Disastrous Consequences of the War in Iraq

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

Disastrous Consequences of the War in Iraq

Kofi Annan Urges Leaders to Restore Respect for Rule of Law

UN Secretary-General’s Address to the General Assembly

Less than two weeks after Tony Blair told the TUC that it was domestic issues rather than foreign policy on which he wished to concentrate, "that the daily lives of our citizens in Britain are not about foreign affairs," the Prime Minister has again found that is difficult to escape from the consequences of the illegal war and occupation of Iraq. He redefined the situation in Iraq, calling the turmoil and violence there a "second conflict" against global terrorism as chaos deepened and the insurgency engulfed more of Iraq.

The disastrous consequences of the Labour government’s foreign policy has been demonstrated in a dramatic way by the plight of Kenneth Bigley in Iraq, but this has also been a week when the Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, has been forced to criticise the US over its refusal to admit another British citizen, Yusef Islam, the former singer Cat Stevens, who was refused entry on "national security grounds" and deported. This week too, the Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Mike Jackson, has admitted that British troops in Iraq are "back at war," and are now "fighting a counter-insurgency war", while this week the Secretary-General of the UN, Kofi Annan, reiterated his view that the war and occupation of Iraq are illegal, condemned the notion of "might making right" and reminded all governments that none are above the law.

Britain’s warmongering foreign policy, the government’s determination not to be diverted from its course whatever the consequences, is totally exposed and stands condemned by all democratic people. At the beginning of the week Tony Blair was urging everyone to forget that the war against Iraq was illegal and that the majority of the world was opposed to it. He argued that what was now at stake was " the values that we in countries like this hold dear," and the freedom and sovereignty of the Iraqi people. But when the Iraqi authorities announced that they were considering the release of women prisoners, who are their own citizens, the US government with Britain’s support immediately intervened to prevent such action, and demonstrated that even on such matters the Iraqi authorities have neither freedom nor independence. It was in such circumstances that the brother of Paul Bigley spoke of the "sabotage" of his brother’s release from detention.

What is clear is that the governments of Britain and the US are totally opposed to the Iraqi people exercising any sovereignty, that they have as little concern for the Iraqi people as they do for their own citizens and that their interests in Iraq are dictated solely by the economic and geo-political aims of the big monopolies. This situation, which has already led to such disastrous consequences, cost the lives of so many, and which threatens the world with even greater dangers must be addressed by the workers and people of Britain. The times cry out for the people to find the means to empower themselves, to become the decision-makers and establish a new and modern foreign policy for Britain so as prevent further disasters throughout the world.

In statements to the press following last week's comment that the war in Iraq was illegal, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stressed that the war demonstrated the need to follow the principles of the United Nations Charter and not take unilateral action.

Annan's office said that in the end everybody has now come to the conclusion that it is best to work together with allies and through the UN to deal with issues such as Iraq. "I hope," he added, "that we do not see another Iraq-type operation for a long time." In future, the Secretary General stressed, armed action against a nation such as Iraq must go through the UN and have the support of the international community.

UN spokesman Fred Eckhard said today that the Secretary General had long had this position and that the Charter forbids pre-emptive attacks such as the invasion of Iraq. "He has over the past more than a year used the words 'not in conformity with the Charter' to describe his view of the Iraq war," Kofi Annan's spokesperson said.

"Since the war, he has been emphasising the need for nations on the Security Council and the UN membership as a whole to pull together, saying it is in everyone's interest that stability be restored to Iraq," Eckhard added, "so once the invasion took place, he did not look back, he looked forward."

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that Annan's earlier comment to the BBC that the invasion of Iraq was illegal was "not a very useful statement to make at this point" and called it a "side-issue".

Following Annan's words speech to the UN General Assembly, US President George Bush gave a speech to the UN which critics described as remarkable in its arrogance and lack of contrition. In spite of the fact that the stated reasons for the Anglo-US invasion – namely weapons of mass destruction and al-Qaida connections with Saddam Hussein – have been disproved, Bush refused to show any regrets. He instead demanded that the UN help build an Iraq that is "secure, democratic, federal and free", justifying his attack on Baghdad as being carried out to "enforce the demands of the world".

Saying that the "people of Iraq have regained sovereignty", Bush added that interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, who was present, needed more help from the United Nations than it was giving. Critics noted that the US president glaringly ignored the prisoner abuse scandal and fell back upon his usual use of terrorism as a scare tactic, warning that "we can expect terror attacks to escalate" in both Iraq and Afghanistan as elections in both nations approach.

Observers also noted that perhaps because he was aware of the animosity of the Arab world towards the US, Bush then called upon Israel to stop further building in the West Bank and to dismantle unauthorised settlements. Saying that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon "should impose a settlement freeze, dismantle unauthorised outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and avoid any actions that prejudice final negotiations," Bush nonetheless took a side-swipe at Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, saying that world leaders should "withdraw all favour and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause".

(material taken from Radio Havana Cuba)

New York, 21 September 2004

Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is good to see so many countries represented here at such a high level. I know this reflects your understanding that, in these difficult times, the United Nations is – as you stated four years ago in the Millennium Declaration – "the indispensable common house of the entire human family".

Indeed today, more than ever, the world needs an effective mechanism through which to seek common solutions to common problems. That is what this Organisation was created for. Let’s not imagine that, if we fail to make good use of it, we will find any more effective instrument.

This time next year you will be meeting to review progress in implementing the Millennium Declaration. By then I hope you will be ready to take bold decisions together on the full range of issues covered in the Declaration, helped by the report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, which will be available before the end of this year. As I said a year ago, we have reached a fork in the road. If you, the political leaders of the world’s nations, cannot reach agreement on the way forward, history will take the decisions for you, and the interests of your peoples may go by default.

Today I will not seek to pre-judge those decisions, but to remind you of the all-important framework in which they should be taken – namely, the rule of law, in each country and in the world.

The vision of "a government of laws and not of men" is almost as old as civilisation itself. In a hallway not far from this podium is a replica of the code of laws promulgated by Hammurabi more than three thousand years ago, in the land we now call Iraq. Much of Hammurabi’s code now seems impossibly harsh. But etched into its tablets are principles of justice that have been recognised, if seldom fully implemented, by almost every human society since his time:

Legal protection for the poor.

Restraints on the strong, so they cannot oppress the weak.

Laws publicly enacted, and known to all.

That code was a landmark in mankind’s struggle to build an order where, instead of might making right, right would make might. Many nations represented in this chamber can proudly point to founding documents of their own that embody that simple concept. And this Organisation – your United Nations – is founded on the same principle.

Yet today the rule of law is at risk around the world. Again and again, we see fundamental laws shamelessly disregarded – those that ordain respect for innocent life, for civilians, for the vulnerable – especially children.

To mention only a few flagrant and topical examples:

In Iraq, we see civilians massacred in cold blood, while relief workers, journalists and other non-combatants are taken hostage and put to death in the most barbarous fashion. At the same time, we have seen Iraqi prisoners disgracefully abused.

In Darfur, we see whole populations displaced, and their homes destroyed, while rape is used as a deliberate strategy.

In northern Uganda, we see children mutilated, and forced to take part in acts of unspeakable cruelty.

In Beslan, we have seen children taken hostage and brutally massacred. In Israel we see civilians, including children, deliberately targeted by Palestinian suicide bombers. And in Palestine we see homes destroyed, lands seized, and needless civilian casualties caused by Israel’s excessive use of force.

And all over the world we see people being prepared for further such acts, through hate propaganda directed against Jews, against Muslims, against anyone who can be identified as different from one’s own group.

Excellencies,

No cause, no grievance, however legitimate in itself, can begin to justify such acts. They put all of us to shame. Their prevalence reflects our collective failure to uphold the law, and to instil respect for it in our fellow men and women. We all have a duty to do whatever we can to restore that respect.

To do so, we must start from the principle that no one is above the law, and no one should be denied its protection. Every nation that proclaims the rule of law at home must respect it abroad; and every nation that insists on it abroad must enforce it at home. Yes, the rule of law starts at home. But in too many places it remains elusive. Hatred, corruption, violence and exclusion go without redress. The vulnerable lack effective recourse, while the powerful manipulate laws to retain power and accumulate wealth. At times even the necessary fight against terrorism is allowed to encroach unnecessarily on civil liberties. At the international level, all states – strong and weak, big and small – need a framework of fair rules, which each can be confident that others will obey. Fortunately, such a framework exists. From trade to terrorism, from the law of the sea to weapons of mass destruction, States have created an impressive body of norms and laws. This is one of our Organisation’s proudest achievements.

And yet this framework is riddled with gaps and weaknesses. Too often it is applied selectively, and enforced arbitrarily. It lacks the teeth that turn a body of laws into an effective legal system.

Where enforcement capacity does exist, as in the Security Council, many feel it is not always used fairly or effectively. Where rule of law is most earnestly invoked, as in the Commission on Human Rights, those invoking it do not always practise what they preach. Those who seek to bestow legitimacy must themselves embody it; and those who invoke international law must themselves submit to it.

Just as, within a country, respect for the law depends on the sense that all have a say in making and implementing it, so it is in our global community. No nation must feel excluded. All must feel that international law belongs to them, and protects their legitimate interests. Rule of law as a mere concept is not enough. Laws must be put into practice, and permeate the fabric of our lives.

It is by strengthening and implementing disarmament treaties, including their verification provisions, that we can best defend ourselves against the proliferation – and potential use – of weapons of mass destruction.

It is by applying the law that we can deny financial resources and safe havens to terrorists – an essential element in any strategy for defeating terrorism. It is by reintroducing the rule of law, and confidence in its impartial application, that we can hope to resuscitate societies shattered by conflict.

It is the law, including Security Council resolutions, which offers the best foundation for resolving prolonged conflicts – in the Middle East, in Iraq, and around the world. And it is by rigorously upholding international law that we can, and must, fulfil our responsibility to protect innocent civilians from genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. As I warned this Assembly five years ago, history will judge us very harshly if we let ourselves be deflected in this task, or think we are excused from it, by invocations of national sovereignty.

The Security Council has just requested that I appoint an international commission to investigate reports of human rights violations in Darfur and determine whether acts of genocide have been committed. I shall do so with all speed. But let no one treat this as a respite, during which events in that devastated region continue to take their course. Regardless of their legal definition, things are happening there which must shock the conscience of every human being. The African Union has nobly taken the lead and the responsibility in providing monitors and a protective force in Darfur – as well as seeking a political settlement, which alone can bring lasting security. But we all know the present limitations of this new-born Union. We must give it every possible support. Let no one imagine that this affair concerns Africans only. The victims are human beings, whose human rights must be sacred to us all. We all have a duty to do whatever we can to rescue them, and do it now.

Excellencies,

Last month, I promised the Security Council that I would make the Organisation’s work to strengthen the rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies a priority for the remainder of my tenure.

By the same token, I urge you all to do more to foster the rule of law at home and abroad. I ask all of you here today to take advantage of the arrangements we have made for you to sign treaties on the protection of civilians – treaties that you yourselves have negotiated – and then, go back home, to implement them fully and in good faith. And I implore you to give your full support to the measures I shall bring before you, during this session, to improve the security of United Nations staff. Those non-combatants, who voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way to assist their fellow men and women, surely deserve your protection, as well as your respect.

Throughout the world, Excellencies, the victims of violence and injustice are waiting; waiting for us to keep our word. They notice when we use words to mask inaction. They notice when laws that should protect them are not applied.

I believe we can restore and extend the rule of law throughout the world. But ultimately, that will depend on the hold that the law has on our consciences. This Organisation was founded in the ashes of a war that brought untold sorrow to mankind. Today we must look again into our collective conscience, and ask ourselves whether we are doing enough.

Excellencies,

Each generation has its part to play in the age-long struggle to strengthen the rule of law for all – which alone can guarantee freedom for all.

Let our generation not be found wanting.

Thank you very much.