As President Bush tries to convince the nation and the world
that war against Iraq will be necessary if Saddam Hussein refuses
to disarm, 41 American nobel laureates, including the only two
living professors at UCLA to win the award, have signed a statement
urging the president to stay his hand.
A UC Santa Barbara faculty member organized the declaration and
released it Tuesday, warning against potential consequences of a
United States-led preventive strike against Iraq made without the
support of a broad international coalition.
Even in the event of a decisive military victory, the
signatories state “the medical, economic, environmental,
spiritual, political, and legal consequences … would undermine,
not protect, U.S. security and standing in the world.”
The University of California is heavily represented ““ 12
of the prize-winners who signed the document have UC affiliations.
Paul Boyer and Louis Ignarro ““ who were honored for their
achievements in chemistry and medicine respectively ““ have
appointments at UCLA. They could not be reached for comment
Tuesday.
The declaration comes as the question of a military attack
against Iraq is becoming more and more controversial. While Bush
enjoyed widespread domestic support for the war against Taliban and
al-Qaeda forces in Afghanistan following the Sept. 11 attacks,
public displays opposing war to remove Hussein from power have
proliferated.
In addition to massive demonstrations organized by activist
groups generally associated with the political left, other
academics have registered anti-war sentiment. Over 250 law
professors sent a petition to the U.S. Senate condemning war
against Iraq as a violation of international law.
Walter Kohn, who won the Nobel prize for chemistry and is a
professor at UC Santa Barbara, organized the effort to unite United
States Nobel laureates against war with Iraq. He described some of
the signatories as “absolute pacifists,” while others,
including himself, could possibly support collective action against
Iraq.
He said a war could be justified as a last resort, but any
military action taken without strong international backing would
have negative results.
“If the United States goes it alone, it will be very bad
for the United States … essentially the whole world would be
angry with them,” he said.
Daniel McFadden, a professor at UC Berkeley who won the prize in
economics, echoed Kohn’s concerns that unilateral war could
backfire against the United States.
“Trying to be another Rome or British Empire … is
destructive to the security of the American people,” he
said.
In addition to causing diplomatic alienation, Kohn said
unilateral action could provoke violent reprisals against the
United States.
“If the United States does go it alone, they will be by
far the most important targets of terrorism,” he said.
In his State of the Union address Tuesday, President Bush said
he would take evidence against Iraq before the United Nations, but
implicitly reaffirmed his administration may launch war without
U.N. approval.
“America’s purpose is more than to follow a process
… the course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of
others,” Bush said.
But McFadden cautioned against the temptations of a policy
independent of U.N. limitations.
“I would like to see (Bush) work through the U.N. I know
it’s a frustrating process,” he said.
McFadden said while adhering to U.N. procedures could limit the
United States’ sovereignty, this is not a strong argument
against multilateralism since Iraqi disarmament also compromises
Hussein’s sovereignty.
As far as whether war against Iraq is justifiable under any
circumstances, McFadden said a convincing case for or against war
has not been made. But making the decision multilaterally, he said,
is a better way to make such a profound choice.
“To go to war and have people killed … that’s not
something you do lightly,” McFadden said.