Illegalities of the Iraq handover

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
Illegalities of the Iraq handover
26
Sun, 08-08-2004 - 3:37pm
The Hand-Over That Wasn't

Illegal orders give the U.S. a lock on Iraq's economy.

By Antonia Juhasz

Antonia Juhasz is a project director at the

International Forum on Globalization in San Francisco

and a Foreign Policy in Focus scholar.

August 5, 2004

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-juhasz5aug05,1,3831327.story?coll=la-news-comment-

Officially, the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended on June

28, 2004. But in reality, the United States is still

in charge: Not only do 138,000 troops remain to

control the streets, but the "100 Orders" of L. Paul

Bremer III remain to control the economy.

These little noticed orders enacted by Bremer, the

now-departed head of the now-defunct Coalition

Provisional Authority, go to the heart of Bush

administration plans in Iraq. They lock in sweeping

advantages to American firms, ensuring long-term U.S.

economic advantage while guaranteeing few, if any,

benefits to the Iraqi people.

Although many thought that the "end" of the occupation

would also mean the end of the orders, on his last day

in Iraq Bremer simply transferred authority for the

orders to Prime Minister Iyad Allawi — a 30-year exile

with close ties to the CIA and British intelligence.

Further, the interim constitution of Iraq, written by

the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, solidifies

the orders by making them virtually impossible to

overturn.

A sampling of the most important orders demonstrates

the economic imprint left by the Bush administration:

Order No. 39 allows for: (1) privatization of Iraq's

200 state-owned enterprises; (2) 100% foreign

ownership of Iraqi businesses; (3) "national

treatment" — which means no preferences for local over

foreign businesses; (4) unrestricted, tax-free

remittance of all profits and other funds; and (5)

40-year ownership licenses.

Thus, it forbids Iraqis from receiving preference in

the reconstruction while allowing foreign corporations

— Halliburton and Bechtel, for example — to buy up

Iraqi businesses, do all of the work and send all of

their money home. They cannot be required to hire

Iraqis or to reinvest their money in the Iraqi

economy. They can take out their investments at any

time and in any amount.

Orders No. 57 and No. 77 ensure the implementation of

the orders by placing U.S.-appointed auditors and

inspector generals in every government ministry, with

five-year terms and with sweeping authority over

contracts, programs, employees and regulations.

Order No. 17 grants foreign contractors, including

private security firms, full immunity from Iraq's

laws. Even if they, say, kill someone or cause an

environmental disaster, the injured party cannot turn

to the Iraqi legal system. Rather, the charges must be

brought to U.S. courts.

Order No. 40 allows foreign banks to purchase up to

50% of Iraqi banks.

Order No. 49 drops the tax rate on corporations from a

high of 40% to a flat 15%.

Order No. 12 (renewed on Feb. 24) suspends "all

tariffs, customs duties, import taxes, licensing fees

and similar surcharges for goods entering or leaving

Iraq." This led to an immediate and dramatic inflow of

cheap foreign consumer products — devastating local

producers and sellers who were thoroughly unprepared

to meet the challenge of their mammoth global

competitors.

Clearly, the Bremer orders fundamentally altered

Iraq's existing laws. For this reason, they are also

illegal. Transformation of an occupied country's laws

violates the Hague regulations of 1907 (ratified by

the United States) and the U.S. Army's Law of Land

Warfare. Indeed, in a leaked memo, the British

attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, warned Prime

Minister Tony Blair that "major structural economic

reforms would not be authorized by international law."


With few reconstruction projects underway and with

Bremer's rules favoring U.S. corporations, there has

been little opportunity for Iraqis to go back to work,

leaving nearly 2 million unemployed 1 1/2 years after

the invasion and, many believe, greatly fueling the

resistance.

The Bremer orders are immoral and illegal and must be

repealed to allow Iraqis to govern their own economic

and political future.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 12:59pm

<>


How about we all just "shut up" about this?

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 1:07pm


Excellent idea - thank you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 4:35pm
I can honestly say there was no "sneakiness" involved on my part in ány of this, on the contrary. I truly believed that

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-12-2001
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 4:54pm
Can you stand one more point of view?

I've been lurking here since yesterday, and djie, when I first read your question to Sondra I did not think it was disrespectful at all. You weren't criticizing her decision; you were simply trying to understand her point of view. And Sondra is obviously secure enough in her beliefs that she was comfortable explaining and defending them. Kudos to both of you for handling this in a very diplomatic manner!

I'm thoroughly enjoying the discussions here. Will jump into the fray when I feel I have something worthwhile to contribute.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Bev

girl in chair
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 5:31pm

Hey Bev!


Welcome to the board!

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-12-2001
Fri, 08-13-2004 - 7:27pm
Miffy, please do stop by! It's not nearly as active as this board, but Sandy and I do try to initiate some interesting and relevant discussions.

Thanks for the welcome!

Bev :-)

girl in chair

Pages