It is strange that the most liberal democracy, the strongest advocate of free market economy and now a superpower needing the widest possible cooperation from the international community suddenly comes up with what Zbigniew Brzezinsky has called the “bizarre” step of barring two-thirds of the world’s sovereign states from prime contracts for $18.6 billion authorised by the US Congress for Iraq’s reconstruction.
A large number of these states have been US allies for more than half a century. The irony has been made even sharper by President Bush calling up French, German and Russian leaders with an appeal to ease Iraq’s debt burden within hours of the announcement of the Pentagon memo making them ineligible for major contracts. It is difficult to dismiss the impression that the US is either afraid of competition or is keen to leverage security through economics.
This single step seems to have generated new tensions with Canada, while exacerbating the bitterness in transatlantic relations, which the Europeans do not appear to be keen to hide. The paradox was also visible in China being debarred from prime contracts in Iraq at about the same time as the US-China summit in Washington sought greater trade and economic relations between the two powers. Former US officials have been highly critical with former secretary of state Madeleine Albright calling the decision “petty”. Washington’s reasoning is that it is the taxpayers’ money that is involved and hence it has every right to pursue this line. But this technical-legal view is far too narrow for today’s complex world, especially with the US already needing more, not less, cooperation. Politically, the Pentagon policy, which some have termed as blackmail, seems designed for the latter.
India is also debarred from prime contracts in the rebuilding of Iraq’s electricity, water supply and the oil sector. Obviously setting up a hospital in Iraq is not sufficient cooperation in the eyes of the Pentagon. Besides US commitment of $18.6 billion, the Madrid Donors have also committed to $13 billion, and another $24 billion are to be raised from Iraqi oil revenues. Thus it is not as if countries and companies from countries not in the friendly-63 list would not be involved in reconstruction activities or in trade and economic relations with Iraq even under the US Coalition Provisional Authority. The embargo only applies to prime contracts and there is no bar on subcontracting to any country. The problem is that the US has managed to lower its own standing and undercut its ability to seek and get international cooperation which it needs more than ever before.