Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------------------------

(NOTE: Tom Nagy, the author of this article will be in Dublin Nov 3rd 
to attend a conference on the sanctions being organised by the 
Campaign to End Iraq Sanctions. Other speakers confirmed so far are 
Richard Becker of International Action Center and Denis Halliday

-Sandeep)



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

(The Progressive, Sept 2001)

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 
www.gulflink.osd.mil. (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 
likely)." 

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 supply."

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 site.

To read or print documents:

1.go to www.gulflink.osd.mil

2.click on "Declassified Documents" on the left side of the front page

3.the next page is entitled "Browse Recently Declassified Documents"

4.click 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"

7.click on the search button

8.the next page is entitled "Data Sources"

9.click on DIA

10.click 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


----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------

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

-------------------------------------------------
This Discussion List is the follow-up for the old stopnato @listbot.com that has been 
shut down

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9spWA
Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This email was sent to: [email protected]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================



Reply via email to