We must stand against the largest exporter of terror: the US Empire

author : Drew Hendricks topic : imperialism | Iraq occupation | petrolium

by Drew Hendricks

Many people in our community oppose the war in Iraq. And while I often agree with my community on issues of war and peace, in this instance I disagree. I do not oppose the war in Iraq.

I don't think that the United States should have any troops stationed anywhere outside the United States. I'm against the Empire. But what those troops are doing in Iraq is not a war -- it's an occupation. It's the colonial administration of another nation, and the suppression of the people of that nation. It's a war crime, and I oppose it. But the war isn't being fought by the US military. The war is being fought by the Iraqi people and their allies. I support their struggle to throw out the US military by whatever means they decide. Their struggle is mine as long as we oppose the same Empire.

The US Military is losing this war. They are concentrating their forces in the larger cities, and sheltering in their bases at night, and generally doing what armies historically have done to lose such conflicts. But if we keep in mind that the United States can lose this war, we need to also keep in mind that the US economic elites will still benefit from the consequences of this war on Iraq and its people. George W. Bush and the people who selected him are winning profits, even as the US military is losing the war. And these elites will continue to win even as the US Army withdraws from Iraq, just as they win when Vietnam's people work in US-owned factories, more than thirty years after their victory. They will win because Iraq is disintegrating.

Iraq possesses a huge source of surface water, petroleum and technical expertise in the region, and was one of the most developed economies in the area prior to the 1991 war and subsequent sanctions regime. The second ground war since 2003 has only accelerated the trend toward dismantling Iraq's resources and disintegrating its political unity. Granted, this was an imperial unity to begin with -- it was imposed during the 1920's by the British Empire. But that political unity was not ours to play with; it belongs to the people who live in that region. The resources we now "manage" for the benefit of a few were once used to house, educate, and feed a much wider segment of Iraqi society than they do now. And more to the point, the natural resources that are tied up by the war cannot be used for the economic development of any other country in the world, and the lack of stable production in Iraq raises petroleum prices worldwide -- prices that are set in US dollars and support our currency by that trade. (Saddam Hussein had moved to trade Iraqi petroleum in Euros rather than dollars, and this was one of the reasons Iraq was attacked by the United States.)

The disintegration of Iraq removes, for the world's Oiligarchs, the threat of Iraqi oil serving the development needs of Iraq, and even more importantly, of China. To remove this threat, by removing the independence of oil suppliers over the disposition of their resources, is the true war aim of the US Empire. In this game, it is almost as important to see which region's resources are not available, as it is to see which regions are producing and for whom. (Somalia is a famously non-producing oil-rich region recently attacked by the US empire for beginning to get its region organized again after 12 years of chaos.)

The central question for the US peace movement -- and it is yet to be seen that there is any such thing -- is whether we will stand in solidarity against Empire, or hang separately once again. The question we must ask, and the question we must answer, is what we are advocating.

For many, opposition to this war is enough. We can proceed down a path of the least common denominator, and reap the least common reward -- perhaps in another eight years. Or we can get to the root of the issue and work together to eliminate the world's largest exporter of terror.

Since the Vietnam War, which ended over 30 years ago, the United States has fought on every continent except Antarctica, and in at least 71 named conflicts.

We can no longer continue to abide quietly in a country that is at war with the world. If we want peace, we must stop the United States military machine. We must reconsider the historical effectiveness of holding signs along the roads in achieving this. At the very least we should step into the roads with our signs -- it's our land, after all -- and block the convoys and trains of war machines that seek to use our Port. But this is not all we should consider.

It was not US demonstrators who stopped the US War on Vietnam. The largest antiwar demonstrations had all but ended by 1970, three years prior to the Paris Peace Accords and five years prior to the final collapse of the US-backed puppet regime of South Vietnam. It was not the tiny, sporadic terror campaign of the Weathermen that ended that war, either.

It was the Viet Minh (more commonly known in the US as the Viet Cong) who fought that war who finally made possible the limited defeat of the US military in 1973 -- 1975. Few in the US stood in solidarity with the right of the people of Vietnam to stand up to their occupiers at the point of arms. But many soldiers for the United States -- mostly conscripts -- did stand in solidarity with their supposed enemies. More than 600, possibly as many as 2000, US military officers were killed by their own soldiers between 1968 and 1972. Thousands of US soldiers refused to go out on patrols. Tens of thousands more men refused to answer the draft. It was this resistance under arms -- as well as the refusal to take up arms at all -- that ended the Vietnam war, and it was our community of support that emboldened them to refuse service. But it took more than just pacifist tactics to make the whole resistance work.

If we want peace, we must insist on justice. But to get justice, we must stand shoulder to shoulder against those in our own society who seek to destroy or subjugate us all. We must use every tool in the toolbox, and consider carefully the effectiveness of any action we take.

We must stand in solidarity with the people of Iraq despite their tactics, despite their desperation, and withdraw our material support for the war on them and their region. We must support an alternative vision of our own resources and purpose as people in our own communities. And we must take our communities back from those who would dispose of them in endless war.

If we are more creative than our opponents in this struggle, we can win victory over war rather than victory over people. With enough people, we can do this nonviolently. But we cannot do this passively.

Drew Hendricks is a member of Olympia Copwatch, Olympia Movement for Justice and Peace and Port Militarization Resistance.