Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK --------------------------------------------- http://www.itn.co.uk/specials/politics/defence/index.shtml http://www.itn.co.uk/specials/politics/defence/010116gulf.shtml Gulf War - a legacy of heartbreak It is ten years since the Gulf War and as British veterans argue with the Government over the effects of depleted uranium, so the major players in the conflict are still bickering. As veterans from both the Iraqi and Allied Forces mark the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the war, ITN examines the legacy of a conflict that many feel is still going on. Ten years of terror The coalition forces launched Operation Desert Storm in the early hours of January 17, 1991, bombing targets across Iraq and occupied Kuwait. The war ended six weeks later with Iraqi forces driven out of Kuwait and Baghdad crippled by UN economic sanctions. The no-fly zone patrols and raids - the United States and Britain say they fire only when Iraqi air-defence units fire at them - have left a sense that the Gulf War has not ended yet. "The war continues," said Walid Khalil, a 47-year-old taxi driver and father of five. "The bombing goes on and so does the sanctions which are another kind of war." "God willing, the crisis will be resolved soon. We don't want more wars, we want peace," Ra'ad Hanoun, a shop owner said. Saleh Mehdi, 65, a shopkeeper who lost a brother during a 1963 revolt by activists from the Baath Party, now the ruling party, and another brother during the war with Iran, said the presence of President Saddam Hussein eases the suffering of Iraqis. "Wars have become a usual thing because we are on the side of good," he said. "As long as Saddam is here, everything seems easy." But Mehdi acknowledged that he too yearns for peace. "There is nothing without a solution. We are a righteous and peaceful country. We are not war-lovers," he said. "This crisis is a summer cloud that will soon vanish," he said. Veterans' battle goes on The anger of Britain's Gulf War veterans over the Government's handling of the depleted uranium issue was highlighted in a special debate in the House of Lords to mark the 10th anniversary of the outbreak of the conflict. Its sponsor, Labour peer Lord Morris of Manchester, parliamentary adviser to the Royal British Legion and founder of the all-party Gulf War Group, said: "It is the compelling duty of any country to act justly towards those prepared to lay down their lives in its service and the dependants of those who do so." The Government has insisted that banning the missiles would put the lives of British servicemen and women at risk during a conflict. But Lord Morris said that since the conflict more than 450 British service personnel involved had died, and some 80 of these had committed suicide. He went on: "The Gulf War was the biggest conflict in which British forces had been involved since the Korean War 40 years earlier. It was also the first conflict in which chemical and biological weapons were deployed against British troops since 1918." Gulf War veterans and their dependants were now saying that what was happening over depleted uranium was reminiscent of the original denial of the use of organophosphates which was subsequently admitted. Lord Morris said: "More depleted uranium shells were used in the Gulf War than were used in Bosnia and Kosovo. "Now the Gulf veterans feel provoked to say it is shameful that Britain can stand by and watch other countries taking the lead in this issue when we were among the first to use depleted uranium." Lord Morris said that some veterans had, at their own expense, gone to Canada for depleted uranium screening. "They have come back with evidence that they have been affected." Iraq's DU legacy Iraq has for years claimed that DU ammunition caused a rise in cancer cases in the wake of the six-week-old war over Kuwait which erupted on January 17, 1991. The United States has denied the claim but the Balkans Syndrome furore has prompted Iraq to renew its demand for an international probe into the effects of DU weapons. Earlier this year a cancer conference organised by the Iraqi Health Ministry said the number of cancer cases registered in Iraq had risen from 4,341 in 1991 to 6,158 in 1997. Doctor Jawad al-Ali, head of Basra's largest hospital, Saddam's Educational Hospital, and a cancer specialist, said he had no doubt that the rise of cancer cases were due to DU. DU munitions were widely used for the first time in the Gulf War. Declassified US documents show that US forces fired about 944,000 cigar-sized rounds against Iraqi armour in Iraq and Kuwait. Cancer rates soar The Iraqis say most of these rounds were used on the Kuwaiti border and in Basra. "Cancer is increasing mainly in Basra province, where depleted uranium was used, and not other districts of Iraq," Ali said. "Another factor is that we have had 31 families who had been contaminated and suffered several cases of cancer." He said in 1988 there were 11 cancer cases per 100,000. In 1998 it rose to 46 cases. Ali said cancer patients had a higher mortality rate than normal because of lack of medicines and facilities for specialised surgery due to 10 years of UN economic sanctions. US veterans' groups say DU weapons are partly to blame for a vast range of health problems among thousands of veterans who fought in the Gulf War. A Pentagon report last month called such a link "unlikely". UNICEF, the UN children's organisation, meanwhile says 4,000 children under five die every month in Iraq as a result of economic sanctions imposed on Baghdad after the Gulf War. World Health Organisation experts said this week they doubted that DU weapons used by NATO in the Balkans in 1994 and 1999 caused blood cancer among troops from alliance countries. But they warned that children playing in former conflict areas where the weapons had exploded could be at risk. Same old arguments Iraq has said it will not allow UN weapons inspectors to return to the country, as Baghdad and the United Nations prepare for high-level talks next month. Oil Minister Amir Muhammed Rasheed reiterated Iraq's dismissal of a UN resolution adopted in December 1999 which calls for the suspension of sanctions against Baghdad if it allows weapons inspectors to return. "It is a complete failure and we will never deal with it and it is totally impractical," Rasheed told a news conference. He said the resolution had removed Iraq "from a long tunnel where we started to see light, and put us in a new tunnel with new procedures and without an end". Baghdad has not allowed arms inspectors to return since they left in December 1998 on the eve of a US-British bombing raid, launched to punish Iraq for allegedly obstructing the UN experts investigating sites where Iraq was suspected of storing or manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan invited a delegation from Baghdad to visit the United Nations in January to try to break the impasse on weapons inspections but the talks have been postponed until February. Rasheed called for sanctions to be lifted and the patrols by US and British warplanes of two air exclusion zones in Northern and Southern Iraq to be ended. Western air strikes on Iraq have become a regular occurrence since Baghdad in December 1998 ordered its anti-aircraft bases to challenge US and British jets on patrol. 'Iraq deserves a break' British and US officials have denied a report that Britain would propose to US President-elect George W. Bush that bombing of targets in Southern Iraq be ended. "The only solution is to lift the sanctions and this we deserve because we have fulfilled our part of the deal," Rasheed said. "The (UN) Security Council has... to condemn and stop the military aggression in the North and South of Iraq," he added. Rasheed also criticised the country's oil-for-food deal with the United Nations, saying it was too difficult to implement. "You cannot run a country of 23 million people with revenues of $16 to 20 billion," under the direction of the Security Council, Rasheed said. The oil pact allows Iraq to sell unlimited quantities of oil over six months to buy food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies for Iraqis hard pressed by sanctions. "We have to accept it... until people in the Security Council realise it is high time that sanctions should be lifted," he said. Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz met visiting former US Attorney-General Ramsey Clark, a prominent anti-sanctions activist, on Sunday, Iraqi TV reported. It quoted Clark as saying he admired the "steadfastness of the Iraqi people and leadership in the face of the unfair embargo imposed against them". Depleted uranium: The health fears As the Government resumes its testing of depleted uranium (DU) shells in the face of sharp criticism from health campaigners, ITN examines the cancer fears associated with these munitions. Anxiety spreads The Ministry of Defence says the test firing into the Solway Firth at Dundrennan in southwest Scotland is routine and poses no health hazards. But local MP, Alasdair Morgan, who has campaigned for several years for DU shelling in the Solway Firth to end, said he wanted the shells to become as "unacceptable" as land mines. A number of servicemen have claimed they became seriously ill with Balkan War syndrome after being exposed to depleted uranium. Mr Morgan added: "I'm conscious that 20 years ago landmines were an essential part of the MoD's arsenal and no modern military could do without them, and now we've reached the stage where they're internationally unacceptable. I'm sure opinion will change in this case as well. "In this day and age we shouldn't be lobbing 7000 cans of baked beans in the Solway, far less 7000 depleted uranium shells." The fears over DU weapons came were highlighted in January after a United Nations report. Experts in the UN Environment Programme, based in Geneva, said that their preliminary findings called for precautions to be taken when dealing with ammunition containing DU. The use of the substance has been linked to leukaemia and other illness suffered by servicemen both in the Gulf War and the Balkans War. Growing health fears Just days after the UN's claims were reported, the MoD staged a U-turn and announced a voluntary screening programme for tens of thousands of service personnel and civilians who served in Bosnia and Kosovo. Armed Forces Minister John Spellar told the House of Commons the move was intended to reassure veterans. Dan Kenny, of Kirkcudbright, lived in Dundrennan for about a decade. He said: "People locally have demanded an immediate halt to the tests. This stuff is radioactive and it's dangerous. "So many people, so many of my friends, have died or are ill with cancer and leukaemia. We had three young girls here who died of tumours. "We have very high levels of leukaemia and cancer in Scotland and it must be linked to these tests." A European problem? NATO took up the issue of DU last month for the first time since a new wave of fear that the tank-busting munitions made from uranium might cause cancer. But the allies quickly shot down an Italian plea for a moratorium on the weapons. Concerns among European nations have intensified since Italy began studying the illnesses of 30 Balkans veterans, six of whom died of cancer, while five developed leukaemia. In France, four soldiers are being treated for leukaemia. Numerous studies into the effects of DU, a heavy metal used in anti-armour munitions because of its high penetrating power, have not revealed any connection between the metal and cancer. Italy made a long presentation to NATO's Political Committee about its concerns for Italian troops who have served as peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo. But, according to sources familiar with the discussions at the meeting, several NATO members opposed any moratorium, some quite strongly. The Political Committee meeting was the first occasion for all of Nato's 19 members to discuss the matter since the latest wave of concern about depleted uranium emerged. All members agreed that there is a common concern and that NATO needs to act. Troops stand their ground Meanwhile, Norwegian peacekeepers refused to sign contracts for service in Yugoslavia, demanding clarification of the risk from DU, the TV-2 network reported. About 400 soldiers from the elite Telemark Battalion were to signed contracts last month for service to start in June. In January, two Norwegian officers said they developed cancer after serving in Bosnia. "Most of those I talked to do not want to go to Kosovo," said Halvard Kristiansen, spokesman for the group. About 7500 Norwegian troops have served in the Balkans. Elsewhere, a group of Belgian soldiers announced plans Tuesday to sue the Belgian government because of health problems allegedly caused by service in the Balkans. The group said five Belgian veterans of peacekeeping missions in Croatia and Bosnia have died of cancer and four others have contracted the disease. In Stockholm, Sweden's military said soldiers who served in the Balkans will be informed about possible health risks from depleted uranium ammunition and will be invited to fill out a questionnaire about their health. In Germany, the US Army Europe denied a published report that American soldiers may have fired depleted uranium ammunition during training exercises in Germany. The Army said DU ammunition is stored in Germany but is not used in training missions on German soil. The statement followed a report last month in Die Welt newspaper that German officers couldn't rule out that depleted uranium ammunition had been fired during training exercises in Germany Europe defends its position Britain has committed 12,500 troops to a European rapid reaction force. It will be used for peacekeeping operations around the world, but ministers are insisting it is not the first stage of a so-called "Euro-army". ITN looks at the proposals and what it could mean for Nato, the European Union and the relationship with America. The need for a Euro force The new European rapid reaction force is intended to allow Europeans to deal with situations that need military intervention, without depending on Nato. ''When we saw that the US and Nato wouldn't fight in Europe below 15,000 feet, we realised that somebody had to be ready to act on the ground,'' says Peter Ludlow, director of the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels. The new 'army', which will probably be commanded by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, will be ready by 2003. The aim is to be able to deploy troops - which could number up to 60,000 - within 60 days. It is not intended to be a fighting force. Also, while Europe wants a more assertive role without spending more, it does not want to damage ties with America. So the EU force will intervene only when Nato and the US decline to do so. As well as 12,500 soldiers, there has been speculation that the UK will also offer to provide 72 combat aircraft and 18 Navy ships. Eurocorps The concept of a European army in not a new one. At the moment we have the Eurocorps. It grew out of the much smaller Franco-German Brigade, and now involves five nations. Eurocorps is a politically-driven creation from which Britain has kept its distance on the grounds that it is potentially divisive and more symbolic than militarily effective. Originally proposed by France, it now includes Germany, Spain, Belgium, and Luxembourg. It consists of 60,000 soldiers, based in Strasbourg., Earlier this year it took command over K-For, the peace-keeping force in Kosovo. It was the first time in Nato's history that the alliance has entrusted an external operation to a unit which is not part of its integrated, US-dominated, command structure. Many feel, especially France, that Eurocoprs would be the spearhead for a fully integrated EU military force. America v EU Many feel the impetus behind the new 'Euro-army' comes from the Kosovo conflict. The comparatively short military engagement showed up European deficiencies. The US force, with its superior air power and technology, saved the face of Europe. And when Nato entered Kosovo, Europe could barely scrape enough troops together to send. Britain was also stretched. Europe mostly spends too little, and often not wisely, UK Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon says. "When we needed it, the European nations could only get 2 per cent of their forces into the theatre at a time and in a place, and in a way that was useful. "We have to improve that commitment from Europe,"Mr Hoon said. The 15 EU armies have 1.9 million soldiers and the USA 1.4 million. But Europe's armies have disadvantages. Many are made up of draftees. And many are still geared up to defend against a Soviet attack in Central Europe. The proposed solution is to construct smaller, more mobile, better equipped forces. However, some doubt Europe will be able to do this. Its defence budgets is just two-thirds of America's. ''A European force needs a lot of new hardware,'' says Maartje Rutten, an analyst at the Western European Union's Institute for Security Studies in Paris. ''This can't be financed just out of savings.'' Nato fears Nato's former supreme Allied Commander for Europe warned that Euro-army may alienate opinion in the United States and undermine the transatlantic basis of the alliance. General Wesley Clark criticised those who have suggested Europe may be able to develop its autonomous military capability outside of Nato. He said: "There has always been a recognition that Nato operates on the basis of shared risks, shared burdens and shared benefits. "What's been clear for all these years is that on both sides of the Atlantic we have been in the same lifeboat. "Some of the rhetoric of the has led people to believe someone was about to launch a smaller lifeboat out of the larger lifeboat." General Clark, whose bombing campaign helped to bring about the withdrawal of Serb forces from Kosovo, said there was a danger Europe's ambitions would be misinterpreted in the US. Although he mentioned no European country, General Clark's comments are almost certainly directed at France, which stays outside some of Nato's structures and advocates an independent European defence capability. Such talk, he said, could fuel isolationist argument in Washington. "Those who promote rhetoric on one side of the Atlantic have to recognise that those on the other side will read it, although they may not fully understand it or use it for their own purposes," he said. "For that reason there is a certain degree of risk". Many details, including whether Nato will have the right of "first refusal" in a conflict and mechanisms for avoiding duplication have yet to be resolved. There is also concern about Nato countries which are not members of the EU, about their role in the new military structure. Turkey, despite being given status as a candidate for EU membership, outlined its anxiety about its role in the new defence force. The Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, said: "Turkey has expressed its own view - that it wishes to make sure that its interests as a member of Nato are represented". Some European ministers voiced concern over the prospect that Washington will proceed with its national missile defence system, which some states believe may destabilise the global security environment. ------------------------------------------------- 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 ==^================================================================
