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]
Greetings list, >From the previous post: " But certain national interests could be blamed at specific periods for delaying the rehabilitation of water systems/supplies" Surely the UN Sanctions Committee was dominated at all times by the US and UK representatives. Even if chlorine was taken off the dual use items list in 1998 (was there an official statement by the UN Sanctions committee to that effect?) the US and UK would have continued to delay shipments, Philippa Winkler ==== Original Message From "R. & M. Skinner" <firstname.lastname@example.org> ===== >[ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] > >Greetings List, particularly Colin, Ghazwan and Boris, > >As a member of the CASI list from its early days I have noted recent exchanges on the subjects of water, chlorine and sanctions. I have now had a quick look at some of the downloaded CASI postings this subject over the years. >I think it would be fair to say "no" to Ghazwan's question: >quote: Would you accept that the UN "frustrated" the efforts of the Iraqi government to get chlorine, imported or donated, to be used in water treatment plants? "frustrated" or "banned" resulted in the death of thousands and thousands of people. unquote. > >"The UN" as such cannot be blamed. But certain national interests could be blamed at specific periods for delaying the rehabilitation of water systems/supplies. Our CASI records show that many UN agencies and others were trying to get adequate supplies of treated water to all in need of it. And, of course, chlorine without a sustained supply of electricity or without delivery systems to all, does not alone help a nation's people at risk. > >To be fair, I think we could accept the UN Sanctions Committee is not an agency of the UN nor is it in that sense a part of its administration. Composed of government representatives under the authority of the Security Council, the Sanctions Committee would deliberate specific requests for a country or region against the backdrop of current international tensions and the force of opinion and influence of any or more of its members at specific times. > >Paul Conlon's book exposes problems encountered during one period. >At different times, for different countries and for different (changing) vested national interests as expressed by strong or weak personalities, different majority decisions could be taken. The whole topic could interest a keen PhD student. > >Roy Skinner >Switzerland > > >_______________________________________________ >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