The one point four billion US dollars defense budget lost the war and the four hundred billion US dollars won the battle of total nation destruction in pursuit of one dictator at the cost of more than eighty billion US dollars plus human misery and world indignation. Whether it is a battle or war, it should not really be fought unless the reason for it is known and recognized by international authority. If the invasion of Iraq was because of human rights atrocities, dozens of invasions should have been carried out in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. If it was to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, the United Nations representatives testified in the Security Council that they could not substantiate such claims. They recommended more intensive searches and requested more time to do their jobs.
This was not acceptable. Instead it was unilaterally decided to invade and the United Nations was bullied into rubber-stamping it. After all, the permission of the UN is not needed to validate a claim by a powerful country when it is threatened from ten thousand miles away by a small country. Nobody denies a nation’s right to act reasonably in self-defense. Especially so when it has the support of other nations. Better still when it is authorized by a world body for which it takes the credit for establishing. For Iraq, there was hardly any proof for planning attacks on Western targets or possessing weapon of mass destruction. As a matter of fact, many other countries in the region are even known to possess nuclear weapons. The war cannot be legitimate unless it conforms to international laws; otherwise new laws which are intended to resolve issues not by negotiation but by unilateral authority must be introduced. Furthermore the reason for the war must be known and stated. In the case of the invasion of Iraq, the decision was made long before the debate to take it to the UN was contemplated. The UN route was thus considered to be a waste of everybody’s time. Furthermore France, Germany and Russia understood that no real debate was possible and they declined to rubber-stamp it. The junior partner to the coalition wanted to rubber-stamp square pegs into round holes. The whole world should offer a healthy salute to the UN. It succeeded in preserving its authority, opposed the most powerful nation and pre-empted its decisions. Human rights abuses by nations or rogue leaders are to be pursued by the elected body of the world nations, namely the UN. The FT of April 5 said it best, “If any nation were to attempt to make such decisions on its own authority, the policy would be as destabilizing as the US’s doctrine of pre-emptive attack on nations that allegedly pose, from a distance, a further threat to its national security.”
This invasion must stop at once. It is the only way to save remaining lives of innocent people and preserve the dignity of the human race. Brutality seen 24 hours on TV cannot be forgotten by sweet words and broken promises.
The writer concludes with a piece of advice. He states that “the US has to recognize it stands to lose more than it can possibly gain from its 19th century policy of pre-emptive attacks. Equally the global community must begin to work out rules for when human rights abuses justify police action against rogue states”.
Arab News Features 7 April 2003
