No Peace in Iraq - It's the OIL of course...

[Future Shock]

Taken from The New York Times (originally AP Newswire):

Also Monday, a leading Shiite lawmaker suggested that he will pursue a federal region in southern Iraq after next month's elections, pushing forward demands for Shiite autonomy that Sunni leaders fear could tear the country apart.

''We have major missions ahead,'' Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, who heads the largest bloc in the interim parliament, told a gathering of tribal leaders. ''The central and southern regions should be achieved after the elections'' set for Dec. 15.

According to Iraq's new constitution, the country's 18 provinces -- except for Baghdad -- can combine to create self-ruled areas. Kurds have such a region in the north and Sunni Arabs fear that a similar Shiite-run mini-state in the south would deprive them of a share of the nation's oil wealth -- concentrated in those two areas.

Wanna bet why there will be no peace possible...? As usual, it's all about the oil money...

Do we REALLY believe that any amount of US intervention is going to settle this dispute about which religious faction gains the oil wealth??? A lasting settlement?

Our whole internal war debate is centered around the assumption that there are only a few thousand "bad terrorists" that hate us, and if we can neutralize them, then things will settle down. We have an implied assumption that if if this occurs, we can get the Shiites to settle down and participate in the government, and that all will be well...

Suppose that isn't the case - suppose that what we are seeing is merely the outward battle of two factions that each will fight a civil war to the death over the oil wealth - regardless of US intervention, regardless of US wishes. That EACH side sees that the domination of the oil wealth is the key to controlling their destiny - and is willing to fight for as long as necessary for it.

Do we REALLY still buy the assertion that this is all about "creating democracy"? Even if it is or was, do our best wishes trump the innate desire for one or the other factions to dominate the oil wealth - and as they can couch it in religious terms, they could literally fight for decades over this?

Future Shock

NB - Oh, wait, what am I worried about? I'm sure the sensible, trustworthy Iraqi Oil Minister will be able to craft an agreement that will split the oil revenues justly and fairly and avoid a civil war...:roll:

 

[Steeplerot]

It is plainly obvious no matter how much the military contract holding corporate media tells them it is not, it's simply oil and weapons contracts, using the people of iraq that want us gone as shields under the guise of liberation.

the rights supporters in here know it (although they use the excuse war in the mideast is nessasary for our economy) though only a few admit it, they know damn well and are complacent inviting suicide bombers to kill innocents as the arab people are occupied for our greed.

The republicans here think ego, not foreign policy -why shouldnt we "kick ass" and take what we want? right bush fans?

 

[conjur]

Don't misunderestimate the greed of the neocons and their oil baron buddies:

The spoils of war
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article328526.ece

Iraqis face the dire prospect of losing up to $200bn (£116bn) of the wealth of their country if an American-inspired plan to hand over development of its oil reserves to US and British multinationals comes into force next year. A report produced by American and British pressure groups warns Iraq will be caught in an "old colonial trap" if it allows foreign companies to take a share of its vast energy reserves. The report is certain to reawaken fears that the real purpose of the 2003 war on Iraq was to ensure its oil came under Western control.

The Iraqi government has announced plans to seek foreign investment to exploit its oil reserves after the general election, which will be held next month. Iraq has 115 billion barrels of proved oil reserves, the third largest in the world.

According to the report, from groups including War on Want and the New Economics Foundation (NEF), the new Iraqi constitution opened the way for greater foreign investment. Negotiations with oil companies are already under way ahead of next month's election and before legislation is passed, it said.

The groups said they had amassed details of high-level pressure from the US and UK governments on Iraq to look to foreign companies to rebuild its oil industry. It said a Foreign Office code of practice issued in summer last year said at least $4bn would be needed to restore production to the levels before the 1990-91 Gulf War. "Given Iraq's needs it is not realistic to cut government spending in other areas and Iraq would need to engage with the international oil companies to provide appropriate levels of foreign direct investment to do this," it said.

Yesterday's report said the use of production sharing agreements (PSAs) was proposed by the US State Department before the invasion and adopted by the Coalition Provisional Authority. "The current government is fast-tracking the process. It is already negotiating contracts with oil companies in parallel with the constitutional process, elections and passage of a Petroleum Law," the report, Crude Designs, said.

Earlier this year a BBC Newsnight report claimed to have uncovered documents showing the Bush administration made plans to secure Iraqi oil even before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US. Based on its analysis of PSAs in seven countries, it said multinationals would seek rates of return on their investment from 42 to 162 per cent, far in excess of typical 12 per cent rates.

Taking an assumption of $40 a barrel, below the current price of almost $60, and a likely contract term of 25 to 40 years, it said that Iraq stood to lose between £74bn and $194bn. Andrew Simms, the NEF's policy director, said: "Over the last century, Britain and the US left a global trail of conflict, social upheaval and environmental damage as they sought to capture and control a disproportionate share of the world's oil reserves. Now it seems they are determined to increase their ecological debts at Iraq's expense. Instead of a new beginning, Iraq is caught in a very old colonial trap."

Seems I posted about this before:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1545789&enterthread=y&arctab=y

And related:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1594587&enterthread=y&arctab=y


So, the U.S. *will* get ahold of Iraq's oil revenue. It's just that instead of using that money to pay for the cost of the invasion, it will go to the neocons' oil baron buddies.

 

[irwincur]

using the people of iraq that want us gone as shields under the guise of liberation.

Could you please provide a reliable source for this information? I have yet to see anything that suggests the majority of Iraqi's want us gone at the moment. Yes, in the long term I would think that most of them do - however they also know what role we are playing at the moment.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: irwincur

using the people of iraq that want us gone as shields under the guise of liberation.

Could you please provide a reliable source for this information? I have yet to see anything that suggests the majority of Iraqi's want us gone at the moment. Yes, in the long term I would think that most of them do - however they also know what role we are playing at the moment.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

BAGHDAD ? Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll. (Graphic: Iraqis surveyed)

The nationwide survey, the most comprehensive look at Iraqi attitudes toward the occupation, was conducted in late March and early April. It reached nearly 3,500 Iraqis of every religious and ethnic group.

And that was 18 months ago. I'm sure by now (after another 20,000 Iraqis have been killed) that they just LOVE the U.S. troops being over there.

 

[Votingisanillusion]

Originally posted by: conjur
Don't misunderestimate the greed of the neocons and their oil baron buddies:

The spoils of war
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article328526.ece

Iraqis face the dire prospect of losing up to $200bn (£116bn) of the wealth of their country if an American-inspired plan to hand over development of its oil reserves to US and British multinationals comes into force next year. A report produced by American and British pressure groups warns Iraq will be caught in an "old colonial trap" if it allows foreign companies to take a share of its vast energy reserves. The report is certain to reawaken fears that the real purpose of the 2003 war on Iraq was to ensure its oil came under Western control.

The Iraqi government has announced plans to seek foreign investment to exploit its oil reserves after the general election, which will be held next month. Iraq has 115 billion barrels of proved oil reserves, the third largest in the world.

According to the report, from groups including War on Want and the New Economics Foundation (NEF), the new Iraqi constitution opened the way for greater foreign investment. Negotiations with oil companies are already under way ahead of next month's election and before legislation is passed, it said.

The groups said they had amassed details of high-level pressure from the US and UK governments on Iraq to look to foreign companies to rebuild its oil industry. It said a Foreign Office code of practice issued in summer last year said at least $4bn would be needed to restore production to the levels before the 1990-91 Gulf War. "Given Iraq's needs it is not realistic to cut government spending in other areas and Iraq would need to engage with the international oil companies to provide appropriate levels of foreign direct investment to do this," it said.

Yesterday's report said the use of production sharing agreements (PSAs) was proposed by the US State Department before the invasion and adopted by the Coalition Provisional Authority. "The current government is fast-tracking the process. It is already negotiating contracts with oil companies in parallel with the constitutional process, elections and passage of a Petroleum Law," the report, Crude Designs, said.

Earlier this year a BBC Newsnight report claimed to have uncovered documents showing the Bush administration made plans to secure Iraqi oil even before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US. Based on its analysis of PSAs in seven countries, it said multinationals would seek rates of return on their investment from 42 to 162 per cent, far in excess of typical 12 per cent rates.

Taking an assumption of $40 a barrel, below the current price of almost $60, and a likely contract term of 25 to 40 years, it said that Iraq stood to lose between £74bn and $194bn. Andrew Simms, the NEF's policy director, said: "Over the last century, Britain and the US left a global trail of conflict, social upheaval and environmental damage as they sought to capture and control a disproportionate share of the world's oil reserves. Now it seems they are determined to increase their ecological debts at Iraq's expense. Instead of a new beginning, Iraq is caught in a very old colonial trap."

Seems I posted about this before:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1545789&enterthread=y&arctab=y

And related:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1594587&enterthread=y&arctab=y


So, the U.S. *will* get ahold of Iraq's oil revenue. It's just that instead of using that money to pay for the cost of the invasion, it will go to the neocons' oil baron buddies.

Why should Iraq's wealth pay for an invasion they did not ask for? Anyway, thanks for that article.