Paris Club forgives loans - the real takeover of Iraq begins

[bitwhys]

The NYT dissappoints. What a headline. Talk about your basic bad arithmetic.



Major Creditors in Accord to Waive 80% of Iraq Debt



Two points. I'm no expert but this rat is so big I can't help but smell it. I can't believe the NYT is regergatating this tripe.



1) That's 80% of the Paris Club (a G7 arm of the World Bank) debt, not the overall debt. 80% of $40B is only $35B. This leave Iraq on the nut for some $85B, well in excess of their annual GDP. Iraq is still in dire straights and there's no telling how much impact the ongoing brutalization of their infrastructure is going to have.



2) Don't think for a second those forgiven loans haven't been made without some willing acceptence of provisos by lap-dog Allawi giving G7 multinationals free reign over the influx of imports to Iraq over the next several years. Iraq's trade deficit is going to spiral and the remaining $85B is going to be impossible to pay off.



these animals know EXACTLY what they are doing. Notice this announcement coincides with the summit in Chile?



the military action in Iraq is just the first wave. now the bankers are packing their bags and getting plane tickets to the middle east. so much plunder to be done.



the NYT is really that stupid? oh well. Canadian headlines probably won't be that much better. Not many journalists take economics as a minor.

[RonOnGuitar]

You're a bit late with this - Mike already noted the debt forgiveness in a thread a few days ago.



Just as the world did not hold Germany to Adolf's incurred debts, the same courtesy has been extended to Iraq re: Saddam's personal greed and his plundering.



Interestingly enough, it was 6 years after it's defeat that Germany was ready for elections. Japan was a bit tougher nut to crack, it took 10 years before it was ready for democracy. Within 3 years we've already seen the first-ever Muslim-based free election and, in a few months, we'll see the second-ever.

[bitwhys]

The world of "debt-forgiveness" has changed since then, and this announcement is brand-spanking new.



BINGO, btw. The NYT article doesn't mention it but Pravada tips the proverbial hand (probably not by accident) in its writeup...



Russia forgives $8 billion to Iraq

Quote:

---

Pursuant to the plan, the procedure will take place in three stages. Thirty percent of the debt will be canceled without any conditions at all. Another thirty percent will be abolished later within the framework of the program of the International Monetary Fund. The remaining 20 percent will be cancelled in 2008, depending on the results of the program.

---

will the others countries play along? no problem once the capital is divied up, eh?



consider it an investment.



btw, don't worry if you find the logic kind of hard to follow. I just skimmed this one but it seems to get the point across...



Structural Adjustment -- a Major Cause of Poverty



does the IMF hurdle come with strings attached? no. its a friggen noose.

[bitwhys]

also, if you compare Mike's posting to the current announcement you'll find the 80% of the 120 is pure bullocks and the forgiven debt (read: bribe) is 80% of the Paris club portion of the debt.



can you say "propoganda"?



Iraq will still be on the nut for more than its annual GDP.

[russky joe]

Hey, bitwhys, take it easy, man, this is a bit hard for him to understand. He'll have to consult with Tonto on this one.



I'll put it more simply - it's a bit of creative accounting, a neat way of diverting payments into investments in a huge reconstruction program that will create huge profits, a bit like swapping a repayment mortgage for a low-risk high-return endowment mortgage. Geddit, kemosabe?

[bitwhys]

yes



the $32B is an investment. in fact, it ISN'T $32B at all. not up front. its a three stage (tranche) arrangement...



1) 30% of 32B (33.6 by Pravada's report) "no strings attached" (but you can bet Iraq will need to take loans to service the remaining debt)

2) 30% of 32B (33.6 by Pravada's report) later "within the framework of the program of the International Monetary Fund" (pravada), ie "the bribe". I'll give the link and again and I encourage everyone to read Structural Adjustment -- a Major Cause of Poverty which explains the sorts of mechanisms the IMF will be insisting Iraq (Allawi (allow we)) institute.

3) 20% of 32B (33.6 by Pravada's report) "depending on the results of the program".



keep in mind there is a remaining $80B+ debt to other countries.



in addition to the measures I've already mentioned, common "conditionalities" include the sale of state enterprises (did someone say "oil companies"?) at discount prices, reduced spending on teachers (layoffs) and disolution of state supplied medical services.



The IMF and WTO have one hell of a track record. Local economies are decimated, resources taken over by multinational interests and the debt load becomes a fact of life. Even Chile, this month's poster child for the WTO business convention, continues to carry an external debt service load in excess of 25% of its GDP.



like the thread title states, IMO this is the start of the real takeover. I've been watching for it.

[russky joe]

Yeah, I get it, now it's easier to understand the whole thing.



It's a bit like the pressure we put on the frickin' Brits and the help we gave them with our B-17s to flatten Europe.



The profit is in the frickin' reconstruction with the added bonus of political control, a regular oil supply and palsy-walsy trade deals in the future.



That English college professor and the Hong Kong chick were saying the same sort of thing a little while ago.



These assholes are crooks, no less.

[bitwhys]

"the Hong Kong chick" is stuck going two falls out of three with the world's second superpower, experts at both sandbagging and playing the system.



bottom line is the WTO forces its clients into export driven economies on a playing field populated by other "clients" in the same situation. the established multinationals (most of whom curiously meet behind closed doors in those "secret societies" they love to prounce around to foster the whole "conspiracy theory" write-off) get full access to exactly what they need, their choice of primary resource landfall and cheap labour.



the New World Order.



its not just a rumour.

[russky joe]

Yeah, I always thought this 'global free trade' thing was a set-up.



So what you're saying is that this frickin' crew need to get rid of democratic states that try to look after their citizens to hook their country and their frickin' resources into the system?



Is that right?



But surely that means America and Canada as well, so they can't really care about their own working people?

[bitwhys]

US, Canada, all the OECD countries. Its referred to as a "rentier" economy. Service based, no real capital or manufacturing. Canada is not in as dangerous situation since we have a wide range of our own resources but we are slowly(?) losing our manufacturing base as it sets up shop where labour is cheap and at the mercy of virtually non-existing protection from the law, since the law is at the mercy of IMF 'liberalization" protocols. We MAY be able to adjust quickly since our own national debt is essentially one to ourselves.



If this thing blows (one input to that would be the shift from the Dollar to the Euro in the oil trade), this could be a whole lot ugly. The US treasury (privately owned, btw) relies on the oil trade (big time, they just keep printing the shit off) and the World Bank's insistance that "client" countries strapped their currency to the dollar to prop itself up.



I keep watching for signs that the Canadian government actually knows what's going on but indications are sorely lacking.

[russky joe]

A global elite! The New World Order!



So what ya saying here is that where the @#%$ and the commies failed to dominate the frickin' world the corporations are gonna succeed by turning it into a frickin' free-but-not-really-free-trade zone where they reap the profits, control all the investment capital and hold states to ransom?



So they'll drive down the price of labour right to the bottom to increase profits, is that right?



But how do they force countries into making stuff for export? Why don't the countries become self-sufficient and tell the corps to go screw themselves?



And where do the frickin' stupid fundies and the islamic extremists come into it?

[bitwhys]

do the words "regime change" ring a bell?



afa the christian v. islamic struggle goes, social divisiveness is at the core of the unrest needed to forge new ground. it may not be deliberate, but its a handle on social engineering that no doubt comes in handy.



at the national level...

case in point, Rhwanda

case in point, Kosovo

case in point, Iraq

case in point, Ireland

case in point, the American frontier

[russky joe]

I think I know what you're saying.



So as usual these religious dummies on both sides are ready-made pre-packaged fodda for ideological manipulation, low-wage labour and violence?



Because if they've already been programmed to believe bullshit this particular piece of bullshit is no problem to 'em?



"same as it ever was"

[bitwhys]

the opiate of the people, which I find rather annoying since I have that particular predisposition myself.



I think it may be prudent that I point out there is a BIG difference between the christian and islam sides of the equation here. The "muslim extremists" (note: them ain't the Iraqi insurgents - they're primarily Ba'athist (Hussein's secular political party) reborn) are NOT considered to be even Muslim by the majority of Islam and there acts against innocent people are openly denounced on the other side of the press, although some (even many) Muslims may willingly step aside to let them do the dirty work. The difference is that the Fundagelical ARE the predominant sect and currently believe they are calling the shots. I think that's worth keeping in mind.



Speaking of opiates, keep your eye on Afghanistan. That little dog-and-pony is FAR from over. and while I'm pointing out hotspots, peace in Palestine will not only require what's not going to happen in Isreal but goes against the interests of those who profit from unrest. entirely on topic, not?

[DreamTone7]

bitwhys...I think you are on to something...but as usual, you have a somewhat anti-Christian slant to your view on things. Christianity/Christians actually play little part in what is going on, except for some Christians voting for Bush instead of Kerry because of Kerry's stance on things such as abortion, stem-cell research, gay "marriages", and such. The real push behind world events are big-business/corporations. They are the motivators...couple this with a lack of Christian morals to be found in them, and you have the recipe for the chaos that we are beginning to see. It's the secular stock-holders, not Christians, that are the driving force in decisions being made. Governments all over the world are becoming more as pawns in the mess than orchestrators of it. But, you are apparently too busy being anti-Christian to notice this.



Muslim extremists, as I mentioned in another thread, are busy fighting for their traditional way of life...and flying the religious flag overhead to justify their violence. As noted, the extremists are in the minority...but none of the other Muslims are doing much about it. Most are afraid to denounce the extemists publically for what they are doing...though there are exceptions. I may have been afraid to denounce the Crusades, too, for fear of being burned at the stake as a witch or something...but that was then, and this is now. This is on a global level, or fast approaching it. You mentioned the labor force...it is only in the traditional Muslim countries that women are not part of the labor force. The corporate world sees this as an untapped resource...and a very large one according to population. So I'm not surprised that we get folks like Osama bin Laden running around trying to put a stop to it. Ever wonder why the terrorists attack places such as the World Trade Center, and have targeted other financial institutions? They are trying to send the Corporations a message. Interesting how you claim that Christians are the heart of the problem, and yet not one Christian church (to my knowledge) has been the target of a terrorist attack. It seems that Osama, as well as myself, disagree with your assesment of Christian involvement with what is going on. Wrap you brain around that.