Following The Money . . . To A Short Circuit Of The Reconstruction Program In Iraq
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Iraq | Precipitous Withdrawals | The Reconstruction Program | War — Comments (5) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Proposals to make the Iraqis pay for more of the cost of the American reconstruction effort through the use of oil revenues sound very good and very appealing. But Iraq is facing desperate financial and economic conditions of its own right now and frankly, it needs those oil revenues to defray many an expense of its own. It certainly needs those revenues to provide basic governmental programs for a populace that is still facing the aftereffects of dictatorship and war.
A more responsible policy would be to work out a repayment schedule that would allow the Iraqis some time to get back on their feet as a nation before having to make payments to the United States for the reconstruction effort. But that policy is not currently being pursued by Congress. Instead, Congress appears to be hellbent on forcing the Iraqis to make payments now, or very soon in the future, at a time when financial conditions are already quite tight and perilous for the Iraqi people. In this context, it is easy to see how forcing the Iraqis to pay more of the reconstruction costs is actually meant to get the Iraqis to ask for American troops to leave their country so as not to have to divert revenues towards paying for the reconstruction effort. In other words, the Iraqis are effectively being bribed to have their government ask for American troops to leave.
And this is at a time when the battle against al Qaeda in Iraq, some of the other Sunni insurgents and the Shi'ite militias has not yet been won. It is also at a time when Iraqis continue to face hardships in trying to obtain basic services that are essential to maintaining a somewhat decent quality of life. Because Democrats in Congress have failed to get the Bush Administration to leave Iraq, they now appear to be focusing on the getting the Iraqi government to evict American troops.
Let there be no doubt: If the Iraqi people, through their elected representatives, ask American troops to leave, then American troops should leave. But when Congress is trying to make that happen before the reconstruction effort is complete via what amounts to a shakedown of the Iraqi government, then people ought to be concerned. Moreover, they ought to call out Congress for its actions. I know that replenishing our coffers is important. But it is even more important to see the reconstruction effort in Iraq through so that we do not leave a failed state--one that Osama bin Laden has himself said he wants to use as an al Qaeda base--in our wake. I am all in favor of having our minds on our money and our money on our minds. But no amount of money will cover the costs of surrendering Iraq to those who mean us and our security interests harm.
« Disconnect — Comments (1) | ABC News' Raddatz: Our troops in Iraq have a crush on Obama. — Comments (141) »
Following The Money . . . To A Short Circuit Of The Reconstruction Program In Iraq 5 Comments (0 topical, 5 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Long term loans would be good, but we have to plug the leak in the budget boat or we're going to sink before the Iraqis.
- Publicus
"We have given you a republic if you can keep it."
Let there be no doubt: If the Iraqi people, through their elected representatives, ask American troops to leave, then American troops should leave.
[Letter from Iraqi Parliamentarians concerning the MNF Renewal:
April 2007]
[original in Arabic, translation into English by Global Policy Forum]
[undated but apparently completed and sent on April 28, 2007]
[Text begins:]
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
To: the Presidency of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, the Iraqi
Cabinet, the United Nations Secretary General, members of the UN
Security Council, the Secretary General of the Arab League, the
Presidency of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and the
Presidency of the European Union.
Subject: Timetable for withdrawal of the occupation forces
(multinational forces [MNF]) from Iraq
WHEREAS, the UN Security Council will soon review the MNF mandate on June 15th 2007
WHEREAS, the Iraqi Cabinet has unilaterally requested a renewal of the UN mandate keeping the occupation troops (MNF) in Iraq
WHEREAS, such a request issued by the Iraqi Cabinet without the Iraqi Parliament's approval is unconstitutional
WHEREAS, the Iraqi parliament, as the elected representatives of the
Iraqi people, has the exclusive right to approve and ratify
international treaties and agreements including those signed with the
United Nations Security Council
WHEREAS, the Iraqi people have expressed their will by demonstrating in marches demanding an end to the occupation by setting a timetable for withdrawal
THEREFORE, we the Iraqi members of parliament signing below demand a timetable for the withdrawal of the occupation forces (MNF) from our beloved Iraq.
[Text ends]
[This text is followed by the names and signatures of 144 Iraqi Members of Parliament. Some signatories have also made comments in a space provided for that purpose. The signatories are an absolute majority of the parliament, which has 275 seats. The letter with signatures comprises six pages of which five have been obtained by GPF. The UN Secretary General’s UNAMI report of October 15 affirms a total of 144
signatures]
[Bold text is from me]
Letter from Leaders of Iraqi Parlimentary Groups to
Members of the Security Council[Baghdad, mid-December, 2007]
In the name of God, the Beneficent and Merciful.
To: The Secretary General of the United Nations and Members of the UN Security Council
Re: Constitutional authority concerning the United Nations renewal of the mandate of the occupation forces.
Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you.
Whereas the Security Council will reconsider the presence of the occupation forces (multinational force) before the end of this year, and
Whereas the Security Council needs an official letter from the Iraqi government requesting the continued presence of the occupation forces before the renewal of the mandate of these forces for another year in Iraq, and
Whereas Article 61, Section 4, of the constitution grants exclusive jurisdiction to the legislative branch of the Iraqi government, the Council of Representatives, to ratify international treaties and agreements by two-thirds majority, and
Whereas a draft law was passed during the 34th Session of the first legislative term of the second legislative year of the Council of Representatives, convened on 5 June 2007, calling for a referral to the Council of Representatives, before the renewal of the mandate of the occupation forces. Article 73, Section 2, stipulates that a parliamentary draft law is considered “ratified after fifteen days’ time from the date of receipt,” except in the case of a veto by the President, in which case he will send it back to the Council of Representatives. To this day, the president has not vetoed or returned the draft law, which makes it a law, under Iraqi constitutional rules.
Whereas a letter addressed by the majority of members of the Council of Representatives to the Security Council and the Secretary General of the United Nations on 28 April 2007, asked for “the setting of a timetable for the withdrawal of the occupation forces (multinational force) from our beloved Iraq,” and detailed the constitutional violations that took place last year when the matter was not brought to Parliament before the requested renewal of the United Nations’ mandate for the occupying forces, and
Whereas many opinion polls, which were undertaken by international and independent local organizations, demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people, from different provinces, sects, religions, and ethnicities, demand the departure of the occupation forces and believe that circumstances are deteriorating due to the presence of the foreign forces and that the situation will improve as soon as these forces withdraw from Iraq, and
Whereas the million-person demonstrations undertaken by our steadfast people in the different provinces of Iraq demanded the withdrawal of the occupying forces and a timetable for their comprehensive and complete withdrawal without leaving behind any permanent military bases.
We, the undersigned members of the current Parliament, ask the members of the UN Security Council not to accept any letter that requests the renewal of the mandate of the multinational force that has not gained the approval of the Council of Representatives, since it will be considered unconstitutional and unlawful under laws currently in effect in the Republic of Iraq.
We also wish to inform your Excellencies that the undersigned representatives of the people reject in the strongest possible terms the unconditional renewal of the mandate, and call for clear mechanisms that obligate all foreign forces to withdraw completely from Iraq according to a set timetable, simultaneous with Iraq’s leaving the Chapter VII mandate of the United Nations.
Dr. Saleh al-Mutlaq, al-Jibhah al-Iraqi li-Hiwar al-Watan (Iraqi National Dialogue Front)
Dr. Nassar al-Rubiei (Sadrist Current)
Dr. Ali Fayad, Hizb al-Dawah (Dawa Party)
Dr. Bassim Sharif, Hizb al-Fadilah (Fadila Party)
Haydar al-Mullah Sa’id, Esq.
Mr. Usama al-Nujayfi (‘Alawi Party)
Mr. Azz al-Din (Accord Front)
(This translation, by Global Policy Forum is based on a copy of the letter that was sent to Raed Jarrar, consultant to the American Friends’ Service Committee, by Haydar al-Mullah, one of the signatories, who guaranteed the letter’s authenticity. Jarrar received the letter on December 18, 2007)
I misguidedly thought that the text I posted was free from fair use because they were public government documents. I was wrong. After reviewing the Fair Use policy of the Global Policy Forum site, I reexamined the documents and found them to not be open source without the prior consent of Global Policy Forum.
I offer my sincere apology to Global Policy Form and the directors and members of RedState. I promise such lapses will not happen again in the future.
The liberals are practically begging for just that.