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]
Thank you Elga. > Adding atropine to the list of forbidden items is one > of the main reasons the US is stalling on the Oil-for-Food > program. As a point of clarification, the Goods Review List (GRL), whose contents are the centre of the UN debate here, is not a list of banned items. The goods on the list are subject to review by the Security Council's Iraq Sanctions Committee. Non-military items not on the GRL are not, and may be approved directly by UN technical staff (Unmovic and the IAEA). One of the odd aspects of the atropine story (which stems from a 12 November New York Times article by Judith Miller) is that there is no evidence that Iraq has ordered it in significant quantities through the UN. These data do not show Iraq to have ordered 2mg doses (the usual anti-CW volume) of atrophine since 1997. The quantities then ordered of 2mg ampoules seem small (3,000) and consistent with the civilian needs of a country the size of Iraq. As up to 200 mg of atropine can be used by single patients to counter poisoning, it is clear that this quantity would have very limited battlefield significance. Larger quantities of 0.6mg and 1.0mg ampoules have been ordered over the years. These are not regarded as particularly useful against CW. Further, holds placed on them prior to the adoption of SCR 1409 (May 2002), the absence of money available in the escrow account and shipping delays mean that past orders are only just expected to maintain a continuous supply for civilian needs. I have heard no indication that auto-injectors have been ordered. I do not know whether orders have been placed outside the UN programme, including orders of auto-injectors. I also do not know how easily 0.6mg and 1.0mg doses can be repackaged as 2.0mg doses domestically. The sense of my sources was that this had truth at core, but that it is being spun. Best, Colin Rowat work | Room 406, Department of Economics | The University of Birmingham | Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK | web.bham.ac.uk/c.rowat | (+44/0) 121 414 3754 | (+44/0) 121 414 7377 (fax) | firstname.lastname@example.org personal | (+44/0) 7768 056 984 (mobile) | (+44/0) 7092 378 517 (fax) | (707) 221 3672 (US fax) | email@example.com _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email firstname.lastname@example.org All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk