Decisions should be left to the future Iraqi government. However, if there is some legitimate equipment/services that any of these countries have provided to the Iraqi people then that part of the loan should be paid back. Any loans that resulted in military equipment for Saddam to oppress his own people should not have to be paid back. Also, the extremely favorable oil contracts to Russia/France that would be executed once sanctions were lifted on Iraq should NOT be honored.
an important topic. a donors conference needs to be put together after the war to figure out what to do about the massive levels of debt the Iraqi government has. loans will have to be forgiven or bought off at a lower price. Iraq won't be able to function if its debt burden isn't lowered.
Well, it is general policy that debts are not forgiven just because a nation changes government, both in the UN and in the US's dealing with other nations. But then, the current administration isn't really a stickler for general policy, so who knows what will happen.
I would agree with you to a point. The Iraqis bought their weapons and should have to pay for them. No matter who ordered them. Now the Oil contracts were used to by French and Russian loyalty should not be honoured.
I don't believe Iraq should be forced to repay the debts or honor any contracts. This will make it much harder for dictators to raise capital in the future.
Never looked at it from that angle. Definitely makes sense. I wonder if Bono will get behind this one. It's basically third world debt relief in a country formerly under dictatorial rule. I guess it doesn't meant the AIDS requirement of his though.
It should. That is one of the questions of bringing in the UN to control Iraq. What influences and pressures would certain countries demand of the UN to put on a new Iraqi government.
I wish this were the case, however international law doesn't hold up on this point. All rights, responsibilities, and boundaries of the state during the course of the previous regime MUST be maintained by the successor regime (including UN resolutions). This is a basic tenet of international law. So, while I would love to see the French, Germans, and Russians have the loans and contracts ripped in front of their faces, LEGALLY speaking, the new Iraqi government will not be permitted to do this.
Good question from Ian. Why does Loney hate democracy and freedom so much. Please, do tell. Edited for typos.
> It's not the iraqi people's debt - it's Saddam's. Wow, what a great con. Clinton should have tried it: "It isn't America's debt - it is Ronald Reagan's debt".
I'm not saying they should have to pay (I agree wiht BenReilly) but doesn't having a vote on whether you should pay someone back seem a little stupid. "OK so who wants to give up that money you've been saving up for food and water to repay the French and Russians for the weapons that were used to oppress us?" Don't think you would get many takers.
Last time I checked, Ronald Reagan received a lot of votes. Please explain why foreign governments and large corporations can conspire with a dictator to enslave 20+ million people for generations?
> Last time I checked, Ronald Reagan received a > lot of votes. Sure, but America has changed its mind, instituted regime change, and is thus no longer bound to old debts. > Please explain why foreign governments and large > corporations can conspire with a dictator to > enslave 20+ million people for generations? What a confusing question. Because it gets them something they want, of couse. What, you think nations and corporations should spend effort and resources (or lose a chance to get resources) just because people live badly somewhere? Morality is a fog that clouds the vision of the world as it is.
> The Iraqi people never had a say. Since when does that matter? I find it increasingly hard to argue because it seems like you live in some magical land where bad things shouldn't happen to you if you don't deserve them. The deal was with the country and the country has to stand up for it. The nations and companies making a deal have a responsibility to themselves. Can you imagine what a unpredictable world it would be if nations could get out of deals just by changing governments? No one would do business with anyone. Previous cases where nations unilaterally changed deals were looked on as acts of war - like the Suez Canal or nationalized oil fields.
Russia has to pay the old debts of the Soviet Union. Unified Germany took over the debts of East Germany. Democratic Germany even took over the debts of the Reich. South Africa has to pay the debts of the Aparthate regime. Debts don´t just fade away. And every country is dealing with dictators, not just "foreign governments". Maybe you could discuss to renounce (?) debts, but in case of Iraq... This country has the possibility to pay them back. Have a look at Africa, they usually don´t. domingo