Last Updated: Aug. 19, 2000
August marks the 10th anniversary of U.N. sanctions against Iraq - the
longest and most severe economic boycott in modern history.
Despite a massive oil-for-food relief program, U.N. agencies acknowledge
that sanctions, which went into effect on Aug. 6, 1990, have contributed
to
a humanitarian disaster in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children
have died prematurely.
The recalcitrance of the Iraqi regime regarding arms inspection and the
absence of compromise within the U.N. Security Council - especially by
the
United States - have produced a political stalemate. The result is a brutal
ordeal for innocent Iraqis with no end in sight.
The U.S. now finds itself isolated in its policy toward Iraq. Even Great
Britain, which stood with the United States throughout the decade, has
recently urged Washington to ease sanctions. There is growing support in
the
Security Council for suspending the general trade sanctions while
maintaining a strict embargo on weapons and military technology.
There are two compelling arguments that should motivate U.S. support for
this approach.
First, by lifting the civilian trade sanctions, the United Nations could
concentrate on the arms embargo that has been instrumental in degrading
Iraq's war making capacity. Prior to their ejection from Iraq in December
1998, U.N. weapons inspectors were successful in locating and dismantling
most of Iraq's nuclear, ballistic missile and chemical-weapons capabilities.
The U.N. Special Commission on Iraq, UNSCOM, certified in 1997 that "there
are no indications that any weapon-usable nuclear materials remain in Iraq"
and "no evidence in Iraq of prohibited materials, equipment or activities."
The arms embargo part of U.N. sanctions has blocked imports of military
equipment.
As a result, the Iraqi armed forces suffer from "decaying, obsolete or
obsolescent major weapons," according to a report from the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
These gains could be preserved through a policy that focuses on blocking
military-related shipments while permitting the controlled recovery of
Iraq's civilian economy. But these inspections can't be carried out as
long
as economic sanctions remain in place, since Saddam Hussein has no incentive
to cooperate.
Second, a policy that leads to the death of hundreds of thousands of
children is morally unacceptable. The human costs of the general trade
sanctions have far exceeded any political gains. From Patrick Buchanan
to
Rosie O' Donnell, Americans have expressed outrage about the Iraq sanctions.
Lifting civilian sanctions while maintaining a vigorous arms embargo is
a
humanitarian imperative, but it also makes sense politically and
diplomatically. Such a policy would recognize the progress that the United
Nations achieved in Iraq, and it could be offered as an incentive to
encourage less hostile relations between Iraq and the rest of the world.
The stakes in the Iraq crisis are huge, not only for the people of Iraq,
but
for the U.S. leadership position within the United Nations. Sanctions
against Iraq have eroded international support for the United Nations and
the United States.
If we act now to lift civilian trade sanctions while maintaining an arms
embargo, it would relieve the U.N. of responsibility for the humanitarian
crisis in Iraq.
It would also bolster the legitimate commitment of the United Nations to
peace and security in the Gulf region and beyond.
Economic sanctions have taken a terrible toll. They must be lifted now.
-
David Cortright and George A. Lopez are co-authors of "The Sanctions Decade:
Assessing U.N. Strategies in the 1990s," the first case-by-case report
on
the effectiveness of U.N. sanctions in the 1990s. This article was written
for The Progressive Media Project in Madison.