------------------------- Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the June 10, 2004 issue of Workers World newspaper -------------------------
NO DRAFT, NO WAY
By Greg Butterfield
Could you or someone you love be drafted and sent to fight in Iraq or elsewhere?
Could you be forced to choose between participating in war crimes like the torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib or going to prison yourself for resisting these illegal orders?
Public outrage forced the Nixon admin istration to end the draft in 1973. Soldiers returning from Vietnam, their families and the anti-war movement were outspoken about the draft's inherent injustice. They showed how young people from working-class families and communities of color were being sent to fight a war in the interests of the rich and powerful.
You won't hear President George W. Bush or Sen. John Kerry talk about reinstating the draft. Not yet. They know it's too unpopular to bring up during an election year.
A recent poll showed that more than 70 percent of respondents oppose a new draft, even if things get harder for the occupation forces in Iraq.
But either candidate could try to push a law through Congress to bring back the draft after November's election.
The government has already taken steps to prepare for a new draft.
In December 2001, the United States and Canada signed a "smart border declaration." Besides targeting immigrants from the Middle East and Asia, the agreement was designed to make it harder for draftees to seek refuge in Canada.
In January 2003, HR163 and S89 were introduced in the House and Senate. These bills call for a Universal National Service Act "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, or for other purposes." High-school graduates 18 to 26 would be included.
In November 2003, the Defense Depart ment began advertising for volunteers to fill positions on local draft boards throughout the United States. It withdrew the ads after reports began to appear in the news media. But the recruiting has quietly continued.
In April 2004, as the Iraqi resistance intensified, Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel and Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden issued calls for a "fresh national debate" on the draft.
In contrast, Workers World Party presidential and vice presidential candidates John Parker and Teresa Gutierrez say, "No draft, no way." WWP calls for taking the Pentagon's multi-trillion-dollar budget and using it for human needs instead. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has also raised the alarm against the possibility of a new draft.
BUSH, KERRY AGREE: MORE TROOPS NEEDED
You won't hear the word "draft" coming from Bush's lips before Election Day. However, he allocated an extra $28 million for the Selective Service System's 2004 budget.
All males between 18 and 25 years old, including immigrants, must register under penalty of law. By March 30, 2005, the agency is to report to the president about the system's readiness to begin calling up draftees as early as June 15 of next year.
Meanwhile, the May edition of the Army Times reported that 118,000 former soldiers are being screened for possible reactivation this summer. The measure affects former active-duty or reserve soldiers under the Army's Individual Ready Reserve.
In a nationally televised speech at the U.S. Army War College May 25, Bush said additional U.S. troops may be required to shore up the occupation of Iraq. Even after the nominal June 30 handover of "sovereignty," an occupation of several years is envisioned to guarantee a regime compliant to U.S. interests.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told West Point graduates May 29 that the "war on terror" is just beginning.
What about Democrat John Kerry? He too knows that talk of the draft would be political suicide in an election year. But while he's not using the "D" word, he has called repeatedly for tens of thousands more troops to be sent to Iraq.
Recently Tim Russert of NBC's "Meet the Press" commented that it's hard to tell Kerry and Bush apart on Iraq. Kerry voted in favor of Bush's aggression against Iraq. He also voted for the Patriot Act, a terrible attack on civil rights and liberties; but he conveniently missed a crucial vote on extending unemployment benefits, sending that bill to defeat. No one should mistake Kerry for an anti-war candidate.
One of Kerry's best known allies is Sen. Hillary Clinton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Clinton has been very vocal about demanding more troops be sent to crush the popular resistance in Iraq. She says the draft may be necessary.
Kerry has been courting another committee member, pro-war Republican Sen. John McCain, as a possible running mate.
WOULD THEY REALLY DO IT?
Many young people are worried about the draft. Mainstream journalists and commentators have pooh-poohed their concerns. They claim the draft is so unpopular no "sane" politician would try to bring it back.
But there are very deep strategic economic and political reasons why the U.S. ruling class and political establishment might feel the need to reinstate the draft.
Since World War II, dominating the oil-rich Middle East has been a primary goal of both Democratic and Republican governments. Wall Street, Big Oil and their loyal political servants in Washington would sacrifice many, many lives to try to hold on to Iraq, home of the world's second- largest known oil reserves.
U.S. big business is dependent on the economic exploitation of peoples and nations all over the globe. To that end it requires pliant governments that will do Washington's bidding. The Pentagon is the military enforcer of these policies, including "free trade" agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Iraq's people aren't the only ones resisting U.S. domination. North Korea, Pale stine, Cuba, Colombia and many other countries have come under threat from the Clinton and Bush administrations. Haiti and Afghanistan are currently occupied by U.S. troops.
Then there's Venezuela, another major oil-producing country. A popular movement for social and economic justice, led by President Hugo Ch�vez, is taking increasingly radical steps to ensure its independence from U.S. domination. What will happen if the next administration decides U.S. troops must invade there as well?
U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel of Harlem, an opponent of the Iraq invasion, introduced the House bill on the draft. Many people believe that he intended it for anti-war purposes, to help raise public concern and opposition to the draft being reinstated. It pointedly includes provisions barring college deferrals--a loophole that let many wealthy white youths off the hook during the Vietnam War.
Whatever its original purpose, however, the bill, or one much like it, could be used, especially by a Democratic administration, to actually restart the draft.
No one should forget how the Clinton administration used rhetoric about "volunteerism" and "personal responsibility" to launch a ruthless assault on hard-won gains of the working class, including welfare and public education.
Supporters of conscription have begun to argue that it would be "more just" than the economic draft that pulls many impoverished young people into the current "all-volunteer" military. Many recruits are Black, Latin@, Asian, Arab, Native and poor white youths who see the military as their only hope of escaping unemployment or getting an education.
Draft supporters are also appealing to the families of soldiers currently stationed in Iraq--especially reservists and National Guard members who have had their tours of duty extended repeatedly--saying it would relieve their loved ones' suffering.
These are false and deeply hypocritical arguments.
In a class-divided and racist society like the United States, the rich will always find loopholes to avoid endangering themselves when they can use poor and working people as cannon fodder instead.
The real answer to the soldiers' long and unjust stay in Iraq is to fight to bring the troops home now.
The economic draft must be opposed. But the way to fight it is not to bring back involuntary conscription. The real solution is to fight to end the occupation and abolish the scandalous Pentagon budget. If that money were used for jobs programs, free quality education, and other human needs, the poverty draft would be wiped out immediately.
A militant mass movement to end the war and bring the troops home will force the capitalist establishment to backtrack from any plans to spring a post-election sur prise to bring back the draft. With more and more workers, soldiers and military families turning against the war, now is an excellent time to build this movement.
- 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]>
