City Council members will vote tonight on an uncontested resolution opposing preemptive U.S. military action against Iran ¬— a measure, that, if passed, will put Oakland among a growing number of cities making public pronouncements about the nation’s foreign policy.
Berkely, Santa Cruz and Portland, Oregon are among the cities that have passed similar resolutions.
Oakland, Nov. 6th— City Council members will vote tonight on an uncontested resolution opposing preemptive U.S. military action against Iran ¬— a measure, that, if passed, will put Oakland among a growing number of cities making public pronouncements about the nation’s foreign policy.
Berkely, Santa Cruz and Portland, Oregon are among the cities that have passed similar resolutions.
The resolution, the city’s statement of support for leaders in Congress to “limit the war authority of the Bush administration with respect to encouraging any military action against Iran,” was introduced in October by Councilmember Jane Brunner and signed by Councilmember Nancy Nadel.
“Council members are joining the chorus of what constituents in this part of the country are saying about this international issue,” Nadel stated in a press release.
The resolution lists the major reasons the council is against war in Iran, in response to the consequences of the Iraq war.
“As the Iraq War has already cost the lives of more than 3,000 American soldiers, the serious maiming of over 26,000 American soldiers, and the death and maiming of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, as well as the cost of more $400,000,000,000 of American tax dollars, embarking on yet another military campaign against a much stronger adversary can do nothing but further exacerbate international tensions, endanger the lives and livelihoods of millions of people both here and abroad, and do little or nothing to address the most serious problems facing the American people and humanity…”
Nadel’s spokesperson said the question of why members of local government should concern themselves with foreign policy arises anytime the council addresses an issue broader than paving roads.
“The bigger picture is if we didn’t put all our tax dollars into the war, we’d have more money to put toward our infrastructural needs,” Nadel said in her statement.
Although the resolution is listed as a consent item — which designates it as uncontroversial and of low public interest, groups such as Code Pink and the Islamic Cultural Center of Northern California (ICCNC), are encouraging people through their Web sites to rally at tonight’s meeting in favor of its passage.
Karen Dolan, executive director of Cities for Progress at the Institute of Policy Studies in Washington DC, said local governments have been creating resolutions and practicing what she calls “municipal foreign policy” as far back as slavery times — but the advent of the Internet has empowered many more citizens and heavily increased involvement.
“It’s more than an isolated movement, it’s a national movement,” Dolan said about the Internet’s ability to encourage people to act. “They know that their voices will be heard beyond city hall.”
Dolan also said there were 300 similar resolutions against the Iraq war before the 2003 invasion and 400 against the Patriot Act. She added that the total sum of the populations of cities and states with resolutions demanding troop withdrawal from the Iraq war represents half of the American public.
“If the past is any indication of the future, as it usually is, this is something that will catch on like wildfire,” Dolan said about the newest batch of resolutions opposing war with Iran.
The Cities for Progress website offers an instructional tool kit to aid concerned constituents trying to influence their local lawmakers. The section titled “No War on Iran,” invites visitors to read sample resolutions, gives talking points and tips on media outreach, and offers news on Iran and the possibility of war.
Dolan said Washington DC’s city council resolution against war in Iran is pending.