Secret U.S. Plans For Iraq's Oil well before 9/11

[Kulapavana 0]

Source: BBC

 

Secret U.S. Plans For Iraq's Oil

By: Greg Palast Reporting for BBC Newsnight

 

Thur Mar 17, 2005 08:25 AM ET

 

MACON,GA.- The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.

 

Two years ago today - when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protestors claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.

 

In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists."

 

"Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants.

 

Insiders told Newsnight that planning began "within weeks" of Bush's first taking office in 2001, long before the September 11th attack on the US.

 

An Iraqi-born oil industry consultant Falah Aljibury says he took part in the secret meetings in California, Washington and the Middle East. He described a State Department plan for a forced coup d'etat.

 

Mr Aljibury himself told Newsnight that he interviewed potential successors to Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Bush administration.

 

Secret sell-off plan

 

The industry-favored plan was pushed aside by yet another secret plan, drafted just before the invasion in 2003, which called for the sell-off of all of Iraq's oil fields. The new plan, crafted by neo-conservatives intent on using Iraq's oil to destroy the Opec cartel through massive increases in production above Opec quotas.

 

The sell-off was given the green light in a secret meeting in London headed by Ahmed Chalabi shortly after the US entered Baghdad, according to Robert Ebel. Mr. Ebel, a former Energy and CIA oil analyst, now a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, flew to the London meeting, he told Newsnight, at the request of the State Department.

 

Mr Aljibury, once Ronald Reagan's "back-channel" to Saddam, claims that plans to sell off Iraq's oil, pushed by the US-installed Governing Council in 2003, helped instigate the insurgency and attacks on US and British occupying forces.

 

"Insurgents used this, saying, 'Look, you're losing your country, your losing your resources to a bunch of wealthy billionaires who want to take you over and make your life miserable," said Mr Aljibury from his home near San Francisco.

 

"We saw an increase in the bombing of oil facilities, pipelines, built on the premise that privatization is coming."

 

Privatization blocked by industry

 

Philip Carroll, the former CEO of Shell Oil USA who took control of Iraq's oil production for the US Government a month after the invasion, stalled the sell-off scheme.

 

Mr Carroll told us he made it clear to Paul Bremer, the US occupation chief who arrived in Iraq in May 2003, that: "There was to be no privatization of Iraqi oil resources or facilities while I was involved."

 

The chosen successor to Mr Carroll, a Conoco Oil executive, ordered up a new plan for a state oil company preferred by the industry.

 

Ari Cohen, of the neo-conservative Heritage Foundation, told Newsnight that an opportunity had been missed to privatize Iraq's oil fields. He advocated the plan as a means to help the US defeat Opec, and said America should have gone ahead with what he called a "no-brainer" decision.

 

Mr Carroll hit back, telling Newsnight, "I would agree with that statement. To privatize would be a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brain."

 

New plans, obtained from the State Department by Newsnight and Harper's Magazine under the US Freedom of Information Act, called for creation of a state-owned oil company favored by the US oil industry. It was completed in January 2004, Harper's discovered, under the guidance of Amy Jaffe of the James Baker Institute in Texas. Former US Secretary of State Baker is now an attorney. His law firm, Baker Botts, is representing ExxonMobil and the Saudi Arabian government.

 

View segments of Iraq oil plans at

www.GregPalast.com/opeconthemarch.html.

 

Questioned by Newsnight, Ms Jaffe said the oil industry prefers state control of Iraq's oil over a sell-off because it fears a repeat of Russia's energy privatization. In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, US oil companies were barred from bidding for the reserves.

 

Jaffe said "There is no question that an American oil company ... would not be enthusiastic about a plan that would privatize all the assets with Iraq companies and they (US companies) might be left out of the transaction."

 

In addition, Ms. Jaffe says US oil companies are not warm to any plan that would undermine Opec, "They [oil companies] have to worry about the price of oil."

 

"I'm not sure that if I'm the chair of an American company, and you put me on a lie detector test, I would say high oil prices are bad for me or my company."

 

The former Shell oil boss agrees. In Houston, he told Newsnight, "Many neo-conservatives are people who have certain ideological beliefs about markets, about democracy, about this that and the other. International oil companies without exception are very pragmatic commercial organizations. They don't have a theology."

[Kulapavana 0]

said the joker to the thief...

 

 

sure it was all about them WMD's and bad Saddam...

 

LOL!!!!

[theist 1]

 

The former Shell oil boss agrees. In Houston, he told Newsnight, "Many neo-conservatives are people who have certain ideological beliefs about markets, about democracy, about this that and the other. International oil companies without exception are very pragmatic commercial organizations. They don't have a theology."

 

 

Was it Shell or some other US oil compamny was getting oil from Angola and making the govt. there rich. Not the people of Angola mind you just the few who were in charge. They were communists in name but never shared the wealth.

 

A rebellion arose I forgot the guys name,I think his group was known as Unita. Anyway they have quite a little war going on trying to oust the communists and the US was helping them. meanwhile inFidel Castro sent his army to fight for the communists. he charged them 1,000US a month per head. How were they paid? Why from the money earned from selling land rights and oil to US companies.

 

This is the threat from unbridled capitailism. More money is the only name of the game. No principles or sense of dharma just greed.

 

 

 

[theist 1]

For me it was always about the Iraq people who were being put alive through industrial size shredders and etc.

 

No laughing matter.

[rand0M aXiS 0]

or under Saddam is the question. It is obvious. The photos of the masses giving the insurgents the purple finger is the proof.

 

If it was about oil, then we would have left Iraq alone and ended the sanctions. But I'm not bothering to answer the lunatic leftists.

[Kulapavana 0]

maybe these are YOUR reasons for supporting this dirty war, but these are not the reasons why this war was started. there are numerous countries where people are butchered by the thousands (just look at Africa) and where US done nothing.

 

killing 100,000 civilians during this war is not funny either.

[Kulapavana 0]

lunacies come in many shapes - look in the mirror maybe you can see a couple /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

as to being a "leftie": ahahahahahaha...

 

politically speaking I'm so far to the right, you folks blur right with Ted Kennedy /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

(you have not been here long, but you can ask theist for confirmation)

[krsna 3]

Where do you think that gas in your limo comes from, eh?

[rand0M aXiS 0]

have a funny mustache? /images/graemlins/grin.gif Most people who throw the aryan word around do. And I believe you about being a far right winger.

[rand0M aXiS 0]

 

 

 

 

What the Iraqis think about US peaceniks and other socialist trash.

[Kulapavana 0]

"Where do you think that gas in your limo comes from, eh?"

 

from Krishna of course! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

(you would be surprised how little oil US imports from the Middle East - less than 20% these days)

 

and remember it is not about YOUR gas. it's about the OIL COMPANIES gas, silly rabbit /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Kulapavana 0]

"Do you also have a funny mustache? Most people who throw the aryan word around do"

 

did Prabhupada have a funny mustache too? you should look up how many times he used that word in his books and classes. it is a noble word in more ways than one.

 

[Kulapavana 0]

was it one of the staged propaganda trash photos Bush administration is famous for? LOL!

 

I'm not ashamed of being for peace. It's the other side that needs to be ashamed of their views.

 

If you are such a "hawk" why not enlist with the Marines? Cannon (IMD?) fodder is in high demand right now, they cant find enough fools to die for Haliburton... I mean America...

 

[Guest guest]

And who says I have not been enlisted in the armed forces? Srila Prabhupada had a beautiful mustache when he wore one. Your ilk imitate a powerful raksasa who murdered millions. Hitler also tried to create his version of varnasrama dharma in the greater Europe.

[Guest guest]

Dasanudas das forgetting to log on....

[Kulapavana 0]

"Your ilk imitate a powerful raksasa who murdered millions. Hitler also tried to create his version of varnasrama dharma in the greater Europe."

 

you are wrong again as to my role models (surprise, surprise...) instead of labeling and demonizing people, try to understand what they are saying. it is children who reply with insults when they cant find arguments to counter your point.

 

if you think all "far right" peeople are nazis, your education in this matter probably comes from ADL or other organizations with serious political agenda. Actually, "far right" most often relates to people who do not trust the government to "do their best for citizens" and who pledge alegiance to their country, and not to the "allmighty dollar" like most politicians and other "civil servants". that's where I stand FYI.

[Guest guest]

If it was about oil, then we would have left Iraq alone and ended the sanctions. But I'm not bothering to answer the lunatic leftists.

 

------------------------------

so if I say it was about the oil, then I am a lunatic leftist?

what a primitive and shortsighted designation.

VdK.

[theist 1]

 

(you have not been here long, but you can ask theist for confirmation)

 

 

Other than opposing the Gay Liberation(or was that Bondage?) Front he is basically a Move On . org type. At least so far. It will be interesting to see if he stands with some others here who are pro-choice on the abortion issue. I don't think so but it hasn't come up yet.

[theist 1]

LOLOLOLOL!!!!! That is hilarious. I remember seeing when they first arrived before the war. They were handing out flyers in Bagdhad in Iraqi that read "We are with you" to passersby. People would read the notice and then just stare at them like the couldn't believe the stupi crazy person before them was even real. LOL

 

They left before the bombs, like real fast.

 

"Wankers" LOL and on the floor

[Kulapavana 0]

"he is basically a Move On . org type"

 

he he... lets move on then... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

there is no real joy bickering with other devotees like that. we generally agree on spiritual issues because we all accept the authority of sadhu and shastra. when it comes to practical application of that knowledge it is almost always contentious - even amongst friends.

 

and since our heated discussion have absolutely no influence on anything (and certainly NOT on the things we are discussing), there is... "no reason o get excited"... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[theist 1]

 

maybe these are YOUR reasons for supporting this dirty war, but these are not the reasons why this war was started. there are numerous countries where people are butchered by the thousands (just look at Africa) and where US done nothing.

 

 

My reasons are all I speak for. As I have been saying since even before the first bomb fell was 'a thorn to take out a thorn'. Do you get it now?

 

 

I am sure oil was a consideration considering how dependent the world is on it I would be surprised if it wasn't. But then all The US needn't to do was to petetion the UN to lift the sanctions and all the Iraqi oil would have started flowing again that very day.

 

Also don't forget the fact that Iraq presented an opening for a democracy that is by its presence will influence the neighborhood. Look at how the Lebanese are now emboldened. And one wonders about the streets of Iran wherte the people also want the the Mullahs out. Saudia Arabia also where they just announced they are going to give women the right to vote.

 

Seeds take time to sprout and grow. these are great signs. Not to forget Libya where Khaddfi surrendered his entire backdoor nuclear weapons program to the United States.

 

Try to see the larger picture and stop waiting for Pariksit.He won't be appearing on the world scene. That means stop worrying about the motives behind all this. Take it for granted that every act down in this world, grand or small is done under the influence the false conception of life. And then from that mess pick the one that looks as if the higher gain can arise from. Remove a thorn with a thorn.

 

 

 

[Kulapavana 0]

dont push it, baba... I still dont agree with you /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[theist 1]

when your fever passes.

[sumedh 0]

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam

 

Theist prabhu:

 

As I have been saying since even before the first bomb fell was 'a thorn to take out a thorn'.

 

 

 

Even though i would want to agree with this, the important point is whether the "body" of Americans would reject the other thorn, and it is not Bush who is the thorn rather the policy of "national" interest. This is not remotely likely to be the case as well seen in the past, so the thorn will only grow. Actually there are only thorns around, and only thorns which are been grown everywhere.

 

Bigger thorn, smaller thorn is only a matter of perspective.

[Guest guest]

Who says I am a hawk?

 

You don't exactly sound like a dove.

 

You may not be one now, but be careful you could be in your next body.