REALITY:
There are a number of important differences in the way that sanctions work in the northern and south/central Iraq. For example, Kurdistan receives 22% more per capita from the oil-for-food programme because a large proportion of southern Iraq's quota is used to pay UN costs and make war reparations to Kuwait.
Kurdistan has 13% of Iraq's population and 13% of the oil revenue. South-central Iraq has 87% of the population, but gets only 57% of OFF income.
The Kurds get a significant income from smuggling oil over the Turkish border. (Rough estimates suggest that the KDP in the north-west of Kurdistan earns about $250 million a year from oil smuggling).
Northern Iraq gets a cash component from OFF which enables it to purchase goods within the region rather than abroad, maintaining the local economy.
Kurdistan has been receiving aid for longer.
There is more international NGO activity in Northern Iraq. The Iraqi government has placed various restrictions on NGO work in southern Iraq and many aid agencies (like Oxfam) have moved out as a result. (See 'Join the Campaign' for details of aid work in Iraq).
The Kurdish authorities are for the first time guaranteed access to Iraq's oil revenues, and so are reserved in their criticism of oil-for-food and sanctions.
MYTH:
"The latest report by the Secretary-General notes that one quarter of all medical goods delivered to Iraq since the humanitarian programme started have not been distributed: they sit in Government-controlled warehouses. There is a similar story in respect of food." Peter Hain, House of Commons debate on sanctions March 24 2000
REALITY:
"The medicines which, says Hain, "lie in warehouses" are there because, as UN officials tirelessly explain, the World Health Organisation has instructed Iraq to maintain emergency buffer stocks and actually wants these increased. Because of the delays in New York, they say, supplies arrive erratically: for example, IV fluids frequently turn up ahead of equipment, without which they are useless." John Pilger, New Statesman 20 March 2000
MYTH:
"Pilger claims that we 'rigidly enforce a ban on vaccines for children'. There is no ban. Contracts containing substances that have potential dual use in weapons of mass destruction are held temporarily. It would be irresponsible not to check that the end-use is legitimate and will be monitored." Robin Cook, New Statesman, 17 April 2000
REALITY:
"Cook's letters are supervised by Jon Davies, the head of the Iraq Desk, who recently explained to a visitor how the ban works. The British government must be 'reassured that the use of every batch of vaccine ordered by Iraq is not for weapons'. That reassurance can only be given by United Nations weapons inspectors, who were expelled from Iraq in 1998 after it was found that they were being used to spy for Washington. Catch-22! Other UN personnel in Iraq are not to be trusted, says Davies. No 'reassurance' equals no vaccine equals children dying from preventable diseases. Professor Karol Sikora, who visited Iraq as head of the Cancer Programme of the World Health Organisation, told me last December that he and colleagues had found 'no possibility of converting these drugs into chemical warfare agents'."
John Pilger, New Statesman, 1 May 2000
MYTH:
"His (John Pilger's) film showed harrowing pictures of a cancer ward. The doctors said that they could not get the drugs they need. Yet there is nothing to prevent Iraq ordering more medicine, and the UN repeatedly urges them to do so."
Robin Cook, New Statesman, 27 March
REALITY:
"A billion and a half dollars' worth of vital supplies to Iraq is currently blocked by the UN Sanctions Committee, including food and fifty million dollars' worth of medical supplies. The supply of 16 heart and lung machines has been blocked for six months. British ministers rigidly enforce a ban on vaccines for children (Hansard, 21 December 1999). Professor Karol Sikora, the former head of the World Health Organisation cancer programme, reported: 'Requested radiotherapy equipment, chemotherapy drugs and analgesics are consistently blocked by the US and Britain.'
John Pilger, New Statesman, 3 April 2000.
MYTH:
"The humanitarian programme is entirely unconditional. There is no limit on Iraqi oil sales to pay for it." Robin Cook, NS, 27 March 2000
REALITY:
"There is an effective limit imposed by the US, which has blocked contracts for vital oil industry parts already approved by the Security Council." John Pilger, NS - 3 April 2000
MYTH:
"He is still developing weapons of mass destruction. He's still developing chemical weapons. To say he doesn't have these weapons sounds like an apology for one of the most brutal tyrants of modern times." Peter Hain, interview in the New Statesman, 3 April 2000
REALITY:
"It was possible as early as 1997 to determine that, from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq had been disarmed. Iraq no longer possessed any meaningful quantities of chemical or biological agent, if it possessed any at all, and the industrial means to produce these agents had either been eliminated or were subject to stringent monitoring. The same was true of Iraq's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. As long as monitoring inspections remained in place, Iraq presented a WMD-based threat to no one." Scott Ritter, former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, Arms Control Today, June 2000
MYTH:
"The no-fly zones were established to stop Saddam's air force from bombing his own people. Iraq fabricates claims of death and destruction." Robin Cook, New Statesman, 27 March 2000
REALITY:
"The UN Security Section regularly reports on the bombing of civilians, using UN sources. In one five-month period, 41 per cent of all strikes resulted in civilian casualties. The targets included fishermen's wharves, villages and livestock. On 30 April last year [1999], the UN reported: 'Allied war planes carried out several sorties over the Ninewa Governate. The jets fired four missiles at Bashiqa area... seven civilians were killed. A shepherd and six members of his family [and] 101 livestock. UN team visited on 2 May.' This was personally verified by the chief UN humanitarian co-ordinator in Iraq." John Pilger, NS, 3 April 2000
MYTH:
"The ball is in Saddam's court. He can secure relief from sanctions if he co-operates with the international community in the verifiable elimination of his weapons of mass destruction programmes. And he can end coalition bombing of Iraqi air defence facilities instantly. He just has to stop endangering the lives of our aircrew. We hope that he will do both." Speech by Geoff Hoon at the Royal United Services Institute, 17 May 2000 | 
