Americans are neither monsters nor fools, although many are very misinformed by the ocean of propaganda of the corporate media and of the government. Nevertheless, far more of us oppose the dictates of the ruling cabal than the mass media reports. This was confirmed by a telephone poll of U.S. senators’ and representatives’ offices reported on Pacifica Radio’s "Democracy Now" program on September 27, 2002. Calls, faxes, e-mails, and letters to these legislative offices were overwhelmingly opposed to the U.S. attacking Iraq, which the ruling clique is clearly intent on doing. This rapidly growing overt popular opposition is being largely, probably deliberately, ignored by the corporate mass media. Unfortunately we do not determine U.S. government policy. The U.S. is in reality not a democracy. It is a plutocracy, governed by money, by an oligarchy of the plutocrats. In this sense it is not our government.

      The ultimate goal of this call to action is to force the United States government to give up both its imperial drive for world domination and its role as universal enforcer of global capitalism. Determined, massive actions by the American people and/or international sanctions that impose economic isolation on the U.S. are probably the most effective means to do this. The focus of this call is, however, limited to possible international sanctions.

      Unless the nations of the world can be mobilized to stop the United States, or we, the people of the United States, act decisively, the lives of hundreds of millions ― or billions ― of people will continue being dehumanized and destroyed, and the biosphere itself ― the source of all life ― will continue to be ravaged. A brief list of possible international actions is proposed in what follows. If a campaign to implement such actions can be successfully initiated ― and that of course is the crucial question ― if it can, then there are ample grounds for believing that the goal will be achievable, not in the immediate future, but within a generation. A livable, humane, sustainable world can be salvaged for future generations.

      Assaults by the United States have never truly been against “Godless Communism”, never against “the plague of drugs”, and are not now against “international terror.” U.S. military and economic attacks ― currently increasing in intensity and ferocity ― have always been, and continue to be an ongoing war of the giant capitalists, by the giant capitalists and for the giant capitalists, an unending war against the poor people of the world (including those in the United States) to further enrich the already inordinately wealthy. This war ― and it is truly a war ― can be stopped only by the American people or by refusal of the rest of the world to continue supporting the American empire. This is a historic moment, because the U.S. is currently the unchallenged towering force imposing the system of global capitalism on the world.

      The brazen arrogance of George W. Bush Jr. and his cabal in their determination to lauch their next war against Iraq has brought world-wide condemnation. We have heard unusually harsh judgements of the war plans from Nelson Mandela, Kofi Annan, and Desmond Tutu, to mention only a few prominent persons who usually offer their criticisms in the most circumspect, diplomatic language. The thermometer that measures world rage at the U.S. government’s apparent blind determination to gain absolute global domination at whatever the cost to the rest of the world is getting to a high enough level to suggest the possibility of broad international support for the campaign here envisioned.

      It is well past time to abandon the pseudo-measures one hears discussed: supposed attempts to persuade the U.S. from attacking Iraq militarily, and to pressure Israel to stop its U.S.-backed slaughter of innocent Palestinian Arabs. Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, if not a tool of Washington, is completely subservient to the U.S. and must dance to the tune Bush whistles. Israel, a client nation-state, complies with any dictates from Washington. Thus, as an example of a pseudo-measure, Germany’s announcement (this past winter or spring) that it would not sell any more arms to Israel was totally ineffective. It did not even pretend to challenge the controlling power, U.S.-based capital, on whose behalf the Bush cabal carries out its bloody game! The idea of Germany voluntarily opening the market even wider to U.S. arms manufacturers by withdrawing (temporarily) from the competition in the sale of lethal weapons was a macabre joke!

      Unless the American people rise up forcefully to oppose the U.S. government, or enough of the world acts collectively by taking real actions (like those listed above), all the wringing of hands, the appeals to the governing politicians, the moral outrage, the massive demonstrations, the singing of songs for peace, all the puppets and drumming and dancing and so on will be for naught. The juggernaut will roll on, spilling ever more innocent blood and savaging the biosphere, on a scale that is already utterly terrifying. We are living (and many are perishing) in Armageddon, and our task must be to put an end to this catastrophe.

Action No. 1, United Nations relocation.
      Moving the headquarters of the United Nations to the southern hemisphere would have enormous symbolic importance. It would signify a total reversal of perspective. Not only because the most publicized and obvious focus of UN activity would shift to the southern hemisphere, but also because it would impact on the functioning of the organization itself. Instead of UN personnel living amidst the wealth and enjoying the personal privileges, the rich selection of fine dining, museums, concerts, opera, art galleries, theatre, libraries and universities, fancy expensive psychiatric treatment, medical expertise, etc. that New York City offers them, they would live in an environment that provided less diversion from the real misery in which most of the world’s people are forced to subsist. It ought to be their task to focus more of their energies on ending that misery, and less on their positions in the UN bureaucracy and their personal prestige within the organization.

      There is, in fact, no compelling reason why UN headquarters should be maintained as a single centralized compound. It was, of course, set up that way initially, and placed in its majestic palatial architectural structures in New York City in order to give the United States major control over the organization. Even there, however, most of the employees interact face-to-face on a daily basis with only a small fraction of the personnel, those who work in the same department. And with modern communication technology it is entirely feasible to have different parts of the organization working at geographically separate locations from one another. It might be preferable to have various regional centers, for example one in Africa, one in southern Asia, one in Latin America, one in the Middle East, one in the western Pacific. Groups of nations in a given region might be more truly united in their goals than is now the case for the entire UN, because they face many of the same problems, which are somewhat different than those faced by nations in other regions. Possibly it would be preferable to have, for each region, its own secretariat, its own secretary general, etc.

Actions Nos. 2 and 3, cutting diplomatic contacts.
      Implementation of the call for nations to close U.S. embassies and consular offices in their territories, and simultaneously to declare that U.S. officials are persona non grata in their countries and must leave at once would serve not only to isolate the United States diplomatically but also would go a long way towards eliminating the enormous network of clandestine terrorist activities that operate under so-called diplomatic cover. There is every reason for nations to wish to prevent agents of the U.S. military, the C.I.A., the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, and other U.S. terrorist agencies, among which is the state department itself, from operating in their countries. It’s interesting to note that Cuba, a nation long targeted by the U.S., recently considered closing the U.S. Interests office in Havana. That proxy office for a U.S. embassy, if closed, would of course automatically eliminate any diplomatic privileges accorded to the personnel it now harbors.

Action No. 4, extending juridical accountability.
      The call upon governments and international jurisdictions to indict and prosecute C.I.A., F.B.I., State Department, U.S. military, etc. employees (present or former) who are or were engaged in promoting terrorist activities by the U.S. government or by other governments or paramilitary forces, simply advocates broadening the scope of international legal accountability to include all U.S. government agents involved in terrorist activities. Precedents for individual accountability are numerous, including the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals, the trials in Israeli courts of individuals involved in crimes against humanity, the trial in a special tribunal of Slobodan Milosevich, and others. In opposition to the United States, the United Nations recently established a permanent Internation Court of Justice, convincing evidence that there exists widespread, almost universal international support for supernational accountability for the most horrendous crimes.
      One of the most publicized and notorious of U.S. war criminals, Henry Kissinger, has been indicted in the Chilean courts and is being pressed by several suits to such an extent that his ability to travel has been impaired. Although still protected by the arrogant government he served, his guilt of unpardonable crimes, as that of Pinochet, is not in doubt in world opinion. Of course these two are only the tip of the iceberg. Bill Clinton and George Bush Senior, the latter along with his son, are right up there too. The roster of the guilty is vast. They should all be held accountable.

Action No. 5, refusing military access.
      Denying the U.S. any military presence on national territory, territorial waters or air space, is one of the most effective actions that nations can take. U.S. military power is established not only by “Fortress America”, the over-militarized homeland, but by the existence of numerous installations throughout the world. The ability of the U.S. to prepare and mount attacks against other countries relies, to a great extent, on its ability to deploy troops and war equipment to this vast network of “off-shore” facilities: airfields, storage depots, port facilities and so on, comprising a huge, aggressive military infrastructure on other nations’ land and territorial waters, and at times utilizing their air space, all of which are parts of the supposedly sovereign domains of these nations.

      Precedents already exist for denying the U.S. use of sovereign territories by other nations. Venezuela, targetted by the U.S. with a coup intended to overthrow its popular, democratic government, does not allow U.S. use of its territory for the war against the insurgency in neighboring Colombia. It remains an open question whether Saudi Arabia would allow the U.S. to use its territory to attack Iraq. Clearly, U.S. military operations based in China are unthinkable; they would not be allowed. Many other nations would likewise not permit U.S. military in their territories or air space. Every nation that truly wants to contribute to ending U.S. imposition of global terror should likewise deny any use of its territory to the U.S. armed forces.

Action No. 6, fossil fuel embargo.
      The oil and gas embargo would likely be the most immediately effective action of all those listed. However, it is unlikely to be the first action to be implemented, for several reasons. A cutoff of all petroleum (crude and refined), and natural gas shipments to the U.S. and its colonies would force a mammoth change in the U.S. economy. Nothing is more basic to the operation of a contemporary industrialized economy than fossil fuel. The most profligate use of fossil fuel is by the United States. The entire U.S. physical infrastructure has been built, and the culture of being wasteful of energy, as of all other resources has been cultivated, to an extent that makes it almost impossible for people in the U.S. to think rationally about how to secure a sustainable social order. The sole “solution”, and it is only a pseudo, short-term solution, that is conceived is to gain control of the world’s rapidly dwindling oil and gas reserves in the Middle East, in Latin America and Canada, in the Caspian Sea region, and so on. Control is secured by force: economically and militarily, brutally and unmercifully as U.S. power is extended to every corner of the globe. It is a mammoth thrust against any possibility of having a civilized world, a truly barbarian onslaught.
      Because of the towering dependence of the U.S. on fossil fuel imports, a severe cutoff would be tantamount to a body blow to its entire culture. Energy use consideration would have to become a top issue on the national agenda. Even those who now are in control in the U.S. would be forced to think of something else than their own short- and long-term profits and lust for power. It would become, overnight, a radically different “ball game.” A dream? Yes, of course it’s a dream. A dream of a world in which no children would be born to face lives of slavery, of torture, of terror, of premature death from preventable or easily treatable diseases, of being murdered because they want human dignity. But it is more than that. It is a dream that extends not only to the immediate generations to come, but to all generations until the end of time. And it is even more than that. Because if it is not realized, if global capitalism, spearheaded by the U.S. is not halted, the inevitable, unique outcome will be the utter destruction of our world, and quite possibly of all forms of so-called highly evolved animal species.

      I previously advocated such unified "break away" action for Latin America (see http://site.www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/Strate/Discus/2001-01-19Fox2.htm), which would qualify on all three counts: a population of over half a billion people, enormous natural resources, and a widespread desire among the bulk of the population to halt U.S.-led destruction of their national patrimonies and the dignity of their shared Latin American cultures and lives. If a high degree of unification were achieved among the nations of Latin America, with pacts of mutual aid and strengthened economic relations, and the strong sense of polarization between the U.S. and Latin America continues to develop, then the U.S. would be strongly inhibited from attacking any one of the Latin American nations, because the result would be to further isolate it and to strengthen the unity of the entire bloc opposing its dominance. Moreover, with such a development among the Latin American nations, there would be a strong incentive for nations in other continents, who also suffer from U.S. dominance, to affiliate themselves with the group and to enter into treaties of mutual aid with Latin American nations, and with one another.

      Quite apart from warding off a military attack from the United States, a move to isolate the U.S. economically, even by imposing “only” an oil and gas embargo, would have an enormous economic impact on all the countries that trade with the U.S. Because of the lopsided world economy, and the monetary pressures of the international financial institutions, dominated by the U.S., much production in Latin America is currently for export to the rich countries. For example, Mexico’s major trading partner is the United States. Production now exported to the U.S. would have to be redirected to other trading partners, consumed internally, or replaced by production of more useful products. And all the essential imports from the U.S. would have to be replaced either by imports from other countries or by producing them internally.

      Replacing the lopsided world economy (global capitalism) with an economy oriented towards mutual aid is of the greatest importance. Both the imposition of poverty upon billions of people and the destruction of the biosphere are direct results of the need for the capitalist system to produce profits, which it can do only by exploiting human labor and the resources of the natural world. The nations of Latin America (as well as all the world’s nations) ought, as a highest priority, become food self-sufficient.

      The benefits to be gained from moving in this direction are manifold, particularly if the mode of agriculture shifts, as it should for the best results, away from agribusiness geared to distant consumption towards smaller-scale local cultivation geared to local consumption. Adequate nutrition and freedom from chemical pollution of foods are possible with largely organic methods. Attention to soil enrichment with non-agrochemical inputs such as manures and vegetable wastes will also help to reverse soil loss and erosion. Reforestation also ought to be a major objective.

      Rebuilding ecological communities and human communities naturally go together. But the challenge here is enormous. To meet it in Latin America would take the energies, imaginations, planning, mutual education and communal wills of these half-a-billion-plus people. The effort needed is gargantuan, but not from any one person. And the goal, to avoid the Argentinization of all of Latin America, indeed of all the world, and to unshackle ourselves from global capitalism and U.S. imperialism is truly a civilizational project. It would involve not only revolutionary political and economic changes, but also freeing ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels, and in fact, to a substantial extent from near-total reliance on mechanical energy forms, shifting instead to greater use of metabolic energy, both human and animal. Bicycles instead of automobiles!

      As acknowledged earlier, a cutoff of oil and gas to the United States, although it would be the most dramatic and forceful act possible, is unlikely to be the first of the proposed actions. It’s interesting to note, however, that Iraq, which had already been targetted by the U.S. shortly after September 11, 2001, imposed an oil embargo in response to the U.S.-supported assault of the Israeli government on the Palestinians, but gave it up after one month when it failed to gain support from other oil-exporting nations. Calls for an oil embargo in other Middle East nations whose peoples were outraged at Israel’s attacks were ignored by those governments.

Actions Nos. 7 and 8, other proposed economic sanctions.
      These proposed actions aimed at preventing U.S.-based financial, industrial and commercial activities outside the U.S. are, like the proposed fossil fuel embargo, unlikely to be implemented at an early stage. However, imposition of these sanctions would also strike enormous blows to the U.S. economy, and their imposition deserves to be strongly advocated throughout the international arena.

      Although we cannot expect most governments to act by imposing sanctions against the U.S. in the immediate future, some might acquiesce to forceful popular demands of their citizens and adopt some sanctions. Others might be compelled by workers in their petroleum industries to agree to boycott fossil fuel exports to the U.S. We should remember the power of the working people. We should remember that the Shah of Iran, the local darling of the U.S., installed by the C.I.A. when it overthrew the elected government of Mossadegh and as faithful to the master as any lap dog, was finally removed by the concerted actions of the Iranian people, among whom the oil workers played a crucial role.

      Let’s start organizing and propagandizing for real, forceful actions. Among other effects, the impact, on the ruling class of the U.S., of a widespread international effort to begin sanctions could be far greater than even a million people going to Washington and calling upon the rulers to change course. But we should not count on influencing the U.S. ruling class. Rather, we should focus on allying our efforts with those of poor people everywhere, including those in the United States. The poor people of Venezuela might be the first to support joining anti-U.S. sanctions, in view of U.S. efforts to bring down their own elected, very popular government. Venezuela is one of the many countries being attacked by the United States for the benefit of global capitalism. We can of course expect immediate and widespread popular support for sanctions throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, and in most of Latin America and much of Africa.

      The urgency of stopping the assault of global capitalism on the world’s peoples and on the biosphere is so great that drastic measures are needed. The attack is headed by the United States, which must be stopped.