Aid groups say the crisis in Ethiopia was the worst since 1984, when a famine captured the world's attention and killed around one million people. The current drought, in a country where more than 80 per cent of its 79 million people live off the land, has been compounded by global food price rises. The famine comes as Ethiopian troops fight a bloody battle [in] Somalia, backing the government against Islamic insurgents.
The Telegraph (UK) 9 June 2008
On the face of it, there is absolutely no correlation between the Ethiopian famine and its intervention in neighboring Somalia.
Nor is there a link between the events in the Horn of Africa and the American invasion of Iraq and its aftermath.
Except for this: sustainability, and "affordability." Just as a thoughtful observer might reflect "What the hell are the Ethiopians doing... occupying a neighboring country when they can't feed their own people?..." so too might that same question be asked of the United States in Iraq. "What the hell are the Americans still doing in Iraq when _____?" Here you get to fill in the blank:
- they allow huge swaths of their population to go without health care?
- bridges collapse, cities sink because "it's too expensive" to fix them?
- millions are evicted from their homes, and the financial system teeters?
- they allow the dollar to fall through the floor, and China owns what's left?
War, which leaders assure us they want to avoid at the very time that they are sharpening their swords, is an expensive matter. In the case of Iraq, Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz puts it at 3 trillion dollars. Ethiopia, which is waging its war in Somalia with the encouragement of the United States, is presumably getting aid from same, but there is an opportunity cost. Money spent on military hardware is often in place of, not in addition to, spending on helping the Ethiopias of the world grow food. And where does the money for US military aid really come from? If the Bush Administration has run budget deficits since it came to office, which it has, then isn't much of government spending like a national credit card? See reference to China, above.
Which brings me back to Iraq. This Administration likes to outsource things that used to be the prerogative of governments. Like the contracting out of security, infrastructure, even intelligence functions, in Iraq. If you can't win their hearts and minds with your power or principles, you just open up your purse strings. This is from "Buying Security in Baghdad" by Anna Badhken in last month's Salon.com:
[In a Baghdad neighborhood] ... the U.S. military here pays a monthly salary of approximately $300 to about 300 people, [Sgt. James] Braet says. Some of them work on the neighborhood council, and some of them are members of a pro-government Sunni militia called Sons of Iraq.
"I'd say 80 percent of these people we pay don't do anything," Braet said. "It's just free money"
"So, in other words, you are buying security," I say. "Pretty much," he responds, and goes back to his steak.
I figure that if the population of Iraq is about 26 million, and if around 7 million of those are adult males (sorry, ladies, but you probably don't have to be paid not to kill), it would cost, at the rate of $300 x 7 million = $2.1 billion a month to buy peace in Iraq. For some reason, this free-market (of sorts) approach to peace purchasing hasn't gotten sufficient attention. It might have to do with scruples about noble causes.
$2 billion a month. The US is currently spending about $12 billion per month in Iraq. This money is not only "off budget" in the form of funding "supplementals," it's also "off shore." It's money that the US has to "borrow" from China and Gulf oil investors who currently deign to buy US debt. So, in one sweeping feat of Bushite outsourcing, I say let's NOT "cut out the middleman" - let's bring him in on the deal: outsource the occupation of Iraq to China. China has few scruples about dealing with dodgy governments in its quest for raw materials for the Chinese industrial machine. China might not quibble about human rights, freedom of the press, all those things that the US government spends lots of effort promoting. China just wants whatever raw materials you possess, thank you. Maybe they'll even get Iraq's huge oil reserves secured and sell us what they can't use. With $10 billion saved every month, we might be able to afford some.
Iraq has oil; China needs oil. The US needs out. We can't afford Iraq. They can.
Now, on Ethiopia's famine and Somalia dilemma: do they have anything that China can buy?