hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXT...agePK:34392~piPK:34427~theSitePK:4607,00.html
Europe Seeks Reconstruction Work in Post-War Iraq
Many Europeans want no part of a war in Iraq, but Europe does want a part in its reconstruction, reports the Wall Street Journal Europe. Even as France, Germany and other European countries continue to thwart US efforts to prepare for a war against Iraq, European diplomats, politicians and businessmen are jockeying to get a share of the spoils if the war does come.
EU Commissioner for External Affairs Chris Patten has said any reconstruction effort should be "international" and coordinated by the UN, even if the UN doesn't sanction a war to begin with. A senior German official has meanwhile said the US should be "magnanimous" in victory, enlisting European partners in the cleanup.
Also reporting, Le Monde (France) notes that Patten told the European Parliament on Wednesday that it would be difficult for the EU to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq if it is attacked without prior approval by the UN. ?It will be essential that the EU, like other international aid agencies, have the freedom to maneuver to extend independent and impartial aid,? he is quoted as saying. ?A strict separation should be maintained between military action and assistance operations, in order to preserve the so-called ?humanitarian space.? This objective will be much easier if the UN sees its coordinating role recognized very early on? It will be much more difficult for the EU to cooperate fully and with important means in the long-term reconstruction process if events unfold without appropriate cover of the UN and if member states remain divided.?
The WSJE notes that even France, which has bitterly opposed US efforts to force a UN Security Council vote for war, wants a part in Iraq's reconstruction. "There is no question that we will be involved" in an aftermath, said one French foreign ministry official. "We have deeper, more substantial and longer-standing ties to the Arab world than they do."
Such statements followed publication of an article in Monday's Wall Street Journal, which revealed that the US is planning to award a prime reconstruction contract valued at up to $900 million to one of a handful of US companies, one of which, Halliburton, is the former employer of US Vice President Dick Cheney. The article, which named four other US companies and no non-US contractors, enraged people throughout Europe, though sometimes for domestic political reasons.
While Patten publicly criticized the discussions between USAID and large US construction companies as "exceptionally maladroit," Friedbert Pfluger, a foreign-policy spokesman for Germany's opposition Christian Democrats, blamed German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder for refusing to prepare for a postwar situation. "Even the UN is working on scenarios," said Mr. Pfluger. "To ignore scenarios means not only denying people help, but also a loss of influence."
Karsten D. Voigt, coordinator for German-US relations in the German foreign ministry, said Germany wouldn't start another dispute with the US, because it has "enough of a dispute already" over the Security Council vote. But he said the US would ultimately have to include other nations in a reconstruction effort. "The Americans will discover that the participation of other partners and the UN in stabilizing Iraq is useful also for America," he said.
Also reporting, Le Figaro (France) says Europeans are convinced that the US will turn to them and the rest of the international community towards the end of their expected military campaign, not only to reconstruct and maintain cohesion in Iraq but also to deal with the shockwaves the operation is likely to produce throughout the Middle East. ?When it comes to re-establishing peace, the UN will be indispensable,? French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin is quoted as saying.
The EU, for its part, is still treating any discussion of reconstruction as "hypothetical," and prefers to talk about humanitarian aid, the WSJE notes. A spokesman for the European Commission said Thursday that it has already set aside ?15 million to that end, and is prepared to tap a reserve fund. "We have the money, we have the mechanisms," said Diego de Ojeda, a commission spokesman.
Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that British International Development Secretary Clare Short on Thursday warned that the international community was ill-prepared for dealing effectively with the "serious risk" of a humanitarian crisis arising out of a war in Iraq. Short?thought to be on the brink of resignation from the cabinet?said the US lacked "ground experience" in Iraqi humanitarian work, and questioned the "optimistic assumptions" about how quickly the UN and NGOs might be able to engage in post-conflict work.
"My assessment of the overall level of preparedness of the international community to cope with the humanitarian challenges which might lie ahead in Iraq is that it is limited, and this involves serious risk," Short said. While avoiding further criticism on the possibility of armed action without the backing of a second UN resolution, Short made clear her belief that the UN had a critical role to play in minimizing the potential disruption of the oil-for-food program.
But in a stark reference to the "worst-case scenario" of Iraq and the region being seriously destabilized by war, Short said that "no reparation would be enough" to cope with the potential for a prolonged interruption of oil-for-food, the complete collapse of water and sanitation systems, and "the possible use of chemical and biological weapons on the civilian population."
La Tribune (France) notes that according to the UN?s World Food Program, a prolonged conflict would plunge at least five million people in the region into food insecurity. UN agencies such as the UNHCR and the WFP and NGOs including M?decins du monde and Oxfam have been preparing for months to deal with the consequences of a war in Iraq on civilian populations and neighboring countries, the story notes.
The news comes as Bob Herbert writes in the International Herald Tribune that the most vulnerable in any war are children. The children in Iraq are already in sorrowful shape. The last thing in the world they need is another war. More than half the population of Iraq is under the age of 18, and those youngsters are living in an environment that has been poisoned by the Iran-Iraq war, the first Gulf War and long years of debilitating sanctions.
One out of every eight Iraqi children dies before the age of five. One-fourth are born underweight. One-fourth of those who should be in school are not. One-fourth do not have access to safe water. This generational catastrophe is the fault of Saddam Hussein, no question. But those who favor war should at least realize that the terrain to be invaded by the most fearsome military machine in history is populated mostly by children who are already suffering.
Reporting on the likely economic consequences of a military conflict, the Economist notes that South African President Thabo Mbeki has also warned that war in Iraq could damage African economies. He says that donor money is likely to be diverted from Africa to aid post-war Iraq, and that high oil prices may push oil-importers into debt.
Meanwhile, reports AFP, a war in Iraq and years rebuilding the devastated remnants could punch a $1.9 trillion hole in the US economy over a decade, according to top world economists. Even a quick victory risked costing half a trillion dollars by 2010, they said. The total bill in the next eight to 10 years may be far steeper than assumed by most officials, according to the two best respected models?one by a US team and the other by an Australian team.
William Nordhaus, Yale professor and lead author of "War With Iraq: costs, consequences and alternatives," has produced models for two scenarios: a short war and a long war, which would cost from $100 billion to $1.9 trillion over the next decade. The $1.9 trillion bill breaks down as follows: $140 billion in military costs; $500 billion for peacekeeping; $105 billion in reconstruction; $10 billion in aid; $778 billion in the impact from higher oil markets; and $391 billion for the economic shock.
And even that bill does not assume a nightmare scenario. "It is a scenario where lots of things go wrong. It is not the worst possible scenario, it does not assume weapons of mass destruction, it does not assume big terrorist actions, it does not assume wider war in the region," Nordhaus is quoted as saying.
Europe Seeks Reconstruction Work in Post-War Iraq
Many Europeans want no part of a war in Iraq, but Europe does want a part in its reconstruction, reports the Wall Street Journal Europe. Even as France, Germany and other European countries continue to thwart US efforts to prepare for a war against Iraq, European diplomats, politicians and businessmen are jockeying to get a share of the spoils if the war does come.
EU Commissioner for External Affairs Chris Patten has said any reconstruction effort should be "international" and coordinated by the UN, even if the UN doesn't sanction a war to begin with. A senior German official has meanwhile said the US should be "magnanimous" in victory, enlisting European partners in the cleanup.
Also reporting, Le Monde (France) notes that Patten told the European Parliament on Wednesday that it would be difficult for the EU to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq if it is attacked without prior approval by the UN. ?It will be essential that the EU, like other international aid agencies, have the freedom to maneuver to extend independent and impartial aid,? he is quoted as saying. ?A strict separation should be maintained between military action and assistance operations, in order to preserve the so-called ?humanitarian space.? This objective will be much easier if the UN sees its coordinating role recognized very early on? It will be much more difficult for the EU to cooperate fully and with important means in the long-term reconstruction process if events unfold without appropriate cover of the UN and if member states remain divided.?
The WSJE notes that even France, which has bitterly opposed US efforts to force a UN Security Council vote for war, wants a part in Iraq's reconstruction. "There is no question that we will be involved" in an aftermath, said one French foreign ministry official. "We have deeper, more substantial and longer-standing ties to the Arab world than they do."
Such statements followed publication of an article in Monday's Wall Street Journal, which revealed that the US is planning to award a prime reconstruction contract valued at up to $900 million to one of a handful of US companies, one of which, Halliburton, is the former employer of US Vice President Dick Cheney. The article, which named four other US companies and no non-US contractors, enraged people throughout Europe, though sometimes for domestic political reasons.
While Patten publicly criticized the discussions between USAID and large US construction companies as "exceptionally maladroit," Friedbert Pfluger, a foreign-policy spokesman for Germany's opposition Christian Democrats, blamed German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder for refusing to prepare for a postwar situation. "Even the UN is working on scenarios," said Mr. Pfluger. "To ignore scenarios means not only denying people help, but also a loss of influence."
Karsten D. Voigt, coordinator for German-US relations in the German foreign ministry, said Germany wouldn't start another dispute with the US, because it has "enough of a dispute already" over the Security Council vote. But he said the US would ultimately have to include other nations in a reconstruction effort. "The Americans will discover that the participation of other partners and the UN in stabilizing Iraq is useful also for America," he said.
Also reporting, Le Figaro (France) says Europeans are convinced that the US will turn to them and the rest of the international community towards the end of their expected military campaign, not only to reconstruct and maintain cohesion in Iraq but also to deal with the shockwaves the operation is likely to produce throughout the Middle East. ?When it comes to re-establishing peace, the UN will be indispensable,? French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin is quoted as saying.
The EU, for its part, is still treating any discussion of reconstruction as "hypothetical," and prefers to talk about humanitarian aid, the WSJE notes. A spokesman for the European Commission said Thursday that it has already set aside ?15 million to that end, and is prepared to tap a reserve fund. "We have the money, we have the mechanisms," said Diego de Ojeda, a commission spokesman.
Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that British International Development Secretary Clare Short on Thursday warned that the international community was ill-prepared for dealing effectively with the "serious risk" of a humanitarian crisis arising out of a war in Iraq. Short?thought to be on the brink of resignation from the cabinet?said the US lacked "ground experience" in Iraqi humanitarian work, and questioned the "optimistic assumptions" about how quickly the UN and NGOs might be able to engage in post-conflict work.
"My assessment of the overall level of preparedness of the international community to cope with the humanitarian challenges which might lie ahead in Iraq is that it is limited, and this involves serious risk," Short said. While avoiding further criticism on the possibility of armed action without the backing of a second UN resolution, Short made clear her belief that the UN had a critical role to play in minimizing the potential disruption of the oil-for-food program.
But in a stark reference to the "worst-case scenario" of Iraq and the region being seriously destabilized by war, Short said that "no reparation would be enough" to cope with the potential for a prolonged interruption of oil-for-food, the complete collapse of water and sanitation systems, and "the possible use of chemical and biological weapons on the civilian population."
La Tribune (France) notes that according to the UN?s World Food Program, a prolonged conflict would plunge at least five million people in the region into food insecurity. UN agencies such as the UNHCR and the WFP and NGOs including M?decins du monde and Oxfam have been preparing for months to deal with the consequences of a war in Iraq on civilian populations and neighboring countries, the story notes.
The news comes as Bob Herbert writes in the International Herald Tribune that the most vulnerable in any war are children. The children in Iraq are already in sorrowful shape. The last thing in the world they need is another war. More than half the population of Iraq is under the age of 18, and those youngsters are living in an environment that has been poisoned by the Iran-Iraq war, the first Gulf War and long years of debilitating sanctions.
One out of every eight Iraqi children dies before the age of five. One-fourth are born underweight. One-fourth of those who should be in school are not. One-fourth do not have access to safe water. This generational catastrophe is the fault of Saddam Hussein, no question. But those who favor war should at least realize that the terrain to be invaded by the most fearsome military machine in history is populated mostly by children who are already suffering.
Reporting on the likely economic consequences of a military conflict, the Economist notes that South African President Thabo Mbeki has also warned that war in Iraq could damage African economies. He says that donor money is likely to be diverted from Africa to aid post-war Iraq, and that high oil prices may push oil-importers into debt.
Meanwhile, reports AFP, a war in Iraq and years rebuilding the devastated remnants could punch a $1.9 trillion hole in the US economy over a decade, according to top world economists. Even a quick victory risked costing half a trillion dollars by 2010, they said. The total bill in the next eight to 10 years may be far steeper than assumed by most officials, according to the two best respected models?one by a US team and the other by an Australian team.
William Nordhaus, Yale professor and lead author of "War With Iraq: costs, consequences and alternatives," has produced models for two scenarios: a short war and a long war, which would cost from $100 billion to $1.9 trillion over the next decade. The $1.9 trillion bill breaks down as follows: $140 billion in military costs; $500 billion for peacekeeping; $105 billion in reconstruction; $10 billion in aid; $778 billion in the impact from higher oil markets; and $391 billion for the economic shock.
And even that bill does not assume a nightmare scenario. "It is a scenario where lots of things go wrong. It is not the worst possible scenario, it does not assume weapons of mass destruction, it does not assume big terrorist actions, it does not assume wider war in the region," Nordhaus is quoted as saying.