What Is ExxonMobil Up to in Iraq and the Essequibo?
Published in Analitica
(Venezuela) on 23 April 2023
by Germán Gorraiz López (link to original)
(Venezuela) on 23 April 2023
by Germán Gorraiz López (link to original)
Translated from
by Patricia Simoni.
Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Steve Coll writes in his book, “Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power,” that “ExxonMobil is a corporate state within the American state and has its own foreign policy rules.”
Coll further writes that, “ExxonMobil has an office in Washington and the donations of its political action committee for the US presidential election campaigns are very much oriented towards one sector, the Republican Party.”* Finally, he adds that ExxonMobil executives "see themselves — ExxonMobil — as an independent sovereign with their own foreign policy," and their own economic policy. ExxonMobil would then also be part of the fourth branch of American government, pathogenic agents of a totalitarian nature that have become a parallel state and a true shadow power whose tentacles extend to all spheres of power and direct U.S. foreign policy.
ExxonMobil and Essequibo
The dispute between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo region has intensified since 1962, notably in 2015 following Exxon’s discovery of oil deposits in the area. Tensions increased following a referendum on the sovereignty of the Essequibo last Dec. 3 in Venezuela and with the arrival of a British warship in Guyanese waters, to which Venezuela responded by mobilizing more than 5,600 men in military exercises near the disputed boundary.
An agreement reached by The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States provided that “the two States will cooperate to avoid incidents on the ground leading to tensions between the two countries,” and Venezuela asked Guyana to reject the “interference of third parties in the territorial dispute,” rejecting the position of the United States and the United Kingdom in support of Guyana.
However, in spite of Venezuela's claim, we are hearing recent declarations by the company’s local president Alistair Routledge, in which he announced that “ExxonMobil plans to drill during this year two wells off the coast of the Essequibo,” with the certainty that it can count on military protection from the U.S. and Great Britain in case of armed confrontation with Venezuela.
Thus, in 2007 during Hugo Chávez’ presidency, the Fourth Estate of American government, the true shadow power that makes foreign policy decisions and which ExxonMobil is a part of, declared the Chavista revolution to be a “dangerous enemy of the USA.” Subsequently, when then-president of ExxonMobil Rex Tillerson became U.S. secretary of state, the U.S. declared Venezuela to be “public enemy No. 1” and started the doomed operation to harass and overthrow Nicolas Maduro.
ExxonMobil's Exit from Iraq's Energy Board
According to The New York Times, a large part of Iraq's oil production could be destined for China given that Western companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and others) would be reluctant to invest in that country. Royalties, taxes and other charges levied in Iraq usually gobble up 90% or more of an oil company's profits, while investments in the U.S. realize a 50% profit, together with the fact that the U.S. imports only 3% of its oil needs from Iraq.
Thus, in 2008 the Nouri al-Maliki government signed a $3 billion agreement with China through which the state firm, China National Petroleum Corporation, obtained exploitation rights for 23 years to the Ahdab oil field (the largest field opened in Iraq during the last two decades, with an estimated production of 25,000 barrels per day). China cancelled 80% of Iraq’s debt from the Saddam Hussein era, estimated at some $8.5 billion.
Currently, Chinese and Russian state-owned oil companies are taking advantage of a bet by Western oil companies, including Lukoil and PetroChina, on the transition to renewable energy by acquiring a greater share of oil-related assets in Iraq. Thus, as announced by the Iraqi Oil Ministry, Inpex (the main oil company of Japan, a key U.S. ally) plans to sell its 40% stake in Block 10 of the Eridu field, one of the largest oil discoveries in recent decades and an oil field acquired by the Russian oil company, Lukoil.
Also, U.S. energy giant ExxonMobil has formally abandoned the West Qurna 1 oil field in southern Iraq, handing over its operations to PetroChina, which takes a majority stake in one of the world's largest oil fields. Thus, the West Qurna field would have reserves estimated at more than 20 billion barrels and represents about 15% of total Iraqi production, estimated at more than 4 million barrels per day.
This would be a foreign policy triumph for China, which is obsessed with increasing its energy sources, as well as a severe setback for U.S. geopolitical interests, since ExxonMobil, the largest U.S. oil company, will no longer have a presence in Iraq's energy sector. And that would set off alarms in the oil lobby, which will try to revive the “Desert Storm” operation to regain control of Iraq's oil fields expeditiously.
Are US Military Bases in Iraq at Risk?
The U.S., using the excuse of helping local forces in the fight against the Islamic State, decided to maintain a contingent of about 2,000 soldiers in Iraqi territory, distributed among several military bases that have reportedly suffered repeated attacks by pro-Iranian Shiite militias since the beginning of the war between Israel and Hamas.
Thus, the Iraqi militia, the Islamic Resistance of Iraq, could attack U.S. military bases at Al Malikiya and Al Omar, the Ain al-Asad Airbase in western Iraq and the base located near Baghdad airport, and the United States could strike the bases and alleged leaders of movements such as Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, part of the pro-Iranian militia, Popular Multitude.
The Iraqi government under Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, has also insisted that “the military contingent of the international coalition created to fight the Daesh terrorist organization must leave its territory, as the country is capable of defending itself against terrorism on its own,” from which it follows that current U.S. bases would be islets in an ocean of pro-Iranian Shiite militias and would no longer have the backing of the Iraqi government. Thus, the Pentagon would have to prepare a plan for a new invasion of Iraq and the subsequent implementation of the Biden Plan.
Is the Pentagon Preparing for Desert Storm 2.0?
The exit of ExxonMobil from the Iraqi energy sector would be a triumph for foreign policy in China, obsessed with increasing its energy sources. It would also be a severe setback for U.S. geopolitical interests, setting off alarms for the oil lobby, which attempt a return to Iraq to quickly regain control of the oil fields and seek to balkanize the country by implementing the Biden-Gelb Plan, approved by the U.S. Senate in 2007 and rejected by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice under President George W. Bush.
This plan envisaged the establishment of a federal system in Iraq to avoid the country’s collapse after the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and proposed the separation of Iraq into Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni entities under a federal government in Baghdad in charge of guarding the borders and managing oil revenues.
Given the convergence of interests of ExxonMobil and the Pentagon, we could soon see a repeat of Desert Storm to expeditiously regain control of the oil fields and the subsequent balkanization of the country with the implementation of U.S. protectorates.
*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, this quoted passage could not be independently verified.
Coll further writes that, “ExxonMobil has an office in Washington and the donations of its political action committee for the US presidential election campaigns are very much oriented towards one sector, the Republican Party.”* Finally, he adds that ExxonMobil executives "see themselves — ExxonMobil — as an independent sovereign with their own foreign policy," and their own economic policy. ExxonMobil would then also be part of the fourth branch of American government, pathogenic agents of a totalitarian nature that have become a parallel state and a true shadow power whose tentacles extend to all spheres of power and direct U.S. foreign policy.
ExxonMobil and Essequibo
The dispute between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo region has intensified since 1962, notably in 2015 following Exxon’s discovery of oil deposits in the area. Tensions increased following a referendum on the sovereignty of the Essequibo last Dec. 3 in Venezuela and with the arrival of a British warship in Guyanese waters, to which Venezuela responded by mobilizing more than 5,600 men in military exercises near the disputed boundary.
An agreement reached by The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States provided that “the two States will cooperate to avoid incidents on the ground leading to tensions between the two countries,” and Venezuela asked Guyana to reject the “interference of third parties in the territorial dispute,” rejecting the position of the United States and the United Kingdom in support of Guyana.
However, in spite of Venezuela's claim, we are hearing recent declarations by the company’s local president Alistair Routledge, in which he announced that “ExxonMobil plans to drill during this year two wells off the coast of the Essequibo,” with the certainty that it can count on military protection from the U.S. and Great Britain in case of armed confrontation with Venezuela.
Thus, in 2007 during Hugo Chávez’ presidency, the Fourth Estate of American government, the true shadow power that makes foreign policy decisions and which ExxonMobil is a part of, declared the Chavista revolution to be a “dangerous enemy of the USA.” Subsequently, when then-president of ExxonMobil Rex Tillerson became U.S. secretary of state, the U.S. declared Venezuela to be “public enemy No. 1” and started the doomed operation to harass and overthrow Nicolas Maduro.
ExxonMobil's Exit from Iraq's Energy Board
According to The New York Times, a large part of Iraq's oil production could be destined for China given that Western companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and others) would be reluctant to invest in that country. Royalties, taxes and other charges levied in Iraq usually gobble up 90% or more of an oil company's profits, while investments in the U.S. realize a 50% profit, together with the fact that the U.S. imports only 3% of its oil needs from Iraq.
Thus, in 2008 the Nouri al-Maliki government signed a $3 billion agreement with China through which the state firm, China National Petroleum Corporation, obtained exploitation rights for 23 years to the Ahdab oil field (the largest field opened in Iraq during the last two decades, with an estimated production of 25,000 barrels per day). China cancelled 80% of Iraq’s debt from the Saddam Hussein era, estimated at some $8.5 billion.
Currently, Chinese and Russian state-owned oil companies are taking advantage of a bet by Western oil companies, including Lukoil and PetroChina, on the transition to renewable energy by acquiring a greater share of oil-related assets in Iraq. Thus, as announced by the Iraqi Oil Ministry, Inpex (the main oil company of Japan, a key U.S. ally) plans to sell its 40% stake in Block 10 of the Eridu field, one of the largest oil discoveries in recent decades and an oil field acquired by the Russian oil company, Lukoil.
Also, U.S. energy giant ExxonMobil has formally abandoned the West Qurna 1 oil field in southern Iraq, handing over its operations to PetroChina, which takes a majority stake in one of the world's largest oil fields. Thus, the West Qurna field would have reserves estimated at more than 20 billion barrels and represents about 15% of total Iraqi production, estimated at more than 4 million barrels per day.
This would be a foreign policy triumph for China, which is obsessed with increasing its energy sources, as well as a severe setback for U.S. geopolitical interests, since ExxonMobil, the largest U.S. oil company, will no longer have a presence in Iraq's energy sector. And that would set off alarms in the oil lobby, which will try to revive the “Desert Storm” operation to regain control of Iraq's oil fields expeditiously.
Are US Military Bases in Iraq at Risk?
The U.S., using the excuse of helping local forces in the fight against the Islamic State, decided to maintain a contingent of about 2,000 soldiers in Iraqi territory, distributed among several military bases that have reportedly suffered repeated attacks by pro-Iranian Shiite militias since the beginning of the war between Israel and Hamas.
Thus, the Iraqi militia, the Islamic Resistance of Iraq, could attack U.S. military bases at Al Malikiya and Al Omar, the Ain al-Asad Airbase in western Iraq and the base located near Baghdad airport, and the United States could strike the bases and alleged leaders of movements such as Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, part of the pro-Iranian militia, Popular Multitude.
The Iraqi government under Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, has also insisted that “the military contingent of the international coalition created to fight the Daesh terrorist organization must leave its territory, as the country is capable of defending itself against terrorism on its own,” from which it follows that current U.S. bases would be islets in an ocean of pro-Iranian Shiite militias and would no longer have the backing of the Iraqi government. Thus, the Pentagon would have to prepare a plan for a new invasion of Iraq and the subsequent implementation of the Biden Plan.
Is the Pentagon Preparing for Desert Storm 2.0?
The exit of ExxonMobil from the Iraqi energy sector would be a triumph for foreign policy in China, obsessed with increasing its energy sources. It would also be a severe setback for U.S. geopolitical interests, setting off alarms for the oil lobby, which attempt a return to Iraq to quickly regain control of the oil fields and seek to balkanize the country by implementing the Biden-Gelb Plan, approved by the U.S. Senate in 2007 and rejected by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice under President George W. Bush.
This plan envisaged the establishment of a federal system in Iraq to avoid the country’s collapse after the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and proposed the separation of Iraq into Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni entities under a federal government in Baghdad in charge of guarding the borders and managing oil revenues.
Given the convergence of interests of ExxonMobil and the Pentagon, we could soon see a repeat of Desert Storm to expeditiously regain control of the oil fields and the subsequent balkanization of the country with the implementation of U.S. protectorates.
*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, this quoted passage could not be independently verified.
Previous article![]( "The US Must End Arms Sales to Israel")
Next article![]( "Resist Pressure and Judge Firmly in Trump Trial")