National Peace Foundation Statement on War and Peace, Democracy and the International Order

The National Peace Foundation opposes war with Iraq. We are especially opposed to such a war if it is undertaken by the United States and a few partners without the strong endorsement of such a course by the United Nations Security Council. The U. S. administration rightly placed the matter before the Security Council. In that arena, the U. S. and the United Kingdom have acted as the primary challengers to the Iraqi regime for its failure to fully disarm itself of suspected weapons of mass destruction. Expert investigators are in Iraq carrying out the Security Council's instructions and frequently reporting their findings to the Council. Under Resolution 1441 no time limit was specified for the inspectors to complete their work, although, it was to be done expeditiously.

In this situation it is the Council, not the chief prosecutor - the United States - that must make a decision about Iraq's compliance or lack thereof, and it is the Council, not just the U.S. administration, that must decide the next steps.

Among the Advisors, Directors and members of the National Peace Foundation, as in the broader peace communities, there are those who believe that war may sometimes be justified as a last resort to defend large segments of humanity against aggression or persecution or annihilation. There are others among us who believe that war is never justified, that it is inherently wrong, always inflicting a terrible cost on the innocent ones.

In this case, our opposition to the war follows President Jimmy Carter's criteria: Iraq does not present the United States or other nations with a clear and immediate threat; there are other options that should take precedence, including those that are being followed by the Security Council; and, undertaking war now, without full UN sanction, is likely to produce outcomes that are opposite to the objectives posited by the U.S. - including democracy, stability and security of the people of Iraq and the region. War now, essentially initiated unilaterally by the United States, is wrong morally and practically and will profoundly disturb the foundations of the international order.

The hard-won codes of international conduct that the United States and other democracies have together erected over fifty years, through diplomacy and joint political action, and the global outpouring of support after 9/11 for a sustained effort to eliminate terrorism - all this can vanish in a moment.

With respect to effects, we believe that the U.S. administration continues to ignore or undervalue the likelihood that an essentially unilateral war against Iraq will generate millions of new "anti-Americans" throughout the Arab and Muslim world, from North Africa, across the Middle East and the Asian continent, to Indonesia. War against Iraq will not be a regional affair, but world-shaking venture that will leave the United States, and American citizens at home and wherever they may be, more vulnerable than ever. Here too, we are convinced that the consequences are likely to be just the opposite of what the U. S. administration aims to achieve by a military conquest.

The consequences of such broad and deep resentment of U. S. policy significantly increases the possibility that the United States and its citizenry may ultimately suffer from the same kind of weapons of mass destruction we are trying to eliminate. Iraq is not the only state with potential or actual weapons of mass destruction. Especially in an unstable world rogue states may use a U. S.-led war as a justification for accelerating their development of such weapons.

Another troubling factor: the U. S. administration repeatedly cites the number of ignored UN Security Council resolutions aimed at Iraq over twelve years as a reason not to wait a week, or a few months, longer to initiate military action. Meanwhile, the administration ignores, as preceding administrations have done, the many United Nations resolutions adopted over 30-plus years demanding that Israel withdraw from the Occupied Territories. The latter requirement, many of us believe, is a more central key to Middle East peace than any other.

Our view of a war is influenced by great moral and spiritual leaders of our time, including President Carter, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, Pope John Paul II, heads of virtually all churches and religious organizations in the United States and elsewhere. Archbishop Tutu, Ambassador Andrew Young, the Reverend Dr. Paul Smith, the late Reverend Dr. George Hill, the Reverend Bob Edgar, and others who have been our close colleagues have been special inspirations as we witness their example. We acknowledge equally the voices of millions of citizens throughout the world, and thousands of our own members, who have risen up in opposition to the war

We are perhaps most deeply affected by the Foundation's direct experience in conflicts and conflict zones over the past twelve years. Even short wars in relatively small areas produce, in addition to many thousands of casualties, even more victims - the hordes of refugees whose lives are ruined and whose children have no hope. The cease-fire between Armenia and Azerbaijan still holds after a decade, but as there has been no political settlement, hundreds of thousands of Azerbaijanis remain physically isolated in miserable camps. Thousands of Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan remain socially isolated and in poverty in Armenia, the "mother country" they never knew and which cannot afford to take care of them. In the Caucasus and Southern Russia, hundreds of miles away from the Chechen war zone, communities and peoples who did not imagine they had a stake in the conflict are being forced to bear heavy new burdens despite their own precarious existence. Can it be different with Iraq? There is no chance!

The war mentality has already done serious injury to the name of democracy and the international order. Historically, enemies demonize each other. Now we are demonizing old friends and longtime allies - independent democracies that have an equal right to formulate their own approaches to the ills of the world, or timetables to solve those ills. There is blame on various sides for the nature and tone of the recent debate. But it is especially discomfiting, for us and others who know that friends and coalitions are essential in this world, to hear fellow Americans who hold high public positions deprecate those who have long been, and in other enterprises still are, stalwart colleagues. Specifically, France and the French, Germany and the Germans are denigrated, even as German and French military personnel work alongside Americans in Afghanistan to stabilize a country that has recently hosted those who inflicted such grief on our country and brought new terror to the world.

We urge our government, and all governments involved in the current crisis, to recommit themselves to respect for other voices, to the United Nations as the best hope for international order, to the true spirit of democracy, and to peace paths -- even though they may take longer to bring us to desired destinations.

• Click here to view the National Peace Foundation Statement of 911
• Click here to view the National Peace Foundation Statement of Iraq War