Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope John Paul II may ask to personally address UN Security Council to stop Iraq war
AFP via Babelfish translation ^ | March 3, 2003

Posted on 03/03/2003 2:46:58 AM PST by HAL9000

The pope wants to go in front of UNO if its message with Bush does not stop the war

Jean Paul II will ask to address personally to the Security Council of the United Nations if its message with the American president George W Bush does not convince it to give up a war against Iraq, learned Monday the AFP from diplomatic source vaticane.L' possibility of a direct address of the pope in the United Nations was evoked during the maintenance of the pope with the secretary-general of UNO, Kofi Annan, there are two weeks in the Vatican, one added of the same source.Le cardinal Pio Laghi left Rome Monday morning for Washington carrying a message of peace as it must give to the American president. The cardinal, old apostolic nuncio (ambassador) in Washington and friend of the Bush family, hopes to be received mercredi.Une delegation of American religious leaders forwarded last week to Jean Paul II a letter wishing that the head of the catholic Church go to ONU."Il is allocated only to the pope himself to make such a decision ", commented on Sunday on a chain of television the archbishop Renato Martino, old observant of the Holy See at the United Nations and current president of the pontifical Council for justice and the peace, which had been charged to transmit to the missive.Si the pope, had tired and old of almost 82 years, had he could benefit from it to go to request in Ground Zero, affirms one diplomatic source vaticane.Ce gesture would be very appreciated by all the Americans, adds one. He had been considered last August at the time of the voyage of the pope in Canada for the world Days of Jeunesse.Dans diplomatic circles of the Holy See, one estimates that the parallel actions and concommitantes of the pope on the two protagonists of the crisis, Iraq and the United States, represent a significant chance so that a war is evité.Le Iraqi president Saddam Hussein should take account of the risk to be relatively insulated in the Arab world if he made the deaf person ear with a call to order of the Arab League, even observes one of the same source.De, underlines one, president Bush, of methodist confession, should not receive from one who asked nearly a billion and half of Christians of the whole world to fast for peace Wednesday. This fast is also preached by the World Council of Churches of Geneva where Protestant Eglises and orthodoxes.En sit reiterating Sunday its call to all the Christians, the pope confirmed his determination with all to try for the paix."Sans to go in front of the difficulties, it is necessary to look for and traverse all the possible ways to avoid the war, which always brings with it serious mournings and consequences for everyone ", he launched to the thousands of brought together pilgrims Saint-Pierre place under the eye of the cameras of télévision.Le cardinal Laghi will make any possible sound to convince president Bush that a unilateral attack except UNO against Iraq is a "crime against peace", Foreign Minister of the pope, Mgr Jean Louis Tauran.



TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; iraq; johnpaulii; pope; saddamhussein; securitycouncil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 261-267 next last
To: HAL9000
I am not Roman Catholic, but I think this pope is one of the heroes of the 20th Century. We are now in the 21st Century. Time for him to be quiet.
81 posted on 03/03/2003 6:36:21 AM PST by clintonh8r (It is better to be feared than to be respected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert Drobot
"..The one man in the entire world who has a spiritual responsibility to lead the One True Church.."

Being a descendent of the same stock as the majority of the 55 Framers of the Constitution of the United States of America, and of the ones who settled the West, I couldn't disagree with you more.

And I'm quite capable of legitimately, logically, and irrestibily defending my position against yours, but that is another subject.

Regardless --- I will also defend your God-given freedoms and rights to believe as you please by upholding the Constitution of the USA.

82 posted on 03/03/2003 6:42:10 AM PST by Matchett-PI (The ball is in Saddam's court. The decision is his. It will be a shame if he chooses war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
Laying off, or remaining silent is EVIL. We must speak up in the name of ridding the world of the likes of Saddam Hussein.

If there was any chance at all that the anti-war faction can win the day and thwart the war if only they can whip up the right number of protestors or make the right pleas, you would be correct. Then it would be possible for the Pope's position to support evil by allowing it to endure.

But there is no chance of this.

The Pope knows that America is going to go to take out Hussein and his supporters. The massive buildup is not there just for show, American resolve is cold and sure. So there is nothing for either the church or the US to gain from having the Pope endorse a war. It's already certain and what the Pope does or does not do will not alter the course.

At best the Catholic church could be more popular among say, US Marines if it said "Ooh rah, let's roll." But by endorsing our actions, the Pope wouldn't be giving us anything we need, nor would he be able to accelerate the pace towards liberation.

There is however, something to lose from endorsing the US position, and that is, unwittingly turning a war in which the US is seen as a liberator, into one in which the US will be perceived as threatening to impose the Christian faith on a mostly Muslim people. The imams and clerics would seem to be right, and they could more easily whip up fears of Americans, of occupation by "Christian zealots," etc.

So while it is evil to "do nothing" I might point out that it is also "evil" to do something which will make the right thing more difficult to accomplish. Sometimes you must do things which are difficult and in which you do not believe, in order to get closer to the right solution. Sometimes we're not even given the choice between good or bad, but only between bad or worse. That's what this country's founding father meant by the phrase regarding the sacrifice of "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." Sometimes, we must sacrifice even that in order to persevere in a righteous endeavor.

The jury is still out on whether or not that is what the Pope is doing. I cannot say what exactly the Pope is up to, if he is up to anything at all; some in the church have promoted communism in South America even as others fought it in eastern Europe, so I can only hope the Pope is still sound in mind. I'm not even Catholic, just a hot-tempered Lutheran who would prefer people say what they mean all of the time and not have to engage in intrigue. But I also know that we are not always given the choice of choosing between a principled position with no ill consequences, and pure evil with its inevitable consequences. Life isn't that easy; sometimes we must choose between maintaining our principles but getting disasterous results, perhaps even inadvertently aiding evil, or temporarily setting aside our honor for a geater cause, and ultimately undermining evil.

Of course, in this case I figure it'll work out for the better for the US and for Iraq's liberty no matter the intentions... but it may cost the Roman Catholic Church in the short run, and sooner or later, we- Protestants as well as Catholics, will have to address Islam in a unified fashion. I prefer that confrontation come later, in a setting of ideological debate and peaceful persuasion between free Men, instead of on the battlefield. Al Qaeda and Hussein would prefer that no such freedom to debate exists.

83 posted on 03/03/2003 6:43:15 AM PST by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
"Prophecies", this sounds like man's traditions.

What is written when the disciples asked Christ "what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?" can be found in Matthew 24, Mark 13 Luke 21

There is no mystery, Christ spoke very clearly what one is to watch for, and He did not name the pope in particular.

The pope is a human being, some may see him as god like, other see him as anti-christ. According to what is WRITTEN both sides are wrong. Maybe if a little more time was actually spent by individuals reading the letter sent, (THE WORD) as to what to be watching for these discussions might be a whole lot more enlightening.

Why is the first warning Christ gave "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in MY name, saying, 'I am Christ; (CHRISTIAN) and shall deceive many."

One must read the "letter" to know who will deceive, who will be deceived and this is the first warning.

Now as far as what the pope is doing, I have no idea where he is coming from and how he can think what he is doing is from our Heavenly Father. It makes no common sense let alone scripture sense.

Each individual was created and each individual must answer for what they believe and why they have not themselves taken the time to read what is written.

Another thing to consider IPeter 4:17 "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of GOD: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?



84 posted on 03/03/2003 6:50:21 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
"Prophecies", this sounds like man's traditions.

It was from St.Malachi. He was a Catholic saint.

85 posted on 03/03/2003 6:57:07 AM PST by concerned about politics (Saddam needs a check up from the neck up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Like I said "man's traditions".
86 posted on 03/03/2003 6:58:41 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
bump
87 posted on 03/03/2003 6:59:46 AM PST by Faith65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildandcrazyrussian
I think that the primary reason that the British Empire made such a mess of things in the Middle East (militarily defending the Ottoman Empire's Muslim tyranny against the Orthodox Christians, such as in 1855-56 and 1878, for example) is precisely because there has never yet been a Protestant nation annihilated by the Muslim armies. They can feel safe behind the buffer. There will never be a "religious war" as the Muslims believe is already happening, until the day that a nuclear bomb or other horror takes out a Western European city.

This is an excellent point. Also, the British in India and the rest of the Middle East in the 19th century had some mistaken cultural impressions of Islam - for instance, they thought it was closer to their own religion and not "idol worship" (as opposed to Hinduism for example.)

I would think that the Russians, on the other hand, have had extensive historical experience with various other barbarian Asian invaders, and appreciate the danger here.

88 posted on 03/03/2003 7:04:06 AM PST by valkyrieanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Well, they did such a good job of stopping Hitler

The FIRST country which tried to stop Hitler was CATHOLIC Poland. Pope did not have so many divisions as Stalin had, so it was Stalin who accomplished this task.

89 posted on 03/03/2003 7:06:47 AM PST by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: livius
There are many people who feel that Pio Laghi's activities were not innocent bumbling, but were a genuine attempt to destroy or at least significantly re-shape the Church. It is horrifying to see that he is being allowed to do more damage now.

Possible manipulation of the pope? Many of the current statements coming out of the Vatican don't square with traditional Church teaching on Just War. We know that there is a lot of liberal infiltration in the Vatican. Could they be manipulating him? I am shocked at the volume of pacifism and anti-Americanism coming out of the Church today. Also, could there be some "wagging the dog" here? Deflection away from the awful mess in the clergy?!

90 posted on 03/03/2003 7:08:10 AM PST by ThomasMore ([1 Pet 3:15-16])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Not suggesting the Pope ENDORSE the war. Suggesting he stifle his usual anti american leanings at this time.
91 posted on 03/03/2003 7:08:13 AM PST by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth; jrlc
...and such a good job of protecting altar boys, that I think we should be grateful that they care so much. /sarcasm...

"...Maybe while he's there he can tell the UN what he's going to do about the sexual crimes committed by "priests" in his "Church" during his tenure....

I'm fascinated by this idea that the Pope must remain silent on worldy matters until sexual sin is eradicated among the one billion souls in the Church.

So tell me, patriciaruth, does this apply to The Heavenly Mole as well? Should he refrain from intervening in the affairs of other countries--bestowing freedom and democracy from the tips of tomahawks--until sexual perversion is eradicated among the 290 million People in his country? Until sexual crimes against American children are ended?

Or is the Heavenly Mole absolved from such considerations by the fact that the military might at his disposal is fourteen times greater than the rest of the world combined? You know the old progressive pagan belief that "might makes right"?

The Pope's buggerers are so much worse than America's buggerers because the Pope has no cruise missiles with which to entertain and distract the masses during the long, boring evenings in bleak midwinter.

92 posted on 03/03/2003 7:09:11 AM PST by LaBelleDameSansMerci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod
"I vigorously disagree with what the Holy Father is doing here, too, but you can take your anti-Catholicism and stuff it you know where."

There is nobody as anti-Catholic as a Catholic who has become disgusted with the Vatican. That would describe me. I will remain in the Catholic Church, if this dottering, old fool of an excuse for a pontif is called home to God real soon so that he can try to explain his actions (or lack, thereof) to God.

93 posted on 03/03/2003 7:10:23 AM PST by You Gotta Be Kidding Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
I think it may be time for JP to step down; someone else must be pulling the strings over there. This certainly doesn't sound like the same Pope who joined President Reagan and PM Thatcher and faced down the Warsaw Pact leaders.

Those are my sentiments exactly. I believe people surrounding the Pope are doing this for whatever reason. Anyone can see watching the Pope that he is a very ill man. If it was 20 years ago, this Pope would never stand by the Butcher of Baghdad. What bothers me is what his stance is doing to the men and women of the military who are Catholic and in the Gulf by embolding Saddam as the French have done.

The Iraqi people need liberated from 37 years of tyranny. I am sorry that the people in the Vatican calling the shots don't see it that way. Appeasement does not work and just makes a tyrant become stronger.

This is not Catholic bashing either but an agreement with the poster that I believe the Pope is not the same man he was 20 years ago. Do believe that some people on this forum are to quick to label Freepers as Catholic bashing when they disagree with the stand of the Pope. When the Pope, the head of Anglican Church in England, National Council of Churches here in the United States or any other religion inserts themselves in foreign policy of the United States, then as a citizen I have a right to criticize that decision without being labeled a Catholic basher or any other religion basher!

94 posted on 03/03/2003 7:12:04 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
Looking over your list, one thing puzzles me. You list many framers of the US Constitution identified as "Episcopalian (Calvinist)," but neither the Church of England nor the American Episcopal Church are particularly Calvinist in doctrine.
95 posted on 03/03/2003 7:12:05 AM PST by valkyrieanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
"This Pope was a warrior against Communism, even took a bullet in that fight. You have got NO RIGHT to disrespect a man who's done so much good.

BULLHORKEY!!!!!!! Maybe he got shot for hidding pedophile priests (didja ever think of that?). I don't take the pathetic pope's word for ANYTHING anymore. The pope stopped communism the way greasy food stops heart disease.

96 posted on 03/03/2003 7:17:41 AM PST by You Gotta Be Kidding Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Cachelot
"...The Pope again. Anyone need any more proof that this is a malign force?..."

Poor Cachelot.You're surrounded by malign forces aren't you? The Papists and, worse, the Americans--as you so eloquently wrote on the thread "Schools Threatened by Terrorsts":

...Far from "exploding", the American public would probably snivel a bit about how much bad karma America has accrued by not helping the arabs delete Israel from the map. And then they'd start looking for a synagogue to burn....

posted on 10/04/2002 12:57 PM EDT by Cachelot

How sickening and degrading it must be for you that Israel depends wholly upon the good will and money of these malign forces.

It's a supremacists lament. So many of Them. So few of Us. Lol!!

97 posted on 03/03/2003 7:18:23 AM PST by LaBelleDameSansMerci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
Thanks for this, I couldn't agree more:

The Pope has a right and a duty to preach Peace. American Catholic soldiers have a right and a duty to wage a just war.

I do wonder whether this is actually JPII's doing, and if so, exactly what worries him so.

98 posted on 03/03/2003 7:21:32 AM PST by Petronski (I'm not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: piasa
So while it is evil to "do nothing" I might point out that it is also "evil" to do something which will make the right thing more difficult to accomplish. Sometimes you must do things which are difficult and in which you do not believe, in order to get closer to the right solution. Sometimes we're not even given the choice between good or bad, but only between bad or worse.

Your thoughts on what could be a logical reason for the recent actions of the pope are very thought provoking.

Thanks for posting that, I had not thought of that possibility.

99 posted on 03/03/2003 7:21:59 AM PST by katnip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Pure Country
"...Does he not have a clue about what is going on in his own backyard or in Iraq....or does he just not care?...

Well, SOMEBODY doens't have a clue, that's for sure..

Christians for Saddam?
by Glen Chancy

Introduction

After the Divine Liturgy a few Sundays ago, I joined several other men from my parish for brunch. The topic of Iraq came up, and one of the men remarked that he had heard that there was a substantial Christian population in Iraq, and that Tariq Assiz, the Iraqi foreign minister, was a Roman Catholic. He was shocked that a Christian could be associated with such a man as Saddam Hussein. "What can that mean for his witness as a Christian to serve such a leader?" my friend asked in bewilderment.

While I cannot know what is in Mr. Assiz’s heart, only God can know that, I can certainly understand, on a basic level, his service to Saddam Hussein. Before we, in the West, become too judgmental of our co-religionists living under Muslim rule, I believe we need to understand the world Iraqi Christians inhabit. It is a brutal world of few good choices, and many potential dangers. Theirs is a truly desperate plight, and it is one that our forthcoming invasion of Iraq is quite likely to make much, much worse.

Background – Iraqi Christians

In Iraq, live an estimated 1 million Christians who are ethnically Assyrian. This community descends from the various Mesopotamian kingdoms that once ruled the area and formed powerful empires in the Fertile Crescent. Their Christian heritage is ancient. Many Assyrians converted to Christianity as early as the second century A.D. Assyrians define themselves as a broad category of Christian groups speaking Aramaic (the language of Jesus) that includes followers of the Chaldean Catholic Church (in communion with Rome), the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Church of the East, among others.

The Assyrians have lived under foreign domination since the fall of the Assyrian kingdom to Persian power in the seventh century B.C. Since then, the Assyrians have been subjected to Persian, Arab, and Ottoman domination. As a result of ethnic cleansing by Iranian, Turkish, and Arab-Iraqi forces in the 1920s and 1930s, the Assyrians lost thousands of people and have found themselves mostly concentrated in the mountainous regions north of Baghdad.

Under various Iraqi governments, particularly those following the British withdrawal in 1945, Christians in Iraq have been politically suppressed. Although substantial numbers of their intellectuals chose to join the Ba'th regime and identify themselves as Arab Christians, the Assyrians have been subjected to systematic attempts by Saddam’s regime to "Arabize" them, a process that includes driving ethnic minorities from their lands and seizing some of their properties, especially in the strategic, oil-rich northern region bordering the Kurdish enclave. This has been done partly out of Saddam’s fear of disloyalty on the part of non-Arabs, and partly out of a desire to reward Saddam’s political supporters with their land.

"The Iraqi government has also forced ethnic minorities such as the Assyrians, the Kurds and the Turkomen to sign 'national correction forms' that require them to renounce their ethnic identities and declare themselves to be Arabs," says Hania Mufti of Human Rights Watch.

Today, in the Middle East, Assyrians are spread across Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran, where rights groups say they live as small, often discriminated-against minorities under governments largely unsympathetic to their religious and cultural aspirations. In Iraq, most Assyrians live in the North, under Kurdish control in an enclave that was established after the 1991 Gulf War. There, they have achieved a modicum of independence, and are allowed five seats in the Kurdish Parliament.

In fact, this is perhaps the best situation in which Assyrians have found themselves in some time. Given their history with Saddam, and the relative freedom they are experiencing in Northern Iraq, you would probably assume that the Assyrians would like nothing better than to see Saddam’s murderous regime consigned to the dustbin of history. Unfortunately, you would be wrong.

Saddam Hussein – That Bad in Context?

This may come as a shock to many Americans, whose image of Saddam has been framed by comparisons to Adolf Hitler, but the prevalent fear among Assyrians, both in Iraq and abroad, is that what comes next after an American invasion will be worse.

"Our greatest fear if there is a regime change in Iraq is if there will be a substitution of Saddam Hussein's tyranny for a new tyranny," says Ronald Michael, president of the Assyrian American League, an Illinois-based organization representing the estimated four-million-strong Assyrian community in the United States.

Saddam Hussein and the Ba’th Regime have been, and still are, nasty and oppressive to all Iraqis. However, Saddam has not been particularly oppressive to the Assyrians, at least compared to what has been the norm elsewhere in the region. One must always keep in mind that the oldest members of Middle Eastern Christian communities remember outright slaughters of Christians by the millions. By the yardstick of his neighbors and Middle Eastern history, Saddam just doesn’t look that bad.

The secular Saddam has neither encouraged nor permitted the type of anti-Christian riots seen in Egypt and Iran. Further, Saddam has never engaged in actual anti-Christian genocide of the type seen in Sudan, where 2 million Christian have lost their lives in the past decade. Unlike any other regime in the Middle East, Saddam has permitted Christians to occupy high public office. This includes the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Assiz, who is a Roman Catholic. In addition, Saddam’s regime has permitted a degree of free practice for Christians that is positively enviable compared to the situations experienced in such U.S. ‘allies’ as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Christmas and Easter decorations always abound, even in Baghdad, and attending church does not require an act of courage.

Today, the Christians of Iraq seem to be split between those who support the status quo – de facto autonomy of a type in the North – and those who support Saddam Hussein’s continuation in power. Broad support, enthusiastic or otherwise, for the ouster of Saddam Hussein by the U.S. Army seems to be noticeably absent from the political landscape.

Is this anxiety warranted? Should the Assyrians be so concerned about being liberated by U.S. military power? If history is our guide, they shouldn’t be afraid. They should be terrified.

Our Friends The Kurds

As noted earlier, the majority of Assyrians live in northern Iraq in the Kurdish enclave. So far, this situation has been reasonably tolerable for the Assyrians, as the Kurds have been conducting a fairly successful democratic experiment under the cover of U.S. and British combat patrols. Given the historical tendency of the Kurds to victimize and slaughter the Assyrians, the current situation seems quite impressive.

However, Assyrians are quick to ask, have the Kurds really moderated their traditional attitudes and embraced Western notions of civil rights? Or, are they only moderating their tone in order to build a unified front against Saddam Hussein? This leads to a great fear among Assyrians in the north that when the unifying factor of a common enemy is removed, the traditional problems between the Kurds and the Assyrians will resurface with a vengeance.

Among the future problems between the two groups are disputes over land, that for now have been put on hold. "There are outstanding issues of Assyrian villages and lands, which were vacated under Baghdad's forced repatriations during the 1970s and '80s," says Hania Mufti of Human Rights Watch.

Recent events in the north fuel fears that the Assyrians may become victims of Kurdish aggression again. The Kurdish authorities have begun attempts to classify Iraq's Christians as "Kurdish Christians." This appellation is an outright fabrication, but it points to a future in which the Assyrians, who survived ‘Arabization’ in Saddam’s Iraq, may find themselves subjected to a harsh ‘Kurdization’ at the hands of an independent Kurdistan.

Also, there has been a resurgence of traditional Kurdish attacks on Christians. The Kurdish authorities have resolutely ignored these attacks. As Ronald Michael explains, it is in the best interests of Kurdish politicians to not antagonize their Muslim constituents by being zealous in the defense of Christians.

"The nationalist parties don't want to lose the support of the Kurdish people," says Michael. "The KDP [Kurdish Democratic Party] turns a blind eye to these attacks out of fear of an Islamic backlash."

The Kurds have an estimated 70,000 anti-Saddam soldiers in the north. How extensively the U.S. plans to make use of them in its war effort remains to be seen. However, one thing is clear – these men aren’t going away after the fighting stops. If the blind eye turned by Kurdish authorities to violence against Christians becomes outright genocide, will our U.S. military forces intervene against our Kurdish ‘allies’ to protect defenseless Christians?

If you and I don’t know the answer to that troubling question, how do you think the Assyrians feel?

Our Friends the Turks

Turkey has repeatedly warned against any attempt to establish an independent Kurdish political entity. The Ankara government is fearful that independent Kurds will be an example for the millions of Kurds under Turkish domination. Should the Kurds attempt to achieve independence, there is a real threat that Turkey will enter the war in order to stop a Kurdish state from forming.

In fact, there is a chance that Turkey may intervene aggressively in any event. Leading up to the latest Turkish election, which brought to power a party with Islamic roots, nationalist Turkish politicians and senior generals threatened to seize Kirkuk and Mosul in the event of war, citing Ottoman-era claims to the two oil-rich northern Iraqi cities.

In September 2002, Ozdem Sanberk, the former Turkish ambassador to Britain, told a reporter, "If the U.S. intervenes, and in the first days the Kurds enter Kirkuk and Mosul, the Turkish army will move in." It has been reported that the Turkish army already has troops inside the Iraqi Kurdish zone, and is already planning to send more to stop any flow of Kurdish refugees into Turkey when full-scale war breaks out.

Currently, Turkey is driving a hard bargain in exchange for backing the U.S. The details are not all public, but it appears that Turkey is demanding at least 10% of the oil revenues from the area around Kirkuk and Mosul. Even if it receives its wish, there is no guarantee that it will abide by any agreement it makes with Washington.

Should the Turks end up in control of northern Iraq, the outcome for the Assyrian Christians in the area is likely to be catastrophic. Turkish rule would likely be far worse than continuing to live under Saddam Hussein, and could very well spell the end of the Assyrian communities.

No nation in the region has as much Christian blood on its hands as Turkey. The Turks carried out major slaughters of Christians in 1915 (close to two million Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks that year alone), the early 1920’s, and again in 1955. To this day, it is the official position of the Turkish government that these genocides did not happen. Further, Turkey has waged a non-stop war of attrition on its native Assyrian, Greek, and Armenian minorities over the last century. Through discrimination, expulsion, race riots, and immigration, these communities have been practically obliterated.

Today, Turkey is almost a Christian-free zone, despite Istanbul serving as the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople – one of the most important Sees of the Orthodox Church. It is estimated that only 60,000 Armenians, 15,000 Assyrians, and 3,500 Greeks remain in Turkey at the dawn of the 21st Century. Less than 100 years ago, the numbers of Christians in what is now Turkey numbered in the millions.

If a Turkish invasion of northern Iraq leads to genocide against the Assyrian Christians as part of a campaign of ‘ethnic cleansing,’ will the United States defend the Christians? History would lead one to conclude that the answer is an unqualified ‘no.’

The United States sat idly by and allowed the Turks to massacre Christians in 1923 and 1955. (In fact, U.S. ships in the area even refused to take aboard survivors who were fleeing for their lives. The U.S. was afraid of ‘offending’ the Turks by helping any of their victims.) The U.S. did not assist the Greek island nation of Cyprus when Turkey attacked it in 1974, and occupied over 1/3 of Cypriot territory. The U.S. has failed to vigorously protest ongoing Turkish abuse of Turkey’s few remaining Christians.

Over and over again, the U.S. has proven that it will sacrifice an unlimited number of Christian lives in order to maintain its alliance with Turkey. The Assyrians are well aware of this history, and are terrified that they will be the next sacrifice offered up on the altar of U.S.-Turkish friendship. Our Friends the Iraqi National Congress

The Iraqi National Congress is an umbrella organization bringing together various anti-Saddam groups. Based in London, it is heavily financed by the United States, and may be expected to play a role in the post-invasion reorganization of Iraq. The groups represented in the INC range from constitutional monarchists to Islamic radicals. Their diversity is representative of Iraq itself, which has a Kurdish north, a Sunni Arab center, and Shiite south. Despite this diversity, however, there may be one thing that all of these various groups could agree on – they are all Muslims.

And this is another fear that grips the Assyrians. In a post-Saddam world, there must be some unifying force to hold the disparate pieces of Iraq together. What that force will be is still to be determined. Will it be an occupation by the U.S. Army? Will it be a new monarchy, loosely based on Islamic principals? Will it be fundamentalist Islam, as in the ethnically diverse nation of Pakistan?

If Iraq turns more fundamentalist after Saddam is removed from the picture, as some future dictatorship seeks to use Islam as a unifying force, the Assyrians could find themselves becoming the sacrificial lambs on the altar of Iraqi unity. It has happened elsewhere in the Middle East – nothing unifies a population like a common enemy to slaughter. If a new Iraqi government, in control of the whole country, turns on the Assyrians with a genocidal fury, will the U.S. military protect the Christians? If history is our guide, the answer is an unqualified ‘no.’

In Kosovo, we have an example of NATO forces, led by U.S. ground troops, occupying a majority Muslim state. While ostensibly neutral between the two sides at the time of deployment, it became quickly apparent to the Serbs in Kosovo that the NATO forces had little stomach for keeping the Muslims in line. The ‘peacekeepers’ were only there to keep Serbian forces out of Kosovo, not to protect the Serbs in Kosovo. If they had tried to do so, then it would have invited casualties from Muslim reprisals. That was the last thing any NATO governments wanted. So 50,000 NATO troops stood by while 100,000 Serbs were ethnically cleansed and 112 churches and monasteries were destroyed. NATO and the United States were, and are, unwilling to make waves in Kosovo in order to save Christian lives and churches – why would post-invasion Iraq be any different? Conclusion

There is probably no avoiding war with Iraq at this time. Too much has happened for us to turn aside now, even if that might be the best thing for all concerned. Despite some of our wishes to the contrary, the war is probably going to come, and its coming is fraught with danger for many innocent people in the Middle East. But if war must come, then as citizens of the United States, we have an obligation to remind our leaders that the lives of Christians are just as important as the lives of Muslims. A victory in Iraq that destroys the Assyrian community in its wake is no victory. If our President and his staff are not considering the fates of these brave Christians, then it is time for us, as Americans, to remind them of their obligations to our co-religionists in a war that we brought to them.

The Assyrians still speak the language of Jesus, and follow the way of the cross, despite centuries of persecution. The strength of their faith should be a humbling example to us all in the West. The Assyrians have survived the coming of the Persians, the Arabs, and the Turks. It remains to be seen if they will survive the coming of the Americans.

February 25, 2003

Glen Chancy is a graduate of the University of Florida with a degree in Political Science, and a certificate in Eastern European Studies. A former University lecturer in Poland, he currently holds an MBA in Finance and works in Orlando, Fl as a business analyst for an international software developer.

article here

100 posted on 03/03/2003 7:24:43 AM PST by LaBelleDameSansMerci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 261-267 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson