[Peace-discussion] Report on the National Assembly anti-war conference in Cleveland
John Walsh
jvwalshmd@gmail.com
Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:05:54 -0400
------=_Part_3201_17271807.1215097554602
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Most of these groups represent the same view, and I believe that they are
simply leftovers from 20th century leftism that was distinguished only by
failure after the struggles for rights of women and blacks reached a certai=
n
level.
As far as war and empire goes, it has not a victory to its name. So it is
not surprising that youth have fled from its musty precincts in droves. An=
d
it is not surprising that UFP"J"s donations have plummeted.
We now have to THINK about what to do next instead of drooling ancient
platitudes.
jw
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Drew Johnson <JamBoi@greens.org> wrote:
> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34503
> Report on the National Assembly anti-war conference in Cleveland
>
> And its impact on our efforts to help prevent an attack on Iran
> By Phil Wilayto, Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality; Organizer,
> 2007 People's Peace Delegation to Iran
>
> Responding to a call by a newly-formed group called the National Assembly
> to End the Iraq War and Occupation (1), some 300 anti-war organizers from
> a broad array of organizations gathered in Cleveland, Ohio, June 28 and
> 29. The conference organizers had announced that their goal was to set a
> date for a massive protest that could bring out the largest number of
> people under the single demand of immediately withdrawing all U.S. forces
> from Iraq.
>
> Despite the fact that some 70 percent of the people of the United States
> now say they want the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq, there has been no
> national anti-war mobilization in the U.S. this year. This is in part
> because the energies of many activists have unfortunately been diverted b=
y
> the November presidential elections, and also because the anti-war
> movement is deeply divided, with competing national coalitions vying for
> influence.
>
> In this context, it was significant not only that the Cleveland conferenc=
e
> took place at all, but that it included among its speakers leaders of mos=
t
> of the major anti-war coalitions: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (2),
> Troops Out Now Coalition (3), United for Peace and Justice (4) and U.S.
> Labor Against the War (5). Several state- and citywide coalitions and
> networks were also represented, as well as local organizations and
> individuals. (Still, it should be noted that the conference attracted
> relatively few youth or people of color.)
>
> Besides the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq, other issues were also to be
> addressed, either at one of 17 scheduled workshops or by speakers at the
> gathering's general sessions.
>
> However, up until just a few days before the start of the conference, non=
e
> of these many speakers or workshops were scheduled to address what many
> observers believe to be the very real threat of an imminent military
> attack on Iran, either by the U.S. or by Israel acting on its behalf.
>
> Moreover, the action proposal being presented by the conference organizer=
s
> included this paragraph:
>
> "In the event of a U.S. government attack on Iran or another major
> international crisis triggered by U.S. military action, the Assembly will
> urge an emergency convening of all the major antiwar forces to plan the
> most massive, united, protest action possible."
>
> This statement was alarming for two reasons: there was no call for any
> protest to help prevent such an attack, and there was no mention of
> opposing an attack by Israel.
>
> As a result, the Campaign Against Sanctions & Military Intervention in
> Iran (6), meeting June 21 in Washington, D.C., decided to send two
> representatives to the Cleveland conference to raise the issue of Iran.
> The representatives were Rostam Pourzal, president of the U.S. chapter of
> CASMII, and Phil Wilayto, organizer of the 2007 People's Peace Delegation
> to Iran (7) and a member of the Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality
> in Richmond, Virginia (8). Both CASMII and the Defenders are affiliated
> with the Virginia Anti-War Network (9), an alliance of two dozen peace,
> community and labor groups. After consultation with VAWN's steering
> committee, it was agreed that Rostam and Phil would also represent VAWN a=
t
> the Cleveland conference.
>
> Rostam and Phil submitted a proposal to the conference organizers for a
> workshop titled "Is the Bush administration planning to attack Iran befor=
e
> the November elections?"
>
> They also drew up a resolution asking the conference participants to
> declare their unequivocal opposition to:
>
> (1)any military attack on Iran, by the U.S., Israel, or any other country
> acting at the behest of the U.S.;
> (2)the imposition or continuation of sanctions, whether economic or
> military, against Iran; and
> (3)any attempt by the U.S. government or any of its agencies to interfere
> with or otherwise attempt to influence the internal political process in
> Iran.
>
> The workshop proposal was accepted. However, that meant there were now 18
> workshops scheduled for the same time on Saturday afternoon, all vying fo=
r
> the attention of the 300 conference participants. Divided equally, that
> would have meant about 16 participants in each workshop. Further, our
> proposal was never posted on the conference Web site, nor was it listed i=
n
> the printed material distributed to each attendee at the conference. We
> were told that all workshops would be listed in a later version of the
> printed material, but that did not happen. We did post signs about the
> workshop around the conference area and also leafleted the conference
> attendees with copies of the resolution. Several friends attending the
> conference helped us spread the word about the workshop. And we obtained =
a
> commitment from the workshops coordinator that our workshop would be
> announced from the podium, which it was.
>
> In the end, the Iran workshop drew more than 30 people, an indication of
> the level of concern of among participants. Rostam made a presentation
> answering the major U.S. charges against Iran =96 that it is attempting t=
o
> develop nuclear weapons, that it is a military threat to the United State=
s
> and Israel, that it sponsors terrorism and that it is a source of
> instability in Iraq. Phil raised suggestions about how activists can more
> forcefully raise the issue of an attack on Iran in their ongoing work. Th=
e
> resolution on Iran was discussed and workshop participants were urged to
> support it when it came up for a vote. The response was overwhelmingly
> positive.
>
> Also scheduled for Saturday was the presentation of the action proposals,
> which addressed a variety of issues. According to the ground rules of the
> conference, only one proposal would be adopted, but that proposal could
> then be amended by a vote of the participants.
>
> The proposal selected by the participants was the one presented by the
> conference organizers =96 to support all the many anti-war activities bei=
ng
> called for this summer, fall and winter, but to view them as building up
> to massive protests on both the East and West coasts in March of 2009 tha=
t
> would have the single demand of immediately ending the U.S. occupation of
> Iraq.
>
> Amendments were considered on Sunday morning, and this is where the major
> discussions and arguments took place. It was agreed that three amendments
> =96 the ones the chair called the "most controversial" =96 would be consi=
dered
> first.
>
> The first amendment called for expanding the focus of the Assembly to
> include the U.S-led war and occupation of Afghanistan. This passed, and
> the new name became the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan
> Wars and Occupations."
>
> The second amendment called for including the struggle of the Palestinian
> people as a central issue to be addressed by the National Assembly. This
> also passed, but only after all references to the pro-Israeli lobby were
> removed, by a very close vote.
>
> Then came the Iran amendment. At this point the conference chair referred
> to an amendment on Iran proposed by the conference coordinating committee
> itself. This was the first we had heard of another resolution on Iran.
> That amendment called for no war or sanctions on Iran, by the U.S., Israe=
l
> or any other country.
>
> At this point one of the conference participants pointed out that there
> was another resolution on Iran (ours), which she described as more
> comprehensive, and asked that it be considered for a vote. Rostam took th=
e
> microphone and presented our resolution. Phil also spoke, emphasizing the
> urgency of the issue in the light of the very real possibility of an
> attack taking place this summer.
>
> In addition to the demands of no war, sanctions or internal interference,
> our resolution stated that "The individuals and organizations attending
> this National Assembly agree to incorporate these demands into any future
> protests =96 local, regional or national =96 calling for an end to the U.=
S.
> occupation of Iraq." At the request of one of the conference organizers,
> this was changed to state that the Assembly "encourages" the inclusion of
> the three demands in any future ant-war protests, on the grounds that the
> conference did not in fact have the authority to impose this demand on it=
s
> participants. Rostam and Phil agreed to the change. The amended resolutio=
n
> then passed by an overwhelming show of hands.
>
> The resolution also called for copies of the resolution on Iran to be
> included with any press release about the results of the conference.
>
> Significance of the resolution
>
> Our main motivation in attending the Cleveland conference was our concern
> that the absence of any substantive mention of Iran could be interpreted
> by the Bush administration that the issue is of little importance to the
> U.S. anti-war movement. This mistaken impression could then become a
> factor in the administration's evaluation of the political consequences o=
f
> ordering an attack on Iran.
>
> Further, there is the urgency of the situation.
>
> The Middle East holds two-thirds of the world's known oil, a source not
> only of incredible wealth but also the resource necessary for the
> functioning of modern industrial societies. Whichever country or block of
> countries effectively controls this oil =96 whether or not they own it
> outright =96 can control the world. (Freely and equitably trading oil for
> money or other needed commodities seems beyond the thinking potential of
> the U.S. ruling establishment.)
>
> The openly stated policy of the U.S. government is to prevent the
> emergence of any potential rival anywhere in the world. Now that the U.S.
> has eliminated Iraq as a potential rival, the only significant "threat" i=
n
> the region is Iran.
>
> Ever since the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, the U.S. has been
> intensifying its demonization of Iran, preparing world opinion for a
> confrontation. That confrontation has been delayed because of the
> unexpectedly strong Iraqi resistance to the U.S. occupation, by Israel's
> failure to subdue Hezbollah in its 2006 invasion of Lebanon, and by the
> inability of the U.S. and Israel to destroy Hamas as a viable political
> force in Palestine.
>
> The Bush administration now has less than seven months left in office. Th=
e
> window of opportunity for an attack is rapidly closing. And so the signs
> pointing to an attack have been increasing. "All options are on the
> table," we are told by the government that controls half the world's
> nuclear weapons. Bush has been touring the Middle East and Europe, lining
> up support for increased pressure on Iran. Israel, which recently bombed
> what the U.S. news media described as a suspected nuclear site in Syria,
> is now threatening to attack Iran, even as it carries out provocative
> military maneuvers in the region. Further, according to a current article
> in the New Yorker magazine by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh,
> Congress agreed has agreed to fund a Bush request for a "major escalation
> of covert operations against Iran ... designed to destabilize the
> country's religious leadership."
>
> In short, we seem to be watching a rerun of the lead-up to the war in Ira=
q.
>
> Some in the anti-war movement may feel that the threat of a new war is
> remote, given the popular opposition to the war in Iraq and the fact that
> a new president will be elected in November. However, the month of August
> has in the past presented an attractive time frame for the U.S. governmen=
t
> to carry out unpopular moves, both domestic and foreign. Congress is not
> in session. High school, college and university students are on vacation,
> as are many working people. The anti-war movement itself is in a
> less-organized mode, with many of its own activists taking time off for
> needed rest. For all these reasons, we believe that the possibility of an
> attack on Iran is credible, serious and possibly imminent.
>
> It should be emphasized here that there was no lack of concern among the
> Cleveland conference participants or organizers about the issue of an
> attack on Iran. Everyone attending the conference was strongly opposed to
> any such attack. Many have already been raising the issue through public
> meetings, protests and in educational materials. TONC is calling for loca=
l
> protests on Aug. 2. UFPJ is discussing issuing a similar (though
> competing) call.
>
> However, the fact that none of these organizations or coalitions suggeste=
d
> a workshop, offered a speaker or submitted a proposal on the issue was
> disturbing. Since the Cleveland conference not only included
> representatives of coalitions that seldom work together, but also is the
> only major anti-war conference taking place in 2008 =96 a presidential
> election year =96 neglecting the issue of Iran could have had serious
> consequences. It might have sent a signal =96 an incorrect one, but a sig=
nal
> nonetheless =96 to the Bush administration or its successor that a possib=
le
> attack on Iran was of no great concern to the U.S. anti-war movement. Tha=
t
> signal then becomes a factor in the administration's calculation about th=
e
> political cost of such an attack.
>
> By attending and successfully intervening in this conference, CASMII, the
> Defenders and VAWN have helped to avoid that mistaken impression.
>
> Our task now is to implement the resolution and raise as forcefully as
> possible the demand of "No War, No Sanctions, No Internal Interference in
> Iran!"
>
> (We would like to thank Jonathan Hutto, GI activist, author and member of
> the National Assembly coordinating committee, for encouraging VAWN to
> participate in this conference.)
>
> (1)National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation -
> www.natassembly.org
> (2)Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (A.N.S.W.E.R.) -
> www.internationalanswer.org
> (3)Troops Out Now Coalition (TONC) - www.troopsoutnow.org
> (4)United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) - www.unitedforpeace.org
> (5)U.S. Labor Against the War (USLAW) - www.uslaboragainstwar.org
> (6)Campaign Against Sanctions & Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII) -
> www.campaigniran.org
> (7)2007 People's Peace Delegation to Iran - www.vawn.org
> (8)Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - WWW.DefendersFJE.org
> (9)Virginia Anti-War Network (9) - www.vawn.org
>
> Submitted to CASMII, the Defenders and VAWN by:
>
> Phil Wilayto
> Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality; Organizer, 2007 People's Peace
> Delegation to Iran
> E-mail: philwilayto@earthlink.net
>
> 7/3/08
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discussion mailing list
> Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org
> http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion
>
------=_Part_3201_17271807.1215097554602
Content-Type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Most of these groups represent the same view, and I believe that they are s=
imply leftovers from 20th century leftism that was distinguished only by fa=
ilure after the struggles for rights of women and blacks reached a certain =
level.<br>
As far as war and empire goes, it has not a victory to its name. =
; So it is not surprising that youth have fled from its musty precincts in =
droves. And it is not surprising that UFP"J"s donations hav=
e plummeted. <br>
We now have to THINK about what to do next instead of drooling ancient plat=
itudes.<br>jw<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:4=
8 AM, Drew Johnson <<a href=3D"mailto:JamBoi@greens.org">JamBoi@greens.o=
rg</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, =
204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><a href=3D"http:/=
/www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34503" target=3D"_blank">http://www.afterd=
owningstreet.org/node/34503</a><br>
Report on the National Assembly anti-war conference in Cleveland<br>
<br>
And its impact on our efforts to help prevent an attack on Iran<br>
By Phil Wilayto, Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality; Organizer,<=
br>
2007 People's Peace Delegation to Iran<br>
<br>
Responding to a call by a newly-formed group called the National Assembly<b=
r>
to End the Iraq War and Occupation (1), some 300 anti-war organizers from<b=
r>
a broad array of organizations gathered in Cleveland, Ohio, June 28 and<br>
29. The conference organizers had announced that their goal was to set a<br=
>
date for a massive protest that could bring out the largest number of<br>
people under the single demand of immediately withdrawing all U.S. forces<b=
r>
from Iraq.<br>
<br>
Despite the fact that some 70 percent of the people of the United States<br=
>
now say they want the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq, there has been no<br>
national anti-war mobilization in the U.S. this year. This is in part<br>
because the energies of many activists have unfortunately been diverted by<=
br>
the November presidential elections, and also because the anti-war<br>
movement is deeply divided, with competing national coalitions vying for<br=
>
influence.<br>
<br>
In this context, it was significant not only that the Cleveland conference<=
br>
took place at all, but that it included among its speakers leaders of most<=
br>
of the major anti-war coalitions: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (2),<b=
r>
Troops Out Now Coalition (3), United for Peace and Justice (4) and U.S.<br>
Labor Against the War (5). Several state- and citywide coalitions and<br>
networks were also represented, as well as local organizations and<br>
individuals. (Still, it should be noted that the conference attracted<br>
relatively few youth or people of color.)<br>
<br>
Besides the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq, other issues were also to be<br>
addressed, either at one of 17 scheduled workshops or by speakers at the<br=
>
gathering's general sessions.<br>
<br>
However, up until just a few days before the start of the conference, none<=
br>
of these many speakers or workshops were scheduled to address what many<br>
observers believe to be the very real threat of an imminent military<br>
attack on Iran, either by the U.S. or by Israel acting on its behalf.<br>
<br>
Moreover, the action proposal being presented by the conference organizers<=
br>
included this paragraph:<br>
<br>
"In the event of a U.S. government attack on Iran or another major<br>
international crisis triggered by U.S. military action, the Assembly will<b=
r>
urge an emergency convening of all the major antiwar forces to plan the<br>
most massive, united, protest action possible."<br>
<br>
This statement was alarming for two reasons: there was no call for any<br>
protest to help prevent such an attack, and there was no mention of<br>
opposing an attack by Israel.<br>
<br>
As a result, the Campaign Against Sanctions & Military Intervention in<=
br>
Iran (6), meeting June 21 in Washington, D.C., decided to send two<br>
representatives to the Cleveland conference to raise the issue of Iran.<br>
The representatives were Rostam Pourzal, president of the U.S. chapter of<b=
r>
CASMII, and Phil Wilayto, organizer of the 2007 People's Peace Delegati=
on<br>
to Iran (7) and a member of the Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equali=
ty<br>
in Richmond, Virginia (8). Both CASMII and the Defenders are affiliated<br>
with the Virginia Anti-War Network (9), an alliance of two dozen peace,<br>
community and labor groups. After consultation with VAWN's steering<br>
committee, it was agreed that Rostam and Phil would also represent VAWN at<=
br>
the Cleveland conference.<br>
<br>
Rostam and Phil submitted a proposal to the conference organizers for a<br>
workshop titled "Is the Bush administration planning to attack Iran before<=
br>
the November elections?"<br>
<br>
They also drew up a resolution asking the conference participants to<br>
declare their unequivocal opposition to:<br>
<br>
(1)any military attack on Iran, by the U.S., Israel, or any other country<b=
r>
acting at the behest of the U.S.;<br>
(2)the imposition or continuation of sanctions, whether economic or<br>
military, against Iran; and<br>
(3)any attempt by the U.S. government or any of its agencies to interfere<b=
r>
with or otherwise attempt to influence the internal political process in<br=
>
Iran.<br>
<br>
The workshop proposal was accepted. However, that meant there were now 18<b=
r>
workshops scheduled for the same time on Saturday afternoon, all vying for<=
br>
the attention of the 300 conference participants. Divided equally, that<br>
would have meant about 16 participants in each workshop. Further, our<br>
proposal was never posted on the conference Web site, nor was it listed in<=
br>
the printed material distributed to each attendee at the conference. We<br>
were told that all workshops would be listed in a later version of the<br>
printed material, but that did not happen. We did post signs about the<br>
workshop around the conference area and also leafleted the conference<br>
attendees with copies of the resolution. Several friends attending the<br>
conference helped us spread the word about the workshop. And we obtained a<=
br>
commitment from the workshops coordinator that our workshop would be<br>
announced from the podium, which it was.<br>
<br>
In the end, the Iran workshop drew more than 30 people, an indication of<br=
>
the level of concern of among participants. Rostam made a presentation<br>
answering the major U.S. charges against Iran =96 that it is attempting to<=
br>
develop nuclear weapons, that it is a military threat to the United States<=
br>
and Israel, that it sponsors terrorism and that it is a source of<br>
instability in Iraq. Phil raised suggestions about how activists can more<b=
r>
forcefully raise the issue of an attack on Iran in their ongoing work. The<=
br>
resolution on Iran was discussed and workshop participants were urged to<br=
>
support it when it came up for a vote. The response was overwhelmingly<br>
positive.<br>
<br>
Also scheduled for Saturday was the presentation of the action proposals,<b=
r>
which addressed a variety of issues. According to the ground rules of the<b=
r>
conference, only one proposal would be adopted, but that proposal could<br>
then be amended by a vote of the participants.<br>
<br>
The proposal selected by the participants was the one presented by the<br>
conference organizers =96 to support all the many anti-war activities being=
<br>
called for this summer, fall and winter, but to view them as building up<br=
>
to massive protests on both the East and West coasts in March of 2009 that<=
br>
would have the single demand of immediately ending the U.S. occupation of<b=
r>
Iraq.<br>
<br>
Amendments were considered on Sunday morning, and this is where the major<b=
r>
discussions and arguments took place. It was agreed that three amendments<b=
r>
=96 the ones the chair called the "most controversial" =96 would be conside=
red<br>
first.<br>
<br>
The first amendment called for expanding the focus of the Assembly to<br>
include the U.S-led war and occupation of Afghanistan. This passed, and<br>
the new name became the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan<b=
r>
Wars and Occupations."<br>
<br>
The second amendment called for including the struggle of the Palestinian<b=
r>
people as a central issue to be addressed by the National Assembly. This<br=
>
also passed, but only after all references to the pro-Israeli lobby were<br=
>
removed, by a very close vote.<br>
<br>
Then came the Iran amendment. At this point the conference chair referred<b=
r>
to an amendment on Iran proposed by the conference coordinating committee<b=
r>
itself. This was the first we had heard of another resolution on Iran.<br>
That amendment called for no war or sanctions on Iran, by the U.S., Israel<=
br>
or any other country.<br>
<br>
At this point one of the conference participants pointed out that there<br>
was another resolution on Iran (ours), which she described as more<br>
comprehensive, and asked that it be considered for a vote. Rostam took the<=
br>
microphone and presented our resolution. Phil also spoke, emphasizing the<b=
r>
urgency of the issue in the light of the very real possibility of an<br>
attack taking place this summer.<br>
<br>
In addition to the demands of no war, sanctions or internal interference,<b=
r>
our resolution stated that "The individuals and organizations attending<br>
this National Assembly agree to incorporate these demands into any future<b=
r>
protests =96 local, regional or national =96 calling for an end to the U.S.=
<br>
occupation of Iraq." At the request of one of the conference organizers,<br=
>
this was changed to state that the Assembly "encourages" the inclusion of<b=
r>
the three demands in any future ant-war protests, on the grounds that the<b=
r>
conference did not in fact have the authority to impose this demand on its<=
br>
participants. Rostam and Phil agreed to the change. The amended resolution<=
br>
then passed by an overwhelming show of hands.<br>
<br>
The resolution also called for copies of the resolution on Iran to be<br>
included with any press release about the results of the conference.<br>
<br>
Significance of the resolution<br>
<br>
Our main motivation in attending the Cleveland conference was our concern<b=
r>
that the absence of any substantive mention of Iran could be interpreted<br=
>
by the Bush administration that the issue is of little importance to the<br=
>
U.S. anti-war movement. This mistaken impression could then become a<br>
factor in the administration's evaluation of the political consequences=
of<br>
ordering an attack on Iran.<br>
<br>
Further, there is the urgency of the situation.<br>
<br>
The Middle East holds two-thirds of the world's known oil, a source not=
<br>
only of incredible wealth but also the resource necessary for the<br>
functioning of modern industrial societies. Whichever country or block of<b=
r>
countries effectively controls this oil =96 whether or not they own it<br>
outright =96 can control the world. (Freely and equitably trading oil for<b=
r>
money or other needed commodities seems beyond the thinking potential of<br=
>
the U.S. ruling establishment.)<br>
<br>
The openly stated policy of the U.S. government is to prevent the<br>
emergence of any potential rival anywhere in the world. Now that the U.S.<b=
r>
has eliminated Iraq as a potential rival, the only significant "threat" in<=
br>
the region is Iran.<br>
<br>
Ever since the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, the U.S. has been<br>
intensifying its demonization of Iran, preparing world opinion for a<br>
confrontation. That confrontation has been delayed because of the<br>
unexpectedly strong Iraqi resistance to the U.S. occupation, by Israel'=
s<br>
failure to subdue Hezbollah in its 2006 invasion of Lebanon, and by the<br>
inability of the U.S. and Israel to destroy Hamas as a viable political<br>
force in Palestine.<br>
<br>
The Bush administration now has less than seven months left in office. The<=
br>
window of opportunity for an attack is rapidly closing. And so the signs<br=
>
pointing to an attack have been increasing. "All options are on the<br>
table," we are told by the government that controls half the world's<br=
>
nuclear weapons. Bush has been touring the Middle East and Europe, lining<b=
r>
up support for increased pressure on Iran. Israel, which recently bombed<br=
>
what the U.S. news media described as a suspected nuclear site in Syria,<br=
>
is now threatening to attack Iran, even as it carries out provocative<br>
military maneuvers in the region. Further, according to a current article<b=
r>
in the New Yorker magazine by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh,<br>
Congress agreed has agreed to fund a Bush request for a "major escalation<b=
r>
of covert operations against Iran ... designed to destabilize the<br>
country's religious leadership."<br>
<br>
In short, we seem to be watching a rerun of the lead-up to the war in Iraq.=
<br>
<br>
Some in the anti-war movement may feel that the threat of a new war is<br>
remote, given the popular opposition to the war in Iraq and the fact that<b=
r>
a new president will be elected in November. However, the month of August<b=
r>
has in the past presented an attractive time frame for the U.S. government<=
br>
to carry out unpopular moves, both domestic and foreign. Congress is not<br=
>
in session. High school, college and university students are on vacation,<b=
r>
as are many working people. The anti-war movement itself is in a<br>
less-organized mode, with many of its own activists taking time off for<br>
needed rest. For all these reasons, we believe that the possibility of an<b=
r>
attack on Iran is credible, serious and possibly imminent.<br>
<br>
It should be emphasized here that there was no lack of concern among the<br=
>
Cleveland conference participants or organizers about the issue of an<br>
attack on Iran. Everyone attending the conference was strongly opposed to<b=
r>
any such attack. Many have already been raising the issue through public<br=
>
meetings, protests and in educational materials. TONC is calling for local<=
br>
protests on Aug. 2. UFPJ is discussing issuing a similar (though<br>
competing) call.<br>
<br>
However, the fact that none of these organizations or coalitions suggested<=
br>
a workshop, offered a speaker or submitted a proposal on the issue was<br>
disturbing. Since the Cleveland conference not only included<br>
representatives of coalitions that seldom work together, but also is the<br=
>
only major anti-war conference taking place in 2008 =96 a presidential<br>
election year =96 neglecting the issue of Iran could have had serious<br>
consequences. It might have sent a signal =96 an incorrect one, but a signa=
l<br>
nonetheless =96 to the Bush administration or its successor that a possible=
<br>
attack on Iran was of no great concern to the U.S. anti-war movement. That<=
br>
signal then becomes a factor in the administration's calculation about =
the<br>
political cost of such an attack.<br>
<br>
By attending and successfully intervening in this conference, CASMII, the<b=
r>
Defenders and VAWN have helped to avoid that mistaken impression.<br>
<br>
Our task now is to implement the resolution and raise as forcefully as<br>
possible the demand of "No War, No Sanctions, No Internal Interference in<b=
r>
Iran!"<br>
<br>
(We would like to thank Jonathan Hutto, GI activist, author and member of<b=
r>
the National Assembly coordinating committee, for encouraging VAWN to<br>
participate in this conference.)<br>
<br>
(1)National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation - <a href=3D"http:/=
/www.natassembly.org" target=3D"_blank">www.natassembly.org</a><br>
(2)Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (A.N.S.W.E.R.) -<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.internationalanswer.org" target=3D"_blank">www.intern=
ationalanswer.org</a><br>
(3)Troops Out Now Coalition (TONC) - <a href=3D"http://www.troopsoutnow.org=
" target=3D"_blank">www.troopsoutnow.org</a><br>
(4)United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) - <a href=3D"http://www.unitedforpea=
ce.org" target=3D"_blank">www.unitedforpeace.org</a><br>
(5)U.S. Labor Against the War (USLAW) - <a href=3D"http://www.uslaboragains=
twar.org" target=3D"_blank">www.uslaboragainstwar.org</a><br>
(6)Campaign Against Sanctions & Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII) =
-<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.campaigniran.org" target=3D"_blank">www.campaigniran.=
org</a><br>
(7)2007 People's Peace Delegation to Iran - <a href=3D"http://www.vawn.=
org" target=3D"_blank">www.vawn.org</a><br>
(8)Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - <a href=3D"http://WWW.De=
fendersFJE.org" target=3D"_blank">WWW.DefendersFJE.org</a><br>
(9)Virginia Anti-War Network (9) - <a href=3D"http://www.vawn.org" target=
=3D"_blank">www.vawn.org</a><br>
<br>
Submitted to CASMII, the Defenders and VAWN by:<br>
<br>
Phil Wilayto<br>
Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality; Organizer, 2007 People's=
Peace<br>
Delegation to Iran<br>
E-mail: <a href=3D"mailto:philwilayto@earthlink.net">philwilayto@earthlink.=
net</a><br>
<br>
7/3/08<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Peace-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org">Peace-discussion@lists.=
gp-us.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion" target=
=3D"_blank">http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion</a><br=
>
</blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_3201_17271807.1215097554602--