|
 |
 |
UNITED NATIONS — Iraq's sanctions stalemate continues as an American and British plan to loosen the economic embargo on Baghdad seems to be stillborn due to Russian diplomatic efforts. The U.S. "Smart sanctions" plan, which would have essentially allowed greater leeway in the embargo while tightening the controls on oil smuggling and dual use military items, has been sidetracked by Moscow's threat to use its Security Council veto thus putting the plan in check.
The U.S./British plan seeks to dilute the charge that the economic embargo only punishes civilians and not the regime. Arab world propaganda stresses solidarity with the suffering Iraqi civilians whose plight is placed at the doors of the White House and 10 Downing Street. To counter this very potent emotional argument, the Bush Administration has pressed for a more flexible approach — namely allowing more humanitarian access while controlling smuggling.
Presently Saddam controls the distribution of food and medicine inside Iraq. Aid officials oft bemoan that while food supplies are there, the distribution and allocation is regulated by the regime.
The UN's Oil for Food Program has again been extended for five months. This closely scripted and supervised plan allows for approximately 2 million barrels of oil per day to be legally shipped from Iraqi ports, in exchange for purchases of food, medicine and infrastructural supplies. Under the UN plan, Iraq has earned $43 billion. The bottom line remains that oil smuggling around the UN program has become rife and immensely lucrative.
While the threat of the Russian veto hung like a Damocles sword over the Security Council, any plan to revise the conditions or to loosen the noose would have to pass political muster with the Council's five permanent members.
Each of those countries has their own views on how to proceed. Washington and London advocate the "Smart Sanctions;" Beijing and Paris, business now; and Moscow, going to bat for Baghdad politically, as to revive Russia's traditional commercial and military links with the Iraqis.
More than a decade after slapping the economic embargo on Iraq for its 1990 invasion of Kuwait, not only is Saddam still in power, but the tensions are often among the Security Council members. Allowing Weapons inspections, the way for Iraq to come clean and to finally end the sanctions, remain on perma-freeze.
Yet there's little pressure from the Arab world on Baghdad to acquiesce to what's increasingly viewed as American and British pressures on an "Arab brother."
Interestingly in the midst of this recent debate, the deputy chief of Iraq's United Nations mission Muhammed al-Humaimidi defected and asked for political asylum in America; the diplomatic defection illustrates the continuing frustration with the foibles of the regime, by even many of its supporters.
But why doesn't the Baghdad regime jump at an opportunity to loosen the ubiquitous sanctions and get more food flowing?
First and foremost, Iraq wants the sanctions scrapped altogether. While this line has varying support in Moscow, Beijing and Paris, realistically this isn't going to fly, given equally adamant U.S. and U.K. counter-pressures.
Second; Saddam needs the defined enemy of the USA and Britain — in other words, given that his people are suffering anyway, the regime's tight control though the use of food and medicine — reward and punishment — should not be underestimated. Should humanitarian supplies become more available, Saddam actually looses. Nor does he wish to countenance any American effort, which would seemingly help his people. This is quite the same with Castro who despite his harangues against the American embargo on Cuba, actually wishes for it to continue as to keep people politically mobilized against the "Yanqui" threat.
Third; control and distribution of food and medicine, not to mention the entire fabric of Iraqi life, remains in the hands of Saddam and his sleazy coterie. There are very lucrative deals made in a black market economy especially when government officials are running most of the black market. Quite plainly, loosened economic sanctions and tightened controls on oil smuggling are bad for business!
Fourth; there's the "Arab Masses" argument, namely, you need to have a perpetual enemy — an Anglo/American/Israeli conspiracy to face off against; if the Americans and British allow the Iraqi civilian population some slack, that sends the wrong signal from Saddam's view.
Ironically a status quo probably profits Saddam in the short term. Russia's blocking strategy while less than creative, effectively puts Western plans in checkmate.
John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.
