Trade and Human Conflict
Foreign aid, foreign trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) have become
weapons of mass persuasion, deployed in the building of both the pro-war,
pro-American coalition of the willing and the French-led counter "coalition
of the squealing".
By now it is clear that the United States will have to bear the bulk of the
direct costs of the actual fighting, optimistically pegged at c. $200
billion. The previous skirmish in Iraq in 1991 consumed $80 billion in 2002
terms - nine tenths of which were shelled out by grateful allies, such as
Saudi Arabia and Japan.
Even so, the USA had to forgive $7 billion of Egyptian debt. According to
the General Accounting Office, another $3 billion were parceled at the time
among Turkey, Israel and other collaborators, partly in the form of
donations of surplus materiel and partly in subsidized military sales.
This time around, old and newfound friends - such as Jordan, an erstwhile
staunch supporter of Saddam Hussein - are likely to carve up c. $10 billion
between them, says the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Jordan alone has
demanded $1 billion.
According to the Knight Ridder Newspapers, in February 2003, an Israeli
delegation has requested an extra $4-5 billion in military aid over the next
2-3 years plus $8 billion in loan guarantees. Israel, the largest American
foreign and military aid recipient, is already collecting c. $3 billion
annually. It is followed by Egypt with $1.3 billion a year - another rumored
beneficiary of $1 billion in American largesse.
Turkey stands to receive c. $6 billion for making itself available (however
reluctantly, belatedly, and fitfully) as staging grounds for the forces
attacking Iraq. Another $20 billion in loan guarantees and $1 billion in
Saudi and Kuwaiti oil have been mooted.
In the thick of the tough bargaining, with Turkey demurring and refusing to
grant the USA access to its territory, the International Monetary Fund -
thought by many to be the long arm of US foreign policy - suddenly halted
the disbursement of money under a two years old standby arrangement with the
impoverished country.
It implausibly claimed to have just unearthed breaches of the agreement by
the Turkish authorities. This systemic non-compliance was being meticulously
chronicled - and scrupulously ignored by the IMF - for well over a year now
by both indigenous and foreign media alike.
Days after a common statement in support of the American stance, the IMF
clinched a standby arrangement with Macedonia, the first in two turbulent
years. On the same day, Bulgaria received glowing - and counterfactual -
reviews from yet another IMF mission, clearing the way for the release of a
tranche of $36 million out of a loan of $330 million. Bulgaria has also
received $130 million in direct US aid between 2001-3, mainly through the
Support for East European Democracy (SEED) program.
But the IMF is only one tool in the administration's shed. President Bush
has increased America's foreign aid by an unprecedented 50 percent between
2003-6 to $15 billion. A similar amount was made available between 2003-8 to
tackle AIDS, mainly in Africa.
Half this increase was ploughed into a Millennium Challenge Account. It will
benefit countries committed to democracy, free trade, good governance,
purging corruption and nurturing the private sector. By 2005, the Account
contained close to $5 billion and is being replenished annually to maintain
this level.
This expensive charm offensive was intended to lure and neutralize the
natural constituencies of the pacifistic camp: non government organizations,
activists, development experts, developing countries and international
organizations.
As the war drew nearer, the E10 - the elected members of the Security
Council - also cashed in their chips.
The United States has softened its position on trade tariffs in its
negotiations of a free trade agreement with Chile. Immigration regulations
were relaxed to allow in more Mexican seasonal workers. Chile received $2
million in military aid and Mexico $44 million in development finance.
US companies cooperated with Angola on the development of offshore oilfields
in the politically contentious exclave of Cabinda. Guinea and Cameroon
absorbed dollops of development aid. Currently, Angola receives c. $19
million in development assistance.
Cameroon already benefits from military training and surplus US arms under
the Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program as well as enjoying trade benefits
in the framework of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act. Guinea gets c.
$26 million in economic aid annually plus $3 million in military grants and
trade concessions.
The United States has also pledged to cause Iraq to pay its outstanding
debts, mainly to countries in Central and East Europe, notably to Russia and
Bulgaria. Iraq owes the Russian Federation alone close to $9 billion. Some
of the Russian contracts with the Iraqi oil industry, thought to be worth
dozens of billions of dollars, may even be honored by the victors, promised
the Bush administration. It reneged on both promises. Debt relief reduced
Iraq's debt by 90% and all Saddam Hussein era contracts were vitiated.
Thus, the outlays on warfare are likely be dwarfed by the price tag of the
avaricious constituents of president Bush's ramshackle coalition. New York
Times columnist Paul Krugman aptly christened this mass bribery, "The
Martial Plan". Quoting "some observers", he wrote:
"The administration has turned the regular foreign aid budget into a tool of
war diplomacy. Small countries that currently have seats on the U.N.
Security Council have suddenly received favorable treatment for aid
requests, in an obvious attempt to influence their votes. Cynics say that
the 'coalition of the willing' President Bush spoke of turns out to be a
'coalition of the bought off' instead'."
But this is nothing new. When Yemen cast its vote against a November 1990
United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force to
evict Iraq from Kuwait - the United states scratched $700 million in aid to
the renegade country over the following decade.
Nor is the United States famous for keeping its antebellum promises.
Turkey complains that the USA has still to honor its aid commitments made
prior to the first Gulf War. Hence its insistence on written guarantees,
signed by the president himself. Similarly, vigorous pledges to the contrary
aside, the Bush administration has allocated a pittance to the
reconstruction of Afghanistan in its budgets - and only after it is prompted
to by an astounded Congress.
Macedonia hasn't been paid in full for NATO's presence on its soil during
the Kosovo conflict in 1999. Though it enjoyed $1 billion in forgiven debt
and some cash, Pakistan is still waiting for quotas on its textiles to be
eased, based on an agreement it reached with the Bush administration prior
to the campaign to oust the Taliban.
Congress is a convenient scapegoat. Asked whether Turkey could rely on a
further dose of American undertakings, Richard Boucher, a State Department
spokesman, responded truthfully: "I think everybody is familiar with our
congressional process."
Yet, the USA, despite all its shortcomings, is the only game in town. The
European Union cannot be thought of as an alternative benefactor.
Even when it promotes the rare coherent foreign policy regarding the Middle
East, the European Union is no match to America's pecuniary determination
and well-honed pragmatism. In 2002, EU spending within the
Euro-Mediterranean Partnership amounted to a meager $700 million.
The EU signed association agreements with some countries in the region and
in North Africa. The "Barcelona Process", launched in 1995, is supposed to
culminate by 2010 in a free trade zone incorporating the European Union,
Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian
Authority, Syria and Turkey. Libya has an observer status and Cyprus and
Malta have joined the EU in the meantime.
According to the International Trade Monitor, published by the Theodore
Goddard law firm, the Agadir Agreement, the first intra-Mediterranean free
trade compact, was concluded In March 2003 between Egypt, Jordan, Morocco
and Tunisia. It is a clear achievement of the EU.
The European Union signed a Cooperation Agreement with Yemen and, in 1989,
with the Gulf Cooperation Council, comprising Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain,
Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman. A more comprehensive free trade
agreement covering goods, services, government procurement and intellectual
property rights is in the works. The GCC has recently established a customs
union as well.
Despite the acrimony over Iran's not-so-civilian nuclear program, the EU may
soon ink a similar set of treaties with Iran with which the EU has a
balanced trade position - c. $7 billion of imports versus a little less in
exports.
The EU's annual imports from Iraq - at c. $4 billion - are more than 50
percent higher than they were prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. It
purchases more than one quarter of Iraq's exports. The EU exports to Iraq
close to $2 billion worth of goods, far less than it did in the 1980s, but
still a considerable value and one fifth of the country's imports. EU aid to
Iraq since 1991 exceeds $300 million.
But Europe's emphasis on trade and regional integration as foreign policy
instruments in the Mediterranean is largely impracticable. America's cash is
far more effective. Charlene Barshefsky, the former United States trade
representative from 1997 to 2001, explained why in an opinion piece in the
New York Times:
"The Middle East ... has more trade barriers than any other part of the
world. Muslim countries in the region trade less with one another than do
African countries, and much less than do Asian, Latin American or European
countries. This reflects both high trade barriers ... and the deep isolation
Iran, Iraq and Libya have brought on themselves through violence and support
for terrorist groups ... 8 of (the region's) 11 largest economies remain
outside the WTO."
Moreover, in typical EU fashion, the Europeans benefit from their
relationships in the region disproportionately.
Bilateral EU-GCC trade, for instance, amounts to a respectable $50 billion
annually - but European investment in the region declined precipitously from
$3 billion in 1999 to half that in 2000. The GCC, on its part, has been
consistently investing $4-5 billion annually in the EU economies.
It also runs an annual trade deficit of c. $9 billion with the EU. Destitute
Yemen alone imports $600 million from the EU and exports a meager $100
million to it. The imbalance is partly attributable to European non-tariff
trade barriers such as sanitary regulations and to EU-wide export subsidies.
Nor does European development aid compensate for the EU's egregious trade
protectionism. Since 1978, the EU has ploughed only $210 million into
Yemen's economy, for instance. A third of this amount was in the form of
food support. The EU is providing only one fifth of the total donor
assistance to the country.
In the meantime, the USA is busy signing trade agreements with all and
sundry, subverting what little leverage the EU could have possessed. In the
footsteps of a free trade agreement with Israel, America has concluded one
with Jordan in 2000. The kingdom's exports to the United States responded by
soaring from $16 million in 1998 to c. $400 million in 2002. Washington
negotiated a similar deal with Morocco. It is usurping the EU's role on its
own turf. Who can blame French president Jacques Chirac for blowing his lid?
==============================================================
Sam Vaknin ( samvak.tripod.com ) is the author of Malignant Self
Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West Lost the East.
He served as a columnist for Global Politician, Central Europe Review,
PopMatters, Bellaonline, and eBookWeb, a United Press International (UPI)
Senior Business Correspondent, and the editor of mental health and Central
East Europe categories in The Open Directory and Suite101.
|