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]
|
Voices in the Wilderness UK LETTER-WRITING
CAMPAIGN:
OIL MEANS MONEY MEANS LIFE
1) Intro
2) Hopeful Signs
3) Action
4) Text of letters to UK Foreign Office and US Embassy
(UK) Dear All,
Intro
As you will have gathered from the Secretary-General's
latest report http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/reports/s-2000-208.htm and
recent reports from New York, the UN system feels that one key issue of the
moment is the holds on oil industry spare parts and equipment, which are
threatening oil output, future oil revenues, and therefore Iraq's ability to
purchase humanitarian goods. The spare parts/eqpt are themselves therefore vital
humanitarian goods.
HOPEFUL SIGNS
1) The US has given way on the dredger contract they were
blocking, highlighted by the S-G in his 10 March report, which will help in
loading/off-loading at Umm Qasr.
2) The US has also lifted 15.6m dollars worth of
oil-related contracts. ( http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/2fc49a7d4815f90a852568af0079376c?OpenDocument.
)
3) The US and UK have also agreed finally to the doubling
of the allocation for oil industry spare parts from 300m to 600m dollars per 6
month phase (UNSCR 1293, 31 March 2000, http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/scrs/scr1293-00.htm )
So, pressure from the UN system has paid off to a certain
extent. But there is a long way to go, even just on the oil spare parts/eqpt
story. Hence the following letters. Let's add our voices to Kofi
Annan's.
ACTION
Voices in the Wilderness UK has just circulated the
following letters to 750 people on our mailing list for immediate action. We
would be very grateful if anyone receiving this who are not also recipients of
our paper newsletter would also sign and send one or both of the following
letters - amended as you see fit (perhaps to your nearest UK and US
representatives if you are outside the UK).
Note: The US Embassy letter has specific US elements, similarly the Peter
Hain version has things addressed to him in particular.
Best wishes
Milan Rai
4) Text of letters to UK Foreign Office and US Embassy
(UK) Letter to Peter Hain MP, Minister of State at the British
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Peter Hain MP Your Name: Foreign and Commonwealth Office Your Address: Whitehall, London SW1 UK Date: Dear Peter Hain, Remarks attributed to you in the New Statesman indicate that you are in charge of developing Robin Cook's famous 'ethical dimension' to British foreign policy. As you will know from the reaction to John Pilger's powerful documentary on the subject, many people regard the continued imposition of economic sanctions on Iraq as the most 'unethical' element of current British foreign policy. I am writing to urge you to push British policy towards the immediate lifting of the economic sanctions. One immediate step to improve the humanitarian situation in Iraq would be to allow Iraq to freely import spare parts and equipment for its oil industry. As you are no doubt aware, the whole foundation of the oil-for-food programme, and of any post-sanctions effort at reconstruction, is Iraq's earnings from its oil exports. Without oil, there would be no money for medicines, for the imported food on which Iraqi families depend, and for the equipment needed for the repair of Iraq’s civilian infrastructure. If Iraq's oil production capacity declines, less oil can be exported, less money can be earned, and smaller quantities of vital humanitarian goods can be bought and distributed. Spare parts and equipment for the Iraqi oil industry are therefore urgently needed humanitarian goods, without which the humanitarian situation will deteriorate. More people will die if they are not speedily supplied. While I am heartened to learn that the UN Security Council has finally agreed to double the allocation for oil spares and equipment from $300m to $600m every six months, I am dismayed by the fact that it has taken since October of last year for the Security Council to act on this recommendation of the UN Secretary-General. I am also outraged to discover, given the humanitarian significance of these items, that the UN Security Council Sanctions Committee - on which Britain sits - has actually been obstructing the supply of oil spare parts and equipment to Iraq. The UN Secretary-General, in his latest report on Iraq (10 March 2000), makes clear that the continuing delays in approving these goods is increasingly posing a risk of 'long-term' and 'irreversible' damage to Iraqi oil fields, and will probably lead to decreases in production/export capacity of 5 to 15 per cent in the short-term. Kofi Annan pointed out that while $1.2bn of oil-for-food money has been allocated to this area, only $506m worth of goods had been approved. Less than a quarter of the goods permitted ($250m worth) has actually arrived in Iraq. While the USA has removed a large number of ‘holds’ on oil spare parts and equipment recently, this still leaves around $275m worth of parts and equipment placed on hold by (unidentified) members of the Sanctions Committee. The respected oil industry journal Middle East Economic Survey (27 March) notes that ‘endorsing an increase in expenditures is one thing and the actual arrival of more spare parts in Iraq is another, since the problem was not the amount of money available but the holds placed on contracts by the US and the UK.’ If it is true that Britain is currently imposing ‘holds’ on oil spare parts and equipment, I ask you to provide a detailed explanation for the holds. I ask you to provide an assurance that the British government will move immediately to lift these holds, and that it will not in the future, place holds on such vital humanitarian goods. The deepening problems for oil-for-food caused by the behaviour of the Sanctions Committee in this vital area strengthen my belief that lifting the economic sanctions immediately and unconditionally is, as urged by Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, the best way to begin solving the appalling tragedy in Iraq. I urge you to improve the ethical content of our policy towards Iraq in the ways suggested above, or to consider following the example of these brave former UN Humanitarian Coordinators for Iraq. Yours sincerely Letter to The Honourable Philip Lader, US Ambassador,
London
The Honourable Philip Lader Your Name: The US Your Address: Grosvenor Square London, SW1 Date Dear Mr Ambassador, I write to express my deep concern at the attitude of the United States towards the humanitarian crisis in Iraq. The recent resignations of two top UN humanitarian personnel, and the UN Secretary-General’s remarks concerning the ‘moral dilemma’ posed by sanctions on Iraq, have dramatized the crisis of conscience facing the international community. One immediate step to improve the humanitarian situation in Iraq would be to allow Iraq to freely import spare parts and equipment for its oil industry. As you are no doubt aware, the whole foundation of the oil-for-food programme, and of any post-sanctions effort at reconstruction, is Iraq's earnings from its oil exports. Without oil, there would be no money for medicines, for the imported food on which Iraqi families depend, and for the equipment needed for the repair of Iraq’s civilian infrastructure. If Iraq's oil production capacity declines, less oil can be exported, less money can be earned, and smaller quantities of vital humanitarian goods can be bought and distributed. Spare parts and equipment for the Iraqi oil industry are therefore urgently needed humanitarian goods, without which the humanitarian situation will deteriorate. More people will die if they are not speedily supplied. While I am heartened to learn that the UN Security Council has finally agreed to double the allocation for oil spares and equipment from $300m to $600m every six months, I am dismayed by the fact that it has taken since October of last year for the Security Council to act on this recommendation of the UN Secretary-General. I am also outraged to discover, given the humanitarian significance of these items, that the UN Security Council Sanctions Committee - on which the United States sits - has actually been obstructing the supply of oil spare parts and equipment to Iraq. The UN Secretary-General, in his latest report on Iraq (10 March 2000), makes clear that the continuing delays in approving these goods is increasingly posing a risk of 'long-term' and 'irreversible' damage to Iraqi oil fields, and will probably lead to decreases in production/export capacity of 5 to 15 per cent in the short-term. Kofi Annan pointed out that while $1.2bn of oil-for-food money has been allocated to this area, only $506m worth of goods had been approved. Less than a quarter of the goods permitted ($250m worth) has actually arrived in Iraq. While the USA has removed a large number of ‘holds’ on oil spare parts and equipment recently, this still leaves around $275m worth of parts and equipment placed on hold by (unidentified) members of the Sanctions Committee. The respected oil industry journal Middle East Economic Survey (27 March) notes that ‘endorsing an increase in expenditures is one thing and the actual arrival of more spare parts in Iraq is another, since the problem was not the amount of money available but the holds placed on contracts by the US and the UK.’ If it is true that the US is currently imposing the majority of ‘holds’ on oil spare parts and equipment, I ask you to provide a detailed explanation for these holds. I ask you to provide an assurance that the US government will move immediately to lift its remaining holds, and that it will not in the future, place holds on such vital humanitarian goods. US Ambassador James Cunningham informed the UN Security Council on 24 March that the United States has on hold 14 contracts containing items destined for what he described as ‘the unauthorized export facility at Khor al-Amaya’. I find this attitude difficult to understand, given that two weeks earlier the Secretary-General had reported that ‘Two berths at the Khor al Amaya loading platform are under repair as an alternative to Mina al Bakr should technical problems occur’ at the latter loading platform, whose ‘safety and operational capabilities’ remain ‘a major concern’. I also find it curious that Ambassador Cunningham laid such stress in his speech on holds imposed by the US while awaiting ‘further information’ from contractors, when he himself conceded that the US had a similar number (339) of contracts on hold ‘because we have not reviewed additional information that we have received’. The deepening problems for the oil-for-food programme caused by the behaviour of the Sanctions Committee in this vital area strengthen my belief that lifting the economic sanctions immediately and unconditionally is, as urged by Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, the best way to begin solving the appalling tragedy in Iraq. I urge you to resolve the ‘moral dilemma’ of US policy towards Iraq by speaking up for the ordinary people of Iraq in the ways suggested above, or to consider following the example of these brave former UN Humanitarian Coordinators for Iraq. Yours sincerely END OF LETTERS
These letters drafted by
|