RE: [casi] This is where the oil for food money was going.

[Hassan Zeini <hasseini@DELETETHISyahoo.com>]

>Under the Oil For Food Program Iraq had no direct
>access and it's impossible they could have "stashed"
>any funds from it anywhere.

>The money was in a UN bank account and administered
>by them. Iraq delivered oil the UN delivered food -
>oil for food.

That is absolutely true. But IPO, once again, indulges
in misinformation and the spreading of US propaganda..


Ahmed Shames, Chairman of IPO, "shames" himself and
his organization by intentionally trying to mislead
the CASI members with titles of messages that do not
reflect the contents of the message itself.

The only way Iraq could have "stashed" any sums, was
through selling oil outside the supervision of the UN;
through Turkey and more recently Syria. Of course the
fact that Kurdish factions got their share of the
"illegal" sale of oil to Turkey is never mentioned in
articles..

It seems IPO members don't know how the sale of Iraqi
oil under the Oil-for-Food program worked. First, the
UN (more precisely US officials) would decide the
price at which Iraqi oil would be sold on monthly
basis. That means, the amount of discount below the
market prices. American companies of course had a
bigger discount than European or Asian companies..

All the money went directly into an escrow account
controlled by the UN in a Bank in New York. About 30%
of the income from oil sales went to pay the UN
inspections activities (including spying on Iraq!) and
the fat salaries of the executives; for compensations
to Kuwait and third country nationals for losses
during the occupation of Kuwait; for compensations to
third country nationals who suffered because of the
actions of the Kuwaiti government AFTER the LIBERATION
(the Palestinians and others who were thrown out of
Kuwait; companies that packed and left; employees who
were sacked, etc..). An additional 13% was directly
allocated for the Kurdish areas. The rest was kept in
the NY bank. Iraq had no access to funds from that
account at all.

Iraq needed cash, which was not allowed to it by the
UN resolutions. Iraq can not live by getting food and
medicine (also restricted) alone, because it needed to
buy spare parts and a whole range of items. Iraqis are
not cattle that only need to be fed..
What would Iraqis wear? Even white cotton in which
bodies were wrapped for burials needed the sanctions
committee's approval!
Where would Iraq get the money to pay salaries to
employees?
Where would Iraq get cash to finance its agriculture
and its industry?
How would schools, universities, hospitals etc.. be
maintained??

And so Iraq tried to make companies pay an extra 15
cents per barrel outside the discount to provide the
cash it needed. The US soon forced companies to refuse
paying the 15 cents extra per barrel, and Iraq had to
give in.
I would expect anyone who cares for the Iraqis to
support any actions that would provide them with what
the US/UK prevented them from having: from medicine,
to pencils, to paper, to books, to the spare parts
needed to repair damaged oil installations so that
Iraq can sell oil and get food...

So, it is dishonest to say that that is where the Oil
For Food money went.
That money was also used to buy things that went into
Iraq to provide items necessary for maintaining life
which the US/UK prevented. I recently posted the text
of a document which shows how the UK prevented a
British medicine manufacturer from selling heart
medicine to Iraq. Iraq needed cash to buy such things
from outside. But that is hardly of any importance to
IPO.. After all, it is acceptable to them that a few
thousand die in an invasion, as long as Saddam is
overthrown..

For many years, we have been told over and again by
supporters of sanctions and war that it was Saddam's
regime not sanctions that was responsible for the
death of over 1.5 Iraqis since 1991. UNICEF's and
similar studies were dismissed as "Iraqi propaganda".
To prove their point, those apologists cited the lower
mortality rates in Kurdish areas (outside the control
of the central government) as proof that the central
government was the cause of the suffering.

If that was the case, why is it so, now that Iraq is
"liberated" from Saddam, the health situation in
Kurdish areas, especially of children, has
deteriorated? Why have mortality rates risen, instead
of decreasing, when their alleged cause has been
eliminated?

While we are told that prior to the imposition of
sanctions, Iraq's health system was the best in the
whole area, we are supposed to accept the illogical
accusation that the same regime is responsible for the
deterioration of the health system since 1991, without
giving an explanation as to why..

Of course, "Shames" does not explain how the US/UK
kept contracts for humanitarian items on hold; how
Iraq still has billions of dollars in the escrow
account for contracts that the US/UK refused to
endorse.
We don't know why, almost two months after the
mythical "liberation" of Iraq, Iraqi money found
inside Iraq has not been used to pay salaries to
employees?
We are not told why Iraq still suffers from lack of
medicines, food supplies, electricity, chlorine, clean
water and everything necessary for the maintenance of
normal life?
We are not offered any explanation as to why child
mortalities have not decreased??

Perhaps someone could offer an explanation!!

Hassan





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.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 casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk