This attack on Iraq is morally wrong - and I was involved in the last one

Hastily devised, externally imposed, and short-sighted Western solutions have led from one problem to another in the Middle East throughout the last century. Both Saddam and Osama bin Laden received substantial support from the US in earlier ill-conceived strategies.

People in the Middle East continue to be outraged at the meddling by Western governments in regional affairs when it suits their own interests (like the economics of oil), and their indifference and intransigence in matters of justice (like the restoration of a Palestinian homeland).

Serious attention to demands for Israeli compliance with UN resolutions unfulfilled by them, which could restore justice to the Palestinian people, would draw the sting out of the tail of Islamic extremism.

The US has weapons of 'massive' destruction that will be able to bomb Iraq back into the dark ages but real peace requires more than military might. Peace will be achieved only when the root problems of justice in economic, social and political terms are addressed.

It is morally scandalous that inestimable billions of dollars will be found to fund this conflict and its aftermath, when these could have been more fruitfully directed to health and human development in the poorest countries of the world where the seeds of discontent are sown.

Strategically, we need more thinking and action directed toward the ways in which we can provide justice to peoples, and nurture and sustain long-term peace, rather than the prevailing short-sightedness of seeking military solutions, which have little prospect of lasting very long.

It is my great fear that unilateral action against Iraq by the US and allies like Australia will greatly swell the ranks of Islamic fundamentalists and unleash forces of evil that it would be extremely difficult to contain. What is needed in the Middle East is justice, legitimacy and integrity. The majority of Islamic people expect these just as much as we do. These are the non-negotiable prerequisites for peace.

The legitimacy of the so-called "war on terrorism", which so far has involved the pursuit of the al Qa'ida network, is to my mind based on a just response to acts of terror perpetrated by an aggressor who seeks to engage us in indiscriminate conflict. A war on Iraq is not in this same category, and can be only tenuously linked to the war on terrorism.

Many media reporters are saying that war is now inevitable. This may be so in the mind of the US administration, but it doesn't need to be. Despite the morally reprehensible conduct of the regime of Saddam Hussein, no ethical justification has yet been established for engaging in a pre-emptive war against the people of Iraq. None of the just war criteria have yet been satisfied. No Iraqi, US, British or Australian soldier should have to shed their blood over the oil fields of Iraq until they are. Continued containment of Saddam or his surgical removal - short of invasion - remain valid options.

If a 'just' case should emerge for conflict to be initiated by us, please God it would employ only a 'just' and discriminate use of force.

I hope the Australian people, and Christians particularly, will have the courage and wisdom to continue to speak their minds to their politicians on this issue, and not just assume we must follow the US line and timetable. World peace is at stake here. Our integrity as a nation is at stake.

History will judge us by our actions and inactions, but more significantly God too will judge us.

We may well ask whether God would want us to be bombing Baghdad in a few weeks' time, or pursuing other means instead to achieve peace. I suspect his answer might echo of the words of Micah, that we should 'do [only] what is just, and show mercy' (Micah 6:8).

© Catholic Leader