March 12, 2003
A Bay Area coalition
of environmental groups, Environmentalists Against the War, has
developed the following statement:
As organizations and
individuals working for the environment and environmental justice,
we have watched with increasing concern as the US government moves
closer to an all-out attack on Iraq. We raise our voices in opposition
to this war and invite others to join us in support of peace. We
oppose an attack on Iraq for the following reasons:
1. An
attack on Iraq could kill nearly 500,000 people. Most
of the peoplekilled would be innocent civilians. In November 2002,
Medact, the British health professional organization, warned that
as many as 260,000 Iraqis could die immediately from a US attack,
while another 200,000 deaths would result from famine and disease.
The UN fears that an attack would create a flood of 900,000 refugees.
2. War destroys human
settlements and native habitats. War
destroys wildlife and contaminates the land, air and water. The
damage can last for generations. The United Nations Environmental
Program (UNEP) has documented lasting damage from the 1991 Gulf
War. Oil, chemical and radiological pollution still contaminates
the region. More than 60 million gallons of crude oil spilled from
pipes. Some 1,500 miles of coast were tarnished with oil and cancer-causing
chemicals. The deserts were scarred with 246 "lakes" of congealed
oil. More than 700 oil wells burned for nine months, producing toxic
clouds that blocked the sun and circled the Earth. In the aftermath
of the Gulf War, more than a dozen countries submitted environmental
claims to the United Nations totaling $48 billion.
3. US clusterbombs, thermobaric
explosions, electromagnetic bursts and weapons made with depleted
uranium are indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction. In
the 1991 Gulf War, US forces reportedly fired nearly a million rounds
of depleted uranium (DU) bullets and shells, leaving 300 tons of
DU scattered across southern Iraq. DU (uranium-238) has a half-life
of 4.5 billion years. According to the Army Environmental Policy
Institute, ingesting DU "has the potential to generate significant
medical consequences." The World Health Organization (WHO) warns,
"children could receive greater exposure to DU when playing in or
near DU impact sites. Typical hand-to-mouth activity could lead
to high DU ingestion from contaminated soil." In the aftermath of
the profound chemical and radiological contamination released during
the 1991 war, cancer and leukemia rates in southern Iraq have increased
six-fold.
4. Bombs pollute, poisoning
the land with unexploded shells and toxic chemicals. Bombs
can't locate or destroy hidden chemical or biological weapons (CBW),
but they can cause the uncontrolled spread of deadly CBW agents.
According to Saudi Foreign Policy Advisor Adel al-Jubeir, the 1991
US attack on Iraq destroyed "not a single chemical or biological
weapon." That may have been fortunate. On March 10, 1991, after
the Gulf War had ended, US troops destroyed several weapons bunkers
at Khamisiyah in southern Iraq. Five years later, the Pentagon admitted
that the explosion released a cloud of CBW agents, exposing 100,000
US soldiers to mustard gas and sarin nerve gas.
5.
Fighting a war for oil is ultimately self-defeating. Our
fossil-fuel-based economy pollutes our air, fouls our lungs and
contributes to global climate change. The world needs to burn less
oil, not more. Earth's remaining recoverable oil reserves are expected
to peak soon and decline well before the end of the century. Waging
wars to control an energy source that is finite will never achieve
long-term national security. Oil-based economies must be replaced
by technologies powered by clean, sustainable, renewable fuels.
6.
Pre-emptive attacks are acts of aggression. A "pre-emptive
attack" would constitute an attack on the rule of international
law, the dream of world peace embodied in the United Nations Charter,
and the promise of environmental security enshrined in a host of
global treaties. Attacking a city of 5 million people with hundreds
of cruise missiles would constitute a war crime and a crime against
humanity.
7.
Aggression invites retaliation. The CIA has concluded that
Saddam Hussein would only be provoked to use chemical or biological
weapons in self-defense - if the US launched an invasion bent on
replacing him. Attacking Iraq would increase the probability of
chemical, biological, and radiological attacks directed against
US cities.
8.
Increased military spending (to control access to the fuel that
powers our oil-based economy) drains funds from critical social,
educational, medical and environmental needs. The war (and
subsequent occupation of Iraq) is projected to cost as much as $200
billion. Meanwhile the economy teeters and unemployment soars while
the administration cuts funding for environmental stewardship and
basic human needs.
9.
Militarization and the war on terrorism are eroding America's freedoms
at home. The US PATRIOT Act has been used to persecute immigrants
and fuels an atmosphere of racism and fear. The terrorist threat
has been used to justify removal of public information databases
that provided communities with critical data on industrial hazards.
There has been a clampdown on the Freedom of Information Act, a
valuable tool that had been used to hold polluting corporations
accountable for their actions. The PATRIOT Act criminalizes legal
forms of political opposition to controversial government policies,
thereby threatening legitimate political and environmental activism.
10.
The US has threatened to strike Iraq with nuclear weapons - the
ultimate weapons of mass destruction. In December 2002, a
US strategy report claimed that the US "reserves the right to respond
with overwhelming force - including through resort to all out options
- to the use of WMD (weapons of mass destruction) against the US,
our forces abroad, and friends and allies." Bush administration
officials stated that the threat of a nuclear first-strike did not
constitute a policy change. Bush's 2002 Nuclear Posture Review called
for development of new nuclear weapons including earth-penetrating
"bunker busters" and five-kiloton "mini-nukes" (four "mini-nukes"
would contain the explosive force of the atomic bomb that destroyed
Hiroshima). If nuclear weapons are used in Iraq, Medact fears that
3.9 million people would die. The radioactive fallout would eventually
circle the planet, dooming even more people to an early death.
Environmentalists Against
the War (650) 223-3306 www.envirosagainstwar.org
Close
Window
|