Muckers
I'm not sure if the American "left" or "opposition", is intentionally mindmucking facts or if they really are this stupid. I posed this question to myself after reading yet another scolding from the "left", Big Oil in Iraq: "World Class Racketeering."
(For starters, all big business (and government) is "racketeering," racketeering defined as extortion. Or do you pay taxes to the city, county, state, and federal level because you love them? Do you pay big premiums on home, car, health, and life insurance because you love paying, or because you fear not paying, or by law you have to pay them? Do you pump your kids full of mercury vaccinations because you love them or because you have to? Does your local copshop protect and serve you, or write tickets for quota and harass the lower class neighborhoods?)
The above article from a "left" blogazine states : "Those who want to hold Iraqis "accountable" with a series of benchmarks that are important to Washington fail to understand what those benchmarks are about to begin with."
Well, like it or not, Iraqis are "accountable." Accountable in that, after defeat, a good deal of their future is in their own hands.
Fortunately, the Anglo hoards have not slaughtered en masse or enslaved the natives. Fortunately this time the Anglo crusaders have not dropped atomic "fat man" and "little boy." Fortunately, the conquistadors have not planted a flag and claimed it all for the crown.
And, like it or not, those benchmarks are important not just to Washington, but to Joe Schmoe and Abid Mahmud.
Blogazine : "… Iraq is being pressured to pass the hydrocarbon laws at a time when we don't even know, for example, what regions will even exist that might lay claim to a portion of the oil revenues."
Okay, the law proposes federalized control over oil/gas resources and sharing revenue proportionately with each province according to population size. As in California receives more federal funds than Rhode Island. The regions in Iraq are simple : north, central, south, Kurds, Sunni, Shia. Why pretend this is more complicated? Only a bullshitter would confuse the situation by suggesting new regions might exist in the future and therefore no agreements can be made today.
Blogazine : "It's not like there's any need to rush to pass the law for Iraq to produce oil. Iraq has 115 billion barrels of proven reserves in 80 fields (20 of which are currently in production). If it were to build up to a capacity of 10 bbd production, it wouldn't have to discover any new reserves for at least ten years.
What?! No rush?? If not revenues from oil production then do tell where and what monies are coming in to fill the Iraqi government coffers? All that oil wealth could be going into infrastructure and programs for the Iraqi people and this clown says no rush? And child, 10 years passes very quickly.
Then there's the usual poll citing " …. Michigan poll ... found that even before the framework draft was introduced, 76 percent of Iraqis believe the U.S. invaded Iraq to control its oil." Michigan has a large Arab/Muslim population, but yes, US invaded for the oil. And your point is? Can you undo what has been done, or just gripe?
Should Anglo/US oil giants concede to Saudi Aramco, Putin Gazprom, CNPC China, NIOC Iran, King Hugo's PDVSA, Brazil’s Petrobras or Petronas of Malaysia? In case you haven't noticed - those giants are the only alternative to US/Anglo Oil Giants.
That's not how it works folks. As despicable as BushCo and the war is – you don't die and spend and bleed and then lick the shitty end of the stick.
It's business. Iraq can write a mutually good deal with Big Oil because they have what Big Oil wants – oil and lots of it, and Big Oil has what Iraq wants – the investment to make it happen.
Another claim the "left" makes against Anglo oil racketeers in Iraq are the PSAs. Profit/production sharing agreements. The last I read the Iraq PSA with Big Oil was a 20 year contract. A good deal. A little googling shows African nations with small oil reserves are signed into PSA deals, i.e. Libya, Angola, Nigeria, and some nations for 40 year contracts. PSAs are signed for exploration blocks and production all over all the time. I don't hear the left shouting about the racketeering deals Big Oil makes with corrupt African regimes.
Nor do I hear the left listing other options the people of Iraq have (or Americans). What would the "left" suggest?
Kick the US out and hope Russia and China roll into town with a better deal? Suggest that regional rescuers such as Saudi/Iran will offer world class deals that Iraq can't refuse? Or maybe Iraq can just go it alone? Put their oil up as collateral and borrow megabucks from the IMF/World Bank to invest and get their fields up and pumping revenues. And of course, so the "left" feels good about themselves - let UN troops "keep the peace."
4 comments:
Iraq was doing just fine going it alone before the first gulf war and the sanctions that followed. There's no reason to think they got suddenly stupid and can't do it again.
The problem is money to fix all that we and the UN have broken in the last 16 years. We're responsible, and we should make good on it.
If PSAs were a good deal for Iraq, they'd be jumping on them. But the difference between Iraq and the countries you cite is that Iraq has a HUGE amount of oil. They don't need foreign investors. They need fair reparations.
abi
Iraq hasn't done well at least since 1922 when the British renamed the area "Iraq" and recognized it as a kingdom. Then there was King Faisal II , and Ghazi I, Prince Abdul-Illah, the pro-Hitler monarchy. Then the 1958 coup with Kassim, who reversed the monarchy's pro-Western policies and wanted to reverse the disparities between rich and poor, and form alliances with Communist countries. But along came the Baath Socialist Party to do a coup on Kassim, then Saddam Hussein. Other than a small middle and affluent class most Iraqis have not done well for a very, very long time, living under brutal and corrupt and conquering caliphates, monarchies, authoritarian dictators, etc.
Before Gulf War 1 and 2 Iraq was not "going it alone", and was dealing with Anglo/Big Oil companies, and has been since oil became much more valuable with the invention of the engine. They do need foreign investment; they need a fair deal, as do many other places around the world.
Iraq's oil is useless to them if they cannot agree on when and who will pump it out of the ground. If not Anglo/US, who? Are you comfortable with Russia and/or China receiving the bulk of Iraq oil contracts?
"There's no reason to think they got suddenly stupid and can't do it again." The ruling class of Iraqi are not stupid; like our own, they may be greedy and have personal agendas, but the average Iraqi is much like the average Joe Merican – picking and choosing which sound bytes or team he will side with.
That the Iraqi ruling elite are not jumping on the PSAs deals is not proof enough for me that the deals are bad. There are too many other factors and influences that could be going on, i.e. other foreign powers in the wings, perhaps not with better deals for the people/oil but better deals and promises of power to Iraqis' ruling class.
I would no more support reparations for Iraq than I would the descendants of American slavery. Reparations would be nothing more than yet another taxpayer funded trough for the Iraqi and Anglo ruling class to administer to themselves.
We should demand Big Oil profits are partially used to rebuild Iraq – not expect Joe Average to foot the bill – again.
We should find, convict, and imprison corrupt officials, politicians, contractors, and heads of business.
We should demand PSAs be made totally public but that has never been done, other countries, just as the US, don't want the commoners to know the truth regarding ruling class business deals.
We should demand US pols work to stabilize the ME and bring ME leaders together. We should dismantle Irsrael's nuclear capabilities.
I could find a dozen more "shoulds" to tackle the Iraq situation but none, at this late date, include bringing our all marbles home and bending Joe over for reparations.
By 'doing just fine' and 'going it alone,' I was talking about managing oil production, since oil was the subject of your post. They don't need to give up control of oil production. They need money to kick-start the industry again.
Reparations for slavery would be impractical at this late date, but not so for Iraq.
I agree Iraqis "don't need to give up control of oil production." And I'm not convinced US oil is demanding they do. Without stability no country is going to risk kick-starting Iraq oil.
The US goal was to destroy or weaken OPEC, greatly reduce dependency on Saudi oil, obtain long-term involvement in Iraq oil - and an ample cheaper supply flowing to the US. Good goals – if it benefits both average Iraqis and Americans which it could if done right. Might piss off Hugo and the House of Saud though.
It was a given that those countries not in the "coalition" would eventually be punished when the contracts began – i.e. France, Germany – but both now with leaders who support the invasion, more lap poodles for BushCo/USA. Russia, having billions in loans and contracts to Saddam also has to walk a fine line to re-coop funds in the future.
It's a given that other world powers would benefit by US failure in Iraq, i.e. the new "Seven Sisters" oil companies, OPEC nations, China, India, etc. and there's no guarantee the Iraqis would get any better deal from those players.
Would if I could change it but Iraq has to deal from a disadvantage.
Large scale reparations to any race or nation is impractical. There's simply too much corruption in the system that would pay out the monies and the people who deserve it would see little to none of it.
If the US cannot sustain Iraq stability – there are other nations who will – and at much greater cost to Iraqis than the bungling politically correct pandering US who can't seem to shit or get off the pot.
Would if I could make it a better world.
Post a Comment