What Unites Iraqis:

Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Blocking Western Petroleum Companies From Seizing Control of Their Oil​
By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted August 9, 2007.

Despite the ethnic bloodshed in Iraq, majorities of Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are united in their disapproval of the proposed oil laws that Washington and Big Oil are pushing. ​

If passed, the Bush administration's long-sought "hydrocarbons framework" law would give Big Oil access to Iraq's vast energy reserves on the most advantageous terms and with virtually no regulation. Meanwhile, a parallel law carving up the country’s oil revenues threatens to set off a fresh wave of conflict in the shell-shocked country.

Subhi al-Badri, head of the Iraqi Federation of Union Councils, said last month that the "law is a bomb that may kill everyone." Iraq's oil "does not belong to any certain side," he said, "it belongs to all future generations." But Washington continues to push that bomb onto the Iraqi people, calling it a vital benchmark on the road to a fully sovereign Iraq. Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio accused his own party of "promoting" President Bush's effort to privatize Iraq's oil "under the guise of a reconciliation program."

As is the norm, nobody bothered to ask Iraqis what they thought of the controversy until recently, when a coalition of NGOs and other civil society groups commissioned a poll ( PDF ) to gauge Iraqis' reaction to the proposed legislation. It found that Iraqis from all ethnic and sectarian groups and across the political spectrum oppose the principles enshrined in the laws. Considering the multiethnic bloodbath we've witnessed over the past four years, it's an impressive display of Iraqi solidarity.

The package of oil laws represent one of the clearest examples of a dynamic that's fueled much of the country's political instability but is rarely discussed in the commercial media. While the war's advocates continue to sell the occupation of Iraq as part of a grand scheme to democratize the region, anything resembling true Iraqi democracy is in fact a tremendous threat to U.S. interests. The law, after all, was not designed with Iraqis' prosperity in mind; plans for throwing the country's oil sector open to (almost) unregulated foreign investment were hashed out by a State Department working group that included major players from the oil industry long before the planning for the invasion itself. These plans were discussed in the White House (under the guidance of Dick Cheney) before that -- even before the attacks of 9/11.

The framework law -- from what we know from a series of leaked drafts -- will hand over effective control of as much as 80 percent of the country's oil wealth to foreign firms with minimal state participation. According to an analysis by the oil watchdog group Platform, Iraq stands to lose tens of billions of dollars in potential revenues under the contract terms being considered.

The administration claims that offering such lucrative terms is necessary given the dire need for investment in Iraq's war-torn oil infrastructure, but those investments could just as easily be made out of Iraq's existing operating budget or financed through loans -- despite the chaos on the ground, Iraq's massive energy reserves would be more than enough collateral for even the strictest lenders.

So while most oil-producing states are moving toward more state control of their energy sectors -- according to the Washington Post, "about 77 percent of the world's 1.1 trillion barrels in proven oil reserves is controlled by governments that significantly restrict access to international companies" -- Iraqi lawmakers are under enormous pressure to go in the opposite direction. (See here for a detailed critique of the framework law.)

It should come as no surprise that Iraqis overwhelmingly reject this arrangement. According to the poll of 2,200 Iraqis released this week, almost two-thirds of Iraqis said they would prefer "Iraq's oil to be developed and produced by Iraqi state-owned companies" over foreign companies. Less than a third favored foreign control -- less than the number who expressed a "strong preference" for the sector to remain under state control.

The findings cut across the divisions that have haunted the post-war occupation: 52 percent of Kurds, 62 percent of Sunni Arabs and 66 percent of Shia Arabs favored state control. Significant majorities in every metropolitan area and every region of the divided country agreed.
 
Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Opposition to the privatization scheme that U.S. lawmakers have pushed for with such zeal is reflected, too, in the Iraqi parliament, where a growing number of lawmakers have come out in opposition to the oil laws.

So, too have many experts in the field, including some of the technocrats who originally drafted the laws. Tariq Shafiq, one of the co-authors of the original version of the legislation, told UPI's Ben Lando that "the version penned by oil experts has been compromised by politics," and that he "no longer wants it approved." Farouk al-Qassem, another expert who worked on the original draft, came out against it earlier. "I think really the majority of the oil technocrats are against it," Shafiq told Lando.

There's evidence to support that statement; last month, more than 100 Iraqi oil experts, economists and legal scholars criticized the proposed legislation and urged the Iraqi parliament to put it on hold.

The most vocal opposition to the oil framework has come from Iraq's influential oil workers' unions. Hassan Jumaa Awaad, president of the Iraqi Oil Workers union, called the proposed hydrocarbon laws "more political than economic" and "unbalanced and incoherent," and said they threatened "to set governorate against governorate and region against region." Iraq's oil unions have threatened to "mutiny" if the law is passed as drafted.

In favor of the laws are the multinational energy companies who stand to gain tens of billions more profits in Iraq than they could expect from any other major oil producer's reserves. They're supported by Iraqi separatists -- especially Shias in the South and Northern Kurds -- who want control over the country's oil to rest in the hands of the regional authorities they dominate. They include Iraq's prime minister, Nouri Al-Maliki, and its president, Jalal Talabani.

Faced with such broad and intense opposition to a set of laws that were effectively crafted in Washington, London and Houston, the Iraqi government and the U.S. authorities in Baghdad have kept Iraqis in the dark over the details of the proposed legislation, brought all manner of pressure on lawmakers and, when that failed, used heavy-handed coercion to move the legislation forward.

According to the poll released this week, more than three out of four Iraqis -- including nine of 10 Sunni Arabs -- say "the level of information provided by the Iraqi government on this law" was not adequate for them to "feel informed" about the issue. Only 4 percent of Iraqis feel they've been given "totally adequate" information about the oil law.

But enough people did learn of the law and specifically its call for the use of "Production Service Agreements" (PSAs) -- the onerous contract form favored by the United States and Big Oil -- to elicit outrage among the Iraqi people. The Iraqi regime responded by renaming the long-term contracts "Exploration and Risk Contracts" (ERCs). According to Hands Off Iraqi Oil, a coalition of civil society groups, ERCs are "the equivalent of PSAs under a different name."

It's not just Iraqi citizens who have been kept in the dark; Raed Jarrar, an Iraq analyst with the American Friends Service Committee (and my frequent writing partner), has called Iraqi lawmakers to get a reaction to the draft legislation, only to be asked if he would send them a copy to review. According to Greg Muttit, an analyst with Platform, by the time Iraq's parliamentarians saw their first draft of the oil law, it had already been reviewed and commented on by U.S. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, who "arranged" for nine major oil companies, including Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips, to "comment on the draft."

The regime in Baghdad, under pressure from Washington, has responded to opposition to the law in a profoundly undemocratic fashion. In May, Hassan Al-Shammari, the head of Al-Fadhila bloc in the Iraqi parliament, told AlterNet: We're afraid the U.S. will make us pass this new oil law through intimidation and threatening. We don't want it to pass, and we know it'll make things worse, but we're afraid to rise up and block it, because we don't want to be bombed and arrested the next day." Armed Iraqi troops have faced down peaceful strikes, setting up what has the potential to become a whole new front in Iraq's multifaceted civil conflict. Senior Kurdish officials -- most of whom are separatists -- have have vowed to block any legislation that doesn't include extensive regional autonomy over oil contracting, an issue opposed by most Iraqis and a serious problem for Iraqi nationalists.

Ultimately, the turmoil around Iraq's oil is a result of commercial interests being placed before the interests of the Iraqi people by an administration that routinely privileges its "free-market" ideology over common sense. Historians will no doubt note the great irony of Iraq's proposed oil law: What is considered a prerequisite for stability in Washington in fact threatens to tear the country further apart.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
And there you have it folks, the reason we went to Iraq, OIL. Blood for oil as I likes to call it. How many gallons of blood have we spilled so far, If the human body has 5.5 quarts, and there are estimates of 600,000+ deaths in Iraq, that's 825,000 gallons of blood, or as a pirate would say, buckets of blood. When will it be enough? BTW, Ive posted this before, just not in the intricate detail as above.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
I wonder if the author of the article has ever been to Karsistan? Did anyone watch 60 Minutes last Sunday?

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
I wonder if the author of the article has ever been to Karsistan? Did anyone watch 60 Minutes last Sunday?

Vi
Click to expand...
Where in the hey is Karsistan? Sprecken zie deutch? Ich Bin eine Deutches spreckmeister. Did you mean Kurdistan? Duefmeister.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Kurdistan proof that US hasn't failed in Iraq

Khasro Pirbal
[email protected]
Mar 10, 2007 Ongoing discussion, both in America and globally, would have us all believe that the U.S. has failed in Iraq. Domestic America, policy study institutions, foreign policy experts, and strategic advisors all refer to the failure of America's policies in their war on terror, specifically their launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom and its execution.
Both U.S. Democrats and Republicans debate the failure of the Bush administration's execution of the war, and offer new platforms and alternative projects, mostly according to their party affiliation. Mostly, they just want to accuse Bush's administration of having exercised wrong policies in Iraq. Through their strong media, Bush's opponents have only highlighted the bad news, including the beheadings and bombings by groups that to this very day are receiving weapons from Iran and Syria.

On the regional level, unfortunately, all of the countries were against American intervention and opposed the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime. All of these countries have dictatorial systems of rule and do not respect the rights of their own people and, similarly, have no respect for the legitimate demands of Kurds. They have all been working against freedom and peace, and that's why they cannot adjust to the democratic process in Iraq. Therefore, they are trying hard through their own media channels to bring terrorism and murder into the spotlight, and consider the acts as nothing more than resistance.

In the media, unfortunately, America's failure in Iraq was predicted. However, one thing we know for sure is that the politics and participation of the U.S. in Iraq have not completely failed. A perfect example of the positives that America has accomplished is evident right here in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. With the help of the U.S., its allied forces, and other peaceful and democratic countries in the world, all of the mechanisms necessary to establish and sustain an administration and an economic infrastructure were put into place, resulting in the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).

America must continue to support the Kurdistan Region experiment, and show the entire world that they have not completely failed in Iraq. I think, as most Kurds do, that from now on America should move past speaking about freedom and democracy, and concentrate on working for the development and revival of the country's economic infrastructure. They must stress and tie in the economic values of political success, and take all the steps necessary to work for the reconstruction of the Kurdistan economy and the Iraq economy in general. They can help the KRG by developing the ever-important production sector. Kurdistan is a calm window of opportunity and a suitable choice for Iraq's economic development and revival process.

We have all entered a new stage, both Kurds and Americans. At this juncture, America must know that Kurds are the better and more loyal friends to have. Because of that, we must work together to develop Kurdistan more actively by getting technology, capital, and American companies to participate in the region's growth. More important than all of this, perhaps, is that there must be a red line drawn to keep Iraqi Kurdistan Region from the dangerous areas in Iraq.

America's efforts in Iraq have not been a complete failure, as we see in Kurdistan Region. America must continue to work with us to succeed, but they must now move away from talk about freedom to effectively participating in the process of making a stronger economic infrastructure in the region.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana,$Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,$Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT]</SPAN>[/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=-2][/SIZE][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2][/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2]
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2][SIZE=-1]KurdistanObserver.com[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2][/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
U.S. Iran Peace Project
Home​
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
February 7, 2007
Editorial
It's Time For the U.S. to Recognize the Kurdistan Regional Government
Webster Brooks 111​

Kurdistan is emerging as one of the most vibrant democracies in the Middle East, and America's only reliable partner in Iraq. However, if President Bush and the Democratic-led Congress continue to ignore the Kurds unique circumstances, America runs the risk of isolating Kurdistan politically, and imperiling its existence as a thriving autonomous region. The time has come for the United States to guarantee Kurdistan's future security and officially recognize the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) as the legitimate representative of the Kurdish region.

After the U.S. enforced the no-fly zone over Northern Iraqi in the early 1990's, the people of Kurdistan made remarkable strides to consolidate their region. The Kurds supported the war to overthrow Saddam Hussein, and have been a critical link in efforts to build Iraq's coalition government. Kurdistan participated in drafting Iraq's new constitution in October 2005, and were instrumental in forming the new unity government in which Jalal Talabani--a Kurd, serves as President of Iraq. Iraq's constitution granted Kurdistan regional autonomy with its own constitution, laws, courts, lands, waters, and military forces known as the Peshmerga.

Today, Kurdistan is peaceful, its economy is booming, foreign investment is flowing into the region, and violence has been reduced to a minimum. In short, Kurdistan is the brightest star in the tragedy, destruction, and sectarian violence that threatens the unitary state of Iraq. Once bitter enemies who waged war on each other, Kurdistan's two competing political groups; the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) have united to run the region on the basis of cooperation and equality. In Kurdistan, Turkmen and Christian groups have participated in regional elections and are represented in Kurdistan's legislative assembly. The Kurdish Regional Government has established offices in ten countries around the world, and is working with the United Nations to recover revenue it never received from the oil for food program.

The refusal of the United States to recognize the Kurdish Regional Government is unconscionable. The Bush administration has consistently opposed Kurdish attempts to seek regional autonomy, establish its own constitution, fight for the equality of its language, and form its own military. Had the Kurds followed the administration's advice, they would likely be mired in the chaos that now characterizes much of the rest of Iraq, and in a much weaker position to repel Turkish aggression.

Even as the U.S. presses the Kurds to provide peshmerga troops to help quell sectarian violence in Baghdad between Sunni and Shiia militias, Bush wants to delay the referendum on the status of Kirkuk, and re-negotiate the oil sharing revenue rights Kurdistan achieved in the constitutional process. The Bush administration's attempt to blackmail Kurdistan into making these concessions by suggesting the U.S. "may" not be able restrain Turkey if it invades Kurdish territory, is nothing short of sinister.

Since Winston Churchill promised the Kurds nationhood status in 1921, and then reneged on the agreement, the Kurdish people have endured repression at the hands of its handpicked Hashimite rulers, Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Saddam Hussein's genocidal chemical warfare attacks in the 1980's. As the world's largest ethnic group without a nation, Iraq's heroic Kurdish people have come too far to sacrifice the fruits of their burgeoning regional autonomy on the alter of misguided and unprincipled American foreign policy.

As the Iraq War enters its most decisive phase with the insertion of 21,500 additional U.S. troops, the Maliki government is teetering on the brink of collapse. Iraq is fracturing and convulsing in the din of civil war and sectarian violence. The U.S. army cannot insure the survival of his regime. If the Maliki government falters and Iraq is consumed with sectarian violence between Sunni and Shiia, the U.S. must politically and militarily to guarantee the integrity and security of the Kurdistan region against state and non-state forces of both groups and Turkey.

The Bush administration and the Democrats should foster no illusions that the Kurds will pawns for the United States "larger strategic considerations." The Kurds have tasted the sweet milk of self-governance, and mastered the rough music of democracy. Before they are dealt another hand of false promises, the Kurds will cut some deals of their own, or they will fight. Self-governance, whether by regional autonomy or independence is an idea whose time has come for Kurdistan. Since the beginning of the Iraqi War, the United States has developed a bizarre, if not harmful tendency in its foreign policy of isolating friends, and uniting its enemies. This policy should stop at the waters edge of Kurdistan. The U.S. should take the first critical step of undoing decades of injustice and treachery foisted on the people of Kurdistan. It's time for the United States to recognize the Kurdish Regional Government, and support the Kurdish people.

Webster Brooks is an independent activist and Editor of U.S.- Iran Peace Website. For more information on the Kurdistan Regional Government go to Kurdistan Regional Government - KRG
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,$Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][SIZE=-2][/SIZE][/SIZE][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-2]Copyright © 2002, Kurdistan Observer [/SIZE][/FONT]​
 
Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Ahh don't you love right wing websites.... Why is it your not speaking to the troops on the ground over there? I have 3 family members who are there right now (I speak to them regularly)... We are losing more than we're gaining over there. For every one step forward we gain, we lose two steps... Go ahead and let the government keep blowing smoke up your ass. History will prove you wrong.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
Dankdude said:
Ahh don't you love right wing websites.... Why is it your not speaking to the troops on the ground over there? I have 3 family members who are there right now (I speak to them regularly)... We are losing more than we're gaining over there. For every one step forward we gain, we lose two steps... Go ahead and let the government keep blowing smoke up your ass. History will prove you wrong.
Click to expand...
Ahhh Yes, History. It all depends on who writes the books. If right wing nazis are in power when the books are written, maybe The Iraq war will smell like roses, If the peoples party is in power, it will be the greatest boondoggle in US history. Again I say, "who put the ram in the rama lama ding dong"
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Dankdude said:
Ahh don't you love right wing websites.... Why is it your not speaking to the troops on the ground over there? I have 3 family members who are there right now (I speak to them regularly)... We are losing more than we're gaining over there. For every one step forward we gain, we lose two steps... Go ahead and let the government keep blowing smoke up your ass. History will prove you wrong.
Click to expand...
The article is about Kurdistan, not Iraq in general. Are your family members in Kurdistan, Dank?

Its amazing to me how one's political stance can be supported only by bad news and suffer the fear of crumbling with good news. This is the political side fully invested in America's defeat.

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
The article is about Kurdistan, not Iraq in general. Are your family members in Kurdistan, Dank?

Its amazing to me how one's political stance can be supported only by bad news and suffer the fear of crumbling with good news. This is the political side fully invested in America's defeat.

Vi
Click to expand...
Man, VI, you don't really have a clue about Iraq or the middle east past the right wing rhetoric do you? We lost that war the day we invaded. The middle easterners only hate one thing worse than their nieghbors and old enemies, the USA. If anything, we have united the whole middle east against us, leaving us with the either or scenario, either we get the fuck out, or we use tactical nukes. I'm pretty sure where you come down on this, nuke em into the stone age. Tell me all about your Christian ethics, please.
 
Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Kurdistan is still in Iraq, while you hear very little about what goes on there they are still having the same things going on in their streets but to a lesser extent.

It's funny how our own government uses fear to prove it's relevancy to the American people day after day. We are no safer now than we were on 9-10-01, no safer, no less unsafe. All that the government is doing right now is trying to protect it's own ass, not mine, not yours.

Where is this good news you speak of? Oh that's it, you only look at right wing sights, so if you look at the world with rose colored glasses, everything looks rosy.

The sooner you and the rest of you lockstep, bury your heads in the sand, swallow the Government's official word as gospel idiots realize this the better off the country will be.

You as well as a lot of other people have fell hook, line and sinker Carl Rove's Divide the country and we can rule for a generation strategy.
 
Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
you know Vi I just figured out why you don't post over in the Political forum at Planet Ganga, they would eat you for lunch and spit you out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top