12/09/07:Negotiation Works; Bush Should Try It-Jane H. Kavaloski and Vincent Kavaloski
Negotiation Works; Bush Should Try It
Wisconsin State Journal :: FORUM :: C4
Sunday, December 9, 2007
A decade ago the U.S. considered Libya to be the foremost "terrorist state" in the world and an emerging nuclear threat. Yet recently the State Department took Libya off of its "terrorist" list, lifted all sanctions and resumed diplomatic relations and trade. What happened?
Quiet, persistent diplomacy, sanctions and negotiations persuaded strong-man Quaddafi to drop his nuclear weapons program, pay reparations for the bombing of the Pan Am flight over Lockerby, Scotland, and stop supporting terrorist organizations. The same approach seems to be working in North Korea.
Yet President Bush refuses today to similarly negotiate with Iran and threatens a "pre-emptive" attack, despite the recent report by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency that there is no evidence that Iran is working actively to build nuclear weapons.
Former general and secretary of state, Colin Powell, advises against any military action against Iran because our armed forces are already over-extended in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Scott Ritter, former Marine intelligence officer and U.N. chief nuclear inspector in Iraq, says the U.S. administration has a plan to attack Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons. Such an attack would kill countless civilians, be condemned by most of the world and could lead to social, economic and political chaos in the Middle East.
Do we really want to start yet another war based on mere suspicion, fear and an unwillingness to negotiate? Let your congressional representatives know your opinion about this important question.
- Jane H. Kavaloski, Grassroots Citizens for Peace; and Vincent Kavaloski, Edgewood College philosophy and peace studies instructor, Dodgeville
Wisconsin State Journal :: FORUM :: C4
Sunday, December 9, 2007
A decade ago the U.S. considered Libya to be the foremost "terrorist state" in the world and an emerging nuclear threat. Yet recently the State Department took Libya off of its "terrorist" list, lifted all sanctions and resumed diplomatic relations and trade. What happened?
Quiet, persistent diplomacy, sanctions and negotiations persuaded strong-man Quaddafi to drop his nuclear weapons program, pay reparations for the bombing of the Pan Am flight over Lockerby, Scotland, and stop supporting terrorist organizations. The same approach seems to be working in North Korea.
Yet President Bush refuses today to similarly negotiate with Iran and threatens a "pre-emptive" attack, despite the recent report by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency that there is no evidence that Iran is working actively to build nuclear weapons.
Former general and secretary of state, Colin Powell, advises against any military action against Iran because our armed forces are already over-extended in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Scott Ritter, former Marine intelligence officer and U.N. chief nuclear inspector in Iraq, says the U.S. administration has a plan to attack Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons. Such an attack would kill countless civilians, be condemned by most of the world and could lead to social, economic and political chaos in the Middle East.
Do we really want to start yet another war based on mere suspicion, fear and an unwillingness to negotiate? Let your congressional representatives know your opinion about this important question.
- Jane H. Kavaloski, Grassroots Citizens for Peace; and Vincent Kavaloski, Edgewood College philosophy and peace studies instructor, Dodgeville
Submitted by wnpj on Fri, 12/14/2007 - 4:10pm.