Global Policy Forum

By Barbara Stocking *

Iraq is not only on the brink of war. It is teetering on the edge of a humanitarian disaster. Child mortality rates have rocketed since the United Nations imposed sanctions in 1990. Up to 16 million people - more than two-thirds of the population - already rely on a fragile system of food aid for their survival.

What are we planning to do about this? The United States and Britain are gearing up for war. Oxfam has 60 years experience of working in conflict. We know the impact that military action has on civilians. In some cases, as in Rwanda, military action is necessary to save lives and is justified. But, on the basis of our experience and the current evidence, we cannot see how a military strike on Iraq can be justified, nor indeed how such an attack could be waged without violating international humanitarian law.

Iraq's economy is already devastated. Even with the food rationing system set up by the international community, malnutrition is widespread, especially among women and children.

A recent visit to Iraq by aid agency experts, including an Oxfam specialist, confirmed that the water and sanitation system is on the verge of collapse. Most urban homes get piped water but two-thirds of it is untreated. In rural parts of central and southern Iraq, Unicef says only 46 percent of homes have piped water. In the towns, the trucks that empty cesspits and septic tanks are not working properly because there are no spares, tires and batteries. Sewage flows back into people's houses. Iraq's water and sanitation system depends on an electrical supply that was crippled during the 1991 air strikes. Eleven years later, it is thought that one-third of the national power supply is still down. Most water treatment plants have their own generators, but 70 percent of them don't work.

Any military action that damages power supplies will inevitably destroy the already fragile water and sanitation system. Inevitably, disease will sweep through the population. Any attack that affects roads, ports or railways will lead to the collapse of the system of food distribution upon which the bulk of Iraq's population depends.

Article 54 of Additional Protocol 1 of the Geneva convention prohibits attacks upon "objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population." In Iraq, this must be taken to include ports, roads, railways and power lines. The convention states that "in no event shall actions against these objects be taken which may be expected to leave the civilian population with such inadequate food or water as to cause its starvation or force its movement."

Given this, how can an attack on Iraq fail to violate international humanitarian law?

Weapons of mass destruction are a real threat to global stability. But in this case the advocates of military action have failed to demonstrate that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction pose such an imminent threat that the risks to the civilian population can be outweighed.

It is dangerous to assume that the suffering of Iraq's people, from Iraqi government policy as well as from 12 years of inept sanctions, could not get any worse. A military attack on Iraq could worsen it.

* The writer is director of Oxfam. She contributed this comment to the International Herald Tribune.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.