Disarmament Diplomacy

News Review

Uphill Struggle For New UK, US Iraq Sanctions Plan

As reported in the last issue, a major diplomatic effort was launched in mid-May by the United Kingdom, with the strong backing of the United States, to secure UN Security Council support for a resolution lifting sanctions on the import of civilian goods into Iraq while strengthening the implementation and monitoring of military and dual-use equipment. By the end of the period under review, it was becoming clear that the plan was meeting some serious resistance, led by a number of states in the Gulf Region and by two Permanent Members of the Council, China and Russia, on the grounds that the 'dual-use' category would be difficult to define, and, more fundamentally, that the plan offered no end to the impasse in UN-Iraq relations or the general retardation of the Iraqi economy and social fabric.

On June 1, the Council unanimously adopted resolution 1352, extending the operation of the 'oil-for-food' programme by one month, until July 3, rather than the customary 180 days. The unusual step was taken to allow more time for the UK-US 'smart sanctions' plan to be hammered out in more detail, and in particular for a reportedly lengthy list of dual-use items drawn up by the US to be finalised. The resolution expresses the Council's "intention to consider new arrangements for the sale or supply of commodities and products to Iraq and for the facilitation of civilian trade and economic cooperation with Iraq in civilian sectors, based on the following principles: (a) that such new arrangement will improve significantly the flow of commodities and products to Iraq, other than commodities and products...on a Goods Review List to be elaborated by the Council; (b) that such new arrangements will improve the controls to prevent the sale or supply of items prohibited or unauthorised by the Council..."

A US State Department statement (June 1) expressed almost unqualified optimism that details of the new arrangements would be in place by July 3: "The United States welcomes the adoption of UN Security Council resolution 1352. There is broad international consensus on the need for a new approach to Iraq that takes into account the needs of the Iraqi people, together with the need to focus controls on the most dangerous threats posed by the Iraqi regime. With this vote, the UN Security Council has set a course to accomplish this, based on clear principles that the Iraqi people should benefit from expanded trade, that Iraq should not be able to acquire arms or other items for military purposes, and that all Iraq's export revenues should remain under UN control. Following a brief period of review, the Security will vote on the specifics of a system that will achieve our parallel goals... Members of the Security Council agree on this direction, but the implementation of a comprehensive new resolution is a complex process. Today's resolution provides for that."

A June 1 Russian Foreign Ministry statement was markedly more cautious: "Although resolution 1352 bears a technical character, provisions of basic importance are reflected in it, in particular for a possible lifting of the sanctions against Iraq linked to compliance with the relevant Security Council resolutions. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq have been confirmed. Thus, the decision makes it possible to continue the current humanitarian operation in Iraq. As to upcoming consultations on the study of various new proposals and ideas, Russia is poised for serious work. It should be remembered that it is about extremely complicated financial, economic, legal and procedural-technical questions on whose solution Russia's trade and economic interests in Iraq depend."

The urgency of the situation is being further exacerbated by serious problems in the existing oil-for-food programme. On June 4, the Office of the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a statement lamenting ongoing difficulties while applauding a new US move to improve implementation: "The Secretary-General has repeatedly expressed his grave concern regarding the unacceptably high level of holds placed on applications for contracts submitted under the humanitarian programme for Iraq...and has called on the members of the Council to reduce the level of holds drastically. As at May 31, the total number of applications placed on hold was 1,651, with a total vale of $3.7 billion. On Friday June 1, the Permanent Mission of the United States informed the Office of the Iraq Programme of the decision taken by the government of the United States to release the holds placed on 410 applications, with a total value of $703.5 million. The applications concerned were submitted under the agriculture, food handling, education, electricity, health, housing, water and sanitation, and the oil sectors... The Secretary-General is encouraged by and welcomes the decision taken, and appeals to all members of the Security Council and its Committee established by resolution 661 (1990) to expedite the approval of applications and spare no effort in lifting the remaining holds placed on applications."

On June 7, remarks by Russia's UN Ambassador Sergei Lavrov provided early evidence of faltering discussions over a new sanctions regime. Lavrov told reporters: "The eventual goal is to suspend sanctions, and the resolution leaves things unsolved." On June 14, senior Russian diplomat Gennady Gatilov made clear that Russia would not be rushed by the July 3 deadline: "We are committed to work within this month to look at the new arrangements. ... But it does not necessarily mean we will be ready to take a decision... Either they just want a vote or a serious outcome of the discussion. We cannot commit ourselves to things which we don't clearly understand... I think there still are a number of difficult issues to resolve."

Gatilov was speaking to reporters following a special experts meeting requested by France and held in France on June 12-13. France is seeking to bridge the evident gulf between the US and UK and China and Russia, principally by concentrating on elaborating a list of prohibited goods that cannot be regarded as a duplicitous means of continuing a general embargo. A French Foreign Ministry statement issued on June 13 noted: "The constructive discussions allowed us to better pinpoint areas of agreement and disagreement, and to promote understanding of each others' concerns... It seems essential to us that the list of goods which will remain subject to approval by the Sanctions Committee will remain as targetted as possible..." A revised UK draft, circulated on June 11, had sought to incorporate some French suggestions, but was reportedly met with disappointment. Washington and London have specifically ruled out a French proposal to allow foreign investment in Iraq's oil industry.

On June 15, setting out his concerns in a letter to Secretary-General Annan, Jordan's Prime Minister Ali Abu al-Ragheb complained: "The effect [of the proposed new arrangements] on the macroeconomic performance [of Jordan] cannot be exaggerated. ... 37% of all Jordanian industrial companies are depending on Iraq... Repeated calls for solidarity with Iraqi and Palestinian people, and the broadening base of support for Iraq and radical Palestinian organisations, are direct results of regional tensions. Such pressures would aggravate the adverse and grave consequences of the proposed sanctions regime on Jordan's economy." Egypt and Syria are reportedly equally opposed to the scheme, with Turkey also said to be expressing concern. Iraq has threatened to cut off oil supplies to Turkey, Jordan and Syria in response to a new sanctions regime. According to Prime Minister al-Ragheb's letter, Jordan imports $750 million of oil from Iraq each year. Oil sales to all other countries were suspended by Iraq on June 4 in protest at the adoption of resolution 1352; the suspension-order was renewed, for an unspecified duration, on June 16.

In Washington on June 19, speaking at the Carnegie International Conference on Non-Proliferation, US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Einhorn observed: "So far, the Russians have been grudgingly supportive of the new approach in general but reluctant to break ranks with Iraq. The following day, Ambassador Lavrov wrote to Secretary-General Annan asking for an open Security Council meeting to discuss "ways of implementing all the Security Council resolutions on Iraq and a post-conflict settlement in the Gulf region."

On June 17, two former coordinators of the UN humanitarian programme in Iraq, Hans von Sponeck of Germany and Dennis Halliday of Ireland, ended a 10-day fact-finding visit to Iraq by calling for a complete lifting of the economic embargo. Speaking to reporters in Baghdad, Von Sponeck, who resigned his post last year, stated: "Only when there is a full lifting of economic sanctions...[will] Iraqis have a chance to live again a normal life. ... We have very carefully studied the draft resolution. We find it a provocation and an intensified punishment of a people for a crime they have never committed. ... The embargo is incompatible with the [UN] Charter, [the UN] Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention..." Halliday, who resigned in 1998, added: "The results of the embargo meet the definition of genocide under the UN Convention on Genocide... [The new US-UK smart sanctions] are intended to create an open-ended opportunity to sustain an embargo... We see headlines in the media in London saying 'sanctions have been lifted on Iraq' but this, of course, is simply not true."

Note: on June 26, Russia flatly rejected the UK-US plan and offered to craft an alternative resolution. Speaking during a fractious Security Council debate, Russian Ambassador Sergei Lavrov stated bluntly: "Adoption of this resolution would be detrimental to averting the humanitarian catastrophe and would devastate the Iraqi economy... Taking into account all of these factors, we cannot agree to this draft resolution, which certainly cannot go through..." See next issue for details and comment.

Reports: Text - US reaction to UN resolution on Iraq, Washington File, June 1; Security Council extends provision of Iraq 'oil-for-food' programme, unanimously adopting resolution 1352 (2001), UN Press Release SC/7067, June 1; Extension of UN humanitarian operation in Iraq, Russian Foreign Ministry Statement, Document 1047-02-06-2001, June 2; Secretary-General urges swifter approval of applications for contracts submitted under humanitarian programme for Iraq, UN Press Release SG/SM/7832, June 4; Russia questioning premise of new Iraqi proposals, Reuters, June 8; New Iraq sanctions plan proposed, Associated Press, June 11; New UN plan lets foreigners render services in Iraq, Reuters, June 11; Paris UN meeting gets underway on Iraq sanctions, Reuters, June 12; Security Council experts meeting ends, Associated Press, June 13; Russia casts doubt on deadline for new Iraq plan, Reuters, June 14; Annan meets hostility over 'smart sanctions' plan for Iraq, Agence France Presse, June 15; Jordan strongly opposed to Iraq sanctions plan, Reuters, June 15; Iraq to halt oil sales until UN sets 6-month renewal, Reuters, June 16; Ex-UN officials attack US-British plan on Iraq, Reuters, June 17; Ex-UN officers protest Iraq embargo, Associated Press, June 17; Russia may not cooperate on Iraq - US official, Reuters, June 19; Russia seeks open UN meeting on Iraq, Associated Press, June 20; Russia has new Iraq proposals, Britain rejects them, Reuters, June 26; Russia rejects Iraq sanctions plan, Associated Press, June 27.

© 2001 The Acronym Institute.