No future for destroyer of peace -- Akahata editorial, September 25U.S. President George W. Bush used his United Nations General Assembly speech to stress that the war on Iraq was legitimate, saying that it has helped to liberate Iraq and calling on all nations to "move forward" in "providing support" for Iraq, taking it for granted that Iraq remains under U.S. military occupation.
Although the president stressed the threats of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), he stopped short of explaining how they are connected with the war against Iraq.
His speech received a very cold response at the UNGA, which proves the failure of the Bush strategy.
Bush has cried wolf
At last year's UNGA, President Bush stressed the need to attack Iraq on the grounds that Iraq was harboring terrorists and possessing WMDs.
That this argument was groundless is evident because the United States, six months after the start of the attack on Iraq, is still unable to show a shred of evidence that supports the allegations.
On the contrary, the U.S. president was compelled to admit that no evidence supports Saddam Hussein's involvement in the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Then what was the purpose of the United States in sending the large number of troops to Iraq to kill many innocent Iraqi citizens by taking advantage of popular anger over the 9/11 terrorist attacks?
The loss of public confidence in the U.S. president is illustrated in falling support rates. Angry Americans are demanding that the president be held responsible for U.S. soldiers being killed day after day.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan criticized the U.S. preemptive attack as a "fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability rested for the last 58 years." This statement shows clearly that there was no justification for the U.S. attack on Iraq and that it was a lawless war aimed at destroying the peace principles of the world based on the U.N. Charter.
Annan expressed concern that "it could not set precedents that resulted in a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force". True, the Bush administration's strong desire to dominate the world by means of war and suppression is so dangerous that it would overturn the U.N. Charter-based order of peace.
The Bush administration, which started the war on Iraq after its failure to have the UNGA adopt a resolution authorizing the use of force on Iraq, is now obliged to seek support from member countries at the UNGA. This is because of the growing international criticism of the U.S. lawless war and the worsening Iraqi situation.
In the present-day world, there are two conflicting currents: one is the reckless use of force for world domination and the other an international order of peace centering on the U.N. Charter. This clearly shows how serious the success or failure of the U.S. policy of hegemony is.
This means that calls for an international order of peace in opposition to lawless war has increased to be a majority of U.N. member states and that this actually influences international politics.
No alternative but total withdrawal from Iraq
Bush requested U.N. member countries to provide troops and money without showing any plan to solve the present problems that have arisen from the war. But there's no prospects of the U.N. Security Council accepting the Bush request.
The common wisdom is that the larger the foreign presence, the more deaths. Japan's Prime Minister Koizumi's submissiveness to the U.S. president is exceptional since many governments are not likely to support it.
The only way for the United States to get free of the quagmire of the Iraq war is to let the United Nations play the main role in assisting Iraq, and to bring its armed forces home. (end)