Dear [Name of Permanent Representative to the UN]

People throughout the world, including the United States, oppose the US Administrations plans to invade Iraq. I applaud your efforts to resist the US resolution, which is the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing.

Concerning Security Council approval of a "compromise" resolution offered by the US Administration, any such resolution will be used to justify military action against Iraq.
I urge you to refuse to agree to any such resolution. Further, I urge you to propose a resolution prohibiting military action without further specific authorization by the Security Council.
We all know that this is not a situation where the US Administration could reasonably interpret international law to authorize military action as self-defense. Hence, Security Council specific authorization should be, and must be, required.

The US Administration seems to wish to sprinkle some of the blood on its hands onto you. Plenty of blood has already splattered onto Security Council member states due to the tragic economic sanctions that have cost hundreds of thousands of innocent lives in Iraq. The question before you is this - do you wish to share the rightful blame for an unjustified and inhumane invasion of Iraq?

You know that the costs of this war would be immense. UNESCO has predicted famine from such a war. The US would again spread depleted uranium throughout Iraq. Dr. Doug Rokke, former director of the US Army Depleted Uranium Project in Iraq, has warned against its use. http://grassrootspeace.org/warningtheworld.pdf

You also know that this war has no merit. See Labour Against the War's Counter-Dossier, Parts I and II, at http://grassrootspeace.org/counter-dossier.html
Finally, Scott Ritter, former US Marine and the weapons inspector with the most experience in Iraq, has debunked the myths propounded by the US Administration, included a bold faced lie propounded by senior officials that Iraq had kicked out the weapons inspectors.

Scott RItter has testified that the weapons inspection process was successful in eliminating 90-95 % of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction capability. At the same time, the process was flawed as it was manipulated by the US Administration to provide a pretext for the Desert Fox campaign, during which the US misused UN weapons inspection data to target Saddam Hussein and his government. Scott Ritter's work is well documented - with audio and written transcripts of his talks at http://grassrootspeace.org and http://grassrootspeace.org/stopwar2002.html.

The goal has been, and remains, regime change. We can speculate on the underlying geo-political and economic reasons for this policy. We can agree that the goal has little to do with weapons of mass destruction.

While there is reason to have concerns about Iraq's weapons programs, there is no need for a new resolution. The weapons inspectors would be in Iraq as I write were it not for US Administration interference. The current, before it was corrupted by US manipulation, was strong enough and remains so to do the job. The only new resolution we need is one requiring UN approval before any military action occurs.

Sincerely,
Charles W. Jenks
Traprock Peace Center

Page created October 22, 2002 by Charlie Jenks