Welcome to the North Lake College Newspaper

A considerate nation?

By Jonathan Pechon
Editor

This month millions of people around the world marched in protest of war in Iraq. From London to Baghdad, San Francisco to Madrid, even in our own terrorist target of New York City, people marched, prayed and hoped that the leader of this country would heed their words. His response was brief.

“I respectfully disagree.”

This statement describes, in short, how the Bush administration has decided to act towards the rest of the world. While major figures ranging from Nelson Mandela to the Pope himself have stepped forward to condemn a unilateral attack, the United States has pressed forward and continued its threats.

Let me clarify a few things here: I believe that Saddam Hussein is a despot whose reign should be ended. His record of atrocities against human rights is definitely lengthy enough for the world to take notice and demand his removal. He has run his country into the ground and failed to serve his people.

The costs of unilateral action by the U.S., however, are severe. This country’s relationships with France and Germany, as well as others, faces the possibility of severe damage. The European Union is suffering from internal rifts as members struggle to form a consensus.

Both France and Germany have practical reasons to oppose a war. French and German purchases of Iraqi oil could be in jeopardy in the case of war. They are much closer to the action than we are, and are much easier targets for acts of terrorism.

Both are also following the will of their people. Recent polls show that 66 percent of the French polled oppose conflict in Iraq. Seventy-one percent of Germans feel the same way. While their Prime Minister Tony Blair supports us, the people of England fail to agree: only 29 percent of Britons support their leader’s policy.

Currently, U.S. House and Senate members are proposing sanctions against both France and Germany for their failures to consent to war with Iraq. The threat of a trade war with the EU looms over the situation. We criticize the two countries, but we don’t consider how the consequences of our actions would affect them or others.

A war could destabilize the entire Middle East, causing chaos that the U.S. is not suited to handle alone. Projections of the resulting conflict range from small uprisings to the use of nuclear and/or chemical weapons on Israel, as well as vastly increased incidents of terrorism abroad. Worst-case scenarios describe a conflict lasting for years.

The consequences of allowing Hussein to continue to hold power in Iraq are severe as well. It is not a question of whether or not we should let him remain in power, but whether force is necessary. If it becomes the consensus of the world to exert force to remove him, then so be it.

He has been offered the option of voluntary exile. It is the simplest answer to the issue, and the strongest moral choice. It is a hope of mine that he chooses to leave, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

Much of the world is seeking an alternative answer to war. They are demanding that both the U.S. and Iraqi governments listen. They hope for an answer other than violence, and are willing to work for it.

Is it wrong for us to concede that they might have a point?