Iraqi Oil Law Gives Cover for Corporate Profit By Emad Mekay, IPS News Posted on March 2, 2007, Printed on March 5, 2007 http://www.alternet.org/story/48605/
quote:
The U.S.-backed Iraqi cabinet approved a new oil law Monday that is set to give foreign companies the long-term contracts and safe legal framework they have been waiting for, but which has rattled labour unions and international campaigners who say oil production should remain in the hands of Iraqis.
Independent analysts and labour groups have also criticised the process of drafting the law and warned that that the bill is so skewed in favour of foreign firms that it could end up heightening political tensions in the Arab nation and spreading instability.
For example, it specifies that up to two-thirds of Iraq's known reserves would be developed by multinationals, under contracts lasting for 15 to 20 years.
This policy would represent a u-turn for Iraq's oil industry, which has been in the public sector for more than three decades, and would break from normal practice in the Middle East.
According to local labour leaders, transferring ownership to the foreign companies would give a further pretext to continue the U.S. occupation on the grounds that those companies will need protection.
Union leaders have complained that they, along with other civil society groups, were left out of the drafting process despite U.S. claims it has created a functioning democracy in Iraq.
Under the production-sharing agreements provided for in the draft law, companies will not come under the jurisdiction of Iraqi courts in the event of a dispute, nor to the general auditor.
The ownership of the oil reserves under this draft law will remain with the state in form, but not in substance, critics say.
On Feb. 8, the labour unions sent a letter in Arabic to Iraqi President Jalal Talbani urging him to reconsider this kind of agreement.
"Production-sharing agreements are a relic of the 1960s," said the letter. "They will re-imprison the Iraqi economy and impinge on Iraq's sovereignty since they only preserve the interests of foreign companies. We warn against falling into this trap."
Ewa Jasiewicz, a researcher at PLATFORM, a British human rights and environmental group that monitors the oil industry, told IPS in a phone interview from London that, "First of all, it hasn't been put together in any kind of democratic process... It's been put through a war and an occupation which in itself is a grotesquely undemocratic process."
The law was prepared by a three-member Iraqi cabinet committee, dominated by the Kurds and the Shiites. It is now expected to be ratified by parliament because the powerful faction leaders in the government have cleared it.
The first draft was seen only by the committee of the Iraqi technocrat who penned it, nine international oil companies, the British and the U.S. governments and the International Monetary Fund. The Iraqi parliament will get its first glimpse next week.
Concerns about the process are compounded because of the ongoing disputes in Iraq over the legitimacy of the Iraqi cabinet and the Iraqi parliament, which have been constructed by the occupation-created governing council, which itself was created in 2004 along sectarian lines.
In a speech earlier this month by Hassan Juma, head of the Iraqi Oil Labour Union, posted on the union's website, he called on the Iraqi government to consult with Iraqi oil experts and "ask their opinion before sinking Iraq into an ocean of dark injustice."
The content of the law has also worried both international campaigners and local Iraqi groups who say that it puts Iraqi oil wealth firmly on the path to full privatisation.
"The hydrocarbon law reflects the process of readying Iraq's oil for privatisation," said Jasiewicz. "Drafted in secret, shaped by foreign powers, untransparent, undemocratic and forced through under military occupation."
Jasiewicz said the law can be regarded as the economic goal of the war and occupation and that "it will be viewed by most Iraqis as not just illegitimate, but a war crime."
But officials from the Iraqi government, who have already sent the draft oil law to parliament for consideration, say it represents a step forward for the war-torn country. Under the law, oil revenues would be distributed to all 18 provinces based on population size, and regional administrations have the authority to negotiate contracts with international oil companies.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a close ally of Washington, called the law "another founding stone in state-building."
"This law will guarantee for Iraqis, not just now but for future generations too, complete national control over this natural wealth," Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani has reportedly said.
Initial drafts of the law starting eight months ago saw squabbles between the Kurdish factions who control the northern part of Iraq and the Shiite-led regime, as they both vied for bigger shares of the country's oil wealth, estimated at 115 billion barrels. That they have finally come to a final agreement may be a sign of long-sought stability.
Yet critics, including Iraqi oil professionals, engineers and technicians in the unions, are instead advocating for technical service contracts, meaning a company would come in and offer services such as building a refinery, laying a pipeline, or offering consultancy services, get their fees and then leave.
"It is a much more equitable relationship because the control of production, development of oil will stay with the Iraqi state," said Jasiewicz.
"That is the model that Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait generally operate. There's no other country in the Middle East with the kind of oil reserves that Iraq has that would consider signing a production-sharing agreement," she said. "It's a form of privatisation and that's why those countries haven't signed these because it's not in their interests."
I was wondering when this was going to surface. If Sunrise was still around would have been up days ago.
No comment at this time.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
I've been posting about this for awhile, although not in the depth given here.
The analysis is really very simple: if the U.S. had as its top priority the rebuilding of Iraq, the U.S. would not push a law that would have so much money to be taken out of the country. The U.S.'s motive is thereby indicted.
And we the public are paying through the nose from the U.S. Treasury in order to secure sweet deals for oil multinationals.
Eveyone except the oil multibationals loses (many U.S. personnel lose their lives).
This message has been edited. Last edited by: BrentBoz-Hell,
If people focused more on the outcomes rather than the rhetoric, things would be so much clearer.
With rhetoric, it is so easy to claim its the "terrorists" fault that things aren't happening in the rebuilding effort. But the fact is, they've botched up the job all along.
When you see policies like this getting pushed through, it begins to make sense. The botched job gave them the distraction they needed to pull off this theft of Iraqi wealth.
For the record, I would be against PSA's, Service contracts are a different matter.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
The botched job gave them the distraction they needed to pull off this theft of Iraqi wealth.
There has been no theft of Iraqi Wealth.
There MAY be theft of Iraqi Wealth, But there HAS NOT BEEN any theft as of yet.
Just keeping you honest.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
For the time being. My high road only extends as far as what the Iraqi people want. I think their long term interest is served by doing it themselves. However that may conflict with their short term needs of getting their oil infrastucture up and running quickly.
IF they wanted to do PSA's I dont see where US based OIL companies need to sit on the sidelines while every other Russia, French, Chinese, Dutch oil company gets to bid on the PSA's.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
There MAY be theft of Iraqi Wealth, But there HAS NOT BEEN any theft as of yet.
While technically true that this particular legislation hasn't passed yet, that doesn't mean we haven't stolen anything from them. We stole their sovereignty, for example. And it doesn't look like we're actually going to give it back, unless they submit to our will.
But that's speculation.
quote:
For the time being. My high road only extends as far as what the Iraqi people want. I think their long term interest is served by doing it themselves. However that may conflict with their short term needs of getting their oil infrastucture up and running quickly.
Loganthor posted: "There has been no theft of Iraqi Wealth"
Au contraire, Loganthor. The approx. $9 bil. that was the Iraqi state's oil revenue was under the control of the Coalition Provisional Authority when it was handed out to who knows who with no documentation having been done.
As for PSAs vs, service contracts: The Iraqis have been extracting petroleum for quite awhile. Possibly they might only need the latest technology (which they wouldn'tt have due to the sanctions). So the basic know-how is definitely there and whatever else to be provided could come from neighboring, oil-producing states. If they actually just need more equipment, I'm sure that could be purchased on credit, considering the country's assets.
Au contraire, Loganthor. The approx. $9 bil. that was the Iraqi state's oil revenue was under the control of the Coalition Provisional Authority when it was handed out to who knows who with no documentation having been done.
I'm not even going to look into that. Do you have anything that possibly supports your contention that there was a theft or are you just throwing stuff on the wall to see what sticks.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
1) All facts are questionable, unless they support the right wing cause.
I asked for facts. Is that too much to ask a liberal for. Or does that just confuse the dogma. Feel free to post the "facts" that support the left wing cause. I can deal with those also.
To clarify, Everything is questinable, As long as it is a good question.
*** And yes, I am the one who determines good questions *** Ordained by God herself
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
Originally posted by BrentBozo: Loganthor- the money is gone and no one with knowledge of where it has gone will say where it's gone, and this was done under CPA authority.
A theft.
But Brent, I thought we were talking about Iraqi Oil. If you want to discuss theft of US tax dollars, that seems to be a different issue. Not that that is not important also, but more important that they get a benefit from their oil.
Posts: 7939 | Location: Santa Barbara | Registered: 19 July 2005
To clarify, Everything is questinable, As long as it is a good question.
*** And yes, I am the one who determines good questions *** Ordained by God herself Big Grin
At first I thought great! Skepticism is the most healthy approach to anything, then the good question part reduced it to a hannity "yes or no, have you quit beating your wife?"
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
At first I thought great! Skepticism is the most healthy approach to anything, then the good question part reduced it to a hannity "yes or no, have you quit beating your wife?"
Was the topic geopolitical Nuclear Iran or Domestic Violence?
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
Originally posted by BrentBozo: Loganthor- the money is gone and no one with knowledge of where it has gone will say where it's gone, and this was done under CPA authority.
A theft.
But Brent, I thought we were talking about Iraqi Oil. If you want to discuss theft of US tax dollars, that seems to be a different issue. Not that that is not important also, but more important that they get a benefit from their oil.
Actually the money in question as I understand it was Iraqi assets seized by the U.S government not U.S tax payer dollars.
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion<br />The Treaty of Tripoli 1797
I posted about the loss, misplacement or "theft" of the Iraqi oil revenues (which had been seized by the U.S. gov. & were handed out by the CPA) because Loganthor, in making the point that the Iraqi parliament is yet to okay the new oil law, also stated that thusfar there's been no theft of Iraqi wealth (Loganthor contended).
Paul Bremer testified that he didn't know what the CPA did with the Iraqi oil revenue.