|
22 April 2003
Nations Stop Sanctioning the Sanctions
|
The Christian Science Monitor reports that the economic sanctions on Iraq, weapons of mass
destruction themselves and killers of hundreds of thousands (see Atrocities
in Iraq), may be nearing their death. Today, France caught the world by surprise by saying
it's all for dropping the sanctions now after seeming to want to use the issue to force the UN
into the Iraqi reconstruction plan. China has also thrown its weight, which is considerable
since it too is a permanant member of the Security Council and had one of the biggest opponents
of the war. Russia, on the other hand, still seems bent on using the sanctions to tip the scale
towards UN involvement and also says it's worried that Iraq may not be completely disarmed.
"In a surprise move, France on Tuesday proposed immediately suspending UN
sanctions targeting Iraq civilians, an important step toward the US goal of ending trade embargoes
that have crippled the country's economy. President Bush called last week for sanctions to be lifted
quickly, so Iraq's oil revenue can be used to finance reconstruction. France's UN ambassador,
Jean-Marc de La Sabliere, made the proposal at a Security Council meeting where members heard a
briefing by chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix and for the first time exchanged views on potentially
divisive postwar issues. Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov had said his country is 'not at all opposed
to the lifting of sanctions.' But he said Russia wants UN inspectors to certify that Iraq has been
disarmed of all weapons of mass destruction, as required under UN resolutions."
"The US picked up a major ally in its bid for the lifting of UN economic sanctions
against Iraq. China said it favored the early ending of sanctions so that Iraqi oil could be sold to help
improve the "difficult situation the people ... are facing." But the Chinese statement also said "the
relevant questions should be appropriately resolved within the UN framework," where fellow Security Council
members France and Russia have opposed ending the sanctions unless the UN assumes the central role in
rebuilding the war-torn country. Meanwhile, in a pilgrimage banned during Saddam Hussein's regime, hundreds
of thousands of Shiites converged on their holy city, Karbala."
No guarantee that these URLs will work after today, 22 April, since they're off a news wire service that changes daily
from "France proposes ending Iraq sanctions" at News in Brief on
The Christian Science Monitor on 22 April 2003 at
http://www.csmonitor.com/newsinbrief/brieflies.html
from "China favors ending Iraq sanctions" at News in Brief on
The Christian Science Monitor on 22 April 2003 at
http://www.csmonitor.com/newsinbrief/brieflies.html
|
|
21 April 2003
New Neighbor
|
The Observer reports that Iran and Syria, one a member of Bush's "axis of evil" and the other
almost a nominee to take Iraq's place may have to get used to the US as a new neighbor that will be
around for a long time. The reports say the US plans on keeping 4 bases in Iraq no matter what Iraq's
new government looks like. The bases, already in use to help the US fight whatever resistence is still
in the country, "are at the international airport near Baghdad, at Talil; close
to the city of Nassiriya in the south; at an isolated airstrip called H-1 in the western desert; and at
the Bashur airfield in the Kurdish north." As for what exactly this "long
term defence relationship," as a senior administration official called it when talking to the New
York Times, "The scope of that has yet to be defined - whether it will be full-up
operational bases, smaller forward operating bases or just plain access."
However the US plans to use any bases in Iraq, it means that 1) Saudi Arabia will be less important as
a US ally since US troops can be landed in Iraq instead, 2) Iran and Syria, obviously not the Pentagon's
favorite countries, will have to deal with a strong US presence just over the fence, and 3) the US will
have a much harder time washing the empire-building label off its forehead, which means anti-Americanism
in the Middle East could get worst.
from "US 'to keep bases in Iraq'" by David Teather and Ian Traynor in
The Observer on Guardian Unlimited on 21 April 2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,940405,00.html
|
|
21 April 2003
Food is a Good Thing
|
The humanitarian situation is Baghdad is "horrible" according to
local UN staff. Baghdad has no garbage collection, and having heaps of garbage all over a city
is not the best way to fight disease. Hospitals, which make piles of bloody bandages and assorted
amputated body parts every day, have an especially big problem. Saddam Paediatric Hospital has so
many corpses on its hands that it has to bury them in its garden. While in the ground one way or
another is better than lying outside (and considering their location, they are now literally pushing
up daisies), a corpse-filled garden is not the most sanitary arrangement. Hospitals need, among
other things, tanks of liquid oxygen (to operate), ventilators, injectable antibiotics, and anaesthetics.
Some children's hospitals report that 70% of inmates have diarrhoea, which in Iraq is often fatal.
But Baghdad doesn't have to be a countdown to catastrophe. Already, aid has started to enter the city,
as the UN brought its first convoy into the city on 20 April, thanks mostly to better security. The food
should be safe from looters in the Rasafa Sell warehouse, guarded by US troops. World Food Program spokesman
Maarten Roest says "Over the past two weeks, WFP has sent a staggering 21,000 (tons) of
food by truck from Turkey into northern Iraq."
from "Signs of hope amid 'horrible' picture in Baghdad, UN local staff say"
at the UN Press Center on 17 April 2003 at
http://www0.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6785&Cr=iraq&Cr1=relief
from "UN humanitarian effort in Iraq picks up pace as security gradually improves" at
the UN Press Center on 20 April 2003 at
http://www0.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6799&Cr=Iraq&Cr1=
|
|
12 April 2003
"No to America, No to Saddam"
|
In Nassiriya today, a crowd whose size has been guessed anywhere from 5000 to 20000 strong
marched through the streets, calling "No to America, No to Saddam."
No one can accuse Iraq's demonstrating Shiites of being overly subtle. Even more blunt is the
motto of demonstrators in Kut: "No Chalabi," meaning the leader
of the Iraqi National Congress, whom the Pentagon seems to love, but Iraqis dislike, noting
that it's unlikely a man who hasn't set foot in Iraq for years will somehow know the answers
to all its problems, or even the problems to begin with.
Instead, the Shiites want their ayatollahs to run the country. Washington does not like the
taste of this, deciding that Shiite rule in both Iraq and Iran would be too spicy for the
tongue of US interests in the region. With the main Shia group boycotting the meetings about
the new Iraqi government, the creation of an interim government, much less a permanant one,
seems several headaches in the future.
from "The nightmare scenario: freedom to choose rule by the ayatollahs" by Ewen MacAskill in
The Observer on Guardian Unlimited on 16 April 2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,937652,00.html
from "Chaos mars talks on Iraqi self-rule" by Rory McCarthy and Ewen MacAskill
The Observer on Guardian Unlimited on 16 April 2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,937669,00.html
|
|
12 April 2003
The Government-less Iraq
|
Now that apparently no one is in charge of the country, Iraq has become a free
for all. Looters help themselves to whatever they want, and not just in government
building. The UN News Center says "Hospitals had closed down
for fear of looters, child nutritional posts were being ransacked, large groups were
fleeing Baghdad and other cities in search of safety and security, and water delivery
to one hard-pressed city had been postponed until further notice because of insecurity..."
A spokesman for the UNICEF reported on the 11th of April 40 more cases of severe
children's diarrhoea in Um Qasr, and this is one of the easier cities to help.
The UN is calling on the US and British troops in Iraq to do something, and on the 11th
of April, Donald Rumsfeld said "We do feel an obligation to assist
in providing security, and coalition forces are doing that. Where they see looting, they
are stopping it." In that case, they apparently aren't seeing much, since the UN
says its compound in Baghdad was looted to the point where starting over would be easier,
and hospitals, universities, and shops haven't fared much better. The biggest problem is
that the US was apparently very unprepared to deal with lawlessness, since though the
troops in Baghdad know urban combat and security, they don't have the tools to deal with
looters. A crowd quelled with automatic rifles and bazookas will probably stay quelled for
a very long time (basically forever), and thus those aren't the best ways to deal with
lawlessness. The US has said it will move in military police soon, though how many it will
need to keep the 23 million person country in one piece is unknown.
from "UN agencies stress dangers to relief efforts from lawlessness in Iraq" at
the UN News Center on 11 April 2003 at
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6730&Cr=iraq&Cr1=relief
from "New aim: hold crime in check" on the Christian Science Monitor
on 11 April 2003 at
http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/early_iraq0411b.htm
|
|
11 April 2003
The Saddam-less Government
|
Plans for the new Iraq have been drawn up in Washington and seem ready to
go other than a few tweaks. Here's one of them, as The Observer tells us:
"The decision to proceed with an embryonic government comes in response to
memoranda written by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last week, urging
that the US begin to entrench its authority in areas under its control
before the war is over. Pentagon officials told The Observer that the
administration is determined to impose the Rumsfeld plan and sees no use for
a UN role, describing the international body as 'irrelevant'."
"It will be installed by the Pentagon's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian
Assistance, under the former US army Lieutenant General Jay Garner, and answerable
to the Pentagon."
Rumsfeld wants to put Iraqi exiles in charge of the different pieces of Iraq
"under the tutelage" of civillian administrators
from the US, who report to Garner. But others, like Colin Powell, think a
military government that would "nurture" a new
Iraqi regime run by people in the country now would be better.
The country would also be split up into thirds, the northern chunk under the order
of General Bruce Moore, the southern piece run by General Buck Walters, and the
center controlled by former ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine.
Exactly how long this arrangement will last is unknown, but it should be from 6 to
12 months.
from "US begins the process of 'regime change'" in
The Observer on Guardian Unlimited on 6 April 2003 at
href="http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,930794,00.html
|
