July 27, 2003


Laundering Saddam's Cash - Literally

Here's an interesting job - escorting money. The cash that has been taken from Saddam's palaces and other places in Iraq is being authenticated and put back into circulation in Iraq, and it's up to a bunch of Soldiers from Iowa to move the money

The Army calls it a "finance mission," which sounds pretty dull. Until the MPs with the machine guns tell the Iowa National Guard truck drivers what they'll be hauling.

It's $50 million cash, part of the hundreds of millions of dollars stashed away by Saddam Hussein and located by American troops after the fall of Baghdad.

On this day, Friday of last week, the soldiers of the Guard's 1168th Transportation Company are carrying a pallet-load of Saddam's cash to the airport in Kuwait City an hour away.

To the men and women of the Red Oak-based unit, it's sort of fun, but not really a big deal.

"I know for a fact our unit has transported over $2 billion since we've been here," said 1st Sgt. David Carstens of Panora. The 1168th has carried more than $100 million in a single trip to the airport.
...
Keeping going is a very big part of this operation. The convoy hits the four-lane highway outside the base, and the MPs block every intersection.

Nothing - not red lights, not cross traffic - stops the trucks.

"We're too vulnerable if we stop," Slack said. "This would seem to be a safe mission in what has been a fairly safe area. But you never know, especially when you haul this kind of cargo."

The soldiers hurry past sheep herders and camels roaming around the desert. They pass pickups and small trucks jammed with shaggy, long-eared sheep.

"Must be sale-barn day," said Sgt. James Kastner, 23, a farmer-welder-truck driver from Bagley.

Kastner and his partner, Sgt. Jason Cowell, 25, of Northwood, chat about their time here as they beat the early-morning traffic into Kuwait City. Cowell talks about the poverty they saw in southern Iraq on one of their missions north.

"Little kids, some of them 2 years old, standing out in this heat - 130 degrees, no shoes - begging for food, rubbing their tummies," he said. "I never imagined poverty like that."

I hope some of that cash finds its way back to the family of that child.

posted by Jo Fish on 07.27.03 at 10:41 PM





Comments:

Cash convoys to Kuwait, huh? Doesn't sound to me like those bills are gonna end up back in Baghdad.

posted by: Lurch on 07.28.03 at 05:58 AM [permalink]



What does International Law provide with respect to this cash, as well as other assets confiscated by the U.S. and Britain? Is there such a thing as a "Prudent Conquerer" rule that requires preservation of such assets?

posted by: Shag from Brookline on 07.28.03 at 06:35 AM [permalink]



Hey, Shag, here's one answer, from an official US Government site.
http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2003/20693.htm

My first thought about all this is that the citation only addresses "state" funds and not those judged or assumed to be "personal property" of any of the Husseins. Whether or not that's a moot question is immaterial in International Law. Since Mr. Lanzilotti only addresses the issue of state funds, and not personal property, I'd be willing to speculate that any cash found anywhere will be deemed "personal property" and will disappear - somewhere.

It's common wisdom that in dictatorships the assets of the dictator and the state become easily mixed, and quite often the dictator views the state funds as his own.

There's a brief discussion of this here:
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1912/a09.html?341

Here's a report of an individual's assets being seized in forfeiture because of linkage to terrorism.
http://www.ict.org.il/spotlight/det.cfm?id=94

There's a .pdf file from a Tulsa oil lawyer about what's *supposed* to happen to Iraqi oil here.
www.energy.uh.edu/documents/behind_the_gas_pump/ Langenkamp_FullPaper.pdf

But, again, barrels of oil, pieces of anitquitarian history and documented funds recorded as assets of the Iraqi government are properly protected by international law.

Cash is so nice, so portable, and so untraceable. Is Saddam going to pop in one day at Mr. Bremer's palace and ask for his $100 million in hundred dollar bills? I suppose Mr. Bremer would ask him to prove it was his.

posted by: Lurch on 07.28.03 at 01:40 PM [permalink]



Lurch,
Although I am not well versed in international law, if the private funds or assets of Saddam were stolen from the state, the state should have a valid claim for those private funds or assets. So the state's claim should be stronger that the finder's forfeiture claim against Saddam. Maybe we can get Baker Botts to take this on a contingency.

posted by: Shag from Brookline on 07.28.03 at 04:42 PM [permalink]



Hey, Shag, props to you for a good logical argument.

Now: go prove to the 1600 crew that the cash was really Iraq's and not Saddam's.

And I know you will accept the "honest count" of the cash that may or may not eventually surface for public consumption. I trust 'em.

Don't you?

posted by: Lurch on 07.29.03 at 06:45 AM [permalink]



In an odd twist to this this story, a related piece proves once again proves that serendipity in news exists.

Seventeen US POWs from Gulf War I sued the Iraqi Government after their release because they were tortured. Their lawsuit wound its way through the Federal Court system and they prevailed.

They were awarded $653 million for damages.

Simultaneously, Occupant Codpiece had ordered the freezing of Iraqi assets in the US, amounting to some $1.7 Billion.

Sounds like a slam dunk, neh?

Naw.

The Administration that loves and supports its troops far better and more than those evil Democrats who are objectively pro-Saddam claims the vets can't be paid from this $1.7 Billion, because it needs that money to pay off Halliburton, Bechtel, and KBR.

Here's the money quote:

" ...John Choon Yoo, who until recently was a Justice Department lawyer specializing in international issues, said the prisoners' suit was dangerous. 'I terrifically sympathize with their personal situation and what they went through,' he said, 'but the use of the courts and damages remedies interferes with the president's conduct of foreign policy.'..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/29/politics/29POW.html?th

posted by: Lurch on 07.29.03 at 09:26 AM [permalink]






Post a Comment:

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?



















usdemvet -at- hotmail.com
or
usndemvet -at- usdemvet.com (coming soon)






All the original material © 2002-2003 Jo Fish
steal what you want, all I ask is an attribution of some sort
Thanks