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]

[casi] News, 12-19/4/02 (titles)

News, 12-19/4/02

This rather rough and ready news mailing is a
week late owing to a jinx operating against the
news compiler or, more precisely, against a
variety of computers the news compiler is
using. These problems, sorry to say, are still

NEWS, 12-19/4/02 (1)


*  Oman signs free-trade pact with Iraq
*  Call to raise voice for Iraqi children [Not
before time that an anti-sanctions movement
should develope among Iraq’s neighbours in
the Gulf.]
*  52 killed, 122 injured while defusing Iraqi
mines: Official [in Iran]
* Daily comments on Saddam's blunder
[Iranian argument that unilaterally cutting off oil
supply merely weakens the Arab/Muslim, and
especially Iraqi, hand.]
*  Egyptian trade fair opens in Baghdad


*  War is best road to peace [If a cess pit could
talk, this is what it would sound like. Easily
wins the prize for most nauseating article of
the week.]
*  Iraq War: The Coming Disaster [I don’t know
who Immanuel Wallerstein is. But he seems
to be an intelligent conservative, attacking US
imperialist adventures from a point of view of
US self interest and proclaimed values. As
things stand at the resent time such people
are rarer and more precious than diamonds.
Note, for example, the following: ‘the U.S.
economic  position is not significantly better
than that of  the European Union or Japan.
This relative  economic decline has cost the
U.S. the  unquestioned political deference of
its close  allies. All that is left is military
superiority.  And, as Machiavelli taught us all
centuries ago,  force is not enough: If that’s all
you have, then  its use is a sign of weakness
rather than of  strength and weakens the
user.’ That’s the sort of thing we don’t hear
very often.]
*  Our enemy’s enemies [I share Nick
Cohen’s feeling that there is something nasty
about the way the CIA has been trashing the
INC. Still, when he says: ‘The  INC left me in
no doubt that its guerrillas will  carry on
fighting if Saddam is replaced with  another
dictator.’ one wonders what ‘guerrillas’ he is
talking about. The only guerrillas in sight are
the Supreme Council for the Islamic
Revolution, and somehow Shi’i
fundamentalist revolutionaries don’t seem to
be so much in favour as they once were
among the world’s most powerful paymasters
of terror.]
*  Crisscrosses hamper arms inspection in
Iraq [Extracts. The article indicates very clearly
that the ‘debate’ between the Defense and the
State departments is about timing. not
principle. The State Department think (almost
certainly rightly) that wepaons inspections are
a necessary legal cover for the forthcoming
war, useful for securing the necessary general
state of paranoia and inducing international
compliance. The Defense Department think
(almost certainly rightly) that the mood in the
US is perfect for an immediate strike, and
advantage should be taken of it.]
*  Rumsfeld: Iraq Checks Not Worthwhile
*  Legality of intervention against Iraq [Letter to
The Times in which former diplomat, Sir Brian
Barder, argues that military intervention
should always require the consent of the UN
Security Council. Which would be fine except
that the UN Security Council, by putting the
most powerful countries in the world above
the law, is not itself founded on any legal
principle that is worthy of respect. It occupies
the position of an ‘arbitrary monarch’ (without
even possessing the coherence of a real
monarch’s will). Sir Brian goes on to say that
to get the UNSC permission for a strike (on
the ludicrous pretext, which he takes very
seriously, of Iraqi military capacity) the US
should renounce the aim of overthrowing
Saddam Hussein. Which is a monstrous
proposal to make. I am deeply opposed to the
forthcoming war on Iraq but, if it is to be fought,
it MUST result in the end of sanctions. Which,
given the intellectual limitations of the current
Masters of the Universe, will never happen so
long as Mr Hussein remains in power.]
*  Mideast distracts US from Iraq [Extract]

AND IN NEWS, 12-19/4/02 (2)


*  Oil is the reason America wants to be rid of
Saddam [Argues that European and US
interests with regard to oil are different. As far
as Iraq is concerned, the US is anxious to
keep it united (= Sunni strongman) while
Europe should be quite happy to see it split in
three (= popular rising). Doesn’t have much to
say about what people living in Iraq might
think about it all.]
*  If Military History Should Repeat Itself, Will
The Markets And Economy Follow Suit?
[Argues that a war on Iraq shouldn’t do much
harm to the stock market. So that’s all right.]
*  Will the euro be a casualty of Blair’s Iraq
war? [Short extract]


*  IRAQ DIARY, Part 8: Ghosts [Pepe Escobar]
*  IRAQ DIARY, Part 9: The voice of a Baghdad
Palestinian [Pepe Escobar]


*  Iraq warnings prompt rush to order vaccine
*  Iraqis 'could turn camel virus into


*  Washington’s Chavez dilemma [Not a lot to
do with Iraq but we include this and the
following just for the pleasure that this incident
has given us.]
*  Oil rises as OPEC champion Chavez
returns to power
*  U.S. Planes Met With Iraqi Fire [US/British
airstrikes start up again]
*  European peace delegation arrives in
*  Jasmine rice for Iraq [from Thailand]
*  60,000 tons wheat being exported to Iraq
[from Pakistan]

This mail sent through UK Online webmail

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]