Invasion End of April Planned
No to Crime of War Against Iran
According to various news reports, including those in Kuwait, the U.S. plans to go forward with an attack on Iran at the end of April. The U.S. uses several military bases in Kuwait for the war against Iraq and Afghanistan (such as Ali Salem Air Base, the Al-Jaber Air Base and Camp Doha) that could also be used in attacks on Iran. The timing of the launch of yet another aggressive war also coincides with the need for British support. President George W. Bush is acting while the current British Prime Minister and fellow war criminal Tony Blair is still in office and can commit British troops. The ability to rely on British support could change after Blair steps down, expected next month.
The U.S. plans bombing raids, targeting Iran’s nuclear-related facilities, using “bunker busters,” which are considered just below nuclear weapons in their impact. The U.S. bombers could also use nuclear weapons, as the bombers now stationed in the Persian Gulf are capable of carrying them and likely have them available.
There is also no evidence that Iran is threatening the U.S. or planning to attack the U.S. There is no evidence, from the U.S., the United Nations or anyone, that Iran has nuclear weapons.There is evidence that Iran is defending its sovereignty and refusing to submit to U.S. dictate. It is this resistance that is being targeted.
There can be no justification for war against Iran and it is vital that all stand together to oppose this aggression. While Bush claims Iran is a threat simply because it might, one day, build a nuclear weapon, there is in fact no evidence of any threat. None. The International Atomic Energy Agency has also confirmed that at present, Iran’s nuclear activities are related to nuclear energy. Iran, like all other countries, have the right to pursue nuclear energy and are doing so consistent with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The U.S. on the other hand, which is duty-bound to disarm and eliminate its stockpile of nuclear weapons under the treaty, is instead building new nuclear weapons and threatening first strike use against non-nuclear states like Iran, both contrary to the treaty and crimes against the peace.
Bush has no justification. He does not have the support of the American people. He is even going against some of his own military generals, who may resign rather than implement the war plans. The fact that he is preparing to bomb Iran is indicative not only of the failure of existing arrangements under the Constitution, where Congress must authorize war, but also of how intense the fighting within the ruling circles has become. Now is the time for vigilance, as attacking Iran could trigger broader war abroad and justification for a “national emergency” and military rule at home.
No War Against Iran!Support Resistance Abroad and at Home!
[TOP]
U.S. in Violation of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) makes clear that the U.S. is in violation. The NPT states, in part, “Considering the devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples, […] Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources.” The U.S. continually threatens not only Iran, but Syria, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Cuba and others, while claiming it can invade any country with the aim of “stopping potential terrorists.” It also has a military budget greater than all other countries combined, is the world’s largest exporter of weapons, and it is openly threatening aggressive (first-strike) use of nuclear weapons, including against non-nuclear states like Iran. All are contrary to the NPT and crimes against the peace.
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) also states:
“ARTICLE IV
“1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.
“2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.”
The U.S. is directly barred from the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State” by the NPT and by the Charter of the United Nations. The Charter states:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” (Chapter 1, Article 2, Paragraph 4).
The U.S. is illegally threatening Iran with the U.S. Naval presence in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. calls for “regime change” in Iran, the U.S. plans and takes actions to attack the political independence of Iran, and the U.S. threatens that “all options are on the table” indicating that the U.S. will use military force, possibly including nuclear weapons, against Iran if Iran does not comply with the unjust and illegal U.S. demands that it cease enriching uranium and desist from developing nuclear technology to enrich uranium.
It can hardly be said that the U.S. is attempting “to make every effort to avert the danger of [a nuclear] war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,” given that the U.S. refuses to negotiate with Iran. The U.S. is demanding that before any talks are held, Iran must submit to the illegal U.S. demands and abandon its rights to pursue nuclear energy. And failing to submit, the U.S. repeats “all options” are on the table and openly threatens with military warships, aircraft and war games right off the coast of Iran.
It is clear from the U.S. refusal to engage in normal, responsible and effective diplomacy, that the U.S. does not desire a negotiated settlement of the dispute, but instead desires a pretext to aggressively attack Iran. Given the current aggressive wars against Iraq and Afghanistan, and U.S. support for Israel’s aggression against Lebanon and Palestine and providing Israel with a nuclear arsenal, the U.S. threats are real. Its excuses for war are all fiction. It is the U.S. that is violating the spirit and the letter of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and not Iran.[TOP]
Incident with British Marines
“A Government Not Fit for Any Purpose”
The article below is directed to the British government. We reprint it here, as the conclusion that the government is “not fit for any purpose” is even truer for the U.S. government. The U.S. is responsible for the crimes of war against Iraq and Afghanistan, the massacres and bombing raids against the peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan, the torture of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, the threat of war against Iran which could unleash a far broader regional conflict. Now is the time to reject the pro-war U.S. government. Now is the time for an anti-war government.
* * *
Open Letter to Gordon Brown
British Chancellor of the Exchequer
Dear Mr. Brown,
Standing in Afghanistan, you called the Iranian holding of fifteen British sailors who it is likely strayed in to Iranian waters: “Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable.” Breathtaking. Compared to the behavior of the British and U.S. troops, their treatment in Iran is seemingly a health spa.
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is the total destruction of the country you were standing in. The boiling to death of several thousand prisoners, held in metal trucks in the sweltering summer, under the watch and very possibly at the hands of our American allies (complex accounts differ). It is the bombing of village after village, of wedding parties and funerals, of goat herders, farmers, shepherds. It is reducing the country to a radioactive nightmare, where families bombed out of their homes have been found living in contaminated bomb craters and suffering all the signs of radiation poisoning, according to the Uranium Metal Research Project, bleeding from all orifices with other accompanying appalling symptoms.
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is the prison at Afghanistan’s Bagram airbase, where people are “rendered,” disappeared, shackled, forced to wear diapers, their eyes covered, and flown to Guantanamo Bay “the gulag of our time,” as cited by Amnesty International. Uncharged and untried, with rare access to lawyers, they are left to rot, between bouts of torturing.
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is Abu Ghraib and the dozens of other prisons across Iraq, which sprung up under “liberation,” where the disappeared also languish, between the odd bit of water boarding (being held under water till near the point of drowning) being stripped naked, having dogs attack, having unspeakable items shoved into bodily orifices (“We need electricity in our homes, not up our asses,” said one eventually released prisoner.)
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is British troops in Basra pulling kids off the street and beating them up. It is hoisting some mother’s son in netting on a forklift. It is beating a young hotel worker to death, over two days. Though as usual, the British Courts find just one person guilty. Other deaths have led to no one being found guilty. Presumably Iraqis have taken to beating themselves to death.
“Cruel, callous, inhuman and unacceptable,” is allied soldiers raping, pillaging, demolishing homes, driving over kids in the road, in case they are “terrorist” kids and toddlers. It is the gang rape of a child called Aber who was then killed and set alight with the rest of her family. It is the reported hanging of bodies round tanks in Falluja and the sickos who collect Iraqi brain matter as a “trophy.” It is sending pictures of pathetic mutilated, dead, burned Iraqis, to porn sites in exchange for free access to shameful images of another kind.
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is the abandonment of British residents in Guantanamo Bay and in Iraq, the recently aired the fact that torture included chaining prisoners to bedsteads, bolted to walls (the U.S. Army sure employs some impressive psychopaths). It is the 650,000 - 900,000 Iraqi deaths at the hands of and under the watch of the “liberators” (and that was last year’s figure). It is the four million known to have fled all that is familiar to them, or who are internally displaced. It is Iraqis and their Palestinian guests, not knowing from day to day whether they will be expelled from their host country.
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” is the destruction of an entire civil society, the lynching of its legitimate leaders, the destruction of Baghdad, the “Paris of the ninth century,” of humanity’s history. It is the statement, last June, of Colleen Graffy, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, devoid of anything remotely connected to humanity, who said of three prisoners in Guantanamo who committed suicide, rather than live tortured and shackled, without hope, that their deaths were “a good PR move.”
“Cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable,” were thirteen years of sanctions which cost maybe one and a half million lives, driven by the U.S. and Britain. Followed by an illegal invasion, a war of aggression and thus Nuremberg’s “supreme crime,” for which there is a growing demand for those responsible to be tried. The sailors too and their colleagues could also be tried.
“Cruel, callous inhumane and unacceptable,” on a personal note, is the Foreign and Commonwealth Office diplomats in Baghdad refusing to speak to the possible kidnappers of Margaret Hassan, who called her husband three times on her mobile phone. It is the refusal of Ken Bigley’s brother’s plea to search for Ken via satellite, since he had one leg almost rebuilt with titanium, which can be picked up by satellites, which are pretty abundant in Iraq’s skies.
British Arrogance
Lastly, it is worth looking at the website of your former Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray (www.craigmurray.co.uk) also former Maritime Head of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. “The Iran-Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British government.... (it is) a fake map.” Good Lord, surely not another “dodgy dossier”?
Oh and “cruel, callous, inhumane and unacceptable behavior,” is, if British arrogance and intransigence ends up with their sailors being banged up for a long time. Iran offered the release of Faye Turney and the British government’s intemperate language has seemingly scuppered that. A diplomatic disgrace of enormity. Yet again, a government “not fit for purpose” — any purpose.
Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist, who has witnessed the crimes of the Anglo-American military agenda.[TOP]
New International Network Forms
Close All U.S. Military Bases Abroad
In a new surge of energy for the global struggle against militarism, some 400 activists from 40 countries came together in Ecuador from March 5-9 to form a network to fight against foreign military bases. The conference began in Quito, then participants traveled in an 8-bus caravan across the country, culminating in a spirited protest at the city of Manta, site of a U.S. base.
While a few other countries such as England, Russia, China, Italy and France have bases outside their territory, the United States is responsible for 95 percent of foreign bases. According to U.S. government figures, the U.S. military maintains some 737 bases in 130 countries, although many estimate the true number to be over 1,000.
A network of local groups fighting the huge U.S. military complex is indeed an “asymmetrical struggle,” but communities have been trying for decades to close U.S. military bases on their soil. Their concerns range from the destruction of the environment, the confiscation of farmlands, the abuse of women, the repression of local struggles, the control of resources and a broader concern about military and economic domination.
The Ecuadorian groups who agreed the host the international meeting had been fighting against a U.S. base in the town of Manta. The U.S. and Ecuadorian governments had signed a base agreement in 1999, renewable after 10 years. The purpose of the base was supposed to be drug interdiction, but instead it has provided logistical support for the counterinsurgency war in Colombia, placing Ecuador in a dangerous position of interfering in the internal affairs of its neighbor. The base has also affected the livelihoods of local fishermen and farmers and brought an increase in sex workers, while the promised surge in economic development has not materialized.
During Ecuador’s presidential race in November 2006, candidate Rafael Correa criticized the base and after winning the election he quipped, “We can negotiate with the U.S. about a base in Manta, if they let us put a military base in Miami.” His comment displayed the stunning hypocrisy of the U.S. government, a government that would never deign to have a foreign base on its soil but expects over 100 countries to host U.S. bases.
In a great boost to the newly-formed network to close foreign bases, President Correa sent high-level representatives to the conference to express support, and he himself, together with the Ministers of Defense and Foreign Relations, met with delegates from the network to express their commitment to closing the Manta base when it comes up for renewal in 2009.
But the Ecuadorian government’s courageous stand is unfortunately not echoed in most countries, where anti-bases activists usually find themselves fighting against both the U.S. bases and their government’s collusion.
Indigenous representatives attending the conference talked about the destruction of indigenous lands to make way for bases. In the island of Diego Garcia, the indigenous Chagossian people have been driven off their lands, as have the Chamorros from Guam and the Inuit from Greenland. Kyle Kajihiro, director of the organization Area Hawaii, explained that the U.S. military occupies vast areas of Hawaiian territory, territory which was once public land used for indigenous reserves, agricultural production, schools and public parks.
The delegation from Okinawa, Japan, has been trying to dismantle the U.S. bases for the past 50 years. One of their main complaints has been the violence against women. Suzuyo Takazato, the director of Okinawa Women Act Against Military Violence, has compiled a chilling chronology of sexual abuse against Okinawan women by U.S. soldiers, including the rape of a nine-month old baby and a six-year-old girl. “We publish these horrible crimes to break the silence and impunity of U.S. soldiers who, according to the base treaty, cannot be judged in Okinawa.” Even when groups are not successful in closing the bases, at least they are pushing for U.S. soldiers to be subject to the laws of the host country.
The representative from Guam talked about the environmental devastation — the dumping of PCBs, Agent Orange, DDT, heavy metals and munitions, as well as fallout from the detonation of 168 nuclear bombs in the Northwestern Pacific between 1946 and 1958, leading to high rates of radiation-linked cancers on the island. Activists who have been successful in closing bases warned that it is critical to force the U.S. to clean up before leaving. The Filipinos who won the closure of the Subic and Clark bases in 1992 after years of popular pressure are still fighting to force the U.S. military to clean the site and compensate the affected population.
One of the most compelling success stories came from Vieques, Puerto Rico, where a U.S. base was installed in 1948 in this island paradise of lagoons and sand beaches. The military used the base to build, store and test bombs and chemical substances, like cancer-causing Agent Orange. For decades the local people, especially the fisherman, protested the base, but the anti-base struggle was catalyzed in 1999 when a bomb killed a local civilian, David Sanes. Activist Nilda Medina spoke with great passion about how they set up permanent protest camps, thousands performed acts of civil disobedience, and others went on hunger strikes. After residents occupied the test area for 13 months, [and massive mobilizations took place on the main island of Puerto Rico] the Navy finally agreed to close the base in May 1, 2003. Now the local people, as in so many other sites, are fighting to clean up the land and treat those who have been exposed to harmful chemicals.” We’re so proud of what we accomplished and want to tell our story to encourage others,” said Nilda Medina. “We understand that this is part of a worldwide struggle against the militarization of our planet.”
Post 9/11, this militarization has become even more entrenched as part of the “war on terror.” Representatives from Cuba at the conference complained bitterly about the use of the Guantanamo base as a center for illegal detention and abuse of prisoners. Activists from Japan, Turkey, Italy and Germany said their countries had been used to facilitate the invasions and ongoing occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Delegates from Germany said they have 81 U.S. bases, more than anywhere in the world, and that Germany had became a central rotation point for U.S. soldiers on their way to and from Iraq.
This is why more than 100,000 people came out for a demonstration in February 2007 in the Italian town of Vicenza against a proposed new military base. “We don’t want the noise, the pollution, the taxing of our infrastructure,” said local organizer Cinzia Bottene. “But most of all, we don’t want to be accomplices to Bush’s war and a target for reprisals.” […]
The U.S. delegates made it clear that the network to close U.S. foreign bases was supported by the U.S. peace movement, which would like to see our military used for defensive, not offensive purposes. U.S. delegates also emphasized how the billions of dollars now being spent to maintain this empire of bases would be better invested in people’s needs for health, education and housing.
The new global network will help local groups share experiences, learn from one another, and provide support for the local efforts. It will conduct research, maintain a global website (no-bases.org), publish an e-newsletter, and convoke regular international meetings to assess progress.
Luis Angel Saavedra, head of one of the Ecuadorian organizations sponsoring the conference, was thrilled with the outcome. “We’ve been working against the base in Manta for the past seven years, and this conference feels like the culmination of this entire campaign,” he said. “It will strengthen President Correa’s position to close the base. Our people are better educated after all the publicity we’ve received. And we now have a network to exchange strategies and experiences with people all over the world. I’d call that a great success.” (To learn more about the Network to Abolish Foreign Military Bases, go to www.no-bases.org.)
Medea Benjamin is cofounder of Global Exchange and CodePink Women for Peace.[TOP]
April 28
Spell I-M-P-E-A-C-H for Congress
George Bush and Dick Cheney lied the nation into a war of aggression, are spying in open violation of the law, and have sanctioned the use of torture. These are high crimes that demand accountability through the Constitutional mechanism of impeachment. Since Congress does not seem to get it, we are calling on all Americans who stand for truth, freedom, and justice to join us on April 28 and spell it out for them: IMPEACH!
Let’s put the word IMPEACH everywhere on April 28. If you are in Miami you will be able to voice your opinion directly to George Bush himself. If you are in San Francisco, you can join 2,000 people who will use their bodies to spell impeachment on the beach in San Francisco and then march to Speaker Pelosi’s house. If you are in San Diego, you can join activists at the California Democratic Party Convention who will tell Nancy Pelosi to put impeachment back on the table. And if you are in Cleveland you can give your support to Representative Dennis Kucinich, who is considering starting the impeachment process.
In New York’s Central Park, a crowd will spell out the word IMPEACH on the grass. Another thousand people will do the same at Coney Island, and then spell it out with pizza pies on the boardwalk. Both events are being organized by military mothers with sons who have served in Iraq. A pilot will fly a banner saying “IMPEACH!” around NYC and take aerial photographs of the human murals.
There is an impeachment rally in front of Faneuil Hall in Boston. In Minneapolis, citizens will spell out “IMPEACH!” with canoes on a lake. That evening they will form the letters with bed sheets lit from behind so that people will be able to read it from planes passing overhead. In Washington, DC, 1,000 people will form a human mural to spell out IMPEACH! at the base of the Washington monument.
Events are planned for April 28 all over the country and outside of it, and you can find one or create one here: www.a28.org
Ten States Take Up Impeachment: What About Yours?
In 10 U.S. states, either this year or last year or both, the state legislature has introduced and considered, though not yet passed, a bill to petition the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach Bush and Cheney. These 10 states have acted: California, Hawai’i, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Texas. These 10 legislators who have taken the lead should be drafted to run for Congress (except for Ellison, whom we have already elected to Congress): Les Ihara, Jr. HI; Lon Burnam TX; Gerald Ortiz y Pino NM; Eric Oemig WA; Paul Koretz CA; Daryl Pillsbury VT; Karen Yarbrough IL; Jamilah Nasheed MO; Frank Boyle WI; and Keith Ellison MN. Special credit goes to Oemig and Ortiz y Pino who have come close to passing their bills.
Dozens of cities and towns have passed these resolutions, and dozens more are trying. At least 16 state Democratic parties back impeachment. A list of all these resolutions, and a kit to help make this happen in your locality and your state can be found here: www.afterdowningstreet.org/resourcecenter
Pass Local Resolutions Against Attacking Iran
Cities for Peace has a new tool for mobilizing against an attack on Iran! Please visit the No War On Iran section of the Citiesforprogress.org website. You will find a toolkit and model resolution stating that your town/city does not support an attack on Iran. Portland, Oregon, and Berkeley, California, have already passed such resolutions.
[TOP]
The Maine Chapter of Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) has been providing DVDs and articles to members of Congress to help them understand our increasing concerns about the safety and mission of our soldiers.
Two of the articles are by Gen. William Odom: “Why America Must Get out of Iraq Now” and “Victory is not an Option.” Gen. Odom was head of Army intelligence and director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan. Everyone who wants to understand what is at risk should read these articles.
The present commander in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus, recently said there is no military solution in Iraq. A political solution may someday be possible, but it is too late for what he says is the primary task of any counter-insurgency: Ensuring the security and well-being of the civilian population. The most recent poll showed 78 percent of Iraqis want the U.S. out and are in favor of targeting U.S. troops, who are seen as occupiers. Two million Iraqis are refugees, and almost that many are displaced within Iraq.
The president promised almost two years ago that “when the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down,” but the Iraq Study Group reported that, in spite of the billions spent, there was never any provision to adequately fund training an Iraqi army. More recently, it has been revealed that Saudi Arabia, home of Osama Bin Laden, is funneling funds to terrorists – fellow Sunnis – to increase ethnic violence against Shiites, and that the U.S. administration promoted this!
The recycling of troops back into combat, the high rate of post traumatic stress disorder, serious combat injuries, and the neglect in treating them, demonstrate that the needs of our military personnel are not being properly considered before, during or after their service. The military has reached the breaking point in manpower and equipment. Add to this the growing revelations of mismanagement, fraud and war profiteering and it is easy to understand that the supplemental funding does not “support the troops”.
The funding has most benefited the weapons industry, whose CEO income has skyrocketed to an average of over $7 million per year! The value of Cheney’s Halliburton stock options has not merely doubled or tripled but multiplied by a factor of 32! We ask Congress, and every American, why should anyone get rich off the blood of our soldiers?
A U.S. Marine Corps maxim is “Never reinforce failure.” It is a betrayal of our military to demand further sacrifice while condemning them to planned failure! So why is Congress still funding this disaster instead of showing leadership?
Rep. Tom Allen announced his intention to approve more war funding, once again failing to back up his claim to be “against the war.” The funding issues a blank check, with no accountability. More ominously, an amendment requiring the president to consult Congress before making war against Iran was removed.
Democrats call it “Bush’s war,” but it never could have happened without the consent of Congress, and they will own it lock, stock and gun barrel with the passage of another funding bill. Both Republicans and Democrats have shown higher loyalty to their parties than anything else, and so, it is [these party] politics that kills our soldiers! It is past time for Congress to show some of the courage they blithely demand of our troops.
Gen. Odom says it is already too late for some 2008 presidential candidate to retrieve the situation. If Congress cannot act, it, too, will live in infamy. Will they continue to fund the occupation and profiteering instead of the safe withdrawal of our troops? We urge our senators to truly support our troops by refusing to fund a mission that has never been defined, never been justified and so, cannot be accomplished.
Not one more day, not one more dollar. Bring them home now and take care of them.[TOP]