NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/9701

Text File | 1992-12-30 | 5.2 KB | 135 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: [e-mail] (Rich Winkel)
Subject: FCNL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 12/30/92
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:17:27 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 119

/** fcnl.updates: 19.0 **/
** Topic: FCNL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 12/30/92 **
** Written  4:12 pm  Dec 30, 1992 by fcnl in cdp:fcnl.updates **

          FCNL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE -- [12/30/92]

This is the Friends Committee on National Legislation,
with updated legislative information.  To speak with a
staff member, call [phone].

This message was prepared at 4:00 p.m on Wednesday,
December 30, 1992.  It contains information and action
suggestions on the following subject: SOMALIA.

Humanitarian Intervention:

     President Bush is visiting U.S. troops in Somalia
over the New Year's holiday.  When he first sent the
troops there, he said, "...You are doing God's work."
The government and press describe the U.S. action as
"humanitarian military intervention" to protect the
distribution of food and medical aid.

     Actually, U.S. military intervention in Somalia
began many years earlier.  For example, during the
'70s and '80s, the U.S. and the Soviet Union sent more
than $4 billion in arms to the Horn of Africa.  These
military interventions helped to create the disaster
that we see today in Somalia.

     Nevertheless, many in government say that Somalia
is a model of how the U.S. military should be used in
the post Cold War world.  "Humanitarian military
interventions" have been proposed for other crisis
areas, such as the former Yugoslavia.  The UN may
become a primary vehicle for this policy.

     In our view, the road of U.S. -- and UN
--military intervention for humanitarian purposes is
paved with good intentions.  Good intentions, however,
will not guarantee a good outcome.  The negatives
associated with military action may outweigh and
outlast the benefits.  Other, non-military,
longer-lasting options for dealing with Somalia and
similar crises are not getting serious and widespread
attention.  Decision makers are formulating
far-reaching policy without ever having considered
these important alternatives.

Among the alternatives that should be examined are:

DISARMAMENT:  Forced disarmament of militias in
Somalia probably will not work; however, economic
incentives for disarmament, such as jobs and community
development projects, probably could succeed.

DE-ESCALATING VIOLENCE:  A number of aid organization
staff observe that "the violence tends to follow the
centralized aid delivery stream."  Violence could be
avoided or reduced by a decentralized system of
providing aid and development.

PEACE BUILDING:  Vast regions of Somalia have been
free of both starvation and violence.  Many Somali
individuals and organizations want to support
reconciliation and peace processes, but they have no
national voice.  An independent radio station for
these leaders, poets, teachers and musicians would
help to revive the civil society.

NEGOTIATIONS:  The peace inside Somalia will have to
be built by Somalis themselves, and from the ground
up.  The large national level peace conference should
be the end, not the start, of the negotiating process.
First, simultaneous peace conferences need to take
place in each of the several regions of Somalia.

TRANSFERS OF POWER:  If U.S. forces withdraw from
Somalia, they will have to transfer power to some
authority.  Right now, the U.S. is negotiating with
the warlords rather than with legitimate civilian
leaders.  If this continues, the price of U.S.
withdrawal will be to leave a military dictatorship or
oligarchy in place.  This will greatly multiply the
problems.  The alternative is to support the several
regions in developing legitimate authorities through
political, not military, means.

     These are just a few of many possible
alternatives to the use of military force which we and
other peace groups could explain more fully in
community forums.  Many colleges and universities have
peace studies and conflict resolution programs.  These
may be a resource for local discussions.

     As many community-based forums as possible should
be created around the country.  The proposals for
so-called humanitarian military intervention need to
be scrutinized and the alternatives examined in
public.

ACTION:

We suggest that your meeting, church, synagogue,
mosque, or community organization sponsor public
forums on "Military Intervention and Humanitarian
Intervention."  Be sure that your event includes
speakers knowledgeable about nonviolent alternatives
to military force.  FCNL may be able to refer you to
resources.  Please inform us of your group's program
or event.  Thank you.

This concludes our message.  For more information,
please write to the Friends Committee on National
Legislation, 245 Second St., NE, Washington, DC 20002.
To follow these and related issues on a regular basis,
subscribe to the FCNL WASHINGTON NEWSLETTER.  Send $25
to the above address and receive 11 issues per year.
** End of text from cdp:fcnl.updates **