The Iraqi people certainly have reason to celebrate the ouster of Saddam Hussein’s regime. But it’s premature for the Bush administration to join in.
Cause for Celebration, Cause for Concern
read more
Iraq
What Can the World Do with U.S. Troops in Baghdad?
Despite the presence of U.S. troops in the center of Baghdad, does the world remain powerless to stop the ongoing invasion? The answer is no. Under a procedure called “Uniting for Peace,” the UN General Assembly can demand an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal. The global peace movement should consider demanding such an action, and support efforts already underway in the UN to enact such a resolution. On Tuesday, April 8, the Arab League formally requested a UN General Assembly meeting on the war in Iraq. The assembly’s General Committee will meet Friday, April 11 to consider the request.
Nine Theses on Moving the Peace Movement Forward
As the U.S. army occupies Baghdad, the peace movement is faced with a series of strategic challenges, challenges we must face openly, and challenges for which there are no easy answers. We must develop political strategies that draw on solidarity and information from activists and analysts in diverse social movements and incorporate those into our own work.
Who Will Govern Iraq?
With Baghdad having fallen and the territorial consolidation of Iraq near at hand, discussion of the postwar period has intensified dramatically. The debate has provoked splits at various levels, within the United Nations, within the vaunted “coalition of the willing,” and even within the U.S. government. The acrimony that has surrounded this debate shows that even with victory in the war assured, wining the peace will be a more arduous task. How Iraq is governed and rebuilt in the first two years following the war’s conclusion may determine whether, in the rhetoric of the Bush administration, it is transformed into a beacon of democracy for the Arab world or, as many Middle East experts and observers fear, it sparks a wave of violent and destabilizing unrest in the region. In light of the monumental significance of this enterprise, it is important to examine the potential models for postwar governance in Iraq and to assess their effectiveness and impact. An examination of public statements issued by policymakers who will shape the postwar dispensation, along with an analysis of previous cases of post-conflict state building–such as post-World War II Germany and Japan, the Balkans in the 1990s, and, most recently, Afghanistan–provides a basis upon which to construct models of governance for Iraq. The model ultimately implemented will vary significantly from the theoretical constructs presented in this paper. However, the purpose of this analysis is not to predict the shape and structure of the postwar administration; it is intended to elucidate the demands and dangers of the postwar environment as a guide to state building.
Iraq War Unleashes Barbarism
So much for winning the cold war. And so much for a world united behind the War on Terror. A poll this weekend showed that 80% of Russians want Iraq to defeat the United States. Polls across the Arab world show the same, and it is likely that in much of the world outside the Western democracies there would be similar numbers rooting for the victory of a blood-thirsty tyrant and certified aggressor.
A Disaster Unfolding in Iraq
One would have thought Washington had learned from the 1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco that you can’t really trust exiles who assure you that their people will greet you enthusiastically as liberators and rise up against the regime. Despite optimistic predictions, there have thus far been no mass defections of Iraqi soldiers, there have been no spontaneous uprisings against Saddam Hussein, and U.S. and British soldiers attempting to enter Iraqi cities have been met not by cheers and flowers but by bullets and grenades. And this has all taken place in predominantly Shi’ite-populated sections of southern Iraq long considered a center of opposition to Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship.
Coalition of the Willing–Part II
After failing to obtain authorization for war from the UN Security Council, the Bush
Administration has scrambled to assemble a so-called “Coalition of the Willing” to lend the
military action against Iraq the illusion of genuine multilateralism and legitimacy.
Authority for War IS an Issue
“We come as liberators, not as conquerors.”
Scarred and Battered, UN Charts Course in Post-War Iraq
There is a clear consensus across the world that neither logic nor legality permit the “Coalition” invading Iraq to enforce alleged UN Security Council decisions against the will of the majority of its members. However, in a backhanded compliment to the legitimating power of the organization—and as the U.S. and UK shred the UN Charter’s keystone provisions on the illegality of war—they both, to varying degrees, feel the need to invoke it.
FPIF Statement on the War
In 1996 Foreign Policy in Focus set out to build a network committed to the goal of making the U.S. a more responsible world leader. By “responsible” we meant a government vigorously pursuing the unfinished business of building international norms and institutions capable of preventing war and advancing political and economic justice.