HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------
> from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: "Action Center" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [IAC] Ramsey Clark Letter to UN: Do Not Support Attack on Iraq > Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 19:10:42 -0400 > X-Original-Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > The following letter by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has > been sent to all members of the UN Security Council, with copies to > the UN General Assembly. Please circulate. > > September 20, 2002 > > Secretary General Kofi Annan United Nations New York, NY > > Dear Secretary General Annan, > > George Bush will invade Iraq unless restrained by the United Nations. > Other international organizations-- including the European Union, the > African Union, the OAS, the Arab League, stalwart nations courageous > enough to speak out against superpower aggression, international > peace movements, political leadership, and public opinion within the > United States--must do their part for peace. If the United Nations, > above all, fails to oppose a U.S. invasion of Iraq, it will forfeit > its honor, integrity and raison d?etre. > > A military attack on Iraq is obviously criminal; completely > inconsistent with urgent needs of the Peoples of the United Nations; > unjustifiable on any legal or moral ground; irrational in light of the > known facts; out of proportion to other existing threats of war and > violence; and a dangerous adventure risking continuing conflict > throughout the region and far beyond for years to come. The most > careful analysis must be made as to why the world is subjected to such > threats of violence by its only superpower, which could so safely and > importantly lead us on the road to peace, and how the UN can avoid the > human tragedy of yet another major assault on Iraq and the powerful > stimulus for retaliatory terrorism it would create. > > 1. President George Bush Came to Office Determined to Attack Iraq and > Change its Government. > > George Bush is moving apace to make his war unstoppable and soon. > Having stated last Friday that he did not believe Iraq would accept UN > inspectors, he responded to Iraq?s prompt, unconditional acceptance by > calling any reliance on it a ?false hope? and promising to attack Iraq > alone if the UN does not act. He is obsessed with the desire to wage > war against Iraq and install his surrogates to govern Iraq by force. > Days after the most bellicose address ever made before the United > Nations--an unprecedented assault on the Charter of the United > Nations, the rule of law and the quest for peace--the U.S. announced > it was changing its stated targets in Iraq over the past eleven years, > from retaliation for threats and attacks on U.S. aircraft which were > illegally invading Iraq?s airspace on a daily basis. How serious could > those threats and attacks have been if no U.S. aircraft was ever hit? > Yet hundreds of people were killed in Iraq by U.S. rockets and bombs, > and not just in the so called ?no fly zone,? but in Baghdad itself. > Now the U.S. proclaims its intentions to destroy major military > facilities in Iraq in preparation for its invasion, a clear promise of > aggression now. Every day there are threats and more propaganda is > unleashed to overcome resistance to George Bush?s rush to war. The > acceleration will continue until the tanks roll, unless nonviolent > persuasion prevails. > > 2. George Bush Is Leading the United States and Taking the UN and All > Nations Toward a Lawless World of Endless Wars. > > George Bush in his ?War on Terrorism? has asserted his right to attack > any country, organization, or people first, without warning in his > sole discretion. He and members of his administration have proclaimed > the old restraints that law sought to impose on aggression by > governments and repression of their people, no longer consistent with > national security. Terrorism is such a danger, they say, that > necessity compels the U.S. to strike first to destroy the potential > for terrorist acts from abroad and to make arbitrary arrests, > detentions, interrogations, controls and treatment of people abroad > and within the U.S. Law has become the enemy of public safety. > ?Necessity is the argument of tyrants.? ?Necessity never makes a good > bargain.? > > Heinrich Himmler, who instructed the Nazi Gestapo ?Shoot first, ask > questions later, and I will protect you,? is vindicated by George > Bush. Like the Germany described by Jorge Luis Borges in Deutsches > Requiem, George Bush has now ?proffered (the world) violence and faith > in the sword,? as Nazi Germany did. And as Borges wrote, it did not > matter to faith in the sword that Germany was defeated. ?What matters > is that violence ... now rules.? Two generations of Germans have > rejected that faith. Their perseverance in the pursuit of peace will > earn the respect of succeeding generations everywhere. > > The Peoples of the United Nations are threatened with the end of > international law and protection for human rights by George Bush?s war > on terrorism and determination to invade Iraq. > > Since George Bush proclaimed his ?war on terrorism,? other countries > have claimed the right to strike first. India and Pakistan brought the > earth and their own people closer to nuclear conflict than at any time > since October 1962 as a direct consequence of claims by the U.S. of > the unrestricted right to pursue and kill terrorists, or attack > nations protecting them, based on a unilateral decision without > consulting the United Nations, a trial, or revealing any clear factual > basis for claiming its targets are terrorists and confined to them. > > There is already a near epidemic of nations proclaiming the right to > attack other nations or intensify violations of human rights of their > own people on the basis of George Bush?s assertions of power in the > war against terrorism. Mary Robinson, in her quietly courageous > statements as her term as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights ended, > has spoken of the ?ripple effect? U.S. claims of right to strike > first and suspend fundamental human rights protection is having. > > On September 11, 2002, Colombia, whose new administration is strongly > supported by the U.S., ?claimed new authority to arrest suspects > without warrants and declare zones under military control,? including > ?[N]ew powers, which also make it easier to wiretap phones and limit > foreigners? access to conflict zones... allow security agents to > enter your house or office without a warrant at any time of day > because they think you?re suspicious.? These additional threats to > human rights follow Post-September 11 ?emergency? plans to set up a > network of a million informants in a nation of forty million. See, > New York Times, September 12, 2002, p. A7. > > 3. The United States, Not Iraq, Is the Greatest Single Threat to the > Independence and Purpose of the United Nations. > > President Bush?s claim that Iraq is a threat justifying war is > false. Eighty percent of Iraq?s military capacity was destroyed in > 1991 according to the Pentagon. Ninety percent of materials and > equipment required to manufacture weapons of mass destruction was > destroyed by UN inspectors during more than eight years of > inspections. Iraq was powerful, compared to most of its neighbors, in > 1990. Today it is weak. One infant out of four born live in Iraq > weighs less than 2 kilos, promising short lives, illness and impaired > development. In 1989, fewer than one in twenty infants born live > weighed less than two kilos. Any threat to peace Iraq might become is > remote, far less than that of many other nations and groups and cannot > justify a violent assault. An attack on Iraq will make attacks in > retaliation against the U.S. and governments which support its > actions far more probable for years to come. > > George Bush proclaims Iraq a threat to the authority of the United > Nations while U.S.-coerced UN sanctions continue to cause the death > rate of the Iraqi people to increase. Deaths caused by sanctions have > been at genocidal levels for twelve years. Iraq can only plead > helplessly for an end to this crime against its people. The UN role > in the sanctions against Iraq compromise and stain the UN?s integrity > and honor. This makes it all the more important for the UN now to > resist this war. > > Inspections were used as an excuse to continue sanctions for eight > years while thousands of Iraqi children and elderly died each month. > Iraq is the victim of criminal sanctions that should have been lifted > in 1991. For every person killed by terrorist acts in the U.S. on > 9/11, five hundred people have died in Iraq from sanctions. > > It is the U.S. that threatens not merely the authority of the United > Nations, but its independence, integrity and hope for effectiveness. > The U.S. pays UN dues if, when and in the amount it chooses. It > coerces votes of members. It coerces choices of personnel on the > Secretariat. It rejoined UNESCO to gain temporary favor after 18 years > of opposition to its very purposes. It places spies in UN inspection > teams. > > The U.S. has renounced treaties controlling nuclear weapons and their > proliferation, voted against the protocol enabling enforcement of the > Biological Weapons Convention, rejected the treaty banning land mines, > endeavored to prevent its creation and since to cripple the > International Criminal Court, and frustrated the Convention on the > Child and the prohibition against using children in war. The U.S. has > opposed virtually every other international effort to control and > limit war, protect the environment, reduce poverty and protect > health. > > George Bush cites two invasions of other countries by Iraq during the > last 22 years. He ignores the many scores of U.S. invasions and > assaults on other countries in Africa, Asia, and the Americas during > the last 220 years, and the permanent seizure of lands from Native > Americans and other nations--lands like Florida, Texas, Arizona, New > Mexico, California, and Puerto Rico, among others, seized by force > and threat. > > In the same last 22 years the U.S. has invaded, or assaulted Grenada, > Nicaragua, Libya, Panama, Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Yugoslavia, > Afghanistan and others directly, while supporting assaults and > invasions elsewhere in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Americas. > > It is healthy to remember that the U.S. invaded and occupied little > Grenada in 1983 after a year of threats, killing hundreds of civilians > and destroying its small mental hospital, where many patients died. In > a surprise attack on the sleeping and defenseless cities of Tripoli > and Benghazi in April 1986, the U.S. killed hundreds of civilians and > damaged four foreign embassies. It launched 21 Tomahawk cruise > missiles against the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum in > August 1998, destroying the source of half the medicines available to > the people of Sudan. For years it has armed forces in Uganda and > southern Sudan fighting the government of Sudan. The U.S. has bombed > Iraq on hundreds of occasions since the Gulf War, including this week, > killing hundreds of people without a casualty or damage to an > attacking plane. > > 4. Why Has George Bush Decided The U.S. Must Attack Iraq Now? > > There is no rational basis to believe Iraq is a threat to the United > States, or any other country. The reason to attack Iraq must be found > elsewhere. > > As governor of Texas, George Bush presided over scores of executions, > more than any governor in the United States since the death penalty > was reinstated in 1976 (after a hiatus from 1967). He revealed the > same zeal he has shown for ?regime change? for Iraq when he oversaw > the executions of minors, women, retarded persons and aliens whose > rights under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of > notification of their arrest to a foreign mission of their nationality > were violated. The Supreme Court of the U.S. held that executions of a > mentally retarded person constitute cruel and unusual punishment in > violation of the U.S. Constitution. George Bush addresses the United > Nations with these same values and willfulness. > > His motives may include to save a failing Presidency which has > converted a healthy economy and treasury surplus into multi-trillion > dollar losses; to fulfill the dream, which will become a nightmare, of > a new world order to serve special interests in the U.S.; to settle a > family grudge against Iraq; to weaken the Arab nation, one people at a > time; to strike a Muslim nation to weaken Islam; to protect Israel, > or make its position more dominant in the region; to secure control of > Iraq?s oil to enrich U.S. interests, further dominate oil in the > region and control oil prices. Aggression against Iraq for any of > these purposes is criminal and a violation of a great many > international conventions and laws including the General Assembly > Resolution on the Definition of Aggression of December 14, 1974. > > Prior regime changes by the U.S. brought to power among a long list of > tyrants, such leaders as the Shah of Iran, Mobutu in the Congo, > Pinochet in Chile, all replacing democratically elected heads of > government. 5. A Rational Policy Intended to Reduce the Threat of > Weapons of Mass Destruction in The Middle East Must Include Israel. > > A UN or U.S. policy of selecting enemies of the U.S. for attack is > criminal and can only heighten hatred, division, terrorism and lead to > war. The U.S. gives Israel far more aid per capita than > the total per capita income of sub Sahara Africans from all sources. > U.S.-coerced sanctions have reduced per capita income for the people > of Iraq by 75% since 1989. Per capita income in Israel over the past > decade has been approximately 12 times the per capita income of > Palestinians. > > Israel increased its decades-long attacks on the Palestinian people, > using George Bush?s proclamation of war on terrorism as an excuse, to > indiscriminately destroy cities and towns in the West Bank and Gaza > and seize more land in violation of international law and repeated > Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. > > Israel has a stockpile of hundreds of nuclear warheads derived from > the United States, sophisticated rockets capable of accurate delivery > at distances of several thousand kilometers, and contracts with the > U.S. for joint development of more sophisticated rocketry and other > arms with the U.S. > > Possession of weapons of mass destruction by a single nation in a > region with a history of hostility promotes a race for proliferation > and war. The UN must act to reduce and eliminate all weapons of mass > destruction, not submit to demands to punish areas of evil and enemies > of the superpower that possesses the majority of all such weapons and > capacity for their delivery. > > Israel has violated and ignored more UN Resolutions for forty years > than any other nation. It has done so with impunity. > > The violation of Security Council resolutions cannot be the basis for > a UN-approved assault on any nation, or people, in a time of peace, or > the absence of a threat of imminent attack, but comparable efforts to > enforce Security Council resolutions must be made against all nations > who violate them. > > 6. The Choice Is War Or Peace. > > The UN and the U.S. must seek peace, not war. An attack on Iraq may > open a Pandora?s box that will condemn the world to decades of > spreading violence. Peace is not only possible; it is essential, > considering the heights to which science and technology have raised > the human art of planetary and self-destruction. > > If George Bush is permitted to attack Iraq with or without the > approval of the UN, he will become Public Enemy Number One--and the UN > itself worse than useless, an accomplice in the wars it was created to > end. The Peoples of the World then will have to find some way to begin > again if they hope to end the scourge of war. > > This is a defining moment for the United Nations. Will it stand > strong, independent and true to its Charter, international law and the > reasons for its being, or will it submit to the coercion of a > superpower leading us toward a lawless world and condone war against > the cradle of civilization? > > Do not let this happen. > > Sincerely, > Ramsey Clark > > Share this page with a friend > > International Action Center 39 West 14th Street, Room 206 > New York, NY 10011 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > En Espanol: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > web: http://www.iacenter.org > CHECK OUT SITE http://www.mumia2000.org > phone: 212 633-6646 > fax: 212 633-2889 > To make a tax-deductible donation, > go to http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org > > ------------------ > Send replies to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > This is the IAC activist announcement list. Anyone can subscribe by > sending > any message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> " JC > > --------------------------- ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.bacIlu Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
