Every day we can see in TV pacifist demonstrations in the Western countries against the war in the Gulf. It is a paradox but the same words together with anti-american and anti-semitic mottos use also members of fascist groups like "Pamyat" and United Workers' Front manifesting with portraits of Saddam "against the war" on the streets of Soviet cities...

It is very difficult for me to express my opinion about this war. Difficult because it can seem that this opinion will be in contradiction with my convictions of non-violent person and former conscientious objector. But I'm sure that this contradiction isn't a contradiction really.

I can't be with "pacifist" and "neutral" position expressed also by Irina. I'm completely accord that every war is a crime against humanity. And I want to cry when I think about men and women killed on the streets of Tel Aviv or Baghdad. But I'm also deeply convicted that it's not enough, simply to say: I'm against war, without any proposal. Look at the real political situation, look for a concrete exit, in other case your position will be like position of Pontius Pilath.

I can't understand the affinities of this police action by UN (Roberto is right) with war in Afghanistan, Falkland etc. I can't compare also Afghanistan and Falkland but it's already another question. The reality is: at first time in its history, the United Nations' Organization and Security Council can enforce its resolutions against burglar (I mean 18 resolutions since 660 till 678). Of course military decision of this problem is human tragedy. But half of year "Arab Stalin" (his own comparison) ignored all voices appealing to him. And half of year the shadow of Munich was lingering over the world.

I can't understand position of those who tells about "peace for all costs" in this situation. It seems me that they forget or ignore that peace is impossible while violence win. Peace - it's my belief - is not simply absence of warfare, peace is absence of violence. Is peace possible in Auschwitz? Or in occupied Kuwait? Or even in Iraq before Hussein's invasion on 2 of August? I can suppose that people who says now "no blood for oil" spit on the freedom of small Kuwait, like some "pacifists" spited on the human rights in the USSR and kissed with people from Soviet Peace Committee although Soviet army destroy Afghan villages. But it's difficult to imagine that they don't understand the danger for the world which proceeds from crazy dictator armed by chemical, biological and perhaps nuclear weapons!

From this point of view we face with the legal question about the aims of current war. Yes, resolution n.678 permits using of military power to liberate territory of Kuwait. But will be it right if multinational forces decide stop on the Iraqi border? Remaining dictator and military machine of Baghdad regime survive? Such limitation I think can promise only new potention of war in the region and may be in the whole world.

The UN was born as result of united nations' victory over Hitler. Multinational forces of anti-Hitler coalition bring democracy to West Germany, it's a fact. Of course I don't say that it was necessary invade in Iraq to deliver democracy in Baghdad. But now, after his aggression, Hussein adjudged his own regime. Must UN remember now the sense of its creation?

I don't write here about non-violent information war against Iraqi regime - in this question I'm completely accord with Roberto and his "War and peace".

Irina, it is not a war for "economic interests". It's a common action to prevent further aggression, other violations of international low by terrible dictatorship and much more deaths of innocent people (including people of Saudi Arabia who are now saved from occupation). I can't believe that you don't understand it!

This UN action basically differs to usually using of military force on the national basis which must go to the history.

And the last thing. This war is for more importance for us, living in the USSR, than our authorities improve us. Not only the future of new world outline, but also future of our newborn democracy is now resolving in the Gulf. Our military industry complex growled Hussein's regime for the last 10-15 years. This complex sustains today Hussein's lobby in our country. The military crack down of Baghdad regime and victory of new non-violent order in the world will intend the political crack down of the Soviet military industry complex.

Finishing this article I want to state: I don't know what about others but I choose position of active non-violence and not a "pacifist" attitude. I prefer to be strongly against violence (may be even by force) and not to stay "neutral" in front of violating of international low, peace and justice.