|
by Naomi Klein
The Nation
[from the January 5, 2004 issue]
It's 8:40 am and the Sheraton Hotel ballroom thunders
with the sound of plastic explosives pounding against metal. No, this is
not the Sheraton in Baghdad, it's the one in Arlington, Virginia. And
it's not a real terrorist attack, it's a hypothetical one. The screen at
the front of the room is playing an advertisement for "bomb resistant
waste receptacles": This trash can is so strong, we're told, it can
contain a C4 blast. And its manufacturer is convinced that given half a
chance, these babies would sell like hotcakes in Baghdad -- at bus
stations, Army barracks and, yes, upscale hotels. Available in Hunter
Green, Fortuneberry Purple and Windswept Copper.
This is ReBuilding Iraq 2, a gathering of 400
businesspeople itching to get a piece of the Iraqi reconstruction
action. They are here to meet the people doling out the cash, in
particular the $18.6 billion in contracts to be awarded in the next two
months to companies from "coalition partner" countries. The people to
meet are from the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), its new Program
Management Office, the Army Corps of Engineers, the US Agency for
International Development, Halliburton, Bechtel and members of Iraq's
interim Governing Council. All these players are on the conference
program, and delegates have been promised that they'll get a chance to
corner them at regularly scheduled "networking breaks."
By now there have been dozens of similar trade shows
on the business opportunities created by Iraq's decimation, held in
hotel ballrooms from London to Amman. By all accounts, the early
conferences throbbed with the sort of cash-drunk euphoria not seen since
the heady days before the dot-coms crashed. But it soon becomes apparent
that something is not right at ReBuilding Iraq 2. Sure, the organizers
do the requisite gushing about how "nonmilitary rebuilding costs could
near $500 billion" and that this is "the largest government
reconstruction effort since Americans helped to rebuild Germany and
Japan after the Second World War."
But for the undercaffeinated crowd staring uneasily at
exploding garbage cans, the mood is less gold rush than grim
determination. Giddy talk of "greenfield" market opportunities has been
supplanted by sober discussion of sudden-death insurance; excitement
about easy government money has given way to controversy about foreign
firms being shut out of the bidding process; exuberance about CPA chief
Paul Bremer's ultraliberal investment laws has been tempered by fears
that those laws could be overturned by a directly elected Iraqi
government.
At ReBuilding Iraq 2, held on December 3-4, it seems
finally to have dawned on the investment community that Iraq is not only
an "exciting emerging market"; it's also a country on the verge of civil
war. As Iraqis protest layoffs at state agencies and make increasingly
vocal demands for general elections, it's becoming clear that the White
House's prewar conviction that Iraqis would welcome the transformation
of their country into a free-market dream state may have been just as
off-target as its prediction that US soldiers would be greeted with
flowers and candy.
I mention to one delegate that fear seems to be
dampening the capitalist spirit. "The best time to invest is when there
is still blood on the ground," he assures me. "Will you be going to
Iraq?" I ask. "Me? No, I couldn't do that to my family."
He was still shaken, it seemed, by the afternoon's
performance by ex-CIAer John MacGaffin, who had harangued the crowd like
a Hollywood drill sergeant. "Soft targets are us!" he bellowed. "We are
right in the bull's-eye .... You must put security at the center of your
operation!" Lucky for us, MacGaffin's own company, AKE Group, offers
complete counterterrorism solutions, from body armor to emergency
evacuations.
Youssef Sleiman, managing director of Iraq Initiatives
for the Harris Corporation, has a similarly entrepreneurial angle on the
violence. Yes, helicopters are falling, but "for every helicopter that
falls there is going to be replenishment."
I begin to notice that many of the delegates at
ReBuilding Iraq 2 are sporting a similar look: Army-issue brush cuts
paired with dark business suits. The guru of this gang is retired Maj.
Gen. Robert Dees, freshly hired out of the military to head Microsoft's
"defense strategies" division. Dees tells the crowd that rebuilding Iraq
has special meaning for him because, well, he was one of the people who
broke it. "My heart and soul is in this because I was one of the primary
planners of the invasion," he says with pride. Microsoft is helping
develop "e-government" in Iraq, which Dees admits is a little ahead of
the curve, since there is no g-government in Iraq -- not to mention
functioning phones lines.
No matter. Microsoft is determined to get in on the
ground floor. In fact, the company is so tight with Iraq's Governing
Council that one of its executives, Haythum Auda, served as the official
translator for the council's Minister of Labor and Social Affairs, Sami
Azara al-Ma'jun, during the conference. "There is no hatred against the
coalition forces at all," al-Ma'jun says, via Auda.
"The destructive forces are very minor and these will
end shortly .... Feel confident in rebuilding Iraq!"
The speakers on a panel about "Managing Risks" have a
different message: Feel afraid about rebuilding Iraq, very afraid.
Unlike previous presenters, their concern is not the obvious physical
risks, but the potential economic ones. These are the insurance brokers,
the grim reapers of Iraq's gold rush.
It turns out that there is a rather significant
hitch in Paul Bremer's bold plan to auction off Iraq while it is still
under occupation: The insurance companies aren't going for it. Until
recently, the question of who would insure multinationals in Iraq has
not been pressing. The major reconstruction contractors like Bechtel are
covered by USAID for "unusually hazardous risks" encountered in the
field. And Halliburton's pipeline work is covered under a law passed by
Bush on May 22 that indemnifies the entire oil industry from "any
attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other
judicial process."
But with bidding now starting on Iraq's state-owned
firms, and foreign banks ready to open branches in Baghdad, the
insurance issue is suddenly urgent. Many of the speakers admit that the
economic risks of going into Iraq without coverage are huge: Privatized
firms could be renationalized, foreign ownership rules could be
reinstated and contracts signed with the CPA could be torn up.
Normally, multinationals protect themselves against
this sort of thing by purchasing "political risk" insurance. Before he
got the top job in Iraq this was Bremer's business -- selling political
risk, expropriation and terrorism insurance at Marsh & McLennan
Companies, the largest insurance brokerage firm in the world. Yet in
Iraq, Bremer has overseen the creation of a business climate so volatile
that private insurers -- including his old colleagues at Marsh &
McLennan -- are simply unwilling to take the risk. Bremer's Iraq is, by
all accounts, uninsurable.
"The insurance industry has never been up against this
kind of exposure before," R. Taylor Hoskins, vice president of
Rutherford International insurance company, tells the delegates
apologetically. Steven Sadler, managing director and chairman at Marsh
Industry Practices, a division of Bremer's old firm, is even more
downbeat. "Don't look to Iraq to find an insurance solution. Interest is
very, very, very limited. There is very limited capacity and interest in
the region."
It's clear that Bremer knew Iraq wasn't ready to be
insured: When he signed Order 39, opening up much of Iraq's economy to
100 percent foreign ownership, the insurance industry was specifically
excluded. I ask Sadler, a Bremer clone with
slicked-back hair and bright red tie, whether he thinks it's strange
that a former Marsh & McLennan executive could have so overlooked the
need for investors to have insurance before they enter a war zone.
"Well," he says, "he's got a lot on his plate." Or maybe he just has
better information.
Just when the mood at ReBuilding Iraq 2 couldn't sink
any lower, up to the podium strides Michael Lempres, vice president of
insurance at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). With a
cool confidence absent from the shellshocked proceedings so far, he
announces that investors can relax: Uncle Sam will protect them.
A US government agency, OPIC provides loans and
insurance to US companies investing abroad. And while Lempres agrees
with earlier speakers that the risks in Iraq are "extraordinary and
unusual," he also says that "OPIC is different. We do not exist
primarily to generate profit." Instead, OPIC exists to "support US
foreign policy." And since turning Iraq into a free-trade zone is a top
Bush policy goal, OPIC will be there to help out. Earlier that same day,
President Bush signed legislation providing "the agency with
enhancements to its political risk insurance program," according to an
OPIC press release.
Armed with this clear political mandate, Lempres
announces that the agency is now "open for business" in Iraq, and is
offering financing and insurance -- including the riskiest insurance of
all: political risk. "This is a priority for us," Lempres says. "We want
to do everything we can to encourage US investment in Iraq."
The news, as yet unreported, appears to take even the
highest-level delegates by complete surprise. After his presentation,
Lempres is approached by Julie Martin, a political risk specialist at
Marsh & McLennan.
"Is it true?" she demands.
Lempres nods. "Our lawyers are ready."
"I'm stunned," Martin says. "You're ready? No matter
who the government is?"
"We're ready," Lempres replies. "If there's an
expro[priation] on January 3, we're ready .... I don't know what we're
going to do if someone sinks a billion dollars into a pipeline and
there's an expro."
Lempres doesn't seem too concerned about these
possible "expros," but it's a serious question. According to its
official mandate, OPIC functions "on a self-sustaining basis at no net
cost to taxpayers." But Lempres admits that the political risks in Iraq
are "extraordinary." If a new Iraqi government expropriates and
re-regulates across the board, OPIC could be forced to compensate dozens
of US firms for billions of dollars in lost investments and revenues,
possibly tens of billions. What happens then?
At the Microsoft-sponsored cocktail reception in
the Galaxy Ballroom that evening, Robert Dees urges us "to network on
behalf of the people of Iraq." I follow orders and ask Lempres what
happens if "the people of Iraq" decide to seize back their economy from
the US firms he has so generously insured. Who bails out OPIC? "In
theory," he says, "the US Treasury stands behind us." That means the US
taxpayer. Yes, them again: The same people who have already paid
Halliburton, Bechtel et al. to make a killing on Iraq's reconstruction
would have to pay these companies again, this time in compensation for
their losses. While the enormous profits being made in Iraq are
strictly private, it turns out that the entire risk is being shouldered
by the public.
For the non-US firms in the room, OPIC's announcement
is anything but reassuring: Since only US companies are eligible for its
insurance, and the private insurers are sitting it out, how can they
compete? The answer is that they likely cannot. Some countries may
decide to match OPIC's Iraq program. But in the short term, not only has
the US government barred companies from non-"coalition partners" from
competing for contracts against US firms, it has made sure that the
foreign firms that are allowed to compete will do so at a serious
disadvantage.
The reconstruction of Iraq has emerged as a vast
protectionist racket, a neocon New Deal that transfers limitless public
funds -- in contracts, loans and insurance -- to private firms, and even
gets rid of the foreign competition to boot, under the guise of
"national security." Ironically, these firms are being handed this
corporate welfare so they can take full advantage of CPA-imposed laws
that systematically strip Iraqi industry of all its protections, from
import tariffs to limits on foreign ownership. Michael Fleisher, head of
private-sector development for the CPA, recently explained to a group of
Iraqi businesspeople why these protections had to be removed. "Protected
businesses never, never become competitive," he said. Quick, somebody
tell OPIC and Paul Wolfowitz.
The issue of US double standards comes up again at the
conference when a CPA representative takes the podium. A legal adviser
to Bremer, Carole Basri has a simple message: Reconstruction is being
sabotaged by Iraqi corruption. "My fear is that corruption will be the
downfall," she says ominously, blaming the problem on "a
thirty-five-year gap in knowledge" in Iraq that has made Iraqis "not
aware of current accounting standards and ideas on anticorruption."
Foreign investors, she said, must engage in "education -- bring people
up to world-class standards."
It's hard to imagine what world-class standards
she's referring to, or who, exactly, will be doing this educating.
Halliburton, with its accounting scandals back home and its outrageous
overbilling for gasoline in Iraq? The CPA, with its two officers under
investigation for bribetaking, and nonexistent fiscal oversight? On the
final day of ReBuilding Iraq 2, the cover headline in our complimentary
copies of the Financial Times (a conference sponsor) is "Boeing linked
to Perle investment fund." Perhaps Richard Perle -- who supported
Boeing's $18 billion refueling-tanker deal and extracted $20 million
from Boeing for his investment fund - -can teach Iraq's politicians to
stop soliciting "commissions" in exchange for contracts.
For the Iraqi expats in the audience Basri's is a
tough lecture to sit through. "To be honest," says Ed Kubba, a
consultant and board member of the American Iraqi Chamber of Commerce,
"I don't know where the line is between business and corruption." He
points to US companies subcontracting huge taxpayer-funded
reconstruction jobs for a fraction of what they are getting paid, then
pocketing the difference. "If you take $10 million from the US
government and sub the job out to Iraqi businesses for a
quarter-million, is that business, or is that corruption?"
These were the sorts of uncomfortable questions faced
by George Sigalos, director of government relations for Halliburton KBR.
In the hierarchy of Iraqi reconstruction, Halliburton is king, and
Sigalos sits onstage, heavy with jeweled ring and gold cufflinks,
playing the part. But the serfs are getting restless, and the room
quickly turns into a support group for jilted would-be subcontractors.
"Mr. Sigalos, what are we going to have to do to get
some sub-contracts?"
"Mr. Sigalos, when are you going to hire some Iraqis
in management and leadership?"
"I have a question for Mr. Sigalos. I would like to
ask what you would suggest when the Army says 'Go to Halliburton' and
there's no response from Halliburton?"
Sigalos patiently instructs them all to register their
companies on Halliburton's website. When the questioners respond that
they have already done so and still haven't heard back, Sigalos invites
them to "approach me afterward."
The scene afterward is part celebrity autograph
session, part riot. Sigalos is swarmed by at least fifty men, who elbow
each other out of the way to shower the Halliburton VP with CD-ROMs,
business plans and résumés. When Sigalos spots a badge from Volvo, he
looks relieved. "Volvo! I know Volvo. Send me something about what you
can achieve in the region." But the small, no-name players who have paid
their $985 entrance fees, here to hawk portable generators and
electrical control paneling, are once again told to "register with our
procurement office." There are fortunes being made in Iraq, but it seems
they are out of reach to all but the chosen few.
The next session is starting and Sigalos has to run.
The serfs wander off through the displays of shatterproof glass and
bomb-resistant trash cans, caressing Sigalos's red-and-white business
card and looking worried.
Return to Table of Contents |