The ‘MENA’ region and the International Monetary Fund http://londonprogressivejournal.com/article/view/1474/the-mena-region-and-the-international-monetary-fund To understand what is currently happening in Syria
it’s also necessary to see what Syria was like before 2011. What was
Syria like before, politically and economically? There, we find
Western European and US leadership circles focusing on the MENA region
(Middle East/North Africa). We find a series of sanctions placed on
Syria by the US/EU nexus. We find the International Monetary Fund
continuously demanding uniform economic policies, drawing those
countries and regions into its financial system. We find the IMF waiting
for its opportunity to move in. Syria before 2011 Syria,
like Iraq, Libya and Iran, had followed an economic model that was more
state-centered. Syria established a central bank, rather than banks
that are subsidiaries of large international consortiums. Syria
maintained subsidization policies providing low cost food items and
transportation petrol, heating and cooking fuel, along with low cost or
free university education and health care, public transportation.
Whatever other internal policies have been deemed repressive by certain
segments of the population, it is clear that many economic policies,
state-directed, had provided support in terms of basic and beyond-basic
services to millions.Though exporting less oil in comparison to other countries in the MENA region (e.g. Libya, Iraq and Iran), Syria’s oil industry has still accounted for anywhere between 16 to 25% of its budgetary income over the years, with Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands among its customers. To finance infrastructural projects, Syria had borrowed monies from Eastern European countries and strategic-partner Russia, as well as Western Europe and from IMF-brokered loans and US aid for infrastructural projects in the hundreds of millions of dollars in the 1970s and 1980s when Syria was run by Bashar al-Asad’s father, Hafez al-Asad. But, in contrast to many other countries of the world ranked as ‘lower middle income countries’ by the IMF, Syria was able to avoid the deep sinkhole of debilitating and long term debt. The reason for this lies with Syria over the years receiving aid-grants from Libya, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, which it did not have to pay back. The largest amount Syria owed was to the Soviet
Union, now Russia, where 80% of its $13 billion debt was written off by
Russia in 2005. [1]
In fact, Syria has managed to steadily reduce its ‘long term external debt’,
according to a recent World Bank report, from a 1995 high of $16.995
billion to a turn-around drop in 2005 to $ 5.007 billion, mostly due to
the Russian write off of 80% of Syria’s debt, to the 2010 figure of $
4.171 billion. But what is most interesting is that in the category
labeled ‘use of IMF credit’
in this same report, all that can be seen are a row of zeros from 1995
to 2010, meaning that Syria did not rely on the IMF for any loans for
that fifteen year period. [2]
Syria, like Iran and Libya, is not beholden to the IMF/World Bank for
any loans, which would seem to be an unusual phenomenon in our present
era of ‘globalization’.
US and Western Pressures on Syria and the MENA countries
In
one form or another, Syria and other MENA countries such as Libya, Iraq
and Iran have been subjected to intense political and military
pressures which have been both covertly and overtly engineered by the US
and certain allied countries. It was the Neocon planners’ focus on the
Middle East prior to the 9/11 event in 2001 (e.g. the US-based ‘Energy
Infrastructure Planning Group’ or EIPG), which led to the US invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq, followed by US sponsorship and arming of
opposition forces in Libya and Syria, intense and widespread sanctions
policies on Iran backed by the EU, the Gulf sheikdoms and Turkey, and
continuous military actions and threats by the US and Israel.The US has aggressively applied and advocated continuous sanctions
policies against Syria for its military and political presence in
Lebanon up to 2005. Yet, it has been internationally agreed upon and
recognized that Syria had played a stabilizing role in Lebanon when
various armed factions, some aligned with Israel in its invasion of that
country in 1982, had created absolute chaos and destruction, including
the massacre of Palestinian men, women and children in the refugee camps
of Sabra and Shatilla by the Phalangists.
It was the presence of the Syrian armed forces that helped to stabilize
the country after 15 years of war, beginning in 1975 and ending in 1990. [3]
But
these rationalizations cover up the actual goal of
internationally-based institutions and elites for certain desired
economic outcomes. Economic pressures have been applied to Syria for
some time, intersecting with the other pressures applied to this
country. Two months before the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the US
continued its pressure on Syria when Congress passed in January the
‘Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act’,
condemning Syria’s political and military presence in Lebanon. The US
led the way in 2005 in targeting Syria’s nationalized bank, the
Commercial Bank of Syria; by specifically placing this bank under
sanctions, which was added onto the US Patriot Act. The US charged that
the bank was involved in ‘money laundering’; a charge usually associated
with gangster-like financial activity and that could just as easily be
applied to banks in the Americas needing to be investigated, which would
of course include US banks, within an atmosphere of immense profits
being created by the narcotics industry using front companies or
personalities to open accounts. But in the case of Syria, the money
laundering charge was levied against the Syrian government for accounts
that were tied to regional and well known political players Hamas and
Hezbollah, both branded as ‘terrorist’ organizations by the US, but
which are in opposition to US and Israeli actions and policies in the
region. The charge, then, can be clearly seen to be politically
motivated.
[ed notes:click link for whole article..
Pro-Western Parties’ Loss in Election Shows Georgians Learned Lessons from
Ukraine
-
Islam Times - With the start of the war in Ukraine that has left massive
impacts on the world's geopolitical issues, the Caucasus region has begun
to have ...
4 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment