U.S. loses moral grounds so model human rights<\/p>\n
The George W. Bush administration seems impatient in attacking
\nIraq despite international protests and reports by the United
\nNations weapons investigation team, which does not verify U.S.
\nclaims that Iraq has a weapons program and arsenal. Lawyer and
\nhuman rights activist Todung Mulya Lubis shares his views with
\nThe Jakarta Post's Soeryo Winoto.<\/p>\n
Question: Do you see any strength or power that could stop the
\nU.S.'s apparent resolve to attack Iraq?<\/p>\n
Answer: There is almost nothing that can stop the U.S., and
\nthe United Kingdom is also willing to attack Iraq. Although
\nreports made by the UN weapons investigation team contain no
\nconclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction or
\nbiological weapons, Iraq's uncooperative response to providing
\nopen access to investigators could be enough for the U.S. to take
\naction, which could take place soon.<\/p>\n
Many parties in Europe, in Middle Eastern countries and even
\nin America have protested Bush's plan (to attack Iraq). And I'm
\nsure that the silent majority in Indonesia have also been very
\nworried about the attack. Here in Indonesia, several Islamic
\ngroups have voiced anxiety about the attack, which they dub as an
\naction motivated by religion. Such a belief is not correct, of
\ncourse, but from the perspective of humanity, the attack (if it
\ntakes place) would be a war of aggression, justified as a
\n\"preemptive war\".<\/p>\n
It is difficult to judge whether there is a threat against the
\nU.S. If we read Chapter 51 of the UN Charter, it says clearly
\nthat a state is allowed to conduct self-defense if there is an
\narmed attack against it, and that a state may use force in the
\ncase of an armed attack. The U.S. could not blame Iraq for the
\nSept. 11 attack in Washington, and thus, (the September attack)
\nis not a justification to attack Iraq.<\/p>\n
This is the general understanding among international legal
\nexperts.<\/p>\n
When America used force against Nicaragua, which had been
\naccused of helping El Salvadoran rebels, its actions were
\nconsidered a violation (of the above Charter), as there was no
\nactual armed attack (against America). This is clear.<\/p>\n
Regardless of the political and economic interests of the
\nU.S., attacking Iraq would be seen as a tragedy of humanity
\nbrought on by a self-professed champion of human rights. What are
\nyour comments on this?<\/p>\n
In wars against terrorism (conducted by various countries),
\nthe real loser is peace. We have witnessed the issuance of many
\nanti-terrorism legislations and laws, which unfortunately deny
\ncivil liberties. War against terror and all anti-terrorism
\nregulations must not violate human rights.<\/p>\n
It is no wonder activists in many countries have protested the
\nanti-terrorism laws produced by their countries. We in Indonesia
\nsaw many protests against the anti-terrorism government
\nregulation in lieu of law (issued in November last year).<\/p>\n
Article 2 of Chapter 4 of the UN Charter clearly recommends UN
\nmember countries not to use force in settling any disputes. This
\nis the UN's noble effort to maintain peace in the world.<\/p>\n
Would the reported plan to raid Iraq be considered justified
\nas a consequence of a clash of civilizations?<\/p>\n
I don't want to be involved in an open discourse on the clash
\nof civilizations.<\/p>\n
I just see the U.S.'s plan as a human tragedy that is actually
\navoidable, because there are peaceful means to settle the
\ntension. We should thank France for opposing the plan, and
\nIndonesia should be more proactive in rejecting the attack.<\/p>\n
What we are witnessing is that Bush is making a unilateral
\ndecision with or without the UN Security Council's
\nrecommendation, and maybe without authorization from Congress.
\nThis is a big threat to international rules, which is based on
\nmultilateralism.<\/p>\n
What would the impact of such a superpower's unilateralism be
\non the ability of communities to build a civil society based on
\nrespect to humans as individuals or as a nation?<\/p>\n
In this context, I think America has lost its moral grounds to
\nbe a model in upholding human rights. I believe there are many
\nAmerican people with good common sense and a strong conscience
\nwho have joined the anti-war movement in their country. And this
\nis evidence that the initiative to crush Iraq is not popular
\nenough and does not win adequate support. We also see similar
\nmovements in England.<\/p>\n
What would be the worst impact of a U.S. attack against Iraq
\nfor the world?<\/p>\n
The war would greatly disrupt the stability of South Asia and
\nthe Middle East. The political and economic costs of the war
\nwould be very high. Iraq has been suffering for a long time; the
\nAmerican aggression would just prolong its suffering.<\/p>\n
Back to your earlier statements. Many Indonesian Muslim groups
\nhave expressed their opposition to the U.S. stance against Iraq,
\nand their spirit of Muslim solidarity has been evoked. How could
\nthe Indonesian government explain to these groups that the U.S.
\nattitude against Iraq has nothing to do with religion?<\/p>\n
In the context of international law, a U.S. attack would be a
\nviolation, a violation against human rights and crime against
\nhumanity. The U.S. should not undermine this.<\/p>\n
The government of Indonesia must be tougher in rejecting any
\nwars of aggression which contradicts international law, and build
\nor support a multilateral power to curb unilateralism. Our free
\nand active (independent) foreign policy enables this.<\/p>\n
Wouldn't it be easier for the government to explain the
\nattack against Iraq if the attack was recommended by the UN? As a
\nmember of the UN, Indonesia would have no choice but to accept
\nthe UN decision.<\/p>\n
This is what I mean by multilateralism. There is an
\ninternational mechanism for such a situation. And if the
\nmechanism doesn't work, there must be something wrong.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/us-loses-moral-grounds-so-model-human-rights-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}