En række medier skriver om, at Irak-krigen nu er dyrere for de amerikanske skatteydere, end Vietnamkrigen (reguleret for inflation, naturligvis) nogensinde var - således f.eks. Al-Jazeera.
I en tid, hvor delstaterne udsultes af skattestop i en grad, så de dårligt kan holde skolevæsnet kørende, er en mislykket, nyttesløs og menneskeligt meget kostbar krig måske ikke liiige det man har brug for at smide penge ud på. I sidste ende kan Irak-krigen ende med at blive på alle måder værre, blodigere og dyrere end Vietnam-krigen - men lad os håbe, det ved et mirakel ikke går så galt.
Men hvis amerikanerne blev tvunget ud, ville de store amerikanske firmaer jo blive tvunget til at få snablen ud af Iraks oliefelter - og det ville næppe passe dem særligt godt.
Asia Times kan i dag berette, at den gruppe, der har arbejdet med at udarbejde en irakisk forfatning, først havde lagt op til, at den økonomisk skulle sættes op som en velfærdsstat efter skandinavisk mønster: Alle irakere skulle som udgangspunkt betragtes som medejere af landets ressourcer, og disse skulle bruges til at sikre skolegang, lægehjælp, osv., til alle.
Og så var det, USA begyndte at blande sig:
As the Iraqis huddled to hammer out their permanent constitution, US officials were with them every step of the way. Outside the Green Zone, the negotiations were protected by 160,000 US and other coalition troops. Playing a central role inside was newly appointed US ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, a member of the Project for a New American Century who had called for invading Iraq since 1998. Having served as an intermediary for the US government with the Taliban regime, Khalilzad previously worked for Unocal in Afghanistan . After the invasion in 2001, he was subsequently appointed to be the US’s first ambassador to Afghanistan . There, he was accused of serving as the “campaign manager” of pro-US candidate Hamid Karzai in that country’s presidential elections.Og hvad var det så for nogle ændringer i den "demokratiske" forfatning, de amerikanske forhandlere gennemtvang? Tjah ...
Complained Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the constitution committee Kurdish member of the constitutional committee who was involved in the caucuses: “The Americans say they don’t intervene, but they have intervened deep. They gave us a detailed proposal, almost a full version of a constitution. They try to compromise the different opinions of all the political blocs.”.
While Khalilzad and his team of US and British diplomats were all over the scene, some members of Iraq ’s constitutional committee were reduced to being bystanders. One Shi'ite member grumbled, “We haven’t played much of a role in drafting the constitution. We feel that we have been neglected. We have not been consulted on important issues.” A Sunni negotiator concluded: “This constitution was cooked up in an American kitchen, not an Iraqi one.”
Gone was the article proclaiming adherence to social justice as the basis of the economy. In its place was a provision binding the state to “reforming the Iraqi economy according to modern economic bases, in a way that ensures complete investment of its resources, diversifying its sources and encouraging and developing the private sector”. By “reforming” the framers of the constitution could only have meant the usual stock of neoliberal economic “reforms” that have been prescribed or imposed on dozens of developing countries around the world. This includes privatizing state-owned enterprises, liberalizing trade, deregulating the market, and opening it up to foreign investors. Instead of revoking the so-called Bremer Laws, or the decrees enacted by the occupation authority implementing these neoliberal policies, the draft constitution would make Iraqis constitutionally bound to enforce them.Med andre ord: Forfatningen skal garantere en fortsat udplyndring, hvor befolkningens interesser eller ve og vel ikke må komme i vejen. Islamisme, demokrati og kvinders rettigheder?
Sålænge Halliburton, Bechtel og bl.a. vort eget A.P. Møller kan komme til fadet, vil amerikanerne da hjertensgerne lade de shi'itiske militser grundlægge deres eget lille Iran eller Talebanland i det sydlige Irak.
Dette er ikke "nation building" eller udbredelse af demokrati - det er intet andet og intet mindre end god, gammeldags kolonial "del og hersk"-politik og udplyndring.
Eller, som det opsummeres her:
By brokering a deal for an Islamist Constitution, the U.S. made a mockery of the endless mouthings by Bush and by support rs of the U.S. occupation that its principle goal was the institution of "democracy." Now, Docena's meticulously documented and cogent analysis of the economic and social aspects of the U.S.-written and -imposed Iraqi Constitution shows that those who have criticized the invasion of Iraq as motivated by a desire for control of oil and the country's other natural and human resources were more than right. There's a lot more in this important article, and you ought to read it in its entirety by clicking here.