I had something more light-hearted for this week, but in the present ‘climate’, it seemed inappropriate. Though probably not for long when you consider the behaviour profile of the rest of the world outside Russia and Ukraine. After a short time in early 2022, global activity became business as usual, with weaponry assistance to Ukraine being enough to appease our consciences.
With Russia and Ukraine, it is four years on and no nearer a peaceful solution. Now we have the USA and Israel attacking Iran, with the resultant counter-strikes by Iran and its Axis of Resistance on peace-respecting countries of the Middle East and beyond; and even alleged intelligence and military assistance from Russia. China is staying out but stands to lose economically, so nothing is guaranteed.
We have all the ingredients of a war that could go on for a long time. Unless, of course, the USA puts feet on the ground in Iran. And that’s when it gets seriously naughty and launches a seismic shift in global behaviour.
As I proceed, I hasten to mention that nothing I am writing is a criticism of the American people. They are a great nation. I’m only against what the president is doing. We must speak freely but respectfully. We all know what is happening. With the fundamental objective of doing good by destroying nuclear weapons of mass destruction in Iran and flattening drug activities in other countries, the USA, driven by its president and not its Parliament, is attacking, invading or threatening to invade the respective countries.
That is not what we were taught to do in life. Analogy One: It’s what Vladimir Putin did when invading Ukraine. He claimed he was doing good. Of course, he wasn’t – he was just obsessed with restoring the Communist bloc that never worked anyway. Now, in a closely comparable sequel, we have the USA similarly doing things its own way, but not, according to a very loud and majority global opinion, the right way. Many, of course, will ignore the humanitarian view and merely groan at the certain impact on oil supply and pricing. Because the knock-on effect on normal life in many countries, including our own, will be significant. And the (grammatically flawed) USA statement that ‘the war is very complete, pretty much’ appears rather misguided.
Here is another analogy, one much closer in nature. Back half a century ago, the USA’s entry into a war in Vietnam in the Far East, precipitated a massive expansion of that war. The USA feared a spread of Communism, which would represent a huge threat to the world of non-Communism. History has shown that the Americans should have left Vietnam and the rest of the Far East to its own devices. China was left alone and look at their situation today. They don’t ascribe to precisely the same political and human protocols as the Western World, but left in peace, they moved from flat-out Communism to absorbing a quasi-capitalism that benefitted their people. The USA death toll in Vietnam was 50 000 soldiers. Every one of those had a life and parents and children who would never see them again. All because the USA got nervous and gained nothing. So why can’t we learn?
Democracy is in the spotlight right now. In the USA and many other countries, you are allowed to own a gun under a licence. And if someone invades your home, you can shoot the invader, provided you can convince the authorities – usually not difficult – that you were in a life-threatening situation. But you, as an individual who hears there is a wild guy with an AK47 strapped over his shoulder roaming the streets and shouting, you are not allowed to go out and shoot him. You report it to the police.
The USA president’s retrospective notification to Congress (allowed under a 1973 resolution) sought justification from the threat from Iran being ‘untenable’. What threat? The UN Security Council did not authorise a lawful self-defence by the USA against an armed attack. Its own attack has clearly contravened the UN Charter prohibition on aggression.
The golden rule is: While you’re talking, you won’t be fighting. And that’s what should be done with a country like Iran. Their destruction of human beings – perhaps over 80 000 – protesting purely for what they believed in – was appalling. And the Western countries and others should have intervened earlier to halt those killings. But not then a bombing campaign that recently killed 175 Iranians, mostly schoolchildren, in order to eliminate nuclear weaponry when there is no direct threat of attack. There was an urgent need, comfortably ignored, for the big nations to collaborate to control extremist-ideology countries that have nuclear power, and bring to justice all of those in Iran, placing religious extremism above the sanctity of human life.
Leave a comment