The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
This should be self-explanatory. Gabriel. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Financial Times. 16th July 1998. US clears way for wheat sales By Stephen Fidler in Washington President Bill Clinton said yesterday he had signed legislation to exempt export credits for farm sales from US sanctions imposed on India and Pakistan last month in response to their nuclear tests. The legislation, which passed rapidly through Congress in the past week, came in response to sharply falling wheat prices which are hurting US farmers. "We need to make sure our sanctions policy furthers our foreign policy goals without imposing undue burdens on our farmers," Mr Clinton said. The lifting of the restriction will allow the US to sell almost 13m bushels of wheat to Pakistan, one of the most important customers for US wheat. Mr Clinton said: "US wheat and other farm products will not be the unintended victims of an important non-proliferation law. When implementing sanctions, we must never forget their humanitarian impact." The administration was compelled by law to impose the sanctions after the nuclear tests by both countries. However, the impact of the sanctions has been watered down by the failure of other countries to follow suit - and this move will be viewed as a further weakening of their effectiveness. Moreover, the sanctions were seen as biting far harder on Pakistan - which at least informed the US in advance of its intention to test - than on India. Earlier this week, the administration asked Congress for waiver authority for all the sanctions now in place against India and Pakistan. Karl Inderfurth, assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of South Asian Affairs, said the authority would only be used if the countries had responded to US objectives - such as signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty - or if a specific sanction had "serious negative or unintended consequences". "We would also like additional flexibility to guard against an overwhelmingly disproportionate effect of these sanctions on one country versus another," he said in a clear reference to Pakistan's greater dependence on external finance than India. Mr Inderfurth also criticised the Pakistani leadership for not taking the necessary steps to deal with its weak economic position and for alienating independent power producers "with what can only be described as a shakedown effort to conserve hard currency." Pakistan's credit rating was slashed this week by Standard & Poor's to a level suggesting default could occur in the next two months. Reserves have dwindled to $700m against short-term liabilities of $10.2bn. Under the sanctions legislation, the US must vote against new loans by the IMF and World Bank to the two countries - but does not have the formal voting power to block new lending. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a discussion list run by Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To be removed/added, email firstname.lastname@example.org, NOT the whole list. Archived at http://linux.clare.cam.ac.uk/~saw27/casi/discuss.html