From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I deleted a big chunk of material here - so feel free to disagree. The main reasons were:

  • whatever went on with Chalabi in Jordon it is clear he was not a ruler of Jordon but a businessman;
  • I don't see the advocacy/implementation of privatization polices as the same as kleptocracy - the former is ideological in the belief that private ownership will benefit all society in the long run; kleptocracy is theft of public wealth for personal benefit without the pretence of public interest; even where privatization benefits supporters/party donors etc I don't see it as being in the same league as the Suharto military regime.
  • to reduce kleptocracy to US terms I think is to devalue the meaning of the term. While I can understand the use of kleptocracy as a rhetorical flourish in a North American context its a very very big stretch to equate Bush/Clinton etc with Ferdinand Marcos or the Abacha regime;
  • I'm not persuaded that kleptocrats are or need to be popular - they are usually tyrants relying on the military to maintain their grip on power.
  • I though the key issue with Charles Taylor in Liberia was more the diamond trade/mines in Liberia and Sierra Leone (the 'blood diamonds')than logging. -- bob