When Intent Makes All the Difference in the World: Economic Sanctions on Iraq and the Accusation of Genocide

The U.N. Security Council responded to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait with acomprehensive regime of sanctions. This Article examines the claim thatthe highly planned policy contains elements of genocide and criticallyexamines the international legal definition of genocide and its centralrequirement of specific intent. It argues that the conception of genocidecontained in the 1948 Genocide Convention ignores whole categories ofatrocities, exculpating certain actors who have committed acts of massivehuman destruction and removing the acts themselves from the sphere ofmoral judgment and accountability. The Article describes the devastatinghuman costs that the Security Council and the United States haveknowingly imposed upon the people of Iraq through the sanctions regime.It suggests that because the policy is justified with claims of internationalpeace and security or denials of moral agency, it cannot meet the GenocideConvention's requirement of specific intent. Drawing upon the work ofphilosophers such as Arendt and Nietzsche, the Article concludes bycharging the Security Council and the U.S. Government with somethingthat will not fit within the Genocide Convention at all, something bestdescribed by Plato's concept of "perfect injustice," which occurs whenatrocities are made at once invisible and good.