::::::::
Consider the following three statements:
"And we will show our enemies that the open debate they believe is a fatal weakness is the great strength that has allowed democracies to flourish and succeed." (George W. Bush, Wall St. Journal, 1/3/07)
"Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal." (Kofi Annan, former UN Secretary-General, when pressed by a BBC interviewer on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, 9/16/04)
".whether the war is lawful" is a political question that could not be judged in a military court. ".contemptuous speech by an officer directed at the president'' is grounds for prosecution under military law. Such a challenge to the war could "prevent the orderly accomplishment of the mission or present a clear danger to loyalty, discipline, mission or morale of the troops.'' (Army Lt. Col. John Head, refusing to dismiss charges against 1st Lt. Ehren Watada in his upcoming court-martial both for refusing to deploy and criticizing the president, 1/17/07)
The president has given no indication that he will intervene in Lt. Watada's case, illustrating that the "open debate" he is so sensitive about reaches its limit at the point it threatens to challenge authority.
A violation of the UN Charter is not merely some arcane point of international law. The Charter is a treaty ratified by the US Senate in 1945, therefore becoming, according to the Constitution, the supreme law of the United States.
Lt. Col. Head's position is hardly controversial. The military is particularly inhospitable to individual appeals to morality and legality. As such, it will be the last bastion of "support" our president can claim, this support owing to its coerced allegiance. Summing it up succinctly - pin medals on those who fight, jail those who refuse!
It should be clear by now - should have been clear long ago - that rulers of all kinds will cloak their most base and secret motives in the decent clothes of morality and goodness to win the approval of the masses. We, as a people, rely on our leaders. We are inclined to be kind, understanding, and generous. This makes us extremely exploitable because a leader may tell us that he is acting in these ways on our behalf merely to win our consent.
We are truly serving this country when we stand up for the ideals it professes for itself, among these, life, liberty, and justice for all. Since all countries are made up of people, we should not be surprised to find that we equally serve our country when we serve all the people who inhabit this planet of ours.
There is a well-known term, neighborhood gang. We understand what that conjures - we detest it - but we don't fully appreciate what that conjures in the vastly larger neighborhood of the world community because we've taken sides. Our side. Our side against theirs. When we act purely out of self-interest, while hiding behind the cover of universal ideals, we possess no greater moral authority than the local street enforcer. Sometimes they have flags too.
by James Rothenberg [send him email], who is a an activist and Populist Party columnist.
