Towards a coalition to oppose US War on Iraq

Contrary to cultural misperception of the anti-war movement as either a mob of emotional knee-jerk radicals and sentimental pacifists, or a hodgepodge of costume wearing urban students and their anti-American professor-demagogues, the current growing movement against US the war on Iraq comprises a diverse array of coherent political, ethical, and ideological standpoints, as well as a multi-cultural, multi-generational, and regionally varied group of people, brought together in an expanding "popular front." This front rallies around a growing list of reasons why Bush's war against Iraq is a horrible idea for the majority of people both inside as well as outside of this country.

As the name of Tufts own local anti-war group, the Tufts Coalition to Oppose War on Iraq (TCOWI) _ of which I am a member _ suggests, there are many perspectives from which to oppose this war and the administration that is pushing for it. With this in mind, TCOWI is working to bring together people who for any number of reasons think or feel that US aggression against Iraq is _ at the very least _ a very bad idea, and to help these people become better educated about the coming war, what it means, how the rhetoric of the Bush administration holds up to rational and empirical scrutiny, and why this war is still being pursued even as the rational grounds for it fall apart. We also aim to organize anti-war sentiment to resist this war and to combat those who are pushing for it.

While our efforts to better understand the present situation will continue, as we host speakers, hold teach-ins, and community forums on and off campus, TCOWI has produced the following public statement, which includes some of the more common and shared objections to the present drive to war. We are asking that all Tufts Community members consider this document and that (should you also oppose this war) you sign it in a symbolic and principled statement of dissent against those making this war.

"Though opposition increases daily, both here and abroad, the US government continues to move towards war against Iraq. We, as members of the Tufts Community, as scholars, as teachers, as students, as workers, as citizens, and as human beings, oppose this very costly, extremely risky, and unjustified course of action.

The American people have been told repeatedly that Iraq has some connection to the Sept 11 attacks, that it's sheltering al Qaeda, and that it's threatening the US and its friends with 'weapons of mass destruction.' But in fact, no credible evidence has been presented that Iraq had anything to do with the Sept 11 attacks. Furthermore the CIA says that there have been no Iraqi attacks on US citizens anywhere in the world since 1993, and that any al Qaeda activity inside of Iraq is limited to the areas controlled by anti-government (anti-Hussein) rebels.

No credible evidence has been presented that Iraq, devastated by the 1991 Gulf War (which killed 100,000 Iraqis) and suffering under a decade of crippling sanctions (which according to UNICEF have killed a million more), constitutes a significant threat to the US. In fact, while Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia could all (theoretically) be hit by Iraqi Scud missiles (unlike the US), they do not feel threatened by Iraq, and oppose a US attack.

As the Bush administration pushes for war, we know that the human costs of war would be huge _ casualties in the tens of thousands are predicted routinely. In addition, with our healthcare systems, schools, retirement plans, and economy in trouble, the economic cost of this Iraq war threatens to drain billions of dollars our country desperately needs.

This unprovoked and unilateral war threatens the whole structure of international law that has evolved since the end of World War II. Such an attack will likely produce more outrage throughout the world, leading to greater instability and more hostility to the US.

There is virtually no international support among the world's people for a US attack on Iraq. Even if the war ends quickly, the US military will occupy Iraq for years, at tremendous cost, and further suffering to the people of the region. And the war may not end; it may spread. The war planners also envision 'regime change' in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Who's to say where Bush's 'mission of peace' will stop?

We, as members of the Tufts Community condemn the move to war against Iraq. We pledge to oppose this war and those who advance it. They do not act in our interests. They must not act in our name."

As our statement argues, the Bush administration's "justifications" for war just do not hold up. Why then _ and the question must emerge _ if Saddam is not a threat to the US, and if he is not "in" with the terrorists, (and also, as Rana Abdul-Aziz argues, if there is no reason to believe that the US will be inclined or even able to install a more humane or more democratically based regime in Iraq, post-Saddam), then why are our leaders pushing so hard for this costly, and risky war?!

About a week ago, buried in the back of page A27 of the Boston Globe, Nikolai P. Tokarev, the head of a Russian oil company that has been doing business in Iraq since 1967, had this to say about US motivations: "Everybody knows why the US is doing this. The only reason is the US desire to establish full control over the oil-gas complex of Iraq." (See LA Times, 11.8.2002, article, "Baghdad's huge oil reserves hand in balance of debate.") Says another oil executive from US regional rival Russia, "Hussein's replacement by somebody else, particularly someone who is appointed by the US government, will mean that Russia may be ousted from Iraq sooner or later," adding that "It becomes clear that resolving the Iraq problem is all about the rivalry around one of the richest oil countries in the world."

Such a "controversial" statement from a rival of Chevron-Texaco and Exxon -Mobil _ controversial enough to get buried on page 27! _ certainly does not end the war debate. But it is the hope of TCOWI, that such imperial-economic angles on the unspoken motivations for the US government's drive to war on Iraq will at least start the debate, where it hasn't started already.

The Tufts Coalition to Oppose War on Iraq aims to help organize and inform such debate and to help channel it in a politically meaningful direction. We encourage you to help us oppose this unjustified war. If principled people in the bastion of privilege, liberalism, and rational inquiry will not stand against the militarist madness of Bush and Company, how can we expect anyone else to?



Joe Ramsey is a graduate student in the English Department and a member of the Tufts Coalition to Oppose War on Iraq.