A good article---
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Bechtel, the giant engineering company, is leaving Iraq. Its mission to rebuild power, water and sewage plants wasnt accomplished: Baghdad received less than six hours a day of electricity last month, and much of Iraqs population lives with untreated sewage and without clean water. But Bechtel, having received $2.3 billion of taxpayers money and having lost the lives of 52 employees, has come to the end of its last government contract.
As Bechtel goes, so goes the whole reconstruction effort. Whatever our leaders may say about their determination to stay the course complete the mission, when it comes to rebuilding Iraq theyve already cut and run. The $21 billion allocated for reconstruction over the last three years has been spent, much of it on security rather than its intended purpose, and theres no more money in the pipeline.
The failure of reconstruction in Iraq raises three questions. First, how much did that failure contribute to the overall failure of the war? Second, how was it that America, the great can-do nation, in this case couldnt and didnt? Finally, if weve given up on rebuilding Iraq, what are our troops dying for?
Theres no definitive way to answer the first question. You can make a good case that the invasion of Iraq was doomed no matter what, because we never had enough military manpower to provide security. But the lack of electricity and clean water did a lot to dissipate any initial good will the Iraqis may have felt toward the occupation. And Iraqis are well aware that the billions squandered by American contractors included a lot of Iraqi oil revenue as well as U.S. taxpayers dollars.
Consider the symbolism of Iraqs new police academy, which Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, has called the most essential civil security project in the country. It was built at a cost of $75 million by Parsons Corporation, which received a total of about $1 billion for Iraq reconstruction projects. But the academy was so badly
built that feces and urine leak from the ceilings in the student barracks.
Think about it. We want the Iraqis to stand up so we can stand down. But if they do stand up, well dump excrement on their heads.
As for how this could have happened, thats easy: major contractors believed, correctly, that their political connections insulated them from accountability. Halliburton and other companies with huge Iraq contracts were basically in the same position as Donald Rumsfeld: they were so closely identified with President Bush and, especially, Vice President Cheney that firing or even disciplining them would have been seen as an admission of personal failure on the part of top elected officials.
As a result, the administration and its allies in Congress fought accountability all the way. Administration officials have made repeated backdoor efforts to close the office of Mr. Bowen, whose job is to oversee the use of reconstruction money. Just this past May, with the failed reconstruction already winding down, the White House arranged for the last $1.5 billion of reconstruction money to be placed outside Mr. Bowens jurisdiction. And now, finally, Congress has passed a bill whose provisions include the complete elimination of his agency next October.
The bottom line is that those charged with rebuilding Iraq had no incentive to do the job right, so they didnt.
You can see, by the way, why a Democratic takeover of the House, if it happens next week, would be such a pivotal event: suddenly, committee chairmen with subpoena power would be in a position to investigate where
all the Iraq money went.
But thats all in the past. What about the future?
Back in June, after a photo-op trip to Iraq, Mr. Bush said something I
agree with. You can measure progress in megawatts of electricity delivered, he declared. You can measure progress in terms of oil sold on the market on behalf of the Iraqi people. But what those measures actually show is the absence of progress. By any material measure, Iraqis are worse off than
they were under Saddam.
And were not planning to do anything about it: the U.S.-led reconstruction effort in Iraq is basically over. I dont know whether the administration is afraid to ask U.S. voters for more money, or simply considers the situation
hopeless. Either way, the United States has accepted defeat on reconstruction.
Yet Americans are still fighting and dying in Iraq. For what?
Bechtel, the giant engineering company, is leaving Iraq. Its mission to rebuild power, water and sewage plants wasnt accomplished: Baghdad received less than six hours a day of electricity last month, and much of Iraqs population lives with untreated sewage and without clean water. But Bechtel, having received $2.3 billion of taxpayers money and having lost the lives of 52 employees, has come to the end of its last government contract.
As Bechtel goes, so goes the whole reconstruction effort. Whatever our leaders may say about their determination to stay the course complete the mission, when it comes to rebuilding Iraq theyve already cut and run. The $21 billion allocated for reconstruction over the last three years has been spent, much of it on security rather than its intended purpose, and theres no more money in the pipeline.
The failure of reconstruction in Iraq raises three questions. First, how much did that failure contribute to the overall failure of the war? Second, how was it that America, the great can-do nation, in this case couldnt and didnt? Finally, if weve given up on rebuilding Iraq, what are our troops dying for?
Theres no definitive way to answer the first question. You can make a good case that the invasion of Iraq was doomed no matter what, because we never had enough military manpower to provide security. But the lack of electricity and clean water did a lot to dissipate any initial good will the Iraqis may have felt toward the occupation. And Iraqis are well aware that the billions squandered by American contractors included a lot of Iraqi oil revenue as well as U.S. taxpayers dollars.
Consider the symbolism of Iraqs new police academy, which Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, has called the most essential civil security project in the country. It was built at a cost of $75 million by Parsons Corporation, which received a total of about $1 billion for Iraq reconstruction projects. But the academy was so badly
built that feces and urine leak from the ceilings in the student barracks.
Think about it. We want the Iraqis to stand up so we can stand down. But if they do stand up, well dump excrement on their heads.
As for how this could have happened, thats easy: major contractors believed, correctly, that their political connections insulated them from accountability. Halliburton and other companies with huge Iraq contracts were basically in the same position as Donald Rumsfeld: they were so closely identified with President Bush and, especially, Vice President Cheney that firing or even disciplining them would have been seen as an admission of personal failure on the part of top elected officials.
As a result, the administration and its allies in Congress fought accountability all the way. Administration officials have made repeated backdoor efforts to close the office of Mr. Bowen, whose job is to oversee the use of reconstruction money. Just this past May, with the failed reconstruction already winding down, the White House arranged for the last $1.5 billion of reconstruction money to be placed outside Mr. Bowens jurisdiction. And now, finally, Congress has passed a bill whose provisions include the complete elimination of his agency next October.
The bottom line is that those charged with rebuilding Iraq had no incentive to do the job right, so they didnt.
You can see, by the way, why a Democratic takeover of the House, if it happens next week, would be such a pivotal event: suddenly, committee chairmen with subpoena power would be in a position to investigate where
all the Iraq money went.
But thats all in the past. What about the future?
Back in June, after a photo-op trip to Iraq, Mr. Bush said something I
agree with. You can measure progress in megawatts of electricity delivered, he declared. You can measure progress in terms of oil sold on the market on behalf of the Iraqi people. But what those measures actually show is the absence of progress. By any material measure, Iraqis are worse off than
they were under Saddam.
And were not planning to do anything about it: the U.S.-led reconstruction effort in Iraq is basically over. I dont know whether the administration is afraid to ask U.S. voters for more money, or simply considers the situation
hopeless. Either way, the United States has accepted defeat on reconstruction.
Yet Americans are still fighting and dying in Iraq. For what?