| letzte Änderung am 22. Nov. 2002 | |
LabourNet Germany ARCHIV! Aktuelle Meldungen im neuen LabourNet Germany |
|
| Home -> Krieg -> 11. Sept -> Gewerkschaft Int. -> Felton | | Suchen |
Einleitend betont Felton, dass es sich um eine persönliche Stellungnahme handelt, die er aus moralischen Gründen abgibt. Er benennt dann einige zentrale Punkte der innenpolitischen antigewerkschaftlichen Politik Bushs, wie die Privatisierung der Post, die Beschneidung gewerkschaftlicher Rechte des neuen Departments für Innere Sicherheit oder seine Geldspritzen für die grossen Unternehmen, speziell nach dem 11.9.01. Warum also Vertrauen in seine Aussenpolitik haben?
Auch Amerikaner werden leiden, schreibt Felton weiter und verweist auf die Toten in Spätfolge des zweiten Golfkriegs vor 10 Jahren. Würde es gegen Terrorismus gehen, müsste vor allem über Saudi-Arabien diskutiert werden, es geht aber eben auch um Öl und andere wirtschaftliche Interessen.
Bush nutze die Emotionen nach dem Anschlag in New York hemmungslos aus, um seine Ziele zu verfolgen und seine Doktrin vom vorbeugenden Militärschlag zeige den reaktionären Charakter seiner Politik in aller Deutlichkeit - denn, würde dies für alle gelten, könne heute auch der Irak losschlagen, weil er ja von den USA bedroht werde.
Ein solcher Militärschlag werde das Leben nirgendwo sicherer machen führt Felton in bezug auf andere Beiträge in Gewerkschaftszeitungen aus, und zitiert auch den früheren Waffeninspekteur Ritter.
Abschliessend kritisiert Felton die Haltung der US Gewerkschaften und wiederholt eine Passage aus seinem Editorial der letzten Ausgabe der Postgewerkschaftszeitung, in der er schrieb, es sähe so aus, als ob die meisten leitenden Gewerkschaftsfunktionäre seit dem 11.9 schlafwandelten....
NALC 480-481
This is an article of conscience. It might not make me popular in some quarters; it would be a lot safer to write an article about the Post Office...
But I feel compelled to say what needs to be said. This article expresses my own personal views, not those of the Executive Board or the Local.
Some will agree with the views expressed here, some will disagree. Hopefully, this will change a few people’s minds, and get a lively discussion going on the workroom floor about the most important question facing all Americans today..
Our country is preparing for a war with Iraq – a war that will not benefit postal workers, or the vast majority of the American people. It will not make us freer, it will not make us safer, it will not make our lives any better. I believe the labor movement should be speaking out, loudly and proudly, against George Bush’s plans to invade Iraq. George Bush wants to privatize the Post Office. He wants to bust Unions throughout this country. His plans for a Homeland Security Department include depriving 170,000 workers of union rights. He wants the government to turn its head while corrupt CEOs steal their employees’ pension money. He smiles when corporations lay off workers in the U.S. to hire sweatshop labor overseas. His economic stimulus package after 9/11 gave millions to wealthy corporate CEOs and gave the shaft to working people (especially airline employees). In short, George Bush is an enemy of working people and a friend to the super-rich. So why should we trust his foreign policy?
If we go to war, many young working people will lose their lives. They will die on the battlefield and they will continue to die after the fighting is over. Nearly 7,800 veterans have died since the Gulf War. Their mysterious illness may have been caused by depleted uranium weapons employed by the U.S. It may have been caused by untested vaccines administered by our military. It may have been caused by the weapons used by Iraq. We don’t know for sure. But we do know that the casualty rate will be much higher this time. And, although it is not popular to worry about this, the death toll among Iraqi civilians will be enormous. If these deaths – of our sons and daughters, perhaps even some of our coworkers – were in the cause of defending freedom, fighting terrorism, or preserving our security, then maybe it would be worthwhile. I don’t believe it for a minute.
We are told this is part of a war against terrorism. But if we really wanted to go after the country that helps Al Queda the most – the country that finances and nurtures their growth – we would go after Saudi Arabia. But the oil companies don’t want us to invade Saudi Arabia; that would interfere with their profits.
We are told we have the right to invade Iraq because they have chemical and biological weapons. These weapons are immoral, and should be destroyed.
First of all, it is hard to point the finger of blame when the depleted uranium our country left behind after the Gulf War continues to kill innocent Iraqi children. Secondly, whether Iraq still has those weapons is an open question. But we do know that these weapons were developed in the United States and given to Iraq at a time when the two countries were allies. To invade Iraq because "You still have those immoral weapons we gave you" would be the height of hypocrisy.
We are being told that Saddam Hussein is a ruthless tyrant and an evil man. This is absolutely true. But the United States supports regimes that are just as evil when those governments are friendly to U.S, corporations. In most of the world, it is known that U.S.-imposed sanctions have killed half-a-million Iraqi children since the Gulf War. It is known that we have been bombing that country constantly, even though we are at peace. It is painful to say this, but America does not occupy the high moral ground when confronting Iraq. Given these facts, we should ask what is the real reason behind Bush’s plans for war.
This war is about crude self-interest, and crude oil. Numerous sources (e.g., The Washington Post, The Nation) have reported that the people Bush wants to put in power in Iraq will turn that country’s massive oil reserves over to American oil companies. That, and a desire for military and political domination of the region, are the real motives for Bush’s war. Let me ask you, when was the last time the oil companies did you a favor?
Aren’t these the same companies that shamelessly doubled prices at the pump in the aftermath of 9/11? Should our brothers, sisters, children, and coworkers die to boost their profits?
Bush’s foreign policy is nothing but an extension of his domestic policy – attacking working people (whose sons and daughters would die) to benefit corporations. The same was true under Clinton and other Presidents (Democratic and Republican) going back decades. When they talked about "American interests" at stake somewhere else in the world, they meant corporate interests. And the same is true, despite the "good versus evil" rhetoric, in Iraq.
George Bush is counting on the outpouring of emotion that followed 9/11 to obtain support for this invasion. He would like to manipulate the honest emotional reaction of the American people: the anger, the coming together, the pride, and the patriotism. He is counting on appealing to our emotions while concealing the true purpose of this war.
But I believe that true patriotism demands that individuals speak out for the interests of the American people as a whole, and not follow blindly when our President wants to lead us into an ill-conceived war. In fact, I believe President Bush has been cynically manipulating us ever since 9/11. A whole lot of evil has been perpetrated under the disguise of "War on Terrorism," including the massive giveaway of money to corporations, the suppression of civil liberties, and increased military spending that boosts profits of defense contractors who donate to his party. Meanwhile, the Social Security fund continues to be raided, and the needs of working and poor people take a back seat. None of this is making the average American any more secure.
But Bush expects us to buy whatever he packages as part of a "War on Terrorism." It makes me angry to see him try to manipulate my honest outrage at what happened in New York (where I grew up) a year ago, to enlist my support in an attack on the rights of working people. And it makes me angry to see him try to manipulate the most noble sentiments among our young people to send them off to kill and be killed in the belief they are defending freedom. I feel it is my patriotic duty not just to speak out, but to join with others and organize for a rational point of view.
George Bush would like us all to remain in a trance, and accept uncritically whatever he says in the name of fighting terror. But once you emerge from the fog, it is easy to see through the rhetoric, especially with regard to Iraq.
First, the doctrine of the preemptive strike. The idea that we can invade another country, because of something we expect them to do to us, is totally ridiculous. By that logic, every country in the world today, except perhaps Switzerland, could find a reason to attack their neighbor. To make this point, I’ll quote Dan Sullivan of the Kalamazoo APWU Local, in an article entitled "War with Iraq won’t make world more peaceful."
Dan wrote in The Union Flash: "The spin doctors of the Bush Administration insist the United States has every right to make a regime change wherever a nation poses a threat to us. Of course, if every nation in the world operated under this Bush Doctrine, we’d have utter chaos in the world. After all, nations always have disputes and often feel threatened. Under the Bush Doctrine, Saddam Hussein would also have the right to attack us, as we now clearly threaten him. The Bush Doctrine violates the most basic principles of International Law and Christian morality…"
Second, the issue of national security. Even if the war goes well, we will be less secure. Al Qaeda, which is not based in Iraq, will be able to recruit with new evidence of American arrogance (really George Bush’s arrogance, not the American people, but Islamic radicals won’t make that distinction). And, as Al Gore pointed out, an invasion of Iraq could squander the sympathy and good will much of the world felt towards America after 9/11. Because most of the world would understand that an invasion of Iraq was not a defensive measure against terror, but an aggressive move for economic and political domination of the region. So terrorists will recruit, and the rest of the world would be less willing to help us, after an invasion of Iraq. In short, an invasion of Iraq increases the likelihood of more terrorist acts against American civilians. And that’s if the invasion goes well! There are worst-case scenarios involving massive numbers of casualties, or an Arab oil embargo, or war spreading throughout the Middle East, that would be absolutely disastrous.
Thirdly, I want to mention one extremely well informed person who sees through the rhetoric. His name is Scott Ritter. He is a former U.S. Marine, and, like Bush, he is a Republican. He has impeccable credentials: he was an arms inspector in Iraq for 7 years, from 1991 through 1998. He is quoted in the Union Flash article as follows: "This is not about the security of the United States. This is about domestic American politics. The national security of the United States of America has been hijacked by a handful of neo-conservatives who are using their position of authority to pursue their own ideologically-driven political ambitions. The day we go to war for that reason is the day we have failed collectively as a nation."
With a few exceptions, the labor movement has been strangely silent about the coming invasion of Iraq. In fact, like much of America, the leadership of the labor movement has been totally uncritical of George Bush’s War on Terrorism. And the President has taken advantage of our trust. In a Previous article (in the July-August issue) I documented some of the ways that a war on unions has been conducted under the disguise of a War on Terrorism. At that time, I wrote: "It seems like many of our leaders have been sleepwalking since 9/11, as if the only item on our national agenda is terrorism. Our enemies haven’t been sleeping. They’ve been aggressively attacking worker rights and adding to their big bank accounts."
The coming war on Iraq is more of the same. It will endanger the security of working people and all civilians in America. It will distort our economy – at a minimum taking away resources from what working people need, and possibly throwing the whole economy into turmoil. It will, as Bush intends, divert attention from the corruption of CEOs who are robbing working people all over this country. It will benefit the oil companies, but not the average American. And, if the truth be known, it will not be a war that will make us proud to be American citizens. For these reasons, the labor movement, from the President of the AFL-CIO on down, should be speaking out to try to stop this coming war. As a patriotic American, all I can do is my share. I thank the membership for taking the time to read what I have to say on the subject, and, in the spirit of democracy, I welcome differing opinions.
| LabourNet Germany | Top ^ |