Vol. 23 (2): 2003 "Why a War on Iraq Concerns Us All"
by APA secretariat
The wide range of speakers included APA Steering Committee members Nighat Said Khan, of the ASR Resource Centre for Women in Lahore, MB Naqvi from the Pakistan Peace Coalition, Herbert Docena from Focus on the Global South, and Rev. Fung Chi Wood from the Hong Kong Committee for Peace Not War.
The central question of the event, �why does a war on Iraq concern us all?�, was laid bare in the opening session of the forum, moderated by APA Steering Committee member Jeannie Manipon of ARENA. The session�s first presentation was delivered by Kumar David of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, who presented participants with an informative, general summary of why a war was being planned in the first place, and its potential consequences for international relations.
Why a War on Iraq?
The plans for Iraq, according to David, were part of a wider process of establishing a global strategic order, which he referred to as �Pax Americana�.
�Both the issue of weapons of mass destruction and the issue of regime change were very partial explanations for why this war is necessary,� David explained. �It is not the war that is necessary, really, it is the occupation of Iraq by the Americans that they find necessary� for oil, a keyword that refers to resources, and, beyond resources, refers to markets.�
Concurrent with this process, he identified the failure of governments around the world, and especially in the Arab countries, to effectively challenge the ambitions of the US. These two points in tandem made it increasingly important, he stressed, for people to �stand on their own feet� and not rely on their governments to challenge war and militarism.
Such concerns were echoed by the following speaker, Virginia Raines, an American geopolitical analyst living and working in Shenzhen. Raines urged the forum�s participants to consider the possible deeper political and economic motivations for an invasion.
�History is constantly being rewritten,� she said. �And there will probably be a lot of time before we find out what is really going on behind the scenes.�
Concerns over these events �behind the scenes�, the real motivations for an invasion, and their implications for people in the world were also clearly expressed in the forum�s two keynote addresses. One of these was delivered by APA Steering Committee member Herbert Docena from Focus on the Global South on behalf of Walden Bello, who was unable to attend the forum at the last moment.
After giving a general description of the strategic ambitions of the US state around the world throughout history, Bello�s presentation went on to place the �Bush Doctrine� specifically in its own historical and political context.
�Bush�s ideology is the product of a unique structural conjuncture: the consolidation of the civilian-military defence establishment that supposedly won the Cold War as a dominant faction of the US elite on the one hand, and the disappearance of an effective countervailing force to US power in the global state system on the other hand. From this perspective, the September 11 attack was a godsend that consolidated domestic support.�
The keynote address by Nighat Said Khan also mentioned the deeper politics behind US and British actions towards Iraq as a concern for people around the world. Khan�s presentation used Pakistan�s own recent history to illustrate the hypocrisy of the rhetoric coming from Washington and London.
�When they supported General Zia ul-Huq, who brought us Islamisation, we had no human rights, we had no civil rights, we had no women�s rights. We had a military dictatorship. But they supported this general for 11 years.�
How could such a glaring hypocrisy be possible in the framework of international law and its institutions? Michael C. Davis, a professor of law at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and editor of a forthcoming book on international military intervention, explained that the parameters of international law and the notion of acceptability were, in fact, constantly changing through precedents set by power politics.
�Now suddenly we have a war against Iraq, and under the UN paradigm the general view is that self-defence is a question only when attack is imminent, not at any time you see an enemy out there. But with an expanded notion of intervention under the humanitarian idea, the Bush administration is in a very fluid environment, and is now trying to argue for something it calls �preemptive self-defence�.�
Implications of War
Representatives from the diplomatic community were in attendance to respond to the speakers� presentations. Thivhilaeli Makatu, acting consul-general of South Africa, and Yousef Botros, representing the Egyptian consulate, both took the opportunity to thank APA for organising such an important event, and to brief the forum on their governments� stance concerning Iraq. Both representatives spoke of the disastrous consequences a war would have for the African continent, and Makatu in particular linked this to a criticism of the hysteria surrounding the US �war on terrorism�.
�Not too long ago, Nelson Mandela was described as a terrorist,� he said.
The closing session of the forum was moderated by Rasti Delizo, APA Steering Committee member and head of the General Secretariat of Peace Camp in the Philippines. This session saw a number of speakers make the link between the situation in Iraq and life in Hong Kong. APA Steering Committee member Rev. Fung Chi Wood, from the local anti-war group Committee for Peace Not War referred back to Hong Kong�s own experiences with war.
�Many people in Hong Kong suffered in the Second World War, if they are old enough. My mother, for example. Or people have been told by their grandparents how pitiful it is and how much suffering one faces during war.�
A stark reminder of the similar fear and suffering that must currently exist inside Iraq was provided through an intervention from the floor by Mr Ng, a journalist from Hong Kong�s Cable TV station who had recently returned from Baghdad. His personal accounts of life on the ground in Baghdad were a rarity for a Hong Kong event, and enriched the discussion.
�One day I was walking in downtown Baghdad,� recalled Ng, �And I saw people renewing their homes, painting the walls with new colours. And I was just wondering why people are still doing this because the war is so imminent� I was thinking that if there was an imminent war threat against Hong Kong, there would be no people investing any money on renewing their homes, not to mention there would be a mass exodus. But that is Iraq, that is Iraqi people, they are so brave, they are prepared for what will happen.�
Chong Chan Yau, Executive Director of Oxfam Hong Kong, followed this up with a more detailed description of the humanitarian situation inside Iraq, and predicted a nightmare for the country�s population in the event of war.
�No one can believe that the vulnerable populations in the country will not suffer from starvation, and internal displacement and refugees moving to the borders will be in great number. We estimate that there will be 900,000 refugees moving to the border of Iran alone, and we expect that bordering countries will try to close their borders, unable to cope with the flood.�
Turning to Hong Kong, Chong noted that although the SAR had a reputation for being politically apathetic, the vast majority of people he had talked to had strong opinions against a war on Iraq.
Challenges for the Peace Movement
Khan concluded her presentation by linking the definition of peace to wider notions of human rights and women�s rights around the world. This was a point echoed by MB Naqvi, who said that concern in Asia over a war on Iraq should be channelled into greater regional cooperation in support of peace in the region.
�My creed is human rights�� he said. ��We Asians ought to be talking about cooperation, security, and human rights among ourselves. Asians particularly, because this is going to be the center of world politics, defining elements in international politics in the next couple of decades.�
Both Bello and Khan addressed the challenges faced by the anti-war movement. Bello explained that the greatest challenge lay in the movement understanding its own role. According to Bello, a global civil society anti-war movement would be most effective if it aimed at destroying the legitimacy of American power by laying bare its �lies, inconsistencies, and brutalities�. This, he said, should be the focus of the peace movement�s organising efforts.
One of the forum�s final speakers, Mohammed Jawwadullah Shah, described the feelings of Hong Kong�s Muslim community. Shah linked their fears to a perceived worldwide repression of Arab and Muslim peoples. While such a perception was understandable, he said, he urged all people in Hong Kong to look beyond religious boundaries and realise the importance of the issue, and the strength of international solidarity.
�It�s not just about Islam, it�s not just about the Muslims,� he explained. �We are all concerned with this issue. It�s a global issue, right? It�s about controlling our very existence, and this we cannot allow� If we look at what�s going on in the world today, there are massive demonstrations, we are all speaking against this together. And we must continue to speak against this.�
The forum concluded on a similarly positive note. MB Naqvi made it clear to the audience that they, in fact, have the power to change the bleak situation in the world.
�While I have advocated here this morning a dialogue among the states, the real dialogue should be among the people� We have to be conscious of setting our own houses in order, democratically. And there has to be an element of understanding and peace through the states, originating in the popular awareness and effort.�
Disseminating information and encouraging public discussion through such means as public forums is an important means of increasing popular awareness.
Now e-mail us and tell us what you think.
|
|||||||||||||||||
