DC Bureau - Investigative Journalism, Environmental News, and National Security Stories That Matter

Whilst military experts and commanders mull over their counterinsurgency strategies, Newsweek’s Christopher Dickey suggests that a better plan could have helped build peace in Iraq and Afghanistan- by making sure that electricity is provided.

The United States’ inability to deliver this basic utility has far-reaching consequences. In Iraq, most of the population was used to having electricity, clean water and good roads, but all these had withered away after the war and sanctions, exacerbated by the orgy of looting.  The provision of electricity could have improved the well-being and standard of living of the Iraqis and Afghans, and could have provided them with jobs.

In Kabul earlier this year, Paul Hinks’s company helped build a power plant that came online. Its price tag was $305million even though it should have cost $130million. Part of the expenditure was on runaway security cost, even though it’s right on the outskirts of the capital.

So why is the supply of this basic service so difficult? The answer, according to Paul Hinks, is the overpriced contracts with the U.S. government. This has generated obscene profits for the biggest contractors, but relatively little electricity is provided. These virtually open-ended “cost-plus” deals allow the privileged contractors to keep billing as costs rise, with a disregard for the responsibility of providing the service in an effective manner.

READ MORE AT NEWSWEEK