Crushing State's Sovereignty: Iraq Project

By Al Sadi

Crushing states sovereignty is a full scale project that needs different means and tools from media to military intervention if needed in its final end. In the case of Iraq; many things were told and done, facts and rumours, to serve certain agenda. A lot was written to cover certain part of the story, nobody dared to fit the pieces of the puzzle together to sight the final picture of the Iraqi scene, which this book intends to do. This intention is dedicated to being an insider who witnessed the whole scenario on Iraq. Only this time, I will leave the choice for the reader to decide who is to be blamed for the catastrophic consequences over millions of Iraqi people, and the chaotic and conflictual feedback inflicted on the international relations and management. Let alone the potential insecure extensions of Iraqi situation to the whole Middle East region in its final end. This book is a good example for the chain reaction practiced by great powers on a state to dissolve its sovereignty, and on the way these powers take advantage of the UN system to protect its strategic interests and maintain its security agenda. The book analyzes key events along the last twenty years (1990-2010) such as; the war on Iraq (1991) that officially dates the end of the Cold War and the beginning of new era of unipolarity, the invasion of Iraq (2003) that dates the collapse of international collective efforts to maintain international peace and security and post US invasion (2003-2010).

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse UK
• Release date: Aug 1, 2011
• ISBN: 9781456782962

Al Sadi

Al Sadi is a master degree holder in international relations and Conflict Settlement, Global Studies Institution in the University of Gothenburg. He worked as ex-Iraqi Nuclear program Team Co-ordinator during the 1990:s and author of political history, his previous publication is “Crushing States sovereignty/Iraq Project”

Book preview

Crushing State’s Sovereignty

Iraq Project

Al Sadi

M.Sc in International Relations and Conflict Settlement

University of Gothenburg/ Sweden

missing image file

AuthorHouse™ UK Ltd.

500 Avebury Boulevard

Central Milton Keynes, MK9 2BE

www.authorhouse.co.uk

Phone: [phone]

© 2011 Al Sadi. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

First published by AuthorHouse 06/01/2011

ISBN: 978-1-4567-8295-5 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4567-8296-2 (ebk)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Table of Contents

Acronyms

Tables, Diagrams, Maps and Photos

Preface

Introduction

and

Theoretical Framework

Introduction

Part One

Parties to the Conflict

Part Two

The Power Relations within the UNSC

Part Three

The Causes of the UN’s Sanctions on Iraq

Part Four

The Sanctions’ Effects

Part Five

The Tragic Consequences and US Policy in Iraq

Conclusion

References

End Notes

To my beloved father who learned me the meaning of collectivism and sharing, and encouraged me continue,

To Avan, my all times partner, wife and friend, the person who took on her shoulders the burden of my study.

To my uncle Dr. Sadi who planted in me the spirit of scientific research and observation.

To all those who decided either to live a life that makes their friends happy for them, or a death that makes their enemy feel small and trivial… to all martyrs on the course of freedom.

Acronyms

ABSP: Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party

Ad hoc: For one main reason

AL: The Arab League

CIA: Central Intelligence Agency

CPA: Coalition Provisional Authority/ in Iraq

CRS: US Congressional Research Studies

DG: Director General

DPKO: Department of Peacekeeping Operations

ECOSOC: United Nations Economic & Social Council

EMIS: Electro Magnetic Isotopes Separation

ESB: Expenditures and Supplies

FAO: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation

FFC: Full, Final, Complete FSU: Former Soviet Union.

FFCD: Full, Final, Complete Document

HEU: High Enriched Uranium

IAEC: Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission

IAEA: International Atomic Energy Commission

IFB: International Federal Brotherhood

IGO: International Governmental Organisation

ILO: International Labour Organisation

INT: Iraqi Nuclear Team

IR: International Relations

KDP: Kurdistan Democratic Party

LON: The League of Nations

ME: Middle East Region

MNF: Multi-National Forces

NAT: Nuclear Action Team

NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation

NMD: (Iraqi) National Monitoring Directorate

NMG: Nuclear Monitoring Group

NPT: Non-Proliferation Treaty

NRC: Nuclear Research Centre

NTM-I: NATO Training Mission-Iraq

NYSC: New York Sanctions Committee

OFFP: Oil for Food Program

OMV: On-going Monitoring and Verification

ORHA: Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance/ in Iraq

P-5: Security Council Five Permanent States

PLO: Palestinian liberation organisation

PUK: Patriotic Union of Kurdistan

R&D: Research and Development Programs

RAND: Research and Development state corporation for US global policy think tank

UN: United Nations

UAE: United Arab Emirates

UNAMI: United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq

UNSC: United Nations Security Council

UNGA: United Nations General Assembly

UNICEF: United Nations Children’s Fund

UNDP: United Nations Development Programmes

UNFICYP: United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus

UNICEF: United Nations International Children Emergency Fund

UNIFIL: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon

UNOHCI: United Nations Office of Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq

UNHCR: United Nations High Commissary for Refugee

UNMOVIC: United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission

UNSCOM: United Nations Security Council On-going Monitoring

UNSG: United Nation Secretary General.

UK: United Kingdom

USA United States of America

WCED: World Commission on Environment and Development

WHO: World Health Organisation

WMD: Weapons of Mass Destruction

WWI: World War One

WWII: World War Two

Tables, Diagrams, Maps and Photos

Tables

1.   UN Secretary Generals

2.   UN Peace Keeping Operations

3.   U.S. debt to the United Nations, from 1995 to 2005

4.   Veto on political questions in the UNSC 1946-2002

5.   Veto in the SC on different issues 1946-2002

6.   Oil import and consumption in the USA

7.   US double standard procedures with Iraq

8.   The Security Council resolutions issued against Iraq

9.   IAEA inspection missions in Iraq according to SCR 687(1991)

10. Iraqi WMD programs’ declarations

11. OFFP 13 Phases

12. The Expenditures and Supplies of OFF Programme in Iraq

13. Infants and children mortality due to cause of death

14. Mortality rates sample for Iraqis, before and after the sanctions

15. The Main Iraqi political parties post 2003

Diagrams and Models

1.   security/interests relations Model

2.   The United Nations system diagram

Maps

1.   Iraqi oil fields map

2.   Old Map for Southern Iraq/Basrah Province

3.   The UN peace keeping missions and operational organs

4.   Multinational occupation forces camps and FOB in Iraq

Photos*

1.   In 1966: Al-Barzani with Mossad agent Amet and General Rehavam Ze’evi , the commander of Israeli Central Military district,

2.   In 1968: Al Barzani and his delegation as guests to Minister of War, Moshe Dayan in his house in Israel

3.   In 1968: Kurdish delegation headed by Al-Barzani with Israeli prime minister Levi Ashkol in Al Quds, From right; David Crown, Shams aldeen AlMufti, Dr. Mahmoud Othman, AlBarzani, L. Ashkol, Mayer Amet, Alof Hrubin

4.   Athar Declaration announcement. Granting Autonomy to the Iraqi Kurds. From right: Jalal Talbani, Vice President Saddam Hussain, Hardan AlTakriti, Masoud Barzani, President AlBakr, Izzat Ibrahim, Obaidullah AlBarzani, Dr.Mahmoud Othman and others.

5.   Al Barzani with Haeem Lekub wearing Kurdish uniform-Head of the Israeli Mossad delegation in Northern Iraq in 1973

6.   Saddam meeting the high Shiite clerics; ALSistani and Muqtada AlSadr

*Photos marked with a star (*) were published in Iraq and is now in the public domain because its term of copyright has expired according to the Iraqi copyright Law. These work meets one of the following conditions:

•    It is a photographic or audiovisual work that is not compositive (artistic in nature) first published in Iraq before 1 January 1999.

•    It is another type of work, first published in Iraq before 1 January 1954, and the author died before 1 January 1979.

•    The author died more than 50 years ago, or in the case of a work owned by a corporation it was first published 50 years ago.

Preface

The reason for selecting this case is related to my personal interest and ex-career as a Coordinator for the Iraqi nuclear program team (1992-96) and IAEC/IAEA liaison officer in 1997, in addition to working with the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) international relations department for almost the whole period of the 1990s, I was one among others, who eye witnessed the different SC working organs in Iraq, and witnessed the birth of UN long list of unprecedented resolutions of subjugation and de-sovereignty measurements that are taken against a UN founding state. As an Iraqi citizen, I went through the daily consequences of the UN thirteen years of sanctions and the continuous US air strikes and bombing.

My first-hand knowledge for the type of inspection activities and SC resolutions issued on Iraq made of me an insider, yet, the task to avoid subjectivity will be hard, and the ability to communicate with the outsiders is even harder. This might be dedicated to mismatch between what was theoretically mentioned and practically done in Iraq. The Iraq case caused a wide range of debates within the international community on three dimensions; the sanctions (1990-2003), the US war (2003) and post war period (2003-2010). The human rights and civil society institutions still question the degree of legitimacy of taken actions on Iraq with direct reference to US security agenda and UN’s norms (state sovereignty, non-interventionism, international security, democracy and human rights).

This practical experience formulated a big deal of my key pre-conceptions on the kind of role played by the UN during the 1990s, and later on in respect to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 against the will of the UN and the international community. The reasons behind destabilizing the relations with the SC will be taken into consideration to have a clear view on the degree of influence among different SC permanent states (P-5). I’ll try to keep a distance to strive towards an objective analysis to increase the degree of validity and to make it easier for the reader to understand the junctions and the way the scenario on Iraq was made and executed. Unlike criminology logic, the beneficiary in the case of Iraq is not necessarily the only one who is to be questioned or suspected or even blamed, the victim in this case will be under focus as well.

This book is based on a research paper submitted to the Global Studies Institution in the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. It focuses on the relation between the UNSC and Iraq within limited historical periods (the sanctions’ period 1990-2003 and post US invasion period in 2003-2010). The first period of 13 years witnessed dramatic changes in the Iraqi policy making, and the worst relations that can be cited between the SC and any other UN sanctioned member state. In that, early UN sanctions targeted local political regimes and aimed at peace keeping and stabilization by emphasising on arms embargo in the first place and other embargoes to neutralize regimes in favour of people. While the sanctions on Iraq targeted people in the first place and was managed by imposing unprecedented SC resolutions, rough procedures and group punishment that basically neutralized people in favour of political regime with full negligence to the UN moral laws, aims and responsibilities and turned Iraq in its final end into a failed state.

The narration covers a period of 20 years (1990-2010) with some reflections on certain related historical issues that have future extensions during these twenty years. The book parts are arranged in chronological order to help understand the causal and accumulative effect between the different periods. The 20 years under focus will be discussed in terms of cause and effect between the different sides of conflict with the intention to maintain a profile on the nature of power relations and balances that affected the decision making among the conflicting parties. Throughout the book, there will be a clear link to some theories in concern with the hope see their degree of liability and practice.

I intend to take into consideration different points of view and discourses on various sides of the UN-Iraq conflict. Some UN seniors and well known writers in a side, and other discourses that belongs to writers with formal US administration affiliations, to give the chance to explain the US acts from different perspectives and see the kind of analyses that might justify the actions taken by great powers to maintain the Western values and their modernity model. These will be also taken into consideration in a try to reach neutrality and objectivity.

The book is composed of five parts;

-Part one: will define some theoretical perspectives, and introduction to the roots and poles of this conflict i.e. the UN, Iraq and USA together with the main political playing factors for each side. This part will discuss inductively the type of relations that combined Iraq with the different regional states and with the US, and the role played by the US to maintain its dominance and interests. The geopolitical internal and external factors that propelled the conflict in and with Iraq and the main reason for targeting this country as well as the ideological transitions post Cold War.

-Part two: will discuss power relations within the UNSC, and how these relations influenced the SC resolutions on Iraq, as well as the inspection teams’ role under the tensed environment among the P-5 states. In addition to discussing the UNSC resolutions on Iraq for the period under study, with some concentration on SCR 687 and 715.

-Part three: will concentrate mainly on the sanctions causes and the OFFP program for Iraq, as well as the taken procedures to maintain these sanctions. The discussion will extend to cover the US tactics in increasing the impact of sanctions on Iraq and the role of the UN in preserving the rights of its member states, taking Iraq as a model.

-Part four: will include sanctions effects on children, women and on the Iraqi social economic system and the failure to maintain human basic needs.

-Part five: will discuss the post invasion period (2003-2010), mainly devoted to highlight the US invasion tragic consequences and future perspective in Iraq.

This book will end up with some conclusions and recommendations, and will rise up some questions that can awake further investigations on the structural problem in the current new world order. Then, it is up to the reader to decide who is to be blamed, and what is to be done to overcome similar future conflicts. There will be some reflections on how all the above affected the sustainability for the Iraqi internal development projects and created a high rate of unemployment, poverty and death among the Iraqis, at a time the whole international community are holding their Millennium meeting (2000) to fight these social illnesses and to sign the Millennium Declaration initiative

Introduction

and

Theoretical Framework

Introduction

The war on Iraq represents one of the most controversial cases in the recent history of international relations. It contains a wide range of ebbs and flows in the level of moral commitments and credibility for the way different parties like Iraq, USA and the UN together with its Security Council acted and behaved. The misuse of power by some permanent members _known as the P-5 states_ on different occasions acting within the United Nations Security Council (SC) mandate caused the UN heavy lost in its credibility to lead the international community and preserve international peace and security. This is partly due to the way great powers selectively addressed different cases in direct reference with its own interests and security agenda. This was done of course on the account of international collective peace and security. Not only recently in the case of Iraq, but on different levels for the last 60 years, the SC became as the main reason behind the UN reputation of double standards in managing different world crises and conflicts. The Iraq-SC relation will be examined under specific historical period (1990-2010); dating the period between the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the UN’s sanctions over Iraq, the US invasion of Iraq, and post US invasion period. This time limitation of twenty years is highlighted by significant events that shaped the relation between Iraq and the SC in general and the USA in particular.

Many theories are written in the field of conflict resolution and peace keeping assuming certain paradigms that combine the conflicting parties and design their conflict models. The conflict reasoned the whole time to historical, ideological, cultural and economic factors, which might be right from the surface, but deep inside some conflicts are totally different shaped and are based on deception and disinformation. The book is written with reference to some theories that address conflict and resistance. Buzan’s amity/enmity relations for example is going to be applied to see whether the negative historical relations between Iraq and some SC permanent members affected UNSC response to Iraqi legal and humanitarian demands, and to see whether the UN’s procedural treatment contradict with the foundation of the UN charter in preserving international peace and security and enhancing international co-operation and prosperity. Lukes, Huntington and others will be present in this part to help reach better understanding for the kind of conflict addressed in this book; still, all these theories will help us understand the conflict from the surface and are disable to suggest any solution to the conflict model. The war on Iraq, I believe, needs a new theory that can match this century’s new world order.

The UN represents a common forum that helps national states within the international community to meet and co-ordinate their interests and needs and to help preserve international peace and security. Theoretically, the UN charter maintained full respect to its member states sovereignty and equality. The key exception in the UN system was in the way its SC was and is formulated. Here, the rights are not equal among its members who are divided into five permanent members (P-5) with veto right plus ten mandatory member states on two years at a time. Yet, the SC enjoyed the minimum standard of balance during the Cold War period. The end of the Cold War dates the beginning of new unipolar world order and new global system that rests basically on unilateral power superiority1.

On the surface, Buzan’s hypothesis on amity/enmity relations in international and foreign policy is utilized, with some readings to the historical context that combine different states and decide the kind of relation that combine them in respect to Iraq. Meanwhile Iraqi response and degree of commitment to SC resolutions will be questioned using Luke’s resistance theory. The US containment policy in respect to Iraqi sovereignty, and the way some great powers reacted lately against the US will to extend the sanctions will be also overviewed within the context of power relations.

There will be some reflections on the UNSC attitude towards Iraq, in respect to the different political tensions and what was behind the curtains that influenced the relations between Iraq and the UN, and how did these relations _among other factors_ affected the SC decision making process. This will be in an attempt to investigate whether the UN in the final end violated the spirit of its own charter in respect to human rights, non-interventionism and the sovereignty of its member states, or not. This can help understand the degree of illegitimacy in the SC procedures against Iraq to be able to see whether the UN was used or not by interested power centres to convert Iraq into a US colony.

The main global feature for the period taken in this book (1990-2010) dates the beginning of drastic accelerating changes in the world order and political individuality and it officially dates the end of the Cold War era. The changes and shifts in power balances in the political arena was obvious in the way some great powers acted in addressing the post Cold War new challenge, namely; containment of political vacuum. The US and Great Britain were in race to full this vacuum in different global and international organs in an attempt to show the whole world that they were/are the main powers left that can decide on world affairs. The US influence over the SC decision making was important after the collapse of the former Soviet Union (FSU) to show off and celebrate this triumph. Unfortunately, Iraq in this time was the main target and means that justify this aim. We will go through the problematic output for the kind of historical relations that combined Iraq with USA that might have multiplied the effect of UN resolutions and procedures on Iraq compliance. The question of US security agenda, oil and other strategic interests in Iraq _as a centre for the Middle East_ remains open in deciding the way this conflict manipulated.

The book focuses on the SC attitude to Iraq, and how the relations (amity/enmity) that combined Iraq with the US affected the SC decision making in different cases such as; sanctions, Oil for Food Programme (OFFP), bureaucratic trading mechanism and different inspection and reporting organs. The problem formation extends to cover the effects of all pre-mentioned SC procedures on the Iraqi society to see whether these procedures helped preparing Iraq for future political change or not.

Theoretical Framework

My hypothesis address the conflict with Iraq in the current new world order, it is based on two factors security and interests that decide the kind of inter-state relations without the intension to falsify other theories and hypothesis. In the case of Iraq both Great powers security agenda and Strategic interests coexisted in a way that multiplied the enmity effect between US-UK and Iraq. My argument is,

In conflict Settlement process; Super and Great powers are motivated by their own Security agenda and Strategic interests in meddling certain conflicts, they affect the UN and other global bodies’ kind of reaction and degree of concern and commitment to conflict solving. This makes Great powers attitude varies from positive engagement to a negative one that enforce a change over the conflict pattern and construct unbalanced buffer zones and manoeuvre spaces for the conflicting parties, through dissimulating the real conflict on the ground, and absorbing the international and regional collective efforts.

Diagram no.(1): Factors that design inter-states’ relations

missing image file

In conflicts; Great powers’ Security Agenda and Strategic interests; motivate and affect Great Powers behaviour (X) specify the kind and degree of International Bodies’ commitment and engagement (Y) and decide the kind and size of manoeuvring space for the conflicting parties (Z).

Conflicts are usually divided into major categories, for instance, there are the conflicts over trade issues, state security considerations, regional influences, and even over territory and natural resources. These are generally considered to be interest-related conflicts. While a conflict that has its roots in political ideologies, religious beliefs, cultural rights, national sovereignty, and social-political status of people groups are considered as value-related one.2

The way SC acted in respect to Iraq case, will be examined using different variables such as the number of SCR:s on Iraq, the kind of resolutions, the way US-UK acted in this case compared with other similar cases, using some comparisons will help illustrate these power relations _with no intention to make a comparative presentation_ I intend to apply Buzan’s amity/enmity relations to see how these relations affected the UNSC decisions’ making on Iraq in an attempt to investigate whether this did lead the UN to violate the spirit and norms of its own charter. Luke’s resistance theory will be applied on the way Iraq resisted the SC resolutions and US containment policy, and will help understand the divergence in the International Community and among some P-5 states as well.

I’ll focus on the most powerful factors and variables that played the main role in shaping the Iraq-UNSC relations such as; the Iraq-US relations itself, the US-UN relations and US power over different UN inspection and reporting organs like the IAEA, UNSCOM and UNMOVIC. The central question on Iraq case will be;

•    How the SC did violate the spirit of the UN charter regarding non interventionism and sovereignty of its member states?

•    What are the real intentions behind the UN-led sanctions and US-led political Change in Iraq?

•    Who is responsible for crushing Iraqi sovereignty?

I find it very beneficial to go through certain theories that are applicable to clear out sides of the conflict with Iraq, although does not give the whole picture; Buzan’s theory will be utilised in reference to direct relations to great powers and how did this relation determined the kind of SC taken actions on Iraq. On the other side Luke’s theory will be subsidiary utilised to understand the kind of resistance made by Iraq towards the continuity of SC taken procedures. The study will include also other kinds of theories like Samuel Huntington’s theory on the necessity of western superiority, and the importance of Western cultural dominance. I will refer also to the dominant theory in the Middle East in reference to the US constant support to Israel and the US policy making. This might theoretically help to start digging to reach the real reasons behind destroying the sovereignty of Iraq.

Amity/enmity relations model

This model was first used and coined by B. Buzan in an attempt to discuss the regional and International security models, in 1983, in his People, States and Fear: The National Security Problem in International Relations,3. Buzan mentions that;

Security is a relational phenomenon. Because security is relational, one cannot understand the national security of any given state without understanding the international pattern of security interdependence in which it is embodied […] in defining regional security, the principal element that must be added to power relations is the pattern of amity and enmity among state4

Buzan defined amity as relationships ranging from genuine friendship to expectations of protection or support and enmity as relationships set by suspicion and fear. He mentions then, that patterns of amity/enmity arise from variety of issues and specific factors ranging from border disputes, interests in ethnically related populations, and ideological alignments, to longstanding historical links, whether positive or negative, such as those between Jews and Arabs5. He adds that "History affects military threats largely in terms of the impact of past