Henry Pelifian
Sep 1, 2018 · 7 min read

The Iraq War and Crony Democracy

(originally published in Truthout in January 24, 2007 and no longer available and link is to site which published a portion of article)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x258866

Has our form of government evolved into crony democracy? What is crony democracy and how does it relate to the Iraq War? What is crony capitalism? Let us start with crony capitalism, for it begins there.

Crony Capitalism is the practice of government supporting specific companies or industries for favorable treatment in legislation, government grants, legal permits and beneficial tax laws. The concepts of open competition and free markets do not apply because government active intervenes to assist privileged corporations. In crony capitalism there is a close relationship between government and corporations on how each group’s actions to the other are mutually financially beneficial. Therefore, friends, relatives and political partners receive benefits from elected officials. National laws and regulations are passed providing special permission for particular companies for acquisitions, mergers, real estate transactions, tax benefits. The quid pro quo for republican and democrat politicians are campaign donations, future jobs for themselves or relatives, disguised or hidden perks. Crony democracy occurs when crony capitalism merges with democracy.

President Eisenhower’s warning about the Military Industrial Complex’s undue and adverse influence on the country was prescient and prophetic. Contracts for military hardware were the hallmark of the military industrial complex in his era. Now it has extended and grown to taking over logistic functions of the U.S. military overseas and creating a revolving chair of government and corporate employees securing government contracts domestically and internationally by using high level contacts while in government for private gain. There is no prohibition of our elected and unelected former government officials to work for private companies using their influence with to assist in securing high value contracts with foreign officials and their governments they formerly had official contact with.

What makes it vastly different today from Eisenhower’s era regarding business and government? In Iraq there also has been a merging of oil services companies, such as Brown and Root and its subsidiary Halliburton providing direct services to the U.S. military in Iraq. The use of one hundred thousand highly paid private security personnel which some call mercenaries is also unprecedented in such numbers for the United States government.

The extent of business contracts with corporations has vastly increased with literally hundreds of billions of dollars of U.S. government contracts annually involving revolving chairs of politicians, military personnel and retired government officials. The scope of the military industrial complex hiring retired military personnel and former government officials has also increased commensurate with the increase in the value of government contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

A prime example of crony capitalism extensively outlined in Robert Bryce’s book Cronies is the company Brown and Root with its subsidiary Halliburton garnering billions of dollars of government contracts in Iraq with Vice-President Dick Cheney as Halliburton’s former Chief Executive Officer. Cheney traded his government contacts when he was hired by Halliburton for domestic and foreign contracts with people he formerly had conducted official business between their country and the United States. There was no conflict of interest charge against Cheney when his former firm Halliburton secured billions of dollars of U.S. government contracts in Iraq. This is all apparently legal. Influence peddling for personal profit is legal.

Mr. Bryce in his book states that Dick Cheney departed Halliburton with a retirement package worth $33.7 million dollars shortly before being sworn in as Vice-President of the United States. Vice-President has also received deferred compensation from Halliburton totaling nearly $400,000 dollars while in office.

In Cronies by Mr. Byrce, it is clear why Halliburton hired Mr. Cheney, for he “knew how to vacuum up federal money and federal contracts. During Cheney’s tenure Halliburton nearly doubled the amount of federal contracts to $2.3 billion dollars.” Also, Cheney assisted the parent company, Brown & Root in receiving a 15 fold increase in federally backed loans and insurance from the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. Prior to Cheney’s arrival the company had received about $100 million dollars in guarantees from these two government agencies. Mr. Cheney understood the importance of lobbying, for he doubled political donations while at Halliburton.

According to the Center for Public Integrity seventy companies and individuals who were substantial contributors to the Bush-Cheney campaign have been awarded billions of dollars in contracts in Iraq.

Have we become a nation of lobbyists, for lobbyists and by lobbyists? The money chain links political candidates, government appointees, corporations, government contracts and lobbyists. The chain includes interchangeable employment with each successive administration from government officials to corporate CEO or lobbyist. The goal is profit at government expense. Is this major reason and cause for the constant and rapid rise of government deficits and debt? Can effective and efficient government ever be the outcome of such a system? What is the financial calculation of waste and abuse in such a system? Is this the best method for conducting the people business called the public sector?

What Dick Cheney did was apparently legal. However, should it be legal for former government employees to use their prior government experience to enrich themselves in government contracts? What is the public interest? Is it in the public interest? The question is not only about Cheney, but what of the other countless number of government and military employees who trade their government experience and influence for private gain. When is former government service, especially by high ranking officials an abuse of the trust put in them by using their influence for private gain? Our Congress appears mute on this subject.

The question we Americans ought to pose: Is self-interest or public interest the goal of elected officials? Is elected office just another avenue to gain access to wealth and privilege? Should there be a long-term prohibition of elected officials and retired military personnel from working with firms the government has done business with? Is self-interest synonymous and analogous to the public interest in our democracy? If it is not, why is it possible for government officials to take jobs with companies whose revenues and profits rely on domestic or foreign government contracts with people they dealt with in their official capacity?

We may have now embarked upon a new age of crony democracy where each of the two major parties Democrat and Republican, exclusively harness millions of dollars from corporations and others to campaign for public office. Retired politicians and government personnel and their relatives may eventually work for corporations requiring access to government. Crony democracy requires cronies. Partners of the Baker Botts firm have been appointed to such jobs as Ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Department of Justice lawyer heading up the anti-trust division with oversight over energy issues. Is former Secretary of State James Baker III whose law firm, Baker Botts handles the legal affairs of Halliburton, Exxon-Mobile and assortment of major companies part of the crony democracy camp relying on government connections for annual revenues of $362 million dollars according to the book Cronies?

Has the U.S. government been co-opted by a new class of American Mandarins from each of the major political parties-democrat and republican- making decisions that are woven inextricably with private profit considerations? Has either party actively prohibited this crony capitalism and crony democracy?

Crony capitalism has now merged with crony democracy where the political party may be more important than country. Why the strong resistance to more political parties by the democrats and republicans? Is it more about access to the government trough? Federal spending is now a major component of the U.S. economy or good or ill. Is preventing political change a conspiracy by democrats and republicans?

The group think in the Congress provided President Bush the authorization to use force against Iraq is an outcome of crony democracy where two tightly controlled political parties are not interested in true debate for the improvement of the country, but rather in the power to pass legislation favorable to their primary financial backers. Had there been several more political parties in the Congress there is less likelihood of group think and vastly more opportunity for true debate of the crucial issues facing the country. Instead, we get an approval and authorization for war by the United States Congress in a matter of days.

A pertinent example is the recent election of a Democrat Congressman Michael Arcuri from central New York who in an interview recently with his district’s only major newspaper said his focus for the first 100 days in office is “to get legislation passed with regard to student loans. Also minimum wage will be an immediate priority, and stem cell research.”

Those are the new Congressman’s priorities, not the Iraq war killing and maiming tens of thousands of people that our government initiated at a cost to the nation of nearly $400 billion dollars and future costs of over one trillion dollars according to economists. One might think that the Iraq war would be the Congressman’s top priority, but it isn’t. Why did the Congressman omit the Iraq war as one of his top priorities? Is it because the party has provided talking points on what is acceptable and permissible to discuss? If he wants to remain a candidate for the party he cannot stray too far from the script provided. Group think of each major political party is a component of crony democracy and it is how our government conducts business.

Is it plausible for Americans to ask the question: Were the corporations that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had close relationships with a factor in the decision making process to attack Iraq since many of these companies secured multi-million or multi billion dollar government contracts as a result of the Iraq war? Were government contracts directly relating to the war in Iraq signed with companies with Bush-Cheney –Rumsfeld connections prior to the attack on Iraq?

The answer is not in stars, it is in intense scrutiny of the ever widening circle in the Military Industrial Complex implementing legislation that is currently absent from curtailing or curbing or eliminating this new age of crony capitalism and crony democracy that has descended like a thief in the night upon the American people and their government.

Henry Pelifian

Written by

Thailand, Malaysia & Iran. Vietnam Veteran, former Peace Corps volunteer, Public & Private sectors. Truth is often friendless while lies are crowded with cash.