The
BRussells Tribunal Saturday April 17 2004.
People vs Total War Incorporated
Consistent with the tradition of the 1967 Russell Tribunal on the Vietnam
War and the work of the People’s permanent tribunal and other similar
tribunals such as the one held in Brussels in 1991, the BRussells Tribunal
met on 14-17 April 2004. This Tribunal is the opening session of the World
Tribunal on Iraq, a series of hearings scheduled to conclude in Istanbul in
2005.
The BRussells Tribunal focused on the programs and policies proposed by “The
Project for the New American Century” (PNAC), a predominantly
neo-conservative “think-tank” that has advocated global US hegemony,
primarily through the threat or use of military power.
The objective of the Tribunal, working as a commission of inquiry, was to
establish whether there was a link between PNAC’s proposals and the foreign
and military strategy of the current US government, and the subsequent
invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Commission also examined the impact of
policies and programs advocated by PNAC on the stability and security of
international relations.
To establish its findings and shape its report the Commission heard
testimony from specialists on international affairs and witnesses
knowledgeable about the current conditions in Iraq. The Commission also
relied on PNAC’s reports and official US government documents, as well as
written analyses (1).
The Commission came to the following conclusions:
The PNAC program consists of three main components:
to establish US hegemony in the new century, relying primarily on military
and technological superiority;
to prevent the emergence of any competing global or regional powers by
imposing what is sometimes termed a “Pax Americana”;
to exercise pre-emptive action against all perceived threats to American
“interests” and security.
A significant number of signatories to PNAC’s 1997 founding Statement of
Principles” became senior members of the current US administration,
including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. The adoption of
those principles by this administration is evidenced by official White House
documents such as “The National Security Strategy” of September 2002. These
principles have been put into action through the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
According to a clear majority of States and a large consensus of legal
experts, the invasion of Iraq constitutes an act of aggression, a breach of
one of the most fundamental norms of the international legal order. This
demonstrates that the implementation of policies emanating from PNAC and
endorsed by the current administration runs counter to the principles of the
UN Charter and undermines the United Nations itself, which bears the primary
responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.
The invasion of Iraq has resulted in more than 10.000 civilian deaths. With
each passing day of occupation, the number of victims grows, as do the gross
violations of humanitarian law and human rights, such as arbitrary
detention, ill-treatment and deprivation in regard to basic needs. The
situation of the Iraqi people has clearly deteriorated and the promises of
democracy and freedom have proved to be illusory. The constant use of the
words “democracy”, “freedom” and “human rights” in such a context amounts to
a complete perversion of those terms.
Far from bringing stability and peace in Iraq and the region, the invasion
and occupation have created instability and chaos. Moreover, the deliberate
destruction of Iraq has effectively promoted the Israeli government’s
policies of further unlawful expansion and de facto annexation of
territories as well as further annihilation of the rights of the Palestinian
people. The Tribunal noted that PNAC itself called explicitly in 2002 for
the US administration to align itself with the views of the Israeli
government. These developments increase hostility between the peoples of the
region and the West, contrary to the proclaimed objectives of making the
world a safer place.
There is evidence of a consistent US strategy, as envisioned by the PNAC
report entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defences”, to establish global
domination by military means. Contrary to claims that this domination would
be a “benevolent hegemony”, it is more likely to lead to a state of
permanent war. PNAC policies are based on brutal unilateralism and disregard
for legality. As such, the ideas of PNAC constitute an intellectual crime.
The war in Iraq is only one element of a global agenda which is linked with
logics of the dominant economic system, inspired by neo-conservative
ideology and supported by religious fundamentalism.
Due to the growing resistance encountered by the occupying powers in Iraq
and other unanticipated difficulties, the United States and United Kingdom
have made cynical requests for the involvement of the United Nations in
Iraq, thereby pre-empting the sovereign rights of the Iraqi people to
determine their future. The United Nations should avoid complicity with --
let alone legitimise in any way -- the illegal invasion and occupation of
Iraq. Any such action would further discredit this world body. The UN should
restore its legitimacy through ensuring the complete withdrawal of all
occupying forces and assisting the Iraqi people in recovering their full
sovereignty. Any involvement of the European Union or of NATO to help the
occupying powers should be refused.
Finally, the Tribunal calls upon the peoples of the world to demand that
their governments
· deny military, political, financial or any other support to the occupying
powers; and
· oppose the illegal implementation by occupation forces or their surrogates
of any plans for the wholesale privatization of the Iraqi economy.
The Tribunal also expresses its solidarity with the Iraqi people and its
support for their attempts at recovering their full sovereignty.
[1] The oral and written testimonies as well as official documents are
reproduced in a preparatory dossier entitled “Questioning the New Imperial
World Order”.
