A must read: 

 

http://www.roubini.com/us-monitor/260858/musings_on_plutocracy

 

 

REH

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of D and N
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 4:30 PM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: [Futurework] Secret oil war memos before Iraq invasion

 

Another example of industry hiring overseas.
In case any of you still felt there were noble intentions to motivate the US
and UK to invade Iraq, check out what's below.

Let's just hope FOI rights aren't revoked. As it stands, these memos can
take over a decade to acquire, and then, if you're lucky, it won't be almost
entirely blacked out. Unfortunately, prosecuting the real evil doers is
usually past the point of public outrage, too expensive, and political will
is never there to pursue fellow crooks. In this case, there is no real Iraqi
government left that would want to take action if it could. I wish I were
wrong about that. US and UK taxpayers and military alike will remain amply
deceived as the story gets bumped from most mainstream venues. It's these
issues that really speak to the imbalance of power, when those who actually
pay for vile industrial/military ambitions grow too old, tired and debt
ridden to care. 

Natalia

>From the Independent, UK, April 19th:

The minutes of a series of meetings between ministers and senior oil
executives are at odds with the public denials of self-interest from oil
companies and Western governments at the time. 

The documents were not offered as evidence in the ongoing Chilcot Inquiry
into the UK's involvement in the Iraq war. In March 2003, just before
Britain went to war, Shell denounced reports that it had held talks with
Downing Street about Iraqi oil as "highly inaccurate". BP denied that it had
any "strategic interest" in Iraq, while Tony Blair described "the oil
conspiracy theory" as "the most absurd". 

But documents from October and November the previous year paint a very
different picture. 

Five months before the March 2003 invasion, Baroness Symons, then the Trade
Minister, told BP that the Government believed British energy firms should
be given a share of Iraq's enormous oil and gas reserves as a reward for
Tony Blair's military commitment to US plans for regime change. 

The papers show that Lady Symons agreed to lobby the Bush administration on
BP's behalf because the oil giant feared it was being "locked out" of deals
that Washington was quietly striking with US, French and Russian governments
and their energy firms. 

Minutes of a meeting with BP, Shell and BG (formerly British Gas) on 31
October 2002 read: "Baroness Symons agreed that it would be difficult to
justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had
itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the
crisis." 

The minister then promised to "report back to the companies before
Christmas" on her lobbying efforts. 

The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about
opportunities in Iraq "post regime change". Its minutes state: "Iraq is the
big oil prospect. BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political
deals should not deny them the opportunity." 

After another meeting, this one in October 2002, the Foreign Office's Middle
East director at the time, Edward Chaplin, noted: "Shell and BP could not
afford not to have a stake in [Iraq] for the sake of their long-term
future... We were determined to get a fair slice of the action for UK
companies in a post-Saddam Iraq." 

Whereas BP was insisting in public that it had "no strategic interest" in
Iraq, in private it told the Foreign Office that Iraq was "more important
than anything we've seen for a long time". 

BP was concerned that if Washington allowed TotalFinaElf's existing contact
with Saddam Hussein to stand after the invasion it would make the French
conglomerate the world's leading oil company. BP told the Government it was
willing to take "big risks" to get a share of the Iraqi reserves, the second
largest in the world. 

Over 1,000 documents were obtained under Freedom of Information over five
years by the oil campaigner Greg Muttitt. They reveal that at least five
meetings were held between civil servants, ministers and BP and Shell in
late 2002. 

The 20-year contracts signed in the wake of the invasion were the largest in
the history of the oil industry. They covered half of Iraq's reserves – 60
billion barrels of oil, bought up by companies such as BP and CNPC (China
National Petroleum Company), whose joint consortium alone stands to make
£403m ($658m) profit per year from the Rumaila field in southern Iraq. 

Last week, Iraq raised its oil output to the highest level for almost
decade, 2.7 million barrels a day – seen as especially important at the
moment given the regional volatility and loss of Libyan output. Many
opponents of the war suspected that one of Washington's main ambitions in
invading Iraq was to secure a cheap and plentiful source of oil. 

Mr Muttitt, whose book Fuel on the Fire is published next week, said:
"Before the war, the Government went to great lengths to insist it had no
interest in Iraq's oil. These documents provide the evidence that give the
lie to those claims. 

"We see that oil was in fact one of the Government's most important
strategic considerations, and it secretly colluded with oil companies to
give them access to that huge prize." 

Lady Symons, 59, later took up an advisory post with a UK merchant bank that
cashed in on post-war Iraq reconstruction contracts. Last month she severed
links as an unpaid adviser to Libya's National Economic Development Board
after Colonel Gaddafi started firing on protesters. Last night, BP and Shell
declined to comment. 

www.fuelonthefire.com <http://www.fuelonthefire.com/>  



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/secret-memos-expose-link-betwe
en-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to