While there is a dispute between the United Nations and Iraq over who is ultimately at fault, there is no doubt that many Iraqis, especially children, are dying because of the UN sanctions regime. When the sanctions were imposed, 11 years ago next month, few can have expected they would be in operation for so long and become such an intractable issue.
Along with the other 14 members of the Security Council, Ireland is a member of the "661 Committee", named after the original sanctions resolution, which oversees the sanctions. Ireland therefore has a direct involvement which it did not have previously, as an ordinary member-state in the General Assembly.
A recent joint effort by Britain and the US to reorganise the sanctions regime failed because of Russian opposition on the council. While broadly supportive of the UK-US proposal, Ireland sought to make a special contribution of its own.
The purpose of the sanctions was to prevent the importation of items by Iraq which could be used to develop weapons of mass destruction, whether nuclear weapons, long-range missiles or biological weapons, as were used in the past against the Kurdish minority. In an attempt to alleviate the consequent suffering to the Iraqi people, the Oil for Food Programme was brought in during the mid1990s: Iraq could sell its oil abroad but payments were made into an account controlled by the UN and about one-third of the money was deducted for Gulf War reparations and UN expenses. The war reparations are supervised by a UN compensation committee based in Geneva which also includes an Irish representative.
The UK-US proposal sought to introduce a system where, instead of all goods having, at least in principle, to be approved for importation by the sanctions committee, the only items requiring explicit approval would be those on a Goods Review List. However, it was objected that this list was still too long and extensive. The UK-US proposal also sought to clamp down on the smuggling of Iraqi oil. In the event, Russia blocked the move on the basis that the new plan would make sanctions permanent, so the existing arrangements are to remain in place for at least another five months. There was a cynical view that Russia was benefiting financially from the existing arrangements.
While supporting the aim of preventing Iraq's capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction, Ireland sought to loosen the restrictions on the flow of goods into Iraq to the greatest extent possible by narrowing down and limiting the contents of the goods review list. Ireland also sought to minimise restrictions on imports which were necessary for civilian infrastructural projects to rebuild the Iraqi economy.
The Irish position was outlined in a letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, to the British Foreign Secretary, Mr Jack Straw, and the US Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell. Ireland is seeking to reduce the number of contracts placed on hold because of objections by members of the Security Council. Ireland also seeks to lift the ban on foreign investment in Iraq and to increase access for the provision of services by foreign companies, especially in the health and transport sectors.
The Irish position has been criticised for a lack of independence and impartiality by Mr Riad El-Taher, chairman of the London-based Friendship Across Frontiers organisation, which campaigns for a lifting of the sanctions. A British subject of Iraqi origin, he wants Ireland to campaign for an end to the unanimity rule on the 661 Committee, in favour of majority voting. At present, if one member objects - usually the US or the UK - an entire contract can be rejected. Mr El-Taher says he has not met anyone on his frequent visits to Ireland who supports the sanctions. Ireland's view is that this would be desirable but would not get past the British or the Americans: instead, Ireland seeks a formal understanding that contracts would not be unreasonably blocked.