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] Halliday: Iraqi People Facing Humanitarian Crisis



Iraqi People Facing Humanitarian Crisis
An Interview With Dennis Halliday

by Dennis Halliday and Scott Harris
Between the Lines
April 07, 2003

As U.S. and British soldiers fight for control of southern Iraq on their way
toward a crucial battle in Baghdad, civilians in large cities like Basra and
smaller towns are confronting severe shortages of water, food and medicine.
But with the American military insisting that they alone will control the
distribution of aid, several international relief organizations are
reluctant to participate, not wanting to be identified with a U.S. invasion
viewed by many as illegal and launched without U.N. Security Council
authorization. The fact that much of the territory now occupied by U.S
forces remains unsecure, makes the distribution of supplies by the Pentagon
itself that much more difficult and chaotic.

Aid agencies from around the world have demanded that President Bush place
the humanitarian relief effort under the supervision of United Nations
agencies and personnel with many years of experience in Iraq. With an eye
toward post-war administration of Iraq, the Security Council recently voted
to transfer control of Iraq's oil for food program to U.N. Secretary General
Koffi Anan.

Between The Lines' Scott Harris spoke with Denis Halliday, a former
Under-Secretary General at the U.N. who administered Iraq's oil for food
program before he resigned in protest against economic sanctions in 1998.
Halliday discusses the current humanitarian crisis confronting the people of
Iraq and the legal obligation of the American and British invasion force to
provide immediate aid to the desperate and frightened population under their
control.
---------------------------------------

Denis Halliday: Well, for me this war is of course unnecessary. It
constitutes blatant aggression by the United States and Britain outside the
bounds of the United Nations without any resolution under Chapter 7 of the
charter in support. I mean it's an extraordinary adventure for two permanent
members of the U.N. Security Council to undertake a war in complete breach
of the charter, international law and without the support of the vast, vast
majority of member states of the organization.
And for me of course the crisis now is, that it be stopped if possible and
end the humanitarian catastrophe in the making. Failing that, at least those
responsible -- and that is Britain and the United States -- respond to their
obligations under the Geneva Conventions and meet the needs for water, food
and other needs of the Iraqi people in their area of control.

Between The Lines: Denis Halliday could you give us an assessment of the
humanitarian crisis that the Iraqi people are now faced with after the first
week of the conflict?

Denis Halliday: Yes, when I was in Baghdad in January and February, the
government had distributed three or four months of its basic food
supplies -- that's wheat, rice, flour, cooking oil, sugar, tea -- all the
very minimal, but basic needs of the family, including powdered full cream
milk and cheese. I think what's probably happened is some of the poorer
families have sold some of these (food items) in order to buy fresh
vegetables, meat, chicken, eggs and fruit. There seems to be some shortage
now of food, we understand at least, in Basra in the south of the country,
although they also receive these supplies. I understand from the Iraqi
Minister of Trade a few days ago that they are actually still trying to send
food to people in Basra.

The immediate crisis, however, other than food -- which (may happen) in a
matter of weeks perhaps -- is the immediate problem of water. Iraq is one of
these countries that does not have natural potable water supplies. It needs
to be treated, it needs to be distributed -- that requires of course a
system, an infrastructure, but also electric power. Now, when these systems
collapse in times of hostilities, whether it's deliberate or not deliberate,
the consequence for the children in particular is catastrophic.

As UNICEF was telling us just recently, in the south of Iraq 25 percent or
more of children under 5 years of age are already malnourished. When you're
malnourished at that age and you get unclean water, just simple diarrhea is
enough to take your life. And of course, dysentery or other more serious
problems, waterborne disease, is an absolute killer. So that I think is the
absolute immediate crisis that several millions obviously are facing in Um
Qaser, Nasiriyah, Basra, Najaf or Karbala to the south of Baghdad.

Between The Lines: Could you summarize for our listeners what international
law says, and the Geneva Convention states about the responsibilities of
invading forces such as the United States and the United Kingdom at this
moment when increasing numbers of Iraqi citizens are falling under their
control in occupied zones in their own country?

Denis Halliday: Well, the Geneva conventions are quite specific. They
establish that the responsibility for the humanitarian care of civilians and
of course those military types who surrender fall squarely on the shoulders
of those in aggression, the combatants -- in this case the United States and
Britain. That of course presents a huge challenge to the United States in
the south of Iraq today, given the difficulties we've described with regard
to water, and the violence of the response and the difficulty of bringing in
food and water to people under these hostile conditions.
But their responsibility is there. This responsibility in fact goes way
beyond the hostilities per se, understanding it's the fourth protocol which
says that this obligation extends up to one year. And therefore for the
United States to (search for) other sources of funding -- although of course
any part of the so-called coalition I guess (may be) willing to put in some
money -- is really negligent of its budgetary and other responsibilities in
this connection.

Between The Lines: Do you see any sign that the United States and Britain
are taking seriously their obligations and making distribution of food,
water and medicine a high priority in this war?

Denis Halliday: No, I'm very sad to say, despite the television coverage,
what I'm seeing is propaganda. A lot of hoopla about bringing in one ship
into Um Qaser. It wasn't an orderly system, it looked more like looting to
me. But nevertheless, it was distribution from the back of a truck to
aggressive young men who came out of these places to look for food and took
the packets and the water. But that does not guarantee that the food gets to
orphans, to single mothers, to families.
This is a humiliation, in my view, of the Iraqi people who are being forced
to beg, in a sense, in their own country under these terrible conditions
imposed upon them by the United States and Britain. It's tragic. To watch it
I find it absolutely awful and it must humiliate, not just the Arabs in
Iraq, but throughout the entire community.

Between The Lines: Denis Halliday, there seems to be a palpable fear that
terrorists will strike in reaction to the U.S. war against Iraq. The Bush
administration, on the contrary, basically says that this war in Iraq will
make the United State safer. But of course there are others who say that
this inflames an already desperate hatred of the United States and its
policies -- particularly in the Middle East, particularly around Israel and
now with this war in Iraq. Do you think that in the end the Bush
administration will be vindicated in executing this war to make America a
safer place?

Denis Halliday: No, of course I don't see it that way. In my view the
pre-emptive strike that was 9-11in New York City was the beginning of a
process and to respond with the sort of violence that Mr. Bush responded
with in Afghanistan and now very falsely in my view linking al Qaeda to
Iraq -- and now with the Iraq war -- is of course exactly the wrong way to
go about it. This is a guarantee of recruitment of many into terrorist
organizations, if that's the way it works with al Qaeda or others. It's
exactly the way to maintain the frustration, anger and poverty and the
neglect and interference that so upsets the Arab community as represented by
the people who think like bin Laden, and of course, most Arabs do not,
happily.

But that sort of thinking, which is very comparable to Mr. Bush himself, you
know good and evil, black and white -- it's a very simplistic sort of
messianic way of going about things. I think it's terribly dangerous and I
think we're helping, sadly, the process of more terrorist involvement
because we are perpetuating the presence of our Christian, western ideals,
our corruption of their culture and Islamic values in the Middle East. And
you know, what on earth are we doing there? Haven't we learned from the
colonial past in this part of the world that we have no competence and no
place in the Middle East?



_______________________________________________
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 casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]