Attac Ireland/Attac na hEireann : Statement on Threat of War on Iraq

national | miscellaneous | news report Thursday January 30, 2003 00:23 by Ciaran Mc Kenna - Attac Ireland ireland at attac dot org c/o 10 Upper Camden Street, Dublin 2 041 9802387

Attac Ireland Statement on the United State's and Britain's planned invasion of Iraq. Covers potential impact on Iraqi civilians, possiblities for a functioning democracy post-war and privatisation of Iraqi oil resources.

Attac Ireland/Attac na hÉireann : Statement on Threat of War on Iraq:

The toppling of Saddam Hussein and his subsequent trial by a duly constituted court for crimes against humanity would be a most welcome development. A US led war on Iraq would probably result in such an outcome, regardless of US motives. Nevertheless, we are opposed to the proposed war on Iraq for the following reasons.

· Iraqi civilians and Iraqi soldiers, many of them conscripts, will die. . It is impossible to know how many, but it is very likely that there will be thousands of direct fatalities. Indirect fatalities - including those caused by depleted uranium - may be in the tens of thousands, or more. A recently leaked UN report estimated that "as many as 500,000 people could require treatment to a greater or lesser degree as a result of direct or indirect injuries”. And after 12 years of sanctions, the Iraqi health service is in no position to cope with such a crisis. Even if the establishment of a functioning democracy were a stated and credible war aim of the US and its allies, the likely human cost would still make it difficult to support the war.

Full Text and short summaries of leaked UN report on casualty estimates available at website of The Campaign Against Sanctions Against Iraq www.casi.org.uk/:

http://www.casi.org.uk/pr/pr030107undoc.html

· But it is extremely unlikely that a functioning democracy will in fact result from the war on Iraq. The US record of support for other dictators, including Hussein himself - though not a sufficient argument against the war per se - is relevant here in attempting to assess likely outcomes. Given that record and the post-war scenarios presented by the US to date, post-war regime change will probably amount to be a less tyrannous and more US-compliant dictatorship. Such an outcome cannot justify the almost certain deaths of thousands of Iraqis.

· Furthermore, the repeated intimations by oil experts close to the Bush Administration that they intend to privatise the Iraqi oil industry after the war are a cause for deep concern . ATTAC, as a movement which stands for greater citizen control over the process of globalisation, opposes these moves to deprive the Iraqi people of their natural resources for the benefit of multinational oil interests

· As to the question of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the mere possession of these by the Iraqi could not justify a war that will kill thousands. Only a clear and present danger of their use could make limited military action justifiable. It seems certain that the UN inspections will not establish the existence of such a clear and present danger.

· If there is no war and Saddam Hussein remains in power every attempt should then be made to render him accountable for his actions in Iraq, Iran and Kuwait. The Pinochet case is powerful precedent in this regard. While the International Criminal Court will not have jurisdiction over crimes committed before its inception, a decision by the US to cooperate with the ICC would be a major step toward establishing the rule of law internationally . The genuine application of the rule of international human rights law - and not just selective use of UN Security Resolutions - offers the best peaceful prospect of bringing Hussein and the many like him to account for their actions.

29.01.03