Why We Say End All Sanctions!

Throughout the struggle against the sanctions on Iraq, the question of de-linking the military sanctions from the economic ones has been thrown out on the table by various forces. Some, moved by the plight of the Iraqi people, especially the children, believe that this is the way to end this crisis. Others agree with the U.S. contention that Iraq poses a military threat and must be stopped. But to get into the question of de-linking, we must understand more about what purpose sanctions serve.

Sanctions function in the arena of international politics as a means of coercion where one or more states force another to comply with their demands. Often sanctions have been called a humane alternative to war and were certainly portrayed as such prior to the bombing of Iraq in 1990. By their very nature, sanctions require military might to be effective-the "resolve" often referred to by U.S. leaders. Without force behind them, sanctions become mere words on a piece paper. This also means that there cannot really be economic sanctions and military sanctions, independent of each other. Sanctions, in all their entirety, are weapons of imperialism.

This means in Iraq sanctions have been used, from the beginning, as a weapon of oppression and domination against the people of Iraq. While the stated aim of the sanctions is against the government of Iraq to prevent its building weapons of mass destruction (an irony not lost on the many of us who know that the U.S. is, and has been, the world's largest producer and user of these kind of weapons), the fact is that the sanctions are aimed squarely at the people of Iraq. The restrictions imposed by the UN SCR661 committee, as well as the U.S.'s liberal use of its veto power on so-called "dual-use" items (items which can have both a military and non-military use, such as pencils, medicine and toys), have made sure that the direct burden of the sanctions are carried by the Iraqi people.

Besides the death, destruction, misery and suffering caused by these sanctions, which have been graphically detailed by Voices In The Wilderness and others, they are also a slap in the sovereign face of the people of Iraq, basically telling them that they are not capable of choosing their own leaders, good or bad. (As if the U.S., with it's latest election circus in full constitutional crisis, is the example of the "proper" way democracies do it). No, the interests of the U.S. are not in helping or even caring about the people of Iraq. Rather they are in maintaining control over a vital oil producing region and in using Iraq as an example to the rest of the world of what's in store if they do not do things the "Amerikkkan way."

So the question of de-linking takes on new meaning when one realizes that it plays right into the hands of imperialism. By making the question a choice between this kind of sanction or that kind of sanction (and they each are causing immense damage to the people of Iraq), one validates the position calling for sanctions. In other words, it lets imperialism set the terms of the debate. This is why VVAWAI has and will always stand firm on the demand of ending all sanctions against Iraq. We refuse to enter the debate on the government's terms. We will struggle with other anti-sanctions forces over the question of de-linking in an open and friendly dialogue. And if the U.S. decides to end economic sanctions as an appeasement, we will accept it and celebrate but not at the expense of military sanctions. We must always demand that all sanctions be lifted. To do otherwise is to abandon not only the people of Iraq but the people of the world as well.