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] Sent to the BBC re: OFF as 'aid'.

Dear Sir or Madam,

The article 'UN nears new Iraq aid deal' contains a serious error: the
title.  The 'oil for food' programme is the use of Iraqi funds for the
purchase of commodities.  By no stretch of the imagination is it 'financial
or material help given by one country to another', a common dictionary
definition of 'aid'.  This is not linguistic sophistry, but an important
part of the controversy that has surrounded the resumption of the
programme.  Quite apart from the logistic problems of delivering supplies,
the funds committed by the United States and United Kingdom for
humanitarian assistance have been grossly inadequate to cover for the
damage and disruption of the war they are waging.  Instead, Iraqis are
being made to bear all the cost and risk, and the fact that the UN assumes
the authority to administer the funds proceeding from Iraqi exports does
not make it 'aid'.  I look forward to seeing this corrected.

Yours faithfully,

Per Klevnäs

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]