Your Excellencies:

There is much truth in an assessment attributed to journalist Alan Nairn that the United States “wields power that no nation should have. It can go anywhere and kill anyone. Only the American public can hold Washington back. Only the American people stand between the bombers and the bombed.” Still, I’m writing today to urge your government, as a member-state of the United Nations Security Council, to use every possible nonviolent means to resist the government of my country, the United States of America, in its quest to consolidate and extend its global military and economic hegemony. As a first step, I urge your government to reject any proposed Security Council resolutions the Bush administration may conceivably invoke to violently topple the odious regime of Saddam Hussein.

Recently, the US government released its “National Security Strategy.” Here, the Bush administration states openly the militaristic foreign policy US governments have actively, if less forthrightly, pursued since at least the end of World War II. “America,” we are told, “will act against . . . emerging threats before they are fully formed” because “the only path to peace and security is the path of [military] action.” And if the international community is not convinced of the necessity, legality, or justness of America’s “path of action” then the US “will not hesitate to act alone” and “if necessary, act preemptively”.

The US government has also served notice that not only will it pursue full spectrum dominance on the battlefield but it will also use its might to “dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States.” Possessing unrivaled conventional military forces, thousands of weapons of mass destruction, and a demonstrated willingness to use them, the US represents a frightening conjuncture of imperialist ability and aspiration.

British historian Alfred Toynbee’s 1967 observation about the United States is well-taken. He said:

"America . . . now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been far more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number."

I am not so naïve as to suppose the poor figure very prominently in the foreign or domestic policy of your government. However, I do trust you realize that, where they do not coincide, America, like Rome before her, puts the interests of her empire and her rich ahead of those of the rich in your country. Thus, your government has some stake in creating a world system where no one country or small bloc of countries can jeopardize the security of another country merely on the basis of “national interest.”

Furthermore, the consequences of America’s misguided, militarized foreign policy have been horrific and far-reaching even for countries not conceivably on the short list for a US invasion. For example, while most of the hijackers came from the repressive US-client state of Saudi Arabia, the terrorist atrocities of September 11, 2001, can be traced back to US support for Muslim extremists seeking to overthrow the government of Afghanistan which, as expected, prompted a Soviet invasion. Years of bloodshed and upheaval followed, fueled by American and Soviet arms and funds. From this mayhem, with US, Saudi, and Pakistani backing, emerged Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida and the Taleban. These erstwhile associates of the US government are, among other things, the most likely perpetrators of the World Trade Center bombings, which, to say the least, killed the citizens of many different countries.

Although the serious terrorist threats and repulsive regimes, such as that of Saddam Hussein, that have resulted from America’s foreign policy must be effectively addressed, they should not be addressed by adding fuel to the flames, least of all by the US. The United States must no longer be allowed to overthrow the governments of other sovereign states. The US government will no doubt engage in bribery and bullying in an attempt to advance its agenda; the pressure for your government to capitulate will be great. However, in consideration of the long-term consequences of any appeasement to American aggression and militarism I hope your government will rise to the challenge and mobilize nonviolently but decisively against America’s imperialist aspirations and actions.

Author’s Note: The current temporary or “elected” members of the UN Security Council are: Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Guinea, Ireland, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Singapore, Syria. The permanent members are: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The fax numbers and postal addresses of the permanent representatives of all UN member states are available at: www.un.org/Overview/missions.htm.

Michelle Kinnucan is a freelance writer who lives in Ann Arbor, MI. Her work has previously been published in PS: Political Science and Politics, CommonDreams.org, and The Record. She may be contacted by e-mail at: mjkinnuc@juno.com.

###