Hang the war criminals and War reparations for Iraq
The occupiers have no
right! They have no security for their blood, property and honour and they
deserve none. Whilst the oppressed and the dispossessed have every right to
resist by any means necessary. There is no blame on them for any acts of
violence executed in the course of resisting the criminal aggressors. The above
stated principle has been practiced for centuries by every civilisation in
history. One could certainly argue that this has been enshrined within the UN
charter, where it clearly states the right of a sovereign nation to defend
itself, if attacked without provocation or authorisation. Absence of legal
authorisation was concurred by the overwhelming majority within the UN assembly
as they all rebuked Bush for his “unilateralism”. A clear majority will not
amount to any weight here; there is no room for democracy when it works against
the US interests. It can be applied as a stick over Iraq or elsewhere but the
good old yanks are completely exempt from it. Similarly the US advocates that
countries and individuals be tried by the ICC (International Criminal Court) but
yet it refuses to be subjected to the same jurisdiction by itself. Likewise we
see the invention of certain terminologies for the convenience of the powerful.
Had a weak nation resorted to “unilateralism” the action would have been
termed a crime and the nation would have been classified as a rogue state and
consequently dealt with severely by the application of economic sanctions and
military force. As for moral and ethical arguments deployed for a regime change,
apart from being an after thought, it can be simply dismissed on the basis that
the Iraqi regime was a product of US Imperialism. Furthermore, treatment of the
illegal captives held in the Guantanamo Bay cages exclude Bush and his cohorts
automatically from advocating any moral or ethical arguments. No nation can
advocate moral or ethical premise when it behaves like an animal. They exhibit
shameless overt hypocrisy by violating all its fundamental principals. It makes
one wonder whether the word “hypocrisy” has been erased from the American
dictionary!
Under such
circumstances how is it that Bush was allowed to address the United Nations,
whilst he is occupying a sovereign nation without any UN mandate? How is it that
leaders of the Muslim countries sat unashamedly in the UN assembly and listened
to the speech of this murderer and a war criminal? Cannot the Arab League and
OIC (Organisation of Islamic Countries) for once show some teeth even if it
can’t bark or bite, to raise at least a small symbolic protest? To the
contrary each member is ready to send its soldiers as mercenaries to do the
dirty work for the US in return for some meagre financial benefit.
The primary and legal
pretext for the war – WMD, has been proven to be clearly false. The only WMDs
visible are the ones that have been dropped by the coalition forces, be they
Napalm, Cluster bombs on civilians, Cruise missiles, JDAMS, Daisy Cutters etc.
The combined destructive power is the same as any WMD. Jack Straw, Tony Blair
and Donald Rumsfeld may argue that absence of evidence is not itself evidence.
In another words, assume the evidence to exist, dispense the verdict of guilty
and execute the punishment. Simply put “guilty until proven innocent”. Such
methods of reasoning implies that Messrs Straw, Blair and Rumsfeld would
not object if their houses were bull-dozed without a legal warrant
(unilaterally) in search of stolen goods, resulting in their arrest and the
killing of their families (collateral damage). They would be perfectly happy to
accept the judgment even if the alleged stolen goods were not found, as Jack
Straw says, absence of evidence does not prove the non-existence of the
evidence.
So where is the
justice for those who have lost their lives as a result of Bush’s
“unilateralism”? First of all Iraq as a nation is clearly entitled for War
reparations. As for the relatives of Iraqi victims, they have every right to
seek just retribution. It would be much better to seek this retribution in
mainland US and UK rather then in Iraq. The innocent foot soldiers are simply
following orders, many of whom are from the impoverished families looking for a
way out of poverty as reports within the US indicates. They are being sacrificed
to make the rich corporations even richer. A high percentage of the US army on
the grounds is composed of Hispanics and blacks. You will not find the sons of
Clinton, Bush, Cheney, Blair, Rumsfeld, Straw, Hoon, and Wolfwitz. The real
guilty ones are these chicken hawk politicians, along with the journalists and
the media moguls who deliberately aided in the manufacturing of this war. In
order to prevent or at least placate the responses from the Iraqi victims-
normally described as "terrorism", the UK and US public,
should take their leaders to task and demonstrate to them and the world that
they have a notion of fair play and justice. The masses need to convey to their
leaders that preaching to the world about freedom and injustices are
not false notions that can be used to serve the whims and desires of the powerful.
This should be done not just for the victims in Iraq but above all for the
innocent British and US soldiers who have lost their lives. Resignation or
impeachment is not good enough. Since innocent blood has been split, they must
equally pay with their blood. Hang’em high in the US, send them to the gallows
with in the UK. This is the recipe to curb terrorism (retaliation) and build a
fairer and a peaceful world.
Yamin Zakaria
UK, London