Enfrentamientos entre ESMAD y campesinos en Tibú 17:48 Jun 13 6 comments
Bombardeos y detenciones de campesinos del alto Ariari, Meta, Colombia 17:44 Jun 13 0 comments
Haïti : première victime de la tentation impériale du Brésil 00:11 Jun 13 0 comments
Negociaciones de paz en Colombia: Entre el cielo y el infierno 19:54 Jun 10 0 comments
Colombia y la OTAN: Las uvas no están maduras 23:24 Jun 07 0 commentsmore >>
Recent articles by Anarcho
Proudhon, Marx and the Paris Commune 0 commentsRecent Articles about Mashriq / Arabia / Iraq Imperialism / War
التضامن الط... May 21 13
١ی ئایار، ڕ... May 03 13
Iraqi Study Group
mashriq / arabia / iraq | imperialism / war | opinion / analysis Tuesday December 12, 2006 19:47 by Anarcho
That the invasion of Iraq was not called "Operation Iraqi Liberty" will do down in history as a missed opportunity for two administrations which seem intend on ensuring the redundancy of satire. For those with any sort of grasp on reality, the large reserves of oil under that country was always a key issue for the Bush Junta (that, and the dilapidated nature of Saddam's war machine and lack of WMD). The desire for a US client state in the heart of the Middle Eastern oil fields has long been a goal of US/UK imperialism.
The recent Iraqi Study Group report makes this extremely clear. As it says, "Iraq is vital to regional and even global stability, and is critical to U.S. interests. It runs along the sectarian fault lines of Shia and Sunni Islam, and of Kurdish and Arab populations. It has the world's second-largest known oil reserves. It is now a base of operations for international terrorism, including al Qaeda." That the Bush Junta made the last sentence become true by its invasion is also a truism.
On the details of what to do next, the report's specific recommendation section is also illuminating. Recommendation 62 states that the "U.S. military should work with the Iraqi military and with private security forces to protect oil infrastructure and contractors. Protective measures could include a program to improve pipeline security by paying local tribes solely on the basis of throughput (rather than fixed amounts)." In addition, "in conjunction with the International Monetary Fund, the U.S. government should press Iraq to continue reducing subsidies in the energy sector, instead of providing grant assistance. Until Iraqis pay market prices for oil products, drastic fuel shortages will remain."
Wonderful -- after turning Iraq into a slaughter house, the least the occupiers could do is let the population have some cheap oil, but no. Subsidies harm profits and they have to go. Which is the key to recommendation 63: "The United States should encourage investment in Iraq's oil sector by the international community and by international energy companies . . . [and] should assist Iraqi leaders to reorganize the national oil industry as a commercial enterprise, in order to enhance efficiency, transparency, and accountability." In other words, open up Iraq's oil to western corporations. Let them make the profits, not the population who has paid the ultimate price. Hence the need, also stated in recommendation 63, for the US to "provide technical assistance to the Iraqi government to prepare a draft oil law."
Which is, of course, a long-term stated aim of the invasion. The US State Department's Oil and Energy Working Group, meeting between December 2002 and April 2003, also said that Iraq "should be opened to international oil companies as quickly as possible after the war." The right-wing Heritage Foundation think-tank also released a report in March 2003 calling for the full privatisation of Iraq's oil sector. Unsurprisingly, a representative of the foundation was s a member of the Iraq Study Group while another assisted in its work.
Given this advocacy for securing foreign companies' long-term access to Iraqi oil fields, it is unsurprising that the report did not advocate immediate withdrawal. No, the report aims to continue the occupation while, at the same time, presenting the image of trying to end it. It is extremely doubtful that any genuinely popular Iraqi regime will support the commercialisation and opening up of Iraqi oil to foreign firms and so the need for occupation for several more years while, at the same time, as appearing to seek a withdrawal.
Which raises the question, how long will we tolerate spilling blood for oil?
Wed 19 Jun, 09:59
Palestine-Israel, Some activities the Anarchists Against the Wall initiative involved with lately 17:23 Tue 15 Feb 0 comments
Iraqi trade union leader on the current situation in Iraq 20:28 Wed 03 Oct 0 comments
Israel: "Occupation 40" - first actions in Tel Aviv 16:48 Wed 06 Jun 1 comments
6 days of protests to mark 40 years of occupation 18:50 Tue 05 Jun 0 comments
Italy: "Resistance, disobedience, solidarity" - an evening with an Israeli refusni 17:09 Tue 21 Nov 0 comments
Israel, Direct action near the border of Gaza Strip 01:29 Sun 19 Nov 0 comments
655,000 Dead in Iraq since Invasion 17:23 Fri 13 Oct 0 comments
Statement on al-Badil article 16:51 Mon 11 Sep 0 comments
Lebanon- The Smoke, Anguish and Terror of a Fascist Attack 21:28 Sat 02 Sep 1 comments
On the slaughter in the Middle East 13:33 Sat 19 Aug 19 commentsmore >>
A Close look at the Syrian revolution Nov 06 3 comments
Imperial Echoes - The Salvador Option in Iraq Nov 05 0 comments
Palestine: No State Solution Aug 25 0 comments
Call for An Anarchist Manifesto about Palestine Apr 20 9 commentsmore >>
6 days of protests to mark 40 years of occupation Jun 05 0 comments
Statement on al-Badil article Sep 11 AL 0 comments
Lebanon- The Smoke, Anguish and Terror of a Fascist Attack Sep 02 Grupo Qhispikay Llaqta, Perú 1 comments
On the slaughter in the Middle East Aug 19 Anarkismo 19 comments
News from Lebanon : the Israeli attack Jul 30 (Libertarian Communist Alternative) 11 commentsmore >>