Jimmy Carter's "Alternative To War"

[pynchonoid]

A Statement By President Carter: An Alternative To War
 
 	By	 
 	Jimmy Carter	 
 	31 Jan 2003	 
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

CONTACT: Deanna Congileo
404-420-5108 

Atlanta…..Despite marshalling powerful armed forces in
the Persian Gulf region and a virtual declaration of
war in the State of the Union message, our government
has not made a case for a preemptive military strike
against Iraq, either at home or in Europe.

Recent vituperative attacks on U.S. policy by famous
and respected men like Nelson Mandela and John Le
Carré, although excessive, are echoed in a Web site
poll conducted by the European edition of TIME
magazine. The question was "Which country poses the
greatest danger to world peace in 2003?" With several
hundred thousand votes cast, the responses were: North
Korea, 7 percent; Iraq, 8 percent; the United States,
84 percent. This is a gross distortion of our nation's
character, and America is not inclined to let foreign
voices answer the preeminent question that President
Bush is presenting to the world, but it is sobering to
realize how much doubt and consternation has been
raised about our motives for war in the absence of
convincing proof of a genuine threat from Iraq.

The world will be awaiting Wednesday's presentation of
specific evidence by Secretary of State Colin Powell
concerning Iraq's possession of weapons of mass
destruction. As an acknowledged voice of moderation,
his message will carry enormous weight in shaping
public opinion. But even if his effort is successful
and lies and trickery by Saddam Hussein are exposed,
this will not indicate any real or proximate threat by
Iraq to the United States or to our allies.

With overwhelming military strength now deployed
against him and with intense monitoring from space
surveillance and the U.N. inspection team on the
ground, any belligerent move by Saddam against a
neighbor would be suicidal. An effort to produce or
deploy chemical or biological weapons or to make the
slightest move toward a nuclear explosive would be
inconceivable. If Iraq does possess such concealed
weapons, as is quite likely, Saddam would use them
only in the most extreme circumstances, in the face of
an invasion of Iraq, when all hope of avoiding the
destruction of his regime is lost.

In Washington, there is no longer any mention of Osama
bin Laden, and the concentration of public statements
on his international terrorist network is mostly
limited to still-unproven allegations about its
connection with Iraq. The worldwide commitment and top
priority of fighting terrorism that was generated
after September 11th has been attenuated as Iraq has
become the preeminent obsession of political leaders
and the general public.

In addition to the need to re-invigorate the global
team effort against international terrorism, there are
other major problems being held in abeyance as our
nation's foreign policy is concentrated on proving its
case for a planned attack on Iraq. We have just
postponed again the promulgation of the long-awaited
"road map" that the U.S. and other international
leaders have drafted for resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is a festering
cancer and the root cause of much of the anti-American
sentiment that has evolved throughout the world. At
the same time, satellite observations of North Korea
have indicated that nuclear fuel rods, frozen under
international surveillance since 1994, are now being
moved from the Yongbyon site to an undisclosed
destination, possibly for reprocessing into
explosives. It is imperative that this threat to Asian
stability be met with aggressive diplomacy.

Since it is obvious that Saddam Hussein has the
capability and desire to build an arsenal of
prohibited weapons and probably has some of them
hidden within his country, what can be done to prevent
the development of a real Iraqi threat? The most
obvious answer is a sustained and enlarged inspection
team, deployed as a permanent entity until the United
States and other members of the U.N. Security Council
determine that its presence is no longer needed. For
almost eight years following the Gulf War until it was
withdrawn four years ago, UNSCOM proved to be very
effective in locating and destroying Iraq's formidable
arsenal, including more than 900 missiles and
biological and chemical weapons left over from their
previous war with Iran.

Even if Iraq should come into full compliance now,
such follow-up monitoring will be necessary. The cost
of an on-site inspection team would be minuscule
compared to war, Saddam would have no choice except to
comply, the results would be certain, military and
civilian casualties would be avoided, there would be
almost unanimous worldwide support, and the United
States could regain its leadership in combating the
real threat of international terrorism.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is chair of The
Carter Center in Atlanta, Ga., a not-for-profit,
nongovernmental organization that advances peace and
health worldwide.

<http://www.cartercenter.org/viewdoc.asp?docID=1165&submenu=news>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com