[IP] NYTimes.com Article: What Went Wrong?
Delivered-To: dfarber+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 07:33:38 -0700
From: Shannon McElyea <shannon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
What Went Wrong?
April 23, 2004
By PAUL KRUGMAN
On April 11 of last year, just after U.S. forces took
Baghdad, I warned that the Bush administration had a
"pattern of conquest followed by malign neglect," and that
the same was likely to happen in Iraq. I'm sorry to say
those worries proved justified.
It's now widely accepted that the administration "failed
dismally to prepare for the security and nation-building
missions in Iraq," to quote Anthony Cordesman of the Center
for Strategic and International Studies - not heretofore
known as a Bush basher. Just as experts on peacekeeping
predicted before the war, the invading force was grossly
inadequate to maintain postwar security. And this problem
was compounded by a chain of blunders: doing nothing to
stop the postwar looting, disbanding the Iraqi Army,
canceling local elections, appointing an interim council
dominated by exiles with no political base and excluding
important domestic groups.
The lesson of the last few weeks is that the occupation has
never recovered from those early errors. The insurgency,
which began during those early months of chaos, has spread.
Iraqi security forces have walked off their jobs, or turned
against us. Attacks on convoys have multiplied, major roads
have been closed, and reconstruction has slowed where it
hasn't stopped. Deteriorating security prevents progress,
lack of progress feeds popular disillusionment, and
disillusionment feeds the insurgency.
Why was it predictable that Iraq would go wrong? The
squandered victory in Afghanistan was an obvious precedent.
But the character flaws in the Bush administration that led
to the present crisis were fully visible in the months that
followed 9/11.
It quickly became apparent that President Bush, while
willing to spend vast sums on the military, wasn't willing
to spend enough on security. And 9/11 didn't shake the
administration's fanatical commitment to privatization and
outsourcing, in which free-market ideology is inextricably
mixed with eagerness to protect and reward corporate
friends.
Sure enough, the administration was unprepared for
predictable security problems in Iraq, but moved quickly -
in violation of international law - to impose its economic
vision. Last month Jay Garner, the first U.S. administrator
of Iraq, told the BBC that he was sacked in part because he
wanted to hold quick elections. His superiors wanted to
privatize Iraqi industries first - as part of a plan that,
according to Mr. Garner, was drawn up in late 2001.
Meanwhile, the administration handed out contracts without
competitive bidding or even minimal oversight. It also
systematically blocked proposals to have Congressional
auditors oversee spending, or to impose severe penalties
for fraud.
Cronyism and corruption are major factors in Iraq's
downward spiral. This week the public radio program
"Marketplace" is running a series titled "The Spoils of
War," which documents a level of corruption in Iraq worse
than even harsh critics had suspected. The waste of money,
though it may run into the billions, is arguably the least
of it - though military expenses are now $4.7 billion a
month. The administration, true to form, is trying to hide
the need for more money until after the election; Mr.
Cordesman predicts that Iraq will need "in excess of $50-70
billion a year for probably two fiscal years."
More important, the "Marketplace" report confirms what is
being widely reported: that the common view in Iraq is that
members of the U.S.-appointed Governing Council are using
their positions to enrich themselves, and that U.S.
companies are doing the same. President Bush's idealistic
language may be persuasive to Americans, but many Iraqis
see U.S. forces as there to back a corrupt regime, not
democracy.
Now what? There's a growing sense of foreboding, even
panic, about Iraq among national security experts. "This is
an extremely uncertain struggle," says Mr. Cordesman, who,
to his credit, also says the unsayable: we may not be able
to "stay the course." But yesterday Condoleezza Rice gave
Republican lawmakers what Senator Rick Santorum called "a
very upbeat report."
That's very bad news. The mess in Iraq was created by
officials who believed what they wanted to believe, and
ignored awkward facts. It seems they have learned
nothing.
E-mail: krugman@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/opinion/23KRUG.html?ex=1083744804&ei=1&en=
ff42d019a8920940
---------------------------------
Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine
reading The New York Times any time & anywhere you like!
Leisurely catch up on events & expand your horizons. Enjoy
now for 50% off Home Delivery! Click here:
http://homedelivery.nytimes.com/HDS/SubscriptionT1.do?mode=SubscriptionT1&Ex
ternalMediaCode=W24AF
HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
or other creative advertising opportunities with The
New York Times on the Web, please contact
onlinesales@xxxxxxxxxxx or visit our online media
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo
For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/