The decision by President Bush to bomb Iraq and the instantaneous support that Tony Blair offered was the latest in a long line of tragedies in our relations with that country.
The bombing itself cannot be justified in international law because the UN Security Council has never authorised the no-fly zones and has, therefore, never guaranteed the safety of pilots who take part. What happened was an act of terrorism and, for that reason, it has not had support worldwide, leaving Washington and London isolated in the international community.
Coming as it has done over ten years after the Iraqi army withdrew from Kuwait, it can only be explained in quite different terms – namely an American desire to dominate the Middle East because it needs oil, and for many years before that had armed Saddam as their best friend.
The no-fly zones have never protected the Kurds in the North because Turkey bombs Northern Iraq regularly and their target is the Kurds. Moreover, when the Kurdish refugees from Iraq escape in a boat that gets shipwrecked off the south of France, they become illegal immigrants in the eyes of the European Union which doesn’t say much for our commitment to keep them safe.
The US and Britain have committed the most terrible crimes against the Iraqi people and over half a million of them – mainly children – have died as a result of the sanctions which have indiscriminately hit that country and its innocent population, leaving Saddam Hussein stronger than ever.
America and Britain have also used depleted uranium, a low-grade form of nuclear weapon, and no one knows what the long-term genetic effect of those weapons will be on future generations.
What is equally interesting is the link between the persecution of the Iraqi people and the persecution of the Palestinians by the Israelis with the full support of Washington. A few weeks ago we were being told about the brave efforts of the American administration to establish a peace process in that conflict. Now, that same administration is engaged in a war process against the Muslim world and starting joint military manoeuvres with the Israeli Government, itself headed by a Prime Minister whom many regard as having been guilty of acts that would class as war crimes.
The news that the Anglo-American coalition is now trying to work out a new system of ‘smart sanctions’, which will be targeted on the Iraqi Government, sounds a bit like the ‘smart bombs’ which were supposed to avoid civilian casualties.
What we need here are some ‘smart political leaders’ who address the immense problems of the region by working for social justice in the Middle East without which peace is impossible.
But there are other wider claims that we in Britain have to consider because, despite Washington’s claim to work with NATO, France, which is a leading NATO country, was not even told about the bombing. This will strengthen the arguments for a Rapid Reaction Force, allowing Europe to break free of the American alliance and be able to conduct its own military operations, which would be equally exempt from the requirements laid down in the Charter of the United Nations.
This breech with America is likely to be widened further still by President Bush’s determination to proceed with the nuclear missile defence system designed to give America total and complete world domination. Admiral Eugene Carroll, a retired American Admiral who has held very high command in the US Navy, warned us against it when he spoke at a CND meeting recently.
The more I think about all these issues, the more I become convinced that a non-aligned Britain, free from NATO and the European army, should devote itself to the resolution of world conflict through the UN. We should only make our forces available in response to Security Council decisions, which have to be unanimous among the five permanent members.
Meanwhile, the campaign against the policy now being pursued so disastrously against Iraq must be challenged and exposed, and replaced by launching a serious attempt to deal with the underlying problems.