| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| In Reversal, Russia Agrees to Discuss Debt Relief for Iraq |
| 2003-12-19 |
| EFL: Russia agreed on Thursday to negotiate debt relief for Iraq, reversing course after months of refusing to forgive any of the $8 billion in obligations run up by deposed president Saddam Hussein’s government. The shift brings Russia in line with other European powers. President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. special envoy, James A. Baker III, that he was prepared to discuss ways to restructure the Iraqi debt within the framework of the Paris Club, an international organization of creditor nations, as France and Germany agreed earlier in the week. Three for three, wonder just what was in Baker’s briefcase. The move came a week after Putin’s defense minister rejected any discussion of debt relief for Iraq, which owes more money to Russia than to any other European nation. The results of Baker’s European trip heartened Bush administration officials because the United States is now working together with all three major opponents of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq on a major aspect of its reconstruction. During a 11/2-hour meeting at the Kremlin, Putin made no specific commitments about how much debt might be erased, officials said, nor was there any public agreement tying debt relief to access for Russian companies to $18.6 billion in U.S.-funded reconstruction contracts in Iraq. The Pentagon last week ruled out giving lead contracts to companies from Russia, Germany, France or other opponents of the war. But members of the U.S. delegation here suggested that countries helping to relieve Iraq’s estimated $120 billion international debt could be looked on with more favor. "If other countries are willing to join the effort in Iraq, conditions can change," said Sean McCormack, a National Security Council spokesman traveling with Baker. If you want to sit at the table, you have to ante up. |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #5 I think the we all know what Otter had in the brief case. Couldn't find the link I wanted. Stumbbled onto this link for movie buffs: Nitpickers. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-12-19 6:01:06 PM |
| #4 "Three for three, wonder just what was in Baker’s briefcase." I think it's more likely a function of what was in Saddam's briefcase. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2003-12-19 3:47:40 PM |
| #3 "wonder just what was in Baker’s briefcase." Hope it wasnt a promise of a weasel veto on political developments in Iraq. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-12-19 1:15:22 PM |
| #2 Love it. The nits at Kevin Drum's left-liberal Calpundit site had been whining about how the denying of contracts to the Weasels was a terrible, stupid move that, being announced in advance of Baker's visit, would cause the visit to fail horribly. Heh-heh, Baker is 3 for 3 with no visible, public concession by us. Bush ends up with the best possible outcome -- the Weasels agree that debt relief has to be done, and he enforces the idea that if you oppose us, you don't share the contracts afterwards. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2003-12-19 12:20:50 PM |
| #1 The negotiations were inevitable. If Iraq had no plans to join the WTO and use the world bank, they could have just refused to honor the debt altogether. As long as the US was willing to buy oil and products from Iraq, sanctions or embargoes would have been ineffective. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-12-19 11:51:04 AM |