Hoping against hope for peace in Iraq

One is said to be hoping against hope when he is clinging to a remote possibility. That is the situation the whole world is in concerning the crisis in Iraq. Their greatest fear is that the war in Iraq is just a matter of days.

But their desire for peace still prevails. An Italian proverb expresses it well, "Hope is the last thing lost." Unquestionably, those advocating for peace want to see Iraq President Saddam Hussein stripped of weapons of mass destruction. But they want these to be done through peaceful means conducted by the United Nations. In short, exhaust all peaceful means before resorting to war.

In a way, you cannot blame American leaders for wanting to launch a pre-emptive strike. Twice in recent history, they were pre-empted. The first was when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. And the second was the September 11 plane crashes in New York and Washington. Enough is enough!

Like the rest of the world, all we want is to be convinced that Saddam Hussein is not complying with the United Nations‚ demand to inspect the country thoroughly for the for the existence of illegal weapons of war. If he does not comply with the wishes of the United Nations, then he has brought the war on himself. But all peaceful solutions must first be exhausted.

What Iraq will stand to gain if it opposes the U.N. inspections of illegal

arms is something we cannot understand. If war breaks out, there is no telling how Iraq will end. First and foremost are their oilfields. We don‚t know what they will have left if they are destroyed. War experts say that the war in Iraq will just be in a matter if days. The important thing is not the length of the war, but the extent of the damage that will result from a war whether it lasts for a few days or years.

The U.N. demand for inspections is in consonance with the agreement among all nations. But the United States is not helping clarify issues when President Bush makes statements to the effect of what the United States will do in Iraq with or without the U.N.’s concern. How can they expect Iraq to comply with U.N. directives when they are the very first to say that they will not?

The basis of all laws – local or international – is reason. Anger and arrogance can never be a substitute for reason. A superior force is not a substitute for reason.

Again we hope against hope that peace prevails in Iraq. If it does not, let it be because Iraq adamantly refused to cooperate with U.N. authorities. But if both parties involved in the pending war ignore the U.N. then, what we have is world anarchy. It will be a world run by individuals without religious or civil principles.

In any problem we face, it is always better to hope than to despair. Our hope is that Saddam Hussein complies with the United Nations’ right to inspect his country to determine if he is hiding prohibited weapons of destruction. If he does not, then we hope that the United States will take the necessary action with the backing of the U.N. Security Council.