Edited by Patricia Simoni
Iraq’s Oil is America’s Oil?
According to T. Boone Pickens, American companies “have a right” to Iraq’s oil. The American oil tycoon informed the American Congress that “American energy companies 'have a right' to some of Iraq’s oil, due to the large number of American soldiers who have lost their lives in combat in Iraq, as well as to American tax payers’ money spent there. Boone complained that the Iraqi government offered contracts to foreign companies, especially Chinese companies, to develop Iraq’s huge oil reserves, while it shut the door on the majority of American companies. Pickens: “We leave there, with the Chinese getting the oil.”
Iraqi oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani, said his government is satisfied with an energy auction it held earlier this year. This was the first auction allowing foreign oil companies to bid on Iraqi oil since the American-led occupation in 2003, that toppled Saddam Hussain. Al-Shahristani stated, “We are pleased with the volume and participation of international oil companies, the public and transparent competition.”
Between al-Shahristani and the American oil tycoon lie numerous questions: Data disintegrates, constants change, and variables overlap, challenging our reasonable predictions on the game of offering contracts and oil investments in Iraq.
I recall President Jimmy Carter in a press conference in 2002, when he received the Nobel Peace Prize, ridiculing as “idiots” those who believe that America’s policy towards Iraq is built on oil interests. He said, “It is possible to buy oil at the reasonable price of $27 dollar a barrel . . . less than the massive cost required for occupying Iraq.” President of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, described as nonsense the suggestion that oil motives pushed America to occupy Iraq.
T. Boone Pickens exploited the visit of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to Washington and his inauguration of the biggest economic carnival, an investment conference, to give his speech before the United States Congress. He literally requested an American stake in Iraq’s oil, raising his voice to the greatest authority in the U.S., declaring that America owns a stake in Iraqi oil.
It is strange that this man has always stressed, “I support everything that is American, and object to just one thing: That is foreign oil.” He is the same man who began his career as a geologist in Phillips Petroleum, before resigning in 1954; the man who was feeding his wife and two kids on 500 dollars a month, a salary that he considered “enough” back then. At the age of 26, he bought a big car and worked as a consultant. After two years, together with a group of investors, he formed the oil company that later became Mesa Petroleum, which, in the end, became one of the biggest independent oil companies in America. What happened? How did Pickens change his mind and ideas? Simple questions...
America, controlling the world through its domination and financial and military power, can acquire anything it wants. However, the U.S. began to realize it is not the only country with an economic presence on the international scene; several other countries are striving to catch up with and even surpass it in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Washington had to either ensure that others failed to catch up or control the process of catching up: Gulf and Iraqi oil are the means to that end.
With the stability of Iraq, came the dream of American companies to reach 112 billion barrels of oil, the declared reserve of Iraq. Some even quote 200 billion barrels. This reserve is considered the most important after the Saudi reserve, which means that controlling Iraq translates into the acquisition of about a quarter of world’s oil reserves. Also, the cost of production of Iraq’s oil is among the lowest in the world - roughly, a maximum of $1.50 per barrel; therefore, profits are massive. These are the truths that pushed America to present the oil tycoon, speaking on the issue before the Congress, to take the flak.
In addition, there have been heated dialogues with Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani, whom Americans accuse of implementing foreign agendas in Iraq to deprive American oil companies of opportunities for investment in Iraqi oil. These calculations and positions will be at the core of future Iraqi elections and will determine the fate of several Iraqi dignitaries. Where will America stand? With whom and against whom? And how it will move its allies in Iraq to remove competitors?
Despite its analyses and secrets, America will lose in Iraq if it moves toward a policy of marginalization and removal of those elements it considers disobedient. Why? Because the Iraqi citizen has begun to enter the game and to understand what is happening. Therefore, the democracy America insisted on exporting to Iraq will transform into a misfortune, and the tables will turn, against all predictions.
Iraqi oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani, said his government is satisfied with an energy auction it held earlier this year. This was the first auction allowing foreign oil companies to bid on Iraqi oil since the American-led occupation in 2003, that toppled Saddam Hussain. Al-Shahristani stated, “We are pleased with the volume and participation of international oil companies, the public and transparent competition.”
Between al-Shahristani and the American oil tycoon lie numerous questions: Data disintegrates, constants change, and variables overlap, challenging our reasonable predictions on the game of offering contracts and oil investments in Iraq.
I recall President Jimmy Carter in a press conference in 2002, when he received the Nobel Peace Prize, ridiculing as “idiots” those who believe that America’s policy towards Iraq is built on oil interests. He said, “It is possible to buy oil at the reasonable price of $27 dollar a barrel . . . less than the massive cost required for occupying Iraq.” President of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, described as nonsense the suggestion that oil motives pushed America to occupy Iraq.
T. Boone Pickens exploited the visit of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to Washington and his inauguration of the biggest economic carnival, an investment conference, to give his speech before the United States Congress. He literally requested an American stake in Iraq’s oil, raising his voice to the greatest authority in the U.S., declaring that America owns a stake in Iraqi oil.
It is strange that this man has always stressed, “I support everything that is American, and object to just one thing: That is foreign oil.” He is the same man who began his career as a geologist in Phillips Petroleum, before resigning in 1954; the man who was feeding his wife and two kids on 500 dollars a month, a salary that he considered “enough” back then. At the age of 26, he bought a big car and worked as a consultant. After two years, together with a group of investors, he formed the oil company that later became Mesa Petroleum, which, in the end, became one of the biggest independent oil companies in America. What happened? How did Pickens change his mind and ideas? Simple questions...
America, controlling the world through its domination and financial and military power, can acquire anything it wants. However, the U.S. began to realize it is not the only country with an economic presence on the international scene; several other countries are striving to catch up with and even surpass it in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Washington had to either ensure that others failed to catch up or control the process of catching up: Gulf and Iraqi oil are the means to that end.
With the stability of Iraq, came the dream of American companies to reach 112 billion barrels of oil, the declared reserve of Iraq. Some even quote 200 billion barrels. This reserve is considered the most important after the Saudi reserve, which means that controlling Iraq translates into the acquisition of about a quarter of world’s oil reserves. Also, the cost of production of Iraq’s oil is among the lowest in the world - roughly, a maximum of $1.50 per barrel; therefore, profits are massive. These are the truths that pushed America to present the oil tycoon, speaking on the issue before the Congress, to take the flak.
In addition, there have been heated dialogues with Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani, whom Americans accuse of implementing foreign agendas in Iraq to deprive American oil companies of opportunities for investment in Iraqi oil. These calculations and positions will be at the core of future Iraqi elections and will determine the fate of several Iraqi dignitaries. Where will America stand? With whom and against whom? And how it will move its allies in Iraq to remove competitors?
Despite its analyses and secrets, America will lose in Iraq if it moves toward a policy of marginalization and removal of those elements it considers disobedient. Why? Because the Iraqi citizen has begun to enter the game and to understand what is happening. Therefore, the democracy America insisted on exporting to Iraq will transform into a misfortune, and the tables will turn, against all predictions.
Previous article![]( "Is Obama Losing Charisma?")
