The United Nations sanction program against Iraq was designed to.
impact the economy, thereby limiting the actions of the countries leader and.
creating an atmosphere to direct change (Gordon 18). While there is.
considerable research that suggests that the economic impacts of these.
sanctions have hurt the general population more than the leadership, there.
are a number of solid arguments in support for continued U.N.-directed.
sanctions and military support for these sanctions by the United States.
The arguments against sanctions in Iraq are not based in the military issues.
or the problems of peacekeeping, but instead in claims that the continued.
actions in Iraq violate humanitarian principles (Gordon 18). In the Spring.
of 1999, the continued U.S. bombings in Iraq drew attention away from.
existing debates about the nature of U.N directed sanctions and their impact.
on the Iraqi populous as a whole (Gordon 18). The imposing of economic.
sanctions against Iraq under the directives of Articles 41 and 42 of the U.
N. Charter was based in the commitment to peacekeeping efforts and were.
based in the belief that by crippling the economy of Iraq, it would be.
possible to bring Saddam Hussein into complicity with U. N. directives.
(Gordon 18).
The criticisms of the sanctions stem not from the belief that the United.
Nations should not have intervened or even from claims against the.
directives of the U.S. military, but instead as an extension of the United.
Nations commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other.
documents created to determine the basic rights of all people to health,.
food, water, shelter and safety (Gordon 18). Opponents have argued that the.
humanitarian directives of the United Nations should determine the.
opposition to the sanctions that have left many women, children, poor,.
elderly and sick without basic needs and has resulted in considerably human.
suffering (Gordon 18). The following is one perspective on this view:.