-Caveat Lector-

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/medi-d06.shtml

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org




WSWS : News & Analysis : Middle East : Iraq

Medical experts warn of devastating impact of US war vs. Iraq

By Simon Wheelan
6 December 2002

Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author

A new report by Medact, an organisation of medical experts, predicts a nightmare 
scenario
of possibly millions of deaths, human suffering and infrastructure collapse if the 
United
States once again goes to war against Iraq.

Medact’s report is entitled Collateral Damage: the health and environmental costs of 
war on
Iraq. It explains how in the event of the Bush administration utilising nuclear 
weapons in
their effort to subjugate Iraq, as many as four million Iraqi civilians could be 
killed.

Before the last Persian Gulf War 11 years ago, the Baathist regime was threatened with
nuclear retaliation if it attacked Israel with chemical weapons. Should the 
forthcoming war
threaten to become a drawn out affair, the American and the British governments have
already expressed a willingness to use pre-emptive nuclear strikes.

Even a conflict rapidly won by American forces, fought only with conventional weapons,
could cause half a million deaths and leave behind a deadly legacy of ill health and
environmental damage in Iraq and the wider Persian Gulf region. Medact predict that the
total possible deaths on all sides during the conflict and the following three months 
could
range from 48,000 to over a quarter of a million. An outbreak of civil war between
competing factions and ethnic groups would lead to a further 20,000 deaths. The adverse
affects of a war upon the population could add a further 200,000 deaths, while a 
further
200,000 lives would be threatened after the conflict.

Any war would leave an aftermath of civil conflict, famine and epidemics, legions of
refugees, a disastrous impact on children’s health and the destruction of 
manufacturing and
agriculture. Needless to say a war waged on Iraq utilising nuclear weapons would render
not only the capital, but also surrounding areas uninhabitable for years to come.

Medact point out that the avowed goal of removing Saddam Hussein and his Baathist
regime will necessitate a far wider war than the removal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait in
1991. It will in all probability involve sustained air attacks on major Iraqi urban 
centres. The
report also factors in the probability of an attack upon Iraq triggering the downfall 
of
regimes in surrounding nations and acting as a catalyst for retaliatory action by 
Islamic
fundamentalists. Even a swift slaughter of the Iraqi army, the so-called “best case”
scenario, will threaten the county’s Balkanisation, between Sunni and Shia groups and
between Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen and Assyrians. Such a conflict will rapidly spread beyond
the borders of Iraq and destabilise surrounding countries.

The stuttering world economy would be tipped into a deep and prolonged recession, while
the ripple effects of oil price hikes and trade reduction would have a disastrous 
effect upon
the less developed nations.

The financial cost of a conventional war on Iraq will be huge. The American government
will spend $150 billion to $200 billion on a conventional war and a further $5 billion 
to $20
billion on the subsequent occupation of Iraq. Just half the cost of an initial war—$100
billion, or between one and two percent of America’s GDP—would fund four years of
expenditure addressing the health requirements of the world’s poorest people.

In the latest edition of New York Review, William Nordhaus, an economics professor at 
Yale
University, insists that the longer-term costs of the war are being underestimated by
Medact and others. After examining recent international experiences in post war Kosovo
and Haiti, the longer- term cost could amount to as much as $600 billion. Nordhaus’s 
worst
case scenario, including oil price spikes and OPEC intransigence envisages costs of as 
much
as $1.6 trillion.

The Medact report places its possible future scenarios in the context of the war of 
attrition
that has been waged against Iraq for over a decade. In doing so they note in passing 
how
Iraq’s fate has been all but ignored by the world’s media. In the introduction the 
authors
explain how their research was hampered by a lack of contemporary research and data:
“More than a decade into one of the major humanitarian disasters of our time, we are 
left
to debate causes and responsibilities without an adequate information base.”

The Iraqi population has been subjected to devastating economic sanctions. It is 
estimated
that one and a half million Iraqi citizens have perished as a result.

The Medact authors point out how during the 1970s Iraq developed from an impoverished,
predominantly rural society, into one that was highly urbanised with a relatively 
modern
social infrastructure. Today the population is impoverished, its infrastructure has 
been
wrecked and the country’s infant mortality is the 37th worst in the world—on a par with
countries like Haiti, the poorest nation in the Western hemisphere, and the Yemen, the
poorest member of the Arab league.

Iraq has plummeted down the United Nations Human Development Index. Before its defeat
in the first Gulf War, in 1990, Iraq was positioned in 50th place. By 2000 it had 
fallen to
126th. By way of comparison Iran is 95th.

Iraqi civilian infrastructure was deliberately targeted during the first Gulf war, with
devastating consequences. Its oil industry, roads, bridges, communications, electricity
supplies, water and sewage systems, factories, warehouses and civilian homes were
systematically destroyed by ordinance. Declassified documents from the US Defence
Intelligence Agency explain how a conscious policy was implemented to destroy 
electricity
generating facilities, together with water storage and treatment amenities. Then to
exacerbate the impact on the Iraqi population, chlorine was placed on the UN embargo 
list.
The predictable result has been a series of devastating famines and epidemics.

Iraq had a GDP of $66 billion in 1989. By 1992 it had shrunk by 270 times to a tiny 
$245
million.

The UN estimated in the late 1990s that 55 percent of Iraqis live in poverty and 20 
percent
in extreme poverty. The most vulnerable sections of society including children, 
pregnant
women, older people and the sick, have been hit most severely by sanctions. In 
response to
reports that half a million children had died due to shortages created by sanctions,
Madeleine Albright, then secretary of state in the Clinton administration, famously 
described
this as “a price worth paying.”

The oil for food programme, which permits Iraq to sell oil to fund relief, only began 
in 1997.
It is widely disparaged as vastly inferior to conventional relief programmes. In 
addition, the
US and Britain declared no fly zones in the north and south of Iraq along the 33rd and 
36th
parallels. Between 1991 and 1999, 6,000 sorties dropped 1,800 bombs and hit in excess 
of
450 targets in those zones. These attacks have recently increased in frequency to 
destroy
any remaining Iraqi air defence facilities and provoke retaliatory action that would 
provide a
possible excuse for an all out attack. Notwithstanding the West’s professed 
humanitarian
concern for the suppressed Iraqi Kurds, the Turkish air force is now allowed to enter 
Iraqi
airspace and bomb Kurdish villages inside the Northern zone.







Copyright 1998-2002
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to