Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Iraq From an Armored BMW: Where U.S. 'Reconstruction' Funds Are Really Going

By Dahr Jamail, Tomdispatch.com. Posted February 14, 2009.


Fallujah remains devastated, even as the U.S. military delivers shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills to the sheiks in charge.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Fallujah, Iraq -- Driving through Fallujah, once the most rebellious Sunni city in this country, I saw little evidence of any kind of reconstruction underway. At least 70% of that city's structures were destroyed during massive U.S. military assaults in April, and again in November 2004, and more than four years later, in the "new Iraq," the city continues to languish.

The shells of buildings pulverized by U.S. bombs, artillery, or mortar fire back then still line Fallujah's main street, or rather, what's left of it. As one of the few visible signs of reconstruction in the city, that street -- largely destroyed during the November 2004 siege -- is slowly being torn up in order to be repaved.

Unemployment is rampant here, the infrastructure remains largely in ruins, and tens of thousands of residents who fled in 2004 are still refugees. How could it be otherwise, given the amount of effort that went into its destruction and not, subsequently, into rebuilding it? It's a place where a resident must still carry around a U.S.-issued personal biometric ID card, which must also be shown any time you enter or exit the city if you are local. Such a card can only be obtained after U.S. military personnel have scanned your retinas and taken your fingerprints.

The trauma from the 2004 attacks remains visible everywhere. Given the countless still-bullet-pocked walls of restaurants, stores, and homes, it is impossible to view the city from any vantage point, or look in any direction, without observing signs of those sieges.

Everything in Fallujah, and everyone there, has been touched to the core by the experience, but not everyone is experiencing the aftermath of the city's devastation in the same way. In fact, for much of my "tour" of Fallajah, I was inside a heavily armored, custom-built, $420,000 BMW with all the accessories needed in twenty-first century Iraq, including a liquor compartment and bulletproof windows.

One of the last times I had been driven through Fallujah -- in April 2004 -- I was with a small group of journalists and activists. We had made our way into the city, then under siege, on a rickety bus carrying humanitarian aid supplies. After watching in horror as U.S. F-16's dropped bombs inside Fallujah while we wound our way toward it through rural farmlands, we arrived to find its streets completely empty, save for mujahideen checkpoints.

To say that my newest mode of transportation was an upgrade that left me a bit disoriented would be (mildly put) an understatement. The BMW belonged to Sheik Aifan Sadun, head of the Awakening Council of Fallujah. Thanks to the Awakening movement that began forming in 2006 in al-Anbar Province, then the hotbed of the Sunni insurgency -- into which American occupation forces quickly poured significant amounts of money, arms, and other kinds of support -- violence across most of that province is now at an all-time low. This is strikingly evident in Fallujah, once known as the city of resistance, since the fiercest fighting of the American occupation years took place there.

Today, 34-year-old Sheik Aifan may be the richest man in town, thanks to his alliance of self-interest with the U.S. occupation forces. Aifan's good fortune was this: He was the right sheik in the right place at the right time when the Americans, desperate over their failures in Iraq, decided to throw their support behind the reconstitution of a tribal elite in the province where the Sunni insurgency raged with particular fierceness from 2004-2006.

In the "Construction Business"

Don't misunderstand. This wasn't a careful, strategically laid, made-in-the-USA plan. It was a seat-of-the-pants, spur-of-the-moment quick fix. After all, by the time U.S. planners decided to throw their weight behind the Awakening Movement, it was already something of a done deal.

In late 2006, roughly speaking, months before George W. Bush's "surge" strategy sent 30,000 more American troops into Baghdad and surrounding areas, the U.S. began making down-payments on the cooperation of local al-Anbar tribal sheiks and started funding and arming the Sunni militias they were then organizing. As a result, the number of insurgent attacks quickly began to drop, and so the Americans widened the program to other provinces. It grew to include nearly 100,000 Sunni fighters, most of whom were paid $300 a month -- a sizeable income in a devastated city like Fallujah with sky-high unemployment rates.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, iraq war, iraq occupation, surge, sunnis, shiites, baghdad, us military, fallujah, al-anbar, sons of iraq, the awakening, al-qaeda in iraq, sheik aifan, sheik abdul sattar abu ri

Dahr Jamail, an independent journalist, has been covering the Middle East for more than five years and is the author of Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches from an Unembedded Journalist in Occupied Iraq. He reports for Inter Press Service and is a regular contributor to TomDispatch. He has also published in Le Monde Diplomatique, the Independent, the Guardian, the Sunday Herald of Scotland, the Nation, and Foreign Policy in Focus, among others. To visit his website, click here.

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


Advertisement
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:
But "the surge is a success"!!
Posted by: kiel on Feb 14, 2009 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every time some dittohead spouts this, it needs to be pointed out how tenuous this "success" is: all it would take is for some other interested party to come in and offer more money, or for the US money to dry up, or for a serious policy/military offense to be committed, and the "success" would crumble like the dry sandcastle it really is.

$3000 a second is being spent in Iraq on this illegal, pointless war, and the GOP have the effing nerve to complain about spending money on rebuilding our own schools here at home. Simply unforgiveable.

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

ORGANISED THEFT BY ELITE OWNED HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Feb 14, 2009 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THIS HAS BEE THE RULE FOR A VERY LONG TIME . ONE QUADRILLION DOLLARS THIS CENTURY

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

So the surge worked? . . .
Posted by: dustdevil on Feb 14, 2009 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
During the presidential campaign, whenever the Repubs brought up the success of the surge, why didn't the Democrats counter with the fact that the insurgents had been bought off?

Are they so braindead that they did not know this? Or have the two parties become one, conducting sham elections where it doesn't matter who wins, the policies remain the same.

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

» RE: So the surge worked? . . . Posted by: johnnyfarout
Brings new light
Posted by: TERRIROBSON on Feb 14, 2009 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that I have read this, all those UN MARKED bills that Paulson asked for makes sense.

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

Purge the myth of the surge...
Posted by: jlowelld on Feb 14, 2009 12:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The 'surge' clearly only worked to the degree that it created a momentary facade of 'peace'--analogous to pain killers for a fatal disease. This mirrors everything else about the Bush/Cheney regime: smoke and mirrors, and in the background murder, theft and baldfaced lies. Great reporting!

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

Promoting Regression and Calling It Progress
Posted by: DrBrian on Feb 14, 2009 6:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For some bizarre reason the strategic thinkers in the military, intelligence and State Department believe that reconstituting tribalism and subsidizing warlords and religious factions is a step towards a peaceful, stable, democratic society, when in fact it's a regression from Saddam Hussain's despotism.

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

They're called "DemoPublicans", now...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 14, 2009 6:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
those Democrats who have become so corrupted that they constantly vote with Republicans against their own country--let alone against their party and their people--that they do nothing more than muddy the numbers as to who is actually the majority party.

DemoPublicans have to be fired. They're the worst kind of traitors. All it takes is to go to the Voting Record site for both Congress & the Senate--Wiki(pedia) it, if you're not sure how to--go there, and see how your Rep voted on issues dear to your heart. If you feel they did OK--fine. If not--go kick them out in 2010. I might add this:

On any issue--don't just breathe a sigh of relief if you got what you wanted. FIND OUT HOW YOUR REP VOTED. If it wasn't what you wanted--that means that your rep was voting AGAINST YOUR INTERESTS--no matter how the vote turned out.

And sometime, some vital issue WON'T turn out the way that you wanted, because YOUR supposed 'representative'--was really working (under false pretenses) against you.

You don't want anyone who votes against your interests, in Congress and the Senate?

You find out who YOUR 'DemoPublican' is, and you vote them out on Election Day, November 2010.

And you never EVER stay home from the polls--ever again.

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

It's amazing how Barry manages to keep the same Bush shills in his cabinet on war/defense and yet
Posted by: Jennifer Bedingfield on Feb 15, 2009 12:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the blindies suddenly say they're ok. Betrayus and Gates are no different now than they were before and the lack of tracking the funding is bound to continue. Besides, since when did Barry ever give any indication that he would reign in this kind of sloppy funding mismanagement ? His intentions are clear. Stay the Dubya course but call us "unpatriotic" for standing up to his lying and betraying.

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

Bribing the bad guys-nothing new
Posted by: solitarysherlockian on Feb 15, 2009 3:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You didn't really think the "surge" was doing it, did you? Paying off protection to the bad guys to keep them from killing--is a plot device from reality. Osama won. He beat our economy into foreclosure.

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

Where's the 12 billion?
Posted by: sicntired on Feb 16, 2009 8:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was put on pallets,shrink wrapped and banded,loaded onto air force transport planes and sent to Iraq but where it went from there is supposed to be a mystery to everyone.The money for Iraqi oil has disappeared as well,four years worth.Reminds me of the story of how the CIA hunkered in a mountain shack for months with billions of dollars,handing it out to war lords for their support in capturing Osama Bin Laden.No wonder the economy is in the tank with this kind of writing off of money as "just lost".These people see a billion dollars as chump change.Guess who the chumps are?

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

Iraq Reconstruction: the Greatest Fraud in US History?
Posted by: Defenestrator on Feb 17, 2009 1:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
link

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

  • 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.

Advertisement
Advertisement