------------------------- Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the March 13, 2003 issue of Workers World newspaper -------------------------
"MULTILATERALISM" BUSH STYLE: U.S. DEMANDS UN ENDORSE BUSH WAR DOCTRINE By Fred Goldstein A combination of world-wide anti-war protests, a deepening split in the Security Council, and a series of major concessions by the Iraqi government have forced the Bush administration into a narrow political corner as it positions its military forces for an unprovoked war of conquest. Bush's reaction to being cornered was to assert openly that the reason Washington was going to war was to overthrow the government of Saddam Hussein. Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesperson, said at a Feb. 28 press briefing that "to escape military action, Iraq must disarm and Mr. Hussein must be deposed." Asked again later in the briefing, Fleischer repeated, "It's disarmament and regime change." As the figleaf of inspections and disarmament falls away, Bush and the right-wing hawks who dominate his administration have openly proclaimed their right to overthrow an independent regime by massive military force in defiance of the fundamental right of national sovereignty and self- determination. By implication, Washington's demand that the Security Council support this outright war of aggression against a small country with a diminished military is basically requiring that it ratify the doctrine of preemptive war. This was put forward in the Pentagon's National Security Strategy document and has become known as the Bush Doctrine. Bush wants U.S. imperialism's right of "regime change" to be the accepted international norm in Washington's new world order, and he wants it sanctified by a UN resolution. ARM-TWISTING AND DIRTY TRICKS While Bush has threatened to go to war without Security Council sanction, and has declared a new resolution unnecessary, the administration is desperately twisting arms and resorting to dirty tricks to keep from being publicly repudiated. A key internal document leaked to the London Observer, which it printed on March 2, revealed that "the United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win votes in favor of war against Iraq." A top official of the National Security Agency-a U.S. body that intercepts communications around the world-sent a directive to the Regional Targets section of the NSA to carry out "an aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates," according to the Observer. The prime targets of the surveillance are the "middle six" delegations from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Guinea and Pakistan. Also targeted are "non-Security Council delegations" that could turn up "anything useful related to Security Council deliberations." In addition to being the target of spying, all the countries are coming under intense pressure. An example is Mexico. The London Economist of Feb. 27 noted that "a stream of American officials, sounding more hostile than sorry, have been trekking south to argue the point. ... One American diplomat has given warning that a Mexican 'no' could 'stir up feelings' against Mexicans in the United States. He draws the comparison with the Japanese-Americans who were interned after 1941, and wonders whether Mexico 'wants to stir the fires of jingoism during the war.'" None of the oppressed countries on the Security Council would vote for Washington's war if they were free of intimidation and left on their own. The populations of all the "middle six" are opposed to the war overwhelmingly. The governments also know that Washington's favors, if ever really delivered, will increase U.S. penetration of their countries and render them more dependent than ever in the future. And no government wants to bless war by the Pentagon, for the simple reason that they could be next. The outcome in the Security Council is highly uncertain for U.S. imperialism, so they are planning for various eventualities. "If nine votes can be assembled," wrote the Washington Post on March 3, "within several days of the Friday meeting with Blix, and if Russian and Chin ese abstentions are assured, U.S. and diplomatic officials said they may vote at the end of next week even under threat of a French veto. 'We could let them veto it and then turn on them,' one official said. If there are not nine votes, the official said, 'then there will be no vote.'" VIRTUAL REBELLIONS IN TURKEY, PHILIPPINES But the vote in the Security Council, while it is important politically, is not Washington's fundamental problem. This was illustrated by the rebellion of the Turkish parliament last week, which opposed a resolution put forward by the government council allowing 62,000 U.S. troops and 225 warplanes to invade Iraq from Turkish territory. This vote, if it holds, creates a major logistical military problem for Washington. The resolution was rejected because a majority of the attending members did not vote for it. A majority is required by the Turkish constitution. Over 100 members of the ruling Justice and Development Party rejected its leadership and voted against the resolution. To some extent the vote was a rebellion against the insensitivity of U.S. officials. It was a fundamental victory for the more than 100,000 Turkish and Kurdish people who poured onto the streets on March 1, the day of the vote. There is nothing like 100,000 angry demonstrators outside the window to give anti-war backbone to legislators. This was a huge political defeat for Washington. One of the chief hawks of the Bush administration, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, had journeyed to Turkey in December to nail down a deal for the troop deployment. Afterwards he had declared, "Turkish support is assured." It is no accident that at the very time that Turkey was rejecting the U.S. troops, the Pentagon had to pull back in the Philippines. It had previously announced on Feb. 20 that it was sending 1,700 troops into combat there. The Pentagon made its announcement about a "combat mission" in the province of Jolo on the island of Mindanao in order to refute the characterization of the mission as an "exercise" made by Ignacio Bunye, spokesperson for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The Philippine constitution forbids any foreign army to carry out combat missions. This provision is specifically calculated to counter the colonial legacy of military occupation by the U.S., which had seized the Philippines from Spain a century ago. As was pointed out in the March 1 New York Times, "tens of thousands of Filipinos are thought to have died at the hands of United States forces in fighting after the transfer of the Philippines to American colonial control from Spanish colonial rule in 1898." This is well known to the Pentagon, but in their arrogance they decided to put the president of the Philippines, and by implication the Filipino people, "in their place." Fearing the masses and trying to preserve whatever sovereignty it has left, the Macapagal government is driven to stop the U.S. deployment. Now the 1,700 troops are sitting offshore in the Philippines, just as there are 62,000 U.S. troops offshore in Turkish waters. SHIPS, BOMBERS RING KOREA Washington has also sent a spy plane to provoke the North Korean government, just as it did to China shortly after Bush took office. It has arrogantly refused to meet with the North Korean government about putting an end to Washington's nearly 60-year campaign to destroy the socialist government in Pyongyang. The Pentagon has sent warships within striking distance of North Korea. It has positioned 24 long-range bombers on alert for deployment to Guam and is moving an aircraft carrier flotilla into the region to threaten and intimidate. According to the New York Times of March 1, the Bush administration is talking about surgical strikes, maritime interdiction and other measures against this embattled socialist country, which has asserted its right of self-defense, the essence of national independence. Because it has refused to bow down to Washington, Korea is part of the "axis of evil" and subject to "preemption," according to the Bush Doctrine. But in spite of all this U.S. intimidation, the masses of both North and South Korea are completely opposed to Washington's designs. Mass demonstrations in the south have demanded that the U.S. get its 37,000 troops out of the country. South Koreans have protested a war on Iraq and demanded that Washington sit down across the table with the North Korean government. Anti-U.S. sentiment is boiling over in the south after 60 years of the harshest repression, particularly since two U.S. soldiers were acquitted of even negligence by U.S. authorities after they ran over two South Korean schoolgirls with their tank. In the same manner, the revolutionary forces in Colombia have not let up their struggle in spite of $2 billion in military aid and the presence of U.S. arms and Special Forces. The government of Hugo Ch�vez in Venezuela and the masses who support him have not been intimidated by a U.S.-backed coup and a Washington-inspired campaign of economic and political sabotage. The militarists in the Pentagon are basing their hopes for world conquest on their ability to intimidate and terrorize governments. But the Turkish events, the recent mass demonstrations in Cairo, and the Feb. 15 demonstrations around the world illustrate that while governments may be intimidated, the masses, once hatred of imperialism and war takes hold, are not subject to arm twisting and bribery. This is the fundamental flaw in the Bush administration's plans for world conquest. Above all, the masses of people in the U.S. are rapidly awakening to oppose the government's aggressive plans for conquest of the oil and the territory of Iraq. They are waking up to the fact that this is not just a war against Saddam Hussein. This is a war to colonize and enslave the Iraqi people. The movement is growing rapidly as the war danger escalates. It is the duty of the anti-war movement to fan the flames of an anti-war rebellion. Be in Washington on March 15. - END - (Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe wwnews- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Support the voice of resistance http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php) ------------------ This message is sent to you by Workers World News Service. To subscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
