputes, they invaded countries in their “spheres of the courtesy of allowing Soviet civilian and biological, and nuclear weapons. During the sensitivity to the “security dilemma” (the influence” many times). The arms race military advisers to leave the country; he pre war against Iran, the United States provided notion that even countries that procure served the domestic interests of the ruling ferred to keep them as hostages, in a futile satellite imagery to assist the Iraqi air force in weapons solely for defensive purposes can elites on each side, but was in turn vulnerable attempt to undermine the uneasy Soviet sup locating Iranian targets for chemical-weapons appear threatening to others), and reliance on to unilateral initiatives of restraint promoted port for military action. attacks. In planning his assault on Kuwait, economic sanctions and UN resolutions as from the grassroots. It ended when the Soviet Operation Desert Storm—the war against Saddam Hussein is widely believed to have alternatives to military action. Saddam leadership under Mikhail Gorbachev heeded Iraq— began on January 16, 1991, the day received a green light from the United States Hussein’s rule of the country has led Iraq into the advice of transnational activists and pur after the expiration of the Security Council in his infamous meeting with Ambassador two disastrous wars. Barely a year after com sued a conciliatory foreign policy under the resolution. Thirty-three countries participat April Glaspie. The United States evidently ing to power in 1979 he provoked a war with banner of “new thinking.” All that was need ed in the war, but the United States clearly failed to anticipate the voraciousness of Iran over a boundary dispute, anticipating an ed was for the United States to acknowledge dominated the military campaign. The strate Hussein’s appetite for aggression, as he swal easy victory against a country in the throes of the change, and Ronald Reagan, to his credit, gy was heavily dependent on massive bomb lowed Kuwait and claimed it as Iraq’s nine Islamic revolution. The war dragged on for did so, even if his successor, George H.W. ing, with much damage inflicted on basic teenth province. eight years, with no clear victor, but with a Bush, feared that he was being too hasty. infrastructure—electricity grids, sewage and In opposing the Iraqi invasion, George toll of well over a million victims. In the What finally persuaded the first President water systems, communications facilities. Bush groped for justifications that would lead midst of the war, Hussein’s army pursued a Bush that Gorbachev’s changes were real Destruction of such targets undoubtedly hin separate campaign against the Kurdish com was the Soviet reaction to Iraq's invasion of dered the Iraqi military forces, but at enor continued on page 8 page 2 The BOOKPRESS November 2002 Everyone is Innocent slandering them. Among other things, Sure, both sides had innocent motivations a no brainer. The one people get stuck on is Jeremy Weir Alderson Palestinians can blame Israelis for usurping when this whole conflict started and the one about just exactly whose wrongs are land, conducting a brutal occupation, wag sure, as Anne Frank said, “people are truly we supposed to overlook? Again, choosing ing a war against them, rejecting peace ini good at heart,” but come on. To say between the options is just a practical mat Dan Cook, writing in response to my com tiatives and slandering them. Of course, to a that both sides are innocent is to gloss over ter. By all reports, God likes it when we ments about the Israel/Palestine conflict house built on such a firm foundation, one the grotesque crimes both sides have remember our own wrongs, and likes it even (Bookpress, October 2002), crosses the line can add storey after storey (or story after committed. Whatever happened to, “No more when we forget someone else’s. It’s and makes numerous misstatements o f fact. story), and, as if that weren’t enough, both justice, no peace?” called forgiveness. And, in the end, it’s not Most egregiously, he accuses me o f calling sides can vent their fury at the press for not The answer is that the truest of all the that there can be no peace without justice.

Load more