March 14, 2003 -- Our School of Public Health Needs to Take a Stand on War

 

 

An American Public Health Association anti-war member wrote this for
the University of Washington School of Public Health magazine.



Our
School of Public Health Needs to Take a Stand on War
Amy Hagopian


Our country is marching off to war.  The military strategy planned
against Iraq is being called "shock and awe"-in the opening two days
of the war, we will drop cruise missiles on Baghdad every four
minutes, day and night, for 48 hours.  The idea is to destroy water,
power, and the will to resist.[1]  Fought in this way, the war can be
brutally short, not taxing the attention span or patience of the
American people.

Half of
Iraq's population of 24 million is children.  Bombing Baghdad
means bombing children.
  We have not ruled out the use of nuclear
weapons,[2] and we have not shied away from the use of depleted
uranium materiel, despite the disastrous health consequences in the
last Gulf War for both our soldiers and the citizens of Iraq.[3] The
United Nations estimates a war will result in 500,000 direct and
indirect casualties.[4]

Our National Security Strategy defines terrorism as "premeditated,
politically motivated violence perpetrated against innocents" (9/02,
p.5).
In the opening days of the
Iraq war, there will be more death,
mutilation and misery, brought about by us, the mightiest military
power in the world's history, than all the combined terrorist acts
carried out by private criminals in the last 20 years.

Wendell Berry[5] says: "One cannot reduce terror by holding over the
world the threat of what it most fears."  He notes we are the ones who
have taught the world that the best economic system for all is the one
that serves
U.S. corporate greed, wastefulness, and selfishness at the
expense of staggering poor country indebtedness at usurious interest
rates. These policies are reaping their rewards in acts small and
terrifyingly large, and won't cease with the bombing of
Baghdad.

We are a school of public health.  We train public health workers.  We
do public health research.  We work with public health officials to
improve the practice of public health.  And yet, as a formal body, we
are sitting silent while our government plans a vicious assault on the
public's health in
Iraq.

In contrast, more than 500 staff, students and alumni of the
London
School
of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine published an open letter in
the BMJ opposing war.  "Health professional worldwide care for the
casualties of war," the statement says.  "We accept this
responsibility.  However, it is also our responsibility to argue for
the prevention of violence and peaceful resolution of conflict."[6]

There have been three anti-war marches in
Seattle since last fall.  I'
ve
seen a number of my U.W. public health colleagues at those events.
But individual participation in these events is not sufficient for a
school of our stature and with our collective responsibilities. We
speak out on health problems-the need for exercise, women's hormone
problems, internal fat--why do we shy away from this most pressing
current health problem?

Robert Byrd spoke to his colleagues in the Senate recently (
2/12/03),
imploring them to act.  "To contemplate war is to think about the most
horrible of human experiences.Yet this Chamber is, for the most part,
silent-ominously, dreadfully silent. We stand passively mute."

In its 2002 resolution against war as "an undertaking that runs
counter to the health and well-being of people," the American Public
Health Association quotes Nazi war criminal Hermann Goering: "The
people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.  That is
easy.  All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and
denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism.  It works the same in
any country."

It is time for us to work together on this as faculty, alumni,
students, and friends of the
U.W. School of Public Health.  We need to
move beyond individual participation towards collective action.  There
are few restrictions to the actions we can take in the defense of
public health, other than our own timidity.


We could: march together under a snazzy public health banner at the
next demonstration, write a resolution for publication in local press
and national journals, collect signatures in
Red Square using that
public health banner we made for the march, and invite our elected and
appointed public officials to take anti-war stands.

The
School of Public Health is uniquely positioned among all the
schools and departments on campus to provide leadership here, because
it grows so naturally from our mission: to promote better health and
prevent illness and injury.

Amy Hagopian, MHA, is a 1983 graduate of the UW master of health
administration program and is now working on her PhD.  She has spent
the last 15 years working on rural health in the WWAMI region for the
UW School of Medicine, and is an assistant clinical professor in the
Dept of Health Services, co-teaching a class on community development.





[1] This Pentagon strategy is attributed by news sources to designer
Harlan Ullman, Senior Associate Center for Strategic and International
Studies (CSIS)
[2]  Arkin. William M. The Nuclear Option in
Iraq--The U.S. Has
Lowered the Bar for Using the Ultimate Weapon.
January 26 2003 - L.A.
Times
[3] Birchard, K.  Does
Iraq's depleted uranium pose a health risk?
The Lancet 351;
2/28/98.
[4]
December 10, 2002, United Nations:
(http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/casi/info/undocs/war021210.pdf)
[5] in a wonderful essay in the New York Times (
2/09/03).
[6] Stephens, Carolyn.  BMJ 2003; 326: 220.