AT ANY COST - THE CIVILIAN CATASTROPHE IN WEST MOSUL: REPORT BY AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Irish Anti War Movement condemns the proposal that Irish Naval Service is to participate in EU Naval Force, Operation Sophia

IAWM PRESS RELEASE 07 APRIL 2017

The Irish Anti War Movement condemns the proposal that Irish Naval Service is to participate in EU Naval Force, Operation Sophia.

The Government has announced that the Dail will be asked to approve the Irish Naval Service changing its role in the Mediterranean from a purely humanitarian mission of rescuing migrants at risk of drowning to a more aggressive military role that includes intercepting and arresting people-trafficking criminals and militias and destroying and sinking their boats. It would appear that this is being rushed through the Dáil at short notice in order to comply with the so-called triple lock, which involves the necessity to achieve UN, Dáil and Government approval for any overseas missions by the Defence Forces. The fact that this new mission has UN approval does not necessarily mean it is appropriate for our Defence Forces.

In 17 March 2011, at the behest of the UK, France and the USA, the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 approved a limited military action by NATO forces in Libya, supposedly to protect civilians in the Bengazi region. NATO and EU military forces went on to abuse this UN approval to effect regime change including the overthrow and murder of the Libyan President Qaddafi, leaving Libya in total chaos ever since. Since there is still no clear Government in Libya, it will be almost impossible to distinguish between boats off the coast of Libya being operated by criminals, militias or Libyan naval or coastguard services.

STOP THE TERRORISM, STOP THE WARS! - IAWM statement on the Manchester Atrocity

IAWM PRESS RELEASE 23 MAY 2017

The Manchester Atrocity

The horror and tragedy inflicted last night on the people of Manchester, especially the young people, will be condemned by all decent human beings. The Irish Anti-War Movement along with everyone with any sense of human solidarity will extend their sympathy and support to the victims, their families, friends and all the people of that city.

Anti-War activists, however, have a duty to say more than this – just as we had a duty after Paris or Nice or 9/11.

John Molyneux, Secretary of the IAWM said:

“If, as seems likely, this atrocity was the work of an Islamist suicide bomber our first duty is to raise our voices against any attempt to exploit the terrible event to stir up hatred, division or racism. Ordinary Muslims will be just as appalled at what has happened as everyone else – in some ways even more so.

Our second duty is to say, yet again, and despite the fact that some of our rulers won’t want to hear it, that these awful outrages have a political and historical context. They are a distorted and deranged aspect and consequence of the wars and dismemberment that have been visited on the Middle East and other parts of the Muslim world by imperialism for many decades, indeed for a century going back to the infamous Sykes – Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration of a hundred years ago.”

He continued:

“It is necessary, even today, to remember that the horror of Manchester has been experienced not hundreds, not thousands, but tens of thousands of times by the people of Afghanistan, of Iraq, of Syria, of Libya, of Yemen and elsewhere.”

Ed Horgan of the IAWM Steering Committee also noted that:

"On 15 April 2017 up to 80 children were killed near Aleppo as they were lured to a car bomb while they were being evacuated from war-torn villages. These 80 Syrian children were no less precious or important that the children in Manchester".

STWC statement on Manchester bombing 230517

The MOAB - Medea Benjamin

Trump’s attack on Syria - not an act of humanitarianism

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/bombs-can-never-be-a-hu...

Edited version of this op ed published in Irish Examiner. Here is the full version.

Trump’s attack on Syria - not an act of humanitarianism

The international outrage caused by the chemical attack on Khan Sheikhun in Idlib province last week which killed over 80 people, most likely carried out by the Syrian regime, is justified and understandable as are calls that something must be done to end the horrific six year war in Syria.

Chemical weapons versus equally horrific weapons
The use of internationally banned chemical weapons against civilian targets are rightly condemned but why does their definition not include such equally awful weapons as depleted uranium and white phosphorous or even conventional weapons? The US Central Command has confirmed that it has used depleted uranium against Da’esh in Iraq. It was used extensively in the 2004 US attack on Fallujah which, a study has shown, has left a legacy of increased rates of infant mortality, cancer, deformed births that are proportionately greater than that those recorded after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs in WW2.

The coalition force’s use of white phosphorous has recently been noted in Mosul and was also used by the Israeli Military against Gazans in the 2008-2009 war, in one case attacking a school where civilians were sheltering.
It’s a mute point that the victims of these attacks would be concerned about the academic and scientific distinction between chemical weaponry and other equally barbaric forms of attack often deployed by coalition forces.

Hypocrisy of the US and other western powers

Syndicate content