U.S. Plan to Build Iraq Clinics Falters

[Donald L.]

U.S. Plan to Build Iraq Clinics Falters (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/02/AR2006040201209.html)


A reconstruction contract for the building of 142 primary health centers across Iraq is running out of money, after two years and roughly $200 million, with no more than 20 clinics now expected to be completed, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers says.

The contract, awarded to U.S. construction giant Parsons Inc. in the flush, early days of reconstruction in Iraq, was expected to lay the foundation of a modern health care system for the country, putting quality medical care within reach of all Iraqis.

Parsons, according to the Corps, will walk away from more than 120 clinics that on average are two-thirds finished. Auditors say the project serves as a warning for other U.S. reconstruction efforts due to be completed this year.

[Nellie]

Couldn't they just have given Corporate American billions of dollars from the treasury and not bothered flattening Iraq into the bargain?

[Andrew Mayer]

They have our oil!

[Brian Rucker]

And in related news, so much for democracy building:


While President Bush vows to transform Iraq into a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, his administration has been scaling back funding for the main organizations trying to carry out his vision by building democratic institutions such as political parties and civil society groups.

The administration has included limited new money for traditional democracy promotion in budget requests to Congress. Some organizations face funding cutoffs this month, while others struggle to stretch resources through the summer. The shortfall threatens projects that teach Iraqis how to create and sustain political parties, think tanks, human rights groups, independent media outlets, trade unions and other elements of democratic society.

The shift in funding priorities comes as security costs are eating up an enormous share of U.S. funds for Iraq and the administration has already ratcheted back ambitions for reconstructing the country's battered infrastructure. While acknowledging that they are investing less in party-building and other such activities, administration officials argue that bringing more order and helping Iraqis run effective ministries contribute to democracy as well.

Jennifer Windsor, executive director of Freedom House, an advocacy group that hosted a Bush speech last week, called the situation "a travesty" and said she is "appalled" that more is not being done. "This is the time to show that democracy promotion is more than holding an election. If the U.S. can't see fit to fund follow-up democracy promotion at this time," then it is making a mistake, she said.

"The commitment to what the president of the United States will say every single day of the week is his number one priority in Iraq, when it's translated into action, looks very tiny," said Les Campbell, who runs programs in the Middle East for the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, known as NDI.

NDI and its sister, the International Republican Institute (IRI), will see their grants from the U.S. Agency for International Development dry up at the end of this month, according to a government document, leaving them only special funds earmarked by Congress last year. Similarly, the U.S. Institute of Peace has had its funding for Iraq democracy promotion cut by 60 percent. And the National Endowment for Democracy expects to run out of money for Iraqi programs by September.

"Money keeps getting transferred away to security training. Democracy's one of the things that's been transferred," said Thomas Carothers of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's project on democracy and the rule of law. "Without that, all the other stuff looks like just background work."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040401626.html

[Bob Cherub]

Yes! America fails! Nothing makes Democrats happier than American failure.

[Brian Rucker]

No, you silly fuck, I'm furious that these idiots not only got us into it but managed not to care how it all ended up. They relied entirely on the magical thinking of ideology to carry the day rather than actually, say, following the plans that State had busted their balls working on or heeding the very serious warnings from the folks at the CIA who actually knew what was likely to occur.

If I'm happy about anything it's that the media, and the public, are slowly catching up with what many of us already understood. But that really pales in comparison to the wretched tragedy that we're all neck deep in. Financially, militarily and economically. Republican or Democrat. Nobody wins here if we fail and it seems Bush is bound and determined to fail.

[MikeJ]

On the clinic construction, I don't understand why they will be walking away from the project when it's two-thirds complete.

I mean, what was the language of the contract with this company? "Here's a pot of money, spend it any way you see fit and whatever you happen to get done is fine"? I don't see why the company isn't on the hook to finish this contract.

Even if the company can walk away from it, how can the US government do so? Have they never completed a project that had cost overruns?

Edit: Hah. I've now read the link. Maybe the USACE should have had all that money to spend itself. So much for efficient private industry in a war zone.

[Uncle Larry]

Couldn't they just have given Corporate American billions of dollars from the treasury and not bothered flattening Iraq into the bargain?

I dunno who this guy is, but he doesn't sound like he's hurtin' for cash.