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]
Dear all:
I thought you might be interested in this letter I've just
sent, especially in light of Moonirah's view that the UK
Govt is committed to maintaining the sanctions as long as
missing persons are not accounted for. My letter seeks
clarification from the FCO. I'll let you know whet the
response is.
Eric
Jon Davies
Iraq Section, Middle East Desk
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Whitehall
London
SW1A 2AH
18 April 2000
Dear Jon:
UK interpretation of the criteria for suspending/lifting of
sanctions on Iraq
Thank you and your colleague for meeting with me last week.
I look forward to your response to the various points
raised. In the meantime, I would be grateful for
clarification of UK policy on the criteria for
suspending/lifting sanctions. In November of last year you
wrote to me regarding SCR 687 that ‘There is a clear
distinction of steps which will be taken when Iraq meets
its WMD related obligations, and others which are tied
explicitly to Iraq's wider "policies and practices" (see
paragraphs 21 and 22).’ However, how the UK Government
interprets how these two paragraphs relate to each other
and how they relate to SCR 1284 is unclear to me. Let me
explain:
SCR 687 paragraph 21 refers to reviewing the provisions of
paragraph 20 (allowing humanitarian supplies) ‘in the light
of the policies and practices of the Government of Iraq,
including the implementation of all relevant resolutions of
the Security Council, for the purpose of determining
whether to reduce or lift’ the sanctions. SCR 687 paragraph
22 refers to ending the sanctions if Iraq complies with its
NBC-BM obligations. SCR 687 also demands of Iraq that Iraq
must also account for all non-Iraqis missing since the
invasion of Kuwait, return property it had looted from
Kuwait, renounce terrorism and accept responsibility for
its external debt. From the wording of the resolution it
is unclear whether or not lifting of the sanctions is
conditional on compliance with these demands as well.
While SCR 1284 reiterates the demands with regard to
repatriation, property and so on, it states that once
UNMOVIC and IAEA report full Iraqi cooperation with
specified disarmament tasks for 120 days, the sanctions are
to be suspended for periods of 120 days. The unclarity
appears to persist.
Put simply, if Iraq complies with the relevant UN
resolutions on nuclear, biological and chemical weapon
(NBC) and long-range ballistic missile (BM) disarmament,
verification and monitoring but not with the other demands
upon it, is it the UK Government’s position that the
sanctions should be suspended (and eventually lifted)? Or
maintained fully? Or maintained at a lesser degree of
intensity? Or does the UK Government not have a position on
this yet and indicates to cross that bridge when/if it
comes to it?
Thank you for your assistance.
Yours sincerely,
----------------------
Dr. Eric Herring
Department of Politics
University of Bristol
10 Priory Road
Bristol BS8 1TU
England, UK
Tel. +44-(0)117-928-8582
Fax +44-(0)117-973-2133
http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Politics
eric.herring@bristol.ac.uk
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email soc-casi-discuss-request@lists.cam.ac.uk
Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website:
http://welcome.to/casi