|
U.N. Legalized Iraq Occupation: Experts
 |
|
Extending oil-for-food program for six months helped U.S. regulate stealing Iraqi wealth, said El-Ashaal
|
By
Alaa Abul Eneen, IOL Staff
CAIRO,
May 23 (IslamOnline.net) – The passage of the U.N. Security Council
resolution lifting sanctions off Iraq is nothing but a legitimization
of the U.S.-British occupation and depletion of the oil-rich
country’s resources, political analysts and international law
experts told IslamOnline.net Friday, May 23.
The
resolution,
drafted by war allies the U.S. and Britain, legalized their status in
occupied Iraq by dubbing the duo the “Authority” which will take
up key missions, including controlling Iraq’s contacts with other
countries, Egyptian Deputy Foreign Minister Abdullah el-Ashaal told
IOL.
“The
extension of the oil-for-food program for other six months come as an
attempt to allow the U.S. to determine how to pump oil and the
payers,” said the diplomat, also professor of international law.
“It
was a period to help the U.S. regulates stealing Iraqi wealth,” he
charged.
The
resolution transfers legal control over Iraq's oil immediately from
the United Nations to the United States and Britain, el-Ashaal said.
Oil
revenues will be deposited with the newly-created Iraqi Development
Fund and disbursed only at the direction of the occupying powers in
consultation with the interim Iraqi government, that is yet in the
womb of time.
The
diplomat-cum-expert slammed the U.S. and Britain’s ignorance of the
return of the U.N. weapons inspectors into Iraq, “in such a smart
way.”
The
U.S. managed to resist demands by many countries, including France,
Russia and even Britain, for the return of U.N. weapons inspectors to
Iraq to ascertain whether it had weapons of mass destruction, as
charged by the U.S. forces.
Washington
has signaled willingness to have inspectors from the International
Atomic Energy Agency return to Iraq but just to check a known nuclear
site after reports of looting.
“The
inspectors would have found that Iraq is free of banned weapons,
leaving the U.S. in full condemnation for launching a military
aggression for no reasons,” ruled el-Ashaal.
“Legally
speaking, the resolution is right as approved by 15 members with no
vetoes, but its content is illegal as it consolidate a colonialist
system and makes Iraq just a cow milked by the U.S.,” he stressed.
The
Security Council decision to lift the sanctions off Iraq is not based
on solid ground, Ahmed Abu El-Wafaa, an international law expert, told
IOL.
“The
sanctions against Iraq were slapped more than 13 years under several
pretexts, including Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass
destruction.
“Now
these sanctions were removed without disarming Iraq of the alleged
weapons,” he said.
El-Wafaa
expressed his concerns that the Iraqi Development Fund would be
exploited the Iraqi Development Fund to cover the costs of invasion.
“The
resolution does not honor the United Nations, and clearly contradicts
with the stance of world powers,” Hassan Nafaa, a political writer,
said.
“It
weakens the authority of the world body and gives it a marginal role
that acts in the service of the occupation forces and legalize their
actions,” Nafaa warned in an interview with Al-Jazeera satellite
channel.
Ahmed
Youssef, the head of the Arab League’s Arab studies and researches
institute, lambasted the resolution, asserting that “it gives the
U.S. a free hand in producing Iraqi oil and disbursing the
proceeds.”
He
argued that anti-war countries France, Russia and Germany agreed to
the U.S.-drafted resolution after “clandestine talks.”
Youssef
expected that Washington had “promised to give these countries some
financial benefits in return for their votes,” including re-paying
of Iraqi debts, some reconstruction contracts and shares of Iraqi oil.
The
Russian press had accused Moscow of selling
its vote to the U.S. after assurances its Soviet-era debt and
massive oil contracts in the country would be respected.
|
