By Sarah Sloan

On April 28 the Clinton administration announced some changes in its policy of using economic sanctions to punish countries Washington considers too independent. Spinning this foreign policy change as a humanitarian gesture, officials announced that it would now be legal to sell food and medical sales to three states—Iran, Libya, and Sudan.

The new policy, however, specifically excludes Iraq, Cuba, and north Korea.

As a justification for these exclusions, the state department cites the United Nation’s oil-for-food deal. This deal permits Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil and then put in bids for food and medicine in a system of contracts tightly controlled by the UN.

The system permits contract delays. UN agencies have reported that only limited amounts of requested goods are actually delivered. Also, Iraq cannot pump its allowed amount of oil because it lacks the spare parts to repair oil infrastructure damaged in 1991 during the Gulf War.

According to UN agency reports, this oil-for-food deal has not meaningfully altered the situation of malnutrition and disease in Iraq. The sanctions have killed over 1.6 million people since they were imposed eight-and-a-half years ago. Only lifting the sanctions completely can alleviate the health problems the Iraqi people face.

On May 3, UN humanitarian coordinator Hans von Sponeck toured northern Iraq. The previous coordinator, Dennis Halliday, resigned from the program to protest the sanctions. He is now on a speaking tour across the country denouncing U.S. policy.

Von Sponeck visited Mosul, in northern Iraq, after a week that included at least four bombing attacks by U.S. planes. On April 30, according to the Iraqi government, a seven-member family and their sheep were killed in one of the attacks.

AP reports that von Sponeck corroborated Iraq’s claims: "I was deeply affected by what I saw—the total destruction of a shepherd’s family and all their possessions."

These attacks have been occurring almost every other day, sometimes daily, since the heavier bombing during so-called Operation Desert Fox Dec. 16-19. U.S. and British forces fly in areas over Iraq where they won’t allow Iraqi planes to fly—the "no-flight zones." U.S. and British policy regarding these zones violates international law.

Washington tries to justify enforcing the northern "no-flight zone" by claiming it protects the Kurdish minority. Yet U.S. planes attack this area from a base in Turkey—a country Washington supports in its repression against its own Kurdish minority.

The scenario repeats itself over and over: According to the Pentagon, Iraq turns on its targeting system in protest of the "no-flight zones," the U.S. fires surface-to-air missiles and laser-guided bombs, supposedly at Iraqi air defense sites and anti-aircraft artillery. Then Iraq reports destruction to civilian life and infrastructure.

In the three separate attacks that took place May 8, 9 and 10, Iraq notes up to 10 people who may have been killed, as well as many others wounded, and destruction to homes and water and electrical facilities.