Right of Reply: Geoff Simons

The writer responds to a critical review by Fred Halliday of his latest work

Geoff Simons
Monday 01 March 1999 00:02 GMT
Comments

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.

FRED HALLIDAY'S review of my book, Imposing Economic Sanctions: Legal Remedy or Genocidal Tool?, rehearses US and UK propaganda.

It is absurd to imply that the Iraqi people suffered in the Eighties as today. Iraq's social provisions were excellent - when Saudi Arabia and Kuwait were bankrolling Baghdad, the US was a war ally of Saddam in the Gulf, and Western firms were aiding his weapons plans.

Halliday is wrong to deny the ban on food and medicine exports to Iraq. The West blocks or delays humanitarian contracts; firms are told not to supply free medicines; and "unauthorised" charities are criminalised (eg Voices in the Wilderness workers threatened with $1m fines and jail). The recent US cruise missile attack on Sudan targeted a pharmaceutical factory licensed to supply medicines to Iraq; grain silos were targeted during Operation Desert Fox.

The nominal $10.5 bn-worth of oil a year cannot be pumped. Sanctions prevent Iraq from repairing its bomb-damaged oil industry and oil prices have plummeted. Moreover Saddam has no access to revenues; they are paid to a UN account. The agricultural potential cited by Halliday is ruined because of the sanctions block on pesticides, antibiotics and equipment imports (including the means to prevent land salination).

It is wrong to say that resources are being diverted. Michael Stone, ex-head of a UN observer unit, has denounced this "common and dangerous misconception".

Madeleine Albright (on US TV in 1996) said that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children, because of sanctions, "is worth it". Fred Halliday, in supporting this deliberate carnage (which he admits does not affect Saddam),violates the UN Genocide Convention. It is a derelict response to the abuse of a people.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in