Re: Transformation from War to Peace

This is a response to the message below that contains statements such as:  "I
have 'encountered' several indigenous activists online engaged in SUPPORT for
Bush's war, and very proud of the Native American soldiers, organizing 'prayer
wheels' online (basically chain letters), and angered by what some call the
Iraqi "murder" of this female Native American soldier. Given the support for
these themes that I have encountered from other indigenous groups with US
representation,
I began to suspect that Amerindians were right wing imperialists who have
finally come out of the closet. No parallels, none, they insist, between 1492
and Iraq; not an invasion, but "liberation"; and the fact that Native Americans
are fighting makes the whole venture rightI began to suspect that Amerindians
were right wing imperialists who havefinally come out of the closet"...  "It
seems to me that the "oppressed" in these cases have not learned anything".

This only my response---The unabashed prejudice in the words above and in the
message below should not go unnoticed.  Even most children are aware of the
diverse reactions to the 'war' of North American Indians, that is, among the
more than 570 American Indian Nations in what is now called the United States.
The thousands of indigenous nations in the world are diverse and have varying
reactions to the 'war.'

Obviously, French people also are diverse.  The posting on February 19 on the
"The French reaction" [pasted below under P.S.] notes the irony of some of the
people in France.  I've passed it on to friends who are from France.  I did not
mention to those friends what they already know, for example, scalping was a
practice imposed on American Indians from the French and British.   The word
'savage' comes from the French.  The word 'Sioux' means cut-throat in French.
Other examples have been exposed over the past 200 years.  Military minds are
not confined to one culture.

I now will pass the message below on to friends who are now called 'American
Indians,"  "First Nations People," and other indigenous peoples I know---to be
sure that my comments are fair and clear.  First,  it's shameful to present
'American Indians' as a monolith.  Second,  there also is a gross call for
unbridled nationalism in the message below.  Third,  under the hegemonic facade
of intellectual exchange [with an ostensible  nod to Manny Wallerstein---who I
hope reads these messages and the phony use of his work], there are conclusions
based on racialization and prattle from the internet.  And, in keeping with the
tradition of the sacredness of 4, I will stop 'talking,' and listen, after
listing only number 4 next.

Fourth,  on April 3, 2003, the following was sent to me by a friend [thank you
again Gunder]:  Subject: Indigenous Peoples Declaration Against US Invasion of
Iraq
http://www.quechuanetwork.org/news_template.cfm?news_id=672&lang=s

Indigenous Peoples Declaration Against United States Invasion of Iraq

Ottawa - Canada - (Posted on Apr-01-2003) The representatives of the
Indigenous Peoples of the Americas gathered during the second Annual Forum
of Connectivity in Ottawa, Canada on March 24-26, 2003 and expressed the
following:

To join our voices to the millions of peoples around the world, including
the voices of the peoples in United States, the voice of our sister
Rigoberta Menchù Tum, 1992 Nobel Peace Prize winner and other indigenous
organizations to condemn the genocidal American invasion against the Iraqi
people.

This genocide is a crime against humanity and violates international law as
well as human and legal rights. This is a criminal invasion and it is
killing innocent children, women and the elderly.

It lacks any kind of legitimacy and cannot be justified as it violates all
declarations to live in peace. It violates the self determination and
sovereignty of peoples and the consensus reached by most states represented
in the United Nations.

The representatives of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas strongly
request that all those responsible for these criminal acts be brought to the
International War Crimes Court and be condemned internationally.

We urge the United Nations to call for an emergency meeting of the Security
Council to condemn the United States government, and its allies decision to
go to war and we call for an immediate cease fire, while re-establishing
diplomacy to end this conflict. Furthermore, we reject any new government
imposed by the United States as it will only justify its presence in Iraq to
protect its own geo- political and geo-economic interests.

We encourage all the peoples of the world to maintain their unity and to
strengthen their mobilization against this injustice, to show their love for
peace, fraternity and intercultural dialogue.

We all shall reject the unilateral use of weapons to impose colonialist
agendas and try to eliminate the cultural diversity of the world.

As indigenous peoples, we do not condone war, violence, or any other
conflict that destroys our Mother Earth. On the contrary, we promote
dialogue as our principle and we do not reject peace.

As indigenous peoples, we have suffered genocide throughout our history and
for that reason we want to congratulate all those states that chose the
option of peace and respect for human life. Therefore, we request all those
states to make their best efforts to re-establish the multilateral order as
a legal instrument against this neo-imperialist disorder.

March 25th 2003

Signatures:

Asociación de Radios Comunitarias. ARCG. Guatemala Abya Yala Nexus USA
Bachillerato Integral Comunitario Ayujk Polivalente. BICAP. Bolivia Consejo
Indígena de Centro América . CICA. Guatemala Central Independiente de
Obreros Agrícolas y Campesinos.CIOAC. México Coalición Obrero Campesina y
Estudiantil del Istmo, COCEI. Comisión de Juristas Indígenas de Argentina.
Argentina Coordinadora Mapuche de Neuquen. Argentina Conferencia Permanente
de Pueblos Indígenas COPPIP. Peru Comision Juridica para el Autodesarrollo
de los Pueblos Originarios Andinos. CAPAJ.Peru CONAIE, Departamento de
Comunicacion. Enlace Continental de Mujeres Indigenas . Panamá Brazil
Fundación Rigoberta Menchu. Guatemala Foro Permanente sobre Pueblos
Indígenas. ONU Instituto Indigena de Propiedad Intelectual, INBRAPI. Brazil
InforCauca . Colombia Information Network of the Indigenous Peoples of the
Americas. INIPA. Canada Liga Maya Internacional . Guatemala Universidade
Federal de Mato Groso. Brasil Coordinadora Nacional de Mujeres Indígenas de
México, CNMI. México Movimiento Chirapaq. Peru Mujeres Mayas de Jovel.
México Maya-Ixil, Proyecto Enlace Quiché . Guatemala Oficina para el
Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas. Guatemala Promama de Derechos
Indígenas, Instituto de Estudios Indígenas. Chile Prensa Indígena
Internacional. Canada Resurgimiento Ancestral Indígena Salvadoreño. El
Salvador Red Nacional de Trabajadoras de la Información y
Comunicación-REDADA.Bolivia RED Kechwa. USA SAPINCHIKMANTA Radio Programa en
Quecha y Castellano. Ayacucho Servicios para el Desarrollo, Pueblo Nahñu -
Mexico Unión Nacional de Mujeres Kunas. Panama

That is one of many similar declarations and statements.  To keep my word, I
will stop and listen.

Vive la all living things,
pat lauderdale


"Maximilian C. Forte" wrote:

> If I am not mistaken, in _After Liberalism_ Wallerstein claimed that
> anti-systemic movements would be judged/face challenges posed by three basic
> 'tests': where they stood on gender, social equality, and democracy. He
> seemed to suggest that essentialist and fundamentalist movements would
> crumble under the internal contradictions caused by internal inequalities
> that simply mirrored those of the external world which the movements
> presumably challenged. Now, I am not certain that this is what he said: I am
> relying on my memory of something I read seven years ago. If it is correct,
> it mirrors Ashis Nandy's concept of "isomorphic oppression". In these tests,
> for lack of a better word, I would like to add that of global peace, an
> issue that some antisystemic movements may not address, directly or
> indirectly, yet it affects everyone.
>
> The Native American piece caught my attention. I have 'encountered' several
> indigenous activists online engaged in SUPPORT for Bush's war, and very
> proud of the Native American soldiers, organizing 'prayer wheels' online
> (basically chain letters), and angered by what some call the Iraqi "murder"
> of this female Native American soldier. Given the support for these themes
> that I have encountered from other indigenous groups with US representation,
> I began to suspect that Amerindians were right wing imperialists who have
> finally come out of the closet. No parallels, none, they insist, between
> 1492 and Iraq; not an invasion, but "liberation"; and the fact that Native
> Americans are fighting makes the whole venture right.
>
> It seems to me that the "oppressed" in these cases have not learned
> anything. In Nicaragua I recall "indigenous" groups that had ties to the
> CIA. Moreover, I am not seeing any organized outcry...actually, I am not
> seeing any kind of formal statements from any indigenous federations in the
> Americas, denouncing the US invasion. Do indigenous peoples only talk about
> 'indigenous issues', and ignore what is being done to others? If so, the
> political practice there seems to be tragically self-centred, and offers no
> answers or solutions to problems that affect, and will affect, all of us.
>
> Of course, that is with the exception of this writer below, not that the
> statement was the most explicit denunciation of the war I have seen. The
> French Foreign Minister is more anti-war than any Native American voices I
> have heard so far.
>
> Vive la France,
>
> Maximilian C. Forte
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jay Fenello
> To: awpd@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: Rosicrucians@yahoogroups.com ; wsn@csf.colorado.edu
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 3:25 PM
> Subject: Transformation from War to Peace
>
> FYI:
>
> At 4/12/2003  11:44 PM, Richard K. Moore wrote:
>
> Friends,
>
> This transformation thread is not something I dreamed
> up on my own. It is a response to a change in the kind
> of mail I've been receiving.  Since the Iraq invasion
> started, people in many parts of the world have been
> inspired to dig deeper, to think harder, to listen to
> their hearts -- seeking solutions to our crisis.
>
> People seem to be realizing that the Iraq episode is
> not an exception -- it is rather the epitome of where
> our civilization is heading.  People are seeing that
> the war cannot be opposed on its own, rather the
> direction of our civilization must be shifted.  I'm not
> sure why these kinds of realizations are being inspired
> by Iraq in particular, but they are.
>
> Below are two such pieces.  They are very different and
> yet very much the same.  One is called "Revolution for
> Global Peace" and the other "Transformation from War to
> Peace".  One is from a German-speaking academic, and
> the other says it is an "American Indian message to the
> world".  (Both appear to be genuine.)
>
> I put the American Indian piece last, since it is
> longer.  But I hope you have time to look at it.  Those
> of you who have been following my work probably know
> why I consider that piece especially important.
>
> ---
>
> When one is lost, it often helps to think back to where
> you went wrong in your wanderings. Sometimes the best
> strategy is to go back to where you lost your way and
> start again.  Our civilization has lost its way.  I
> suggest that we must look deeply at the question,
> "Where did we first lose our way?".
>
> Was it merely the coming to power of the
> Rumsfield-Cheney clique?   Was it the elections of
> Reagan and Thatcher and the launch of the neoliberal
> globalization program?   Was it the assassination of
> JFK?  Was it the industrial revolution and capitalism?
> How far back do you go before you can find a time we
> were not lost?  Were we better off under kings and
> aristocratic rule?   Under the Catholic Church?  Under
> the Roman Empire?  When were there EVER good old days?
> When were we ever not already on the path to where we
> are now?
>
> I came to the conclusion some time ago that we need to
> look back very far indeed before any credible case can
> be made for the existence of societies worth emulating.
> We must look before the advent of civilization --
> because the history of civilization is nothing other
> than the history of ever-expanding power hierarchies.
> It is the history of ever-more sophisticated means of
> control, and every-more-efficient means of
> exploitation.  To the extent we cannot see this, we
> only provide evidence for the efficacy of the
> propaganda-education-media-matrix machine.
>
> I've often pointed to the Native Americans as a
> particularly valuable place to look.  Their cultures
> were a broad canvas, serving as a not-bad rough
> representation of the kinds of cultures we evolved from
> ourselves, before the advent of systematic agriculture
> and civilization.  (I am specifically not including the
> Aztecs and Incas, culture which were already on our
> same civilization path.)  Equally important, the
> (other) Native American cultures were studied and
> documented in great detail, and many eloquent expressions
> are available from Native Americans themselves ("Black Elk
> Speaks", and the like).
>
> ---
>
> The piece I've forwarded at the bottom is especially
> relevant to this question of "Where did we go wrong?"
> It deals with the time when certain tribes made the
> transition from habitual warfare to peaceful
> coexistence.  They made this transition long before the
> arrival of the White Man, and they seem to have come up
> with a somewhat stable and worth-examining system.  A
> system which allows for local autonomy while providing
> order on the larger scale.
>
> Our own cultural ancestors faced that same transition.
> The dominant solution in our case was not peaceful
> co-existence, but rather the conquest of the weaker
> tribes by the stronger ones.  Bush is simply the latest
> example of someone carrying that millenniums-old banner
> forward.
>
> regards,
> rkm
> http://cyberjournal.org
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Delivered-To: richard@cyberjournal.org
> From: Institut für Globale Friedensarbeit <igf@tamera.org>
> Subject: D.Duhm: Revolution for Global Peace (regarding the Iraq war)
> Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:56:30 +0100
>
>     The Revolution for Peace
>     Third comment regarding the Iraq War
>     (Dieter Duhm, March 2003)
>     http://www.tamera.org/english/aktuelltext/Irakdd3.html
>
> [extracts]
> I want to say the truth and still serve peace. I thank
> the peace movements and the demonstrations all over the
> world. Maybe never have so many people demonstrated for
> peace as now (March 2003). A thanks - for this time -
> also to the German federal chancellor Gerhard Schröder
> for his consistent "no" to this war. The demonstrations
> must not stop now. They can start a historic change for
> the whole world. We need a global peace plan for a new
> earth.
>
> We are witnesses to a wrong civilisation in which we,
> ourselves, belong. We are experiencing a war by two
> barbarian cultures and governments. The barbarism of a
> US-American government and the barbarism of a
> dictatorship in Iraq are two aspects of the same
> devastating history, and the same continuum of
> violence.The same injustices are happening here as in
> Afghanistan, in Israel/Palestine, in Chechnya, in the
> Balkans, in Latin America, in Africa, Indonesia and
> almost everywhere on the earth.
>
> There is hardly any island left on the earth that is not
> besieged by this world-wide disease. It is a similar
> form of barbarism as previously in Chile or Vietnam
> just with another amount of concealment and propaganda.
>
> (....) Murder is transmitted to us in a sterile way by
> means of figures, tables and electronic technology. The
> daily mass-murder has become a inconspicuous part of
> our whole life-system. Behind the clean medicine, the
> cosmetics, or the stock exchange figures stands the
> nameless misery of the tortured creature. This torture
> has long since become global. The keyword for it is
> "globalisation". It is the globalisation of violence.
> But we need the globalisation of peace. The life forces
> of evolution must be steered in a new direction. (....)
>
> We, the ones who are standing behind these words, can
> no longer remain spectators in a Disneyland where the
> war is presented as a computer game. Awakened by our
> own thoughts, we can no longer look away from what is
> really happening on the side of the victims. We have
> friends in Palestine and in Israel. Others have friends
> in Iraq. No human being who looks to what is happening
> there could accept the war for a single second. The
> children, the friends and beloved ones who are dying
> there could be our own. The cruelty of a dictatorship
> regime (Saddam Hussein) cannot be ended by means of the
> cruel killing of humans and animals in a war, they
> would only be continued with different means. We
> experience this now in Afghanistan and in Chechnya.
> (...)
>
> We are here to build up a new life form. Our pacifism
> is militant and absolute; this means unconditional. But
> it is free of hatred, for it has surpassed hatred. The
> absolute NO lies beyond hatred or revenge. Those who
> have said this NO don't need to hate any more. It is
> not an emotion, it is not a religious belief, and not a
> philosophical or religious position. It is pure
> existence and truth. We say NO because any other
> statement would be self-denial. We say NO because
> otherwise we would no longer feel trustworthy and
> secure in front of each other. We say NO because we
> want to become truthful again in our own friendships
> and love relationships. At the same time, we connect
> ourselves with a YES as powerful to life, yes to all
> creatures, yes to a joyful coexistence and co-operation
> of all living beings - toward the One (....).
>
>  > Forwarded by:
>   Summer-University 2003  "Movement for a Free Earth"
>   July 28th - August 6th of 2003
>   IGF - Institut für Globale Friedensarbeit (Institute
>   for Global Peace Work), Monte do Cerro, P-7630 Colos,
>   http://www.tamera.org
>   igf@tamera.org
>   Tel: +351-283 635 3-06, Fax: -74
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Delivered-To:richard@cyberjournal.org
> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:39:29 -0700 (MST)
> From: Evan D Ravitz <evan@vote.org>
> To: misc. groups
> Subject: American Indian message to world
>
> (Lest we forget how civilization got this far... Evan Ravitz)
>
>     COMBING THE SNAKES OUT OF ATOTARHO'S HAIR
>     A Transformation from War to Peace
>
> Both the Charter of the United Nations and the
> Constitution of the United States of America are
> founded on the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Great Law of
> Peace.  We, the carriers of the Haudenosaunee
> traditions consider it our duty to remind the world of
> the basic principles and spirit of the Great Law for
> bringing peace and harmony to human relations.
>
> In our teachings, there was a man named Atotarho.
> Atotarho is described as a powerful evil man who spread
> fear and death everywhere he went - visually he is
> represented with snakes coming out of his head and as
> having a crooked and misshapen body.  He was a
> cannibal, a sorcerer who killed and maimed people for
> his pleasure and caused dissention, exploiting people
> to feed his own selfish greed.  The world was at war.
> Sound familiar?
>
> Long before the Europeans came to North America, two
> men, Dekanawida and Ayonwatha taught the warring
> nations about the Great Law of Peace which brought
> peace and established the Confederation of Five
> Nations. Over 200 nations allied themselves with the
> Confederacy and accepted the terms of equality and
> peace.
>
> How did Dekanawida and Ayonwatha straighten Atotarho
> out and comb the snakes out of his hair?
>
> When Dekanawida was trying to bring peace to the
> warring nations by forming the Confederacy and showing
> people how to work together, he had trouble convincing
> the Onondaga to join because they were lead by
> Atotarho.  Atotarho enjoyed the power and fear he put
> into people.
>
> Dekanawida and Ayonwatha sang him a song to help him
> calm down. They massaged his aching, crooked body and
> then started to gently comb the snakes out of his hair.
> As they did so, they taught him about the Great Law of
> Peace.
>
> Dekanawida and Ayonwatha worked gently and with great
> patience. As Atotarho began to relax, he was
> transformed and became straight, strong and whole
> again.  Atotarho, after he was pacified, became head of
> the Grand Council of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.
> Atotarho learned the ohenton kariwateken, the words of
> thanksgiving that come before any gathering of the
> people.  As he began to understand his place in the
> universe - a universe where everything and all people
> are interconnected and equal - he could no longer
> exploit the fears of others.
>
> Instead of removing him from any position of power in
> the new confederacy, he was given the opportunity to
> act as chairman, listening to everything everyone else
> had to say and presiding over discussions.  He acted as
> a peacemaker and diplomat, listening to all the
> positions carried from the people by their
> representatives.  He made sure that relations were
> conducted in a friendly and respectful manner.  This
> position still exists in the modern day Confederacy.
>
> In this position, he does not represent anybody or any
> nation.  He does not force others to follow his way.
> He is a mediator for all of the nations and for the
> Great Law of Peace.  It is understood that because he
> had been so crooked to begin with, he understood the
> opposition and imbalance that could occur among people.
>
> The person who sits in Atotarho's place cannot be in
> two canoes at once - that of war and that of peace - he
> would fall into the river. Their paths naturally go in
> opposite directions.  Atotarho realizes that if you
> have everything, you have nothing.  He knows the
> importance of keeping balance within the circle where
> everyone is equal.
>
> Where is our Atotarho today? Is there anyone who knows
> how to comb the snakes out of the hair of our most
> recalcitrant warring leaders so we can have peace? Have
> we forgotten the lessons of the past?  Why is America
> at war?
>
> We are all like Atotarho. We are living in a time of
> violence and destruction.  We all have snakes in our
> hair.  Our minds are crooked and we are wasting our
> energies.  But we all have power.  We have the power to
> look after each other, to comb the snakes from each
> other's hair, to straighten aching bodies and to learn
> the soothing songs of peace.
>
> There is no need to go back to the time before Atotarho
> learned the Great Law of Peace.  We must bring back the
> principles that Atotarho learned.
>
> We must not be afraid. We must take on the
> responsibility of making sure that all people are cared
> for. We must give up our positions of dominance and
> remember our connectedness to all people and all
> things. We must remember the small condolence where we
> wipe our eyes with the softest cloth so we can look at
> reality.  We must take an eagle feather and gently wipe
> our ears so we can listen and hear what is really being
> said.  We must drink pure water to soothe our rasping
> throats so our words are soft and clear, without sharp
> edges.
>
> We must ask ourselves, are we ready to hear the message
> of Deganawida? Are we strong enough to learn from the
> past?  Surely we have suffered enough. The mountains
> are cracking.  The rivers are boiling.  The fish are
> turning with their bellies up.  We must leave the
> millennia of death and destruction behind.  We can link
> our hands together in peace.  We have the United
> Nations already, let's use it!
>
> We can make the world safe and beautiful for everyone.
> The Indigenous spirit can come back. Our brothers and
> sisters from all parts of the world can teach us. We
> can burn our good medicines and call on Creation, so
> Deganawida's message returns like a light from the
> east. We can respect each others' differences and live
> in harmony together.
>
> Now is the time for us to take responsibility for our
> future and the future generations.  We must use our
> voices and speak up!  Act out! We are not powerless.
> We have to let people know that we all have the power
> to do something about this conflict and
> misunderstanding!
>
>     Kahn-Tineta Horn, Kanienkehaka (Mohawk) Mother, Grandmother
>     Kahente Horn-Miller, Kanienkehaka (Mohawk) Mother
>     Karonhioko'he, daughter
>     Kokowa, daughter
>     Grace Lix-Xiu Woo, Aunt, Sister, Ally
>     Ekiyan, Mi'kmaq Son, Ally
>     Orakwa@paulcomm.ca
>     Kahntineta@hotmail.com
>
> --
>
> ============================================================================
> cyberjournal home page:
>     http://cyberjournal.org
>
> "Zen of Global Transformation" home page:
>     http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/
>
> QuayLargo discussion forum:
>     http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ShowChat/?ScreenName=ShowThreads
>
> cj list archives:
>     http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj
>
> newslog list archives:
>     http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog
>
> subscribe addresses for cj list:
>     cj-subscribe@cyberjournal.org
>     cj-unsubscribe@cyberjournal.org
> ===========================================================================
>
> +++
>
> Jay Fenello, Internet Services
> http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765
> http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Partnering
> http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "Our enemies are never as bad as we make them out to be,
> and we are never as good as we think" - Hans Morgenthau

P.S.  Below is the diverse face of France, pl
==========

Subject:
        The French reaction
   Date:
        Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:34:44 -0800
   From:
        "E. Prugovecki" <prugovecki@laguna.com.mx>
     To:
        wsn@csf.colorado.edu



Some of the US media have been recently accused the French of being "ungrateful"
when refusing to support US
warmongering. Here is the a French response, presented with typical French wit.

E. Prugovecki


     Merci For the French Correction


     By Justin Vaisse
     Saturday, February 15, 2003; Page A33

     As a Frenchman, I have certainly learned a lot about my country in recent
weeks.

     "How dare the French forget," read a headline in the New York Post on
Monday, on a page with a photograph
     of a military cemetery in Normandy.

     I apologize for being so ungrateful. It's just that I learned in school
that France and Britain declared war on Nazi
     Germany in September 1939, while the United States was enacting
isolationist laws, and that America entered the
     war two years later, only after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. But now I see
that was just Gallic propaganda. How
     could I have believed it?

     I now know what really happened: Franklin D. Roosevelt felt that a country
with more than 300 kinds of cheese
     was worth liberating, and for the love of France he came to our rescue.
Joseph Stalin came to the same
     conclusion, but -- fortunately for us -- he was slower and had to stop in
Berlin.

     Meanwhile, Lafayette and Rochambeau were a different story altogether: They
apparently came here not to help
     Americans gain their independence but merely to execute the crass
realpolitik maneuvers of Louis XVI.

     I have also been interested to learn that my hesitation in endorsing war in
Iraq is mainly a product of my nostalgia
     for France's past glory. As Thomas Friedman writes in the New York Times,
being weak after being powerful is
     a terrible thing. Perhaps he is right. I had been deluded into thinking
that my doubts about military intervention in
     Iraq had something to do with fears of civilian casualties, the use of
weapons of mass destruction, increasing
     terrorism or Middle East instability. But apparently we French are really
just longing for the time of Napoleon or
     Louis XIV.

     In those good old days, we could unilaterally invade a Muslim Arab country,
say Egypt or Algeria, and create a
     regional mess just because we felt like it. Now, because we can't do that
anymore, we try to bother the United
     States. The fact that war is opposed by large majorities in most other
countries around the world, which have no
     such nostalgia complexes, must be pure coincidence.

     Another thing I had failed to appreciate was how isolated we French are.
It's painful to admit, but only 73 percent
     of the French people oppose a war without a second U.N. resolution. We
definitely cannot pretend we speak for
     the rest of the world, as war is opposed by 82 percent of the European
Union (84 percent of Brits), and in other
     parts of the world, let's say South America, it's more in the range of 90
percent. So we should shut up. And we
     should also admit that our isolation makes us insignificant, though I still
can't understand why publications such as
     the Weekly Standard keep talking about us so much. Maybe it has something
to do with our food.


     Now that I have admitted everything, I should own up to the true motivation
of our foreign policy: We are
     protecting commercial interests, especially oil. For the harsh truth, just
check out the International Monetary
     Fund's Web site:

     From 2000 to 2001, our exports to Iraq jumped from 0.12 percent to 0.2
percent of our total exports! Never
     mind that we'll never realize our oil contracts with Iraq or get our debt
repaid so long as Saddam Hussein stays in
     power, and don't believe anyone who tells you that a truly mercantilist
France would help America attack Iraq
     and share the spoils afterward. Some even make the bizarre claim that if
America wanted to enhance its oil
     interests, it would join France and oppose the war in the United Nations so
as to keep oil flowing from Iraq at
     current levels (America is the first buyer of Iraqi oil). But not too much
oil, as this would lower the price to a point
     where it would be bad for Texas producers and Alaska drilling. But I take
that as typically far-fetched Gallic
     perfidy.


     My situation is now very difficult: When I talk to my former French friends
on the phone, they claim they oppose
     the war for the same reasons about 40 percent of Americans do. They claim
that they find their own arguments
     expounded in American newspapers by American statesmen; namely, that war
would help Osama bin Laden
     recruit new followers, that war would trigger more terrorist attacks at
home and abroad, that containment can
     work, and that it would be hard to impose stability -- let alone democracy
-- on Iraq, especially when you look at
     Afghanistan.

     But I don't listen to them anymore. After all, they're French. I know
better. I have become an American.

     Justin Vaisse is a visiting fellow at the Center on the U.S. and France at
the Brookings Institution.

     © 2003 The Washington Post Company