For the second time in succession, a United Nations
                humanitarian aid co-ordinator in Iraq has resigned
                because he can no longer stand by and watch the
                suffering of Iraqis affected by sanctions imposed since
                the Gulf War.

                German official Hans von Sponeck will leave his post
                next month, after only 17 months. His predecessor,
                Irishman Dennis Halliday, was another critic of the UN
                policy. He left saying he did not want to be associated
                with the adverse impact of UN sanctions on the hapless
                people of the country.

                If sanctions were achieving the principal aim of forcing
                the rogue regime to destroy its weapons of mass
                destruction and allowing the return of disarmament
                inspectors, there might be a strong case for continuing
                them. However, nine years after the end of the Gulf War
                nothing looks remotely like unseating the despotic
                Saddam Hussein, who is still hanging on to his weapons.
                He told his people last month: "The embargo will not be
                lifted but will erode itself. We have no choice but to
                adhere to our path, and the spirit of jihad."

                True to type, a tyrant depicts the suffering he inflicts on
                his nation as some kind of holy war. Iraq's economy is
                destroyed and its children are dying from malnutrition
                and lack of medicines. But there is no group in the
                country capable of loosening his iron grip on power.

                The World Health Organisation puts the number of
                sanctions-related deaths of children aged under five at
                between 5,000 and 6,000. At that rate, sanctions begin
                to look like a war waged against babies for which both
                sides are responsible.

                The US blames the Iraqi people's plight on Saddam's
                callous disregard for their welfare. It says the regime is
                using less than seven per cent of the US$25 million set
                aside for nutritional supplements and has medical
                supplies worth US$287 million sitting in warehouses.
                Iraq claims it does not have the trucks to move them, to
                which the US counters that Saddam does not lack
                trucks to move his troops.

                Regardless of the dictator's actions, the situation is
                incompatible with the UN Convention on the Rights of
                the Child. This should concern the US, which claims
                moral leadership in human rights, and Britain, which
                claims to have an ethical foreign policy. The UN is split
                over the latest weapons inspection programme. Instead
                of wasting time to produce yet another ambiguous
                agreement, these two countries should now try to design
                a programme that cripples Saddam's regime without
                killing its people.

                Washington's only comment on the von Sponeck
                departure is to say it looks forward to "an able
                manager" who will boost the benefits of the oil-for-food
                programme. Perhaps it should also reflect upon why it
                has so far failed to find one