Francis WURTZ (GUE/NGL) Speech to the Extraordinary EP Session

Brussels - 20 March 2003

Mr Chairman,

The day began in Baghdad this morning, with the population - those men, women, and children some of whom we met, saw living, spoke with a few weeks and whose faces come back to us in spirit in these dramatic hours - drawn from sleep by the deafening unbearable noise of the first bombs.

They know that 3,000 missiles will be released on Iraq in the first phase of the war. They expect to see or re-examine the terrible endless stream of F15s, F16s, B1s, B2s, B52s, Awacs, and Apaches rain on their country.

Bush dares to evoke honour and morals and to invoke God, while he took the most inhuman, most unforgivable of decisions: to stop the peaceful disarmament of Iraq, to launch against this country, exhausted by the previous wars and by a criminal embargo, and half of whose population is under 15 years of age, 600 fighter aircraft, 70 warships, 6 aircraft carriers, tank columns and 300,000 soldiers!

Perhaps some of the 600 journalists "embedded" in the armed forces will deliver some scenes of popular celebration by Iraqis welcoming their liberation "with sweets and flowers", as was promised to George W. Bush, by Kanan Makiya, figurehead of the pro-American Iraqi exiles.

The New York Times-Magazine tells us that this presidential adviser, who has been living in Cambridge since 1968, that he spent a good part of the time of his meeting at the White House, last January, explaining to his famous host that there are two kinds of Moslems in Iraq: Shias and Sunnis! This shows how much the knowledge of this country and consideration of its future has penetrated the summit of American power!

And these are the people - who claim to decide, in the place of the international community, on war and peace!

What prospects do they promise to the Iraqi people? Saddam Hussein's eviction? The Iraqi people will probably not cry for the dictator. But afterwards? A long-term American military occupation, in one of the largest and most emblematical Arab countries? Who can believe that it would be accepted? And what prospects do they promise to the world in general? A new hunt for the "Hooligan-states" under other skies, as suggests general Wesley Clark, who directed the NATO forces in Yugoslavia and for whom "if our ultimate aim is to obtain the end of the terrorist threat (...), Iraq constitutes only a battle in an otherwise vast campaign".

Do we appreciate the extent to which we are being dragged into the destabilisation of the region and the threat to the safety of the whole planet? A superpower, with a military strength without precedent in History, openly claims to be imperial, even if it means worsening divisions, generating world disorder and nourishing terrorism!

History will record that world public opinion was strongly expressed and mobilised against this irresponsible policy; that courageous voices were heard, including that of the Churches; that statesmen dared to say NO and hold fast under pressure, calumnies, or even threats.

What will one record of Europe in these historical circumstances? This morning, I heard nothing on the essentials. Will Europe dare to require the immediate halt to this unjust, illegal and dangerous war? What does it say of the Iraqi population's fate, including the Kurdish and Iraqi refugees who are likely to be threatened by this war?

Unanimity or not, among the 15, there are issues in which Europe can and must involve itself in any event because they involve the bases of our international system, in force since 1945, and of the law that it embodies in the eyes of all democracies!

Thus Europe must express itself on the new strategic doctrines of the Bush administration which magnify military strength, which justify unilateralism and which legitimate "preventive war".

It must forcefully come out against the extremely serious precedent represented by fact that the American defence secretary does not exclude the use of tactical nuclear weapons or of nerve gases in Iraq.

It must denounce with absolute clarity the irresponsible decision taken unilaterally by a group of states, including two Member States, to launch a war without the support of the Security Council of the UN, and even against the opinion of the overwhelming majority of its members.

It must engage in a much more active way for the effective revival of the peace process in the Middle East; for a just and durable solution of the Palestinian problem. Moreover, by allowing the war in Iraq to continue, the way is opened for the worse, in the Middle East! "The doors of hell are opened" warned the President of the Arab League.

The only European institution to have given an opinion on this war is finally our Parliament. I would recall the terms of our resolution adopted on 30 January last:

· "Parliament reaffirms its commitment with regard to peace (...) and with regard to international law (...)

· It "supports fully the work of Messrs Hans Blix and El Baradei (...)"

· It "considers that the violations of the resolution 1441 (...) currently raised by the inspectors (...) do not justify the launching of military action" (...)

· It "expresses its opposition to any unilateral military action and considers that a preventive attack would contravene international law as well as the Charter of the United Nations, and would generate a more serious crisis, which would involve other countries of the region.

That, at least, provides to our President, the basis of a clear, explicit and strong intervention at the European Council today. But we cannot leave it at that, for all that! Faced with the very serious events which unfold before our eyes and which are likely to degenerate dramatically, we must assume our responsibilities to stop the logic of war. "Old Europe" must be able to make the vision of a new world emerge. Let us listen to the pressing calls of our fellow-citizens: it is what they expect from us!

thank you.