================================================================= Stuck In Traffic "Current Events, Cultural Phenomena, True Stories" Issue #18 - September 1996 Contents: Clinton's Missile Strike: Clinton's justification for the latest missile strike against Iraq both misrepresents the current situation in Iraq and the United State's military objectives in the region. How can we trust a President not to abuse his military powers? In the Wake of Fran: A report from the inland aftermath of Hurricane Fran. Central North Carolina wasn't hit as badly as the coastal region, but it was enough of a disaster for people, businesses, and governments to show their true colors in times of crisis. ÿ ==================================== Current Events Clinton's Missile Strikes There used to be a time when you could count on the Democrats to oppose war. They would routinely denounce any foreign intervention into the internal affairs of another country as "imperialism" or "colonialism." Whether it be Viet Nam, Panama, Nicaragua, Lebanon, the Soviet Union, the Caribbean, South Africa, the Middle East, or the Pacific Rim, the Democrats consistently voiced the sentiments of the country's anti-War movements. Not anymore. First with Haiti, and now with the latest military strike against the Iraq, the Democrats have proven without a doubt that they are just as much in favor of foreign intervention as their Republican opponents. What provoked the latest missile strikes on Iraq? What's the justification? According to President Clinton, the man who ordered the attack and ultimately has responsibility for it, "Our missiles sent the following message to Saddam Hussein: When you abuse your own people or threaten your neighbors, you must pay a price." Obviously President Clinton has bought into the "U.S. as the world's policeman" way of thinking. Pretty embarrassing for the Democrats who have opposed this attitude for the past three decades. Justification for the Missile Strike: President Clinton's subsequent statements after the strike make it clear that he was referring to Iraq's Kurdish minority when he spoke of Saddam Hussein abusing his own people. And it's difficult not to feel sorry for the Kurds, whom Hussein has systematically been persecuting for many years. But, as with all sound bites, President Clinton's justification for the raids barely scratches the surface of what's really going on in Iraq. President Clinton would have you believe that Hussein's persecution of the Kurds was ethnically based. Americans are hypersensitive to charges of racial/ethnic discrimination. It's one of the worst sins imaginable in our eyes. So if Clinton can convince us that the Hussein's persecution of the Kurds is a matter of ethnic or racial discrimination, then the American public will be more likely to approve of the missile strikes he ordered. But Hussein's persecution of the Kurds appears to be far more political in nature than ethnic. The Kurds are, for all practical purposes, of the same race as their Iraqi and Iranian counterparts. And the Kurds are devout Moslems as are the Iraqi and Iranians. So Hussein's persecution of the Kurds, can't simply be written off as racially, or religiously based. The main reason Hussein seems to be after them is that they don't buy into the ruling Baath party's utopian socialist vision of a modern Iraqi society. They prefer a traditional nomadic way of life. But if the Kurds were content to simply wander around the northern regions of Iraq, they probably wouldn't capture Hussein's attention. Hussein after all, as bigger problems to deal with these days. Currently he has big problems feeding his country since UN resolutions are forbidding him selling oil. And even if he didn't have world sanctions to contend with, he'd have to worry about Iraq's arch nemesis, Iran. Even though the eight year war between Iran and Iraq is pretty much over, the tensions between the two countries remain. So the nomadic Kurds would be at least number 3 on Hussein's list of problems to deal with if they had been content to keep to their traditional way of life. But they haven't. The Kurds have realized that they can't survive without participating in the realities of modern world politics and they have begun organizing. And like so many other tribal based societies that try to enter the world of modern politics, they immediately split in to tribal based factions and began fighting amongst themselves. In northern Iraq, there is an organization known as the Iraqi National Congress (INC) which is supposed to serve as an umbrella organization for all Iraqi opposition forces. But the real power of the Iraqi opposition is held by two parties. First there is the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) led by Massoud Barzani. The KDP is probably the more moderate of the opposition. While they have no sympathy for the Baath party or Hussein, they usually speak in terms of ousting the Baath party from power and ruling Iraq themselves or even seceding from Iraq and setting up an independent state if Kurdistan in what is now northern Iraq. The other political party among the Kurds is the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) led by Jalal Talabani. The PUK also speaks of setting up an independent state of Kurdistan, but they can't seem to unite with the KDP toward that goal and instead seem more interested in allying themselves with Iran's Moslem government. After Iraq was defeated in the Gulf War, the United States, with United Nations approval, established two "no fly" zones on the Iraqi military where Iraqi planes would not be allowed to fly. The first was in the southern end of Iraq to establish a buffer zone between Iraq and Kuwait in order to protect Kuwait from surprise attacks. The second no fly zone was at the northern end of Iraq, where the Kurds lived. Presumably, this no fly zone was put into place to give the Iraqi opposition a safe haven to regroup and build a united front against Hussein. But instead, the rival Kurd factions have continued their infighting and show no real promise of moving against Hussein. However, recent events in the northern region have begun to worry Hussein. First, the pro-Iranian PUK had managed to gain control of the main Kurdish city of Arbil, giving them a big strategic advantage in their fighting against the KDP. Second, the PUK has recently stepped up its pro-Iranian rhetoric, warning anyone who would listen that the northern region of Iraq could erupt into fighting between pro-Iranian and pro-Iraqi forces. And there are reports from the KDP that Iranian military forces have been spotted as far as 25 miles inside the Iraqi border assisting the PUK. Iran has so far neither confirmed or denied this military activity. If Iranian/Iraqi fighting gets started again among the Kurds, it's a reasonable concern for Hussein that the fighting could reopen the all out war between the two countries. At minimum Hussein runs the risk of losing his northern territories to Iran. But the big worry would be that Iran wouldn't stop there and would escalate the fighting back into an all-out war again. And Iraq, in its weakened condition simply cannot afford another war. So Hussein felt the pressure to do something to keep the pro-Iranian PUK in check. He would much rather let the PUK and KDP fight among themselves or even have to deal with opposition from the KDP than have to deal with an Iranian backed PUK. So he used Iraqi ground troops and artillery to assist the KDP in retaking control of Arbil. This is the military action which Clinton says is the reason for the U.S. missile strikes. So while Clinton has portrayed Hussein's military action as being a matter of ethnic persecution, one can reasonably argue that the take over of Arbil is more correctly classified as an attempt to prevent pro-Iranian forces from getting to strong in the U.S. protected no-fly zone. So far from being a matter of ethnic persecution as Clinton would have the American public believe, Hussein's military actions to retake the town of Arbil are a political move to support one political faction of the Kurds rather over another. The Arab League has denounced Clinton's missile attacks, putting the United States in a difficult position of having to justify them. The Arab league has correctly pointed out that Iraq has not violated any of the current U.N. sanctions. Current sanctions only prevent Iraq's air defenses from flying into the no-fly zones. There are no restrictions on Iraqi ground troop movements currently in place. Furthermore, the Arab league correctly points out that the U.S. attacks have no "international legitimacy" because the U.N. has not endorsed the missile attacks. In fact the U.N. security council was unable even to agree on a resolution condemning Iraqi's military action on Arbil, much less endorse the missile strikes. Further more, the Arab League said in a press statement that "It is thus considered an infringement on an Arab country's sovereignty ... and an interference in its internal affairs." Clinton's claims that the reason for the attacks are to punish Hussein for abusing his people are further weakened by the fact that the missile strikes on Iraq were south of Bagdad, near the southern no-fly zone. The U.S. attacks were not aimed at repelling the Iraqi armed forces from Arbil or to protect any of the opposition groups in the region, but to extend the United State's control of the southern airspace of Iraq and to extend its sphere of control closer to Bagdad. It is true that Saddam Hussein and his ruling Baath party are not going to win any popularity contests among the rest of the nations of the world. It is also true that his past persecution of the Kurds is well known and documented. But for President Clinton to claim that he ordered the missile strikes in order to punish Hussein for persecuting his people grossly misrepresents both the current situation in Iraq and the military objectives accomplished with the missile strike. Why Now? When it's this close to the election, everything the President says and does affects his chances for reelection. And since President Clinton's stated reasons for the missile strikes do not stand up to close scrutiny, and since there is virtually no international support for the missile strikes, one can't help but wonder if there are other motivations for the President's military action. In particular, one can't help but ask the question, "Why now?" Was there any pressing reason for the President to attack Hussein now? Were there any time critical factors at stake? Certainly one can't argue that there were any time critical factors at stake due to the Iraqi movements on the town of Arbil because the missile strike did not affect the town of Arbil nor did it do anything to further protect the Kurds. The sole result of the missile strike was to increase the United States' control over Iraqi airspace. Had it been deemed critical to do this, it could have been done during the initial Gulf War raid on Iraq. If not deemed critical, it could have just as easily been done after the November elections when the political climate in the United States would be more stable. Because of the President's flimsy justification for the missile strike, because of the lack of international support for the missile strike, and especially due to the date chosen for the missile strike, one can't help but questions whether President Clinton is using the military campaign to help change the public's perception that he is a weak leader on international affairs. After all, the public still remembers that it was Jimmy Carter that successfully resolved the Haitian crisis. Of course, anytime a U.S. President authorizes a military initiative, he should be subject to this sort of criticism. It's the nature of his position and should be expected. Once upon a time, it took an act of Congress to declare war and commit U.S. troops to military action, but that particular check and balance has long been obliterated by power-hungry politicians in the name of expediency. So the only check available to balance Presidential abuse of his military power as commander-in-chief is the court of public opinion. When the lives of U.S. troops are at stake, and when the lives of any civilians are at stake, American or otherwise, it is our moral duty to question the need of the military action and examine the motives of the President. Unfortunately, the person in this country best in a position to lead a critical examination of the appropriateness of Clinton's missile strikes on Iraq, Bob Dole, has so far been unwilling to raise the issue. In his usual Bush league diplomacy, he has refused to take a stand on the issue. Instead he has issued statements to the press like "I stand foursquare behind our troops." A very nice platitude that's guaranteed to win favor with veterans and active military personnel, but neatly sidesteps taking a position. If things go badly in the during this latest military action, Dole can then, after the fact, criticize the action. If things go well, and the public approves, he has not gone on record as opposing the action. In other words, Dole is acting as a follower, not a leader. The essence of a true leader is taking a definitive stand on tough issues and leading public opinion rather than following it. The President's Obligation: Since it no longer takes an act of Congress to commit U.S. troops to military conflict and life and death situations, the country is unable to debate the merits of military action before it happens. The Commander in Chief of the world's last remaining superpower has the ability to wreck havoc all over the world in a matter of hours. We have to trust the President to act wisely. We have to trust the President to understand and represent the opinion of the nation. And above all, we have to trust the President not to abuse the power he wields for personal political gain. Because there is no way to stop the President from using his military power as commander in chief once in office, it is vitally important that we find out as much as we can about the views of all Presidential candidates on how they intend to wield military powers before we elect one of them to the office. Of course we can't predict the future and we can't know all the possible situations that might arise requiring military action so we can't demand from the candidates to take a stand on every specific situation that might arise. But we can demand to know from Presidential candidates the principles he or she will follow once in office to determine when to commit U.S. troops. We can demand that the candidates take a stand on exactly which national interests are important enough to risk the lives of U.S. troops. In order for the American public to make an informed decision about the best candidate for President, the candidates must be willing to publicly state the principles and policies they intend to use when making decisions about military actions. And it is only by consistently following those stated principles and policies that the President can avoid charges that he is using military action for personal political gain. ==================================== "...the essence of the evil government is that it anticipates bad conduct on the part of its citizens. Any government which assumes that the population is going to do something evil has already lost its franchise to govern. The tacit contract between a government and the people governed is that the government will trust the people and the people will trust the government. But once the government begins to mistrust the people it is governing, it loses its mandate to govern because it is no longer acting as a spokesman for the people, but is acting as an agent of persecution." --Philip K. Dick in a 1977 interview published in SF Eye #14 ==================================== L'Ouverture "The Black Marketplace of Ideas" $1/per issue P.O.B. 8565, Atlanta GA, 30306 e-mail: cudjoe@leveller.org (404) 572-9141 Now accepting submissions ==================================== "The obsession with perfection can be a deterrent to progress." ==================================== Cultural Phenomena True Story In the Wake of Fran I live in the small Town of Cary, North Carolina, which is a suburb community of Raleigh. And though we are over 100 miles inland, we were directly in the path of Hurricane Fran. The advantage we have these days in dealing with hurricanes is that we know in exact detail where the hurricane is going to hit land, when it is going to hit land, and how strong the winds are going to be. Sure, hurricanes can make unexpected course changes, but they don't exactly sneak up on anybody. For two days prior to Fran, every news broadcast mentioned Fran's latest position and strength. Everyone was sharing hurricane survival tips with each other. Everyone trooped to the stores to stock up on bottled water, flashlight batteries, and candles. So on the night that Fran hit, I was prepared. Not so well prepared as some perhaps, but I had my battery powered radio, my flashlight, and plenty of food stocks to last me for a while. I had stashed the lawn furniture in the garage. I had phoned my parents to make arrangements for contacting them after the storm had passed. I had the TV tuned to the Weather Channel. Frankly, I got kind of tired of it all and I was more than ready for the hurricane to get here and get it all over with. It's a little maddening to hear the same news reports over and over and over. It's a bit tiresome to be told for the sixth time to go buy bottled water because you won't have fresh water after the storm passes through. But I also appreciate it. I have come to realize that it is this redundancy in human endeavors, especially during times of emergency, that makes the human race so resilient to natural disaster. Starting about 9:00, the winds began to pick up and the rain increased to a steady downpour. At 9:30, the power went out in my neighborhood. There's one thing you quickly notice about sitting in a dark house at night with no electricity. It's boring. So I called my parents to give them an update. Not that it was really necessary, but I couldn't think of anything else to do. Then I called my friends, the Haslup family, in another part of Cary to see if they had lost their electricity yet. They hadn't. And this is where the human race start's showing such grand potential. Lee Haslup told me quite simply and plainly, that I was coming over to their house and that they would stop by in 20 minutes to pick me up. And they did. They were doing me a big favor by letting me come over to their house. No one knew if I would be able to get back home the next day or how long I might have to stay at their house. But they offered their charity and hospitality in such a gracious way that I never even had the chance to refuse it. As we were driving back to the Haslup's house, I saw the CP&L power company trucks roaming around my neighborhood, already trying to fix the power outage. These folks have my total admiration for braving the storm. Playing around with high voltage power lines in the wind and rain strikes me as an extremely risky job. If it had been me, I would at least have waited for the storm to pass before trying to restore power, but not these folks. They were right on top of the trouble. I feel sorry for the power companies though. No matter how fast they try to restore power after a storm. It's never fast enough. Someone is always going to complain that they were slack and didn't do enough or didn't get the electricity back on fast enough. But I think they did a great job, as good as could be expected. So I spent all night with the Haslup's watching the storm from their front porch. Amazingly enough, they didn't lose their electricity at all. We had air-conditioning, TV, refrigeration, and all the luxuries of modern life as we rode out the storm. We were incredibly fortunate, but it was still tense. Every few minutes, we would hear a loud crack, which meant yet another tree and been blown over by the winds. We saw trees blown over in the back yard, and in the neighbor's yards. We saw a tree fall across the driveway mere minutes after they decided they better move their car out of the way. It was at that point that I finally began to understand the real danger of the situation. At any minute a tree cold come crashing through the roof. I got a couple of hours of uneasy sleep that night but woke up the next morning to the sound of chain saws. People had already gathered in the street in a makeshift work gang to clear away the trees from the streets. One guy had a chain saw and seemed to know how to use it properly. So he was the chief cutter while everyone else worked to clear away the debris and stack the logs. It is simply amazing to see how naturally people fall into a cooperative work effort, with everyone doing what they can do, without anyone directing anyone else. I was naturally anxious to see the state of my house, so Irene Haslup braved the debris strewn streets and drove me over to my place. The situation in my neighborhood was the same. It was barely light out and it was still raining. But already informal work groups had formed and people were helping each other clear fallen trees from the streets and yards. They were amazingly nonchalant about it. It didn't matter whose tree had fallen on whose house. Everyone just worked to clear it up. I have to thank everything that is holy, good, and lucky for the fact that my house was spared any damage. There was one gutter that had come slightly loose, but it will be easily fixed. There weren't even any fallen trees in my yard, just some debris to clean up. There still was no power or phone service at my house, so after checking in with my immediate neighbors to see if everyone was all right, (they were), I hopped in the car to head back over to the Haslup's so I could call home and check in with my parents. Due to where trees had fallen in the main streets, I could not drive back the same way I came. I had to snake my way through several neighborhoods. And everywhere I looked, I saw the same thing. Neighbors working together. Work gangs cutting up fallen trees. Ladies serving coffee to them. I even saw grade school kids directing traffic away from the blocked roads. Several stores were already open. Despite the fact that they had no power, they opened their doors and sold supplies by flashlight, ringing up orders on hand held calculators. The Town of Cary's magnanimous contribution to this community spirit was to impose a curfew on the entire population of the town that required everyone to stay in their houses unless there was a medical emergency. It pleased me greatly to see that most people had the good sense to break the law. As I write this two days after the storm, there is still much work to do in my town. There are some trees that will require professional help to clear away, especially those that had fallen on houses. The insurance claims on all the damage will take months to settle. The power is still out in some parts of the city. But the worst of it is over. Things are beginning to get back to normal. Our area of North Carolina certainly wasn't hit as hard as the coast was. But Hurricane Fran gave us a big enough disaster for the people, businesses and governments in our area to show their true colors in the face of a crisis. ==================================== About Stuck In Traffic Stuck In Traffic is a monthly magazine dedicated to evaluating current events, examining cultural phenomena, and relating true stories. Why "Stuck In Traffic"? Because getting stuck in traffic is good for you. It's an opportunity to think, ponder, and reflect on all things, from the personal to the global. As Robert Pirsig wrote in _Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_, "Let's consider a reevaluation of the situation in which we assume that the stuckness now occurring, the zero of consciousness, isn't the worst of all possible situations, but the best possible situation you could be in. After all, it's exactly this stuckness that Zen Buddhists go to so much trouble to induce...." Submissions: Submissions to Stuck In Traffic are always welcome. If you have something on your mind or a personal story you'd like to share, please do. You don't have to be a great writer to be published here, just sincere. Contact Information: All queries, submissions, subscription requests, comments, and hate-mail about Stuck In Traffic should be sent to Calvin Stacy Powers preferably via E-mail (powers@interpath.com) or by mail (2012 Talloway Drive, Cary, NC USA 27511). Copyright Notice: Stuck In Traffic is published and copyrighted by Calvin Stacy Powers who reserves all rights. Individual articles are copyrighted by their respective authors. Unsigned articles are authored by Calvin Stacy Powers. Permission is granted to redistribute and republish Stuck In Traffic for noncommercial purposes as long as it is redistributed as a whole, in its entirety, including this copyright notice. For permission to republish an individual article, contact the author. E-mail Subscriptions: E-mail subscriptions to the ASCII text edition of Stuck In Traffic are free. Send your subscription request to either address listed above. Print Subscriptions: Subscriptions to the printed edition of Stuck In Traffic are available for $10/year. Make checks payable to Calvin Stacy Powers and send to the address listed above. Individual issues are available for $2. Archives: Postscript and ASCII text editions of Stuck In Traffic are archived on the internet by etext.org at the following URL: gopher://gopher.etext.org/11/Zines/StuckInTraffic Trades: If you publish a `zine and would like to trade issues or ad-space, send your zine or ad to either address above. Alliances: Stuck in Traffic supports the Blue Ribbon Campaign for free speech online. See for more information. Stuck In Traffic also supports the Golden Key Campaign for electronic privacy and security. See =================================================================