While not responsible for the old maxim of when in Rome do as the Romans, Cato’s message is still being interpreted by both military men as well as those who wish that international laws that govern warfare be followed as they see fit. That is, very much by imposing a code of ethics that rules one place - Rome, or Washington, or Moscow - upon another - be that Carthage, Baghdad or Grozny.
Cato found fame and glory during the period of the Punic Wars, when the upstarts of Carthage were soundly trounced, albeit after a struggle or two, by the Roman legions. Not to draw historical parallels between Desert Storm and Operation freedom or the Punic Wars, but in both cases “infidels” who “ignored” existing laws were dismissed by the reigning world power, and it took more than one effort to so. Another parallel - Romans had to consider the Greeks at the same time as a worthy “moral adversary”, much the way Russia is setting itself up as the “moral adversary”of the coalition today.
Well, surprise, little has changed since the pre-Christian world ruled by the Romans. Cato has been considered to represent the stern, stiff, stupid and brutal moral code by means of which Rome had defeated Carthage. He was scupulously honest towards his own State, avoiding the bribery and plunder that other Roman generals were wont to practice. He exacted - demanded, even, in his oratories - that all other Romans practice his world view. He asserted that to accuse and pursue the wicked was the best thing an honest man could do.
Today, we have many who claim the same moral high ground - and not only statesmen but NGOs as well. How can you err? Cato’s honesty, loathing of plunder, desire to punish the wicked are all laudable qualities. Yet, as soon as one is a subject of Carthage, of Baghdad or Grozny this type of severity of manners becomes questionable.
Goldberg notes that Soviet scientists had been involved with Iraq’s weapons programs since the 1970’s, and allegedly supplied a smallpox strain to Iraq. Thus the death of “Chemical Ali” at Basra, the Iraqi who ran the biological weapons program outside Baghdad came as a relief to Russia, who would not have wanted him captured alive. Rumours abound today that Russian intelligence supplied info about his whereabouts.
And then there are the retired Soviet generals who were honoured scant days before the outbreak of war by Saddam Hussein for their contribution to Iraq’s air defense and weapons programs.
For all of Putin’s present bluster, he did send an emissary, Yevgeny Primakov, to Baghdad three days before the air attack launched the war, to plead that Saddam leave the country. Saddam’s refusal left, publicly at least, Putin with his hands tied.
The final component, the fact that Iraq is a massive Russian debtor, dating back to Soviet times, means that Russia has an economic reason to keep Iraq from being plundered, or at least controlled by US-led interests. What would Cato say here?
On a related moral ground issue is the curious silence of human rights groups, after evidence has been unearthed abpout the cruelty of the Saddam regime. They remain more concerned about American “atrocities”. Very little has been made of the fact that when POW Jessica Lynch was freed Special ops forces found a torture chamber, munitions and weapons - at the Saddam Hussein Hospital! The use of a civilian hospital for military purposes - where is the public outrage? Embedded reporters have filed reports of Iraqi soldiers firing on civilians, executing women and children. Where is the consternation, massive protests?
Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General heads the International Action Center, a part of Answer, and publishes “the Report on Baghdad”. Curiously, many of these “reports” are not written from Baghdad, but from Havana, as it turns out. Where is “the Report from Havana”, the “Report from Grozny”? ANSWER has no answers.
Amnmesty International is also in on the act. They relased a report concerning human rights abuses the same week that Lynch was freed, reports of Iraqi atrocities had been made public in the media. AI’s report found evidence of human rights violations in 14 countries, including, naturally Great Britain and the United States - but not Iraq. The crimes committed? America and Britain are hindering anti-war protests.
Many remember how during the Vietnam war the United States was being accused of war crimes, because according to the Marxist-dominated campus groups, the Vietcong were not committing atrocities, but merely defending their country and right to personal freedom. Only the US was capable of such evil. Evidence about the Vietcong was obviously an American fabrication.
The moral ground is a fine one to take - but the evidence readily available indicates that even today people ignore what is unpleasant and choose to attack a democratic regime rather than those in Russia and Iraq, whose war crimes over the years have been documented, transparent, and numerous.
Rome did crumble after overcoming the crisis of the Punic Wars, the US may not be able to hold on to world power in the coming years. Over two thousand years have passed since Cato’s time, and one thing, however, still remains constant - pursue the wicked, and you will be punished yourself. The truth has no place in the moral high ground.