Editorial

War in Iraq? Questions to be considered

Peter Westmore

Contents - Mar 2003 - Buy a copy now Editorial: War in Iraq? Questions to be considered - Peter Westmore Sydney Archdiocese RE test: behind one school's success story - Michael Gilchrist News: The Church Around the World - AD2000 Ten years on former Anglicans enrich Church - Fr Peter Geldard Vatican tells politicians: Don't hide your light - Michael Casanova Good priest, bad priest - my faith remains - Frank Mobbs Religious faith and modern culture: responding to a secular critic - Bill Muehlenberg Liturgy: The Mass is the same sacrifice as the Cross - Msgr. Peter J. Elliott New Age ideas: how Catholics should respond - Fr Peter Joseph The media and evangelisation - Moira Kirkwood Letters: Brisbane Synod (letter) - John F. Nolan Letters: 'Partner' or spouse? (letter) - Peter Hannigan Letters: Women's Commission (letter) - Leon Voesenek Letters: Church renovation (letter) - T.E. Geraghty Letters: Government proposals (letter) - Dr Arnold Jago Letters: Last things (letter) - Kevin McManus Letters: New springtime (letter) - Errol P. Duke Letters: Apostolate (letter) - Barry O'Brien Letters: Catholic websites (letter) - John Carroll Letters: Third rite (letter) - Norm Power Letters: Invalid (letter) - Maria Lossberg Letters: New Age? (letter) - Dr Lance Eccles Letters: Accountability (letter) - John Leach Letters: Infallible teaching (letter) - Peter Howard Poetry: From Tradition (For my mother) - Andrew Huntley Books: Life's Worth: The Case against Assisted Suicide, by Arthur Dyck - Bill Muehlenberg (reviewer) Books: Human Cloning And Human Dignity: Report of the President's Council on Bioethics - Bill Muehlenberg (reviewer) Books: The Self Evident Proof, by Richard Kouchoo - Catherine Sheehan (reviewer) Books: The Latest from AD Books Reflection: Lenten self-denial - at the very heart of our lives with Christ - Fr F.E. Burns

The imminent danger of war with Iraq as this issue of AD2000 goes to press raises important and difficult moral questions, made even more complex by current political divisions, which make it hard to separate moral from merely political considerations.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the best guide on such issues, emphasises that all people and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war (2308); but "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right to lawful self-defence, once all peace efforts have failed."

In relation to Iraq, there is no doubt that the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, has threatened his neighbours - waging war on at least two of them, Iran and Kuwait - tyrannised his people, and thumbed his nose at attempts by the UN, over many years, to force him to abandon his chemical and biological warfare arsenals.

His persistent secret attempts to develop these weapons, which cause indiscriminate and widespread suffering, and his proven willingness to use them, make him a pariah in the international community. For years, Iraq has been under a UN-sanctioned oil embargo, because of its refusal to comply with UN resolutions demanding that the regime disarm.

A question which must be asked is whether the security of the United States is sufficiently threatened by Iraq that it is entitled to act in self-defence against Saddam? After the September 11 bombings, attacks which justify the use of military force must be interpreted more widely than direct invasion.

The UN-sanctioned attack on the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was almost universally accepted as morally justified, although it failed to capture much of the leadership of al Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist organisation responsible for September 11, as well as earlier bombings, including those on US embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam.

Terrorist cells connected with al Qaeda perpetrated a terrorist attack in Moscow last year, where hundreds of people were held hostage, and organised the Bali bombing last October, where nearly 200 people died.

While Saddam Hussein's threatening conduct may be sufficient to justify a US strike to disarm him, it would be prudent for the Bush Administration to act only after securing the agreement of the UN Security Council, which has assumed responsibility for disarming the Iraqi dictator.

• Peter Westmore is Publisher of 'AD2000'.

Reprinted from AD2000 Vol 16 No 2 (March 2003), p. 2