Ultra-Hawks Vs. Moderate Hawks

The debate over the Bush administration's call for war is usually described as hawksv. doves -- those for the war pitted against those opposing war. In fact, the debate in mainstream news ishawks v. hawks; the question isn't whether or not to wage war, but what form that war should take.

Bush and the ultra-hawks want a full-scale war as soon as feasible, to secure controlover Iraq and its oil. The hawks at themoderate extreme argue for continuing "containment," a euphemism for devastating economic sanctionsand regular bombing in the so-called "no-fly zones."

Sanctions, imposed after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait, are administered through theUnited Nations but in place only because the United States insists; most of the rest of the world hascondemned them. The embargo has helped cause the deaths of more than 500,000 children under the age of 5,according to a UNICEF study. That's why two former U.N. humanitarian coordinators in Iraq -- Denis Hallidayand Hans von Sponeck -- have resigned in protest, calling the sanctions immoral and even genocidal.

Though the sanctions have strengthened Saddam Hussein's control over Iraq whilepunishing ordinary people, the United States insists they remain.

Starting with a complete ban on oil sales and frequent restrictions even on basicmedicines, the sanctions have gone through stages. Currently, there is no limit on total oil sales and mostmedicines are allowed in, but there are still major problems with funding projects to repair criticalinfrastructure and foster economic development.

Combined with the almost complete (and quite deliberate) destruction of Iraq'scivilian infrastructure, particularly water- and sewage-treatment plants, by U.S. forces during the Gulf War,the sanctions have meant increased malnutrition, disease and death -- not for Saddam but for the Iraqi people.

U.S. official blithely claim that the so-called "smart sanctions" approvedby the Security Council in July would solve these problems. But instead of feeding Iraqis, the changes mostlyhelped confuse the public -- which, according to some U.S. officials, was the original intent of smartsanctions.

Now, as worldwide attention to the effects of sanctions has decreased, thehumanitarian situation has worsened. Even as cumbersome bureaucratic procedures for approving imports weresupposedly streamlined, the monetary value of "holds" (contracts held up by some nation on theSanctions Committee, almost always the United States) is at $4.7 billion, higher than before smart sanctionswere proposed. Worse, because of a retroactiveoil-pricing scheme recently implemented by the United States (oil companies don't know what price they'll payfor Iraqi crude until after it is loaded), Iraqi oil exports are way down; in August, exports averaged 800,000barrels per day, compared with more than 2 million at earlier points. This funding shortfall means Iraq isunable to pay even for some approved humanitarian imports.

U.S. officials blame all this on Saddam, and certainly the Iraqi government has madesome questionable allocations of resources. But Tun Myat, the current U.N. humanitarian coordinator in Iraq,has described Iraq's food distribution as "second to none," echoing evaluations by other UNofficials.

While the sanctions kill slowly, the United States continues to patrol the no-flyzones in the northern and southern parts of Iraq, bombing at will and killing civilians -- at least 27 attacksby U.S. planes in 2002. The most recent, on Sunday (Aug. 25), killed eight, according to Iraq.

When challenged, U.S. officials robotically repeat that they bomb only when threatenedby Iraqi air defenses. However, despite U.S. claims, there is no U.N. Security Council authorization for thisviolation of Iraqi sovereignty. U.S. journalists rarely mention the obvious point -- that if the United Statesceased its illegal patrols, Iraqi radar would not "light up" U.S. planes, making U.S. attacksunnecessary.

While not militarily significant, these attacks serve to terrorize the Iraqi peopleand remind everyone that the United States exempts itself from international law. Combined with the sanctions,they constitute a war on the people of Iraq.

While the fanatical hawks argue with the moderate hawks about the way in which a waragainst Iraq should proceed, virtually all the world opposes a full-scale war. It's time for us to realizethat most of the rest of the world also wants to stop the containment war, end the suffering of the Iraqipeople and begin the diplomatic process necessary for regional peace.

Robert Jensen is a professor of journalism at the University of Texas and author ofWritingDissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream.  

Rahul Mahajan is a member of the Nowar Collective and the Green Party candidate for Governor of Texas. His book, TheNew Crusade: America's War on Terrorism (Monthly Review Press, April 2002) has been described as "mandatoryreading for anyone who wants to get a handle on the war on terrorism." He is currently writing a book onIraq titled Axis of Lies: Myths and Reality about the U.S. War on Iraq.