|
Fending Off the Threat of Peace
by Norman Solomon
To fend off the threat of peace, determination is necessary.
Elected officials and high-level appointees must work effectively
with reporters and pundits.
This is no time for the U.S. government to risk taking "yes"
for an answer from Iraq. Guarding against the danger of peace, the
Bush administration has moved the goal posts, quickly pounding them
into the ground.
In early August, a State Department undersecretary swung a
heavy mallet. "Let there be no mistake," said John Bolton. "While
we also insist on the reintroduction of the weapons inspectors, our
policy at the same time insists on regime change in Baghdad -- and
that policy will not be altered, whether inspectors go in or not."
A sinister cloud briefly fell over the sunny skies for war.
The U.S. Congress got a public invitation. A letter from a top
Iraqi official "said congressional visitors and weapons experts of
their choice could visit any site in Iraq alleged to be used for
development of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons," USA Today
reported.
Summing up the diplomatic overture, the front page of the New
York Times informed readers that the letter "was apparently trying
to pit legislators against the Bush administration" (a pithy phrase
helping to quash a dastardly peace initiative). Later on, the
article noted that "the letter said members of Congress could bring
all the arms experts they wanted and should plan to stay three
weeks."
There may have been a moment of panic in Washington. On the
face of it, the Aug. 5 invitation was unequivocally stating that
members of the Senate and House -- plus some of the best and most
experienced weapons inspectors in the world -- could go to Iraq and
engage in a thorough inspection process. That's similar to what the
White House has been demanding of Iraq for many years.
The news had ominous potential. It could derail the war train
gaining so much momentum this summer. But U.S. media coverage
matched the bipartisan refusal by leaders in Congress to do
anything but scorn the offer.
Even before describing the invitation from Iraq's government,
the first words of the USA Today news story on Aug. 6 called it
"the latest Iraqi bid to complicate U.S. invasion plans." That's
some reporting! When our most powerful politicians are hell-bent on
starting a war, complete with human misery and death of
unfathomable proportions, then the last thing they want is
complications before the bloodshed gets underway.
Why should anyone in Washington try to defuse this crisis when
we have such a clear opportunity to light such an enormous fuse in
the Middle East?
Oh sure, here at home, there are always some people eager to
unleash the dogs of peace. Not content to pray, they actually
believe: Blessed be the peacemakers. They don't defer to the
machinery of war that grinds human beings as if they were mere
sausage. They don't make peace with how determined the Executive
Branch must be -- and how sheepish and even cowardly the members of
Congress must be -- so that the bombs can fall in all their glory.
One of the people who's trying to impede the war drive is
Scott Ritter, a former chief weapons inspector for the U.N. in
Iraq. "To date," Ritter says, "the Bush administration has been
unable -- or unwilling -- to back up its rhetoric concerning the
Iraqi threat with any substantive facts."
In Britain, the press is failing to welcome the next war. On
Aug. 4 in the Observer, foreign affairs editor Peter Beaumont
wrote: "The question now appears to be not whether there will be a
war, but when. The answer is that in war, as other matters, timing
is all. For President George W. Bush that timing will be dictated
by the demands of a domestic political agenda."
A news story in the July 30 edition of the Financial Times
began this way: "Rolf Ekeus, head of United Nations weapons
inspections in Iraq from 1991-97, has accused the U.S. and other
Security Council members of manipulating the U.N. inspections teams
for their own political ends. The revelation by one of the most
respected Swedish diplomats is certain to strengthen Iraq's
argument against allowing U.N. inspectors back into the country."
Such reporting, if widely pursued on this side of the
Atlantic, could seriously undermine the war planners. But don't
worry. The threat of peace is up against good ol' professional news
judgment here in the USA.
Norman Solomon's latest book is "The
Habits of Highly Deceptive Media." His syndicated
column focuses on media and politics.
Note to online readers:
:
- Audio/video of Norman Solomon's
recent appearance on C-SPAN's
"Washington Journal" is available at:
-
http://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/ndrive/wj20020703.rm?start=1:01:43
- Or you
can access the same one-hour program, listed under July 3, at:
http://www.cspan.org/journal
Buy the
related book (s) now:
Source:
by the same author:
|
