This Saturday, a “massive” antiwar protest will take place in Washington DC, marking the first time that a national antiwar rally will take place with a majority of people in the United States opposing the Iraq war. According to a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, 55% of those surveyed would like to see the United States speed up plans to withdraw from Iraq and 54% of the respondents expressed doubt that the United States would “win” the war in Iraq.

With the growing doubt about the war and US casualties rising above 1,900 (1,912 at press time), the antiwar movement in the United States has potentially reached the critical mass that is necessary to begin the process of stopping the war. The two major antiwar coalitions, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and International ANSWER have finally put aside some of their differences and organized a joint rally, putting an end to some of the sectarian infighting on the left that has occasionally threatened the potential development of a strong national antiwar movement. UFPJ is hoping to use the DC rally as a catalyst for further actions (already rallies are planned in cities across the United States) and will encourage attendees to go back and organize against the war in their communities by emphasizing the connections between the Iraq war and cuts in domestic programs. Additionally, small steps have been made in Congress with a recent hearing against the war, all of which point towards a possibility of curtailing the war if the national momentum continues to build.

Of course, within the antiwar movement there is still considerable debate over several key questions, namely the speed of the US withdrawal, the place of civil disobedience, and the role of legislative and political action. Yet, for the first time, a national coalition has provided some tacit support to those wanting to engage in civil disobedience and has endorsed a day of “nonviolent direct action” on Monday to coincide with the weekend antiwar mobilization and many other differences have been downplayed for the benefit of the overall movement. While it is a small step and will probably do little to please those advocating large-scale civil disobedience as the primary tactic, it is an important step. Similarly, while the notion of a fairly restrained national mobilization may be off-putting to many who have been opposed to the Iraq war since the beginning, it should open the way for greater resistance to the war.

Despite the widespread public opposition to and anxiety about the war, President George W. Bush has continued to downplay concerns about the war and is has recently reaffirmed his position that the war is necessary. Speaking yesterday, Bush said that the United States cannot allow “terrorists” “to claim a historic victory over the United States” and that “withdrawing our troops would make the world more dangerous.” Bush acknowledged that there is opposition to the war, but described it as “wrong” and dismissed their concerns.