Friday, December 23, 2005

IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION:STATE IN, PENTAGON OUT

By William Fisher

After a thousand days of widely acknowledged failure in the job of rebuilding Iraq, the Department of Defense has quietly been relieved of that responsibility, with the State Department taking over as America’s lead reconstruction agency and coordinating the work of all other government departments.

While supporters of the policies of President George W. Bush dismiss the change as an administrative adjustment, others suggest it is symbolic of a decades-old turf battle between the two departments, and the administration’s increasing frustration with the reconstruction performance of the DOD and its contractors.

They also point to the switch as an example of how the president goes about making policy changes in Iraq: exhorting the public to “stay the course” while changing it without fanfare.

Steven Aftergood, who heads the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, told IPS, "It's a belated recognition that existing policy on reconstruction and stabilization has been woefully inadequate."

The switch was made through a little-noticed December 7 Presidential National Security Directive. Its objective is “to promote the security of the United States through improved coordination, planning, and implementation for reconstruction and stabilization assistance for foreign states and regions at risk of, in, or in transition from conflict or civil strife.”

The Directive says, “The Secretary of State shall coordinate and lead integrated United States Government efforts”, coordinating these efforts with the Secretary of Defense to ensure harmonization with any planned or ongoing U.S. military operations across the spectrum of conflict.”

It explains that to maximize the effectiveness of U.S. rebuilding efforts, “a focal point is needed (i) to coordinate and strengthen efforts of the United States Government to prepare, plan for, and conduct reconstruction and stabilization assistance and related activities in a range of situations that require the response capabilities of multiple United States Government entities and (ii) to harmonize such efforts with U.S. military plans and operations.”

To achieve the objectives of the Directive, the Secretary of State will appoint a Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization with wide-ranging responsibilities.

These include “developing and approving strategies…for reconstruction and stabilization activities directed towards foreign states at risk of, in, or in transition from conflict or civil strife: develop guiding precepts and implementation procedures for reconstruction and stabilization which, where appropriate, may be integrated with military contingency plans and doctrine; and coordinate reconstruction and stabilization activities and preventative strategies with foreign countries, international and regional organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector entities…(and) identify lessons learned and integrate them into operations.”

While reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have been made far more difficult by security concerns, they have also been plagued by massive corruption, overcharging by many American contractors, lack of transparency and accountability in the contracting process, and confusion about lines of responsibility among U.S. Government agencies, and between the U.S. and Iraqi governments.

The State Department has now been tasked to “resolve relevant policy, program, and funding disputes among United States Government Departments and Agencies with respect to U.S. foreign assistance and foreign economic cooperation, related to reconstruction and stabilization….”

The Bush Directive, which is global in scope and not limited to Iraq and Afghanistan, also established a Policy Coordination Committee (PCC) for Reconstruction and Stabilization Operations. The PCC will be chaired by the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization and a member of the National Security Council (NSC) staff.

The State Department will lead U.S. Government efforts to prevent countries at risk “from being used as a base of operations or safe haven for extremists, terrorists, organized crime groups, or others who pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy, security, or economic interests.”

Problems with contractors and with financial management in general have dogged the DOD for many years. The agency’s contracting procedures have been widely condemned and, in one much-publicized case, the department’s most senior contracting official received a prison term for conflicts of interest and other offenses involving the Boeing Corporation, one of the largest military contractors. Other DOD contractors have also proved problematic; in particular, the Halliburton Company has been accused of substantial over-charges on many of its no-bid contracts and has become the poster child for a broken system.

Government accountants have never been able complete a satisfactory audit of DOD expenditures.

Most recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) revealed that DOD contractors have received $8 billion over five years in bonuses on weapons programs that were often plagued by significant cost overruns, performance problems and delays.

The GAO, an independent auditor for Congress, reviewed 93 of 597 military contracts in force between 1999 and 2004 that included the possibility of a bonus. Contractors on average were awarded about 90 percent of the bonus money available, the agency said.

For example, Lockheed Martin and Boeing received $1.7 billion, or about 91 percent of $1.847 billion available on four major programs, including the Joint Strike Fighter, even as these programs "experienced significant cost increases, technical problems and development delays," the GAO said.

The GAO report also cited the Boeing-United Technologies RAH-66 Comanche helicopter, canceled in April 2004, and two other Lockheed programs: the F/A-22 fighter and a satellite system to detect enemy missile launches.

Bonuses paid on these troubled programs ranged from 74 percent to 100 percent of the potential award, the agency said. "These practices undermine the effectiveness of fees as a motivational tool and marginalize their use in holding contractors accountable," the audit agency said. "They also serve to waste taxpayer funds."

5 comments:

  1. Bill,

    You can take a natural occurance and write it so that it appears the Bush Administration is messing up again. If you didn't have the Bush Administration to poke in the eye every day,,,what purpose would you have in life? Extoll the virtues and rightousness of the Clinton years? Point out the high moral standards of the Democratic leaders?

    The turnover of the rebuilding of Iraq from the Pentagon to the State Department is a natural occurance. The military needs to blend more into the background and the state department needs to be the point man on many of the activities the military used to handle. That is consistent with the theory of tuning down the military force and letting negotiations take the forefront.

    But you don't write it that way. So your bias is perfectly clear. Can you give any other examples of nation building to compare with the one in Iraq that you scornfully discount? Any at all? To say that it is failed would have to mean that you know how one would be successful or have a benchmark. Don't have one do you?! You are an armchair critic with one purpose in mind.

    You ramble also. You start to talk about rebuilding Iraq and somehow talk about costs relating to defense projectsl.

    If you have an actual positive idea to post that will help matters, feel free to contribute.

    ReplyDelete
  2. phoenixsoulfire,

    Among many other things, you forget that the first viceroy, General Jay Garner, wanted to hold elections right away, was sacked soon after, and replaced by Paul Bremer, that the Army War College had a plan for the occupation, which was ignored, and that the State Department was supposed to have taken over relations with the new Iraqi government within months, not years. Even with the shifting of rationales and restating of goals to fit events as they occur, the war and occupation have been a disaster. By themselves, these things make your statement fatuous.

    Bill Fisher's "bias" is to call a disaster a disaster. You have imputed a shallow partisanship to him that has no basis in fact. The condescension and pop psychology you attempt are risibly inappropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Phoenix:

    This is not a natural occurence.

    http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_24/cover.html

    We literally had kids with resumes like tried to start cooking school or driving ice cream truck overseeing billions.

    Once the sanctions were let off and the borders opened the economy took off, but now it stalled. It is believed the Iraqis will not be able to mantian many of the plants our contractors built.

    Only recently has the new amanssador been able to install provincial teams to work with the local governments, before that we tried to direct out of the Green Zone.

    We are just starting things which should have been put in place at the beginning. Back then it was easier to work among the people and we might have been able to nip problems in the bud.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Cool blog! Have you been to my website http://newsfromiraq.org? My site has to do with Marines. Come see it for yourself!

    ReplyDelete

  5. general business service - Home Business Sales Mastery Audio Course

    Are you ready to slam the door on your job for good?

    What about setting your own hours?

    How about being, doing and having everything you want from life?

    What makes you any different from the folks you pass on the freeway driving those luxury cars?

    Discover what the difference is by hearing the The Home Business Sales Mastery Course.

    The Home Business Sales Mastery Course is written and developed by Paul Barrs. He authored the now famous Internet Marketing Mastery Course in addition to the Home Business Success Keys.

    This brand new course takes you to an entire new level of learning. general business service

    ReplyDelete