Petition Campaign Against Iran War
A local activist friend has created a new petition campaign against an Israeli attack on Iran. He asks signers to commit to divesting from Israel in their personal and political lives if it launches a pre-emptive assault on Iran.
In all honesty, there is one element of the text with which I have difficulty, which calls for ending U.S. military and diplomatic support for Israel in light of such an assault. My problem is with calling for an end to diplomatic support of Israel, which essentially demands that the U.S. government to put Israel into diplomatic isolation. It’s not that different from a law passed by Congress which criminalizes any contact by any American official with any Iranian official. It also would do roughly to Israel what the west is now doing to Iran. If it won’t work, and isn’t right for Iran, I don’t think it’s right for Israel. So this is a tough one for me.
UPDATE: The petition organizer tells me that the term “diplomatic support” wasn’t mean to imply the U.S. should shun Israel diplomatically or refuse to deal with it. Rather, that the U.S. should cease providing diplomatic “cover” or support for Israel’s most provocative behavior (such as war against Iran).
But I believe in letting 1000 flowers bloom when it comes to finding ways to oppose war. Some will find the Israel Loves Iran campaign perfect for them. Others will want more political substance to express their sentiments. There are many readers of this blog who will agree with this petition and the organizer has done an excellent job offering a new tool for activists to express their opposition to an Iran war. I urge you to sign if it accords with your beliefs.
18 thoughts on “Petition Campaign Against Iran War – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم”
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
Some thoughts on international pressure, including diplomatic pressure, on Israel in regard to an attack on Iran or — for that matter — to continuation of the settlement program.
Even those who believe the UN is prejudiced against Israel (I don’t) may nevertheless agree that the USA should stop using its veto to prevent UNSC actions which aim — not at ending the occupation but — within the territories occupied in 1967 and still held by Israel, at ending the settlement process, removing the approximately 650,000 settlers, removing the wall, ending the seige of Gaza, and quite possibly pulling down (dismantling) the settlements themselves (as called for in para. 6 of UNSC-465)
In my view, it does not harm Israel’s security to require it to remove the settlers, wall, and settlements, all violations of international law or agreements — it merely brings Israel back into that particular, and large, community of nations which do not violate these laws and agreements.
Isolating Israel (BDS activity by nations: diplomatic, trade, cultural, sport, travel, etc.) is perfectly appropriate behavior for nations trying to bring Israel back into the community of nations which I wrote of above; but such behavior is only necessary, today, because of the USA’s use of its veto in UNSC. Forceful UNSC action would be far preferable, but the USA refuses to permit it.
This petition might be effective, but not because it has anything to do with bombing Iran.
The Israeli politicians are as smart as they are mendacious. There is no threat of bombing Iran; there never has been. If Israel ever had any intention of attacking Iran, they would have done it a year ago. Israel doesn’t make an international storm over whether or not to bomb anybody – they do it, and then deny it. There is an ulterior motive to all of this banshee screaming about Iran.
The real motive is to divert attention away from Bibi’s tactic of strangling Palestine, and Danny Danon’s and Naftali Bennet’s insatiable campaign in the Knesset to annex Area C, which is 61% of the West Bank and already controlled and administered by Israel. Israel is promoting/protecting settlements, sucking up the Palestinian’s water, and cutting off the Palestinians’ solar panels that Spain and other Europeans have provided. It’s Area C that’s under attack, not Iran.
The irony is that the Zionists’ diversionary tactics could blow up in their own face by generating more international animosity and anti-war counter-initiatives like this BD petition. Although the petition is superfluous with respect to Iran because there is no real threat to Iran, at least it promotes the more general BDS initiative.
Forget Iran. It’s not a problem. We need petitions that will get Israel off of the Palestinians’ back and that will give the Palestinians’ complete control over all of Gaza and the West Bank; i.e. statehood.
My problem with this particular petition is that it’s anonymous. I don’t see a single person identified at divestfromwar.org. I don’t deal with anonymous websites, and I certainly don’t provide them any information – not even my name. Of course, just by clicking the link I provide them my IP address, but that can’t be helped if you want to see what’s up. Could be a front for AIPAC or SWU trying to collect info on pro-divestment activists for all I can tell from the website. (I’m being facetious, but that statement is factually true.)
Are your readers aware of the provenance of this cartoon? Also curious if you know and/or support the cartoonist’s POV on Iran generally. You are no doubt aware that he was arrested and is now living in exile in France.
Some of my best Iranians friends were arrested and are living in exile. But they don’t necessarily share your views about Iran.
I was just asking if you knew anything about the cartoonist and his views of the Iranian government. And if you did know them, I was wondering if you shared them.
I don’t much know or care what his political views are. I think his cartoon speaks for itself. Don’t you.
That bolsters the morality of his anti-war stance.
I agree with Richard’s generally positive views of the petition. Would have been stronger if it included a demand that Iran open its suspect nuclear facilities to full international inspection under the NPT as well. (The fact that Israel never signed the NPT and is not bound by it is not a good excuse to let Iran off the hook; that line of nonsense leads to any country signing the treaty and doing whatever it wants.)
I am really conflicted on this point. I half agree with you, but am troubled by the basic inequity of this whole thing.
First of all, there is a running provision in the US budget that no money goes to IAEA unless Israel has a role in its operation. Now, that just really pisses me off, seein’ how even tho’ Israel has no obligations to the IAEA under NPT or any other treaty, AIPAC/Congress insures Israel has a role in the IAEA’s work by controlling the money. If you closely read these IAEA “reports” on how Iran is such a naughty boy, they are all based on “information” from unnamed members of the UN. Neither the information itself or the source are divulged. Anyone want to venture a “wild” guess as who the source is??
Second, what other signatory countries are required to open their secret military operations to IAEA investigators? The US? The UK? Russia? And why is all of this pressure being put just on a country who has signed NPT — why not direct the pressure and sanctions to India, Pakistan, and Israel to sign the treaty and open up their own nuke sites?
I’ll tell you why: India, Pakistan and Israel aren’t sitting on billions of barrels of oil that the west is going to take, one way or another, just like they’re taking it from Iraq and Libya.
So in the face of all of this blatant hypocrisy, what moral or legal obligation does Iran have to allow inspectors into the country? None. They are entitled to lie all they need to and to cooperate only as far as they have to to keep from getting bombed. They are buying time and digging deeper. Fair enough, IMHO.
Couldn’t agree more, Denis. If the NPT is unable/unwilling to turn some serious screws on the nuclear ‘haves’ to get rid of their nukes and submit to go-anywhere, go-anytime IAEA inspections, then it belongs in the rubbish bin.
Denis, The reason Iran has been “asked” (ordered) to submit to extra inspections is because it has violated the NPT, which it signed. It thus became subject to additional protocols. It has built facilities without declaring them first, and disclosed them only after they were found! It has also engaged in petty annoyance of IAEA inspectors, trying to wear them down.
Much is made, in ignorance, of the IAEA suggesting violations and not actually stating them outright. This is the way the game is played. Agencies don’t make UN policy. The Security Council does. It is up to the Security Council to say Iran is in violation, and to try to enforce sanctions. It has done so, differing only on the strength and scope of the sanctions.
THIS DOES NOT MEAN IRAN is currently working on a bomb! It only means they are violating the treaty they signed.
Andy, I find nothing “hypocritical” about NPT. NO COUNTRY HAS TO SIGN IT. Countries sign it to get help developing peaceful uses of atomic energy. This involves significant technology transfers that would also help them build a bomb. So in exchange for signing the NPT, they get a lot of benefits but must pledge not to build a bomb, and must submit to inspections. Why is this a problem?
Denis, there are nutty restrictions on US funding in the UNITED NATIONS TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND REFORM ACT OF 2011, which is a bill, not a law. It has not even passed the wacko House, let alone the slightly less wacko Senate. It has almost zero chance of passing. GovTrack.us gives it 8% chance of passage. The bill, of course, a poor response to the UN practice of barring Israel from various UN bodies that have nothing to do with conflict. Delegitimizing countries and entities (Israel, Hamas, etc) you fear negotiating with is a favorite habit of all sides.
No one I know at IAEA has ever complained to me of Israeli interference — only of Israel’s intransigence on the whole Palestinian issue.
Still — why does congress assure Israel a role in adminstering the IAEA program? Americans ought to know that Israel is the true maverick and should not be delivering nuclear morality to any other country.
My understanding of Iran’s position is that under NPT it was not required to declare or even mention any sites whatsoever until nuclear materials were transferred to the sites. At the time Israel and the US started making a big stink about Fordow being “discovered” and Iran being in violation for not disclosing this site, the site had no nuclear material and there was no duty to disclose.
Israel should have no input or any other connection with IAEA until it signs the NPT. If it doesn’t want to be a part of a civilized attempt to control nukes, then it should bugger off and stay out of the IAEA’s business. That Congress would even consider making funding of IAEA dependent on Israeli input is more than adequate proof that AIPAC money controls Congress.
If I understand your viewpoint, it is that the quid pro quo was Iran signed the NPT and in exchange they got benefits, which you don’t specify. But if that is true, then if Iran is perceived to have reneged, the proper response is to w/draw the quid — the benefits — not to threaten or try to strangle Iran financially.
Just which part of the NPT is it that gives the US, or Israel, or the Security Council any right to put Iran in a strangle hold?
What you are saying would be like if MS finds that you violated their EULA, they are then entitled to take your house, your wife, and your three poodles because they say so — they = MS, not the poodles.
Israel signed treaties with the US for assistance in building nuclear reactors in the 1960’s, and then violated the treaties and lied to the US and most of the rest of the world. Now they are sitting on hundreds of nukes. So where are the sanctions for Israel violating their treaties? Well, according to Avner Cohen, Kennedy made the fatal mistake of threatening Ben Gurion with sanctions.
The Middle East nuclear problem, and the only Middle East nuclear problem, is Israel. It is a rogue nuclear state that must be controlled. Take their nukes out of the picture and everything is cool. In my opinion, as long as Israel is sitting on its nukes, Iran has every right to acquire MAD capabilities. Israel already threatened to nuke Cario in 1973, why should Iran or any other country be exposed to similar threats? Forget Fordow, the problem is Dimona, IMHO.
But my main point remains — the only reason Iran is being subjected to these threats of attack and economic sanctions is because it’s sitting on oil that the west wants. And it controls the Hormuz.
“That Congress would even consider making funding of IAEA dependent on Israeli input is more than adequate proof that AIPAC money controls Congress.”
“Congress” has not given control of IAEA to Israel. One idiot wrote something much milder but still nuts into a bill. The bill has yet to get out of committee in 8 months.
Iran’s position on the facilities it didn’t declare is nonsense. The Treaty it signed, it violated. The language of the NPT is clear. In exchange, among other things, they got a nuclear reactor from Russia. Not an easy thing for the Russians to “take back.” Kinda heavy to fit into a suitcase.
The French, not the US, sold Israel and Iraq research reactors. Not smart. No agreements were ever signed with USA to build reactors.
“Why is this a problem?”
It’s not a problem AS LONG AS China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and above all the United States are also subject to such inspections.
Editorsteve, your credibility on this issue would be much higher if you were to forthrightly call for the aforelisted nations to give up their nuclear weapons and submit to IAEA inspections. Are you or are you not willing to do this?
Slow down. Iran has not violated the NPT by refusing to rape their own sovereignty by revealing intimate military secrets and infrastructure completely irrelevant to Iran’s compliance to the NPT and only necessary to snooping and invasion-minded eyes who have politicized the UN Security Council.
As it stands, the main proponent of accusations was Israel. These accusations are admittedly fraudulent (Israel’s analyst’s admitted Iran has not even DECIDED yet to build a bomb – and in fact, the evidence shows clearly they have done everything – including staking their entire religious reputation on a death penalty for any engaging in nuclear WEAPONS development whatsoever – to show that they will NEVER decide to build a nuclear weapon). The sanctions that have been laid down have been fraudulent.
The proponent has also skirted and circumvented their obligations to the international community by refusing to sign the same NPT they are now using as a sword against Iran. You cannot be a non-signatory and also use a treaty you don’t belong to as a main source of complaint.
Iran is completely compliant with the NPT. Israel’s justifications completely bogus. Israel has been the main proponent of US war over the last 40+ years.
above was not addressed to this blog’s author but a general commentary or open letter to the community and the NPT “experts” herein 😉 More like disinformation shills, no other way to explain the disinformation. Can’t be mere confusion of the law or the matters at hand — completely inverts truth and legal reasoning.