|
|
|
"WAR
FOR PEACE? IT WORKED IN MY COUNTRY"
JOSÉ
RAMOS-HORTA
Dili, East Timor
I
often find myself counting how many of us are left in this world.
One recent morning my two surviving brothers and I had coffee together.
And I found myself counting again. We were seven brothers and five
sisters, another large family in this tiny Catholic country.
One brother died when he was a baby. Antonio, our oldest brother,
died in 1992 of lack of medical care. Three other siblings were murdered
in our country's long conflict with Indonesia. One, a younger sister,
Maria Ortencia, died on Dec. 19, 1978, killed by a rocket fired from
a OV-10 Bronco aircraft, which the United States had sold to Indonesia.
She was buried on a majestic mountaintop and her grave was tended
by the humble people of the area for 20 years.
Early in September of last year, I went through the heart-wrenching
process of unearthing the improvised grave of our sister, whom I last
saw when she was 18. As her body was exhumed, I noticed that the back
of her head and one side of her face had been blown off. She must
have died instantly. We reburied our sister in the cemetery in the
capital, Dili. Two other siblings who were killed, our brothers Nuno
and Guilherme, were executed by Indonesian soldiers in 1977. With
little information on the area where they were killed and disposed
of, we have no hope of recovering their bodies for a dignified burial.
There is hardly a family in my country that has not lost a loved one.
Many families were entirely wiped out during the decades of occupation
by Indonesia and the war of resistance against it. The United States
and other Western nations contributed to this tragedy. Some bear a
direct responsibility because they helped Indonesia by providing military
aid. Others were accomplices through indifference and silence. But
all redeemed themselves. In 1999, a global peacekeeping force helped
East Timor secure its independence and protect its people. It is now
a free nation.
But I still acutely remember the suffering and misery brought about
by war. It would certainly be a better world if war were not necessary.
Yet I also remember the desperation and anger I felt when the rest
of the world chose to ignore the tragedy that was drowning my people.
We begged a foreign power to free us from oppression, by force if
necessary.
So I follow with some consternation the debate on Iraq in the United
Nations Security Council and in NATO. I am unimpressed by the grandstanding
of certain European leaders. Their actions undermine the only truly
effective means of pressure on the Iraqi dictator: the threat of the
use of force.
Critics of the United States give no credit to the Bush administration's
aggressive strategy, even though it is the real reason that Iraq has
allowed weapons inspectors to return and why Baghdad is cooperating
a bit more, if it indeed is at all.
The antiwar demonstrations are truly noble. I know that differences
of opinion and public debate over issues like war and peace are vital.
We enjoy the right to demonstrate and express opinions today because
East Timor is an independent democracy — something we didn't
have during a 25-year reign of terror. Fortunately for all of us,
the age of globalization has meant that citizens have a greater say
in almost every major issue.
But if the antiwar movement dissuades the United States and its allies
from going to war with Iraq, it will have contributed to the peace
of the dead. Saddam Hussein will emerge victorious and ever more defiant.
What has been accomplished so far will unravel. Containment is doomed
to fail. We cannot forget that despots protected by their own elaborate
security apparatus are still able to make decisions.
Saddam Hussein has dragged his people into at least two wars. He has
used chemical weapons on them. He has killed hundreds of thousands
of people and tortured and oppressed countless others. So why, in
all of these demonstrations, did I not see one single banner or hear
one speech calling for the end of human rights abuses in Iraq, the
removal of the dictator and freedom for the Iraqis and the Kurdish
people? If we are going to demonstrate and exert pressure, shouldn't
it be focused on the real villain, with the goal of getting him to
surrender his weapons of mass destruction and resign from power? To
neglect this reality, in favor of simplistic and irrational anti-Americanism,
is obfuscating the true debate on war and peace.
I agree that the Bush administration must give more time to the weapons
inspectors to fulfill their mandate. The United States is an unchallenged
world power and will survive its enemies. It can afford to be a little
more patient. Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations,
has proved himself to be a strong mediator and no friend of dictators.
He and a group of world leaders should use this time to persuade Saddam
Hussein to resign and go into exile. In turn, Saddam Hussein could
be credited with preventing another war and sparing his people. But
even this approach will not work without the continued threat of force.
Abandoning such a threat would be perilous. Yes, the antiwar movement
would be able to claim its own victory in preventing a war. But it
would have to accept that it also helped keep a ruthless dictator
in power and explain itself to the tens of thousands of his victims.
History has shown that the use of force is often the necessary price
of liberation. A respected Kosovar intellectual once told me how he
felt when the world finally interceded in his country: "I am
a pacifist. But I was happy, I felt liberated, when I saw NATO bombs
falling."
José Ramos-Horta, East Timor's minister of foreign affairs
and cooperation, shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 1996.
|
