Letter: Blame Saddam for Iraqi hunger
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.ROBERT FISK's article about incidents in the No Fly Zones ("Exposed: Britain and America's merciless secret blitz", 21 February) and George Alagiah's article about sanctions ("Starvation: the West's weapon of mass destruction" 28 February) give a misleading impression about the situation in Iraq.
Our aircraft are performing a vital humanitarian task in the No Fly Zones. The zones were set up after the Gulf War in response to a situation of overwhelming humanitarian necessity, when thousands of Iraqis were fleeing brutal repression at the hands of the Iraqi regime. That same regime continues to persecute its own civilians, as Patrick Cockburn's article ("Baghdad riots over killing of Ayatollah", 21 February) makes clear.
Since last December Iraqi aircraft have systematically violated the zones on more than 100 occasions. Iraqi air defence systems have shot at and threatened our pilots. We have always made it clear that we will take robust and appropriate defensive measures should our forces be threatened. We have no hidden agenda. When Iraq stops violating the zones, we will stop responding. It is as simple as that.
Fisk and Alagiah also query UN sanctions. Food and medicine imports have never been prohibited under sanctions. But the Iraqi regime has consistently refused to take advantage of this. It prefers to allow its people to starve in a cynical attempt to get sanctions lifted without complying with its obligations to the UN, in particular on weapons of mass destruction.
The report last week by the UN Secretary-General on the implementation of the "oil for food" programme makes interesting reading. The contrast between the programme in the north, where there are few, if any, shortages of food and essential drugs, and the situation in the centre and south is stark. The difference is that the UN implements the programme in the north. Elsewhere, the Iraqi government is responsible but persistently obstructs the programme. As just one example of Iraqi obstruction, the UN report points out that only 15 per cent of medical equipment has been distributed, of which only 2 to 3 per cent has been installed. These facts, sadly, speak for themselves.
The UK, unlike Saddam, is concerned for the Iraqi people. The oil-for- food programme was a UK initiative and we have consistently taken the lead in the UN in refining and improving it. We are putting forward new ideas to the UN panel which is considering ways of improving the humanitarian situation. We will continue to work both for improvements in the humanitarian programme, and for additional humanitarian assistance. But we also call upon the Iraqi government to comply with its obligations to the international community and to its own people.
DEREK FATCHETT
Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office London SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments