You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
No Agreement on Iraqi Debt Forgiveness
2004-06-11
Leaders of rich nations made little progress this week towards a final deal on whether to forgive much of Iraq's foreign debt. The United States is pushing for a significant reduction in Iraq's $120 billion debt to give its war-shattered economy a chance to rebound. World Bank President James Wolfensohn said last year that the United States and other rich nations would need to forgive at least two-thirds of the debt burden for the country to have a chance at economic recovery. But the U.S. drive to get agreement on a specific amount of debt relief for Iraq faltered, in large part because of resistance from countries who think relief for Iraq should be accompanied with more generous debt relief for the world's poorest countries, many of them in Africa.
Y'all want to forgive your debts, go right ahead.
French President Jacques Chirac said Iraq's potential oil wealth would make debt forgiveness hard to explain to other poor debtor countries. "How would you explain to these people that in three months we are going to do more for Iraq than we have done in 10 years for the 37 poorest and most indebted countries in the world," Chirac said.
You're the Frenchman, this should be easy.
"That is why France - and we are not alone - has taken a clear position: cancellation, yes, substantial, yes," Chirac said. "What does substantial mean? For us it is around 50 percent. We do not want to go higher than that."
Hokay, we'll take the 50. Memo to James Baker: visit Paris tomorrow, with briefcase, see how much more we can get.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder simply repeated earlier agreements to work on the issue through the Paris Club of wealthy creditor nations. "There really was no figure mentioned" at the summit, he said. Germany has agreed to substantial debt forgiveness for Iraq, on the condition that the U.S.-led coalition turn over control to an Iraqi interim government as scheduled on June 30.
Looks like the Germans will ante up then.
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said he was prepared to "eliminate the vast majority" of the Iraq debt that Japan holds if other members of the Paris Club also do so, said Japanese delegation spokesman Jiro Okuyama. Iraq owes about $42 billion to the rich nations represented by the Paris Club. An additional $80 billion is owed to several Arab governments.
CancellingNegotiating the Saoodi debt ought to be easy.
Posted by:Steve White

#14  Well, I can see their point. We should forgive debts to many of the African countries...

...as soon as we invade, smash their governments, and put their dictators on trial.

Let's start with Zimbabwe.
Posted by: jackal   2004-06-11 10:15:16 PM  

#13  Thanks, aris, for a good history lesson! Funny, I assumed that the Swiss would not have missed a golden opportunity to wheel and deal with world leaders ie. be ready and waiting to open new bank accounts as one Third World thug is replaced by another despot/thief. But the Swiss are also frugal. I did further research and evidently previous referenda to join the UN were defeated because the Swiss thought membership would be a poor investment[no kidding] as well the Swiss worried about losing their neutrality and be forced to follow UN sanctions against dictators[clients] like Uncle Saddam.

So withdrawing UN membership would probably please the Swiss voters, since they narrowly approved joining the UN in 2002...what threat, what threat would strike fear in the hearts of the Swiss???...perhaps, threatening to move the UN headquarters from Manhattan to Geneva? Yes, that might tick the Swiss off, the prospect of having valuable real estate wasted on a meeting place for UN thugs, thieves, and dictators. LOL.
Posted by: rex   2004-06-11 6:29:40 PM  

#12  rex> If Switzerland wants to play with the bad boys of the world, they should lose their seat in the UN [big loss, I know, don't laugh,Switzerland probably would see membership in the UN as valuable, argh]

LOL!! Do you know that Switzerland wasn't even a UN member until a couple years ago? It clearly saw UN as far less valuable than the US sees it.

Threaten it to take it back to 2002 when it didn't have UN membership? How will it *ever* manage.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-06-11 4:41:55 PM  

#11  If he makes the cost of business with Saddam high enough, countries lke France and Germany may look at the potential losses of dealing with other dictator regimes (China?) in the future.

Precisely what Reagan did during the Cold War; he made the Soviets pay a price (in increasing military expenditures) they couldn't afford.

Au contraire, Chiraq, history does repeat itself.
Posted by: Raj   2004-06-11 12:39:35 PM  

#10  Awright! I agree with flash91 on every point. Iraq has what everyone needs and will need for decades to come. It IS debatable whether or not those who do business with a Dictator should expect any legal "protection" when the asshat is retired. They can tell anyone who does not forgive the debt to go piss up a rope. Someone will pay market price for their oil. Period. And the US could certainly kick off the festivities by signing a contract for whatever they have for export. I don't wear hats, but black would be fine by me, heh.
Posted by: .com   2004-06-11 11:24:52 AM  

#9  We shouldnt encourage debt forgiveness. Saddam, although a dictator, was the legitimate ruler of Iraq. He is no longer, due to the US. I don't accept legality/illegality of war, because I dont accept extra-national court systems.

Now as the new leadership comes in, they must repudiate the debt (and risk loosing a trading partner) or talk someone into covering the debt/debt forgiveness.

IF that debt isnt paid, who will be Iraq's main trading partner? Could it be the US? Why yes, we are willing to buy your oil and supply nice things which will boost the US economy.

And that outcome sounds better than debt forgiveness to me :)

My hat is very black today how odd...
Posted by: flash91   2004-06-11 11:15:28 AM  

#8  Bush goal is to make support of dictators a losing proposition. If he makes the cost of business with Saddam high enough, countries lke France and Germany may look at the potential losses of dealing with other dictator regimes (China?) in the future.
Posted by: john   2004-06-11 7:32:22 AM  

#7  Iraq just threatens to default on their debt It would also dictators credit ratings to ratshit. "Sorry sir but your credit line has been withdrawn. Would you like to pay cash for that?"
Posted by: Phil B   2004-06-11 3:58:55 AM  

#6  And everyone knows...It's better to have the Swiss hide the 'dough', than shelter it in space, behind the Moon somewhere!!
Posted by: smn   2004-06-11 3:47:07 AM  

#5  Don't mess with the swiss!
i got money there.....
Posted by: frenchfregoli   2004-06-11 3:32:32 AM  

#4  Why is Bush bothering to negotiate with these clowns? Who is going to uphold the legitimacy of the debtor nations?

That's what I was thinking. Another thing to consider: how about if Iraq just threatens to default on their debt. Then see the Euros squirm and quickly change tune. Given Iraq's oil reserves (potential wealth) the consequences of defaulting wouldn't be a problem, as opposed to other countries.
Posted by: Rafael   2004-06-11 2:33:37 AM  

#3  "Jacques Chirac said Iraq's potential oil wealth would make debt forgiveness hard to explain"

Bingo. We have a winner. "Why should we forgive a perfectly good debt? Iraq is good for it I tell ya!"

"Germany has agreed...on the condition that the U.S.-led coalition turn over control to an Iraqi interim government as scheduled on June 30"

Translation: "We can get far better deals (bribing the Iraqis) without the Yankees getting in the way."
Posted by: Rafael   2004-06-11 2:25:37 AM  

#2  Good point, #1. Switzerland should be compelled to open the books on Uncle Saddam and company. It's nonsensical that in this day and age of terrorism that Switzerland should be allowed to keep in good faith the privacy rights of terrorist regimes like Saddam and his Baathist thugs. If Switzerland wants to play with the bad boys of the world, they should lose their seat in the UN[big loss, I know, don't laugh,Switzerland probably would see membership in the UN as valuable, argh]

2. the other point that's been mentioned before is why should ANY country have its chits from Saddam honored, when they took a risk giving money to a lunatic despot? In the real world, if you choose to be a loan shark, you'll not get the Attorney General to validate your losses, right? Iraq should start off with a clean slate. Fools who dealt with Saddam should take the loss for their own stupidity. Why is Bush bothering to negotiate with these clowns? Who is going to uphold the legitimacy of the debtor nations? Kofi Annan?? He's up to his ears in scandal himself, he won't take on the USA for fear of more info. tidbits about the oil for food embezzlement getting out to the MSM.
Posted by: rex   2004-06-11 2:21:10 AM  

#1  For me this is simple...take over Switzerland. This is where the money is. This little piece of dung country has been given way to much rope. Have the Swiss cough up the 120 billion or pay in other ways...This so called neutral country that plays both sides of the fence needs to play on one side or be eliminated.
Posted by: Long Hair Republican   2004-06-11 2:03:09 AM  

00:00