RTI International's role in Iraq

The Herald-Sun ran two articles about work promoting "democratic" "self-governance" carried out by RTI International (www.rti.org) in Iraq (RTI says Iraq is making progress , on the front page, and Iraqi infrastructure presents challenge, on A5).  Supposedly Iraq did not have a constitution (this could be true, but I doubt it) or laws, other than those from the 50's, and the whole tone of the first article is that these 'savages' had little without us and cannot create democracy on their own.  For example, consider the phrase "the country's still awkward embrace of self-determination," which it of course had since freeing itself from the UK until it was occupied by the US and again by the UK in 2003).  An independent country is sovereign whether it is democratic or a dictatorship, and nations generally have the government they tolerate.  Also, there was an article several years ago, reprinted in the Triangle Free Press, that democratic local governments were formed early on by the Iraqis, but the US military disbanded them, and the US was forced to have elections ahead of schedule by pressure from the Shiite establishment.   

 

Deputy chief of party for the RTI project, Mark Grubb, is quoted as saying his team "believe[s] in a peaceful solution," and the reporter says "a local government program, as in Anbar province, was a key to seeing terrorists pushed out." Apparently using force is "peaceful," and RTI's program is admittedly supporting occupation.  This is how it usually is with the media, so use of force by Americans, Israelis, or other allies is for self-defense and peaceful, but the opposition is the only one that disturbs the peace and uses violence.  RTI could not do what it is doing without the US attacks on civilians and the resistance forces.  The "terrorists" in this case could be foreign al Qaida Islamists who are apparently disliked, with good reason, by the Iraqis, or are they patriotic Iraqis who want to free their country?  The Chief of party, Ross Wherry, is quoted later about the "normal leaders," such as local government, teachers, and professors being assassinated.  This could be more of al Qaida's terrorist campaign against secular institutions, but you could also assume from the article that these people are collaborating with the occupation.  In our society of course local government officials and educators exist to uphold the status quo, because the government is what pays their salaries, that's why we talk about ivory tower intellectuals. It could be unjust that civilian government employees are targeted, but that is often part of a war for independence, and not proof of any unique Muslim 'barbarism.'   

 

It is also 'funny' that Wherry says "Life is a little cheaper than in the United States" and that the Iraqis refuse to give up to people "who want to run the country with guns."  This is odd because the US military is cheap with Iraqi lives - for example in Falluja they bombed the hospitals and the US apparently does not track civilian casulaties, as are contractors like Blackwater, and the US wanted to 'run the country with guns' in 2003.  Of course al Qaida is careless with Iraqi lives, but so is the the US, which pulled al Qaida's strings in Afghanistan in the 70's, 80's and 90's, where Islamists also attacked teachers (look for that fact in Charlie Wilson's War).   

 

The second article starts by saying that efforts to win hearts and minds are hampered by "the deplorable state of infrastructure left behind by the regime of brutal dictator Saddam Hussein."  Wherry admits that Iraq was "a pretty nice place to live in 1975," under Hussein, but was destroyed by war "and a long set of sanctions because of the behavior of their government."  They correctly admit that Iraq was at the front of development in the Arab world, in addition to lacking today's sectarian violence, and that the sanctions were a disaster for Iraqi civilians.  Wherry's statements is more of the US, UK, and UN Security Council hypocrisy about Saddam making them kill Iraqis.  The US bombed civilian infrastructure such as water treatment plants in Yugoslavia, and presumably in Iraq too.  Wherry also makes it look like the Iraqi government did not try to help people survive the sanctions, when there was an effective food distribution system, dismantled by the occupiers.  I think Iraq could have done much better than President Saddam Hussein, but removing him was not up to us or necessary for our safety, and I am disgusted by the way most reporters and politicians lie about Iraq, to justify this neo-colonialism. We can do a lot better than George W Bush, or any of the frontrunners for 2008, but it would be a crime for another country to 'save us' from our government.       

 

In all of this, RTI is working with US AID, an agency the US uses to project insidious soft power, though I think I also read of its involvement in the attempted overthrow of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez in 2002.  Wherry and Grubb are former Marines.  Much of RTI's top management comes out of the big pharmaceutical companies, such as GlaxoSmithKline, the military industrial complex, and the US military.  The military industrial complex, US imperialism, and pharmaceuticals compose much of RTI's client list, posted online.  

 

I am sure RTI will come up at the March Triangle Socialist Forum, on who has benefited from the "War on Terror."