-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

The Nation
November 24, 2003


By Naomi Klein

Bring Halliburton Home

Cancel the contracts. Ditch the deals. Rip up the rules.

Those are a few suggestions for slogans that could help
unify the growing movement against the occupation of
Iraq. So far, activist debates have focused on whether
the demand should be for a complete withdrawal of
troops, or for the United States to cede power to the
United Nations.

But the "Troops Out" debate overlooks an important fact.
If every last soldier pulled out of the Gulf tomorrow
and a sovereign government came to power, Iraq would
still be occupied: by laws written in the interest of
another country, by foreign corporations controlling its
essential services, by 70 percent unemployment sparked
by public sector layoffs.

Any movement serious about Iraqi self-determination must
call not only for an end to Iraq's military occupation,
but to its economic colonization as well. That means
reversing the shock therapy reforms that US occupation
chief Paul Bremer has fraudulently passed off as
"reconstruction" and canceling all privatization
contracts flowing from these reforms.

How can such an ambitious goal be achieved? Easy: by
showing that Bremer's reforms were illegal to begin
with. They clearly violate the international convention
governing the behavior of occupying forces, the Hague
Regulations of 1907 (the companion to the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, both ratified by the United States), as
well as the US Army's own code of war.

The Hague Regulations state that an occupying power must
respect "unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force
in the country." The Coalition Provisional Authority has
shredded that simple rule with gleeful defiance. Iraq's
Constitution outlaws the privatization of key state
assets, and it bars foreigners from owning Iraqi firms.
No plausible argument can be made that the CPA was
"absolutely prevented" from respecting those laws, and
yet two months ago, the CPA overturned them
unilaterally.

On September 19, Bremer enacted the now-infamous Order
39. It announced that 200 Iraqi state companies would be
privatized; decreed that foreign firms can retain 100
percent ownership of Iraqi banks, mines and factories;
and allowed these firms to move 100 percent of their
profits out of Iraq. The Economist declared the new
rules a "capitalist dream."

Order 39 violated the Hague Regulations in other ways as
well. The convention states that occupying powers "shall
be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of
public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural
estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in
the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of
these properties, and administer them in accordance with
the rules of usufruct."

Bouvier's Law Dictionary defines "usufruct" (possibly
the ugliest word in the English language) as an
arrangement that grants one party the right to use and
derive benefit from another's property "without altering
the substance of the thing." Put more simply, if you are
a housesitter, you can eat the food in the fridge, but
you can't sell the house and turn it into condos. And
yet that is just what Bremer is doing: What could more
substantially alter "the substance" of a public asset
than to turn it into a private one?

In case the CPA was still unclear on this detail, the US
Army's Law of Land Warfare states that "the occupant
does not have the right of sale or unqualified use of
[nonmilitary] property." This is pretty straightforward:
Bombing something does not give you the right to sell
it. There is every indication that the CPA is well aware
of the lawlessness of its privatization scheme. In a
leaked memo written on March 26, British Attorney
General Lord Peter Goldsmith warned Prime Minister Tony
Blair that "the imposition of major structural economic
reforms would not be authorized by international law."

So far, most of the controversy surrounding Iraq's
reconstruction has focused on the waste and corruption
in the awarding of contracts. This badly misses the
scope of the violation: Even if the selloff of Iraq were
conducted with full transparency and open bidding, it
would still be illegal for the simple reason that Iraq
is not America's to sell.

The Security Council's recognition of the United States
and Britain's occupation authority provides no legal
cover. The UN resolution passed in May specifically
required the occupying powers to "comply fully with
their obligations under international law including in
particular the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Hague
Regulations of 1907."

According to a growing number of international legal
experts, this means that if the next Iraqi government
decides it doesn't want to be a wholly owned subsidiary
of Bechtel or Halliburton, it will have powerful legal
grounds to renationalize assets that were privatized
under CPA edicts. Juliet Blanch, global head of energy
and international arbitration for the huge international
law firm Norton Rose, says that because Bremer's reforms
directly contradict Iraq's Constitution, they are "in
breach of international law and are likely not
enforceable." Blanch argues that the CPA "has no
authority or ability to sign those [privatization]
contracts" and that a sovereign Iraqi government would
have "quite a serious argument for renationalization
without paying compensation." Firms facing this type of
expropriation would, according to Blanch, have "no legal
remedy."

The only way out for the Administration is to make sure
that Iraq's next government is anything but sovereign.
It must be pliant enough to ratify the CPA's illegal
laws, which will then be celebrated as the happy
marriage of free markets and free people. Once that
happens, it will be too late: The contracts will be
locked in, the deals done and the occupation of Iraq
permanent.

Which is why antiwar forces must use this fast-closing
window to demand that the next Iraqi government be free
from the shackles of these reforms. It's too late to
stop the war, but it's not too late to deny Iraq's
invaders the myriad economic prizes they went to war to
collect in the first place.

It's not too late to cancel the contracts and ditch the
deals.

This article can be found on the web at
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i031124&s=klein



portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a
news, discussion and debate service of the Committees
of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It
aims to provide varied material of interest to people
on the left.

Post            : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subscribe       : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Unsubscribe     : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Faq             : http://www.portside.org
List owner      : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web address     : <http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/portside>
Digest mode     : visit Web site


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to