This is a moderately lengthy, well documented analysis in "Asia Times on line" of the showdown the Bush administration will face 23 & 24 October in Madrid over the financing of the reconstruction in Iraq. Will the unilateralist Bush succeed in persuading other nations and International Financial Institutions (IFIs) to make major contributions or will he be forced into a more multilateral stance by his unwillingness to raise taxes at home? Unilateral? Multilateral? This is a case study worth following.
This meeting could be a turning point in the occupation because whether the hat goes back to the US full or not will determine whether the US can afford to stay. The decision of donor countries to cough up cash will depend, in turn, on whether this continues to be a unilateral or multilateral economic takeover of an occupied country.. . .
Making use of the Iraqis' assets for reconstruction means that the Iraqis themselves will be paying for rebuilding what the Americans destroyed. This is a violation of the Geneva Convention, which unequivocally states that humanitarian assistance, aid, reconstruction and other development expenses are the legal and moral obligation of the occupying forces. The use of the Iraqis' money to finance the massive privatization scheme of their economy means that the Iraqis themselves will be paying US corporations to buy off their own assets from them. [Emphasis added]
. . .
But the possibility of getting billions from donors, in turn, appears to be solely dependent on whether the US will lock its firm grip on the business opportunities in Iraq, or relax it. The question before Madrid, then, is whether this will continue to be a unilateral corporate takeover or a multilateral one.
Notice that in either case it is still a corporate takeover of a nation. Stay tuned!