XBOX 360 2656

The whole "Food for Oil" bizzo was doomed to failure from the outset because of the mbuttive potential for corruption. Remember that I mumbled something about "control inputs; manage outputs"? Well, not much of that was going on.

"Doing something" made some people feel better about the reportedly dire circumstances inside Iraq; but not so much the people who needed help as those in the food chain (pun intended) who helped themselves. It's a shame really that the offender can't be trialled as war criminals.

I doubt very much that certain individuals and corporations from the US and UK missed out on the fantastic opportunities that the programme presented. But let's not mistake the actions of corrupt officials (and their private industry sub-contractors) as reflecting government policy. The Australian link (via the AWB) has only really come to light quite recently.

But the effect of individuals cannot be disregarded as policy, actions and timings of actions by governments are often influenced by those individuals. With or without collusion.

The infrastructure of the country is determined by how the sovereign government of the country deems appropriate. While external pressure can be excerted, the direction of the flow of money cannot feasibly be controlled by an external power. Hence the people in hospitals dieing from lack of simple medical treatment and malnutrition.

One must beware of setting precedents when invasively interfering with the internal affairs of a sovereign country. The tables may be turned in future.

Moral recbreastude evaporates if your own actions violate the principles you preach to others to follow. They will instead follow your example.

The Coalition of the Willing accepted the responsibility for setting Iraq right by their act of invasion and disrupting "orderly" government. It's turned out to be a much bigger job than anticipated -- a reflection of the lack of intelligence and analysis prior to hostilities. And it's going to cost a shirtload more than expected; financially and politically.

It's a fine, golden, bejeweled goblet; filled with hemlock.

Blix and other UN inspectors were delayed because they had no investigative resources; and in any case few powers to investigate or to enforce compliance with requests. They were at the "mercy" of those "naughty people" who were being inspected.

The reason to look at the past is so that better processes can be developed; such as providing powers including compulsion to cooperate and means for investigation; either with or without cooperation of the local authorities; when weapons inspections are next imposed.

That will no doubt require the inclusion of police or (semi-)military resources with the real inspectors. Such "enforcers" should be drawn from an ethnically-compatible background to minimise unnecessary conflicts.

It's very important to think about these things now; especially with the situation in Iran evolving. There are matters of pride that cannot be ignored. It'll take a great deal of diplomacy to feel a way through to an amicable arrangement.

I did get a sense that Iran is determined to pursue research into nuclear power. They say that they don't want nuclear weapons. But the rest of the world needs to be sure that the research doesn't also provide them with means to realize nuclear weapons. Hence the need for inspections.

The prospect of somebody else doing original research into (hopefully "safe") nuclear power raises the potential to improve nuclear power generation within the existing "club". Monitoring the research closely could have technical benefits as well as strategic importance.

Perhaps it'd be easier to steer Iran towards using thorium as a fuel in a pebble-bed reactor. The products are much more difficult to use in weapons.

-- "Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ASCII ribbon campaign "Laws do not persuade just because X against HTML mail they threaten." and postings Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.