Newspost: US shuts down Iraqi GSM network

[Simpi]

Some people (like me) were certain that US would hand out a business deal to some american corporation. Now it's proved beyond shadow of a doubt.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/ame ... ory=428886

Cut off for un-American activities: the mobile phone firm that connected Iraqis

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington

30 July 2003

America's desire to rebuild Iraq in its own image even extends to setting up a mobile phone network that only works for US phones.

A Bahraini company that established a network accessible to those without American phones has been forced to scrap its plans after a week.

Batelco had started placing more than $5m (£3m) of aerials and other equipment for GSM mobiles across Baghdad. Foreign businessmen and journalists were able to abandon expensive satellite phones for the first time. But mindful of its desire to set up a tender for the country's mobile network, the US authorities apparently started to put pressure on Batelco, threatening to confiscate its equipment.

"They applied enough pressure for us to push the button," said Rashid al-Snan, the company's regional operations manager. "I feel really sorry - sorry for the Iraqis and sorry for the foreigners who were using the network. It's a pity we had to stop. We really put in an effort and felt a cheer coming towards us from all over the world."

The US-led authority in Iraq wants to hold a tender for three regional mobile phone licences - almost certain to be one of the most lucrative contracts in post-Saddam Iraq. Mobile phones were not available under the Saddam regime.

But a decision has not yet been taken on whether the mobile network should use GSM technology - used in Europe, the Middle East and many other parts of the world - or the American CDMA technology, which is only used in the US. A decision to use GSM would be a blow to US firms tendering for the contract.

A conference on the phone tenders will take place this week in Jordan. Batelco is ready to invest $50m in Iraq. "If they give us the licence, we could operate immediately," said Mr Snan. "We deserve more than anyone else to get this licence. We have shown we can do it."

The provisional authority declined to comment on the alleged threats to Batelco.

[jonmartensen]

Some people (like me) were certain that US would hand out a business deal to some american corporation. Now it's proved beyond shadow of a doubt.

...

30 July 2003

...

But a decision has not yet been taken on whether the mobile network should use GSM technology - used in Europe, the Middle East and many other parts of the world - or the American CDMA technology, which is only used in the US. A decision to use GSM would be a blow to US firms tendering for the contract.

...

*cough*

[madmallard]

You know, you might be inclined to believe this article's crap spin if you didnt know that AMERICA USES GSM PHONES TOO.

and CDMA/TDMA is used by america, russia, japan, and austrailia. Hardly and American exclusive.

I'd like to see what kind of research YOU did, or the author did to substantiate they were shut dow so a big bad american conglomerate could come in and steal everyone's money.

[Dannywilson]

Everyone puts a spin on things, including your "independant" news source simpi. Grow up and get a life.

[Simpi]

You know, you might be inclined to believe this article's crap spin if you didnt know that AMERICA USES GSM PHONES TOO.

and CDMA/TDMA is used by america, russia, japan, and austrailia. Hardly and American exclusive.

I'd like to see what kind of research YOU did, or the author did to substantiate they were shut dow so a big bad american conglomerate could come in and steal everyone's money.

Note, I did not write the article so don't put words in my mouth. Sure the technology is used elsewhere but I was hoping you would take the bait.

Seeing the ability (or lack of it) of U.S led occupation, somebody actually manages to get something running in Iraq. Instead of making some sort of short term deal with aforementioned company, U.S shuts down the network completely.

The end result. Nobody can use the network and U.S probably won't get their network up anytime soon. Will somebody benefit from this situation? I don't think so. If you think otherwise, please post why do you think it is so.

[madmallard]

pay attention to what i asked you, dip.

Note, I did not write the article so don't put words in my mouth. Sure the technology is used elsewhere but I was hoping you would take the bait.

Seeing the ability (or lack of it) of U.S led occupation, somebody actually manages to get something running in Iraq. Instead of making some sort of short term deal with aforementioned company, U.S shuts down the network completely.

yet in your first post you said:::

Some people (like me) were certain that US would hand out a business deal to some american corporation. Now it's proved beyond shadow of a doubt.

who is putting words in whos mouth?
so the question remains, dip.

I'd like to see what kind of research YOU did, or the author did to substantiate they were shut dow so a big bad american conglomerate could come in and steal everyone's money.

Do you know why they shut it down? Did you have the resolute fortitud to dig up other news sources? did you call the pentagon press contact? did you hit any other websites for news? did you call a friend in Iraq?

Or are you lazier than you claimed Americans to be, and are content to have your news spoon fed to you by a socialist tabloid rag?

[Otohiko]

I don't post in these discussions if I would.

Just let me extend gratitude to Simpi here, since from what I see he'll be taking the position I would have taken here.

Not to offend anyone, but I've just about had it with American nationalist/imperialist/propagandist attitudes. It's like a machine: facts go in, lotsa incoherent blabber comes out, backed up by billions of G's in various currencies.

But anyways, I'll go back to where I belong (out of here) and leave the reasoning to others.

[kthulhu]

Supposedly Batelco jumped the gun <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... ml">before any contract talks came up</a>. While one might state "Let them build" (and maybe they should), the bigger picture in all of this is that:

1. Batelco is forcing its business into Iraq. The coalition authority would probably rather not see a provider monopoly build up, which is what Batelco is essentially trying to do. As the article I linked suggested, the main goal is to have competition in the market over there, and Batelco laying down foundations before any talks have started is not helpful to that goal.

They should wait for their turn to bid, before going crazy with the equipment.

2. Does Batelco have the resources to wire up all of Iraq? Even if they do, how long would it take them to do so, versus a larger corporation with deeper pockets?

[madmallard]

exactly. there may have been other issues not discussed, like who this "unnammed partner" was.

[Simpi]

who is putting words in whos mouth?
so the question remains, dip.

Business deal = building a network. Occupying forces = americans= deal goes to american company. Major rebuilding contracts have gone to US companies so why should I assume anything else in this, even though bidding will be open for everyone.

Do you know why they shut it down? Did you have the resolute fortitud to dig up other news sources? did you call the pentagon press contact? did you hit any other websites for news? did you call a friend in Iraq?

Or are you lazier than you claimed Americans to be, and are content to have your news spoon fed to you by a socialist tabloid rag?

As they said, it might upset the upcoming bidding for network building. As reported by BBC for example. Wait, that's another socialist rag isn't it?
You could now try to answer my first question, but I quess Kthulhu answered on your behalf.

btw, GSM does represent over 70% of mobile phone users and new users choose it nearly 80& of the time instead of other standards.