June 2002

Views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily of the AFSC.

Across the Iraqi Desert:
Sanctions-Defying Walk To Raise Funds for Children with Cancer

On May 22, sixteen Americans journeyed to Iraq to begin a six-day walk across the desert to dramatize the need for the US and the international community to "go the extra mile" in averting the all-out war threatened by the Bush Administration. "The 23 million people of Iraq have suffered cruelly for a dozen years under US bombing and sanctions. It is time to end this failed policy, not to start a new war," says Dr. James. E. Jennings of the Compassion Iraq Coalition which is organizing the Walk for Peace. "Washington readily spends millions on defense, but not one cent for diplomacy. Why not talk?"

Voices in the Wilderness supporters at the massive April 20 demonstration, Washington DC. Photo: Louise Dunlap

The Walk began May 24th when the delegation started across the desert into Iraq at the Jordanian border carrying signs calling for an end to ten years of mindlessly bombing Iraq, an end to the sanctions, and no new war, They will walk from the Euphrates River to Baghdad, stopping to meet and talk with people in the towns of Rutba, Ramadi and Falluja and planning to return June 21. Each walker has received pledges for every mile walked, with proceeds going to the Pediatric Oncology ward at the Basra Children's Hospital. According to press reports, the Basra region has experienced a 242% increase in childhood cancers and leukemia that many experts link to depleted uranium (DU) contamination resulting from US bombing during the Gulf War.

The Compassion Iraq Coalition (conscience@usa.com) comprises volunteers from a dozen US cities, including Seattle, Denver, Chicago, Atlanta, Washington, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. The Peace Walk is led by Jennings and Kathy Kelly, Director of Voices in the Wilderness. Jennings, President of Conscience International, led the 2001 Baghdad Airlift, the first American civilian delegation to fly to Iraq in defiance of the US/UK imposed so-called "No-Fly Zone." Kelly is widely known as a leader in the anti-sanctions movement and has led several humanitarian missions to Iraq.

For more information, contact Voices in the Wilderness, 1460 W. Carmen Ave., Chicago, IL 60640; 773/784-8065; <info@vitw.org> www.vitw.org

Education for Peace in Iraq Center (EPIC), an organization devoted to providing reliable information on the situation in Iraq, is in the process of developing talking points and other materials to address "streamlined" sanctions <www.epic-usa.org>

Last week, the UN Security Council (UNSC) unanimously adopted Resolution 1409, the most significant overhaul of economic sanctions since Resolution 1284 lifted the cap on Iraqi oil sales in December 1998. 

Resolution 1409 establishes a unified Goods Review List (GRL) intended to block military goods, control the transfer of dual-use technology, and facilitate a freer flow of consumer goods to Iraq's isolated population. Perhaps the most significant improvement is that goods which do not appear on the GRL will now be allowed into Iraq after a quick check. In practice, however, the GRL runs the risk of being a "Goods Rejection List."

Prior to Resolution 1409, there were "green lists" and the "1051 list." If an item appeared on a "green list," it was automatically approved. If an item appeared on a "1051 list," the contract was subject to a technical review by UNMOVIC and the IAEA and a more politicized review by the 661 Sanctions Committee. And if an item neither appeared on the green lists nor the 1051 list, the entire contract had to be reviewed by the 661 Sanctions Committee. 

Notorious for blocking contracts that include 1051 items, US officials often claim that, without having weapons inspectors in Iraq, there is no way to monitor end use to ensure that dual-use goods are used for civilian purposes. If the same logic is applied to the GRL, then the problem of blocked contracts will continue. As of May 14th, over $5.2 billion worth of Oil-for-Food contracts were "on hold" at the 661 Sanctions Committee.

Resolution 1409 does not allow foreign investment or loosen any controls on Iraq's civilian economy. Oil revenue will remain under UN control, forcing the Iraqi government to purchase goods outside Iraq, doing little to revive economic activity inside Iraq. Thus, "streamlined" sanctions fail to directly address why Iraq is poor.

In addition, by continuing the ban on foreign investment, the new system fails to adequately address the decline of Iraq's civil sector. As a result, the rehabilitation of Iraq's oil sector, power stations, sewage systems, schools, and hospitals will have to continue to wait.

By taking no steps to address the widespread poverty in Iraq, "streamlined" sanctions appear to be far more about shifting blame away from the United States rather than about "alleviating the suffering of ordinary Iraqis" as Secretary of State Colin Powell once called for. For example, there has been no mention of the fact that Resolution 1409, unlike Resolution 1284, did not develop in response to a humanitarian assessment.

Instead of questioning whether Resolution 1409 will reduce suffering, the mainstream media appears to be far more interested in whether the new sanctions will make it easier for the Bush Administration to launch a war against Iraq.

A recent editorial in the New York Times declared: "Washington is now in a better position to lead the international debate on the future of the Iraqi regime without the distraction of accusations over humanitarian concerns."

The Washington Post, in part, concurred: "Administration officials are still peddling the now-irrelevant pre-Sept. 11 argument that the new sanctions regime will deprive Baghdad of a propaganda argument about civilian suffering. More plausibly, they hint that cooperating with allies on the UN resolution, and on parallel negotiations to return UN weapons inspectors, is a necessary prerequisite to winning international support for more aggressive action."

Insofar as "streamlined" sanctions are effective in reducing or confusing blame, they reduce responsibility, therefore reducing incentives for further improvement. Don't let this happen. Remind the New York Times and all other papers what the real objective is: ending the 12-year-long crisis in Iraq.

Previous Article    Next Article