Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

As a peace activist, I feel moved to try to explain why we continue to protest even as the war is raging in Iraq. First, it is clear that to the extent that the Anglo-American forces are attempting (although with a growing lack of success) to prosecute the war with minimal harm to civilians, this is a result of the brisk peace movement. This is clear, given the fact that in Operation Desert Storm, a war prosecuted in the midst of much less protest, there was absolutely no concern about avoiding civilian casualties. Indeed, the U.S. purposely bombed important civilian targets — including water treatment facilities, electrical generating plants, and food-processing and storage facilities — in order to inflict the most suffering on the Iraqis. Tens of thousands of civilians died as a result.

In this war, the peace movement has forced the Anglo-American forces to try to avoid such outcomes. And, we must keep protesting to keep these forces, who are already talking about “changing the rules of engagement,” to continue to try to avoid civilian casualties. It is equally important to pressure the U.S. government to make good its promises to rebuild Iraq and help war victims — victims who will be counted in the thousands, even in Basra alone where the loss of clean water will inevitably lead to countless illnesses and deaths. Given the United States’ utter failure to live up to its promises to rebuild Afghanistan, with President Bush apologizing for “forgetting” to include any such aid in his latest budget, continued pressure is critical.

Further, while the peace movement is criticized for failing to support the troops, this is far from the truth. Many involved in the peace protests are parents, siblings and friends of troops serving in the conflict. We believe we can best support the troops by bringing them home now to their families where they are safe instead of continuing to press a war which is escalating in violence and horror for all sides. Certainly, President Bush — who avoided service in Vietnam himself, is now attempting to slash veterans’ benefits, who is risking U.S. lives in an unjust war, and who is further endangering U.S. troops by (illegally) utilizing depleted uranium on the front and thereby increasing the risk of cancer to the troops (as well as to Iraqis) — cannot claim to support the troops. It is also hard to see how supporting Bush and his mad plans for war — a war which is making U.S. citizens here and abroad much more vulnerable to terrorist attacks — can possibly be supportive of these troops.

Finally, the Bush administration is bent on further wars (possibly in Syria and Iran as Rumsfeld is now signalling), and by protesting now we are protesting against these future wars as well. Indeed, given that Bush has promised us eternal war — the one promise he appears to be delivering on — it is clear that if we held off on exercising our right to free speech and to dissent during wartime, we may have to forgo these rights forever.

Daniel Kovalik
Greenfield

Posted by Colonnade Archives on Apr 10 2003. Filed under Letters to the Editor. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry