To the Editor:
Following Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's statement that the US is anticipating civilian casualties in the course of military action, I would like to draw public attention to Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The article reads: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person." What the article means is that each individual, "without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status" (as the Declaration also states), is entitled to his or her own life, and that the decision of what to do with it lays only and exclusively in his or her hands. If we uphold Article 3, then, American attacks that will cause the death of innocent civilians will disrespect the right to life of those innocent Afghani citizens - making those very same attacks illegal and immoral.
I have only respect for those soldiers and individuals that have chosen to risk their life in the attempt to bring those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks to justice. That is a brave and noble decision. They have the right and freedom to make such decision - to pursue justice at the risk of losing one's own life - in accordance with Article 3. However, if we want to fight terrorism effectively, and make Afghanistan a better nation, should we not start doing this by granting innocent Afghani the same rights that we have? And do we think that an innocent Afghani would be willing to lose his life as 'collateral damage' of the US attacks? I think not. Yet, what scares me the most is that we don't even care to ask.
Bernardo Monzani
Liberal Arts ' 01
