[R-G] A Stirring in the Nation (NYT Editorial on Anti-War Protests)

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

A rarity in the _New York Times_ -- a favorable _editorial_ about 
anti-war protests and the anti-war movement in general, going so far 
as to state that "[m]illions of Americans who did not march share the 
concerns" and that "[t]hese protests are the tip of a far broader 
sense of concern and lack of confidence in the path to war that seems 
to lie ahead."  The Jan. 18, 2003 protests in D.C., San Francisco, 
and other cities in the USA and the rest of the world did serve to 
make an impact on the mass media (many other local and national 
newspaper articles and TV coverage of the protests were largely 
favorable and placed prominently).

*****   _New York Times_ Editorial   January 20, 2003

A Stirring in the Nation

A largely missing ingredient in the nascent debate about invading 
Iraq showed up on the streets of major cities over the weekend as 
crowds of peaceable protesters marched in a demand to be heard. They 
represented what appears to be a large segment of the American public 
that remains unconvinced that the Iraqi threat warrants the use of 
military force at this juncture.

Denouncing the war plan as an administration idée fixe that will 
undermine America's standing in the world, stir unrest in the Mideast 
and damage the American economy, the protesters in Washington massed 
on Saturday for what police described as the largest antiwar rally at 
the Capitol since the Vietnam era. It was impressive for the obvious 
mainstream roots of the marchers - from young college students to 
grayheads with vivid protest memories of the 60's. They gathered from 
near and far by the tens of thousands, galvanized by the possibility 
that President Bush will soon order American forces to attack Iraq 
even without the approval of the United Nations Security Council.

Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators 
as a clear sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel 
obliged to salute the administration's plans because of the shock of 
Sept. 11 and that many harbor serious doubts about his march toward 
war. The protesters are raising some nuanced questions in the name of 
patriotism about the premises, cost and aftermath of the war the 
president is contemplating. Millions of Americans who did not march 
share the concerns and have yet to hear Mr. Bush make a persuasive 
case that combat operations are the only way to respond to Saddam 
Hussein.

Other protests will be emphasizing civil disobedience in the name of 
Martin Luther King Jr. But any graphic moments to come of 
confrontation and arrest should be seen in the far broader context of 
the Capitol scene: peaceable throngs of mainstream Americans came 
forward demanding more of a dialogue from political leaders. Mr. Bush 
and his aides, to their credit, welcomed the demonstrations as a 
healthy manifestation of American democracy at work. We hope that 
spirit will endure in the weeks ahead if differences deepen and a 
noisier antiwar movement develops. These protests are the tip of a 
far broader sense of concern and lack of confidence in the path to 
war that seems to lie ahead.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/20/opinion/20MON2.html>   *****
-- 
Yoshie

* Calendar of Events in Columbus: 
<http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>
* Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/>
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>
* Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio>
* Solidarity: <http://solidarity.igc.org/>