OK, so the US is spending money in Iraq. Not much, really, but fine. There is $18.6M in contracts being bid out by, well, by the Pentagon, basically. The Department of Defense, on behalf of the Coalition Provisional Authority.
Stop me if you’ve heard this one.
On December 5, last week, the Deputy Secretary of Defense released a Determination and Findings, which determined and found, in part, that:
It is necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States to limit competition for the prime contracts of these procurements to companies from the United States, Iraq, Coalition partners and force contributing nations. Thus, it is clearly in the public interest to limit prime contracts to companies from these countries.
I don’t even understand how this parses. It’s necessary to limit competition, so it is in the public interest to limit the awards of the contracts? Is it the competition that is so risky? Do we need to release details of where the troops are in order to get bids? Well, anyway, it’s memoese, and DepSec Wolfowitz scarcely takes all the blame for that.
More seriously, the memo sets out that it is using the contract awards to “encourage the expansion of international cooperation in Iraq and in future efforts” and “encourage the continued cooperation of coalition members.” In other words, it’s a carrot and a stick.
Now, I happen to think that it makes a lot of sense to use US economic might to influence the world. It made sense when the sanctions were on the Apartheid government of South Africa, it made sense when we bailed out the Mexican economy, urging reforms and making clear that they were essentially a condition of the assistance. I’m less in favor of them if the policy goals are ones I loathe, but I understand that’s my problem; the general point I’m making remains that I support my country doling out its economic pretties to improve the world and our position in it, as that’s defined by the various policy-making bodies who’d better do a good job, dammit.
So. That still leaves two questions: first, whether this is a good move, and whether this is a smart move. It isn’t a good move; it’s not going to make France send soldiers under US command, and it’s hard to see what else could be a positive. And it isn’t a smart move; it’s going to make political trouble without actually accomplishing anything, more than making some company re-incorporate itself in Panama so that it can bid.
But that’s not going to make me furious. I don’t expect every move the Pentagon (or its civilian oversight body) makes to be smart or good, and the response by now is more head-shaking than fist-shaking. It’s the naked lying about what is “necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States” that has got Your Humble Blogger going.
And no, that’s not a surprise either, really. It’s just that—Well, once the Government starts putting “It is necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States” at the front of every document, I expect the rest of the document to involve conscription, suspending habeus corpus, setting up internment camps, and fining bloggers for typos. I shudder at that phrase.
Shudder.
Redintegro Iraq,
-Vardibidian.
ps. Thanks to My Best Reader for spotting the typo. Abject apologies to anyone to whom I subjected an erroneus it's to.