A Canadian Policy Response to the Humanitarian Crisis in Iraq

A brief to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs

and International Trade (SCFAIT)

The UN Charter provides for the imposition of economic sanctions, which are generally considered to be a benign alternative to war, and are intended to bring about the downfall of an objectionable regime. They may be imposed by individual countries acting alone or by groups of countries acting together.

For almost 10 years, the people of Iraq have been subject to the most severe international sanctions in history. While specific statistics vary, all sources confirm that sanctions have resulted in a humanitarian disaster of enormous proportions.

The real and tragic impacts of these decade-long sanctions are hardly mentioned in the media and have received little attention from diplomats and government officials world-wide. In the absence of any meaningful public debate, Canadians are largely unaware of the devastation these sanctions have caused.

While medicine, food and "supplies for essential human needs" were to be exempt from the sanctions, the arbitrary, inefficient and highly political process by which import goods are approved has prevented the most basic needs from being met. Coupled with a ban on goods which can be categorized as "dual-use" (civilian or military), common items such as candles, chalk, soap and light bulbs are prevented from reaching Iraqi citizens. Iraq’s crumbling infrastructure also contributes to the country’s inability to provide necessities to its citizens. The "oil-for-food" program has done little to alleviate this suffering.

Canada’s active support for sanctions against the people of Iraq makes us complicit in the deaths of approximately 1.5 million people. There is little question that these sanctions are inhumane, immoral and illegal.

UN Resolution 661, passed on August 6, 1990, was intended to punish Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait and to force an end to its illegal occupation of that country. Resolution 687 was passed on April 3, 1991, after Iraq withdrew from Kuwait. This Resolution upheld the sanctions imposed in Resolution 661 as a means to gain compliance with the rest of the Resolution’s stated purpose – primarily the elimination of weapons of mass destruction and Iraq’s capacity to develop them.

The abolition of all weapons of mass destruction has long been an objective of the Canadian Peace Alliance. However, it would be hypocritical for Western nations, Canada included, not to acknowledge their role in the increased militarization of the Middle East. Canadian military exports to that region have continued to increase over the past decade. In the long run, forcing a unilateral disarmament of one country in the region, while continuing to arm others, only risks further destabilization.

Canada has recently acknowledged that the condition of requiring confirmation that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction, prior to lifting the sanctions, is unattainable. Furthermore, it is clear that US policy goals go far beyond the stated objectives of the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. Repeated statements by US officials have confirmed that the current focus is on the deposition of Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein.

It is criminal to impose prolonged sanctions on a population in order to achieve a political end such as this. There is no moral justification for punishing a civilian population for the actions of its leadership.

The sanctions leveled against Iraq, coupled with weapons inspections, have undoubtedly gone some distance towards eliminating Iraq’s capacity to maintain or develop weapons of mass destruction. In fact, former UNSCOM representatives have asserted that Iraq has no meaningful capacity to create these weapons.

Despite this, sanctions continue.

There is no reason to believe that continued sanctions have had any success in achieving the unofficial objective – the removal of President Hussein. In fact, it is arguable that sanctions have shored up support for Hussein and increased the anti-Western sentiment within Iraq.

The efficacy of sanctions is a hotly debated topic. It is generally agreed that UN sanctions against South Africa played an important role in ending the apartheid regime, which crumbled due to the combined effect of sanctions, internal resistance, economic obsolescence and a flight of capital resulting from a drop in the world price of gold. However, others argue that sanctions are effective only in a limited number of cases and that, in order for them to be successful, they need the support of the internal population, as was the case in South Africa. This is certainly not the case in Iraq.

Despite this, sanctions continue.

What is abundantly clear is the disastrous effect of sanctions on the quality of life of average Iraqi citizens. Iraq was once one of the most prosperous countries in the region. The unprecedented and comprehensive nature of these sanctions has left Iraq without the ability to maintain or replace is decaying infrastructure. Other social indicators point to the drastic decline in the quality of life for Iraq’s population.

Most disturbing are reports from UNICEF and other UN bodies confirming that an estimated 5000 children die each month as a result of malnutrition and disease. Child mortality has skyrocketed along with the number of underweight births. A host of other horrifying statistics detail the real impact these sanctions have.

Despite this, sanctions continue.

International humanitarian law is meant to protect civilian populations. The Geneva Protocol, Article 54, specifically states that starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited. Approximately 1.5 million people have died as a result of sanctions that severely limit access to the basic necessities of life.

Despite this, sanctions continue.

Despite assertions by former weapons inspectors that Iraq has no meaningful capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction (an official objective of the sanctions), and despite the obvious failure to depose President Hussein (an unofficial objective of the sanctions), and despite the questionable legal and moral authority to subject a population to such draconian measures – sanctions continue.

Canada actively supports the sanctions against Iraq. At the UN Security Council Canada has consistently voted for their continuance and provides military support to the blockade in the Gulf.

The Government of Canada has doggedly pursued its so-called "human security" agenda at the United Nations. According to the Government, human security encompasses democratic governance, human rights, the rule of law, sustainable development, and equitable access to resources.

How can the enormous suffering being inflicted on the people of Iraq by 10 years of crippling sanctions be, in any way, consistent with these principles?

The Canadian Peace Alliance believes that the human devastation that is a result of prolonged economic sanctions in Iraq can no longer be tolerated by civil society. These sanctions are not an alternative to war, but have become their own form of warfare. Our Government should waste no more time before calling unequivocally for an end to this suffering.

The Canadian Peace Alliance, therefore, respectfully makes the following recommendations:

1. The Government of Canada should call for an immediate end to all non-military sanctions. Instead, political and diplomatic pressure should be brought to bear on the Iraqi government to secure measurable improvements to its record on human rights.
2. The Government of Canada should advocate for a Middle East conference to promote a balanced, comprehensive and verifiable disarmament agreement throughout the region. Extending the embargo on military exports to Iraq’s neighbours would be an invaluable confidence-building tool and could enhance the chance for a lasting peace.
3. The Government of Canada should support measures that would help reverse the devastating effects of sanctions and strengthen Iraq’s civil society. Only when Iraqi citizens are no longer struggling for survival can they begin to hold their government accountable to democratic principles.
4. The Government of Canada should lead in the call for a peaceful resolution to this conflict and an end to the on-going military attacks by the US and the UK over so-called "no-fly zones" in Iraq. Only genuine diplomacy and compromise will bring an end to on-going tensions.