Iraqi official says limited German, French help won't be forgotten

[jimnyc]

"MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- A top Iraqi official attending an international conference on raising funds to rebuild Iraq warned Thursday that France and Germany's limited donations would not be forgotten.

Ayad Allawi, the current head of Iraq's U.S.-appointed governing council, said he hoped German and French officials would reconsider their decision not to boost their contributions beyond funds already pledged through the European Union.

"As far as Germany and France are concerned, really, this was a regrettable position they had," Allawi said. "I don't think the Iraqis are going to forget easily that in the hour of need, those countries wanted to neglect Iraq."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/10/23/sprj.irq.main/index.html

 

[Amras]

There is a still a consensus between France, Germany and Russia to oppose the US military policy in the middle East. A country like Germany merely donated 168 million €. This is not substantial. It's a small symbolic gesture of support, and that's how it should be understood. 33 billion dollars have been raised, far less than the US had hoped. After all those incidents which have harmed the transatlantic relationship over the past year, it doesn't surprise me. 80% of the war in 91 were financed with funds. Biggest donors at that time were Saudi Arabia and Germany.
This is one story of the day, another one is that the German parliament has extended the mandate for it's peacekeeping force in Afghanistan. Soon, those peacekeepers will take over the city of Kunduz and replace the americans that are there. It's an unstable region that is controlled by warlords and drugbarons, usually the warlords are also those that export the narcotics.

 

[jimnyc]

There is a still a consensus between France, Germany and Russia to oppose the US military policy in the middle East. A country like Germany merely donated 168 million €. This is not substantial. It's a small symbolic gesture of support, and that's how it should be understood.

I'm not doubting your report, but where did you see that Germany gave money? This is the latest I saw:

" France and Germany, the two leading opponents of the U.S.-led war in Iraq, are holding back to register their disapproval of the U.S. blueprint for restoring Iraqi sovereignty."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...u=/ap/20031024/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_conference

Just curious

 

[Amras]

I heard it on the news this evening. I just checked a german online news magazine because I could not find that elsewhere.
Germany had already agreed to donate aid, worth 193m € (not 168). Those are peanuts if you consider what Iraq really needs and they promised to give that aid already before the conference. At the conference in Madrid, there was just a small delegation which honored you with their presence but had nothing to offer or to say. Powell is disappointed, I can understand him.

Here are some figures to show what others donate:

Japan gives 5 billion $, it expects Iraq to pay them only 3.5b $ back. It's the second biggest donater after the US
United Arab Emirates: 215m $
South Korea: 200m $
Canada: another 150m $
Italy: 232m $ over the next 3 years
Spain: 400m $
GB: 440m $ till 2005

IWF: 4,25b $ over the next 3 years
The Worldbank agreed to loan 3b-5b dollars to Iraq over the next 5 years¨
A lot of eastern european countries will try to help with medicine and other goods, the amount they donate is not so important.

 

[ranchu]

The USA invaded and bombed Iraq.. and now they want to pass the bill to other nations.

Hmmmm.... I don't think so.

Americans started the war and they should rebuild Iraq with the money of american taxpayers. That's the price they should pay for electing a President with two braincells.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by ranchu
The USA invaded and bombed Iraq.. and now they want to pass the bill to other nations.

Hmmmm.... I don't think so.

Americans started the war and they should rebuild Iraq with the money of american taxpayers. That's the price they should pay for electing a President with two braincells.

It's not a bill that we owe, it's the building up of a nation that not only benefits it's people, but benefits the rest of the world.

You'll notice that this wasn't an American complaining, it was an Iraqi official.

If thats the way Germany and France choose to start relations with the new government thats their choice. So much for them being solely against war and "all for the people". If they cared about the people so much they would help them. It must still be upsetting them that they'll no longer have the contracts they once had with Saddam.

 

[ranchu]

Of course... how could I not see it? Americans have a big heart and started this war so they could free the iraqi people. I suppose they'll follow up and do the same with Cubans, Chinese, North Koreans, Nigerians.. and citizens from almost all third world countries where human right violations are an ordinary event.

Iraq was doing bad with Saddam and now they'll be worse without him. It's easy to predict a long painful civil war that will last decades once the americans step out. The result will be another dictator, or a religious goverment just like that in Iran... while the US moves on and focus her attention on a country which can't defend itself, in order to fit her political agenda.

PS. english is not my first language, so please excuse my grammar.

 

[ranchu]

Originally posted by jimnyc

You'll notice that this wasn't an American complaining, it was an Iraqi official.

An Iraqi official working for Americans. And it wasn't his idea that other countries should pay for the rebuilding of Iraq, was it?

I'm comenting on the fact that the US expects other countries to help rebuild Iraq, when they're the ones who bombed it and destroyed it. To pass the bill to other countries... (included those who opposed war) is a joke and a desperate attempt to silence critics in the US... angered at the cost of the war and the number of american soldiers killed week after week.

BTW, I'm not anti-american. I'm anti-war and both things are different. I love your country and have had the pleasure of visiting it many times.

It's the US foreign policy I don't agree with...

And nice forum! someone posted a link on yahoo boards. I have been reading some of the threads for the last hour... it's interesting to read other people's points of view without name-calling and insults. I like it.

Peace!

 

[jimnyc]

Of course... how could I not see it? Americans have a big heart and started this war so they could free the iraqi people. I suppose they'll follow up and do the same with Cubans, Chinese, North Koreans, Nigerians.. and citizens from almost all third world countries where human right violations are an ordinary event.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. We very well may do the same to one of the mentioned countries if they start bombing their neighbors, killing their own citizens and putting them in mass graves & allowing their soil to be used as one big terrorist training camp. Of course they might not get 12 years to rectify the situation.

Iraq was doing bad with Saddam and now they'll be worse without him. It's easy to predict a long painful civil war that will last decades once the americans step out. The result will be another dictator, or a religious goverment just like that in Iran... while the US moves on and focus her attention on a country which can't defend itself, in order to fit her political agenda.

Despite the turmoil that exists in Iraq they are already better off then they were with Saddam and company in charge. The USA will stay until they can start to do things for themselves, then they will be responsible for themselves. If they allow themselves to go back to the way they were it won't be the fault of the USA. I believe, in my opinion, that what the majority of people want will prevail.

PS. english is not my first language, so please excuse my grammar.

You're doing quite well; I wouldn't have guessed that if you didn't point it out.

An Iraqi official working for Americans. And it wasn't his idea that other countries should pay for the rebuilding of Iraq, was it?

No, it wasn't his idea. I also don't think he is working for the Americans. He works for the Iraqi people and speaks in a large part for them. In fact, I've read a bit already where this new government has spoken out against Americans.

I'm comenting on the fact that the US expects other countries to help rebuild Iraq, when they're the ones who bombed it and destroyed it. To pass the bill to other countries... (included those who opposed war) is a joke and a desperate attempt to silence critics in the US... angered at the cost of the war and the number of american soldiers killed week after week.

I don't fully agree with this assessment. Iraq wasn't fairing too well before the invasion. A lot of what is being rebuilt has been destroyed through years of abuse from Saddam and his regime. There is much more to be "rebuilt" than broken buildings. A lot of this money goes to security, education, business funding, oil enhancements, banking... I think some, but not all, of the rebuilding effort is the responsibility of all nations who wish for peace and prosperity in the Middle East.

BTW, I'm not anti-american. I'm anti-war and both things are different. I love your country and have had the pleasure of visiting it many times.

Where are you from? (if you stated earlier, I missed it!)

It's the US foreign policy I don't agree with...

And many Americans oppose some of the policy as well. It's extremely complex. You'll never please everyone.

And nice forum! someone posted a link on yahoo boards. I have been reading some of the threads for the last hour... it's interesting to read other people's points of view without name-calling and insults. I like it.

You'll see the occasional name calling here as well. I'm guilty of some myself when backed into a corner. All in all I think the environment here is much better than a place like Yahoo.

Welcome to the board.