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]
Richard, As far as I can see, the main differences between the two resolutions lies in clauses 10-13 of the Russian draft. The S-G's most recent report recommended that all items except those on the 1051 dual-use list be pre-approved, and only notified to the S-G instead of submitted for approval to the 661 Committee. Clauses 10 and 11 implement that recommendation in the electricity and housing sector and commit, somewhat vaguely, to implement it in all sectors as soon as possible. This seems to differ from the British proposal by not creating a new 23-page list of questionable items, instead sticking to the old 1051 list. Clause 12 cuts the UNCC withholding to 20% Clause 13 says all contracts currently on hold should be taken care of within 60 days. The British resolution also helps institutionalize the sanctions by bringing Turkey, Jordan, and Syria completely within their purview, unlike the Russian. It seems that the Russian draft is a tinkering which improves things (from the point of view of the Iraqi government) wherever it changes them, while the British draft is an attempt to recast the whole thing, institution many changes for the worse (again, from the govt's perspective) along with those for the better. In solidarity, Rahul Mahajan >Dear all > >I've looked at the Russian SCR draft and it's even more >incomprehensible than the British draft. > >As far as I could tell it just involves tinkering around with oil >for food, maintaining the escrow account. > > I couldn't figure out if there was anything in there about allowing >foreign loans and credits for infrastructure repairs, which could be >in Russia's interest, preuming Russian companies got the work. > >It looked unlikely to me that the Iraqis would accept it. In fact i >was hard put to figure out how it differed from the British draft > >Can anyone make any more sense of it? > >Richard Byrne -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq For removal from list, email firstname.lastname@example.org Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website: http://www.casi.org.uk