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]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

(Fwd) UK campaign

------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:                   "Amir _" <>
Subject:                Iraqi Sanctions

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.

Salaam, I hope you are well.

1) Intro (by me)
2) Sample letter
3) Contact details
4) Article
5) Reply to article

1) I n t r o

Even Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is asking people to write to the Government to end sanctions, I have 
copied her article below along with a letter to the editor regarding it. I think it would be 
worthwhile to see what your letter can do but remember not to demand the ending of sanctions only 
but also 
for Saddam to be put to trial also because my intelligence source says that one without the other 
will have no affect. If sanctions are ended with Saddam intact then the people will be plundered, 
if Saddam is ended with sanctions intact then the people will be plundered.

I have left you a letter that will save you the time of writing your own letter and also some 
contact details, what is interesting is that contact details given to  me seem to be private 
details, i.e. they are not available to everybody, for example Tony Blair's e-mail address is not 
on the web 
(at least last time I checked). All you have to do is copy the letter and e-amil it - too much to 
ask? Also there is an online petition that I told you about a while ago, if you have not signed it 
please do <>. The IHRC have a campaign pack in PDF format on their website.

2) S a m p l e   l e t t e r

[I find that if you want to e-mail the Government or your MP you either need an address that says 
where you are from like and not or you can leave your postal address or 

Dear Mr Blair,

Are you not ashamed that you are partly responsible for what US congressman David Bonior calls 
"infanticide masquerading as policy"? I do not plan to persuade you that maintenance of sanctions 
upon the Iraqi people is wrong because you know that better than I do. The point of my letter is to 
you when you will end the sanctions and place pressure on Saddam by other means thus relieving the 
innocent Iraqi people but not Saddam.

Running away from this issue and not facing the facts is useless as it is well reported that 
sanctions are responsible for the suffocation of the Iraqi people. Reports such as Yasmin 
Alibhai-Brown's of the Independent and BBC Radio 4's "From our Own Correspondent" confirm this. 
With elections 
ever nearer you may find that gross neglect of human life may turn your "Ethical Foreign Policy" 
into an Albertros around your neck. 

Mr. Blair, baby Leo's of Iraq who have wronged none are deprived of a chance to grow up and their 
parents are left to bury them. I look forward to your reply.


3) C o n t a c t   d e t a i l s

Tony Blair
Fax office:- - 0207 925 0918
Fax private:- 0207-930-9572
Tel:- - - - - - 0207-270-3000

Labour Party:

4) A r t i c l e

Ten years of sanctions have failed to oust Saddam. But they're killing Iraq 
The Independent July 31st, 2000 
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
`Sanctions and bombings are creating new generations of young Iraqis  who hate the West'
Ten years. Ten years is a long time. And it is ten, slow, bleeding years this week since the UN 
sanctions against Iraq were imposed following the Gulf War. The First World War lasted only four 
years; the Second, six. Yet these historical events feel massively more extended than they actually 
because we are, quite understandably, never allowed to forget them. All I am comparing here is 
time. When it comes to Iraq, time has lost all meaning, vapourised into nothingness, because there 
is barely any public consciousness of what has been happening in that country. 

The consequences of the draconian UN sanctions policy are there for all to see if they choose to 
look. The mortality rate for children under five has risen from 48 per thousand in 1990 to 125 per 
thousand in 1999. One in four children is under-nourished, a rise of 73 per cent since 1991. The UN 
sanctions committee has the right to veto anything from getting to Iraq. Today you cannot get 
books, envelopes or paints for children. The infrastructure has been demolished. Iraqi doctors, 
physiotherapists, lawyers, writers, have had to sell almost everything they own to buy basic 

One of the most powerful images of this is a picture taken by photographer Karen Robinson showing a 
line of loved dolls propped up against a pavement waiting to be sold by desperate families. In 
1996, the American journalist Lesley Stahl asked Madeleine Albright if she was concerned that more 
children appeared to have died in Iraq than in Hiroshima. She replied: "I think this is a very hard 
choice, but the price 

 we think is worth it." 

Once in a while an ethical journalist writes an impassioned article or a resourceful but powerless 
anti-sanctions campaign group organises a meeting for the converted. The Muslim News, The New 
Internationalist and some internet sources try their best to agitate and educate but they have 
effect on the wider population, which remains either ignorant or wilfully indifferent to what is 
being done in our name to some of the most highly accomplished, educated and cultured people on 

I say "Iraqis" and not "Saddam Hussein". The UN sanctions are meant to tame Saddam not to punish 
the Iraqi people, or so we are told with nauseating regularity by the powerful. Oh Yes? Call me 
stupid for asking such a naive question, but how is it then that Saddam is still in control and not 
looking an inch thinner while according to UNICEF, 5000 children are dying each month as a direct 
result of the sanctions? Oh, simple, answers the Foreign Office website: "Sanctions are not 
responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people. Sanctions could have been lifted within months 
of their 
imposition if Iraq had chosen to comply with its obligations rather than obstructing weapons 

The first thing to note here is the use of the word "Iraq". Is it not grotesque that "Iraq" is used 
as a synonym for Saddam, a ruthless dictator who has systematically cowed and throttled Iraq so 
that nobody else in that country has a voice or even a whisper of their own? 

The Foreign Office is right that the ruling regime in Iraq is to blame for provoking the responses 
and nobody I know would argue against military sanctions. But do our politicians really expect a 
power-crazy dictator who uses terror and torture, to don a white robe when the evening comes and go 
out handing over to his people the food and medicines which are allowed under the "Oil for Food" UN 
humanitarian programme? Or is their calculation based on the expectation that driven mad, the most 
malnourished, defeated and sick citizens of Iraq will one day storm the doors of the many palaces 
and bring us out Saddam's head on a stick? 

I lived under such a dictator once. Idi Amin, like Saddam Hussein, was once thought a good, 
dependable chap with whom the West could do business. When he showed himself to be the villain he 
always was, it was his people who he turned on. If sanctions had been imposed on Uganda in the 
Seventies, already-oppressed Ugandans would have suffered even more and Amin would have blamed the 
West for their woes. 

I met the tyrant in 1971 when I was twenty-one at an event where student leaders could meet the 
country's leaders. He was already heating up under the pressures being put on him by Israel, the US 
and the UK, who were tired of giving him vast amounts of aid money. He said that if all aid 
he didn't care. People could starve, he said 

 eat mud or each other (it is believed that he, in fact, relished human flesh), before he would go 
begging again. To expect tyrants to go all humanitarian because the UN demands it is insane. In 
South Africa, those opposing the Apartheid regime were prepared to suffer the sanctions for 
freedom. I 
have never met a single Iraqi from the opposition who agrees with the UN sanctions policies. 

There is evidence that misery is mounting in Iraq and that more Westerners are becoming vocal in 
challenging the UN policies. Besides the dedicated and tenacious work of individual journalists 
such as the New Internationalist's Nikki Van der Gaag, we now have the voices of two ex-UN 
Co-Ordinators. The first, Denis Halliday, left because he felt: "We are in the process of 
destroying an entire nation... It is illegal and immoral." His successor, Hans von Sponeck, left 
this February for the same reason. Politicians such as Alice Mahon and US congressman David Bonior 
Michigan, are getting more and more critical, in part because they know that these sanctions and 
the unquestioned, continuing bombings of Iraq are creating new generations of young Iraqis who hate 
the West. Der Gaag met a young child in Iraq recently who had drawn a picture of a white soldier 
shooting flowers. American and English soldiers, she explained, hated flowers. 

We must wake up and this is the week for it. Protests begin today and will continue all week with 
meetings and "Die-Ins" 

 mock corpses which will place themselves in key localities around London. Similar peaceful 
demonstrations are planned in Canada, the USA, France, Southern Ireland and Italy. Most of us may 
not feel comfortable with anything that dramatic. But what is there to stop us writing in to our MP 
Downing Street? 

5) R e p l y   t o   a r t i c l e

[sent to me by the Mariam appeal]

Letter - Our friend Saddam. 

By John Kinahan.
Sir: Yasmin Alibhai-Brown's excellent article about sanctions against Iraq (31 July) quotes the 
Foreign Office website as claiming that "sanctions are not responsible for the suffering of the 
Iraqi people". Amongst the omissions from the Foreign Office's line is recognition of Britain's 
responsibility for the Iraqi people's suffering before the Gulf War.

When in the British Council, I was ordered by the Council's then representative in Iraq to (I quote 
his exact words) "present the correct positive line about the regime of Saddam Hussein". This was 
after the gassing of Kurdish villagers was widely reported and in response to the increasing number 
of British academics refusing to be recruited by the British Council to work in Iraq.
It is nauseatingly hypocritical of British politicians and civil servants to claim concern for the 
suffering of the Iraqi people, whilst refusing to face our own part in that suffering. It also 
helps to ensure the repetition of the same selfish, short-sighted and ultimately stupid behaviour 
patterns elsewhere - look at British arms sales to Indonesia.
(c) Independent Newspapers (UK) Limited 2000

------- End of forwarded message -------
This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email
Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]