[Reader-list] The new "liberators" of Iraq

[Rajlakshmi]

-An interesting piece on the new "civilian" administrator elect of Iraq.
No cognitive metaphors here.
TKR 


The Man Who Would Be King of Iraq
Ian Williams

While the U.S. military finds itself bogged down on the road to Baghdad,
the real hitch in Bush administration's grand vision for post-war Iraq
may well be the man slated to take charge of it -- arms-dealer and
former "Star Wars" guru General Jay Garner. 
In a move typical for what passes for U.S. diplomacy these days, the
Pentagon developed and announced its occupation plan without consulting
the rest of the alleged coalition (no, not even trusty Britain) or the
State Department. Worse, to this highly visible and important position,
it picked a man with a dubious past and ideological credentials worthy
of a Bush appointee. 
A unilateralist hawk, the retired general is an ideological soulmate of
Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz, his main collaborators
in developing the "axis of evil" approach to U.S. foreign policy. But
when it comes to the Middle East, his track record is even more
alarming. 
In 2000, Garner and 26 other U.S. officers signed a statement released
by the right-wing Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA)
praising the Israeli Defense Forces for its "remarkable restraint in the
face of lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of a Palestinian
Authority." Indeed, the choice of Garner seems designed to enflame local
and regional resistance. This is a man who after one JINSA junket
declared, "A strong Israel is an asset that American military planners
and political leaders can rely on." 
Fortune magazine burbled that "Garner's civilian status is a big plus."
But although his official title is "co-ordinator of civilian
administration,"Garner has always been a die-hard advocate of all things
military --sometimes at the expense of the facts. During the first Gulf
War he went to Congress and touted the success of the Patriot missiles
during the Iraqi attack on Israel. He did not issue a retraction when it
was revealed that the Patriots caused more damage to Israel than the
Iraqi Scuds they were supposed to bring down. 
The man who will be in charge of the disarmament of Iraq was also a
fervent proponent of the fatally flawed Star Wars missile defense
system, touting its virtues even when the results of its testing was
later revealed to be rigged. 
Garner's so-called civilian career was also closely related to the
Pentagon. In a classic example of the military-industrial complex at
work, Garner retired from the military in 1997 to become President of SY
Technology, a defense contractor specializing in missile defense
systems. The company soon landed non-competitive contracts as part of
the Star Wars program that Pentagon whistleblower, former Lt. Colonel
Biff Baker, alleged were procured through Garner's influence. SY
Technology sued Baker for defamation and for "causing loss of privacy"
for Garner. 
The case was settled out of court in January this year, just as Garner
was moving to his new and very public position. And by a yet another
startling coincidence, the company was awarded a $1.5 billion contract
this year to provide logistics services to U.S. special operations
forces. The Iraqis themselves may be unhappy, if not surprised, to hear
that their to-be satrap's former company has contracts to help build
Patriot missile systems for Israel and Kuwait. 
The Bush administration has been busy spinning Garner's record to make
him appear the perfect, sensitive, team player that Iraq needs to
rebuild itself in the American image. But it seems entirely appropriate
that Garner was unilaterally appointed on Jan. 20, even as the US was
still officially trying to get a UN resolution for the invasion of Iraq. 
Nor did Garner's visit to the UN impress the aid officials. He made it
clear the only job for the UN in Iraq is to help finance the U.S.-led
occupation. But if anything can save Iraq from Garner's tender clutches,
it will be the need for UN money. 
The Bush Administration is like the Red Queen in Alice in the Looking
Glass, perfectly able to believe in three impossible things before
breakfast. This is a White House that has committed itself both to tax
cuts and an expensive war. It claims Iraqi oil fields are the property
of its people even as it prepares to pay the post-war reconstruction
with the same oil. The same administration that pledged to ensure a role
for the UN at the Azores Summit had already announced plans for an
all-American administration headed by Jay Garner. 
At the heart of Washington's contradictory and constantly shifting
position is the desire to monopolize the control of Iraq but persuade
the rest of the world to split the bill. The U.S. attitude is best
epitomized by the junior diplomat who turned up at the United Nations in
the first week of the war and asked the UN officials to hand over the
money they had allocated for relief and humanitarian aid -- money that
the White House sorely needed since Congress had failed to appropriate
any money for the worthy effort.
Not surprisingly, Kofi Annan refused. 
The two sides finally reached a temporary compromise on Friday when the
Security Council unanimously passed a short-term measure allowing the UN
to take charge of the oil-for-food program and sign off on food
shipments, which then will be distributed by the coalition forces to the
Iraqis. But the resolution also made it very clear that the UN is not
interested in financing a U.S.-ruled Iraq. It stressed that "to the
fullest extent of the means available to it, the occupying power has the
duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population." So
when the time comes to set up a post-war administration in Iraq, the
U.S. will either have to pay its own way or play ball with the rest of
the Security Council. 
But so far, there are few signs that the White House is willing to
change its greedy ways. Even the British were not impressed
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,924421,00.html>
with the U.S. decision to let the infamous union-busting company,
Stevedoring Services of America, run the newly "liberated" port of Umm
Qasr -- a role that they thought rightly belonged to the Iraqis. Aiming
General Jay Garner at the innocent civilians of post-war Iraq will be
yet another ham-handed, arrogant decision that guarantees an aftermath
that is as messy and potentially disastrous as its initiation.