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]
>Suzy Kane wrote: " But won't >extracting oil in Iraq be a problem for a while? Is the UN escrow fund >large enough to dip into for humanitarian aid without the further sale >of oil?" It is not clear whether, as allegded (see below) the UN escrow/oil for food account has $48 billion (!)in it. Since it takes time, I think six months, for profits from oil for food to show up in the escrow account, there must presently be money in the account. Another reason why I think there must be money in the account is that the US and UK habitually hold up most contracts going to Iraq, and therefore money is not spent. I propose a) finding out exactly how much is in the escrow account. b) demanding that proceeds from that account continue to flow as humanitarian aid, either through NGOs, the Red Cross, a neutral country (Malaysia?) or the Arab League c) have the escrow account be open for individual private donations if the flow of humanitarian aid can be secured. Philippa Ppg sent the CASI list this which shows that in Russia at least it is an issue: Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2003/03/20/042.html Thursday, Mar. 20, 2003. Page 7 Report: U.S. Plans to Tap $40Bln Iraq Account More than $40 billion from Iraqi crude sales are sitting in an escrow account controlled by the United Nations, and the United States and Britain want to use it to pay for humanitarian war aid, The Associated Press reported Wednesday. The news agency said the $40 billion figure came from "previously undisclosed UN figures," and represented money Baghdad was unable to spend under the oil-for-food program, which was introduced to soften the blow of economic sanctions imposed on Iraq after it invaded neighboring Kuwait in 1990. Citing unnamed diplomats and UN sources, the AP said Russia and the other Security Council members have asked Secretary General Kofi Annan to oversee any use of the money to avoid further conflicts within the council. The proposal, which apparently envisages a quick overthrow of the Iraqi regime, will reportedly be put forward by Annan shortly after the war begins. Neither Washington nor London will have direct access to the alleged cash, which would ease their liabilities in rebuilding a post-war Iraq. It would also mean the end of any deals that Russian, French or other countries have with Baghdad through the oil-for-food program, according to the AP. A UN spokesman for the program said Iraq has $1.3 billion in nonearmarked funds on an account set up for the northern regions of the country. He could not say how much there might be in the account on top of that in funds pegged for deals that have not yet been concluded . A senior UN diplomat involved with the program in New York said late Wednesday that the UN liked to keep details of those earmarked funds "close to its chest." Another account, for the central and southern regions of the country, has a cumulative shortfall of almost $5.4 billion in approved contracts that could not be covered by revenues due to fluctuations in the oil supply, the UN spokesman said.It also has another $9 billion in funds earmarked for other deals still in the pipeline. However, the senior diplomat denied that Iraq had $40 billion in any or all of its United Nations' accounts. "The $40 billion is the amount that has gone through one of Iraq's UN accounts under the oil-for-food program over the last six years,'' he said on condition of anonymity. "That's how much has been used." The plan being put forward by the United States and Britain would not end the oil-for-food program, but adapt it, he said, adding that the goal was to give humanitarian supplies of foodstuffs and medicines priority over equipment. The idea is to make use of deals totaling $6 billion that have already been approved, but not yet delivered, he said. Russia has been a major supplier under the oil-for-food program, making it potentially the biggest loser if the program is wound up. France is the next biggest supplier, followed by Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, and China, according to the UN. Russia's Economic Development and Trade Ministry released figures Wednesday showing that Russian oil firms won contracts to sell 124 million barrels of Iraqi oil in 2002, or 40 percent of the country's total crude exports. Some 15 Russian firms brokered Iraqi crude deals worth a total of $2.8 billion last year, the ministry said. In addition, some 60 Russian firms exported a total of $1.5 billion worth of goods, services and equipment to Iraq in 2002. French diplomats told The Associated Press that France and Russia want Iraq's funds to remain under UN control, rather than the U.S. or Britain. The oil-for-food program was suspended Monday because of the evacuation of UN staff from Iraq. A new resolution is necessary to continue the flow of humanitarian goods into Iraq because the current agreement was made with the government of Saddam Hussein. ===== Original Message From "Suzy T. Kane" <firstname.lastname@example.org> ===== >Good points, Philippa, but I would like to add another question: the >oil-for-food program is part of the sanctions system, so why isn't the >lifting of sanctions included in the so-called "liberation" of Iraq? To >keep sanctions going after the war would be a scandal. > >Perhaps the UN could administer humanitarian help for the Iraqis outside >the oil-for-food plan through NGO's, as Philippa suggests. But won't >extracting oil in Iraq be a problem for a while? Is the UN escrow fund >large enough to dip into for humanitarian aid without the further sale >of oil? > >Suzy > >-----Original Message----- >From: email@example.com >[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of pjw8 >Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 8:06 AM >To: casi-discuss; peter kiernan; pjw8 >Subject: RE: [casi] oil for food program stopped > > >>Yes, this raises several important issues. First of all, Iraq >is effectively now under complete siege BY THE ORDER OF THE UN. If the >UN >Security Council did not vote for this war, then how is it that the UN >oil for >food program has been stopped? Saying it is because UN officials >running the >program, had to leave Iraq, is a poor excuse. >In cases of an attack by an aggressor, there should be a back-up plan >to keep the income flowing into the country. For example, the UN could >have turned the management of the oil for food program over to non- >governmental organizations. >And, as Peter Kiernan says, where does that leave the UN Escrow Account >after >the war? >The point is, the oil for food program needs to be reinstated as soon >as possible, and that falls under the mandate of the UN Security >Council. >Perhaps someone with contacts on the Security Council, or a media >reporter, >could follow up on this ASAP, Philippa Winkler > >===== Original Message From peter kiernan <email@example.com> ===== >>There were some media reports last week that the US has a plan to >employ >>Iraqi soldiers in reconstruction work after the war, and pay their >salaries. >>Donald Rumsfeld stated that money to pay these salaries would come from >>Iraq's overseas frozen assets, and from the Oil for Food program >account. To >>my knowledge there is no facility in the now suspended program to pay >>salaries for civil servants or military personnel, and any change would >>require a SC resolution. No-one in the press picked up that the funds >for >>oil for food are kept in a UN controlled escrow account, and there >would be >>legality issues if the US or any-one else wanted to get access to it. I >>think this is something worth following. >>Peter Kiernan >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "pjw8" <Philippa.Winkler@NAU.EDU> >>To: "casi-discuss" <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 4:30 PM >>Subject: [casi] oil for food program stopped >> >> >>> Friends, >>> The US Department of Energy is now giving daily updates on energy >prices >>etc, >>> because of the war: >>> website:http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/security/esar/esar.html. >>> >>> This was sent by the DoE: >>> >>> "Production/Export/Infrastructure Developments >>> Iraq: As of Thursday morning, Iraqi oil exports effectively were >halted >>except >>> for a small amount of remaining oil to be loaded from storage tanks >at >>> Turkey's >>> port of Ceyhan. This is because, with the departure of UN staff from >Iraq >>and >>> with war appearing imminent, the UN "oil-for-food" program is >effectively >>on >>> hold. Earlier reports had indicated that no oil was leaving Iraq's >Persian >>> Gulf >>> port of Mina al-Bakr, and that buyers were shying away from purchases >of >>Iraqi >>> oil. As of 9 AM Thursday, there have been reports (on Kuwaiti and >Iranian >>> television) regarding possible oil fires near Basra in southern Iraq. >>Iraqi >>> Oil >>> Minister Rasheed has denied these reports. In statements made on >Thursday >>> afternoon, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that he has seen >>indications >>> that the Iraqi regime may have set fires to oil wells in the South. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >email@example.com >>> All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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 > > >_______________________________________________ >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 email@example.com >All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk > > > > >_______________________________________________ >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 _______________________________________________ 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 email@example.com All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk