Much of the US financial contribution to Iraqi reconstruction will be earmarked for American companies, according to the top international official at the US Treasury.
Congress on Friday prepared to approve around $20bn (?18bn, £12bn) of spending on Iraqi reconstruction ahead of next week’s international donors’ conference in Madrid.
Speaking to reporters, John Taylor, Treasury international undersecretary, said that while the US would make some contribution to an international trust fund, “a lot of it will be through bilateral aid”.
Under the “tied aid” rules of the US Agency for International Development, which have repeatedly been criticised as unfair and inefficient by most development experts, bilateral aid is reserved for contracts for US companies.
No news here, right? Congress has approved a relative blank check for no-bid contracts with firms tied to the Bush administration.
They have freed the administration from any significant discussion or need for transparency and have guaranteed George’s smooth sailing through the 2004 elections without any nasty reminders of the costly Iraq adventure causing ill will between the king and his paupers.
What do you think will be the long term repercussions of this hostile takeover of Iraq’s economy and future holdings, this raping of the very autonomy the Bush administration now claims as its reason for pre-emptively striking Iraq and that it supercedes any absence of WMD?
Do you think this could possibly seed deep resentment among allegedly ‘freed’ Iraqis?
This NYT’s article suggests the U.S. has conceded somewhat on this point in an effort to solicit more donations yet it reports the $20 billion and future oil revenues are not part of the plan.
As for how any future donations will be handled I think this quote says it all:
“The donors all want to have a little bit of distance from us,” the official said. “That’s fine. But you can’t really do much of anything without some coordination with us.”
Update: Juan Cole on U.S. intentions to privatise state owned enterprises in Iraq.
This wink, wink, nudging carrying on regarding legitimacy not only of the initial strike but the current occupation is bottom line the most ignored aspect of the entire situation.
If the United States can make up rules as they go, then other countries will likely figure they are entitled to the same privilege. Denying that the U.S. is operating as a corrupt and lethal rogue state posing great risk to world peace is a slick cop out that will no doubt end up jamming its pointed beak of Pinnochio-like proportions into a very tough and possibly inextricable spot eventually.