IRAQ SANCTIONS MONITOR Number 181 Thursday, January 4, 2001 Italy blames army deaths on US shells >From THE GUARDIAN, January 4th, 2001 Concern about the use of depleted uranium shells by US forces intensified yesterday when Italy asked Nato to investigate claims that six of its soldiers who died after serving in the Balkans were killed by exposure to the munitions. The request came after an official investigations by France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, the Netherlands and Finland into the effect of DU weapons. The Italian prime minister, Giuliano Amato, told the newspaper La Repubblica that alarm about the `Balkan syndrome' was `more than legitimate'. `We've always known that [depleted uranium] was used in Kosovo, but not in Bosnia. We've always known that it was a danger only in absolutely exceptional circumstances like, for example, picking up a fragment with a hand on which there was an open wound, while in normal circumstances it isn't dangerous at all. But now we're starting to have a justified fear that things aren't that simple.' His defence minister, Sergio Mattarella, said Nato had told Rome only last month that DU had also been used in Bosnia. US GBP10 aircraft fired more than 31,000 rounds of DU ammunition in Kosovo. More than 14,000 rounds fell in the area of Kosovo now controlled by Italian troops, according to Italian the deputy ecology minister, Valerio Calzolaio. DU is a by-product of converting natural uranium into the enriched form used in nuclear weapons and reactors. It is about 40% less radioactive than natural uranium. The US fired more than 850,000 rounds during the 1991 Gulf war. This has been linked to birth defects in Iraq. The six Italians who have died since returning from the Balkans all had leukaemia. The latest was Salvatore Carbonaro, 24, from Sicily, who died in November after serving twice in Bosnia but never in Kosovo. Doctors have said there is insufficient evidence to link the deaths to exposure to DU shells but the Italian media say the number of deaths is too high to be coincidental. A group representing their families has released a copy of a document in English which it said was a list of Nato guidelines for dealing with DU. It said the document, dated November 22 1999, was not distributed to troops before that date, although soldiers had by then spent months peacekeeping in Kosovo. Last month the British armed forces minister, John Spellar, admitted that advice on the potential dangerof DU shells failed to reach British troops in the Gulf war. The Ministry of Defence said yesterday it was not planning to review the effect of DU weapons in the Balkans. It said the radioactivity from the shells was no higher than from household appliances. The US agency for toxic substances and disease registry had said that no human cancer of any type has ever been seen as a result of exposure to natural or depleted uranium'. Nato sources said yesterday that the North Atlantic Council would discuss the issue at its regular meeting next week. ___________________________________________________________________ `It is an outrage that you repeat fabricated disinformation' >From THE GUARDIAN, January 4th, 2001 As the Bush administration prepares for power, the UN policy of sanctions against Baghdad, introduced 10 years ago, must be one of the first areas to claim its attention. A former senior UN official writes an open letter to Britain's minister with responsibility for Iraq, Peter Hain, a leading voice in defence of a policy now widely seen as ineffective and immoral December 17 2000 was the first anniversary of UN Resolution 1284, which was offered by the security council as a step towards resolving outstanding disarmament and arms-monitoring issues as a precondition for the suspension of comprehensive economic sanctions against Iraq. As many feared, including myself, this resolution was a still-born creation [for which] the people of Iraq continue to pay dearly, and daily. The European public is increasingly unwilling to accept such a policy. There is deep concern, because of the suffering of innocent civilians and the irrefutable evidence of violations of international law by the security council. Without a transparent political agenda . . . I do not see an end to this costly human tragedy. Your speech of November 7 at Chatham House has not helped. Let me single out your main points: `Our air crews risk their lives patrolling the skies above southern Iraq.' The public does not know that you do this without a mandate from the security council. It is in your hands to stop endangering your pilots by withdrawing them. It angered your office that I introduced reporting of air strikes for 1999. I did so as the UN secretary general's official for security, because of the dangers [faced by] UN observers on the roads of Iraq. The report showed that out of 132 [air strikes], UN staff witnessed 28. The public does not know that in the `no-fly zones' you established to protect the population, 144 civilians have died and 446 have been wounded by UK/US air forces. The Foreign Office classified these reports as `Iraqi propaganda with a UN imprimatur', even though much of it was collected and verified by UN staff. `Our sailors are involved in activities to curb the illegal export of Iraqi oil.' You are silent about the UK- condoned export of illegal oil from Iraq into Turkey. Your silence is understandable . . . [Anglo-US] concurrence in this illegal export is in exchange for Turkish government agreement to the use of Incirlik airbase for allied sorties into the northern no-fly zone. `I firmly believe that [Saddam Hussein] remains determined to develop his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons capacity.' You offer no evidence. What I `firmly believe' is that you want to keep a picture of Iraq alive even though it no longer reflects the realities. This is not surprising. Without it the case for sanctions would be over. The resolution `represents the collective will of the security council and has the full force of international law.' You know how deceptive this assertion is. Three out of five permanent [security council] members and Malaysia did not support this resolution. You are aware, no doubt, of the increasing numbers of serious objections by interna tional legal experts to the continued application of these laws. The evidence is overwhelming that these `acts"have become illegal. `Resolution 1284 removed the ceiling on the amount of oil Iraq is allowed to export.' This is a political ploy. Your government knows well from annual UN reports on the state of the Iraqi oil industry that it cannot pump more oil unless the security council allows a complete overhaul of the industry. You mention recent increases in production. Why, when you know that Iraqi oil output has not risen at all . . .? `With this large amount of revenue available, one cannot help but ask why we still see pictures of malnourished and sick children?' Unicef has repeatedly pointed out that such a reality is only going to change with a normal functioning economy. More often than not, it is the blocking of contracts by the US/UK which has created huge problems in implementing the oil-for-food programme. The present volume of blocked items amounts to Dollars 2.3bn, the highest ever. `It is an outrage that the Iraqi government wilfully denies food and medicine . . .' Please forgive me if I say that it is an outrage that against your better knowledge you repeat truly fabricated and self-serving disinformation. Why do you ignore UN stock reports which give you the monthly distribution situation and which, verified by UN observers, show for food, medicines and other humanitarian supplies an average of over 90% distributed per month. `There are those who are undermining sanctions and challenging UN authority.' Yes, this is true, and it includes me. Do accept that I do so with the utmost discomfort. I am fully aware that this weakens the very machinery set up to deal with conflicts like this one. However, I see no alternative when the fundamentals of human rights and international law are applied in a biased and lopsided manner. Graf Hans von Sponeck, former humanitarian coordinator for Iraq ____________________________________________________________________ Letter: Iraq's tragedy >From The Independent January 3rd, 2001 Ray Davies Sir: There is a terrible irony in the disclosure (1 January) that the Wilson government had considered prosecuting Peter Hain for his activities against the human rights abuses of the apartheid regime. Was this fearlesscampaigner the same man who now presides, as a minister in the Foreign Office with responsibility for the Middle East, over some of the worst human rights abuses since the Second World War- against the children of Iraq? The bombing and sanctions against Iraq started because Iraq invaded Kuwait. It is now 10 years since Kuwait was given back to its people; since then we have continued to destroy most of Iraq's infrastructure. I visited Iraq last year and was a witness to this human tragedy. I visited schools with no pencils, idle sewerage works with no spare parts to replace those destroyed by war, hospitals which had to watch children die when the power failed. I have had an Iraqi mother with her baby on the point of death pin me to the wall crying, "Why are you killing my baby?" I, with my two healthy little boys, could only cry with her. I will campaign unceasingly until the bombing stops and sanctions are lifted. RAY DAVIES Caerphilly __________________________________________________________________ First flight to touch down in Baghdad this year January 3rd, 2001 BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) _ An Egyptian plane became the first this year to arrive at Baghdad's Saddam International Airport, the official Iraqi News Agency reported. Egyptian businessman Mohammed Shata chartered Wednesday's flight. The Iraqi News Agency said the passengers on the EgyptAir Boeing 737 included 40 businessmen, journalists and doctors _ and famous Syrian actress Raghda, who uses one name only. "We hope that this flight will open the way for a normal weekly commercial flights between Cairo and Baghdad," Raghda told the official agency. In Cairo, Magda Attia, general manager of EgyptAir's charter department, said regular flights to Baghdad were not yet possible. "We have no commercial relations with Iraq yet, so we can't. We still have to get the approval of the U.N. sanctions committee," Attia said. Attia said Iraq was providing free services to planes landing in Baghdad. ______________________________________________________________ Iraqi government denies that Saddam suffered a stroke BAGHDAD (AFX) - Iraq's Information Ministry denied reports that President Saddam Hussein had suffered a "severe stroke". "These press reports are stupid and do not even merit a response," a spokesman told reporters in Baghdad. The announcement came after the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, an opposition group based in Damascus, issued a statement on Monday saying Saddam had suffered a "severe stroke" the day before. _______________________________________________________________ Another Italian soldier dies of `Balkans syndrome` ROME, Jan 2 (AFP) - An Italian soldier, who served in Bosnia, has died of leukemia, his family announced Tuesday, adding to the growing concern over the health of NATO military personnel who served as peacekeepers in the Balkans region. 24-year-old Salvatore Carbonaro, from Sicily, was the sixth Italian soldier to die of "Balkans syndrome," the name given to a series of health problems contracted by those who served in the former Yugoslavia. The Italian press has linked the deaths to exposure to radiation from depleted uranium contained in United States weapons used in the region. His family announced that Carbonaro, who served in Bosnia in 1998 and 1999, had died in November. The dead soldier's brother, Mauro Carbonaro, told a regional newspaper that Salvatore had been in contact with depleted uranium weapons. "Balkans syndrome" has affected soldiers from several European nations who took part in missions in the region since 1992. Besides the six Italian military fatalities linked to the syndrome, the press here has listed another 30 suspected cases on soldiers contaminated by depleted Uranium. In Belgium, five cases of cancer have been diagnosed in soldiers who worked in the Balkans, but no link with the arms has been established. Several cases of leukemia have been recorded amongst Dutch veterans of the Balkans. Spain too has launched an intensive study of some 32,000 military personnel who were on duty there. Portugal's army chief of staff said Thursday that about 900 former peacekeepers would undergo medical tests to see if they had been exposed to radiation linked to depleted uranium arms. The newspaper Publico-citing a Lisbon cancer specialist-reported last week that the death of a Portuguese soldier who served in Kosovo could be linked to NATO's use of the weapons in the Balkans. But a German defence ministry spokesman told the country's Welt am Sonntag newspaper that tests carried out by the German army on its Kosovo veterans over the past 12 months had not shown any radiation-linked illnesses. NATO officials said last month that US aircraft fired more than 10,000 depleted uranium projectiles in Bosnia between 1994 and 1995 as well as in Kosovo in 1999. Depleted uranium weapons are denser than conventional arms, which means they can penetrate heavy armour more easily. They were also used in Iraq in 1990 and 1991, in Bosnia during the 1994-95 war and during the air campaign against Belgrade in 1999. The Italian defence ministry has set up a commission of enquiry to investigate the mooted link between the deaths and cancer cases and the use of the depleted uranium. Some 60,000 Italian troops and 15,000 Italian civilians have taken part in missions in the former Yugoslavia since 1995. _________________________________________________________________ The great survivor: For 10 years the west has spent billions enforcing no-fly zones, policing sanctions and funding opposition groups but, as the anniversary of the Gulf war approaches, Saddam Hussein is still in power and stronger >From THE GUARDIAN, January 3rd, 2001 The puffs of tobacco and gun smoke from the presidential reviewing stand on Sunday marked the start of a military parade, the likes of which Iraq has not seen for more than 10 years. Jet fighters flew in formation and helicopter gunships hovered over central Baghdad. More than 1,000 Russian-made tanks, together with artillery and surface-to-surface and anti-aircraft missiles, rumbled through Grand Festivities Square in a four-hour march-past. It could almost have been a flashback to the old days of the Soviet Union, with the Iraqi leader in period costume: blue three-piece suit and black, wide-brimmed hat. But among the uniformed naval, infantry and paramilitary units on parade there was, perhaps, a sign of things to come: white-hooded figures with only their eyes showing allegedly volunteers for martyrdom in the struggle against Israel. To one side, a giant poster showed Iraqi horses trampling an Israeli flag in front of the Dome of the Rock, with Saddam looking on, god-like, from the sky. By January 16, the 10th anniversary of what the west calls Desert Storm and what Iraq calls the Mother of Battles, Saddam will have seen off four American presidents: Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr and Clinton. It was supposed to be the other way round. Getting rid of Saddam has been official US policy for years and, by any normal standards, it should have succeeded long ago. The devastating war over Kuwait came hot on the heels of a bloody eight-year conflict with Iran, and the damage continues through sanctions and America-British bombing of the no-fly zones. Throughout Saddam's 20-year rule, Iraqis have known only four years without war or sanctions. That would be enough to bring down most leaders, and yet as the familiar faces of the US administration that tried to destroy him return to Washington, Saddam will be strutting across their TV screens, ready to needle them once more. It's not surprising that he looked pleased with himself during Sunday's parade: it was a firm reminder to the world that he has pulled off one of the most remarkable feats of political survival in modern times. There was a moment, in 1991, when he seemed about to fall, but his forces bounced back from their humiliation in Kuwait, crushing revolts in the Kurdish north and the Shi'ite south of Iraq. Two years ago, President Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act, which made available pounds 58m to opponents of the Baghdad regime. Since then, the problem has been how to spend the money. The opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC) has made little headway since 1996, when Saddam wiped out its power base in northern Iraq, under the noses of the Americans. Fortuitously, this provided a morale-boosting victory for the Iraqi army just as it was beginning to show signs of disaffection with the regime. The INC, which includes Kurdish, monarchist, Islamist and independent elements, has been beset by internal squabbles and the Americans have never been totally happy with its leader, Dr Ahmed Chalabi, who was once at the centre of a banking scandal in Jordan. More direct forms of insurrection, meanwhile, have so far failed. It is virtually impossible to organise a successful coup, according to one opposition leader. `The moment you get three people involved they all tell Saddam about it,' he said. `That's because each one knows that if he doesn't tell Saddam, the other two will.' The money donated to the opposition is nothing compared with the cost of policing the no-fly zones, where 450 tonnes of bombs have been dropped in the past two years, mainly by the Americans. In total, Britain has spent pounds 800m on maintaining the no-fly zones, while the American presence 200 aircraft, 19 warships and 22,000 personnel has been costing around Dollars 1bn a year. Although this containment policy may have helped to keep Iraq in check, Saddam has effectively discredited it by highlighting the deaths of innocent shepherds and other civilians caused by the bombing. Two recent events have contributed to Saddam's newfound buoyancy. One was the arrival in Baghdad of a hijacked Saudi airliner in October. It might have been the cue for a confrontation, reminiscent of the human shield crisis of 1990, but that didn't suit Iraq's new international image. All the passengers were released unharmed and kindly sent on their way, allowing Saddam to bask for a few days in the unfamiliar glow of international adulation. In Israel and the occupied territories, meanwhile, the gathering uprising triggered by Ariel Sharon's visit to Jeruselem's Temple Mount was doing more for Saddam's popularity in the region than any PR campaign could. While political realities force other leaders in Egypt and Jordan, for example to take a more cautious stance, much to the frustration of public opinion, Saddam is free to increase his stature through ostentatious preparations for an imaginary battle. Bad news from Israel is good news for Saddam. It is largely because of Israel that Iraq is now back in the Arab fold. The Arab League summit, last October, needed to show unity in its support for the Palestinians and had no option but to invite Iraq for the first time since the invasion of Kuwait. Saddam has also pledged Dollars 881m from oil revenues to support the Palestinian uprising. Some of this is going to the families of dead Palestinians, in lump sums of several thousand dollars. Sunday's military parade followed a Christmas message in which Saddam called on Christians, as well as Muslims, to take `the path of jihad, without which we cannot attain our aspirations of establishing right, justice and peace and delivering humanity from the evils of aggressors, criminal killers'. More than six million Iraqis, including two million women, have already signed up for the struggle to `put an end to Zionism'. Nobody dares to ask how, exactly, this will be achieved. For the moment it is, almost certainly, a fantasy to please the masses. Today, the official picture from Baghdad looks brighter than at any time in the past 10 years. Thinly-disguised `humanitarian' flights from abroad arrive almost daily, Iraqi Airways is operating again (even in the no-fly zones) and oil production has recovered to pre-war levels. Ordinary Iraqis can see changes, too. Food rations are up, power cuts are less severe, drinking water and sewage services are slowly improving. We hear less now about the malnutrition, the lack of medicines and the dying children. Those problems are still there Iraq's health ministry blamed sanctions for more than 10,000 deaths last month but Saddam's message has changed: it is no longer that sanctions are a disaster, but that they are so full of holes we might as well abandon them. Resistance to sanctions takes two forms. One is simply to flout them, though some of this illicit trade is stopped by patrols in the Gulf. But despite seizures, supporters of the regime still manage to acquire new cars or the latest computers. One London-based Iraqi recently brought back a much-coveted PlayStation2 for his son from Baghdad: `It's cheaper there, and there's no waiting list,' he said. At another level, there are what the Americans describe as Iraq's `salami tactics' picking at weak points in the rules of sanctions, preferably in ways that cause disagreement between the US and other countries. For example: what, precisely, makes a flight to Baghdad `humanitarian'? In a region where political symbolism is often valued more than hard facts, Saddam's defiant stance against sanctions plays well to the masses. It has certainly embarrassed the west, but it is largely theatre like the missiles on display last weekend which looked menacing enough but which actually had ranges under 150 kilometres and therefore complied fully with UN arms-control restrictions. While Iraq continues to protest about sanctions, it shows no willingness to end them on the UN's current terms. But as Britain and the UN have been making conciliatory noises about sanctions, many Arabs believe George W Bush will feel compelled to adopt the hard line his father took. Colin Powell, the new Secretary of State, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Bush pere, declared immediately after his nomination that he hoped to `re-energise' sanctions. Bush himself has said that he wants sanctions to be tougher an idea that many experts dismiss as unrealistic. Meanwhile, there is still no sign of repentance or regret from Baghdad over the invasion of Kuwait. Iraqi soldiers are currently being paid to write short memoirs for inclusion in a book to mark the 10th anniversary of the Mother of Battles. Sanctions may not have achieved their goals, but there is little doubt that Saddam's campaign against them has kept him out of serious mischief. In his battle with the Security Council he needs international support and, so long as that battle continues, he is not going to risk losing support through military adventures. Once sanctions have gone, it may be a different matter. Even if Iraq meets the weapons inspection criteria, there will be little to stop it re-arming. Intelligence sources suggest that Iraq's nuclear programme is continuing and that it may be between five and 10 years from developing a usable nuclear weapon. Saddam still hankers after leadership of the Arab world, and the history of his rule suggests that he sees only one route to achieving that and to ensuring the survival of his regime: through conflict. ___________________________________________________________________ Iraqi agency reports Saddam Husayn chairing government session on 3 January January 3rd, 2001 Iraqi President Saddam Husayn has chaired the first government session of the year 2001, which discussed the intifadah, oil marketing and other issues, the Iraqi news agency reported on 3 January. On the same day, London-based ANN satellite TV said that an Iraqi Information Ministry spokesman had dismissed as "ridiculous", reports that Saddam Husayn had suffered a stroke on 1 January. __________________________________________________________________ Exiled Iraqi opposition cannot agree on whether Saddam is sick LONDON, Jan 2 (AFP) - Iraqi opposition groups in exile in London could not agree on Wednesday on whether to believe unconfirmed reports that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had been taken seriously ill. The Damascus-based Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq said on Monday it had information that Saddam had suffered a severe stroke during a military parade in Baghdad on New Year's Eve. Those reports have been dismissed as "stupid" by the Iraqi government and there has been no independent confirmation. Sharif Ali, official spokesman for the London-based opposition group the Iraqi National Congress, said it was impossible to tell if there was any truth in the rumours. "Through our sources in Iraq we have no hard evidence that anything has happened, there is nothing concrete we can put our finger on," he told AFP. "There are many different sources saying that he did collapse, that he was taken to hospital. Through second or third hand sources that is what we are hearing." But he added: "We can't confirm that...We haven't heard that there is any kind of alert within Baghdad, which would be standard procedure if anything of that nature happened." However, Mowaffak Al-Rubaie, who described himself as an independent spokesman for the Iraqi opposition in exile, told Sky News that the Iraqi security forces had been put on alert. He said that according to his sources, members of the ruling Ba'ath party had also been put on standby, and staff at the Iraqi radio and television station had been ordered to stay at their desks because a major announcement was expected. "If you look at all this together, we believe there is something serious going on," Al-Rubaie said. "We don't know what because of the iron curtain surrounding the country." To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
