 Iraqi sanctions shuffle
UNITED NATIONS Ñ ItÕs a bit like a game of musical chairs round the table of the UN Security Council. Before the Iraq conflict, countries such as China, France, and Russia favored lifting Iraqi economic sanctions, while the USA opposed the move. Now with a new political tune playing in Baghdad, itÕs the U.S. who wishes to lift the crippling embargo, while Russia says itÕs simply too soon. France concedes to suspend the sanctions but not formally end them. The players have all taken new places.
A myriad of UN economic and transportation sanctions were slapped on SaddamÕs regime in response to IraqÕs invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991, the sanctions remained, pending Iraqi compliance and certifiable disarmament on weapons of mass destruction.
As the sanctions lingered, and a solution to Iraqi non-compliance fell by the wayside during the Clinton Administration, the general feeling emerged that the embargos only real effect was causing a humanitarian disaster. In a sense that was true.
Furthermore major Iraqi trading partners such as China, France, and Russia were loosing major commercial contracts. Washington was characteristically placed in the role of the bad guy with the black hat wanting to keep a noose round SaddamÕs neck through a tight international sanctions regime.
Despite the embargo, or perhaps because of it, a flourishing black market run by SaddamÕs political cronies thrived, often run through his socialist BaaÕth Party which institutionalized corruption at the highest levels.
The embargo was eased through the UNÕs Oil for Food Program a plan in which Iraqi petroleum sales would in effect pay for food and medicines and supplies. Oil for Food is feeding 60 percent of Iraqis. Baghdad earned $64 billion from oil sales since 1996 and in turn purchased humanitarian supplies; some $10 billion remains yet to be delivered.
Given the new situation in Iraq, the U.S. is right to press for fully lifting sanctions.
Even France has shown flexibility here discussing a path to ÒsuspendÓ the sanctions until Iraq is certified disarmed of its chemical and biological weapons. Practically speaking this would work. China will likely go along with this too.
Russia however, stresses that the embargo should stay in place until Iraq is certified free of its weapons by UN inspectors. President Vladimir Putin made a strong case in Moscow with Tony Blair on this issue.
Yet even UN Secretary General Kofi Annan concedes that the sanctions will be ended and that the Oil for Food program will be phased out Ñ no date or timetable however.
Sanctions set the rules for the game plan on Iraq, giving the UN an undue control over IraqÕs future Ñ something the Bush Administration bristles at. Washington moreover feels that keeping the cumbersome Sanctions review Committee in the Security Council (Chaired by Germany) needlessly slows down and complicates the process of getting needed food, medicine, and supplies to Iraq. While Oil for Food has now been extended to early June, thereÕs over $500 million in supplies in the immediate pipeline for Iraq, paid for with earlier oil sales.
The entire process of Oil for Food while keeping the humanitarian pipeline open, encourages a tightly scripted and rigid economic system which in a sense will keep a potentially rich country in low gear. Moreover, economic spontaneity will be stifled or encouraged to work through lucrative black market channels.
IraqÕs extraordinary petroleum resources can serve as an invaluable resource to rebuild, reform, and to help renovate a land ravished by political dictatorship and economic incompetence. ItÕs time the script for an embryonic free Iraq is set in place Ñ free of the constraints put on SaddamÕs now crumbled regime.
For years we have been hearing the endless prattle that the Iraqi embargo should be lifted in the name of humanity. Fine, so letÕs do it.
John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense
issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.
See current edition
of
   |
