The legacy of the UN Security Council sanctions on Iraq

In thinking about the legacy of the sanctions on Iraq, some things are quite clear: the long-term impact of malnutrition; the loss of life and the suffering from lack of adequate medical care; the disappearance of the middle class; the deep corruption and growth of criminal networks and so forth. But there is a different kind of legacy as well. The sanctions imposed by the United Nations (UN) Security Council for over a decade were as damaging as they were in large measure because they were deeply imbedded in bureaucracies, and bureaucratic manoeuvres, that were both arcane and opaque. These included the ‘retroactive oil pricing policy’, the reverse veto, the holds on contracts and the consensus rule within the 661 Committee. While the narrative that emerged in the aftermath of the sanctions holds that ‘we are now in the era of smart sanctions, and the old, comprehensive measures we saw in the Iraq case are now in the past’, in fact that is not at all the case. Rather, part of the legacy of the Iraq sanctions is that precisely the bureaucratic manoeuvres that made it possible to cripple Iraq’s infrastructure, healthcare, education and food security are the mainstay of contemporary sanctions regimes. This article looks at how the reverse veto and the absence of a sunset clause in the Iraq sanctions can be seen at work in the current US sanctions against Cuba; how the interminable obstacles and burdens that choked the humanitarian exemption process are now being used in the Security Council measures against North Korea; and how macroeconomic shocks that were triggered by undermining Iraq’s oil exports have been put in place in regard to UN and US sanctions against Iran and Venezuela.