United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Committee on Foreign Affairs, 

Subcommittee on International 

Organizations, Human Rights, and 

Oversight, U.S. House of Representatives 

STABILIZING AND 

REBUILDING IRAQ 

Coalition Support and 

International Donor 

Commitments 

Statement of Joseph A. Christoff, Director 

International Affairs and Trade 

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT

Wednesday, May 9, 2007

 

GAO-07-827T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

May 9, 2007

STABILIZING AND REBUILDING IRAQ

Coalition Support and International Donor 

Highlights of GAO-07-827T, a testimony Commitments 

before the House Committee on Foreign 

Affairs, Subcommittee on International 

Organizations, Human Rights, and 

Oversight 

As of May 2007, 25 countries were contributing 12,600 troops to 

multinational forces in Iraq. Compared with 145,000 U.S. troops, coalition 

countries represent about 8 percent of multinational forces in Iraq. From 

December 2003 through May 2007, the number of coalition troops decreased 

from 24,000 to 12,600; the number of coalition nations contributing troops 

decreased from 33 to 25. The United Kingdom, Poland, and Republic of 

Korea are responsible for leading operations in three of seven security 

sectors in Iraq. In addition, coalition troops have performed humanitarian, 

medical, and reconstruction missions. Some have provided combat 

capabilities, such as infantry and explosive ordnance capabilities. 

The United States has spent about $1.5 billion to transport, sustain, and 

provide other services for military troops from 20 countries other than the 

United States and Iraq. The United States used about $1 billion of the $1.5 

billion to feed, house, and equip these countries. In terms of allocation by 

country, about $988 million, or 66 percent, was used to support Poland and 

the countries under its command, and $300 million, or 20 percent, supported 

Jordan for border operations and other activities. In addition to support for 

operations in Iraq, the United States, through the State Department, has 

provided about $1.9 billion in security assistance for military training and 

equipment to 10 coalition members and Jordan since 2003. 

As of April 2007, international donors had pledged about $14.9 billion for 

reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Some countries exceeded their pledges by an 

additional $744 million for a total of $15.6 billion. About $11 billion, or 70 

percent, of these pledges are loans, with the remaining $4.6 billion in the 

form of grants. As of April 2007, Iraq had accessed about $436 million in 

loans and $3 billion in grants. 

U.S. and Coalition Troops in Iraq 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Coalition troops

U.S. troops

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data.

Dec.

2003

Year

July

2004

Dec.

2004

July

2005

Dec.

2005

July

2006

May

2007

Dec.

2006

Troops in thousands

126.9 126.8

152.3 155.1

139.2 145.0

133.5 131.5

24.0 22.0 25.0 23.0 23.0 19.0 15.2 12.6

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-827T. 

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Joseph A. 

Christoff at (202) 512-8979 or 

christoffj@gao.gov. 

In March 2003, a U.S.-led 

multinational force began 

operations in Iraq. At that time, 48

nations, identified as a “coalition of 

the willing,” offered political, 

military, and financial support for 

U.S. efforts in Iraq, with 38 nations 

other than the United States 

providing troops. In addition, 

international donors met in Madrid 

in October 2003 to pledge funding

for the reconstruction of Iraq’s 

infrastructure, which had 

deteriorated after multiple wars 

and decades of neglect under the 

previous regime. 

This testimony discusses (1) the

troop commitments other countries 

have made to operations in Iraq, (2) 

the funding the United States has 

provided to support other

countries’ participation in the

multinational force, and (3) the

financial support international 

donors have provided to Iraq 

reconstruction efforts.

This testimony is based on GAO's 

prior work and data collected for 

this hearing. Although we reviewed

both classified and unclassified 

documents, the information in this 

statement is based only on 

unclassified documents. We

completed this work in accordance

with generally accepted 

government auditing standards.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss U.S. support for non-U.S. coalition 

troops1

 in Iraq and international donor support for reconstruction in Iraq. 

In March 2003, a U.S.-led multinational force began operations in Iraq. At 

that time, 48 nations (in addition to the United States), identified as a 

“coalition of the willing,” offered political, military, and financial support 

for U.S. efforts in Iraq. In addition, international donors met in Madrid in 

October 2003 to pledge funding for the reconstruction of Iraq’s 

infrastructure, which had deteriorated after multiple wars and decades of 

neglect under the previous regime. 

My testimony today discusses (1) the troop commitments other countries 

have made to the multinational force in Iraq, (2) the funding the United 

States has provided to support other countries’ participation in the 

multinational force, and (3) the financial support international donors 

have provided to Iraq reconstruction efforts. This testimony is based on 

prior GAO reports and on data collected for this hearing. Although we 

reviewed both classified and unclassified documents, the information in 

this statement is based only on unclassified U.S. government documents. 

This limits the detail we can provide on coalition troop strength in Iraq 

since DOD classifies the specific troop levels for each coalition country 

that contributes to operations in Iraq. Accordingly, this statement only 

provides aggregate data on total coalition troop levels in Iraq.

We obtained financial data on the funding the United States has provided 

to non-U.S. coalition troops operating in Iraq from the Departments of 

Defense (DOD) and State. For troop levels from coalition countries, DOD 

and State provided data for December 2003 to April 2007.

2

 However, the 

departments did not have information on coalition troops in Iraq from 

March to November 2003. We determined that the data we did receive

were sufficiently reliable for estimating the U.S. contribution in support of 

coalition troops and the number of troops contributed by other countries. 

We obtained data on international contributions to Iraq reconstruction 

from the Department of State, the United Nations, and the World Bank. We 

determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for these purposes. We 

conducted our work in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. 

 1

For purposes of this report, non-U.S. coalition troops do not include Iraqi security forces. 

2

We obtained troop data for May 2007 from a publicly available document.

Page 1 GAO-07-827T 
As of May 2007, 25 countries were contributing 12,600 troops to 

multinational forces in Iraq. Compared with the 145,000 forces from the 

United States, other coalition countries represent about 8 percent of 

multinational forces in Iraq.3

 From December 2003 through May 2007, the 

number of non-U.S. coalition troops decreased from 24,000 to 12,600, and 

the number of coalition nations contributing troops to military operations

decreased from 33 to 25.4 Although the numbers of these troops are 

declining, three countries—United Kingdom, Poland, and Republic of 

Korea—are responsible for leading operations in three of seven security 

sectors in Iraq. In addition, coalition troops have performed humanitarian, 

medical, and reconstruction missions. Some troops have provided combat

capabilities, such as infantry and explosive ordnance capabilities. 

Summary 

The United States has spent about $1.5 billion to transport, sustain, and 

provide other services for military troops from 20 countries other than the 

United States and Iraq. The United States used about $1 billion of the $1.5 

billion to feed, house, and equip these troops. In terms of allocation by 

country, about $988 million, or 66 percent, was used to support Poland as 

the commander of Multinational Division (MND)-Central South. However, 

the support provided Poland was not solely for its own troops, but for 

those from other countries under its command. In addition, $300 million, 

or about 20 percent, supported Jordan for border operations and other 

activities. In addition to support for operations in Iraq, the United States 

has provided about $1.9 billion since 2003 for military training and 

equipment to 10 coalition members and Jordan. State Department security 

assistance programs provided this additional assistance. 

As of April 2007, international donors have pledged about $14.9 billion in 

support of Iraq reconstruction. In addition, some countries exceeded their

original pledges by about an additional $744 million for a total of $15.6 

billion, according to State Department. About $11 billion, or 70 percent, of 

these pledges are loans, with the remaining $4.6 billion in the form of 

 3

In addition to U.S. and other coalition troops, the number of Iraqi military and police 

forces trained and equipped by coalition members totaled about 331,000 as of May 2007.

However, GAO has raised concerns about these numbers. See Stabilizing Iraq: Factors 

Impeding the Development of Capable Iraqi Security Forces, GAO-07-612T (Washington,

D.C.: Mar. 13, 2007). 

4

In addition to multinational force contributions, seven countries contribute troops to the

NATO Training Mission in Iraq, which supports training of Iraqi security forces. As of May 

2007, these countries were Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, and 

Turkey. 

Page 2 GAO-07-827T 
grants. As of April 2007, Iraq had accessed about $436 million in available 

loans and $3 billion in grants. 

In March 2003, the United States—along with the United Kingdom, 

Australia, and other members of the coalition—began combat operations 

in Iraq. The original “coalition of the willing” consisted of 49 countries 

(including the United States) that publicly committed to the war effort and 

also provided a variety of support, such as direct military participation, 

logistical and intelligence support, over-flight rights, or humanitarian and 

reconstruction aid.5

 The term “coalition of the willing” refers to those 

countries that declared political support for the war effort; not all of these 

countries contributed troops to multinational operations. Between 

December 2003 and May 2007, 39 countries (including the United States)—

some of which were not original coalition members—provided troops to 

support operations in Iraq. 

Background 

Three sources of funding help support non-U.S. coalition troops in Iraq: 

coalition support funds, lift and sustain funds, and peacekeeping 

operations funds. First, the Emergency Wartime Supplemental 

Appropriations Act of 20036

 authorized DOD to use up to a certain amount 

of its operations and maintenance funds to reimburse countries for the 

logistical and military support they provided to U.S. military operations in 

Iraq. DOD refers to these funds as coalition support funds. Congress has 

continued to make such funds available in each subsequent fiscal year. 

Second, DOD’s annual Appropriations Act7

 in 2005 authorized DOD to use 

funds from its operations and maintenance accounts to provide supplies 

and services; transportation, including airlift and sealift; and other 

logistical support to coalition forces supporting military and stability 

operations in Iraq. DOD refers to these funds as lift and sustain funds. This 

authority has also been continued in subsequent appropriations acts. 

 5

In March 2003, the White House reported the following countries in the coalition of the

willing: Afghanistan; Albania; Angola; Australia; Azerbaijan; Bulgaria; Colombia; Costa

Rica; Czech Republic; Denmark; Dominican Republic; El Salvador; Eritrea; Estonia; 

Ethiopia; Georgia; Honduras; Hungary; Iceland; Italy; Japan; Kuwait; Latvia; Lithuania;

Macedonia; Marshall Islands; Micronesia; Mongolia; Netherlands; Nicaragua; Palau;

Panama; Philippines; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Rwanda; Singapore; Slovakia; Solomon 

Islands; Republic of Korea; Spain; Tonga; Turkey; Uganda; Ukraine; United Kingdom;

United States; and Uzbekistan. 

6

Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2003, P.L. 108-11. 

7

Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005, P.L. 108-287. 

Page 3 GAO-07-827T 
According to a DOD official, both coalition support funds and lift and 

sustain funds are used for any requirements that could be appropriately 

paid for from operations and maintenance accounts, including airlift, 

sealift, and sustainment services such as feeding and billeting for coalition 

troops, among other things. In addition, a DOD official stated that both of 

these funds are used to support nations whose economic conditions 

prevent them from fully funding their troops’ presence in Iraq. The key 

distinction between the coalition support and the lift and sustain funds is 

that coalition support funds are used to reimburse countries for costs they 

incur, and lift and sustain funds are used to reimburse U.S. military 

departments for services they provide to support eligible countries. 

Third, the State Department provided peacekeeping operations (PKO) 

funds in 2003 and 2004 to provide basic supplies and equipment such as 

armor and medical supplies to coalition troops in Iraq. These funds were 

used to make initial equipment purchases for countries participating in

Polish and U.S.-led divisions in Iraq. 

Many nations and various international organizations are supporting the 

efforts to rebuild Iraq through multilateral or bilateral assistance. U.N. 

Security Council Resolution 1511 of October 16, 2003, urged member 

states and international and regional organizations to support the Iraq 

reconstruction effort. On October 23-24, 2003, an international donors 

conference was held in Madrid, with 76 countries, 20 international 

organizations, and 13 nongovernmental organizations participating. 

As of May 2007, 25 coalition nations were contributing about 12,600 troops 

to multinational force operations in Iraq. This compares to the 145,000 U.S. 

troops in Iraq, for the same time period. See figure 1 for a comparison of 

U.S. and coalition troops from December 2003 through May 2007. 

Troop Contributions 

from Coalition 

Members Have 

Declined and 

Represent a Small 

Percentage of Total 

Forces 

Page 4 GAO-07-827T 
Figure 1: U.S. and Coalition Troops in Iraq 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Coalition troops

U.S. troops

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data.

December

2003

Year

July

2004

December

2004

July

2005

December

2005

July

2006

May

2007

December

2006

Troops in thousands

126.9 126.8

152.3 155.1

139.2

145.0

133.5 131.5

24.0 22.0 25.0 23.0 23.0 19.0 15.2 12.6

Non-U.S. coalition troops represent about 8 percent of multinational 

forces in Iraq as of May 2007. Although the coalition has trained and 

equipped about 331,000 Iraqi army and police forces, we do not include 

Iraqi security forces (ISF) in our analyses. As we have reported, these data 

provide limited information on the forces’ capabilities, effectiveness, and 

loyalties. For example, DOD reported in March 2007 that the number of 

ISF forces present for duty is one-half to two-thirds of the number trained 

and equipped.8

 

In addition, the number of coalition forces has declined by 47.5 percent—

from 24,000 in December 2003 to 12,600 in May 2007, as shown in figure 2.

 8

See Stabilizing Iraq: Factors Impeding the Development of Capable Iraqi Security 

Forces, GAO-07-612T (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 13, 2007). 

Page 5 GAO-07-827T 
Figure 2: Non-U.S. Military Forces in Iraq 

Troops in thousands

Sources: DOD and State Department.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Dec

Jan.

.

Au

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

g.

July

Dec

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

.

Au

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

g.

July

June

Mar

Apr.

May

.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

S

Au

ept.

g.

July

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Dec.

Jan.

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Although the number of troops is declining, three countries—the United 

Kingdom, Poland, and the Republic of Korea—have led operations in three 

of seven security sectors in Iraq (see figure 3). 

Page 6 GAO-07-827T 
Figure 3: Organization of Multinational Force-Iraq 

U.S. Central Command

Multi-National Force-Iraq

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Security

Transition Command-Iraq

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National CorpsIraq

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Division -

South East

(Lead: United Kingdom)

Multi-National Division -

Central South

(Lead: Poland)

Multi-National Force -

West

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Division -

Baghdad

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Division -

North

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Division -

Center

(Lead: United States)

Multi-National Division -

North East

(Lead: Republic of Korea)

Gulf Regional Division

U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers

(Lead: United States)

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and Multinational Force-Iraq documents.

Secretary of Defense

Since July 2003, the United Kingdom has led operations in one of the seven 

sectors—Multinational Division-Southeast—in southern Iraq in the area 

around Basra. As of October 2006, coalition troops in this sector were 

from Italy, Japan, Australia, Romania, Denmark, Portugal, Czech Republic, 

and Lithuania. Since that time, Italy and Portugal have withdrawn troops 

from military operations in Iraq.9

 The United Kingdom has provided the 

 9

Italy and Portugal contribute trainers to the NATO training mission in Iraq. 

Page 7 GAO-07-827T 
largest number of non-U.S. coalition troops, peaking at 46,000 from March

through April 2003, then declining to 7,100 in November 2006. British 

forces have conducted combat operations to improve the security 

environment and have trained Iraqi security forces, among other things. 

They had sustained 147 fatalities as of May 1, 2007. The United Kingdom 

announced that it will begin withdrawing troops in 2007 but has pledged to 

maintain a presence in Iraq into 2008.

Poland has led operations in the MND-Central South, which is south of 

Baghdad, since September 2003. As of May 2007, non-U.S. coalition troops 

in this sector were from Poland, Armenia, Bosnia, Denmark, Kazakhstan, 

Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Romania, El Salvador, Slovakia, and Ukraine. 

Poland’s highest troop level was 2500, declining to 900 by October 2006. 

Poland’s troops have conducted joint combat operations and performed 

humanitarian, medical, advisory, and training missions, and have sustained 

20 fatalities. 

The Republic of Korea has led operations in MND-Northeast from Irbil 

City in the area north of Kirkuk since September 2004. Their peak number 

of troops was 3,600 troops in that year but declined to 1,600 in March 2007. 

Their missions have included medical, humanitarian, and reconstruction 

efforts. The Republic of Korea’s government is to draw up a timetable in 

2007 for withdrawing its troops from Iraq. 

The number of contributing countries has decreased from 33 in December 

2003 to 25 in May 2007.10 Figure 4 shows the countries that have 

contributed troops between 2003 and 2007. According to State Department 

officials and government press releases, the decline in the number of 

troops can be attributed to completion of missions, domestic political 

considerations, and the deteriorating security condition in Iraq. 

 10The 25 contributing countries do not include the seven countries that provide troops to

the NATO Training Mission. 

Page 8 GAO-07-827T 
Figure 4: Non-U.S. Coalition Countries Providing Troops to MNF-I, December 2003 Through May 2007 

Iraq

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.

Albania 

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark

Dominican Republic

El Salvador

Estonia

Georgia

Honduras

Hungary

Italy

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Macedonia

Moldova

Mongolia

Netherlands

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Norway

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Republic of Korea

Romania

Slovakia

Spain

Thailand

Ukraine

United Kingdom

List of

countries

Year 2003 2004 2005 2006

Albania 

Armenia

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark

El Salvador

Estonia

Georgia 

Italy

Japan

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Macedonia

Moldova

Mongolia

Netherlands 

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Republic of Korea

Romania

Singapore

Slovakia

Thailand

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Albania 

Armenia

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark

El Salvador

Estonia

Georgia 

Italy

Japan

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Macedonia

Moldova

Mongolia

Netherlands 

Poland

Portugal

Republic of Korea

Romania

Singapore

Slovakia 

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Albania 

Armenia

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark 

El Salvador

Estonia

Georgia 

Japan

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Macedonia

Moldova

Mongolia 

Poland 

Republic of Korea

Romania

Singapore

Slovakia 

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Albania 

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark

Dominican Republic

El Salvador

Estonia

Georgia

Honduras

Hungary

Italy

Japan

Kazakhstan

Latvia

Lithuania

Macedonia

Moldova

Mongolia

Netherlands

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Norway

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Republic of Korea

Romania

Slovakia

Singapore

Spain

Thailand

Tonga

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Year additional countries began 

contributing troops 

Coalition forces

Year stopped contributing troops 

2007

As the figure shows, eight countries withdrew their troops from Iraq 

during 2004. For example, in mid-April 2004, the new government of Spain

announced that it would withdraw its 1,300 troops from Iraq. The 

Page 9 GAO-07-827T 
government withdrew the troops much earlier than the United States 

expected, after violence escalated in the Spanish area of operations in 

Iraq. Shortly thereafter, Honduras and the Dominican Republic announced 

they would also withdraw their national contingents from the 

multinational force, which they did the same year.

Some countries that have provided troops to the multinational force in 

Iraq are not financially able to support those troops in the field for 

extended periods of time or may need assistance in preparing their troops 

for this type of operation. Since 2003, the United States has provided about 

$1.5 billion to 20 countries. Of the $1.5 billion spent to support these 

troops, about $725.9 million was reimbursed to countries, and about $702 

million was reimbursed to U.S. military departments that provided support 

to non-U.S. coalition troops. See table 1 below for the total amount of 

support provided for non-U.S. coalition troops in Iraq. 

The United States Has 

Provided about 

$1.5 Billion to Support 

Coalition Troops in 

Iraq 

Table 1: Total Amount Provided for Coalition Nations in Iraq, by Type of Funding 

and Fiscal Year (dollars in millions) 

FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Total

Coalition supporta$151.7 $274.3 $245.6 $54.3 $725.9

Lift and sustainb$0.0 $0.0 $483.3c$219.0 $702.3

Peacekeeping operationsd$50.0 $16.0 $0.0 $0.0 $66.0

Total $201.7 $290.3 $728.9 $273.3 $1,494.2

a

These are DOD-managed funds that are reimbursed to countries for support they provided to 

operations in Iraq. b

These are DOD-managed funds that are reimbursed to U.S. military departments for support they

provided to coalition troops in Iraq. c

According to a DOD official, this number is relatively larger than the others because it represents

costs incurred between 2004 and 2005, and was largely attributable to costs associated with 

preparing an operating base for MND-Central South. d

These are State-managed funds. 

Since 2003, the departments used about $1 billion of the approximately 

$1.5 billion (71.5 percent) for sustainment services such as food, supplies, 

and base operations services such as communications and equipment. The 

departments used the remaining funds to support other operational 

requirements: 

• About $212 million to support Jordan’s border operations; 

• About $43 million to support hospital operations; and 

• About $125 million to support lift requirements. 

Page 10 GAO-07-827T 
Nineteen coalition nations and Jordan received support from these funds.11

As displayed in table 2, Poland received the largest amount of support—

about $988 million, or 66 percent of total funding—for requirements 

sustained in its capacity as Commander of the MND-Central South sector. 

However, the support provided Poland was not solely for its own troops 

but for the coalition troops under its command—Armenia, Slovakia,

Denmark, El Salvador, Ukraine, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Mongolia, 

Kazakhstan, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. 

Table 2: U.S. Support to Non-U.S. Coalition Troops from March 2003 through March

2007, by Country (dollars in millions) 

Country Total Percent

Poland a$988.4 66.2

Jordan $295.0 19.7

Other Nations $123.3 8.3

Georgia $63.1 4.2

Ukraine $12.5 .8

United Kingdom $5.6 .4

Romania $3.0 .2

Bosnia $2.0 .1

Mongolia $1.3 .1

Total $1,494.2 100

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

Note: Of the U.S. support to other nations ($123 million), $114 million was reimbursed to U.S. military 

departments by DOD. The data were not arrayed by allocations to specific countries. 

a

This funding was not solely for Poland but for the troops from nations operating under its command. 

According to a DOD official, as a matter of policy, it confined its support 

to those coalition countries that they deemed were less capable of 

absorbing the costs associated with participating in operations in Iraq. 

However, one exception to this policy was the decision in 2005 to 

reimburse the United Kingdom about $5.6 million for improvements it 

made to Royal Air Force (RAF) Base Akritori on Cyprus to accommodate 

U.S. requirements for lift and refueling needs. Jordan was the next largest 

 11The countries are Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Czech Republic, El Salvador, 

Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Macedonia, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Romania,

Slovakia, Thailand, Tonga, and the United Kingdom. 

Page 11 GAO-07-827T 
recipient of support, receiving reimbursement or services worth about 

$300 million for border operations and other activities. 

It is important to note that the United States also has provided security 

assistance funds to develop and modernize the militaries of several 

countries contributing to operations in Iraq. Security assistance has 

included military equipment, services, and training. From fiscal year 2003 

through 2006, the United States provided about $525 million in security 

assistance to 10 countries contributing troops to Iraq.12 In addition, since 

2003, the United States has provided Jordan about $1.34 billion in security 

assistance. 

International donors have pledged about $14.9 billion in support of Iraq 

reconstruction. In addition, some countries exceeded their pledges by 

providing an additional $744 million for a total of $15.6 billion, according 

to the State Department. Of this amount, about $11 billion, or 70 percent, 

is in the form of loans. As of April 2007, Iraq had accessed about $436 

million in loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The 

remaining $4.6 billion is in the form of grants, to be provided multilaterally 

or bilaterally; $3.0 billion has been disbursed to Iraq. See table 3 for 

pledges made at Madrid and thereafter for Iraq reconstruction. In addition,

16 of the 41 countries that pledged funding for Iraq reconstruction also 

pledged troops to the multinational force in Iraq.

International Donors 

Have Pledged Billions 

of Dollars for 

Reconstruction 

Efforts in Iraq 

Table 3: Donor Pledges for Iraq Reconstruction (dollars in thousands) 

Donor Madrid Pledges

Post-Madrid Pledges and

Donations in Excess of 

Madrid Pledges Total

Australia 45,590 28,680 74,270

Austria 5,480 0 5,480

Belgium 5,890 0 5,890

Bulgaria 640 0 640

Canada 187,470 0 187,470

China 25,000 6,500 31,500

 12These countries are Thailand, Bulgaria, Georgia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Ukraine,

Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and Honduras. 

Page 12 GAO-07-827T 
Donor Madrid Pledges

Post-Madrid Pledges and

Donations in Excess of 

Madrid Pledges Total

Croatia 0 333 333

Cyprus 120 0 120

Czech Republic 14,660 0 14,660

Denmark 26,950 35,000 61,950

European 

Commission 235,620 685,685 921,305

Estonia 80 0 80

Finland 5,890 2,944 8,834

Germany 0 4,150 4,150

Greece 3,530 3,618 7,148

Hungary 1,240 430 1,670

Iceland 2,500 500 3,000

India 10,000 0 10,000

Iran 5,000 1,000,000 1,005,000

Ireland 3,530 0 3,530

Italy 235,620 0 235,620

Japan 4,914,000 0 4,914,000

Republic of Korea 200,000 0 200,000

Kuwait 500,000 0 500,000

Lithuania 0 30 30

Luxembourg 2,360 199 2,559

Malta 27 0 27

Netherlands 9,420 3,465 12,885

New Zealand 3,350 2,760 6,110

Norway 12,870 10,840 23,710

Oman 3,000 0 3,000

Pakistan 2,500 0 2,500

Portugal 0 600 600

Qatar 100,000 0 100,000

Saudi Arabia 500,000 0 500,000

Slovenia 420 0 420

Spain 220,000 28,000 248,000

Sweden 33,000 0 33,000

Turkey 50,000 0 50,000

United Arab Emirates 215,000 0 215,000

United Kingdom 452,330 198,000 650,330

Page 13 GAO-07-827T 
Donor Madrid Pledges

Post-Madrid Pledges and

Donations in Excess of 

Madrid Pledges Total

Vietnam 0 700 700

Lower end of planned 

World Bank lending 3,000,000 0 3,000,000

Lower end of planned 

IMF lending 2,550,000 0 2,550,000

Total non-US 

pledges and 

donations 13,583,087 2,012,434 15,595,521

Source: State Department. 

Note: Bolded countries also contributed troops to the multinational force. 

About $11 billion, or 70 percent, of the $14.9 billion pledged in support of 

Iraq reconstruction is in the form of loans. Pledging the majority of these 

loans were the World Bank ($3 billion), the IMF (up to $2.55 billion), Iran 

($1 billion), and Japan ($3.4 billion), according to the State Department. In 

September 2004, the IMF provided a $436 million emergency post-conflict

assistance loan to facilitate Iraqi debt relief.13 The World Bank has 

approved loans for $399 million from its concessional international 

development assistance program, which the Iraqis have not accessed.14

According to the State Department, the Iraqis lack a system for approving 

projects supported by donor loans, which has impeded efforts by the 

World Bank and Japan to initiate loan-based projects.15 In addition, Iraq 

has not yet accessed loans from Iran, according to the State Department. 

Further, according to IMF reporting as of February 2007, Iraq has received

about $39 billion in debt reduction from commercial and bilateral 

creditors. 

Most Pledges Were in the 

Form of Loans 

Most Grants Have Been 

Provided 

As of April 2007, international donors for Iraq reconstruction had pledged 

$3.9 billion in grants to be provided multilaterally and bilaterally. In 

 13In addition to this loan, Iraq secured a $685 million Stand-by-Arrangement with the IMF in 

December 2005; however, the Iraqis have not drawn upon this support, according to the 

State department. 

14This loan is within a $500 million program for concessional international development 

assistance. 

15A proposed clause of Iraq’s 2007 Budget Law that was intended to clarify matters for

approving projects supported by donor loans was deleted by Iraq’s Council of 

Representatives before the law was passed in final form, according to State department. 

Page 14 GAO-07-827T 
addition, some countries exceeded their pledges by providing an 

additional $744 million, according to the State department. 

Of the total grants, donors provided about $1.6 billion multilaterally to two 

trust funds, one run by the U.N. Development Group (UNDG) and the 

other by the World Bank.16 Donors have provided about $1.1 billion to the 

UN trust fund and $455 million to the World Bank trust fund. As of March 

2007, the UN has disbursed about $612 million to support, among other 

things, Iraq’s elections, infrastructure projects, health and nutrition, 

agriculture and natural resources, and assistance to refugees. As of March 

2007, the World Bank fund had disbursed about $96 million to support, 

among other things, capacity building, school rehabilitation and 

construction, and health rehabilitation. 

Donors provided about $2.3 billion in bilateral grants for Iraq 

reconstruction efforts. As of April 2007, these grants have funded more 

than 400 projects as reported by Iraq’s Ministry of Planning and 

Development Cooperation.17 According to State, these projects include 

about $1 billion in grant assistance from Japan, $775 million from the 

United Kingdom, $153 million from Republic of Korea, $110 million from 

Canada, and $100 million from Spain. These funds have been provided as 

bilateral grants to Iraqi institutions, implementing contractors, and 

nongovernmental organizations for reconstruction projects outside the 

projects funded by the UN and World Bank trust funds. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer any 

questions you or the members of the subcommittee may have. 

 16On March 20, 2007, at the (IRFFI) International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq 

Donors Committee meeting in Istanbul, it was decided that the lifetime of the fund would 

be extended through December 2010 to allow adequate time to finance the existing projects 

through to completion. 

17The Iraqi Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation tracks donor assistance in a 

recently established Donor Assistance Database. 

Page 15 GAO-07-827T 
For questions regarding this testimony, please call Joseph A. Christoff at 

(202) 512-8979. Other key contributors to this statement were Muriel 

Forster, David Bruno, Monica Brym, Dorian Herring, Lynn Cothern, Judith 

McCloskey, and Mary Moutsos. 

Page 16 GAO-07-827T 

GAO Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 

(320492) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER