Stabilizing and Rebuilding Iraq: Coalition Support and International Donor Commitments
Published: 2007-05-09T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: 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 ordinance 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.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss U.S. support for non-U.S. coalition  troops 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. 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.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: 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. 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.
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 2003 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 Act 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.
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.
section_title: Troop Contributions from Coalition Members Have Declined and Represent a Small Percentage of Total Forces
paragraphs: 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.
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.
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.
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).
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. The United Kingdom has provided the  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. 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.
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  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.
section_title: The United States Has Provided about $1.5 Billion to Support Coalition Troops in Iraq
paragraphs: 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.
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.
Nineteen coalition nations and Jordan received support from these funds.  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.
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  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. In addition, since  2003, the United States has provided Jordan about $1.34 billion in security  assistance.
section_title: International Donors Have Pledged Billions of Dollars for Reconstruction Efforts in Iraq
paragraphs: 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.
subsections: section_title: Most Pledges Were in the Form of Loans
paragraphs: 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. The World Bank has  approved loans for $399 million from its concessional international  development assistance program, which the Iraqis have not accessed.  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. 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.
section_title: Most Grants Have Been Provided
paragraphs: As of April 2007, international donors for Iraq reconstruction had pledged  $3.9 billion in grants to be provided multilaterally and bilaterally. In  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. 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. 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.
section_title: GAO Contacts and Acknowledgments
paragraphs: 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.
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.