[IMC-bristol] oil...........

[ivan]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C2F0AB.43EF3820
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



The word from the CIA: it's the oil, stupid
September 23 2002




Who should be more worried, asks Kenneth Davidson, Saddam; or the French =
and Russian oil companies presently in Iraq?


France and Russia have oil companies and interests in Iraq. They should =
be told that if they are of assistance in moving Iraq towards decent =
government, we'll do the best we can to ensure that the new government =
and American companies will work with them. If they throw their lot with =
Saddam, it will be difficult to the point of impossible to persuade the =
new Iraq government to work with them. Former CIA director James =
Woolsey, quoted in The Washington Post, September 15, 2002. So there you =
have it. The Bush administration may be telling the world that the =
reason the UN Security Council has to approve an allied attack on Iraq =
is because of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capability, but the =
real reason France and Russia are being told to get on board the US =
military bandwagon is Iraq's oil reserves.

According to The Washington Post, all five permanent members of the =
Security Council - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - have =
international oil companies with major stakes in a change of leadership =
in Baghdad. The Washington Post is one of the major media vehicles =
through which members of the American establishment talk to each other.

It is clear the real issue here is who controls Iraqi oil.

Neither the US nor Britain - nor Australia for that matter - has =
produced any credible evidence to back up the ostensible reason for an =
attack on Iraq, or "regime change" (read assassination of Saddam).

The debate about how the US should go about getting control of Iraqi oil =
has been blunt and to the point. The new regime that the US intends to =
impose on Iraq will not honour any of the agreements made between the =
old regime and oil companies around the world.


As the Post points out, since the Gulf War in 1991, companies from more =
than a dozen nations have either reached or sought agreements to develop =
Iraqi oil fields or repair existing facilities.

According to the latest US Department of Energy background paper on =
Iraq, published in March, the UN had warned in 2000 of a "major =
breakdown" in Iraq's oil industry if spare parts and equipment were not =
forthcoming.

The US said any extra money should only be used "for short-term =
improvements to the Iraqi oil industry and not to make long-term =
repairs".

The US Department of Energy said: "As of early January, 2002, the head =
of the UN Iraq program, Benon Sevan, expressed 'grave concern' at the =
volume of 'holds' put on contracts for oilfield development, and stated =
the entire program was threatened with paralysis. According to Sevan, =
these holds amounted to nearly 2000 contracts worth about $5 billion =
($A9 billion), about 80 per cent of which were 'held' by the US."

The Iraqi regime-in-waiting, politely known as the Iraqi National =
Congress (an umbrella group financed by US oil interests), has made =
plain that it will not be bound by any of these deals.

The INC leader, Ahmed Chalabi, is quoted in the Post as saying he =
favoured the creation of a US-led consortium to develop Iraq's oil =
fields. Iraq's oil fields are second only to Saudi Arabia, controlled by =
the US through the House of Saud, which the US has guaranteed to protect =
against external or internal threats.

According to the US Department of Energy: "Iraq contains 112 billion =
barrels of proven reserves along with roughly 220 billion barrels of =
probable and possible resources. Iraq's true resource potential may be =
far greater than this, however, as the country is relatively unexplored =
due to years of war and sanctions."

There is nothing new in the US/British policy in the Middle East and in =
Iraq in particular.

Iraq was a client state or, in polite terms, an ally. Client states are =
defined, according to US academic Noam Chomsky, by their obedience, not =
their values. Saddam was given diplomatic cover for as long as he was =
obedient to US interests. Now, he is damned as a monster.

A client oil state was first defined by Lord Curzon, who was the British =
foreign secretary after World War I. He said it was an "Arab facade =
ruled and administered under British guidance and controlled by a native =
Mohammedan and, as far as possible, by an Arab staff . . . There should =
be no actual incorporation of the conquered territory in the dominions =
of the conqueror, but the absorption may be veiled by such =
constitutional fictions as a protectorate, a sphere of influence, a =
buffer state and so on".

The US took over the British imperial prize in the Middle East after =
WWII. The official US State Department history (1945, volume 8, page 45) =
noted: "These resources constituted a stupendous source of strategic =
power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history . . . =
probably the richest economic prize in the world in the field of foreign =
investment."

The US is not going to give Iraq up without a fight, even if the main =
cost will be damage to its reputation as a good global citizen.

If Australia follows its present course - a more sophisticated version =
of "all the way with LBJ" - we will share the cost, but without the =
minor benefits that might be available to the four members of the =
Security Council, which the US wants on side to provide a moral fig leaf =
for its policy in the Middle East.

Kenneth Davidson is a staff columnist.
dissentmagazine@ozemail.com.au


------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C2F0AB.43EF3820
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<H1><HEADLINE>The word from the CIA: it's the oil, =
stupid</HEADLINE></H1>
<P class=3Darticledetails><DATE>September 23 2002</DATE><BR></P><BR =
clear=3Dall>
<P><STRONG>Who should be more worried, asks Kenneth Davidson, Saddam; or =
the=20
French and Russian oil companies presently in Iraq?</STRONG></P><BOD>
<P>
<P>France and Russia have oil companies and interests in Iraq. They =
should be=20
told that if they are of assistance in moving Iraq towards decent =
government,=20
we'll do the best we can to ensure that the new government and American=20
companies will work with them. If they throw their lot with Saddam, it =
will be=20
difficult to the point of impossible to persuade the new Iraq government =
to work=20
with them. Former CIA director James Woolsey, quoted in <I>The =
Washington=20
Post</I>, September 15, 2002. So there you have it. The Bush =
administration may=20
be telling the world that the reason the UN Security Council has to =
approve an=20
allied attack on Iraq is because of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction=20
capability, but the real reason France and Russia are being told to get =
on board=20
the US military bandwagon is Iraq's oil reserves.</P>
<P>According to <I>The Washington Post</I>, all five permanent members =
of the=20
Security Council - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - have=20
international oil companies with major stakes in a change of leadership =
in=20
Baghdad. <I>The Washington Post</I> is one of the major media vehicles =
through=20
which members of the American establishment talk to each other.</P>
<P>It is clear the real issue here is who controls Iraqi oil.</P>
<P>Neither the US nor Britain - nor Australia for that matter - has =
produced any=20
credible evidence to back up the ostensible reason for an attack on =
Iraq, or=20
"regime change" (read assassination of Saddam).</P>
<P>The debate about how the US should go about getting control of Iraqi =
oil has=20
been blunt and to the point. The new regime that the US intends to =
impose on=20
Iraq will not honour any of the agreements made between the old regime =
and oil=20
companies around the world.<BR clear=3Dall><ISLANDAD>
<SCRIPT> =0A=
 <!--  // =0A=
var b;var greater =3D 0 ;name =3D navigator.appName; ver =3D =
parseInt(navigator.appVersion); var agt =3D navigator.userAgent; if =
(agt.indexOf('Macintosh')=3D=3D-1) {  =0A=
 if (name =3D=3D 'Netscape' && ver >=3D 4)  { =0A=
 b =3D 0; =0A=
 }  else if (name =3D=3D 'Microsoft Internet Explorer' && ver >=3D 4) { =0A=
 b =3D 2; =0A=
 }    else { =0A=
 b =3D 0; =0A=
 }  if (b =3D=3D 1) { =0A=
 var toolkit =3D java.awt.Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit();  var size =3D =
toolkit.getScreenSize();  width =3D self.innerWidth;  if (width >=3D =
772) greater =3D 1; } else if (b =3D=3D 2) { =0A=
   if (document.body.clientWidth >=3D 772) greater =3D 1; } =0A=
 if (greater =3D=3D 1) { =0A=
document.write("<br clear=3D'all' /><style type=3D'text/css'>@media =
print {.nopr {display:none}}</style><div class=3D'nopr'><table =
cellpading=3D'0' cellspacing=3D'0' border=3D'0' align=3D'right' =
width=3D'300'><tr valign=3D'top'><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td> <td =
align=3D'right'><font size=3D'-1' =
color=3D'#666666'><strong>advertisement</strong></font></td></tr><tr =
valign=3D'top'> <td nowrap>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td bgcolor=3D'#ffffff' =
align=3D'center' valign=3D'middle'>");document.write("<IFRAME =
WIDTH=3D'300' HEIGHT=3D'250' MARGINWIDTH=3D'0' MARGINHEIGHT=3D'0' =
HSPACE=3D'0' VSPACE=3D'0' FRAMEBORDER=3D'0' SCROLLING=3D'no' =
BORDERCOLOR=3D'#000000' =
SRC=3D'http://campaigns.f2.com.au/html.ng/cat=3Dnews&ctype=3Dstory&subcat=
=3Dopinion&site=3Dage&adspace=3D300x250'><SCRIPT =
LANGUAGE=3D'JavaScript1.1' =
SRC=3D'http://campaigns.f2.com.au/js.ng/cat=3Dnews&ctype=3Dstory&Params.r=
ichmedia=3Dyes&subcat=3Dopinion&site=3Dage&adspace=3D300x250'></SCRIPT><N=
OSCRIPT><A =
HREF=3D'http://campaigns.f2.com.au/click.ng/cat=3Dnews&ctype=3Dstory&Para=
ms.richmedia=3Dyes&subcat=3Dopinion&site=3Dage&adspace=3D300x250'><IMG =
SRC=3D'http://campaigns.f2.com.au/image.ng/cat=3Dnews&ctype=3Dstory&Param=
s.richmedia=3Dyes&subcat=3Dopinion&site=3Dage&adspace=3D300x250' =
HEIGHT=3D'250' WIDTH=3D'300' =
BORDER=3D'0'></A></NOSCRIPT></IFRAME>");document.write("</td></tr><tr =
valign=3D'top'><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td nowrap align=3D'left'><font =
size=3D'-1' =
color=3D'#666666'><strong>advertisement</strong></font></td></tr></table>=
</div>"); =0A=
 } =0A=
 }  =0A=
 // --> </SCRIPT>
</ISLANDAD></P>
<P>As the <I>Post</I> points out, since the Gulf War in 1991, companies =
from=20
more than a dozen nations have either reached or sought agreements to =
develop=20
Iraqi oil fields or repair existing facilities.</P>
<P>According to the latest US Department of Energy background paper on =
Iraq,=20
published in March, the UN had warned in 2000 of a "major breakdown" in =
Iraq's=20
oil industry if spare parts and equipment were not forthcoming.</P>
<P>The US said any extra money should only be used "for short-term =
improvements=20
to the Iraqi oil industry and not to make long-term repairs".</P>
<P>The US Department of Energy said: "As of early January, 2002, the =
head of the=20
UN Iraq program, Benon Sevan, expressed 'grave concern' at the volume of =
'holds'=20
put on contracts for oilfield development, and stated the entire program =
was=20
threatened with paralysis. According to Sevan, these holds amounted to =
nearly=20
2000 contracts worth about $5 billion ($A9 billion), about 80 per cent =
of which=20
were 'held' by the US."</P>
<P>The Iraqi regime-in-waiting, politely known as the Iraqi National =
Congress=20
(an umbrella group financed by US oil interests), has made plain that it =
will=20
not be bound by any of these deals.</P>
<P>The INC leader, Ahmed Chalabi, is quoted in the <I>Post</I> as saying =
he=20
favoured the creation of a US-led consortium to develop Iraq's oil =
fields.=20
Iraq's oil fields are second only to Saudi Arabia, controlled by the US =
through=20
the House of Saud, which the US has guaranteed to protect against =
external or=20
internal threats.</P>
<P>According to the US Department of Energy: "Iraq contains 112 billion =
barrels=20
of proven reserves along with roughly 220 billion barrels of probable =
and=20
possible resources. Iraq's true resource potential may be far greater =
than this,=20
however, as the country is relatively unexplored due to years of war and =

sanctions."</P>
<P>There is nothing new in the US/British policy in the Middle East and =
in Iraq=20
in particular.</P>
<P>Iraq was a client state or, in polite terms, an ally. Client states =
are=20
defined, according to US academic Noam Chomsky, by their obedience, not =
their=20
values. Saddam was given diplomatic cover for as long as he was obedient =
to US=20
interests. Now, he is damned as a monster.</P>
<P>A client oil state was first defined by Lord Curzon, who was the =
British=20
foreign secretary after World War I. He said it was an "Arab facade =
ruled and=20
administered under British guidance and controlled by a native =
Mohammedan and,=20
as far as possible, by an Arab staff . . . There should be no actual=20
incorporation of the conquered territory in the dominions of the =
conqueror, but=20
the absorption may be veiled by such constitutional fictions as a =
protectorate,=20
a sphere of influence, a buffer state and so on".</P>
<P>The US took over the British imperial prize in the Middle East after =
WWII.=20
The official US State Department history (1945, volume 8, page 45) =
noted: "These=20
resources constituted a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of =
the=20
greatest material prizes in world history . . . probably the richest =
economic=20
prize in the world in the field of foreign investment."</P>
<P>The US is not going to give Iraq up without a fight, even if the main =
cost=20
will be damage to its reputation as a good global citizen.</P>
<P>If Australia follows its present course - a more sophisticated =
version of=20
"all the way with LBJ" - we will share the cost, but without the minor =
benefits=20
that might be available to the four members of the Security Council, =
which the=20
US wants on side to provide a moral fig leaf for its policy in the =
Middle=20
East.</P>
<P><I>Kenneth Davidson is a staff=20
columnist.<BR>dissentmagazine@ozemail.com.au</I></P></BOD></DIV></DIV></B=
ODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C2F0AB.43EF3820--