Document:LNC Minutes 11-12 August 1990: Difference between revisions

=37. RESOLUTION CONCERNING SAUDI ARABIA:=  

 

Ahmad moved:

Saddam Hussein's intervention into the internal affairs of Kuwait by rolling tanks across its border has outraged the world as an act of naked aggression. Any such military incursion not required for the defense of a  nation's territorial integrity must be soundly condemned by all who believe in justice. Accordingly, and in line with our Party platform's  strong  and    consistent opposition to foreign interventionism,  including  the  affairs  of  the  Middle  East,  the National  Committee  of  the  Libertarian  Party  condemns  the  Bush

Administration decision to send American troops to Saudi Arabia and calls for their immediate recall.

A military blockade is an act of war. American youth should not be sacrificed to defend monarchies, nor artificial national boundaries drawn by a previous generation of British politicians.  Iraq's marauding despot is no direct threat to America's security.  His pernicious cause is only advanced by the insertion of American troops into the present turmoil. The residents of the region are the best defenders of their own interests against Saddam Hussein's aggression. The Baath movement,  Hussein's so-called Arab Socialism, will fall the same way that the Socialist movements of Europe are falling  -- from the moral and economic bankruptcy of Socialism.

The Republican and  Democratic politicians supported Iraq after its unprovoked invasion of  Iran, subsidizing Iraqi grain purchases with American taxpayers' money.  They continue to fund aid to countries guilty of occupation and annexation comparable to that perpetrated by Iraq. The hypocrisy of their alleged concern over the most recent Iraqi aggression is an embarrassment to the founding principles of the United States.

The Libertarian Party stands ready and eager to lead America back to a commitment to those principles of free trade and friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none.

Thies explained that he had an alternative text that was organized around platform planks.

Neale moved to change "a previous generation of British politicians" to  "previous generations of foreign politicians"; there was no objection.

Discussion included the following points: the linkage at the beginning between opposition to Iraq's action and to US action may be confusing, we need to address this issue as it may turn out be a major war, there are other aspects  of our Platform that apply to this situation and we should try to address all of them. Nathan suggested passing this as an official resolution and using Thies' text as a "policy statement" with which we could approach talk shows.

Givot, arguing that  there were little  things in the text  that could embarrass us and  that a simpler  resolution would be better, moved to delete the two  paragraphs beginning "A military blockade..." and "The Republican and Democratic politicians...", and to change, in the first paragraph, "Accordingly, and  in line with"  to "Notwithstanding  this act of war,  we reaffirm".  Ahmad objected that removal of the two paragraphs would eliminate the guts of the resolution.

Dasbach moved to divide Givot's motion;  there was no objection,  and the change to the first paragraph was considered first.  Thies moved to change "reaffirm"  to "support", and to rearrange the sentence so that "Libertarian National  Committee" appeared in place of the first "we",  making appropriate adjustments for grammar;  there was no objection to these changes.  The motion to amend the first paragraph passed on a voice vote.

The motion to delete the two paragraphs failed on a voice vote.  The main motion to  adopt the resolution [Attachment FF] passed on a voice

Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait outrages us, the members of the Libertarian National Committee.  It is an act of naked aggression. It outrages us just as Hussein's invasion of Iran, his use of chemical weapons, and his threat of using weapons of mass destruction against the people of  Israel and the people of its occupied territories outrage us.

The question we address is what should be our response.  We remind ourselves of the first brave response to this invasion: the refusal by hundreds of Iraqi military officers to participate. Their courageous act cost them their lives but gained for them a  place of honor in history and in our hearts.

We know that many other brave men and women will resist  Iraqi aggression. Our concern is to be successful, minimizing the loss of innocent lives, and establishing the basis for a just and lasting peace.

As we meet,  the United States is deploying military forces in and around Saudi Arabia, joined by the military forces of other nations including NATO allies, the Soviet Union and various Arab countries. All of this is for the stated purpose of deterring an Iraqi invasion of Saudi Arabia.

Our platform clearly states that, while we condemn violations of the rights of Americans traveling abroad by foreign governments, we oppose any protection of  Americans abroad as an unjust tax-supported subsidy involving potential military intervention.  While we also condemn violations of human rights throughout the world, we oppose foreign intervention by the United States.  Our platform only supports the use of military force to protect the lives, liberty and property of the American people in the United States.

We, therefore, oppose the deployment of  U.S. military forces to  Saudi Arabia.

Our platform opposes the President's power to initiate military action. There must be no unilateral acts of military intervention by the Executive Branch.  We note that this deployment is not being conducted under any Senate-approved treaty, binding the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to mutual defense. It is being conducted as a unilateral act of the President.

We, therefore, oppose the action of the President to deploy military forces to Saudi  Arabia and demand that,  if he does not order a redeployment to the United States, the President ask the U.S. Congress for a declaration of war so this deployment would at least be conducted in a constitutional manner.  

Our platform opposes foreign aid, including guarantees of export-related loans. We note that U.S.  aid to Iraq, consisting of diplomatic and intelligence support during its recent war against Iran, and loan guarantees financing food exports to  Iraq, did not serve to placate  Hussein, but only emboldened him to continue his aggressive ways, and propped up his economically-bankrupt regime.

We, therefore, call upon the United States to end foreign aid programs. When will the  U.S. stop propping up dictators that oppress their own people and terrorize the people in neighboring countries? When will the U.S. stop the policies that drag us into one after another war in distant places all around the world?

Specifically, concerning the  Middle East, our platform calls upon the U.S. government to cease all interventions and opposes incorporation of the  Persian Gulf into the  U.S. defense perimeter.  Wars and insurrections have marked this tragic area of the world ever since European powers first intervened during the Crusades. It's unrealistic to think continued  Western or even global intervention is going to resolve the underlying problems. An end to interventionism is the best policy.

Our platform opposes  U.S. export policies that hold American farmers hostage to politics.  We note that the U.S.  used grain embargoes against Iran in support of Iraq during the recent Gulf War, and to no advantage.

On the other hand, our platform supports voluntary cooperation with economic boycotts. While boycotts have had mixed success when world Even though we support a boycott against Iraq,  we oppose a Naval blockade to enforce the boycott since a blockade is an act of war.

Our platform also clearly supports the rights of all people to defend themselves against tyranny,  including their right to revolt against oppressive governments.

We, therefore, support Arab resistance against Iraqi aggression and encourage voluntary support by freedom-loving people around the world.

We believe that Saddam Hussein's so-called  Ba'ath movement of Arab socialism will fail,  and that it would have already failed if it hadn't been propped up by aid from the United States,  Soviet  Union and, ironically, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

We must remind ourselves of the devastating cost of war. The state loves war.  War plays right into the hands of dictators such as Hussein. Libertarians support the right of self-defense, but making war shouldn't be an emotional first response.

Freedom works, and socialism doesn't. We can be patient and,  in the long run, we will not only surely win, but we will also win at the least cost in terms of lives as well as property.

Neale moved to replace the first paragraph concerning boycotts, beginning with "On the other hand",  by  "Our platform supports voluntary cooperation with economic boycotts.  Therefore,  while  we reject the U.N.  resolution calling for  a mandatory  boycott  against Iraq, we support a boycott against Iraq on a voluntary basis."

Givot moved to suspend the rules  to take up the question of presidential convention scheduling,  followed by approval of the new Program plank.  The motion passed on a 2/3 voice vote.