Soon after the U.S. invasion had taken Baghdad, the carefully filtered war coverage yielded to chaotic images of looting. The entire city seemed to degenerate into one big free-for-all.

With scant exceptions, the U.S. military made no effort to stop the looting. This was no case of “unpreparedness” or an “oversight” on the part of the occupying forces. On the contrary, it is clear that the U.S. government had made the cool, calculated decision to allow the looting to run its course.

It was fully foreseeable that, given the circumstances, such scenes would ensue after the downfall of the Baath police-party regime – a downfall precipitated not by the mobilization of a people defending their own interests, but by an invading army. The looting could have come as no surprise to the trained planners and policymakers in Doha and Washington.

But if the looting was predictable, why would they choose to do nothing about it?

What conclusion were we supposed to draw from the spectacle of rampant lawlessness? That the Iraqis, if left to their own devices, would plunge their own country into self-destructive chaos? That the Iraqi people, like incorrigible children, require the firm hand of an “adult” to hold them in check and protect them from themselves?

More important, what is the only force that can restore order and “civilization?” What else – the firm hand of the occupying army. The invasion succeeded not only in disrupting basic services like water and electricity but in creating a power vacuum in which only chaos could result.

By dragging their feet and allowing conditions to deteriorate further, the invading forces would rub the Iraqi people’s faces in their own impotence and leave them with no apparent choice but to accede – in spite of their own reluctance – to the occupiers’ dictates.

The use of chaos as a weapon by imperial powers is nothing new. The British used it in Syria to suppress the Arab revolt following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. The French, Belgians and Portuguese used it to sabotage the transition to independence in their African colonies.

Indeed, the Pentagon has insisted that its troops were under orders not to prevent the looting. It is instructive to observe the speed with which the country’s oil fields were secured by the occupying forces. The looters never had a chance there. And what is the one government building in Baghdad that has remained intact? The headquarters of the Ministry of Oil.

Let’s contrast that display of security with the deliberate failure to protect hospitals. In a country with thousands of people wounded and in need of medical attention, the health care system in Baghdad and other cities was callously allowed to collapse.

Iraq’s great museums and libraries – with cultural treasures dating back millennia – have been pillaged as well. Here too, the complicity of the invading army is easily exposed. Six months before the invasion, UNESCO had provided the U.S. military with a specific list of cultural sites to be protected. Prominent news articles had also issued warnings in this regard.

Here, the looters were not mere individuals taking food or appliances for their homes. These were organized gangs who knew exactly what to look for and how to extract it quickly. Some even had keys to museum vaults.

The stolen pieces will be hustled out of the country and into the hands of fences – known as “dealers” – in Europe, the U.S. and Japan. This is a well-tread path: After the 1991 war on Iraq, several thousand pieces of art were stolen. Many of them later resurfaced in museums and art sales in the “civilized world.”

Finally, it should be noted that the real looting is proceeding as planned. The organized plunder of Iraq’s resources is being prepared through a secret bidding process open only to U.S. companies (much to the chagrin of their howling European rivals). Initial contracts have already been palmed off to the likes of Bechtel, and the U.S.-based oil cartels are licking their chops in anticipation of their share of the spoils. Wars kill, and companies make a killing.

Paul Coltrin is a future graduate student in Spanish, and is studying through Continuing Education. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].