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] The Secret Behind the Sanctions

A visitor to our website (see "reply to" above) sent you this e-mail in order to share the 
following item from

The Progressive magazine

September 2001 Issue of The Progressive magazine

The Secret Behind the Sanctions
How the U.S. Intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water Supply
by Thomas J. Nagy

Over the last two years, I've discovered documents of the Defense Intelligence Agency proving 
beyond a doubt that, contrary to the Geneva Convention, the U.S. government intentionally used 
sanctions against Iraq to degrade the country's water supply after the Gulf War. The United States 
knew the cost that civilian Iraqis, mostly children, would pay, and it went ahead anyway.

The primary document, "Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities," is dated January 22, 1991. It spells 
out how sanctions will prevent Iraq from supplying clean water to its citizens.

"Iraq depends on importing specialized equipment and some chemicals to purify its water supply, 
most of which is heavily mineralized and frequently brackish to saline," the document states. "With 
no domestic sources of both water treatment replacement parts and some essential chemicals, Iraq 
will continue attempts to circumvent United Nations Sanctions to import these vital commodities. 
Failing to secure supplies will result in a shortage of pure drinking water for much of the 
population. This could lead to increased incidences, if not epidemics, of disease."

The document goes into great technical detail about the sources and quality of Iraq's water supply. 
The quality of untreated water "generally is poor," and drinking such water "could result in 
diarrhea," the document says. It notes that Iraq's rivers "contain biological materials, 
pollutants, and are laden with bacteria. Unless the water is purified with chlorine, epidemics of 
such diseases as cholera, hepatitis, and typhoid could occur."

The document notes that the importation of chlorine "has been embargoed" by sanctions. "Recent 
reports indicate the chlorine supply is critically low."
Food and medicine will also be affected, the document states. "Food processing, electronic, and, 
particularly, pharmaceutical plants require extremely pure water that is free from biological 
contaminants," it says.

The document addresses possible Iraqi countermeasures to obtain drinkable water despite sanctions.

"Iraq conceivably could truck water from the mountain reservoirs to urban areas. But the capability 
to gain significant quantities is extremely limited," the document states. "The amount of pipe on 
hand and the lack of pumping stations would limit laying pipelines to these reservoirs. Moreover, 
without chlorine purification, the water still would contain biological pollutants. Some affluent 
Iraqis could obtain their own minimally adequate supply of good quality water from Northern Iraqi 
sources. If boiled, the water could be safely consumed. Poorer Iraqis and industries requiring 
large quantities of pure water would not be able to meet their needs."

The document also discounted the possibility of Iraqis using rainwater. "Precipitation occurs in 
Iraq during the winter and spring, but it falls primarily in the northern mountains," it says. 
"Sporadic rains, sometimes heavy, fall over the lower plains. But Iraq could not rely on rain to 
provide adequate pure water."

As an alternative, "Iraq could try convincing the United Nations or individual countries to exempt 
water treatment supplies from sanctions for humanitarian reasons," the document says. "It probably 
also is attempting to purchase supplies by using some sympathetic countries as fronts. If such 
attempts fail, Iraqi alternatives are not adequate for their national requirements."

In cold language, the document spells out what is in store: "Iraq will suffer increasing shortages 
of purified water because of the lack of required chemicals and desalination membranes. Incidences 
of disease, including possible epidemics, will become probable unless the population were careful 
to boil water."

The document gives a timetable for the destruction of Iraq's water supplies. "Iraq's overall water 
treatment capability will suffer a slow decline, rather than a precipitous halt," it says. 
"Although Iraq is already experiencing a loss of water treatment capability, it probably will take 
at least six months (to June 1991) before the system is fully degraded."

This document, which was partially declassified but unpublicized in 1995, can be found on the 
Pentagon's web site at (I disclosed this document last fall. But the news 
media showed little interest in it. The only reporters I know of who wrote lengthy stories on it 
were Felicity Arbuthnot in the Sunday Herald of Scotland, who broke the story, and Charlie Reese of 
the Orlando Sentinel, who did a follow-up.)

Recently, I have come across other DIA documents that confirm the Pentagon's monitoring of the 
degradation of Iraq's water supply. These documents have not been publicized until now.

The first one in this batch is called "Disease Information," and is also dated January 22, 1991. At 
the top, it says, "Subject: Effects of Bombing on Disease Occurrence in Baghdad." The analysis is 
blunt: "Increased incidence of diseases will be attributable to degradation of normal preventive 
medicine, waste disposal, water purification/distribution, electricity, and decreased ability to 
control disease outbreaks. Any urban area in Iraq that has received infrastructure damage will have 
similar problems."

The document proceeds to itemize the likely outbreaks. It mentions "acute diarrhea" brought on by 
bacteria such as E. coli, shigella, and salmonella, or by protozoa such as giardia, which will 
affect "particularly children," or by rotavirus, which will also affect "particularly children," a 
phrase it puts in parentheses. And it cites the possibilities of typhoid and cholera outbreaks.
The document warns that the Iraqi government may "blame the United States for public health 
problems created by the military conflict."

The second DIA document, "Disease Outbreaks in Iraq," is dated February 21, 1990, but the year is 
clearly a typo and should be 1991. It states: "Conditions are favorable for communicable disease 
outbreaks, particularly in major urban areas affected by coalition bombing." It adds: "Infectious 
disease prevalence in major Iraqi urban areas targeted by coalition bombing (Baghdad, Basrah) 
undoubtedly has increased since the beginning of Desert Storm. . . . Current public health problems 
are attributable to the reduction of normal preventive medicine, waste disposal, water purification 
and distribution, electricity, and the decreased ability to control disease outbreaks."

This document lists the "most likely diseases during next sixty-ninety days (descending order): 
diarrheal diseases (particularly children); acute respiratory illnesses (colds and influenza); 
typhoid; hepatitis A (particularly children); measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly 
children); meningitis, including meningococcal (particularly children); cholera (possible, but less 

Like the previous document, this one warns that the Iraqi government might "propagandize increases 
of endemic diseases."

The third document in this series, "Medical Problems in Iraq," is dated March 15, 1991. It says: 
"Communicable diseases in Baghdad are more widespread than usually observed during this time of the 
year and are linked to the poor sanitary conditions (contaminated water supplies and improper 
sewage disposal) resulting from the war. According to a United Nations Children's Fund 
(UNICEF)/World Health Organization report, the quantity of potable water is less than 5 percent of 
the original supply, there are no operational water and sewage treatment plants, and the reported 
incidence of diarrhea is four times above normal levels. Additionally, respiratory infections are 
on the rise. Children particularly have been affected by these diseases."

Perhaps to put a gloss on things, the document states, "There are indications that the situation is 
improving and that the population is coping with the degraded conditions." But it adds: "Conditions 
in Baghdad remain favorable for communicable disease outbreaks."

The fourth document, "Status of Disease at Refugee Camps," is dated May 1991. The summary says, 
"Cholera and measles have emerged at refugee camps. Further infectious diseases will spread due to 
inadequate water treatment and poor sanitation."

The reason for this outbreak is clearly stated again. "The main causes of infectious diseases, 
particularly diarrhea, dysentery, and upper respiratory problems, are poor sanitation and unclean 
water. These diseases primarily afflict the old and young children."

The fifth document, "Health Conditions in Iraq, June 1991," is still heavily censored. All I can 
make out is that the DIA sent a source "to assess health conditions and determine the most critical 
medical needs of Iraq. Source observed that Iraqi medical system was in considerable disarray, 
medical facilities had been extensively looted, and almost all medicines were in critically short 

In one refugee camp, the document says, "at least 80 percent of the population" has diarrhea. At 
this same camp, named Cukurca, "cholera, hepatitis type B, and measles have broken out."

The protein deficiency disease kwashiorkor was observed in Iraq "for the first time," the document 
adds. "Gastroenteritis was killing children. . . . In the south, 80 percent of the deaths were 
children (with the exception of Al Amarah, where 60 percent of deaths were children)."

The final document is "Iraq: Assessment of Current Health Threats and Capabilities," and it is 
dated November 15, 1991. This one has a distinct damage-control feel to it. Here is how it begins: 
"Restoration of Iraq's public health services and shortages of major medical materiel remain 
dominant international concerns. Both issues apparently are being exploited by Saddam Hussein in an 
effort to keep public opinion firmly against the U.S. and its Coalition allies and to direct blame 
away from the Iraqi government."

It minimizes the extent of the damage. "Although current countrywide infectious disease incidence 
in Iraq is higher than it was before the Gulf War, it is not at the catastrophic levels that some 
groups predicted. The Iraqi regime will continue to exploit disease incidence data for its own 
political purposes."

And it places the blame squarely on Saddam Hussein. "Iraq's medical supply shortages are the result 
of the central government's stockpiling, selective distribution, and exploitation of domestic and 
international relief medical resources." It adds: "Resumption of public health programs . . . 
depends completely on the Iraqi government."

As these documents illustrate, the United States knew sanctions had the capacity to devastate the 
water treatment system of Iraq. It knew what the consequences would be: increased outbreaks of 
disease and high rates of child mortality. And it was more concerned about the public relations 
nightmare for Washington than the actual nightmare that the sanctions created for innocent Iraqis.

The Geneva Convention is absolutely clear. In a 1979 protocol relating to the "protection of 
victims of international armed conflicts," Article 54, it states: "It is prohibited to attack, 
destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian 
population, such as foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and 
irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the 
civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out 
civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive."

But that is precisely what the U.S. government did, with malice aforethought. It "destroyed, 
removed, or rendered useless" Iraq's "drinking water installations and supplies." The sanctions, 
imposed for a decade largely at the insistence of the United States, constitute a violation of the 
Geneva Convention. They amount to a systematic effort to, in the DIA's own words, "fully degrade" 
Iraq's water sources.

At a House hearing on June 7, Representative Cynthia McKinney, Democrat of Georgia, referred to the 
document "Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities" and said: "Attacking the Iraqi public drinking 
water supply flagrantly targets civilians and is a violation of the Geneva Convention and of the 
fundamental laws of civilized nations."

Over the last decade, Washington extended the toll by continuing to withhold approval for Iraq to 
import the few chemicals and items of equipment it needed in order to clean up its water supply.

Last summer, Representative Tony Hall, Democrat of Ohio, wrote to then-Secretary of State Madeleine 
Albright "about the profound effects of the increasing deterioration of Iraq's water supply and 
sanitation systems on its children's health." Hall wrote, "The prime killer of children under five 
years of age--diarrheal diseases--has reached epidemic proportions, and they now strike four times 
more often than they did in 1990. . . . Holds on contracts for the water and sanitation sector are 
a prime reason for the increases in sickness and death. Of the eighteen contracts, all but one hold 
was placed by the U.S. government. The contracts are for purification chemicals, chlorinators, 
chemical dosing pumps, water tankers, and other equipment. . . . I urge you to weigh your decision 
against the disease and death that are the unavoidable result of not having safe drinking water and 
minimum levels of sanitation."

For more than ten years, the United States has deliberately pursued a policy of destroying the 
water treatment system of Iraq, knowing full well the cost in Iraqi lives. The United Nations has 
estimated that more than 500,000 Iraqi children have died as a result of sanctions, and that 5,000 
Iraqi children continue to die every month for this reason.

No one can say that the United States didn't know what it was doing.

See for Yourself

All the DIA documents mentioned in this article were found at the Department of Defense's Gulflink 

To read or print documents:

1.go to on "Declassified Documents" on the left side of the front page

3.the next page is entitled "Browse Recently Declassified Documents" on "search" under "Declassifed Documents" on the left side of that page

5.the next page is entitled "Search Recently Declassified Documents"

6.enter search terms such as "disease information effects of bombing" on the search button

8.the next page is entitled "Data Sources" on DIA on one of the titles

It's not the easiest, best-organized site on the Internet, but I have found the folks at Gulflink 
to be helpful and responsive.

Thomas J. Nagy teaches at the School of Business and Public Management at George Washington 

The Progressive magazine

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]