The occupation of Iraq and disintegration of its political and economic infrastructure provided a suitable opportunity for the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Trade Organization (WTO) to expand their role and influence.
The issue of canceling Iraqi debts is but a pretext for the three top international economic/financial bodies to impose on the Arab country their demands, such as privatization, liberalization, bigger presence and participation of multinational corporations in various domains, especially oil.
These demands on the one hand could eventually seriously undermine Iraq’s economic modus operandi, and on the other serve as an ideal situation for the three institutions to exercise control over Iraq’s resources and holdings.
There is reason to believe that the WB, IMF and WTO are pushing hard for economic reforms in the war-torn country with the main aim of ensuring the best interests of giant American corporations including Bechtel and Halliburton.
As a matter of policy the top priority of American regimes, irrespective of their political affiliations, is to promote the interests of specific entities largely dominated by Zionists and/or their backers.
It is small wonder that soon after invading Iraq, George Bush sent a special envoy to countries to which Saddam Hussein owed large amounts of money to work out ways to forgive and forget Iraq’s multibillion dollar debts.
By dispatching the high-profile representative, Bush created the conditions in which the WB, IMF and WTO have found the opportunity to rewrite Iraq’s economic agenda on the basis of their narrow paradigms.
For instance take the Paris Club. This is an informal group of official lending nations is membered by the so-called G8. The eight richest countries that jointly represent about 65 percent of the world economy and other major players on Nov. 21, 2004 agreed that some 80% of Iraq’s $38 billion debt to the club be revoked in three phases.
The plan was to write off 30 percent of the debt right away, another 30 percent as soon as IMF’s plan in Iraq got ratified and the remaining 20 percent in three years after IMF Directors verified the fulfillment of its declared terms and conditions.
Two points are noteworthy. First, Iraq’s debt to the IMF hardly constituted one percent of its total commitment to the Paris Club. But due to the ’turn of events’ the Fund strangely emerged as the main institution in charge of approving the terms and conditions needed for revoking Iraq’s foreign financial commitments.
Secondly, the Club has declared that canceling Iraq’s debts is due largely to the extraordinary conditions the Arab country is facing and its limited ability to repay the debts in the coming years.
This move is in line with the stark reality that the show must go on to let the Americans plunder the planet although on the surface one may get the impression that the lending club has democratic foundations.
It is plausible that the Club’s decision could entail some benefits for Iraq; however, what is of importance is that the debt issue in the long run helps serve as a mechanism for the IMF, WB, WTO and in short the big western powers to exercise more control over global developments one of the most sensitive dilemmas of which is the Iraq crises.
Meanwhile, the WB’s approach vis-ˆ-vis Iraq and its reconstruction further proves that hegemonic powers, the US in particular, are the least interested in the well being of the Iraqis. What is important for the greedy powers is profit in the end.
The World Bank reportedly engineered the removal of half million Iraqi government employees, including 400,000 armed forces personnel. This means that about 80 percent of Iraq’s workforce has been laid off or in the process of being fired. Moreover, another one of the WB’s plans is to rewrite Iraq’s foreign investment laws in a manner that the Iraqi economy becomes one of the most liberal in the developing world.
Interestingly enough, among the implications of the push for Liberalization is that the new Iraqi investment laws seem to transcend their counterparts in many advanced countries. The Economist, one of the world’s well-read journals has written that the new conditions in Iraq are long-time dreams of foreign investors come true.
The international approach toward Iraq, which is and must be compatible with the neo-liberal and neocon schools of thought, has been molded in a manner that the tools of rich countries such as WB, IMF and WTO benefit the most. It is also built on allowing the US and Israel achieve their ominous goal of plundering the world and its precious resources under a variety of fictitious names, be they democracy, human rights, war against terror or regime change.