STRATEGYPAGE SAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY:
In Iraq, it’s the state of the economy, more than anything else, that drives politics and stability. The economy stagnated from 1990 to 2003, because of the UN embargo following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. The invasion in 2003 caused another major hit to the economy, causing it to contract 21.2 percent. Since then, the Iraqi economy has had no place to go but up. The economy grew 54 percent in 2004, and is headed for a 34 percent increase this year. Most of this growth is not reported, the violence in Sunni Arab areas being considered more newsworthy. But in the south and north, the economic boom is very visible, just from the growing number of traffic jams, satellite dishes and new construction.
Iraq needs about $100 billion to rebuild. Most of this is not repairing war damage, but doing maintenance of infrastructure that Saddam did not do for two decades. He stopped work on roads, schools, hospitals, and utilities when he went to war with Iran in 1980. . . .
In May, 2005, 1.9 million barrels a day were being produced. Current maximum production capacity is 2.5 million barrels a day. Reconstruction and expansion of the oil industry will take 2-3 years, but will get production up to four million barrels a day. Maximum production of the Iraqi oil fields is believed to be about six million barrels a day. At current prices, that’s over $110 billion a year, which is over $4,000 for every man, woman and child in Iraq. In the past, the Sunni Arabs, about 20 percent of the population, grabbed some 80 percent of the oil income for themselves. The Sunni Arabs continue to attack the oil fields and pumping facilities, to make sure that they eventually get their share of the oil wealth, and maybe a little more. If you want to understand what causes the violence in Iraq, follow the money.
This is why I wish that the “oil trust” idea I was pushing before had gotten more traction. Perhaps there were good reasons for not taking that approach, but I certainly never saw any sign that the Administration was mulling the issue seriously to begin with. I think that might have prevented some of the violence.
On the other hand, the BBC reports that the terrorists’ violence is generating some blowback:
Al Jazeera – often accused by the Americans of stirring anti-US feeling – has adopted less of an “Us and Them” approach.
The militants are no longer referred to as the “resistance” but as gunmen or suicide bombers.
Eyewitnesses are shown denouncing them as “terrorists” – condemnations that are echoed by a parade of Iraqi officials and religious authorities.
One recent attack drew this comment from the al-Jazeera reporter: “Most of the time it’s civilians who pay the price for the violence that has cost thousands of their lives”.
Al-Jazeera’s main rival, the Dubai-based al-Arabiya, has also shown little sympathy for the bombers – a recent report, instead, painted a favourable picture of British soldiers patrolling Basra.
Our PR efforts may be inadequate, but they’re better than deliberately blowing up innocents. As some people keep saying, you can’t win hearts and minds with random bombings.