Bechtel Reponses

Dear Editor,
   Jason Vest's story, "Fables of Reconstruction" [News, Web extra, April 16] illustrates the danger of relying on thirdhand reports for your facts. In particular, it recites incorrect claims about Bechtel's work in Iraq. It quotes an article by two other journalists, who in turn quoted an Iraqi plant manager's claim that Bechtel had failed to supply needed parts to fix a steam generator. The fact is, as we told the original reporters, Bechtel specified what parts were needed, but the Coalition Provisional Authority was responsible for the purchase and delivery of those parts.
   Mr. Vest's story also recycles a quote from the earlier story speculating that work in the power sector was being held up because Russian, German, and French companies could not participate in the rebuilding of Iraq. As we and USAID have stated publicly, Bechtel is free to choose subcontractors from those countries. Indeed, our current list of subcontractors includes two German firms: Siemens and Standard Aggregatebau AG.

   [Jason Vest responds: It's interesting that when Canavan complains about a "recycled quote," the flack doesn't actually reproduce the quote – which was a statement of fact about Bush administration policy barring French, Russian, and German companies from bidding on tenders they might be better suited for as primary contractors, not subcontractors, in Iraq – but rather attempts a disingenuous sleight of hand. I never said anything remotely like "could not participate in the rebuilding of Iraq," and I certainly don't contest the fact that subcontractors in Iraq can be from any nation. And – vis-à-vis both this point and Canavan's bit about Bechtel dutifully "specifying the parts needed," but not being responsible for anything more than that – it's interesting that Canavan invokes the "German" firm Siemens. On Nov. 21, 2003, Siemens announced it had secured a subcontract from Bechtel for work on one electrical plant in Iraq – though it was Siemens UK, the company's wholly owned British component, that got the tender, thanks in part to the ministrations of British trade and industry secretary Patricia Hewitt. (As the Glasgow Herald reported on Aug. 14, 2003, Hewitt "asked the Ministry of Defense to take a more active role in support of British companies seeking reconstruction work. She intervened after an approach from Siemens UK, which was putting together a bid to help repair Iraq's shattered electricity infrastructure – it was perhaps the first sign of a real impetus on the part of the UK government to seriously promote UK business in the war-torn country.") It also bears mentioning – as Canavan doesn't – that under a pre-war UN oil-for-food contract, Germany's Siemens AG was tasked with repairing two turbines at the Daura power plant, which the company originally built. But as Michael Jansen of the Irish Times noted in a Jan. 3, 2004, dispatch – echoing the previous reporting of the Financial Times' John Dizard and the Los Angles Times' superlative David Streitfeld, among others – "Bechtel, the US company given the contract to restore electricity, refused to permit Siemens to finish refurbishing the turbines." It was only after "several months of acrimony" in 2003, that "Bechtel capitulated" and let a Siemens team return. We can only speculate as to how Iraq's electrical situation might have been more expeditiously improved had Siemens been allowed to complete its work under its original contract. According to a Nov. 23, 2003, Newsweek investigation, Siemens subcontractors from at least one other site in Iraq weren't getting the support they needed from Bechtel. While it may be the case that the problems at the Najibaya plant, which I noted from the Chatterjee/Docena story, may be the exclusive domain of the CPA, this isn't what a Bechtel spokesman told Newsweek in response to the magazine's query about why there weren't even any engineers from Bechtel at the Doura power plant. According to that spokesman, individual power plants don't actually matter: "Iraq's power has to be viewed as 'a holistic system' – generation doesn't have to come from a particular plant." As Newsweek noted in its report, getting a straight answer from anyone – contractors, CPA, USAID – about who is actually responsible for what in Iraq is a task fraught with peril, as apparently no one did truly adequate planning, thus creating a situation where both everyone and no one shares accountability for the sorry state of Iraq's infrastructure. Finally, while Bechtel's current list of subcontractors may include Siemens, Canavan doesn't note that many of the actual subcontracting personnel aren't there anymore. On April 23, 2004 – seven days before Canavan apparently wrote AAN the presumptuously titled e-mail "correction" – Siemens announced it was pulling the majority of its personnel out of Iraq due to security concerns.]