YouSaid · the spoken record

Mohammed Said Al-Sahaf

lines on the record: 134
first: 1996-09-24
most recent: 2000-09-24
sittings or episodes: 5
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“This paragraph specifies that the measures imposed on Iraq should be applied to other countries in the region in order to make the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction and of all systems of delivery of such weapons, as well as to pursue the goal of imposing international prohibitions against chemical weapons. The Security Council has taken no action in this regard, despite the fact that Iraq has implemented all the required measures. Consequently, the way in which the Security Council has acted under American pressure in this context is a flagrant example of a double-standard policy.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The Zionist entity occupying Arab Palestine refuses to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and refuses to place all its nuclear installations under the comprehensive safeguards regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Besides being a threat to peace and security in the Middle East region and the world, such a position exposes the double standard applied by the United States, which at once arms the Zionist entity and gives it unlimited support and deliberately ignores the provisions of paragraph 14 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991).”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Resolution 1284 (1999) does not represent a solution at all, nor is it, in essence, anything other than a deliberate ploy to further American anti-Iraq policy, as embodied in the indefinite perpetuation of the embargo. We have therefore clearly declared that we shall have nothing to do with that resolution. The Middle East region is suffering from a grave situation caused by the fact that the Zionist entity that occupies the Arab Palestinian territories possesses a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction of all kinds — nuclear, chemical and biological — and longrange ballistic missiles.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“We cannot, under any circumstances, deal with an unjust position that ignores the record of our fulfilment of our obligations and that denies us our legitimate right to have the embargo lifted, as required by the Charter and the correct interpretation of relevant Security Council resolutions. A flagrant example of how the record of the fulfilment of our obligations has been flouted and how our right to have the embargo lifted has been denied is to be found in the underhanded way by which the United States of America and Britain have made Security Council resolution 1284 (1999) a vehicle for defrauding Iraq of its rights and for misrepresenting its full discharge of its obligations under relevant Security Council resolutions, including in particular resolution 687 (1991).”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The Saudi Government provides American and British aggressors with military facilities and the bases of Rafha, Dhahran, Khamis Mushait, Al-Jauf and Tabuk, from which scores of American and British planes take off to attack Iraq. In Kuwait, the rulers provide services, facilities and financing to the American and British aggressors at the air bases of Ali Al Salim and Ahmed Al Jaber. Iraq has discharged its obligations under relevant Security Council resolutions. Consequently, the logical result would be for the embargo imposed on Iraq to be lifted. Moreover, the Charter requires that the American-British aggression against Iraq be condemned and that its perpetrators and those who participate in it — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey — bear the international responsibility, with all its legal implications.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The American and British acts of aggression have inflicted enormous material and moral losses on Iraq and gravely damaged its civilian infrastructure. The loss of human life to date has amounted to more than 300 martyrs, while more than 900 civilians have been wounded. The United States of America and Britain bear responsibility for these acts of aggression and for all their consequences, in accordance with the rules of state responsibility under international law. By the same rules, that responsibility is shared by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey by virtue of their participation, support and assistance in carrying out these acts of aggression.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The illegal character of the imposition of those two no-fly zones has been confirmed by official statements issued by the Russian Federation, France and China, which have from the very outset declared their position that the imposition of those zones has no basis in law. This position is also supported by a former Secretary-General of the United Nations who, in his book entitled Unvanquished: a U.S.-U.N. Saga, makes it clear that the American claim that Security Council resolution 688 (1991) authorizes the launching of attacks against Iraq in order to enforce the no-fly zone is baseless and that the enforcement of the no-fly zones, far from having been endorsed by the Security Council, is no more than a unilateral act by the Governments of Washington and London.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“I must also point out that my country is being subjected to ongoing daily aggression by American and British aircraft in the no-fly zone imposed on northern and southern Iraq by unilateral decision of the Washington and London Governments. The aircraft launching the aggression take off from their bases in Saudi, Kuwaiti and Turkish territory. This continuous military action, which violates the integrity and sovereignty of Iraq's airspace, has no basis in law or in any binding resolution adopted by any competent organ of the United Nations. It constitutes instead an illegitimate unilateral action undertaken by the United States of America and the United Kingdom. These belligerent acts constitute both interference in the internal affairs of Iraq and ongoing military aggression against Iraq through the imposition of the two no-fly zones.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Therefore, it behoves the States Members of the United Nations to voice their opinion as to the extent of the Security Council's faithful compliance with such authorization. In this connection, it is worth mentioning that, under Article 25 of the Charter, Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the Charter. This means that implementation of the comprehensive sanctions imposed on Iraq, which have become illegal under international humanitarian law and human rights law, is no longer binding on States Members of the United Nations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“10 The United States openly declares that it is prepared to use the veto against any attempt to lift the sanctions imposed on Iraq. It is indeed shameful for the United States that its Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, has declared on television that the continuation of sanctions is worth the death of 500,000 Iraqi children. Just to clarify the matter, although the States Members of the United Nations have authorized the Security Council to act on their behalf provided that it do so in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, pursuant to Article 24 of the Charter, the Security Council has, in the case of the comprehensive sanctions imposed on Iraq, gone so far beyond the purposes and principles of the Charter as to turn itself into a cover for perpetrating a policy of genocide against an entire people.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“There are also floating and semi-frozen allocations for certain needs of Iraq amounting to $10 billion that have not been disbursed owing to obstructions placed by the Americans and the British. Such egregious obstructions include the suspension of 1173 contracts, valued at more than $2 billion, relating to construction materials and humanitarian needs. Despite increasing pressure on the international community to put an end to this ongoing genocide, two permanent members of the Security Council — the United States of America and Britain — insist on perpetuating this crime to further their plans to destabilize the Arabian Gulf region and preserve its hotbeds of tension with a view to prolonging their hegemony over and military occupation of the region and to plundering its wealth.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It is well known that both the United States and Great Britain claim that the oil-for-food programme, agreed to between the United Nations and Iraq, alleviates the impact of the unjust sanctions imposed against Iraq. Such a claim, however, is quickly proved to have no basis when set against the figures published by the United Nations itself. More than three and a half years have now passed since the inception of the programme, during which Iraq has exported $31.6 billion worth of oil. Of this total, $9.5 billion has been allocated to the Compensation Fund in Geneva and $1 billion allocated for operational administrative expenses of the United Nations while, in the course of three and a half years, only $8.3 billion has been disbursed for purchases to cover the needs of the Iraqi people.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“There is no longer any doubt that these sanctions constitute a continued, flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, of international law and of international humanitarian law. This matter has been confirmed by the reports of United Nations agencies and humanitarian and human rights organizations. The most recent testimony to that effect is to be found in the working paper adopted by the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights at its fifty-second session, held in Geneva from 31 July to 25 August 2000. The paper affirmed that the comprehensive sanctions against Iraq are unequivocally illegal under existing international humanitarian law and human rights laws.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Nor should such an affirmation overlook the fact that the world is characterized by cultural and civilizational diversity, and that the cultural and social assumptions tacitly accepted by a given culture cannot be imposed on other nations and peoples. What I have just stated does not belong to the realm of theory. We in Iraq continue to suffer from the domination and abusive actions of the hegemonic powers headed by the United States of America. Our deep faith in the righteousness of our position explains the steadfastness shown by our country and our people in the face of the might of the unipolar Power. The comprehensive sanctions imposed on Iraq have entered their eleventh year. By all standards, these sanctions amount to genocide and involve a brutal application of collective punishment and revenge against an entire people.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Furthermore, the call for respect for international law and its primacy at the national level will remain devoid of credibility unless it is associated with the kind of conduct that calls for respect for the letter and spirit of the Charter of the United Nations and the rules of international law, and with the possibility of recourse to international judiciary bodies, with regard to the interpretation and application of legal provisions to ensure a delicate balance between powers and responsibilities, rights and obligations. Any affirmation of respect for human rights should not overlook the fact that civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights should, as a matter of equal importance and urgency, enjoy the same respect.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“A dynamic partnership between the countries of the North and the countries of the South is fundamentally opposed to the logic of domination and unilateral power and to the transformation of science and technology into political tools for the subjugation of others. On the other hand, the call for democratization within countries will remain spurious unless its advocates adhere to a democratic course at the level of dealings with other States and with international organizations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“9 The wave of capitalistic globalization sweeping over today's world continues to widen the gap between the rich and the poor in the world. This dangerous phenomenon requires a forceful call to lay the foundations of a true international partnership in order to re-establish economic and social justice at both the international and national levels, upholding the principle of equitable sharing by all of the fruits of scientific and technological progress, and stopping rich countries from using science and technology as tools for imposing their policies of exploitation on the countries and peoples of the world.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“This noble collective goal can be achieved only by upholding the United Nations system and by reforming and developing that system in order to invest it with the ability and competence to achieve that goal. Reform is particularly called for in the case of the Security Council, which must respect its obligations towards the community of States and must comply with the correct interpretation of the purposes and principles of the Charter in the performance of its functions and the use of its powers. It is also necessary to restore the role of the General Assembly in the maintenance of international peace and security, so as to ensure the necessary balance if the Security Council fails to assume its basic responsibilities under the Charter because of the unilateral and abusive exercise of its powers.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“That is how the Charter of the United Nations was drawn up, in order to establish a system of collective security based on common collective interests. The stability and effectiveness of the system of collective security is based on cooperation among partners and on the basis of specific obligations, not unilateral action and domination, as is the case today. The right of nations and peoples to live in peace and stability is the essential requirement for the maintenance of international peace and security. This right can be guaranteed only if it is firmly linked to the right to economic and social development and to freedom from any kind of pressure or interference.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Sixthly, it noted the phenomenon of evading responsibility in cases where the assumption of responsibility would not be profitable from an economic point of view, as is the case in questions related to environmental pollution, the expansion of the sphere of poverty in the world and the obstruction of the development of the States of the South, all of which are cases where the responsibility of the advanced industrialized countries is quite obvious. The dangers, challenges and negative phenomena to which I have referred, as have many other speakers in the course of this general debate, have led to broad reflection on the solutions needed to overcome those difficulties and problematic issues. Iraq is of the view that the starting point is for United Nations actions to be a true expression of the will of all peoples and nations.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Fifthly, it noted the phenomenon of the forcible adjustment and adaptation of established rules of international law to serve the unilateral policies of the hegemonic Powers, headed by the United States of America, through the imposition of strange and bizarre interpretations of the contents of such rules, or even total disregard for them when said Powers were unable to impose their strange interpretations thereon. An example of this dangerous phenomenon can be found in the feverish attempts to minimize the importance of the principles of State sovereignty, national independence and non-interference in the internal affairs of States.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Fourthly, it drew attention to the imposition on the international community of unilateral policies through mechanisms and arrangements outside the international system, and to the fact that such arrangements were treated as substitutes for the United Nations in those cases where the hegemonic Powers, headed by the United States, expected to meet with strong opposition by the United Nations to those unilaterally determined policies, as we saw in the case of the aggression launched by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“Thirdly, it noted the prevalence of the logic of “power and opportunity” in the exploitation of United Nations mechanisms to ensure the adoption of resolutions supporting the selfish political aims of one country or a few countries at the expense of common principles in international relations, without first giving consideration to obligations undertaken under the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of justice and equity — hence the recourse to mandatory embargoes and comprehensive economic sanctions as a goal in and of itself, as well as the continuation of the policies of starvation and destruction of the economies of various countries and societies.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“The first was the exploitation by the industrialized countries, the United States in particular, of scientific and technological progress for political purposes, with a view to engulfing all other countries 8 of the world in a wave of capitalistic globalization, claiming that globalization is an inevitable fate to which all must submit, regardless of the negative consequences and dangers it entails for the lives of the vast majority of humankind. Secondly, it drew attention to the adoption of a double standard as far as political positions are concerned, and it noted an indifference to the legal and political standards imposed by internationally binding agreements, where a balance is struck between rights and obligations in the process of the coexistence of interests among various countries, without any distinction or discrimination.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“He also warned against the dangers posed by that State's recourse to illegitimate and immoral ways and means of achieving that goal, including the use of brute force; the exercise of pressure; political and economic blackmail; interference in the internal affairs of States; the fomenting of racial, religious and sectarian conflicts; and the use of international institutions to serve the interests of American policy. Iraq also drew attention to the following situations at an early stage.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“More than 10 years ago, Iraq drew attention to the first signs of many dangers and basic problems that have since grown worse and become the focus of a significant part of the discussions of the Millennium Summit. In February 1990, President Saddam Hussein warned against the grave dangers resulting from the unilateral control assumed by the United States of America and its headlong rush to impose its hegemony on the world in general and on the Arab Gulf region and other Arab countries in particular.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“It is my pleasure to congratulate Mr. Harri Holkeri on his assumption of the presidency of the fifty-fifth session of the General Assembly, and I should like to convey to him our best wishes for a successful accomplishment of his tasks. I should also like to express our high esteem to his predecessor, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Namibia, who conducted the work of the previous session with notable skill. The Millennium Summit came to an end just a few days ago. From a certain point of view, it was an occasion for reviewing the state of international relations following the collapse of the bipolar international order. We have taken note of the increasing number of States complaining of the unipolar control over international affairs and the extent of the current and future dangers that this situation can give rise to.”
2000-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 55 (2000)
“These concepts can be achieved only through carrying out an interrelated series of administrative, structural and political reforms of the United Nations, its agencies and organs so that it can shoulder its responsibilities under the Charter, primarily its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It should also support their struggle against the Zionist colonization of their territory and their fight to establish a sovereign independent State on their national territory, with Jerusalem as its capital. The United Nations must implement its resolutions on making the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction. In particular, it should implement paragraph 14 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991), which considers Iraq's disarmament a step towards establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction. So far the United Nations has taken no steps in that direction. In conclusion, the realization of the concepts of justice, democracy and development throughout the world is subject to the fair democratization of international organizations, in particular the United Nations.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The United Nations adherence to the principles set out in its Charter and the full and fair implementation of its resolutions, without selectivity and discrimination, is the benchmark of its credibility in restoring the trust of States in its ability to achieve justice and peace and to encourage States to comply with and implement the provisions of its resolutions. The United Nations, in particular the Security Council, should implement its resolutions on the Middle East, primarily those relating to the question of Palestine, and should support the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people to regain their legitimate and inalienable rights to live on their national soil in Palestine.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“From this rostrum we call upon the peoples and States of the world that have faith in the values, culture, freedom, independence, justice and equity of the nations and peoples of the world, to consider President Saddam Hussein's proposal with a view to initiating a dialogue aimed at turning the proposal into a reality that would help achieve balance, peace and security throughout the world. Moreover, many States, including permanent members of the Security Council, have explicitly called for a multipolar world in which political, economic and military balance prevails, in the interest of maintaining international peace and security.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“31 In a speech delivered by President Saddam Hussein on 17 January 1999, Iraq called for an assembly of various institutions to be established by interested States to agree upon statutes and charters with a view to achieving serious cooperation in the economic, political and military fields in order to preserve balance and bring about peace, starting with Asia and questions related to it. That assembly would not be directed against anyone, but would be aimed at protecting its members and at legitimately defending their security and interests as well as international security, in accordance with established humanitarian norms.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“But the United Nations has taken no action to curb these operations, and the reason is very clear: it is a reflection of the United States policy aimed at maintaining the abnormal situation in Iraq. The continued United States hegemony and governance of the destinies of the peoples of the world, as well as of international economic and political organizations, confront the United Nations with its most serious challenge ever. The United Nations should stand up to this domination and prove its ability to restore equilibrium so as to realize the purposes set out in the Charter, primarily the achievement of peace, security and stability, the promotion of friendly relations and the encouragement of economic cooperation between States.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“This American policy has contributed to encouraging Turkish forces to carry out large-scale military operations inside Iraqi territory on the pretext of chasing elements of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). These Turkish military operations have caused instability and disorder in northern Iraq and pose a threat to Iraq's national security and territorial integrity. Iraq has regularly reported these repeated Turkish acts of aggression to the United Nations Secretary-General and to the President of the Security Council. These acts constitute a violation of the principles of good-neighbourliness and a threat to international peace and security in the region.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The hostile policy of the United States towards Iraq, which runs counter to the Charter of the United Nations and international law, has been made clear in official statements by senior officials in the United States Administration that stress that the United States is determined to unseat the patriotic Government of Iraq and dismember its national unity. In addition, the highest American legislative body has enacted laws that allow the Administration to interfere in Iraq's internal affairs, to allocate huge sums of money to carry out acts of terrorism, sabotage and assassination inside Iraq and to appoint high-ranking officials in the Administration to oversee these immoral and illegitimate tasks.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“A senior Pentagon official, in describing these operations in the The Washington Post on 2 September 1999, admitted that this was a low-level war. Proceeding from its legitimate right to self-defence, which is guaranteed in all international instruments and covenants, Iraq will not hesitate to counter all American and British acts of aggression that aim at violating the integrity of its airspace and territory and threaten its security as well as that of its people. Iraq will continue to confront American and British aggression by all available means and potential. It will not yield to American blackmail.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Two thousand three hundred and thirteen (2,313) sorties were carried out in northern Iraq from Turkish territory. The United States Administration is seeking to find inconsistent pretexts for these daily acts of aggression, to which hundreds of innocent civilians fall victim. It claims that the bombing of civilians is in legitimate self-defence against Iraqi air force attacks. Let us ask this: where does the United States derive the right to defend an act that lacks any kind of basic legal legitimacy? Who gives the American aggressors the right to act in self-defence, as they claim, in Iraqi airspace? The acts carried out by the United States Administration represent a declared war waged against the people of Iraq. This is a charade — no more, no less.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Proceeding from this policy of partitioning the aggression, the American and British warplanes have been carrying out daily exercises in a show of power that violates Iraq's airspace. In this way they launch savage bombardment operations against civil and economic sites in Iraq, including communication stations, oil pumping stations and private houses. Even mosques and churches have not been spared these continued savage attacks; the churches include the Church of Mar Matti, which goes back to the fourth century AD and which the American and British aircraft bombed on 11 August 1999. From the aggression of December 1998 to the present, the total number of sorties carried out by American and British aircraft amounted to 12,143, of which 9,830, launched from Saudi and Kuwaiti territory, were carried out in southern Iraq.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is well-known that the continuation of these no-fly zones is a means to perpetuate the aggression with a view 30 to achieving the purposes of the Anglo-American political scheme against Iraq. American officials do not hesitate to indicate their real intentions of using these daily bombardment operations to achieve the United States Administration's goals against Iraq's independence and sovereignty and to destabilize its patriotic Government. The Washington Post published on 31 January 1999 an article quoting a senior official of the United States Administration describing a certain attack as a means of reaching the goal in a way that satisfied all objectives without any loss, and saying that if the United States were to carry out a massive campaign, people would inquire about what had provoked such attacks.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“This American objective has become quite clear through the many statements made by American officials that make the embargo a tool to achieve the hostile American political policy against Iraq. One of the basic pillars of the hostile American/British policy against Iraq is the imposition of the two no-fly zones on Iraq. This constitutes a violation of the United Nations Charter and international law. We have already mentioned the evidence about this in a letter to the President of the Security Council dated 15 January 1999. This has also been confirmed by the views expressed by some permanent members and by others inside and outside the deliberations of the Council.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The United States Administration has spared no costs to distort the facts about the Memorandum of Understanding, or spared any tendentious lies and allegations about the distribution of food and medical supplies. The Secretary-General's reports on the Iraq programme, which are based on the reports of United Nations observers deployed throughout Iraq, have proved the accuracy, regularity and equity of the distribution process of all humanitarian supplies received under the Memorandum of Understanding. The United States of America deliberately works to maintain the embargo and to double the suffering of the people of Iraq, despite the disappearance of all the reasons linked to the imposition of the embargo.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“For example, while the value of the contracts signed for water, sanitation and electricity has amounted to $352 million, the value of the supplies that have arrived in Iraq so far is only $64 million — that is, only 18 per cent of the total value of those contracts. The rest has been put on hold by the British and the Americans. The most striking evidence of the suffering of the children of Iraq as a result of this unjust, comprehensive embargo is the 12 August 1999 report of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), which contains statistics on child mortality resulting from malnutrition, shortages of medicines and the deteriorating economic and nutritional situation of Iraqi mothers. The report has proved decisively that the embargo imposed on Iraq is the main reason for the huge increase in the child mortality rate.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“The methods the United States and Britain use in dealing with the contracts that are related to humanitarian needs, and the deliberate delay in processing these contracts, make the main goal of the Memorandum of Understanding the financing of the expenses of the United Nations instead of securing the essential humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people and stopping the deterioration of their humanitarian and health situation. This also exposes the intentions of the American and British Governments to strip the Memorandum of its humanitarian substance by putting on hold the contracts directly related to the health situation of the people of Iraq.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“It is worth mentioning that the total value of the supplies that arrived in Iraq for the five initial phases of the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding is almost equal to the funds deducted from the revenues of Iraqi oil sales to cover the expenses of the Special Commission, the expenses of the United Nations in Iraq and the costs of the United Nations Compensation Commission. The total value of the supplies that have arrived in Iraq from the beginning of 1997 to the present is $4,948,300,000, while the funds deducted for the Special Commission, the United Nations services and the Compensation Commission are $4,041,185,000. A cursory look at these two figures clearly shows the failure of the Memorandum of Understanding to meet the essential humanitarian needs of the people of Iraq.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“They reached their ugliest forms in the open obstruction of any efforts to ease the effects of the comprehensive embargo imposed on Iraq, which has resulted in bitter suffering for the people of Iraq, particularly its children. The obstacles experienced during the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding signed between Iraq and the United Nations regarding the oil-for-food formula — which all reports and realities indicate cannot meet the essential humanitarian needs of the people of Iraq — are striking evidence of the American Administration's insistence on harming the people of Iraq and depriving them of their fundamental humanitarian rights, as enshrined in all international covenants.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Those samples were used by the Commission to contaminate the missing warheads that were sent to American laboratories for analysis. That was in order to enable the United States 29 Administration to find evidence supporting its allegations regarding Iraq's weapons programmes. The Commission's dubious practices were not limited to this, but went as far as hastily destroying the VX samples in order to conceal the irrefutable evidence of the Commission's involvement in the American conspiracy against Iraq. The American attempts to distort and pervert the relationship between Iraq and the Security Council have not been limited to exploiting the former Special Commission.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“In order to achieve the ultimate end of its main mission, the former Special Commission had adopted two methods for its work in Iraq: first, conducting espionage activities for American, British and Israeli intelligence so as to enable them to realize their objectives of destabilizing Iraq politically and removing its patriotic regime; and, secondly,keeping the embargo in place by reporting to the Security Council that the Special Commission had not yet fulfilled its mandate of disarming Iraq. During its work in Iraq, the former Special Commission resorted to dubious methods to falsify facts and present them in a manner that was in line with the American approach, which is hostile to Iraq. The last of these had to do with the issue of VX vials found in the Commission's headquarters at Baghdad.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Now it is the turn of those five States to honour their obligations. Iraq's position should be clear to all. To gain Iraq's approval, any proposal or resolution — or consequences, if there are any — should be based on international law and non-selectivity, otherwise the results will meet with a definite rejection and we will continue our struggle to lift the sanctions comprehensively and finally in order to achieve all our legitimate demands. It has become clear to all, through public, personal and official testimonies, that the former Special Commission — a panel unfortunately bearing the name of the United Nations and acting nominally under its flag — has been used by the United States and Great Britain to achieve their aggressive objectives against Iraq's people, sovereignty and security.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“Why then has the Council failed to lift the embargo on Iraq? The reason behind all this is the American hegemony over the Council, which prevents the Council through various means from properly implementing its resolutions. We have seen for several months intensive endeavours in the Security Council, particularly by the five permanent members, to adopt a unified position on Iraq. The correct position that conforms with the resolutions of the Security Council is very clear and uncontroversial. Once the logic of law and justice is adhered to, Iraq demands its clear and legitimate rights — namely, the lifting of the iniquitous sanctions imposed on it in accordance with the Council's resolutions. These resolutions were agreed upon by the five permanent members and have been implemented by Iraq over the last nine years.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)
“While the Security Council resolutions imposed various obligations on Iraq, they in turn imposed a specific obligation on the Security Council, stipulating that the comprehensive embargo was to be lifted once Iraq fulfilled its obligations under the same resolutions. But what has happened in the course of the last nine years is that the Council, during 40 sessions held to review Iraq's implementation of its obligations, has failed to take a decision to lift the comprehensive embargo, much less to ease the situation even by 1 per cent, despite the fact that all countries, even Iraq's enemies — for example, the United States of America — have attested that after nine years of intensive implementation under the severest circumstances and threats of continued aggression against Iraq nothing important has been left unfulfilled.”
1999-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 54 (1999)