
As a Christian and as a president who was severely provoked by international
crises, I became thoroughly familiar with the principles of a just war,
and it is clear that a substantially unilateral attack on Iraq does
not meet these standards. This is an almost universal conviction of
religious leaders, with the most notable exception of a few spokesmen
of the Southern Baptist Convention who are greatly influenced by their
commitment to Israel based on eschatological, or final days, theology.

"...For a war to be just, it must meet several clearly defined
criteria."
. The war can be waged only as a last resort, with all nonviolent options
exhausted. In the case of Iraq, it is obvious that clear alternatives
to war exist. These options -- previously proposed by our own leaders
and approved by the United Nations -- were outlined again by the Security
Council on Friday. But now, with our own national security not directly
threatened and despite the overwhelming opposition of most people and
governments in the world, the United States seems determined to carry
out military and diplomatic action that is almost unprecedented in the
history of civilized nations.
We The
first stage of our widely publicized war plan is to launch 3,000 bombs
and missiles on a relatively defenseless Iraqi population within the
first few hours of an invasion, with the purpose of so damaging and
demoralizing the people that they will change their obnoxious leader,
who will most likely be hidden and safe during the bombardment.
The war's weapons must discriminate between combatants and noncombatants.
Extensive aerial bombardment, even with precise accuracy, inevitably
results in "collateral damage." Gen. Tommy R. Franks, commander
of American forces in the Persian Gulf, has expressed concern about
many of the military targets being near hospitals, schools, mosques
and private homes.
Its violence must be proportional to the injury we have suffered. Despite
Saddam Hussein's other serious crimes, American efforts to tie Iraq
to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been unconvincing.
The attackers must have legitimate authority sanctioned by the society
they profess to represent.
The unanimous vote of approval in the Security Council to eliminate Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction can still be honored, but our announced goals
are now to achieve regime change and to establish a Pax Americana in the
region, perhaps occupying the ethnically divided country for as long as
a decade.
For these objectives, we do not have international authority. Other members
of the Security Council have so far resisted the enormous economic and
political influence that is being exerted from Washington, and we are
faced with the possibility of either a failure to get the necessary votes
or else a veto from Russia, France and China. Although Turkey may still
be enticed into helping us by enormous financial rewards and partial future
control of the Kurds and oil in northern Iraq, its democratic Parliament
has at least added its voice to the worldwide expressions of concern.
The peace it establishes must be a clear improvement over what exists.
Although there are visions of peace and democracy in Iraq, it is quite
possible that the aftermath of a military invasion will destabilize the
region and prompt terrorists to further jeopardize our security at home.
Also, by defying overwhelming world opposition, the United States will
undermine the United Nations as a viable institution for world peace
.
What about America's world standing if we don't go to war after such a
great deployment of military forces in the region? The heartfelt sympathy
and friendship offered to America after the 9/11 attacks, even from formerly
antagonistic regimes, has been largely dissipated; increasingly unilateral
and domineering policies have brought international trust in our country
to its lowest level in memory. American stature will surely decline further
if we launch a war in clear defiance of the United Nations. But to use
the presence and threat of our military power to force Iraq's compliance
with all United Nations resolutions -- with war as a final option -- will
enhance our status as a champion of peace and justice.
Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, is chairman of
the Carter Center in Atlanta and winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.
.
<<
back |