Questions about Iraq baffle officials, observers

When asked what should be done in Iraq, Mark Houben shrugged his shoulders, scratched his head… When asked what should be done in Iraq, Mark Houben shrugged his shoulders, scratched his head and said, “I don’t know.”

Houben’s answer doesn’t differ from that of many Americans, but he does have a different perspective. Houben, an expert officer on the ground in Basra, Iraq, visited the University Honors College on Friday to talk about the post-war reconstruction. He shared his first-hand experience, telling stories of failed efforts and answering the nagging question on the minds of students and faculty in attendance: “What should have been done?”

Houben works as the Netherlands Liaison Officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority, allocating money to rebuild the fallen nation. The CPA acted as the temporary governing body of Iraq, designated by the United Nations until the transfer of sovereignty to the interim Iraqi government took place in June 2004.

Since the newly elected have taken office, Houben has witnessed discord between the Iraqi people and organizations like the CPA, which seeks to help them, he said.

“Instead of creating a beacon of democracy, we ended up with a black hole,” Houben said, as some audience members frowned and shook their heads.

He said the plan of reconstructing a post-war Iraq is — “in a sense” — failing because the CPA has neglected to help the newly formed government become credible, capable and stable.

“Elect these bodies and energize them — that is the trick to success, and it is not being played in Iraq,” he said firmly, emphasizing what he called the new face of international crisis management.

Houben also stated that empty promises made by the CPA to the Iraqi people are to blame for failure and mistrust. He said that it “promised the heaven” to the Iraqi people, raising their expectations for results. When it did not deliver, the people lost faith.

The CPA did not live up to all of its promises because most were unrealistic. More importantly, he said, the money for CPA to fund reconstruction was not adequate in Baghdad. Projects designed to improve the conditions of daily life — building new schools and hospitals, purifying water systems and providing other essential services — were done, but the people still grew dissatisfied.

“Would you trust someone who can’t organize the practical side of things with your political future?” Houben asked.

Houben also stressed the importance of crafting a foolproof strategy to successfully rebuild a nation, listing seven cardinal rules he created. One rule stressed a “window of opportunity” that exists in the first 100 days after a takeover, a time which should be used to significantly improve the lives of the ordinary people.

But Houben has seen that window close. While he acknowledged that his answer of not knowing what should be done was not the most reassuring, he ended his lecture with a positive message.

“I think that there is hope left, even if it is against all odds,” he said.

“We have to hope for the Iraqi people, because to give up on them would be inhumane,” he added.

Pitt student Patrick Kirts, a philosophy and classics major, thought it was refreshing to hear someone with expertise, and not the media, speak on Iraq’s issues.

“It confirmed a lot of what I thought,” he said.

Brian Sadacca, a neuroscience and philosophy major, said the speech was disheartening because it focused on all the things that were done wrong, but he thought it was insightful.

Edward Mccord, director of programming for the Honors College, described Houben’s lecture as a pleasant surprise.

Houben ended with a strong but powerful warning to the audience.

“We must make sure that we learn our lessons,” he said. “Otherwise we will have another Iraq in years to come.”