An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

‘Soaring Child Mortality In Iraq’: But Who Cares?

mother_child.jpg
(Photo courtesy care2.com)

“Infant mortality in Iraq soars as young pay the price for war,” writes Andrew Buncombe in The Independent.

“Two wars and a decade of sanctions have led to a huge rise in the mortality rate among young children in Iraq, leaving statistics that were once the envy of the Arab world now comparable with those of sub-Saharan Africa.

“A new report shows that in the years since 1990, Iraq has seen its child mortality rate soar by 125 per cent, the highest increase of any country in the world. Its rate of deaths of children under five now matches that of Mauritania.

“Figures collated by the charity show that in 1990 Iraq’s mortality rate for under-fives was 50 per 1,000 live births. In 2005 it was 125. While many other countries have higher rates – Angola, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, for instance, all have rates above 200 – the increase in Iraq is higher than elsewhere.

“Precisely how many children died because of sanctions is unknown but a report in 1999 from the United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef), suggested that between 1991 and 1998 an additional 500,000 died.

“Denis Halliday, who resigned as the UN’s humanitarian coordinator in protest at the sanctions, said at the time: ‘We are in the process of destroying an entire society. It is as simple and terrifying as that. It is illegal and immoral.’

“Kathy Kelly, an anti-war campaigner with Voices in the Wilderness, said last night: ‘The punishment of children through the economic and military war against Iraq has been the greatest scandal’.”

It is said that the test of any civilised country/society lies in its visible concern about women and children, especially during wars and conflicts. If it is absent then the thin line dividing civilised behaviour/thought and barbarism simply vanishes.

I have enjoyed writing for The Moderate Voice blog for more than a year now.

However, what I have experienced (and what has baffled me most) is the priority (in America?) to first ascertain whether a blogger/writer/commenter is a “leftist”, “moderate”, or a “rightist”, or a “liberal”, or a “neo-con”, or whatever.

This tendency to label would have appeared funny (if not eccentric)…but for the fact that even human tragedy and suffering are at times viewed from within the prism of these labels.

I wonder which label would cover the writer of this tragic story on the impact of war and conflict on the children in Iraq?



12 Responses to “‘Soaring Child Mortality In Iraq’: But Who Cares?”

  1. Strick says:

    I share your outrage, but isn’t everything in the article old news? We knew from earlier reports that UN sanctions (and Saddam’s response to them, pushing their effects on those least capable of defending themselves) had a horrendous impact on infant mortality in Iraq before the war. Note the main study is from 1999.

    I’m surprised that important information is missing here. The article is essentially silent on how that infant mortality has changed since the war. Yes, it quotes a 2005 figure, but how has the war changed it? Have things improved since sanctions were ended despite Iraq’s other problems? Can you honestly say?

    Sadly, this estimate of 500,000 Iraqi infant deaths that resulted from UN sanctions before the war (other, more responsible estimates are lower but still appalling) is much, much higher than the number of Iraqi deaths estimated due to the war and later violence. Higher even than Saddam is said to have murdered during his regime.

    That should give you pause. This isn’t an argument against the war but against UN sanctions. It turns out there are still things more terrible than war.

  2. Strick Says: I share your outrage, but isn’t everything in the article old news?

    Let me make it clear…this is not “my outrage” but today’s news item from The Independent newspaper.

    As a blogger I am just quoting from a newspaper of some standing.

    We know well how all statistics with regard to Iraq are being fudged today. So how do we get the real picture?

    Well if you want to make an issue regarding the children’s death please get in touch with The Independent newspaper.

  3. Rudi says:

    Swaraaj _ Strick seems to be using selective cut and paste. This snip from the article states that mortality has increased from 1990 to last year, the war is more deadly than sanctions.

    Figures collated by the charity show that in 1990 Iraq’s mortality rate for under-fives was 50 per 1,000 live births. In 2005 it was 125. While many other countries have higher rates – Angola, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, for instance, all have rates above 200 – the increase in Iraq is higher than elsewhere.

    Egypt, Indonesia and Bangladesh have made the most progress in tackling child mortality, while Iraq, Botswana and Zimbawe have regressed the most.

    Sanctions against Saddam Hussein’s regime were imposed by the UN in 1990 after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and remained in place until after the coalition invasion in 2003. The sanctions, encouraged by the US as a means to topple Saddam, were some of the most comprehensive ever put in place and had a devastating effect on Iraq’s infrastructure and health services.

  4. AustinRoth says:

    Rudi – it is a horrible situation by any definition. But the unanswered question is when did the rate peak (during Saddam’s rule or after), and is it currently trending down or up over the past few years?

  5. Jason Steck says:

    Women and children wouldn’t do very well under the Taliban-type regime that would take over in Iraq if the war were terminated without thought to the consequences.

    I don’t think the appropriate question now is whether Saddam killed more or less. The appropriate question now is: what kind of policies will minimize suffering in the future? Remaining fixated on the question of whether the war itself was proper or helpful is a good question for history and assignment of political responsibility during elections or hearings, but not useful for policymaking in the midst of a political and military crisis. We need to respond to the situation as it exists now and decide whether withdrawal, continuation, or some middle way alternative is the best way to reduce suffering in Iraq.

  6. Strick says:

    I’m sorry, Rudi, I probably wasn’t clear. The statistics being cited are consistent with reports published by UNICEF and others prior to the war when the talk was on how sanctions were killing children. You can google them up for yourself easily enough. Many of us were as appalled by them back then as you are now.

    FWIW, the article itself does not address how those pre-war infant mortality stats compare to post-war stats. The reason it’s interesting is that the rapid, horrific increase in infant mortality from 1990 — prior to the first Gulf War — to 1999 — prior to the second — was attributed to the sanctions cutting off vital food and medical supplies to the Iraqi people. It was a primary justification for the Food For Oil Program. I even seem to recall a report made after FFO was implemented that showed infant mortality going back down.

    The point is, the specific scarcities that were thought to cause the increase in infant mortality prior to the war no longer exist. If sanctions based scarcities were the cause of the higher mortality rate, you’d expect the rate to be going down now. Only you can’t tell, not from this report, because it appears someone only quoted some of the numbers, as if they weren’t interested in discussing the trends that matter to the issue now, after the war.

    Interesting. You know, it’s almost as if someone was cherry-picking the numbers they put in the report, as if they had an agenda they wanted to promote. Any reasonable person’s BS detector should be going off right now.

    If the Iraqi infant mortality rate remains high, I’ll be happy to agree that something needs to be done and pitch in to help get it done. You just can’t expect me to get excited about it over something as transparent as this is.

  7. C Stanley says:

    I would think that it’s probably next to impossible to get accurate stats right now in Iraq and it seems likely that the situation probably hasn’t improved much since the era of the sanctions. Solving this problem, like so many others, is a matter of recreating the infrastructure, purchasing new equipment, supplies, medicine, and training personnel or having an influx of trained medical personnel from elsewhere. I’d wager a bet that almost none of that has happened in midst of battle zones and suicide bombers.

    I agree with Swaraaj here: this isn’t a partisan problem, it’s a humanitarian one.

  8. DaveA says:

    Actually, I recall reading a news blurb on this very subject at http://warnewstoday.blogspot.com. Too bad search is not my friend today.

    In any event, the results were a mortality rate of 1 in 8 by 8 years of age. An astonishing 12.5% mortality rate for that time frame. I believe this was indeed higher post W, but its probably been two months so, and my memory is not great.

    However as supporting evidence of malnourishment is up form 19% in 2003 to 28% today its probably more than fair to say its far worse post W. Especially given that women and children tend to get hit the worst in these scenarios.

    linkie: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/fromthefield/carintern/9e9e54eac735cfcd9b98b3a8e031cfa4.htm

    Also, if you take an embargoed nation that has food cards and compare it to one that has civil war, targeting of doctors and medical facilities by all sides (including us), and reduced food cards… Well, really now what do you expect to find honestly??? An improvement?

  9. Rudi says:

    Here is a link to the actual study. In the text below the study says a conservative estimate is a 36% increase in infant mortality since the start of the war.

    http://www.savethechildren.org/publications/mothers/2007/SOWM-2007-final.pdf
    Iraq’s child mortality rate has increased by a
    staggering 150 percent since 1990, more than any other
    country. Even before the latest war, Iraqi mothers and
    children were facing a grave humanitarian crisis caused by
    years of repression, conflict and external sanctions. Since
    2003, electricity shortages, insufficient clean water,
    deteriorating health services and soaring inflation have
    worsened already difficult living conditions. Some
    122,000 Iraqi children (1 in 8) died in 2005 before
    reaching their fifth birthday.133 More than half of these
    deaths were among newborn babies in the first month of
    life. Pneumonia and diarrhea are the other two major
    killers of children in Iraq, together accounting for over 30
    percent of child deaths.134 Only 35 percent of Iraqi
    children are fully immunized, and more than one-fifth
    (21 percent) are severely or moderately stunted.135
    Conservative estimates place increases in infant mortality
    following the 2003 invasion of Iraq at 37 percent.136

  10. Rudi says:

    Damn spam filter or other BS, the smiley face doesn’t belong and blockquote didn’t take. What happened to the old buttons?

  11. C Stanley says:

    Rudi: Ths smiley is because you typed the number 8 with a close parenthesis behind it- that automatically turns into an emoticon.

    For blockquotes, I’ve been writing out the tag codes: type the word blockquote with the angle brackets around it before the text that you want to indent, and then same thing at the end but put the / before the word blockquote to make it a close tag.

    I’d like to see the idiot proof ones back too though: much quicker that way.

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity