[277] in peace2
Haliday's Testimony
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (F. AuYeung)
Fri May 19 20:39:21 2000
Message-Id: <200005200039.UAA21030@w20-575-108.mit.edu>
To: peace-list@MIT.EDU
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 20:39:12 -0400
From: "F. AuYeung" <auyeung@MIT.EDU>
von sponeck's harvard talk <mit.edu/justice/www/download/Von_Sponeck.mp3>
is a great primer for this speech since he describes the problems while
haliday proposes a route for a solution.
------- Forwarded Message
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 17:01:46 -0700
From: "Kate Reuer, FOR" <bsp@forusa.org>
To: auyeung <auyeung@MIT.EDU>
Subject: [Fwd: [iac-disc.] Denis Halliday's Congressional Briefing, 3 May '00]
Denis Halliday's Congressional Briefing, 3 May '00
Denis Halliday for a Congressional Briefing on Wednesday 3 May 2000, in 2203
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington DC at 3.00 p.m.
Distinguished Members of Congress,
Ladies and Gentlemen
We are all aware of the letter signed by some 72 courageous members of
Congress to President Clinton calling for the de-linking of economic from
military sanctions, and for the lifting of economic sanctions on the people
of Iraq. We have heard the statement of Congressman Bonior lamenting the
economic sanctions-caused deaths of Iraqi children which he characterized as
infanticide. More recently we have listened to Congressman Hall, just
returned from witnessing the situation in Iraq, expressing his concern for
the humanitarian crisis. And this afternoon, we have heard Hans von Sponeck,
until last month the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad,
describe the human calamity ongoing in Iraq today on account of widespread
deprivation caused by U.S. driven United Nations economic sanctions.
What these sources have confirmed, is that economic sanctions are a blunt
and deadly instrument, and that the devastation is felt by the people, not
the leadership. Prolonged economic sanctions directly and indirectly cause
death, malnutrition and social destruction in respect of the innocent, the
children and others who are blameless for the bad decisions of government.
The case of Iraq is the most glaring failure of this otherwise legitimate
device provided for in the UN Charter, under Chapter 7, Article 41, to
enforce standards of behavior consistent with the requirements of the
Charter itself. Sadly, in the case of the children and adults of Iraq, we
find that the results of Security Council decisions as impacting on the
ground are incompatible with the spirit and intent of the Charter, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other instruments of international
law. The Iraq crisis is uniquely prolonged, unjustified by the laws of
proportionality and unacceptable to millions around the world, to many
member states of the General Assembly, and not surprisingly to millions of
Americans who are informed. Not surprisingly, as this great country has a
history of reaching out with enormous generosity of resources and spirit to
other peoples in need. The very basic human needs that are no longer
available to the children and adults of Iraq. Iraq does not want American
charity. Iraq needs the opportunity to restore the standard of living
enjoyed by its people as of 1990. The unfortunate reality is that not enough
of your constituents are informed about the deadly impact of economic
sanctions to demand your focus on policy change. Thus, distinguished members
of Congress, as you are fully informed, the burden of positive change is
primarily yours.
We know that there has been some terrible decision making in Baghdad. We
know of risings north and south in 1991, and of civil war before that, which
have been suppressed with brutal efficiency. And Americans above all know
the cost and pain of civil war. We know of the tragic loss of life on both
sides in the Iran-Iraq conflict. We also know of Western and other support,
including that of the United States via war material and intelligence to
Baghdad in these various military actions.
As to the deadly human cost of UN economic sanctions today, we may be
tempted to allocate all responsibility to President Saddam Hussein. That is
an easy way out, but we also know that that is simplistic and less than
honest. The Security Council has known full well for more than nine years of
the famine and other deadly consequences of this UN economic sanctions
policy. Following the total UN embargo on importation of all food for six
months as of August 1990, and after some unacceptably modest offers of
relief via Iraqi oil sales, the UN and Iraq established the so called
Oil-for-Food program in 1996. While the program has been well monitored by
the UN, its design faults (under funded, lack of buffer stock and UN
Sanctions Committee constraints inappropriate to a humanitarian crisis), and
its qualitative failures reported by the Secretary-General, we have,
nevertheless, continued it, albeit with superficial adjustments, as Mr von
Sponeck has just outlined. It has done little more than sustain high child
mortality levels and widespread malnutrition. We have done this in full
knowledge of these unacceptable consequences, apparently as a means to
punish the government and coerce the President of Iraq to step down. As many
members of Congress and Administration officials know full well from U.S.
bilateral experience, economic sanctions targeting a people, are not likely
to bring down a head of state, or produce the fullest cooperation. Thus,
given the mutual lack of Washington/Baghdad confidence, and despite very
substantial progress made by UNSCOM in collaboration with the Government in
regard to inspection and demolition of weapons of mass destruction , about
which I believe Mr Scott Ritter will speak shortly, we have today the signs
of an apparent impasse with regard to UN Resolution 1284.
Meantime, the children of Iraq are dying in their thousands every month.
The focus this afternoon should not be the past, but the immediate future.
In short, how does the Congress get out of this moral, humanitarian and
legal quagmire, so damaging to the leadership of the United States? And to
get out in a manner that is acceptable to the Administration here in
Washington without international and domestic loss of face. And yet viable
for the leadership in Iraq that also has to consider the realities of
domestic politics in a volatile environment of social collapse and great
anger. Anger directed at the UN and the United States and Britain, not as
some might wish here in Washington, at the leadership in Baghdad. As almost
always with punitive embargoes, the leadership is strengthened and the
status of the people diminished. However, anger and frustration with, and
alienation from, the outside world dangerously thrives. And that is
certainly the case of Iraq today.
Setting aside the current difficulties surrounding last December's
Resolution 1284, and the double standards of the Security Council with
regard to countries of the middle east, and taking into account the
continuing fears of neighboring governments and perhaps the concern of the
United States for the well being of its regional allies (despite the
comprehensive work of UNSCOM), I invite members of Congress to consider the
following, which (although I speak with no authority whatsoever) might be
broadly acceptable to Iraq :
a) re-establish inspections and monitoring with regard to weapons of mass
destruction within Iraq, as well as on its borders, including means for
period review under existing non-proliferation agreements;
b) impose "smart" sanctions on the Government in Baghdad in respect of
weapons purchasing, and in respect of those profiteering from civilian
suffering;
c) re-open a U.S. dialogue with Baghdad, just as President Clinton has done
with apparent success in respect of North Korea, thereby applying the
principle that isolation leads to alienation whereas dialogue and
communication can lead to influence and positive change.
d) lift economic sanctions on Iraq essential for the economy, including
capital investment in infrastructure, and by this means provide the
"carrot", necessary for effectiveness in all cases of sanctions regimes, in
response inter alia to: considerable, if imperfect, Iraqi collaboration with
UNSCOM over many years; for acceptance of the new Kuwait-Iraq border; and
for cooperation with the UN in regard to the Oil-for-Food program, as
reported by the Secretary-General;
e) release the oil production equipment on hold in the Sanctions Committee
of the Security Council to enable Iraq to put more oil on the world market
and enhance its much needed earnings capacity;
f) facilitate American and other private sector capital investment in Iraq
to begin the task of rebuilding the civilian infrastructure and refurbishing
the environment so severely damaged during the Gulf War, to: produce and
distribute electric power so essential for
health care, clean water treatment and distribution, sanitation systems,
irrigated agriculture, food processing and storage; rehabilitate transport
and communications requirements; introduce modern technology for education
and management of a modern economy, needed to end unemployment, salvage the
value of the dinar and restore to families and individual citizens their
economic and social (human)rights;
g) postpone payment of reparations, thereby allowing Iraq full access to its
oil revenues, excepting payment to those individuals who have yet to be
compensated for lost homes, employment and/or residency in Kuwait, until
such time as the mortality
and malnutrition crisis in terms of Iraqi children has ended;
h) encourage overseas visits of Iraqi professionals and study by Iraqi
graduate students to begin to close the gap created by almost ten years of
intellectual and technological isolation;
i) invite Iraqi participation in the regional process for middle-east peace
to enhance expectations of a middle-east community of nations in the years
ahead;
j) establish with Baghdad arrangements for the semi-autonomy of the Iraqi
Kurds of the northern provinces until such time as they work out with the
central government a modus vivandi that is mutually acceptable;
k) respect the constraints of Security Council resolutions, including the
termination of US/UK bombing of the so called "no-fly zones" plus regular
incursions by the Turkish military into Kurdish Iraq, for which there are no
legal provisions in any existing UN resolution.
Many will see risks inherent in these proposals. However, it is difficult to
make progress without risk. As for the fear of resurgence of any Iraqi
military threat to its neighbors, it is expected that proposals a) and b)
will succeed and that American military presence will remain in the Gulf,
and in the countries of the region, for as long as necessary. In reality,
Iraq today is surrounded by highly armed and more powerful neighbors. As for
military potential, inspections and monitoring should address that concern,
particularly when backed up as described.
Were these proposals, or some modified version thereof, considered viable by
all concerned, the resulting impact would certainly: be in the immediate
best interests of the children and of the people of Iraq; enhance the world
leadership of the United States; restore some of the lost credibility of the
United Nations Security Council; and demonstrate some respect for the rule
of (international) law as per the Charter. It would also immediately begin
to address the loss of fundamental human rights as set out in Article 25 of
the Universal Declaration under the impact of economic sanctions. And it
would set in motion the lengthy task of restoring prosperity to the Iraqi
people at the levels, or better, that they enjoyed back in 1990.
Based on discussions with Iraqi exiles in the European Union, including the
UK, and in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and in the United States, an end
to economic sanctions would bring home many economic refugees of the middle
and professional classes, so important for the economy, but also for social
well being and possible change in governance towards a more participatory
and democratic system, were that to be the choice of the Iraqi people.
Nothing can be more dangerous and volatile for the middle east region than
the present uncertainty, human deprivation combined with the economic and
social despair within Iraq. To think of peace in the middle east without
Iraqi participation is naive.
In conclusion, distinguished Members of Congress, after almost ten years of
uniquely comprehensive economic sanctions and blockade, surely it is time
for the United States, the Congress and Administration, to attempt to find
an alternative way to live with Iraq, without punishing its innocent
populace, not involved in the bad decisions leading to the invasion of
Kuwait, nor in government policy-making and actions before 1990, or since.
Setting aside the American desire for moral and democratic leadership, and
even if only to protect its positive place in history, the United States
needs to make positive policy changes in respect of Iraq. The member states
of the United Nations will surely follow.
Denis J. Halliday, former United Nations Assistant Secretary General and
Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad, Iraq 1997-98.
________________________________________________________
------- End of Forwarded Message
