Protests over, antiwar activists look for new focus - Critical views of many persist
By Jeff Donn, Associated Press, 5/27/2003 BOSTON GLOBE
CAMBRIDGE -- The war is over in Iraq, but Reyko Shiraishi's heart is not at peace.
Outwardly, things are much the same in her life as before the war. No more antiwar vigils, forums, or protests. She has returned to her gardening and quiet routines of retirement.
But sadness again darkens the eyes of Shiraishi, 73, of Brookline, who spent 3 1/2 years in American internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II. Like many who objected to this latest war, she carries away a sense of failure -- protests didn't prevent the fighting -- and dejection over hardships in postwar Iraq.
''I feel so discouraged by what our country has done,'' said Shiraishi, a former schoolteacher. ''We `won the war,' but I personally feel defeated.''
Earlier this year, hundreds of thousands of Iraq war opponents like Shiraishi hoisted signs, waved banners, marched, and blocked streets and federal offices in dozens of American cities coast to coast. It was the widest outpouring of domestic protest since the Vietnam War.
Since early April, when American forces took control of Baghdad, the booming voice of protest has subsided to a murmur.
What has become of the peace movement? Did protesters come to see the war as more justified when they learned more of Saddam Hussein's oppression? Did the relatively quick collapse of the regime relieve their fears of military and civilian casualties?
The short answer is that minds were not changed, according to an Associated Press sampling of war opponents' postwar views.
The AP spoke with 20 people from Maine to California who had opposed the war, from protest leaders to objectors who never went to a single demonstration. Included was a panel discussion at the regional headquarters of the American Friends Service Committee, an arm of the pacifist Quaker church, in Cambridge. The interviews did not represent a scientific survey sample.
In their comments, those interviewed struck some common themes. Many profess to feel personally changed by the war, which they view as a history-making act of aggression, a brutish projection of American military and corporate might, and an embarrassing flouting of international opinion.
Many acknowledge feeling powerless and weary after standing up against a military campaign that rolled over both Iraqi defenses and the antiwar movement. However, many are already rechanneling their energy into other social causes or party politics, often with a mind to unseating President Bush in next year's election.
''Has my passion diminished? It's not focused in the same direction. I would say it's focused on the next election and regime change at home,'' said Donna Francescani, 35, a lawyer in Bethesda, Md.
She has begun attending campaign events for Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat. He hasn't taken the strongest antiwar stand of all presidential candidates, but his big asset, in her mind, is simply that she thinks he can beat Bush.
Some of the calm on the antiwar front is perhaps natural. The immediate crisis seems to have passed. Many peace activists had been driving themselves hard since the September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. They simply needed a break.
Gordon Clark was sometimes putting in 50-hour weeks, or more, as national coordinator of the Iraq Pledge of Resistance. Last week, he was vacationing in California with his wife. ''One of the things that I've tried to do as much as possible during vacation is ignore current events,'' he said.
Annie Bartos, 25, a coordinator for the Boston-area group United for Justice with Peace, was left with a deeper cynicism about government. ''They're not listening, and it's getting harder to stay optimistic,'' she said. Yet the explosive growth of the peace movement earlier this year is a consolation to the war's opponents. Anna Hendricks, a 21-year-old Cambridge dance teacher, said the war gave her the chance to connect with activists from the Vietnam era and other movements.
Peace Action, a large national group, has launched the Campaign for a New Foreign Policy, refocusing on international human rights, arms control, and cooperation. It has also joined in placing get-out-the-vote ads in advance of the presidential election.
''It may be quieter out there, but the groups aren't fading away. They're looking toward the future,'' said Scott Lynch, a spokesman for Peace Action.
In Montpelier, Andrea Stander, 50, who works for an arts group, has contacted the presidential campaign of Democrat Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor. She is attracted by his opposition to the war. ''I certainly have a greater sense of urgency. I feel that we are facing an unprecedented crisis, at least in my lifetime,'' she said.
Many war opponents have kept abreast of Iraq's occupation, too, and say the United States should turn over control to the United Nations or an international coalition. Many find vindication for their antiwar stance in what they see as a country unhinged.Frances H. Jarvis, a staffer at American Friends Service Committee in Cambridge, finds other justification for her antiwar stand in the occupation: ''The lack of proof that weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq confirms my belief that the war was built on lies.''Some war objectors have felt alarm at recent reports of mass graves of Hussein's enemies and outright satisfaction in his fall.
But many say the war was too high a price and the wrong way to set things right. Alex Liazos, a sociology professor at Regis College in Weston, said, ''Saddam may be out, but what's happening is even worse.''
boston.com |
