Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

The True Fall of Iraq?

12:33 / 10.12.03

Reported here by the BBC is more news on the controversial contract assignment by the US for the 'rebuilding' of Iraq.

I think perhaps the most disturbing item on this list - for me at least - is that given to Creative Associates International, who will be responsible for both primary and secondary education, involving "Schools rebuilding, training of teachers and reform of education system[my italics]". The idea of a US approved curriculum in Iraq is frankly abhorrent, and to add insult to injury, this is a country whose pre-Desert Storm literacy rate was over 90%.

Suddenly I feel very angry and very helpless.

14:05 / 10.12.03

And 95% pre-Iran-Iraq war.

This is bad, but what is the option? And do you have any info on the curriculum? Will they be teaching kids the capitals of US states?

Shanghai Quasar

17:11 / 10.12.03

Just another part of the de-Baathification of Iraq, innit? Are we expecting that the US contractors and subcontractors are going to somehow wipe out literacy programs and leave the youth of the nation in the grips of total ignorance?

21:51 / 10.12.03

Shanghai - are you seriously suggesting that handing the Iraqi school system to contractors from the American private sector is the ideal way to 'free' the next generation of Iraqis from Baathist influence?

Shanghai Quasar

23:15 / 10.12.03

sleazenation: I am suggesting that this is the most realistic option available to the CPA. They need the Ministry of Education up and running at full capacity and they need a standard curriculum that will be implemented across Iraq. If we're honest, the private sector (CAII in this instance) is the fastest way to get this done.

Furthermore, if we consider that at the moment most of the work the CAII is doing at the moment involves rebuilding schools and training teachers, I fail to see what is so abhorrent about it. Should the CPA be waiting around until the Iraqi government is settled? Maybe after the elections, whenever they might be, the new representatives can get to work dictating what is going to be taught where?

Can anyone provide some link to a suggested curriculum? If someone can point out some error to my way of thinking, go ahead and poke holes.

12:04 / 11.12.03

Why do you think the private sector is necessarily the fastest/most appropriate way to do this?

I'm also interested in the way it's clear (in what you say as well as in the action itself) that this programme is determined by the needs of the CPA - not necessarily the needs of Iraqis...

I can see that it might not be the best idea for the occupying coalition to leave the education system open to potential influence by religious fundamentalists. And, of course, the education provided by the Baath party was not exactly impartial. I don't agree that a private company, operating on a CPA contract, is the most appropriate way to provide education to Iraqis.

Shanghai Quasar

21:30 / 11.12.03

It will be the Iraqi Ministry of Education, the CPA, UNESCO and the United Nations Children's Fund redoing the text books. The private sector, in the form of Creative Associates International Inc, is only responsible for making arrangements for the printing and distribution of the text books.

That is to say: they're responsible for selling the contracts for printing and distribution to other companies.

Basically, the private sector is just doing supply whore business and assisting in the clean-up of a great tangled mess. Maybe there has been a general misinterpretation of what they will be doing in Iraq?

14:57 / 12.12.03

Well, according to a story from Voice of America and other sources, there's problems with at least one private company supplying stuff that other agencies can do better: gasoline.

From the Oakland Tribune reprint of a NY Times story on the same subject:

In March, Halliburton was awarded a no-competition contract to repair Iraq's oil industry, and it has already received more than $1.4 billion in work. That award has been the focus of congressional scrutiny in part because Vice President Dick Cheney is the former chief executive officer of Halliburton. As part of that contract, Halliburton began importing fuel in the spring when gasoline was in such short supply in Baghdad and other large Iraqi cities, that long gas lines clogged the streets and tempers flared.

The government's accounting of imported fuel costs, shows that Halliburton paid its subcontractor $1.17 a gallon in Kuwait, when gas was selling for 71 cents a gallon on the wholesale market in the Middle East.

In addition, Halliburton is paying $1.21 a gallon to transport the fuel an estimated 400 miles from Kuwait to Iraq, the documents show. It is paying 22 cents a gallon to transport gas into Iraq from Turkey.

The 26 cents a gallon kept by Halliburton includes a 2 cent fee and 24 cents for "mark-up costs," the documents show. The "mark-up" portion is intended to cover the company's overhead costs of administering the contract.

So skepticism of private companies is merited. (As if the other hot news item about awarding reconstruction contracts only to coalition partner nations didn't make clear that "reconstruction" = "spoils of war".)

Harold Washington died for you

16:17 / 13.12.03

I forget the source (you google researchers can find it in a few minutes), but the plan, about a month ago, for Iraq was a central government-funded medical care program for all Iraqis. I was more concerned with puberty at the time, but I still remember when the Clintons tried to get someting similar for American citizens in '93. Maybe I am imagining this, but I heard somewhere else the Iraqis will get free post-secondary education too.

Think about it, we're (US and UK citizens) funding the creation of a idealized 21st century republic, with social programs but without the cruel specter of socialism. Despite my naked, red-hot hatred for the Bush administration, I really hope they pull this off.

Harold Washington died for you

16:20 / 13.12.03

As for construction contracts, if France and Germany and motherfucking Andorra want contracts they should invade their own country. My tax dollars payed for the bullets and bombs that made necessary the reconstruction. I want some return.

01:02 / 14.12.03

Well, Harold, it's worked before, in the UK after WWII -- free healthcare and education, funded by the US. Those days are gone though, I'm not so sure they'd be as generous now.

I wouldn't encourage Germany and France to invade anyone, it's happened before and it's not a good thing. And you can't blame them for trying to get a piece of the pie -- they're just trying to recoup what they lost when Iraq was invaded.

Morlock - groupie for hire

07:54 / 14.12.03

Harold Washington: My tax dollars payed for the bullets and bombs that made necessary the reconstruction. I want some return

Oh I'm sorry, I must be getting confused somewhere. I thought this whole effort was about freeing Iraqis into democracy, making the world a safer place, blah blah blah. Should have realised that it's just about money in the end. Oh, hang on, we did...

Idealised nation? Big words, but what do they mean? Whose ideal, based on what criteria? Economically, it would be quite handy for America if Iraq ended up as just another backwater nation, irrevocably dependent on the sale of oil.
Hell, the West helped the Baathists get into power in the first place, it's not like we have such a great track record of running other countries.

If there is Baathist influence to be removed (wasn't the Baath party supposed to be cruelly dictatorial, so that the population would be glad to see the back of them? Did I miss another memo somewhere?) it'll take years to do so. rather longer than the provisional government is supposed to be in power. How is that going to work, then?

09:08 / 14.12.03

This should be pretty basic stuff

If the aim of the coalition forces is to create a democratic Iraq that is not punished for the faults of the previous regime then it needs to get *everyone* in the international community involved regardless of their level of involvement in the military escapade - to put it another way - if the coalition want France and Russia to cancel or cut Iraq's debt then telling those countries that they aren't going to have any stake financial or otherwise in reconstruction is the most helpful course of action – it just leaves them more reason to hold out foor the full debt they are owed.

Harold Washington died for you

14:32 / 14.12.03

I agree, but the involvement of the international community needed right now is peacekeepers and Arabs to mediate. We do not need the Flags of Many Nations flying from every dump truck and bulldozer. Down the line the Iraqis can hire whoever they want (it probably won't be Halliburton), but til then our treasury is the Iraqi treasury.

14:58 / 14.12.03

they aren't going to have any stake financial or otherwise in reconstruction

They are not precluded from being subcontractors. All they have lost is a little bit of profit margin.

And Russia, for one, doesn't have much power to fuck up the debt restructuring because it needs to retain its pre-war oil development contract with Iraq (you know, the one that was entirely unconnected with their opposition to the war). France was after that contract as well, but it still has some other deals it would like to keep.

It's a big snub and perhaps unnecessary, though it is amusing, given who's involved. But it doesn't really mean much in the long run.

16:55 / 14.12.03

Ignatious J said
They are not precluded from being subcontractors. All they have lost is a little bit of profit margin.

erm, yes, The Pentagon stated that it was barring companies from countries opposed to the conflict in Iraq from bidding for new rebuilding contracts worth $18.6bn on Wednesday, 10 December

or do you have any references/links that show otherwise?

Interestingly, the White House has intimated that the two issues of iraqi debt relief and access to reconstruction contracts are linked and the bar might be lifted if countries 'join in our efforts in Iraq' (a phrase which probably means a commitment to place troops on the ground)

from the people's daily

"It's very simple. Our people risked their lives. Friendly coalition folks risked their lives and...the contracting is going to reflect that...that's what the U.S. taxpayers expect," said Bush, as the bar threatened fresh international rifts.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan suggested, however, there was room for some flexibility when asked whether countries that helped erase Iraqi debt could qualify to win contracts from $18.6 billion of U.S. reconstruction funding.

"If countries want to join in our efforts in Iraq...then circumstances can change, and we'll make that very clear," McClellan told reporters.

17:27 / 14.12.03

do you have any references/links that show otherwise?

Of course I do. There's one here.

17:39 / 14.12.03

It's a little way down the page so, to save you valuable time, here is a pasted quote:

"Di Rita also said that although companies in France, Germany, Russia and other countries that oppose the war cannot be prime contractors on the reconstruction projects, they can be subcontractors."

18:41 / 14.12.03

I was completely unaware that sub-contracting was permisable but reading your article and re-reading the original BBC article its all there too, in black and white. Mea culpa. I still question the wisdom of such a policy but i should take comfort that it is not as draconian as it could have been.

21:49 / 15.12.03

It would be pretty difficult to prevent any foreign subcontracting, given the nature of how these firms operate. Somewhere down the line there will be someone from Old Europe.

It makes a pretty clear statement though. We own the place now and we're going to build it how we like (as if that wasn't clear enough already).