By Marjorie Cohn
So far, Bush’s plan to maintain a permanent
U.S. military presence in Iraq has been stymied by resistance from the
Iraqi government. Barack Obama’s timetable for withdrawal of American
troops has evidently been joined by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki,
Bush has mentioned a “time horizon,” and John McCain has waffled.
Yet Obama favors leaving between 35,000 and 80,000 U.S. occupation troops
there indefinitely to train Iraqi security forces and carry out “counter-insurgency
operations.” That would not end the occupation. We must call for
bringing home – not redeploying – all U.S. troops and mercenaries, closing
all U.S. military bases, and relinquishing all efforts to control Iraqi
oil.
In light of stepped up violence in Afghanistan, and for political reasons
– following Obama’s lead – Bush will be moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Although the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was as illegal as the invasion
of Iraq, many Americans see it as a justifiable response to the attacks
of September 11, 2001, and the casualties in that war have been lower
than those in Iraq – so far. Practically no one in the United States
is currently questioning the legality or propriety of U.S. military
involvement in Afghanistan. The cover of Time magazine calls it “The
Right War.”
The U.N. Charter provides that all member states must settle their international
disputes by peaceful means, and no nation can use military force except
in self-defense or when authorized by the Security Council. After the
9/11 attacks, the Council passed two resolutions, neither of which authorized
the use of military force in Afghanistan. Resolutions 1368 and 1373
condemned the September 11 attacks, and ordered the freezing of assets;
the criminalizing of terrorist activity; the prevention of the commission
of and support for terrorist attacks; the taking of necessary steps
to prevent the commission of terrorist activity, including the sharing
of information; and urged ratification and enforcement of the international
conventions against terrorism.
The invasion of Afghanistan was not legitimate self-defense under article
51 of the Charter because the attacks on September 11 were criminal
attacks, not “armed attacks” by another country. Afghanistan did
not attack the United States. In fact, 15 of the 19 hijackers came from
Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, there was not an imminent threat of an armed
attack on the United States after September 11, or Bush would not have
waited three weeks before initiating his October 2001 bombing campaign.
The necessity for self-defense must be “instant, overwhelming, leaving
no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” This classic
principle of self-defense in international law has been affirmed by
the Nuremberg Tribunal and the U.N. General Assembly.
Bush’s justification for attacking Afghanistan was that it was harboring
Osama bin Laden and training terrorists. Iranians could have made the
same argument to attack the United States after they overthrew the vicious
Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1979 and he was given safe haven in the United
States. The people in Latin American countries whose dictators were
trained in torture techniques at the School of the Americas could likewise
have attacked the torture training facility in Ft. Benning, Georgia
under that specious rationale.
Those who conspired to hijack airplanes and kill thousands of people
on 9/11 are guilty of crimes against humanity. They must be identified
and brought to justice in accordance with the law. But retaliation by
invading Afghanistan is not the answer and will only lead to the deaths
of more of our troops and Afghanis.
The hatred that fueled 19 people to blow themselves up and take 3,000
innocents with them has its genesis in a history of the U.S. government’s
exploitation of people in oil-rich nations around the world. Bush accused
the terrorists of targeting our freedom and democracy. But it was not
the Statue of Liberty that was destroyed. It was the World Trade Center
– symbol of the U.S.-led global economic system, and the Pentagon –
heart of the U.S. military, that took the hits. Those who committed
these heinous crimes were attacking American foreign policy. That policy
has resulted in the deaths of two million Iraqis – from both Bill Clinton’s
punishing sanctions and George W. Bush’s war. It has led to uncritical
support of Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestinian lands; and it has
stationed more than 700 U.S. military bases in foreign countries.
Conspicuously absent from the national discourse is a political analysis
of why the tragedy of 9/11 occurred and a comprehensive strategy to
overhaul U.S. foreign policy to inoculate us from the wrath of those
who despise American imperialism. The “global war on terror”
has been uncritically accepted by most in this country. But terrorism
is a tactic, not an enemy. You cannot declare war on a tactic. The way
to combat terrorism is by identifying and targeting its root causes,
including poverty, lack of education, and foreign occupation.
There are already 60,000 foreign troops, including 36,000 Americans,
in Afghanistan. Large increases in U.S. troops during the past year
have failed to stabilize the situation there. Most American forces operate
in the eastern part of the country; yet by July 2008, attacks there
were up by 40 percent. Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security advisor
for Jimmy Carter, is skeptical that the answer for Afghanistan is more
troops. He warns that the United States will, like the Soviet Union,
be seen as the invader, especially as we conduct military operations
“with little regard for civilian casualties.” Brzezinski advocates
Europeans bribing Afghan farmers not to cultivate poppies for heroin,
as well as the bribery of tribal warlords to isolate al-Qaeda from a
Taliban that is “not a united force, not a world-oriented terrorist
movement, but a real Afghan phenomenon.”
Indeed, on July 29, 2008, the RAND corporation released a report that
argues that, “Current U.S. strategy against the terrorist group
al Qaida has not been successful in significantly undermining the group’s
capabilities.” The United States should pursue a counterterrorism
strategy against al Qa’ida that emphasizes policing and intelligence
gathering rather than a “war on terrorism” approach that relies
heavily on military force, according to RAND.
We might heed Canada’s suggestion that a broader mission, under the
auspices of the United Nations instead of NATO, would be more effective.
Our policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan should emphasize economic assistance
for reconstruction, development and education, not for more weapons.
The United States must refrain from further Predator missile strikes
in Pakistan, and pursue diplomacy, not occupation.
Nor should we be threatening war against Iran, which would also be illegal
and result in an unmitigated disaster. The U.N. Charter forbids any
country to use, or threaten to use, military force against another country
except in self-defense or when the Security Council has given its blessing.
In spite of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency’s conclusion
that there is no evidence Iran is developing nuclear weapons, the White
House, Congress, and Israel have continued to rattle the sabers in Iran’s
direction. Nevertheless, the antiwar movement has so far fended off
passage of HR 362 in the House of Representatives, a bill that is tantamount
to a call for a naval blockade against Iran – considered an act of war
under international law. Credit goes to United for Peace and Justice,
Code Pink, Peace Action, and dozens of other organizations that pressured
Congress to think twice before taking that dangerous step.
We should pursue diplomacy, not war, with Iran; end the U.S. occupation
of Iraq; and withdraw our troops from Afghanistan.
Marjorie Cohn is president of the National Lawyers Guild and a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, where she teaches criminal law and procedure,
evidence, and international human rights law. She lectures throughout
the world on human rights and US foreign policy.
Listen to Marjorie Cohn every Monday
from 3:10-3:30 p.m. EDT on TalkBack on WBAI-FM in New York. It streams
live at wbai.org