Printed in Marin Independent Journal September 29, 2002

How much safer will we be if the U.S. goes to war with Iraq? Will our world, our children, the people of the Middle East or the citizens of Israel be any more secure? I believe that going to war against Iraq would be a mistake. The cost would be heavy in lives lost, and dollars wasted and we would squander the goodwill of our allies.

The serious question we must ask is when will the human race work towards peace, rather than war? As citizens of the most educated and financially well-off country in history, when will we decide to put our strength, our energy and our creativity behind peace, rather than destruction?

It is true that Saddam Hussein is a dictator – he is a menace and the world would be better off without him. But, the world will also be better off if the United States works within the scope of international institutions instead of launching an unprovoked first-strike against Iraq. America’s greatest asset is our moral authority, not our military power. Attacking a sovereign country unprovoked forfeits that authority completely.

A war with Iraq will cost between $100-200 billion. Just think what we could do with that amount of money if we decided to invest in human infrastructure rather than military hardware.

With $112 billion we could repair or rebuild all the public schools in the United States, $150 billion could help developing countries in Africa by forgiving half of the continent’s debt, and less than $140 billion we could provide health care coverage for every uninsured family in America for one year.

Multilateral and cooperative dialogue, not increased saber-rattling, is the way to peace and true national security. I have called on the President to support the ABM treaty, I have fought for international women’s rights by calling on the Senate to ratify the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Woman (CEDAW), and now I call on Congress to refuse the President unleashed power to wage war against Iraq.

The United States should not be considering a pre-emptive, first strike. The United States is in the business of defending freedom, justice and liberty; not attacking countries on a whim, no matter how strongly we disapprove of their leadership. The U.S. is a member of the United Nations, an international organization based on the cooperation of sovereign nations. What precedent would it set if we decide to invade another sovereign nation in order to depose its leader? The message we would be sending to countries like Pakistan, China and North Korea is that unprovoked aggression is an acceptable choice. It is not.

Prime Minister Tony Blair has been going out of his way to help President Bush justify war with Iraq. For weeks, the Bush administration promised that Blair would provide the evidence that would erase all doubt. Finally, Prime Minister Blair addressed Parliament but offered no smoking gun. The report Blair presented didn’t make a case for war, in fact it strengthened the case for U.N. weapons inspections.

We owe it to our children to exercise the full range of diplomatic options in Iraq, so we can prevent a war that will cost thousands of lives. War is not an answer. War is a failure of national policy. It is a last resort. America’s strength is our commitment to moral action and a government based on the rule of law. That law must never be silent, and our moral sensibilities must never be influenced by fear.

As the Representative of California’s 6th district, I have to stand up what I believe is right and I will oppose a pre-emptive, unilateral attack of Iraq, for our security and that of future generations.

###