Shields alert: We must be better prepared next time

The deteriorating situation in Iraq and the loss of credibility in Westminster & Washington does not mean any slackening in the drive to war. On the contrary, as the crisis in Western geopolitical thinking becomes more acute, the desperation of Bush and Blair is likely to drive them into more military adventures, against Cuba, Syria, Iran,  North Korea, or anywhere else their global hegemony is threatened.

Yet the Human Shields movement is less prepared for action in defence of peace than we were at the end of January, when the first buses left London for Baghdad. And it was our lack of training and selection procedures then, our lack of self-discipline, our failure to attract thousands rather than hundreds to Baghdad, that resulted, ultimately, in the failure of our mission.

However, we learned some valuable lessons in Baghdad. The committee structure we set up was brilliant, and if we had not wasted so much time squabbling among ourselves and with our hosts about the exact nature of humanitarian sites, it could have provided the authorities with a valuable channel for liaison with us.

In any future threat of conflict, our probable hosts are likely to be even less tolerant of our idiosyncrasies than were the Iraqis. We need to demonstrate that when the chips are down we really mean business and have not merely transplanted gesture politics to their countries.

It is my suggestion that we reconstitute ourselves as, virtually, a peaceful rapid reaction force, to go immediately to any future trouble spots.

I propose that we set up the UK chapter of Human Shields and convene a founding conference to elect a properly accountable steering committee.

Such a conference would need to consider a number of issues, among which I would like to suggest the following (not an exhaustive list):

1. Should we make immediate contact with the most likely targets of Anglo-US aggression, to explain our aims and objectives, and to devise, as far as possible, streamlining of visa and other entry formalities? Transport to trouble spots could also be researched, in order to get the cheapest deal.
2. Should we set up a secretariat, including a fund-raising officer, with a view to setting up a full-time office?
3. Consultation with the International Solidarity movement, and others involved in such actions, in order to devise a mandatory training scheme, which all Shields should take.
4. Shields be asked to state which country they are prepared to go and protect, and be formed into affinity groups of no more than 12 persons each all committed to that country. Country-specific training on culture, climate, diet etc, could be made be mandatory for all affinity groups (problems in N. Korea are likely to be quite different from those in Iran, for instance).

What do you think? Please let me know.

Karl Dallas, 15 Church Green, Bradford, W. Yorks, BD8 7QN. Tel: +44(0)1274 823949

Mobile: +44(0)771 980 5903 Email: karldallas@blueyonder.co.uk