Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bush's Iraq: A Bloodbath Economy

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted July 27, 2006.


The president's plans to subject Iraq to the most radical forms of capitalism are as responsible as the war itself for the destruction of Iraq.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Joshua Holland

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Iraqis have been brutalized not only by bombs and bullets; they've also been the victims of economic violence in the form of the free market "shock therapy" cooked up by a firm in Virginia on a $250 million no-bid contract before the U.S. invasion. Tranforming Iraq's economy overnight was a matter of ideology trumping commonsense, and it's killed thousands of innocent Iraqis and shattered a way of life for hundreds of thousands more.

That the radical restructuring of Iraq's political economy has received so little critical attention -- even as Iraq's nascent government threatens to crash and burn -- is a testament to how deeply indoctrinated we are --especially our media -- in the narrative of what "American-style" capitalism is. It was taken as a given that after knocking off Saddam, we'd rapidly privatize huge swaths of Iraq's national companies, get rid of hundreds of thousands of civil servants, completely restructure the country's tax and finance laws and throw Iraq's economy wide open for foreign multinationals. File it under bringing "democracy and capitalism" to the poor, backward Arabs.

The reality is that the economic policies we imposed on Iraq were not some generic form of "capitalism"; they included the most radical business-state rules imaginable -- policies that developing countries have vehemently resisted for over a decade. What's more, imposing them at the point of a gun appears to have violated both international and U.S. laws. There's nothing "normal" about it.

And while "democratization" and "free markets" supposedly go hand-in-hand, the truth is that Iraq's economic transformation was mutually exclusive with the goal of forming a legitimate government, and the Bush administration knew it well in advance of the occupation.

That's because it's universally accepted -- even among the most vocal proponents of the very model of corporate globalization that inspired Iraq's new economy -- that in the short-term those policies create economic pain, displacement, anger and civil unrest, as well as a lack of faith in government. That's no way to win hearts and minds.

Even the man who implemented the shock therapy, coalition boss L. Paul Bremer, understood this quite well. Before his installation as "the dictator of Iraq" -- in the words of one UN envoy -- Bremer was a risk management consultant. In 2002, he wrote in a report to his corporate clients: "The painful consequences of globalization are felt long before its benefits are clear… Restructuring inefficient state enterprises requires laying off workers. And opening markets to foreign trade puts enormous pressure on traditional retailers and trade monopolies." Bremer noted that corporate globalization is "good for the economy and society in the long run, [but has] immediate negative consequences for many people," and concluded that those consequences cause "political and social tensions."

Pushing those policies in a country like Iraq was a matter of ideological preference and greed, not necessity. A good example is Iraq's new flat-tax, established by Order #37 (now Law #37). As the Washington Post reported : "It took L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator in Baghdad, no more than a stroke of the pen … to accomplish what eluded [Republicans] over the course of a decade and two presidential campaigns."

Former Reagan and Bush 41 official Bruce Bartlett said with no small amount of envy that an occupation government doesn't have to "worry about all the political and transition problems that have made adoption of fundamental tax reform here so difficult," and Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, called the move "extremely good news." Meanwhile, one Middle East expert briefed on the plan told the Post "A piece of social engineering is being done on Iraq, but it has almost no support from other members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council."


Digg!

Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Rest Easier
Posted by: Captainmagic on Jul 27, 2006 12:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For amerika aka (Bu$hCo) will not prevail in Iraq...that much is obvious to all but the to the fools and when Iraqi's decide for themselves just how THEY are going to live with each other they will be able to go (with confidence) to the UN and tell all that the Iraq invasion was illegal and that the illegal and catastrophic results of this hideous occupation has resulted in the almost destruction of a soveriegn nation of the U.N. and restitution is sort......for the henious HIGH crime of greed before humanity. There could not be any argument could there!! No law instigated by any of this amerikan cartel will be allowed to stand..The proof is flooding in and also America is off the Hook because Bu$hco was shown to be not the real president of America but a fascist cartel of greedy pigs who have hijacked it's people to form a new amerika.....Am I wrong

Captain OUT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Economic Policies of Bush and his cronies
Posted by: kgs1947 on Jul 27, 2006 3:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dictator Bush has simply abandoned the people of Iraq. As he destroys the possibilities of any kind of democracy in that country, he does so clandestinely (no media coverage of it to the USA citizens). Iraq's infrastructure is demolished and the money is going into the coffers of USA sociopathetic corporations (aka Cheney's cronies). Shame on this country and it's citizens for being so blind and deaf out of apathy. Bush, Rumsfeld, Rick, Cheney need to be brought up to the War Crimes Tribunal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You are one sick puppy Posted by: HeroesAll
mistake generator
Posted by: rsaxto on Jul 27, 2006 4:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies have become an effective mistake generator which hopefully we will be able to shut down through impeachment in the near future before the USA has been so discredited by world public opinion that the USA will never regain the confidence of most of the people of the world and we here will experience a huge drop in buying power and standard of living. On second thought maybe that is just what we need to make a dent in global warming (the poverty would drastically cut auto and air travel).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraqis want peace and prosperity
Posted by: coldeye on Jul 27, 2006 4:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No question about it: you cannot build stable social or capitalist institutions in the middle of a vicious sectarian bloodbath like Iraq. However if there were stability, and the "socialist" Baath Party(better known as the Corrupt Payoff Sadaam Party) were outsted, does anyone doubt that Iraqis overwhelmingly would not want a vibrant private marketplace? Iraqis and other Arab nations have thousands of years experience with free markets; Arab merchants taught Europeans the tricks of the commerce trade when Europeans were still recovering from the destruction of the Roman Empire. Socialism is a foreign concept imported into the Middle East by Communist trained cadres and students after World War I. It has failed wherever tried-Egypt, Syria, Algeria, Libya, Iraq. Arabs, Iraqis in particular are educated, smart Western oriented people who need peace in order to establish stable currencies, invest in infrasturcture and energy and leverage their assets to participate fully in international commerce. If this region ever stabilizes, Iraq could easily be one of the great tourism attractions of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ooh, I forgot something! Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: Ooh, I forgot something! Posted by: Basenjis
US now seen as most corrupt entity on planet
Posted by: Bobsays on Jul 27, 2006 5:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The handing over development to greedy private companies has done huge damage to the reputation of the US. I have seen the US modus operendi in many countries. It is always about taking a high and mighty attitude (barracking people about how they need to be more free and more democratic and more entrepreneurial) while not walking the talk.

I worked in one country where the US claimed it was a solid ally. It pulled all the strings on government policy. So, the locals at first thought they would see all sorts of US businesses come in. But when I went back there eight years later, nothing. It was the Europeans and the Koreans and the Chinese who were doing all the investing and business start-ups.

And they were having a blast. It was America's loss. It is time for Americans to pipe down and get some humility. I admire so much that has come out of the US, but these days not much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, Lord, a Cold Warrior
Posted by: Moonray on Jul 27, 2006 5:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our friend Coldeye, above, seems to have stepped out of a time machine from circa 1952. Relax, Coldeye, the commies in Moscow discovered the dubious pleasures of capitalism and decamped en masse to Brooklyn and the south of France. You and the other vigilant defenders of the marketplace can put your muskets down and rest a spell.

Seriously, Coldeye displays the same mental aberration as other free-market worshippers: He reduces socialism to one Global Threat, as if it were implemented with a playbook written by Joe Stalin himself and smuggled into developing countries by hordes of masked men with handlebar mustaches.

Actually, various forms of socialism have worked well for centuries in many less-developed countries, and nobody from Europe had any part in it. These societies learned by themselves to share their wealth and responsibilities in many different ways, from providing communal health care and child care to low-interest loans for new entrepreneurs.

Iraq's heavy-handed and corrupt form of socialism was far from ideal, but at least it kept the trains running on time, the hospitals open and the children fed. It will be years before the current, Bush-imposed form of "capitalism" can do the same, if it ever can.

Coldeye needs to get over the Cold War and see the world with a clear eye. Of course, if he could do that, he wouldn't be a conservative. I know. I'm a reformed conservative myself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right-wing rhetoric Posted by: Moonray
The future
Posted by: Arvy on Jul 27, 2006 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
William Rivers Pitt - New York Times journalist :
"It has come down to this. Again. We have, you see, been here before. Our support of Iran begat our support of Saddam Hussein once the Shah was overthrown. Our support of Hussein begat his reign of terror, the invasion of Kuwait and the first Gulf War. Our support of the anti-Soviet mujeheddin in Afghanistan, followed by our total abandonment of that war-ravaged nation once the Soviets were beaten, begat the Taliban and al Qaeda. This begat September 11, which begat our current Iraq fiasco for reasons only a few reality-deprived hard-liners in Washington care to even try to explain. What we are doing in Iraq today will begat the next series of horrors, and the next, and the next.
It has come down to this, it will always come down to this, because failure is profitable in the long run for a select few. It will always come down to this until the cycle is broken, forever.

George Orwell, former colonial (Burma) policeman and writer :
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face...forever."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Free Market is NOT War and Killing and STATE CAPITALISM
Posted by: ChrisBieber on Jul 27, 2006 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the Free Market is about VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE and RESPECT FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY

The Editors Pavlovian-like reflexive terminology is to be expected.

State Capitalism ie THE UNITED STATES is NOT about free markets it is about PLANNED and COORDINATED and SUBSIDIZED markets.....

And THAT is your "mixed economy"..."3rd Way"....
economic FASCISM....

and now with the GOVERNMENT COORDINATED and UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL "LEGALITY" backing it, the US STATE CAPITALISM backed by obedient GOVERNMENT officials and the obedient GUNS OF THE MILITARY are out to plunder the world(other peoples fruits of their labor(which is now mostly subsidized by their/our governments anyway...)

Most of America has now been conditioned to define the Marketplace in Marxian terms with Marxian solutions...

So who WON the Cold War????

Socialist Legality or the free market?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua: the beginning of the beginning
Posted by: mythbuster on Jul 27, 2006 11:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any sense of whether this model is being planned for Lebanon, Syria, and Iran?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Resistance appears unremarkable in light of this
Posted by: kh on Jul 27, 2006 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the Iraqi protest is against having their public assets given into private hands, and their public services converted into consumer goods -- without democratic input into these decisions -- some kind of resistance makes more sense to me than it did.

Here we get to vote on things like that. But I read somewhere that Bremer's orders are constructed so as to be binding on subsequent governments -- wouldn't that imply that the only way to change anything in those rules is to throw out the whole package? I'm just asking, I don't claim to understand this.

If the rules include things that we are democratically able to reject for ourselves -- but under the Bremer orders they can't have a say in -- well, perhaps there was a good reason -- lord knows no one has all the pertinent facts -- but it doesn't seem a form of government we'd like here.

I am curious to hear from others - Was it clear to you, when the decision to remove Saddam Hussein forcefully was made, that this would include commercializing everything, even things we here have divided opinions about, like medical care, national parks, tax strategies -- without them making those decisions? Do we even want to carry that much responsibility for how they do things long-term?

As for forbidding governments to prefer local contractors in doing reconstruction -- Suppose your state had been devastated -- why on earth would you want to prevent local contractors from participating in reconstruction? Seems to me it would be angry-making to have such a rule.

I am glad to see this article. It's hard to know the right path in a complicated world. I hope some more good discussion and information will come in the comments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wait A Sec Coldeye
Posted by: vivachavez on Jul 27, 2006 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There have been plenty of instances in which people have chosen socialism over neo-liberalism and top-down free market imposition by the likes of the IMF and the World Bank. Venezuela, Bolivia, and Argentina are just a few of the examples. The relative lack of examples is due not to the inherent superiority of capitalism over socialism, but of the U.S. overthrowing and installing right-wing dictatorships to replace the popular and democratic socialist governments previously in power. The U.S. did this in Indonesia in 1965, in Chile in 1971, in Italy in the 1940s, in Haiti in 2004, and tried to do it in Vietnam fortunately to no avail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wait A Sec Coldeye Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Wait A Sec Coldeye Posted by: HeroesAll
Foriegners Unwelcome
Posted by: 1rufus1 on Jul 27, 2006 7:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One thing I believe that was overlooked, or miscalculated, at the start of the Iraq debacle is the fact that it is extremely dangerous for foreigners, especially Americans, to implement any form of politcal or economic change because they are targets for death or kidnapped for ransom. Very few, if any, large companies are going to allow engineers, supervisors, skilled workers, and trainers into a country as violent as Iraq has become. It is almost impossible to go out into the field and rebuild the infrastructure on a large scale and do it quickly. Even in the few instances where it has been done, the insurgents destroy it or sabotage it enough to incur costly repairs. Many of the well-educated Iraqis have fled, been killed, or been intimidated into submission. Insurgents infiltrate the workforce, political structure, and security forces so the targets are easily known and set-up for the kill. I don't see a peaceful enough Iraq for many more years that will be acceptable for a foreign company to establish an economic base from which to work from. I think Bush and Co. was so naive that they thought they could go into a desperate country, liberate the people from a cruel dictator, and exploit the resources and the Iraqi people would welcome them with open arms. Then the multinational companies could come in and take over, and establish a new economy from which to rule and reap the profits. The mission is not accomplished, yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Interesting point Posted by: HeroesAll
The people factor
Posted by: Gregor on Aug 5, 2006 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When governments think people are expendable, that is when they lose power. People are the government. Without our support, taxes and willing to support the infrastructure, there is no government. When our government rains down death and destruction on another peoople, we in the long run, destroy ourselves. No more young men and now, young women growing up healthy and free, they all eventually grow into war. Disease spreads because the funny thing about disease it just doesn't stay in one place, especially in this global world. So if they get sick, we get sick. All man is one. We end up spreading radiation everywhere, and gee, it affects our population too...We spread fear and terror and they learn from us and do the same to us. So really, we win nothing. We just have created a cancer that will spread. The solution isn't more fear, death, disease and destruction...The answer is education, compassion and taking care of our own people in our own country and spreading that positive stuff around.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]