Democracy Canceled

[This is Part 2 of a 2 part essay: see Chicago School for Part 1]

No one in the Bush administration anticipated that the application of Milton Friedman ‘s basic principles would cause the “violent backlash” that occurred. It was assumed that after “shock and awe” the population would be so frazzled that they would happily accept the privatization of their economy. But amazingly, instead the Iraqis shocked Washington by insisting that they wanted a voice in any changes in the economy. So what did they do immediately after the invasion? They voluntarily held elections on their own in every municipality in Iraq. Didn’t Bush tell them that they were to become “the democratic state” of the Middle East? So when Paul Bremer, who had previously run a private counter-terrorist company, arrived and saw what was happening, he within the first two weeks canceled all the elections. He further canceled any election of delegates to a constituent assembly which would, if allowed, vote for members of an executive council. He realized quickly that any such election would put Iraqis in power over whom we had no control. Instead he would appoint the delegates and the executive council. In addition Bremer and his committee would appoint the local leaders as well.

Obviously if the Iraqis were allowed freely to vote for their own representatives, we would be giving up control of the oil, establishment of military bases and corporate investment. And certainly the Iraqis did not intend to give up the nationalization of their resources. So what happened? Violent uprisings across the country occurred. Despite our lying promises, the trusting Iraqis believed every word. In the end we denied them their democratic rights because those rights would negate the real purpose of the invasion. Interestingly enough, a poll that was taken in 2003 after the invasion indicated that 49% of Iraqis would vote for a political party that promised an increase of government jobs and only 4.6% would support a political party that promised more “private” jobs. This poll may have had something to do with Bremer’s decision to cancel all elections.

And so the ebb and flow of forceful resistance has continued for the past five years. In order to combat the resistance, because Rumsfeld refused to increase our forces, we had to hire private security firms to protect our VIPs and our contractors. So here we are privatizing our army. Over time the mercenaries were involved in “street combat”. In the first year there were only 10,000 private fighters but three years later it had increased to 48,000.And these guys were fighting side by side with the regular army. They came from all over the world. Some had actually been in our army but after discharge joined the private army because the pay was significantly better. Blackwater became well known as a security firm and private army and got into serious trouble for killing too many civilians. Blackwater is a neoconservative right wing organization. It has given large amounts of money to the Republican Party.


Reference:

Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine. N.Y. Holt, 2007

The Chicago School

[This is Part 1 of a 2 part essay: see Democracy Canceled for Part 2]

It was Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize economist, who instructed President Reagan in the “trickle down theory” of economics. But “Uncle Miltie’s” Chicago School of economics was more complex than that. He made it simple for Reagan. The pixie-like Friedman believed in three basic tenets: privatization, government deregulation and cuts in public spending. These basic principles were applied at a time of crisis or catastrophe when the destruction of the infrastructure left a clean slate ready for a free market economy whether caused by military invasion or a hurricane. Then the corporate investor who is waiting at the border invades the nation or the state applies the three tenets and rebuilds the infrastructure for profit. The neoconservatives call this “a free market democracy”. But what is it really? The wealthy corporations and the rich politicians merge and buy up what is left of the infrastructure with public money, reconstruct it and operate it for profit. In Iraq the desirable resources were the electric grids, and the water system but most importantly the oil. The intention is to privatize all of this. However, the corporatists have not been successful in Iraq as yet because of too much violent opposition by Iraqis and corruption by Bechtel, Halliburton and Carlyle.

On the other hand, in New Orleans after Katrina the neocons saw this as an opportunity to do away with the public school system. As a result, today there are only four public schools in New Orleans but there are thirty charter schools. Very little else has been done and the charter schools are operated for profit. The poor cannot afford to send their kids there and the public schools are inadequate.

You see, in the case of Iraq nothing can be privatized, even remotely, until the violence is under control. No corporatist will invest money in an unstable country. So then the dream, and it is only a dream, of a “free market democracy” cannot be realized. And this is why Bush’s neoconservative plan of a so-called “democracy” spread throughout the Middle East is plainly delusional.

One last point, many analysts have said that the invasion was a success and the occupation was a failure. Not so. That was the plan: utter destruction in order to provide a clean slate for privatization. But so far the Iraqis haven’t let it happen.

Reference:

Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine. N.Y. Henry Holt. 2007.

The Forgotten War

The war in Iraq has been pushed off the front pages by the presidential campaign. There has not been much discussion lately about Iraq except to report briefly that there is some “good news” coming out of Iraq and if that is so some people might just think that “victory” over this devastated land is possible.

Recently a Congressman from my district returned from Iraq ecstatic about the progress being made in that country. He was pictured in the local paper decked out in full body armor and surrounded by U.S. security troops. And what did he say? This didn’t look like a war to him. He could walk around town surrounded by his entourage and the violence was less compared to his previous visit. Two days later five U.S. soldiers were killed and three severely wounded by a bomb directed to them in the heart of the shopping district in Baghdad. A day later just a short distance out of town three more soldiers were killed not to mention the injured. That’s eight deaths in a little more than 48 hours.

Four thousand troops killed, sixty thousand injured, some permanently, not counting the mental health patients suffering from PTSD who return to the U.S. and kill themselves and their families. 1.3 million Iraqis killed, 2.5 million refugees now trying to survive in Jordan and Syria. These two countries cannot continue to support these people with very little space and money. No one else is contributing to their support. Both Jordan and Syria cannot accept anymore refugees and will eventually have to ask them to leave. Where will they go?

If the violence in Iraq has decreased, it must be because there are not that many left to kill.

A permanent decrease in violence could occur if the occupying forces would withdraw. It is the general belief among most Iraqis that the cause of the violence between sectarian and ethnic groups is the occupation of their country by U.S. troops. Reconciliation could occur if the invaders would leave. The official position now for the original invasion was to protect the world from terror. But instead terror has increased 7-fold according to some terrorist specialists.

As for reconstruction of Iraq, Gen. Petraeus claims that the Iraqi government has greatly increased spending on reconstruction. Good news, right? But when the Government Accountability Office examined the facts, they found that the figure was actually one-sixth of that reported by Petraeus and further was a fifty per cent decline when compared to the previous year. Should we praise our government for militarily destroying the infra-structure of a country and then proceeding to reconstruct it for profit? Practically all the no-bid contracts go to Halliburton, a company linked to Vice-President Cheney, not to mention the reported corruption involved in the process.

What is the clincher? Bush plays his trump card once again, another signing statement. This time he is refusing to implement the provisions of a Congressional law that prohibits him from spending tax payer money on permanent military bases in Iraq or control of Iraqi oil.

Last week Deputy Secretary of State, John Negroponte, testified before Congress that the administration had no plans for permanent bases in Iraq, ignoring the fact that four huge bases were already built. No Congressman challenged his statement. The poor people of Honduras will always remember Negroponte, who as Ambassador to Honduras under Reagan, constantly denied the horrific crimes of the Chief of the Honduras armed forces so that financial aid to the military would continue. (Reagan’s policy) It was called bringing democracy to the people of Honduras. Where have we heard that before? Mendacity in government is our watchword.

Reference:

Znet