CAIRO, Jan 9: US engineering giant Bechtel's landing a juicy $1.8 billion contract for reconstruction in Iraq topped economic news in the Middle East this week, with tenders announced for 17 more contracts worth a total $5 billion.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) announced that the contract was awarded to the construction and infrastructure giant during a standard bidding procedure launched in September.

Bechtel will team up with Parsons Corp. in California to fulfil the 24-month contract, with financing subject to US congressional approval, a USAID representative said.

Bechtel should have access to Iraqi sub-contractors in its repair of power stations and restoring electricity networks. The contract also involves the rebuilding of airports, public buildings, schools, irrigation systems and the modernization of the port at Umm Qasr.

The San Francisco-based company was criticized last spring when USAID awarded it a similar contract without a tender. The company defended itself, saying it used Iraqi subcontractors for the first contract.

But researchers at the Washington-based watchdog Centre for Public Integrity also raised criticism, reporting that Bechtel and other contract recipients are connected.

With another call for tenders starting for the allocation of 17 more contracts of up to $5 billion, the Pentagon announced a total of 26 new reconstruction contracts for Iraq in December, financed by a congressional package of $18.6 billion.

In December, the United States announced that countries opposed to US-British military intervention in Iraq would be excluded from bidding on the contracts, including Germany, Canada, China, France and Russia.

But in Baghdad, Governing Council member Ibrahim al-Jaafari assured the participation of France and the other countries in the Iraqi reconstruction. However, he said it recognizes that the United States, "which assumed the responsibility of the war in Iraq without UN consent, and paid the price for its decision in men and money, does not easily accept letting countries which were against the war profit from the situation without having shouldered the cost."-AFP