On Friday, the Norwegian Nobel Institute announced that President Jimmy Carter would be the Nobel Peace Prize laureate for 2002. In honoring Carter for his 25 years of work in humanitarian projects and peaceful conflict resolution. Many–including Gunnar Berge, the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize committee–have interpreted the award as not just an honor for Carter’s work, but also as a pointed challenge to the present Bush administration sabre-rattling and unilateralist war-mongering towards Iraq.

Those of you who follow this space may find this development particularly interesting, because back in February I reported on the nomination of Bush and Blair for the Nobel Peace Prize by Harald Tom Nesvik, a Right-wing Norwegian MP for–that’s right–starting a war. In reaction to the news, I launched an Internet campaign protesting the nomination and urging the Nobel Committee to give the award to a candidate who had truly worked for peace. The outcome of that action was nothing short of astounding: over the eight months between the beginning of the action and the announcement of snub of Bush and Blair, some 43,850 e-mails were sent from people all over the world to the Nobel Peace Prize committee through my web site, and many people also sent faxes and letters by international post (I reported on the remarkable outpouring of support for the action in GT 2002/02/18, GT 2002/02/20, and GT 2002/03/01).

Now, reality check: did a bunch of polemical e-mails about Bush and Blair actually affect the Nobel Peace Prize committee’s decision? It’s unlikely. They had already stated their hostility towards Bush and Blair’s promises of ever-expanding militarism. The stance of the European Left–which presently holds the majority on the committee–towards DC‘s renewed calls for a militaristic New World Order is well known to be hostile. They had already stated, in fact, that they would consider giving the prize to Bush and Blair–but only if they brought al-Qaeda to justice without bombing Afghanistan, and, well, we all saw how that one went.

Nevertheless, I can’t help but be pleased with how things have turned out on this count. Who knows; maybe the flood of e-mail did embolden them towards sharper criticism of the Bush administration. And whether it did or not, I am simply humbled by how much people all over the world put into a campaign on my little page off in an obscure corner of the Internet. It had nothing in particular to do with me, except in terms of the software; I publicized the actions on a few mailing lists and a few IndyMedia sites, and then simply stood by and watched as nearly 50,000 spread the word amongst themselves all over the world. I received piles of e-mail from people I’ve never met; I had people voluntarily contribute French transations to help the international appeal of the website. Such simple devices as e-mail forwards and listservs rallied a tremendous response from all over the world. As I wrote near the beginning of the campaign, we could be living at the beginning of a new era in using the Internet as a space for democratic political transformation. The networks that we are building–if we do the work we need to, to expand them, make them effective, make them inclusive, and use them to bring actions out to the streets–are one of our best hopes for the future. I hope that I have done some small work towards helping to demonstrate that promise. And I think that this weekend is an excellent opportunity to think ahead to how we can continue this work.

Take Action!

You can thank the Norwegian Nobel Institute by writing them an e-mailthanking them for respecting the worldwide outcry against Nesvik’s nomination and Bush’s militarism, and for rewarding a man who has truly worked for peace for the past 25 years.

(This letter is part of the Open Letters BlogBurst against war on Iraq)

The Letter for Democrats

Dear Senator Daschle:

I am writing today to urge you to take a leadership role to stop the Bush administration’s plans for unprovoked war against Iraq.

As the Majority Leader in the Senate, you will have to choose whether to cooperate with the Bush administration’s lawless and politically-motivated plans for war, or to take a stand for the rule of law and the lives of innocent civilians. You will have a great deal of responsibility on your shoulders, and you will have to choose whether you will exercise it in the name of international aggression or international justice.

The Bush administration has floated over a dozen rationalizations for crying havoc, and yet no conclusive evidence has ever been produced which shows that the Iraqi government poses an imminent threat to the life or liberty of American citizens. After Iraq accepted the Bush administration’s demand for weapons inspectors to return, the administration turns around and declares that it will invade Iraq anyway. Unjustified by evidence and unsupported by the international community, the Bush administration is asking for your cooperation in a naked war for conquest.

This is literally a matter of life and death–for American men and women in uniform, and for the innocent Iraqi civilians who will be caught in the line of fire. As you prepare for the upcoming November elections, I urge you to remember that according to recent Zogby polls, the majority of Americans oppose unilateral war against Iraq, and that Americans consider the jobs and the domestic economy to be the most important issue in the upcoming election. The President’s rush to war is a transparent attempt to keep corporate corruption and the increasingly fragile economy off the front pages. If Democrats speak with a united voice against his asleep-at-the-wheel domestic policies and his October surprise warmongering, then they can easily make their case to the American public and clean up in the November elections. If, on the other hand, they remain divided and let the administration get away with its callous manipulations, they will lose–and they will deserve to lose. Today I join many other Americans in pledging that I will never vote for, and will actively work against, any Democrat who votes in favor of the Bush administration’s dangerous proposal for lawless aggression. I urge you to work to give the American people a principled alternative to Republican war-mongering–by voting against any resolution authorizing unprovoked war against Iraq.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing your views on this urgent issue.

The Letter for Republicans

Dear Senator Sessions:

In a matter of days, the Senate will have a choice to make.

The Senate leadership on both sides of the aisle is working to bring a resolution to the floor which would authorize President Bush to wage war against Iraq. You will have to choose whether to vote for or against war on Iraq. You will have to choose whether to sign off on unprovoked aggression, or to stand up for the rule of law and the lives of innocent civilians. There is a great deal of responsibility on your shoulders, and you will have to choose whether you will exercise it in the name of international aggression or international justice.

The Bush administration has floated over a dozen rationalizations for crying havoc, and yet no conclusive evidence has ever been produced which shows that the Iraqi government poses an imminent threat to the life or liberty of American citizens. After Iraq accepted the Bush administration’s demand for weapons inspectors to return, the administration turns around and declares that it will invade Iraq anyway. Unjustified by evidence and unsupported by the international community, the Bush administration is asking for your cooperation in a naked war for conquest.

This is literally a matter of life and death–for American men and women in uniform, and for the innocent Iraqi civilians who will be caught in the line of fire. As you prepare for the upcoming November elections, I remind you that the majority of Americans oppose unilateral war against Iraq. I have voted in every election since I became eligible, and I pledge today that I will never vote for, and will actively work against, any elected official who votes in favor of the Bush administration’s dangerous proposal for lawless aggression. As your constituent, I urge you to give Alabama a Senator we can support–by voting against any resolution authorizing the unprovoked use of force against Iraq.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing your views on this urgent issue.

P.S.

Excuse me, but could someone please, please, please explain to me what the bloody hell the point is of going to the UN and demanding that Iraq allow arms inspectors to re-enter the country—and then when they do allow arms inspectors to re-enter the country, turning around and declaring that we don’t give a damn and we’ll bomb ’em back to the Stone Age, anyway?

Also, could someone explain to me why the hell the Democratic leadership in DC has insisted on not just being spineless and amoral—I expect that out of them—but also politically suicidal? It’s one thing to be yellow-bellied, but it’s quite another to just roll over and allow this sloped-brow thug to run around and play international cowboy in a painfully transparent and obvious attempt at an October Surprise before the mid-term Congressional elections. Are the War Party toadies in Congress that committed to spreading death and destruction far and wide? Or are they just that oblivious to the fact that the American public still is nowhere near sold on war against Iraq, with a majority opposing unilateral action and opposing a commitment that would result in serious American casualties and opposing a war that would result in Iraqi civilian casualties?

I mean, for crying out loud, how pathetic is it when Al fucking Gore is the only high-level Democrat who is making sense on this issue? According to Zogby, 22% of Americans rate the economy and jobs as the single most important issue in the upcoming election–which is more people than any other issue pulled. The war was the most influential issue for only 10% of the people. And, as Gore has pointed out, George W. Bush is presiding over the worst economy slump since… well, since George H. W. Bush was President. The whole administration is asleep at the wheel, but the administration is using their ridiculous antics toward Iraq in a painfully obvious attempt to keep his War Party toadies on the other side of the aisle from giving him the media plastering he so richly deserves.

Take Action

We have about a week left to act. Congress is still debating whether or not to give Bush the resolution he wants; but there’s still time to get the Democrats’ heads out of their asses and convince them to stand firm against Mr. Bush’s war. First, sign Michael Moore’s pledge to let the Democrats know we’re not fucking around: You’re either with us, or you’re fired!. Second, call your Senators and Representative and—firmly but politely—demand that they vote against further aggression against Iraq. If they are Democrats, remind them that the election is coming up and insist that they hold the administration accountable for its economic failures instead of letting it get away with its Wag the Dog strategy. Third, write a letter to the editor of your local paper speaking out against war on Iraq. Finally, talk to your friends, and make sure that everyone knows what bullshit this sabre-rattling is. The elections are coming up and Congress-critters will be watching the signs of public opinion very carefully.

We are faced with an administration that is just a step short of overtly speaking of global empire. Every day they are acting in an even more lawless and aggressive fashion. There’s time left to stop them, but we have to get our shit together now, draw a line in the sand, and fight hard. Will we win on Iraq? Who knows. But whether we do or not, if we don’t unite now, we are doomed to lose on everything else.

Since I’ve posted two stories on Iraq in a row, I would also like to take this time to remind you that the aftermath of the past 10 years of reckless corporate welfare giveaways and rank corporate malfeasance by cronies of, among others, George W. Bush, continues to make for an extremely fragile economy, with low profits, surging oil prices (as a direct result of U.S. sabre-rattling), and dismal retail results.

The lowest US interest rates for 40 years have helped keep the American economy afloat, especially through strong consumer spending. But companies are still struggling to make profits in an environment of low prices while saddled with debt accumulated in the 1990s boom. Analysts thought companies would be over the worst by now, but the stream of profit warnings and credit downgrades shows no sign of drying up.

Well, it should be noted that the coexistence of "the lowest U.S. interest rates in 40 years" and accumulating debt is not merely a coincidence. When your central bank is giving away basically free money, and the legislature is stealing money from workers in order to write billions of dollars in corporate welfare checks, the amount of investment is artificially jacked up. That will jack up the economy temporarily, but eventually the chickens will come home to roost: artificially low interest rates means artificially high malinvestment – pouring cheap money into bad projects because the risk is artificially lowered. We are now living with the hangover of our central planners’ and corporate bureaucrats’ long investment binge in the 1990s.

The Bush apparatchiks, of course, have been trying to blame this all on Clinton. And certainly Clinton’s economic policies helped create the bubble economy and continued the long tradition of massive corporate welfare giveaways. Rush Limbaugh has gone so far as to claim that every single problem Bush faces – from international terrorism to the going-nowhere economy – is not, in fact, the result of any of his own numerous fuck-ups, collusions of interest, or back-room deals. Instead, it’s all messes that Clinton left for Bush to clean up. Why? Because Clinton was too distracted by the Monica Lewinski investigation! (In other news, Limbaugh announced that four legs good, two legs bad.)

Let’s get serious, folks. We have an administration in power that is dedicated to increasing command and control over the economy by central planning bureaucrats – in corporate boardrooms and in government offices. The economy has been weak for the entire Bush Presidency and it shows no signs of letting up. He’s had a year and a half now; by now, even the lagging indicators (such as unemployment levels) are reflecting decisions made under the Bush administration. The problem is that the Democratic leadership is too spineless and too cowed and too much in collusion with the same corporate interests to point out that Bush’s policies have been making things worse, not better. Once again, more proof that we desperately need a system that allows for vibrant third parties in America. We desperately need a lot of other things, too–like an end to corporate welfare and centralized command-and-control over the economy–but until we have some basic democracy reforms we are very unlikely to get any of that.

You know, it’s really just pathetic when the Democratic leadership’s most forceful condemnation of reckless international aggression comes from Al fucking Gore. If he ends up being the most pro-peace Democratic candidate for the Presidency in 2004, I think I am going to go insane and start systematically knocking off people’s hats.

Meanwhile, in DC, the waffling continues:

Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, the House’s second-ranked Democrat, said yesterday that she didn’t think Democrats would offer a single alternative to the Bush proposal. Her party, she said, was working on a number of different approaches that she hoped would become a part of the resolution that Congress finally votes on.

This is precisely what the problem is. Despite some high-level divisions, the Right is overwhelmingly lining up behind George W. Bush. They’re pushing this issue as hard as they can and trying to use it as a wedge for November. The Democratic Party, meanwhile, because it’s viscerally terrified of anything that might vaguely resemble a consistent commitment to social justice, or an opinion seriously challenging the Administration on foreign policy, has no unified plan, is making no common voice, and generally is letting the Right-wing nuts have a field day with it.

This is precisely why we need a vibrant multiparty system, so that the many people who are now in the Democratic coalition (Congressional and otherwise) who know that the present course of the Party leadership is politically suicidal and fundamentally reckless and stupid, actually have some leverage to challenge the War Party toadies and the Right-wing maniacs.