Saddam's Damn Dam

Saddam's Damn Dam
By Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, November 06, 2007

The surge of U.S. troops in Baghdad is succeeding but deeper
structural problems continue to plague the American presence in Iraq.
The country's largest dam, 40 kilometers northwest of Mosul, near the
Turkish border, spectacularly symbolizes this predicament.
Just after occupying Iraq in April 2003, a report found that Mosul
Dam's foundation was "leaking like a sieve and ready to collapse." A
more recent, still-classified report from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers concludes that "The dam is judged to have an unacceptable
annual failure probability." More explicitly, the corps finds the
current probability of failure to be "exceptionally high." A senior
aid worker calls the dam "a time bomb waiting to go off."

That's because the dam was built on unstable bedrock of gypsum that
requires a constant infusion of grout to prevent the foundation from
eroding and the giant earthen wall from collapsing. Over the years,
engineers have pumped into the foundation more than 50,000 tons of a
bentonite, cement, water, and air mixture. As the Washington Post
explains, "Twenty-four clanging machines churn 24 hours a day to pump
grout deep into the dam's base. And sinkholes form periodically as the
gypsum dissolves beneath the structure."

Despite these efforts, the dam's condition continues to deteriorate,
raising the prospect of its complete collapse. Were this to happen
with a reservoir full of water, predicts Engineering News-Record, "as
much as 12.5 billion cubic meters of water pooled behind the 3.2-km-
long earth-filled impoundment [would go] thundering down the Tigris
River Valley toward Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq. The wave
behind the 110-meter-high crest would take about two hours to reach
the city of 1.7 million." In addition, parts of Baghdad (population 7
million) would come under 5 meters of water.

The Army Corps estimates the flood would kill a half-million people
immediately, while the aftershocks, such as power outage and drought,
would kill many more. (Not coincidentally, Iraq was the site of Noah's
Ark.) It would likely be the largest human-induced single loss of life
in history.

Many Iraqi officials, unfortunately, exhibit a cavalier attitude
toward these dangers, further exacerbating the problem. They reject as
unnecessary, for example, the Army Corps recommendation to build a
second dam downstream as a back-up.

Yet, were a catastrophic failure to take place, who would be blamed
for the unprecedented loss of life? Americans, of course. And
understandably so, for the Bush administration took upon itself the
overhauling of Iraqi life, including the Mosul Dam. Specifically, the
U.S. taxpayer funded attempts to shore it up by with improved
grouting, at a cost of US$27 million. The Special Inspector General
for Iraq Reconstruction has, however, judged these efforts mismanaged
and ineffective.

Massive Iraqi deaths would surely spawn conspiracy theories about
American malevolence, inspiring epic rage against the U.S. government
and creating a deep sense of guilt among Americans themselves. Yet,
this blame and remorse would be entirely misplaced.

Saudi and other Arab aid - not U.S. monies - funded what was
originally called the "Saddam Dam." A German-Italian consortium headed
by Hochtief Aktiengesellschaft built the US$1.5 billion structure in
1981-84. It had a primarily political goal, to bolster Saddam
Hussein's regime during the Iran-Iraq war. The dam, in other words,
had nothing to do with the United States - not in funding,
construction, or purpose. Nonetheless, misbegotten American policy has
made it an American headache.

Mosul's dam replicates a myriad of lesser problems in Iraqi life that
have landed in the lap of Americans (and, to a much lesser extent,
their coalition partners), such as provisioning fuel and electricity,
working schools and hospitals, a fair political and legal system, and
an environment secure from terrorism.

Since April 2003, I have argued that this shouldering of
responsibility for Iraq's domestic life has harmed both Americans and
Iraqis. It yokes Americans with unwanted and unnecessary loss of life,
financial obligations, and political burdens. For Iraqis, as the dam
example suggests, it encourages an irresponsibility with potentially
ruinous consequences.

A change of course is needed, and quickly. The Bush administration
needs to hand back responsibility for Iraq's ills, including and
especially the Mosul Dam. More broadly, it should abandon the deeply
flawed and upside-down approach of "war as social work," whereby U.S.
military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to
the defeated enemy, rather than to Americans.

.

Quantcast