As I understand it, december, we haven’t done a particularly good job of restoring utilities, establishing a stable national currency, or maintaining order either.
It’s been about three months since the end of the war, and the Pentagon estimated that only 50,000 soldiers would be needed in Iraq by now. Regardless, we still have 150,000 soldiers there suffering what appear to be several dozen guerrilla attacks a day. We’ve also resorted to using pre-war Saddam dinars, which I suspect doesn’t exactly boost the confidence of those who hold them. Perhaps even more alarmingly, water and power services remain rather spotty throughout Baghdad, to say nothing of the rest of the country.
These things are basic. These things, while not necessarily “easy,” are nothing compared to the challenges of building an entirely new, secular, democratic government from scratch where none has existed before. The fact that we haven’t been able to accomplish them so far doesn’t seem to bode well for the rest of the occupation.
Incidentally, december, I’m a bit perplexed that your list of goals to be accomplished during the war mentioned nothing about neutralizing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. I am also rather perplexed by your definition of “low civilian casualties” - do you really think 4,000-8,000 is low?
And here we have december repeating his little mantra, “all’s well in Iraq, all’s well in Iraq!” “Evil Liberals and Bush Haters are trying to dupe you, really all’s well in Iraq.”
What I so love about december is he needs only a blog and an op ed and he sincerely believes he knows something, and ever afterward is insensible to fact or correction. It’s so very charming.
That’s so very deeply ironic, coming from you.
Repeating the prior observation.
I do so very much love december’s Orwellian revisionism.
Of course the number one item was the feared NBCs that Sadaam supposedly threatened the US and the world with. Items he went shrieking on about as if Sadaam were a world threat, a real genuine threat. Too dangerous to be contained.
Of course as we all know there have been some wrinkles in this, but there is enough discussion of NBCs elsewhere that we need only take note of the sad attempts at revisionism and transparent back peddling.
I further note that while direct bombing did relatively little damage to the infrastructure, inability to control the post-“fall of the regime” situation allowed for substantial damage to the infrastructure or key portions thereof, damage that has yet to be repaired.
Again, wonderful Orwellian spin.
The first item is december’s deliberate straw man, although it could be said to stand alone if we add further a seperate item on improving civilian standards of living to pre war levels.
That has not happened.
Restoring power and water. Nope. Baghdad per my recent reports still at best has half days of power, often far less. Much worse than pre war levels. Rumors are rife among Iraqis that they are being collectively punished for opposition to the Americans.
News reports carry claims of seeing that on a tank, along the lines of when troops get safety, Iraqis get power - I suspect there is some truth to the rumor in the very limited sense that a hot headed soldier, hot, tired and frustrated probably said something along these lines, although with a different sense (i.e. we can repair when we stop getting shot at).
However little room for maneuver.
Next item, Port: Umm Qasr remains only partly operational and most shipments are coming through Kuwait or through Aqaba, Jordan. Sorry , bzzt again.
Restoring working monetary system: Bzzzt. Nope, nothing restored yet. There is no monetary system, only old circulating cash and possibly some new printing to inject liquidity. No credit, no insurance, no nothing. There is, in short, no way to do financial business in Iraq except by cash, and that in the old souq style wild market. No system at all.
Permit businesses to operate: this is a sick joke not even worthy of comment.
Establish local governance: largely absent, a few towns, in part. Largely dysfunctional.
As for the museums and the like, I’ve had enough of ring around the posy. Facts are out there, those who wish to follow through can.
What I love about this is the hand waving assertion quality.
Spin happy critics indeed. I’ve already expressed, in the pit, my sentiments on this type of commentary. They remain the same.
First, I have personal communications from friends in the UN community that some of them are being pulled out as the situation is becoming too hostile for operations.
Second, from the latest international security coordination report, other than title bolding the emphasis is added, not in the original, except the General which was highlighted:
[sub](Also note this is a partial quote of a longer 4-5 page document)[/sub]
Note the last in regards to the southern region. By the way, the no direct attacks refers to recent past, as I quote from May reports, there were southern incidents, but June appears to and July to date have been quiet. Of course reports were unavailable for a while.
Now, a comment on the “most of the country” being fine claims. Nice little bit of dodgery in fact insofar as the reality is that the demographic weight of Iraq, if one looks at the maps, is located in the narrow river valley corridors. That restricted “Sunni triangle” region is one of the demographic centers of Iraq. Much of the rest of the territory is empty. It’s rather deceptive to say “most of the country is quiet” insofar as most of the country is empty, of either CPA forces or Iraqis. What we have is the northern, fairly lightly populated Kurdish regions, they’re genuinely quiet excepting Mosul which apparently is getting out of control; the central Sunni dominated but not exclusive zone, center of troubles; the Shia corridors along the rivers, relatively quiet to date, excepting a few ugly incidents, but as noted in the sec. report, things appear to be degenerating there.
As I said, if December and his ilk want to do some good, perhaps instead of engaging in transparent propaganda, they should be ringing their Republican representatives and demanding that more resources be made available to the poor bastards in Baghdad.
By the way, in regards to Sailor’s inquiry re my statement on compensation: nothing wrong with that, per se, but the laws of unintended consequences kick in. First, we reinforce what ideally should not be reinforced – revenge killing traditions, but now is not the time to get all up on principals. Second, the lack of clarity on who is ‘innocent’ and who is not opens the door to accidentally funding the very people you’re trying to suppress. Again, in an ideal world one knows the difference. In the real world it is messy and hard to tell – and may change over time. However, even allowing for point Two, I think a bit of bribery is not a bad, even if unpalatable, option at this stage. Some money will surely go to the wrong people, and so be it.
Your critique is well taken, but all things are relative.
First, the British have rather a bit more experience in occupation, and however one may criticize them, they clearly have displayed stronger PR and cultivating skills than US troops have.
Second, it is a matter also of deeper regional knowledge. The Sandhurst tradition in re regional connexions is clearly more profound than the US depth of expertise, with all due respect to my US milit. amigos in the region - a few of whom are fine regional specialists.
That was implicit. By winning the war and removing Saddam from power, we have neutralized the possibility that his regime will develop WMDs and use them to threaten other countries, or make them available to terrorists. This is a more-or-less permanent solution. Six years from now President H. Clinton will still be dealing with the intractable problems of North Korean WMDs and Irani WMDs, but she won’t be worrying about Iraqi WMDs.
I’ve been complaining about spin. One way to make a good result look like a bad result is to compare the outcome against some impossible ideal, instead of other real-world instances. I believe the number of civilian casualties in Iraq was a low number indeed for total victory in a major war against a sizable, well-armed country. I believe there were at least hundrecs of thousands of civilian casualties in Germany, Japan, Korea, South Vietnam, and the former Yugoslavia.
Collounsbury indulged in simlar spin when he compared power and water to pre war levels, rather than to what can reasonably be expected only a few months after the end of the war. No, I’m wrong. The war hasn’t fully ended, as Collounsbury’s later cite points out. There are ongoing attacks against US soldiers and against Iraqi infrastructure by the enemy. It’s an unusual war when the enemy is sabotaging their own country, while the invader is trying to protect it.
I’m in Iraq right now. For the past couple of weeks I’ve been in Hillah, which despite the above mentioned incident if relatively quiet. I drive around un-escorted and have never encountered anything but friendly people.
Karbala, on the other hand is much more tense and there was some overt hostility to my presence.
In general, I’ve found a large variance in people’s attitudes to the US presence. I think the process has gotten off to a slow start, but there has been progress. I’ve heard that services in the South are at their pre-war level. I don’t know if that is true, or not, but they are improving.
Collounsbury, are you in country right now? If so what city? I’m always interested in meeting another development professional.
[QUOTE] Originally posted by december *
** The most important goals were during the war. They include[ul][li]WIN it![]Quickly[]Low coalition casualties[]Low civilian casualties[]Prevent widespread oil well fires.[]Avoid extensive damage to the infrastructure.[]Kill or capture key enemy leaders.[]Kill or capture Saddam Hussein.[/ul]All these goals were accomplished very well except for the last.**[/li][/quote]
:o I am awe struck, December. The whole “WMD in immediate need of disabling” issue has just slipped off the radar and totally from your memory, hasn’t it? Surely you must remember that being top of the charts not so long ago?
[quote] Then we come to the most important postwar goals[ul][li]Avoid civilian deaths due to widespread starvation, lack of water, plague, etc.[]Establish control[]Restore power, water, etc.[]Clear the port and restore deliveries by ship.[]Restore a working monetary system[]Permit businesses to operate[]Establish local governance[*]Protect museum antiquties[/ul][/li][/quote]
All fine and good. But isn’t it strange that the one goal getting an awful lot of attention from both the Americans and the opposing Iraqis doesn’t feature in it? i.e. oil production.
So we have two lists that avoid all mention of either WMD or oil. How very bizarre! I guess they can’t be involved at all.
madmonk28: I would love to hear your overall opinion on how the reconstruction of Iraq is going. What do you think is going right, or wrong? How do you see it turning out? Is the situation better, as good as, or worse than we’re being led to believe in the media? What does the average Iraqi think of the U.S. invasion?
We have Collounsbury’s opinion, but Coll has his own biases. Another opinion would be welcome.
Actually I remember anti-war and anti-Bush people misrepresenting his position this way. But, I remember Bush talking more about the long-term problem of Iraq seeking WMDs. How about providing cites that the Bush administration actually said “WMD in immediate need of disabling”.
Hi there. I was wondering about the reactions of different people to the new governing council. Good idea, bad idea, “puppet government”…? And also what (if any) other nationalities do you encounter in development, as in the Polish, Canadians, etc. Thanks in advance.
Good, excellent even. Do watch the latest warnings from the ISM.
Basra region south according to the reports is more stable, on the other hand as the last ISM report notes, recent negative developments.
[quote]
Collounsbury, are you in country right now?
[/quote
Not allowed in mate, I’m private sector.
I’m a capitalist pig, actually. Or exploiter, what was the phrase used? Yes, Capitalist Exploiter. That’s what some human shields told me. Part of the select group of people crazy enough to look at early stage investing in Iraq. But still no go.
Oh this is rich, rich indeed. So suddenly you’re claiming the Administration and its lackeys was NOT claiming imminent danger from Sadaam and the NBC stocks he supposedly had?
Truly worthy of 1984. Truly.
I would note that it was the opposition to the war that argued that the threat was not imminent.
You remember? Well, that is rich, so very rich. Very creative memory of yours. Bankrupt and pitiful as a means of argument, but very creative.
Sam Stone and Tee (sorry, I don’t know how to bold):
I’ve done a lot of post-conflict and developing world work and I find the media usually over-reports problems and over-reports successes.
For example, there are large parts of Iraq where I feel fine moving around on my own, eating in local cafes and talking to the people (if I can, I don’t speak Arabic). But the media makes it sound like the whole place is the wild west.
As for over reporting the successes: when I was in Kosovo working on elections, the press came out on election day, shot some pics, reported that everything is fixed and went home.
In general the reporting on these kinds of situations is never as nuanced as I would like.
Here in Iraq, I think it makes sense to delay a national government for a while and try to get some local government going. This will give people a chance to build up a sense of community, understand the possibilities of democracy and its limitations.
If we establish a national government right away there is a good chance it will A) be seen as nothing more than a tool of the US, if it is appointed, or
B) (if it is elected) be composed of hard liners from different camps who cannot agree on any kind of agenda except that they hate each other. I think that in Bosnia, national elections were held too soon and that we ended up with people not interested in cooperating with other members of the assembly.
I think getting some local neighborhood councils going, and plugging those councils into reconstruction efforts is the way to go. Neighborhoods can choose their reps, these reps go to US counterparts and say “we need a stop light, or garbage pick up or whatever” Over time, some of these neighborhood reps will become skilled at taking care of constituent interests and run for regional or national office.
As for people’s attitudes, it is all over the map. Around Hillah, people are generally supportive, and very interested in America. In other parts, there is some hostility, although that is not a monolithic attitude either.
If the US can get some realsuccesses going, a lot of the problems will go away. The majority of people I meet want to raise their families, give their kids some kind of opportunity to have a better life, and be able to do all this without worrying about getting shot. Whether a killer is a Baathist, or a random bandit doesn’t matter, bad security is bad security. If we can create room in Iraq for people to pursue these modest goals, we can turn the corner.
Overall, I see the US recon. effort as very uneven, in some places it is quite good, in others it is non-existent. Well that’s all for now, folks.
Madmonk
Well, now we’re talking, “possiblity”! And I note the scare tactic of “giving to terrorists” – although of course the disappearance of the regime and any controls on chemical stocks and the like have rather increased this possibility.
The rest of the tripe is not worthy of comment but this is rich:
Oh that’s spin my master of ever shifting goal post?
Well, it was you who argued for that goal, and indeed restoration to pre war levels - themselves depressed - is the ongoing CPA goal. And what Iraqis expect.
Hardly, it is typical guerrilla warfare. Or indeed warfare with scorched earth tactics, e.g. the Dutch breaking their dikes and blowing their bridges to stop the Germans, the Germans trying to prevent the same.
I was wondering about the reactions of different people to the new governing council. Good idea, bad idea, “puppet government”…? And also what (if any) other nationalities do you encounter in development, as in the Polish, Canadians, etc. Thanks in advance.