Must We Help Reconstruct Iraq?

Secondly, because our assistance will support a rapid transition to an independent and democratic government in Iraq. And thirdly, because it is very much in all of our interests to contribute to regional stability in the Middle East.

Today in Madrid around 70 countries will set out their initial contributions to the reconstruction of a country torn apart by thirty years of brutal dictatorship and conflict. Attention in the run up, and on the day itself, will no doubt focus on hurried tallies of just how far the combined sums reach or, inevitably, fall short, of the huge figures bolted together from the careful assessments of the World Bank, UN and others by observers eager to decry failure. But crude cumulation of the contributions misses the point. This is not a bargain sale, where we needn’t mind the quality, just feel the weight.

Take the contribution from the European Union’s budget, for example. This is money that comes from the joint pot of money for external spending, into which the member countries contribute. The Commission has agreed to contribute €200m until the end of 2004. Together with EU countries’ individual contributions, the EU as a whole will be contributing some €750m to reconstruction in Iraq over the next year, when its needs are likely to be greatest. This comes on top of the €100m that we have already earmarked for humanitarian relief in Iraq, and have been spending since March this year.

The level of assistance from the EU budget is comparable to our annual commitment in Afghanistan, although in that case we were able to set out a pledge for a five-year period. We are setting out today our proposed funding for Iraq until the end of 2004. Last week we also undertook to report to EU foreign ministers in March next year, setting out the Commission’s medium-term strategy for Iraq. I hope and trust that we will be able to accompany that report with plans for future reconstruction expenditure. It will clearly be easiest to consider possible multi-annual pledges when the political and security situation is clearer.

Our experience in Iraq, together with that of other organizations, has shown that conditions on the ground will be key to eventual success, and that they are difficult. I value in particular the advice and experience of the United Nations, whose tragic loss of Sérgio Vieira de Mello and so many other dedicated UN personnel in August brought home in unspeakable terms just how dangerous the situation remains. And we know from our experience operating in difficult countries across the world that it is no good offering vast sums, if there is no realistic prospect of seeing them spent where and how they are needed.

That is why we have spelt out the circumstances that need to be in place for the money pledged today to be put to good use. We need an improvement in the security situation, which will need more effective action by the military, and efforts to expand and improve civilian policing. We need a clear commitment to the establishment of a sovereign Iraqi government, which I am glad to say moved closer with last week’s UN Security Council Resolution. We need the creation of a transparent and operational multilateral framework for reconstruction, recognized by the establishment of a UN and World Bank Multi-Donor Trust Fund to channel reconstruction funds. And we need the involvement of Iraq’s neighbors, to establish the context of regional co-operation essential to long-term stability in Iraq.

These are not outlandish conditions. They tally with the findings of the UN-led Needs Assessment report, which found an inadequate safety environment, and noted that "the scale of the needs identified across all the sectors would require a level of planning and implementation capacity that would tax even the most advanced economy". I draw two lessons from this. First, we have to be realistic in our ambitions for the short term, and focus on getting Iraq back on its feet. Second, and more hopefully, I look forward to Iraq being once again an advanced economy, and being in a position to govern and administer its own development. That after all is our collective goal. The possibility is there. In the late 1970s Iraq’s GDP per capita was greater than Portugal’s. Before Saddam’s murderous dictatorship it nurtured a long tradition of valuing education and commerce. And it is of course rich in natural resources, albeit unable fully to exploit them for now.

The EU is well placed to respond. The Commission spends over €6.5bn every year on external assistance throughout the world. We work in partnership with governments in the recipient countries, and co-ordinate our work on the ground with other donors. In the Middle East alone we spent some €550m last year.

The EU will not, of course, be alone in Madrid. Countries from across the globe – including, I am very pleased to see, some of Iraq’s regional neighbors – have shown that they can come together in peace despite the divisions of the war. They are responding to a clear need to re-establish shattered infrastructure and decayed public services, to provide roads, power, water, healthcare, education, policing and a range of other needs.

We should go into today’s conference with a down-to-earth view of what we can achieve in the short term, while allowing ourselves a dose of optimism at the thought of what the Iraqi people can do in the longer term. Of course, we should not let them down by pretending that simply throwing money at this problem will fix it. We should make sure that we apply the lessons we have learned about spending money wisely, and that we remain committed and engaged to ensure a democratic and prosperous future for the Iraqi people. After so much suffering, we owe them at least that.

* Mr. Patten is Commissioner for External Relations for the EU.