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]
Dear all: I thought you might be interested in this letter I've just sent, especially in light of Moonirah's view that the UK Govt is committed to maintaining the sanctions as long as missing persons are not accounted for. My letter seeks clarification from the FCO. I'll let you know whet the response is. Eric Jon Davies Iraq Section, Middle East Desk Foreign and Commonwealth Office Whitehall London SW1A 2AH 18 April 2000 Dear Jon: UK interpretation of the criteria for suspending/lifting of sanctions on Iraq Thank you and your colleague for meeting with me last week. I look forward to your response to the various points raised. In the meantime, I would be grateful for clarification of UK policy on the criteria for suspending/lifting sanctions. In November of last year you wrote to me regarding SCR 687 that ‘There is a clear distinction of steps which will be taken when Iraq meets its WMD related obligations, and others which are tied explicitly to Iraq's wider "policies and practices" (see paragraphs 21 and 22).’ However, how the UK Government interprets how these two paragraphs relate to each other and how they relate to SCR 1284 is unclear to me. Let me explain: SCR 687 paragraph 21 refers to reviewing the provisions of paragraph 20 (allowing humanitarian supplies) ‘in the light of the policies and practices of the Government of Iraq, including the implementation of all relevant resolutions of the Security Council, for the purpose of determining whether to reduce or lift’ the sanctions. SCR 687 paragraph 22 refers to ending the sanctions if Iraq complies with its NBC-BM obligations. SCR 687 also demands of Iraq that Iraq must also account for all non-Iraqis missing since the invasion of Kuwait, return property it had looted from Kuwait, renounce terrorism and accept responsibility for its external debt. From the wording of the resolution it is unclear whether or not lifting of the sanctions is conditional on compliance with these demands as well. While SCR 1284 reiterates the demands with regard to repatriation, property and so on, it states that once UNMOVIC and IAEA report full Iraqi cooperation with specified disarmament tasks for 120 days, the sanctions are to be suspended for periods of 120 days. The unclarity appears to persist. Put simply, if Iraq complies with the relevant UN resolutions on nuclear, biological and chemical weapon (NBC) and long-range ballistic missile (BM) disarmament, verification and monitoring but not with the other demands upon it, is it the UK Government’s position that the sanctions should be suspended (and eventually lifted)? Or maintained fully? Or maintained at a lesser degree of intensity? Or does the UK Government not have a position on this yet and indicates to cross that bridge when/if it comes to it? Thank you for your assistance. Yours sincerely, ---------------------- Dr. Eric Herring Department of Politics University of Bristol 10 Priory Road Bristol BS8 1TU England, UK Tel. +44-(0)117-928-8582 Fax +44-(0)117-973-2133 http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Politics firstname.lastname@example.org -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq For removal from list, email email@example.com Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website: http://welcome.to/casi