Don’t shift the cost of war to Iraqis

Sen. Susan Collins has endorsed legislation that would restrict future reconstruction dollars to loans instead of grants in an effort to make Baghdad pay for more of the costs of the U.S. combat mission and reconstruction in Iraq. Shifting the costs of the war to Iraq should not make the war more acceptable to us. The human cost of the war will remain the same. We are actually an occupying power, so it seems simply wrong to even consider using Iraq’s oil revenue to pay for our combat costs. Should Iraqis have to help pay for us to drop bombs on them? Instead, we should consider compensating for the death of innocent Iraqi civilians on par with U.S. soldiers, not the mere $2,500 we offer their loved ones.

Sen. Collins’ endorsement also demonstrates a misunderstanding about the occupation and U.S. policy in Iraq and the consequences of those policies on reconstruction efforts and the responsibilities of an occupying power under the Geneva Convention.

Before the occupation, the Iraqi economy was anchored by revenues from the national oil company and 200 state-owned companies which produced most of the products Iraqis needed from basic staples for their diet to raw materials for industries. Shortly after the invasion, Paul Bremer, head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, renewed the law from the Saddam Hussein era that banned labor unions and then made several “reforms” under order No. 39. All the state-owned factories were to be privatized “for economic recovery.” The factories were closed and workers laid off; and then there was a privatization auction for companies to build new factories. To entice foreign investment, the Iraqi corporate tax rate was lowered from 45 percent to 15 percent; foreign companies would now be allowed to own 100 percent of Iraqi assets; foreign investors could take 100 percent of their profits out of the country with no reinvestment or taxes required; and foreign investors could sign leases and contracts for 40 years with an option for renewal.

These economic reforms were designed to create an investment frenzy for the reconstruction of Iraq. It was kick-started with $38 billion from the U.S. Congress, $15 billion from other countries and $20 billion of Iraq’s own money. Yet most of that money never went to the Iraqi factories so they could reopen and form the foundation of a sustainable economy, create local jobs, or create a social safety net.

Unemployment rates have soared upwards of 70 percent to 80 percent, while the U.S. government contracts, most often issued through the U.S. Agency for International Development, were given to U.S. contractors such as Halliburton, Bechtel, and the California-based engineering company Parsons. Most of these contracts were no-bid contracts that favored American companies rather than Iraqi companies. Furthermore, these companies preferred to import foreign workers they felt they could control, leaving the Iraqis out of the picture again.

We smashed the country’s infrastructure with our military “shock and awe” and then our “economic shock” smashed the economy. Iraqis had virtually no role in the plan and no ability to participate in the rebuilding of their own country because of the economic structure we imposed on them, not because they don’t want to work or take responsibility for their own country.

Their country has been pillaged and fed to U.S. multinational corporations for profit. For example, Bechtel was awarded a reconstruction contract to repair the water infrastructure in 10 urban areas within the first month and restore potable water in all urban areas within six months. Bechtel failed even minimally to meet this mandate. As a direct result of lack of access to potable water, there is an alarming incidence of cholera, yellow fever, and hepatitis E. Access to potable water is a human rights issue. Under article 56 of the Geneva Convention, it is an occupying power’s obligation to ensure access to basic necessities to prevent the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics.

Now Sen. Collins wants Iraq to use its oil revenue to offset the cost of reconstruction and combat costs. Why? So Iraqis can pay U.S. multinational corporations to profit off them too? It seems immoral and certainly will not improve our image abroad.

Rather than endorse legislation which seeks to reduce the costs of the occupation, I have a better idea. Since the Iraqi and U.S. economies are on the brink of collapse, why don’t we simply begin the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops and U.S. contractors? This would allow the Iraqi people to use their own oil revenues to fund their own companies to reconstruct their own country. It would also improve our economy more than any incentives could by saving $3 million a day.

Katrina Bisheimer of Bucksport is a nurse with a specialty in psychiatry and mental health.