Contents

1. Mass Die-In
2. UN Passes "Smart" Sanctions
3. Ryan and Kelly
4. A Year of Action
5. The Illegal War
6. The Pledge of Resistance
7. World Fears Bush
8. Same Old Stupid Sanctions
9. Thank-you

1) MASS DIE-IN, FASLANE 6 AUG 2002
Return to top

British Defence Secreatary Geoff Hoon has issued nuclear threats against Iraq three times in recent months, saying that countries like Iraq 'can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons'; 'in conditions of extreme self-defence, nuclear weapons would have to be used'. (Guardian, 6 June, p.18)

The British Government is threatening not only to make war on Iraq, but to fire a Trident nuclear missile at this suffering country.

Voices in the wilderness UK and Trident Ploughshares are responding with nonviolent civil disobedience.

At 8am on Tuesday 6 Aug.2002, 12 years after economic sanctions were imposed on Iraq, 57 years after Hiroshima, we are holding a 'die-in' at the Faslane Trident submarine base near Helensburgh in Scotland.

Please write to Geoff Hoon. Arrow briefing no.18 'Don't Nuke Iraq' is available from Voices or at www.justicenotvengance.org.

2) UN PASSES "SMART" SANCTIONS
Return to top

On 14 May, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1409, a watered-down version of Britishproposals circulated last year. The purpose of this reform of sanctions was made clear immediately, as Jack Straw announced that the new resolution had remove[d] Saddamís spurious excuses for the suffering he inflicts on the Iraqi peopleí.

The New York Times judged that Washington was ënow in a better position to lead the international debate on the future of the Iraqi regime without the distraction of accusations over humanitarian concerns.

CAFOD, a Catholic aid agency, on the other hand, described the new resolution as amounting to little more than cosmetic changes that will do little to help the plight of the ordinary people.

Missing the Point

With many Iraqi families living on as little as $6 a month, and a 600% increase in water contamination since 1990, poverty and the massive deterioration of Iraqís civilian infrastructure (sewage, watertreatment, electricity and so on) are currently the key obstacles to resolving the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

Neither of these fundamental problems is addressed by the new resolution. All the new resolution does is modify the procedures for exporting goods to Iraq, nothing else.

Before 1409, except for certain pre-approved items, all exports to Iraq required approval from the UN Sanctions Committee, an opaque body dominated by a US veto.

Under the new resolution only those items named on a new list of potentially suspect goods (the Goods Review List or GRL) will need such approval from the Sanctions Committee.

Contracts will be scrutinised by UN weapons experts to determine whether or not they contain items on the GRL (and therefore require Sanctions Committee approval.)

These new procedures may lead to a reduction in the number of goods placed on holdí by the US and Britain (currently over $5bn) - this remains to be seen.

Still Banned

Much more significant, however, is what the resolution does not permit.

As the Economist explained (24 May 2002), the resolution does not allow the foreign private investment that would enable Iraq to start rebuilding its shattered industry, agriculture and sanitation system (the cost of which has been estimated at $50-$100 billion). It also prohibits the spending of hard-currency earnings on local goods and services... perpetuat[ing] Iraqís dependence on state-rationed imports.

The Economist concluded, that the new resolution was little more than cosmetic surgery that will not greatly affect ordinary Iraqis.

Save the Children Fund UK (SCF) says similarly that the ìstreamlined sanctions will not - ëin the absence of complementary initiatives (such as locally-available financial resources) - significantly improve the humanitarian situation.

For SCF, the new procedures will only marginally assist the rehabilitation of essential civilian infrastructure: and without such rehabilitation the high levels of preventable illnesses among children will continue, with a detrimental effect on child mortality. SAME OLD STUPID SANCTIONS PLEDGE ëI pledge to take part in or to support nonviolent civil disobedience in the event of a major US/UK attack on Iraq or any other country in the course of the ìwar on terrorismî.í 580 people have signed the Pledge of Resistance. Please sign online: ARROW / PLEDGE WEBSITE www.justicenotvengeance.org SH0WER THE FOREIGN OFFICE WITH FOREIGN EXCHANGE 1) Write to Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary, Foreign Office, Whitehall, London SW1 2) Use quotes from this article to argue that the new Security Council resolution cannot solve the humanitarian crisis and that these are not real targeted ìsmart sanctionsî. 3) Point out that Iraq needs foreign investment, foreign loans, access to foreign markets for its goods (in addition to oil), and direct access to foreign exchange. 4) Enclose a coin with your letter - Iraq needs foreign exchange - and ask for it be used to benefit the people of Iraq. On 14 May, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1409, a watered-down version of British proposals circulated last year. The purpose of this reform of sanctions was made clear immediately, as Jack Straw announced that the new resolution had ëremove[d] Saddamís spurious excuses for the suffering he inflicts on the Iraqi peopleí. The New York Times judged that Washington was ënow in a better position to lead the international debate on the future of the Iraqi regime without the distraction of accusations over humanitarian concerns.í CAFOD, a Catholic aid agency, on the other hand, described the new resolution as amounting to ëlittle more than cosmetic changesí that ëwill do little to help the plight of the ordinary people.í missing the point With many Iraqi families living on as little as $6 a month, and a 600% increase in water contamination since 1990, poverty and the massive deterioration of Iraqís civilian infrastructure (sewage, watertreatment, electricity and so on) are currently the key obstacles to resolving the ongoing humanitarian crisis. Neither of these fundamental problems is addressed by the new resolution. All the new resolution does is modify the procedures for exporting goods to Iraq, nothing else. Before 1409, except for certain pre-approved items, all exports to Iraq required approval from the UN Sanctions Committee, an opaque body dominated by a US veto. Under the new resolution only those items named on a new list of potentially suspect goods (the ëGoods Review Listí or GRL) will need such approval from the Sanctions Committee. Contracts will be scrutinised by UN weapons experts to determine whether or not they contain items on the GRL (and therefore require Sanctions Committee approval.) These new procedures may lead to a reduction in the number of goods placed ëon holdí by the US and Britain (currently over $5bn) - this remains to be seen. still banned purchasing power ëChildrenís right to an adequate standard of living means that their families must have livelihoods,í says SCF. Yet ësanctions and financial controlsí have destroyed much of Iraqís economic life and productive capacityí, creating ëvery high levels of povertyí and undermining the functioning of ëstate institutions and private markets, on which Iraqi livelihoods depend.í Jack Straw claims that Resolution 1409 ëunderline[s], once again that the Security Council has only ever had a problem with the Iraqi regime, not the Iraqi peopleí. For the millions of ordinary Iraqis who have been sentenced to crushing poverty - and for whom every day is a struggle - such rhetoric will ring very hollow. This is a resolution designed to undermine the anti-sanctions movement. It must not succeed. A detailed analysis of the resolution by Colin Rowat of CASI is available online at or from the voices office 0845 458 2564.

3) RYAN AND KELLY
Return to top

4) A YEAR OF ACTION
Return to top

5) THE ILLEGAL WAR
Return to top