Cleveland Peace Action Policy on Real Security
Introduction:
In the aftermath of September 11, we find the US Government pledged to the pursuit of “war without end,” with most Americans accepting of this idea. The Bush Administration has used the threat of terrorism to justify the same old military and foreign policy objectives of hegemony, a huge military buildup and the erosion of civil liberties, essentially repackaging old wine in new bottles. While the threat of terrorism is quite real, Cleveland Peace Action advocates policies that will lead to “real security.” We believe the Bush Administration’s policies will, in the long run, make us far less secure. Those policies will create a world filled with more weapons on all sides, including weapons of mass destruction and space weapons, more unstable governments, and more people angry at the US for its unilateralism and its military and economic control of this planet. In short, the world will become a better breeding-ground for terrorists and for the tools which will make them more dangerous.
Cleveland Peace Action supports the following initiatives, to promote real security for the US and for the community of nations:
Address the root causes of insecurity, violence and poverty:
We can never be free of insurgency and terrorism if we do not address their root causes. Of course, terrorists promote insecurity for many reasons, including their own self-interest and misguided belief systems. But the real problem is the conditions which make it so easy to recruit others to carry out acts of violence. At the heart of the problem is poverty, the deep alienation of people from their governments, and the profound frustration that comes from knowing things can and should be much better; that children should not starve to death; that governments should not be so corrupt and self-serving in the distribution of resources; that people have a right to live in peace and security and to maintain their unique identities. It is time we seriously addressed these issues as an integral part of national and world security.
Specifically, we support a considerable increase in “economic development assistance” primarily targeted to serve the needs of the poor, and administrated principally through non-governmental organizations based in poor countries. Micro-enterprise lending is one example of a program that should be expanded substantially and targeted to a greater degree toward poor women and women heads of households. We also strongly support a greater emphasis on the involvement of citizens’ groups in conflict resolution and peace building so that societies have alternatives to violence in dealing with their internal stresses. We support policies that encourage repressive and elitist regimes to include their people in the policy process and in the benefits of growth including rewarding with more investment and liberal trade policies regimes that move toward greater popular accountability and better human rights records. We oppose giving military assistance, including training such as is done at the School of the Americas (now the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation), or selling lethal arms to regimes that refuse to move in this direction in large part because they are likely to use these arms against their own people. We support an enhanced role for the U.N. in helping people engaged in internal wars and regional conflicts to find just and negotiated solutions to these conflicts. Among the most urgent conflicts which threaten the security of everyone today are the regional conflicts in the Middle East, and particularly between Israel and the Palestinians; and the conflict over Kashmir threatening war between two nuclear powers—Pakistan and India. The world cannot merely stand by and allow these conflicts to explode into full-fledged war and at the same time promote real security on a global level.
Support only those military expenditures which promote real security for the American people:
While we recognize the need for military expenditures to combat on-going threats of violence to our society and those of our allies, we believe that the current defense buildup is little more than the funding of weapons wish lists, some of which are pure pork with no real mission and others of which might even serve to undermine our security (such as a space-based laser system for “defense.”) We support a top to bottom review of the military budget as it relates to the current and near term real security threats that credibly exist. A smaller defense budget could still provide for a high level of security, with the elimination of pork, inefficiency, and misguided weapons programs. The rush to fund almost any military and homeland defense program, including many programs hidden from public scrutiny, with the largest increase in defense spending since the Vietnam War, and without careful examination, can only compromise our real security further, by increasing budgetary deficits, threatening the viability of Social Security, and forcing reductions in programs vital to our economic recovery, such as education, job retraining, and rebuilding infrastructure.
Ratify and honor treaties and international agreements:
In the spirit of the coalition against terrorism, the US must cooperate with the community of nations instead of going it alone. The most dramatic way to show we are members of the world community would be to ratify and honor treaties and agreements in the following areas: biological and chemical weapons, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, a Landmines Ban, the Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol on global climate change, agreements on money laundering, racism, human rights, and the creation of an International Criminal Court, so that crimes against humanity, like terrorist acts against innocent civilians, can be effectively treated as international crimes. Mostly the US took part in negotiating these treaties and agreements and is now among a very few nations which refuse to ratify them.
Oppose a foreign policy justified by moral crusade and the characterization of our opponents as “evil”:
We resist a return to framing U.S. foreign policy in a veiled reworking of the ideology of the Cold War- with a monolithic enemy, motivated by pure evil, as contrasted with our morality and love of freedom. This kind of thinking serves only to mobilize unthinking support and inflexibility in a world that begs for policy that is nuanced and flexible. We need a policy that welcomes change where it is occurring and recognizes the legitimate security and needs of other nations, including ones the Bush Administration now labels as “rogues” or as an “axis of evil.” Such a policy could well take advantage of opportunities to encourage the North Koreans to halt their missile and nuclear weapons programs, to encourage moderating trends within Iran and recognize common security interests in places like Afghanistan. It might even distinguish between a bellicose regime in Baghdad and the legitimate interests and needs of the Iraqi people that are being hurt through the application of sanctions against civilians. The current policy is likely to create more intransigent enemies and make their job of recruitment easier. We oppose any extension of the “war on terrorism” to other countries. We support lifting the economic sanctions on the people of Iraq.
Create a Department of Peace and promote alternatives to military force:
We support the creation of a cabinet level Department of Peace, as proposed in Rep. Kucinich’s (D-OH) bill, which would give the highest priority to alternatives to war and “defense.” These would include international conflict and dispute resolution, the creation of stable governmental and non-governmental institutions. A Department of Peace could be the focal point for funding and promoting major research efforts into the theory and practice of negotiation, of non-violent political actions, of various forms of conflict management prior to the escalation of conflict into violence, and even once violence has become widespread. More serious efforts are needed in the field of post-conflict “peace building.” The approach by the current administration of first ridiculing “nation-building” and then conceiving of it mainly in military terms only leads to more violence.
Keep space for peace, through a space weapons ban, and stop Star Wars:
US long-term strategy appears to include the extension of missile defense weapons into space. Space is currently free of weapons and we propose to keep it that way. To this end, we support a worldwide ban on space weapons, and domestic legislation towards this end, HR3616, introduced by Rep. Kucinich (D-OH). Furthermore, we support the elimination of all funding for Star Wars missile defense, which will destabilize the nuclear balance by adding a new offensive weapon system to the US arsenal, one purpose of which is to control space for military and commercial purposes. Star Wars will not protect us against terrorism, will promote a new nuclear arms race, will not be technologically viable to work at a level that would reliably protect us from missile assault, and would cost hundred of billions of dollars, which would be better spent in other areas.
Reduce nuclear weaponry and work towards nuclear abolition:
Bush’s unilateral arms cuts are a step in the right direction. However, it undermines the spirit of his dialog with President Putin to stockpile the warheads rather than dismantle them. Nuclear stockpiles must be further reduced. Nuclear weapons must be de-alerted. The de facto ban on nuclear testing must be maintained. No new nuclear weapons should be designed. Existing treaties must be upheld. Only prioritization of nuclear non-proliferation and ultimate nuclear abolition will make it less likely that terrorists will get their hands on nuclear weapons.
Reduce and restrict the conventional weapons trade; support a code of conduct regulating all arms transfers:
The US is the world’s number one arms supplier and September 11 only increased US arms sales. The US has sold arms to regimes of all kinds, often fueling conflicts from both sides. We believe the US should end arms sales to the Middle East and to the developing world. It should stop arming the likes of Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, as it did for narrow foreign policy interests in the past.
Affirm Constitutional liberties, which are now under attack in the name of national security:
We strongly support the application of the rule of law, both domestic and international, in the settlement of disputes and in the application of sanctions against those who violate the law. Efforts to create exceptions to the use of regular judicial practices, such as the proposed Military Tribunals, arrests and detention without habeas corpus, strengthening the role of the investigative and enforcement branches of government while by-passing the courts and judicial review are steps toward our defeat at the hands of the enemies of liberty, freedom and due process. Particularly troubling is the treatment of foreign nationals reportedly citizens of 31 different countries, particularly those from allied and friendly countries such as Australia, Britain, France, Sweden, and Belgium, suspected of having fought for al Queda or the Afghani Taliban government. The current policy of treating them as non-combatants who have no rights under international conventions is dangerous and self-defeating to our efforts to affirm the rule of law and our partnership with others in defeating terrorism. We strongly oppose these “exceptional powers” especially in a period described by our government as “war without end” against a nebulous enemy, which will probably never produce a clear-cut victory. These policies will neither defend our security nor win the respect of the rest of the world.
Drafted by Francis Chiappa and Robert Charlick
