Amid allegations of massive fraud in the Ukrainian presidential run-off election, thousands of people have filled the streets in protest. Withstanding bitterly cold weather, with little food and sleep, these protesters have lined the streets of Kiev for two weeks refusing to accept the falsified election results.
To most Americans this kind of civil disobedience is a foreign concept. It is relic of the turbulent '60s. Americans today prefer to remain card-carrying members of the silent majority. That tendency is destructive to our democracy. For over a year now the sons and daughters of America have lost their young lives in the brutal conflict over Iraq's future. But protests have died down in recent months, even as the war escalates.
When the initial case for war was being made there were demonstrations both in opposition to and support for the war. People eagerly watched the nightly news to hear the latest decisions and justifications, but as the war has dragged on most have become complacent observers.
As we prepare to bulk up the U.S. military force in Iraq, and as devastating attacks continue against U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians, it is time to awaken the sleeping giant. The public must make a sustained effort to be informed on the various and often complex issues that have arisen because of this war so that they may develop and express relevant opinions on this serious matter.
Our decision to enter Iraq marks a new course for U.S. foreign policy and its implications deserve full and public discussion. In what has caused a divisive rift in the world, the United States choose to undermine the role of the UN Security Council by bypassing the resolution and eventual enforcement process by entering into the war without international support. While espousing their intentions of installing freedom, democracy and human rights in Iraq, the Bush administration overrode the system, destabilizing an institution that has provided opportunities for these rights.
President Bush identified 16 UN resolutions that Iraq ignored and that the Council did not enforce. However Iraq is only one of several countries that have not complied with resolutions. The list also includes Cyprus, Morocco and notably Israel. Also UN experts like Simon Chesterman of the International Peace Academy and Columbia University maintain that the UN rarely threatens action without having a firm strategy of enforcement.
In the end it appears that Iraq was actually conforming to UN resolutions. The fizzle of the exaggerated claims of weapons of mass destruction stockpiles deflating indicates that the non-violent method of weapons inspectors was effective. Iraq did not have these dangerous weapons and therefore did not pose the "mushroom cloud" threat that we were lead to believe.
Rather than this rushed and poorly constructed case for war put forth by the administration's hell-bent war hawks, the U.S. could have pursued a different strategy. But though the die has been cast in Iraq, many forks in the road remain, and public engagement is more important than ever.
Are the lofty ideals that the UN works for something we are committed to pursuing, or do we cast them away and rely on our own narrow interests? Are the human and financial costs of war something we want to bear the total brunt of, limited international support in the form of lip service notwithstanding? This is where Americans must weigh in. Large numbers of Americans ought to line the streets, and legislators, political parties and the president should hear and heed our concerns.
