I was replying to posts on another thread and found out a few things I thought would bear mentioning here.
The US shut down mobile phone services in Iraq shortly after the invasion. A Bahraini company, Batelco, had managed to get things up and running, but
they were using a system at odds with the one in use in the US.
But then, so does most of the rest of the world.
So Batelco was shut down, and then when the time came for the US authorities to allow bids on the mobile phone contracts for Iraq, they weighted the
scales massively in favour of US firms, as
this BBC news item shows:
Rules drawn up for mobile phone licences in Iraq by the US authorities in Iraq could bar many of Europe's biggest telecoms companies - and almost
all those in the Middle East - from bidding.
Why? Because the US wants to export its own mobile standard, and it doesn't matter if it's more expensive and inconvenient for Iraqis as long as
the US companies make money on the deal:
While all neighbouring countries work on the GSM standard which is used by 70% of mobile subscribers worldwide, there has been pressure from the
US to favour the cdmaOne standard invented by US company QualComm.
Some Republican congressmen with ties to QualComm have said that would help US companies win deals to build the networks.
But the licence rules require winners to "provide full national and international roaming service to their customers through agreements with other
Iraqi licensees and with a wide range of operators in trading partner countries".
Almost all Iraq's trading partners use GSM, and cross-network roaming - whether domestic or international - is both technologically difficult and
very expensive.
This article gives more detail on the politicking behind the
standards war. It's hilarious that Congressman Darrell Issa (R, QualComm) played the French card... remember all that propaganda against the
French?
"If European [sic] GSM technology is deployed in Iraq, much of the equipment used to build the cell phone system will be manufactured in France
by Alcatel, in Germany by Siemens, and elsewhere in western and northern Europe."
He seems a little vague here about "Northern Europe" and is very coy about naming the Nordic telephony pioneers explicitly: Sweden and Finland. But
he continues, a little shakily:
"Therefore, if our understanding of this situation is correct, because of ill-considered planning, the U.S. government will soon hand U.S. taxpayer
dollars over to French, German, and other European cell phone equipment companies to build the new Iraqi cell phone system."
"This is not acceptable" he cries.