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]
>Conclusions - final paragraph of this
piece
>If we are not careful, the 'smart sanctions' pill could be a powerful >sedative, lulling the world's conscience to sleep. I believe we must re- >focus our attention. We must stop concentrating on 'holds' and 'lists', >and concentrate our energies instead on the real causes of the >humanitarian crisis. >This seems to me the best way to explain to
>people how US/UK policy is failing the ordinary people of Iraq. Thanks to Milan for a useful and lucid analysis of
the new Resolution. My only point of disagreement is on the question of
holds.
If we ignore, for argument's sake, the fact that
sanctions are to a large extent, intrinsically about holds(eg. on foreign
investment, imports and exports, free movement of labour, and so on) and just
consider what Milan describes as contract holds, there is still good reason to
examine the role of the US/UK in the Sanctions Committee. This is because the
"real causes" of the humanitarian crisis are wholly political, not
economic. After all, the economy did not collapse by itself. It was
subjected firstly to miltary assault and then to sanctions. And sanctions are
first and foremost a political act. One danger of presenting the crisis in
broadly economic terms is that you end up covering up this crucial
fact, giving people the impression that the crisis is just a result of economic
mismanagement. I believe that, like other features of the sanctions regime, the
Sanctions Committee should be studied and exposed for what it is. All the
best, Tim
|