A Peoples' Strategy For The Gulf Crisis
 
The Gulf crisis appears to pose a dilemma: go to war or submit to aggression. 
However, neither of these options will resolve the conflict nor help to build
a just and peaceful world.

War would be disastrous.  Thousands of people and other living beings would
die; huge areas of the natural environment would be devastated; the city of
Kuwait could be reduced to rubble; and much Middle Eastern infrastructure
(including oil facilities) would be destroyed.  Moreover, war would not
achieve the West's implied and stated goals: to retain its influence over
Middle Eastern affairs and a secure supply of oil; it may not even 'liberate'
Kuwait.

However, there is a third strategy that does not entail war or submission.  It
is a strategy entailing nonviolent sanctions and problem-solving processes. 
It is a strategy by which ordinary people can compel governments to act in
accordance with our needs.  Some elements of this approach are outlined below.

Aim
To address the needs of all parties to the Middle East conflict without
further violence or loss of life using nonviolent sanctions and interactive
analytical problem-solving processes.

Goals
1. To humanize all participants in the Middle East conflict.
2. To be truthful about the underlying causes of the Gulf crisis.
3. To build a global consensus against war in the Middle East.
 
Recognize Underlying Causes
The stated grievances of the Iraqi government (including their historical
claim to Kuwaiti territory and the dispute over oil fields and prices) reflect
deep-seated human needs for identity, recognition, participation, security and
distributive justice.

Recent research clearly demonstrates that there are certain universal human
needs concerned with survival and development which humans will and must
pursue.  It is the imperative to satisfy these needs which finally determines
behaviour.  The frustration of human needs - which repression, threat and
coercion cannot eliminate - is a sufficient explanation of political
instabilities, including war.  Attempts to resolve conflict fail unless this
is taken into account.

Historically, the Middle East has suffered the adverse effects of Western
intervention in the region; this has seriously compromised their sense of
identity and security.  These underlying needs must be addressed if the
conflict is to be resolved in a manner that is self-sustaining.  The tactic of
seizing territory, for instance, masks the goal of security.
 
Nonviolent Sanctions
We should use nonviolent sanctions to get all governments to the
problem-solving table.  Nonviolent sanctions are very powerful - as the
removal of the Shah of Iran, Marcos of the Philippines and various governments
of Eastern Europe all demonstrated.  These sanctions need time to have full
impact.  We should:
 
1. Get involved in ongoing nonviolent campaigns (with actions such as vigils,
demonstrations, war tax resistance, conscientious desertion and oil company
boycotts) in order to compel a Western military withdrawal and willingness to
talk.
2. Get involved in ongoing nonviolent campaigns to ultimately compel Western
governments and multinational corporations to stop their continuing
intervention in the Middle East.
3. Retain the embargo on Iraqi and Kuwaiti oil; or, buy the oil and put the
proceeds into a special account to be released when the dispute is settled.
Either of these options provides a strong
economic incentive for Iraq to talk.
4. Boycott all Iraqi (non-oil) exports.
5. Stop selling weapons to the Middle East to make profits.
6. Organize the presence of nonviolent peacekeeping teams (such as the Gulf
Peace Team) in the Middle East to resist military aggression and human rights
abuses committed by troops.
 
Conflict Resolution Framework
An appropriate problem-solving process would rely on an international
facilitation panel using a 'no-fault' approach:
 
1. Analyze the situation to reveal underlying motivations (eg. Iraqi objection
to the colonial division of the Middle East).
2. Define the separate goals of each party clearly.
3. Differentiate negotiable interests (eg. the degree of Western military
influence in the Gulf region) from non-negotiable needs.
4. Distinguish tactics (eg. seizure of territory) from goals (eg. the needs
for identity, security and distributive justice).
5. Provide an opportunity to assess the cost of ignoring, suppressing or
failing to promote non-negotiable needs (eg. the cost of the continuing
failure to respond to the need of ordinary Arabs - not just Western-oriented
elites - to participate in Middle Eastern political processes).
6. Discover options which meet the needs of all (eg. universal recognition of
the Palestinian and Israeli identities).
7. Assist the parties to deduce what alterations in structures (eg. redrawn
Middle Eastern borders), institutions (eg. democratisation of processes of
governance) and policies (eg. Western energy conservation measures to reduce
reliance on oil) are required to enable the fulfilment of these respective
needs.
 
Act With Goodwill And Provide Assurances
1. Support the transport of humanitarian items to Iraq.
2. Work for no preconditions to discussions.
3. Indicate support for the discussions to include all outstanding Middle East
issues such as the Israeli occupations, the Palestinian issue and the
democratic status of Kuwait.
 
The Role Of The Gulf Peace Team
The Gulf Peace Team is an international multi-cultural group of nonviolent
activists responsible for establishing peace camps between opposing military
forces along the border between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

The purpose of this nonviolent intervention is to encourage greater community
discussion and participation in the effort to build a global consensus against
war in the Middle East and to encourage all parties to the current conflict to
seek a nonviolent resolution of it.  It is also intended to nonviolently
resist military aggression by any party.

Robert J. Burrowes
P.O. Box 167, North Carlton, Victoria 3054, Australia
Email - igc:peg:burrowes
Telephone: + 61 3 387 339