The US government secretly facilitated dealings between Shell and the Iraqi Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts.
In June of this year, Andrew Kramer, writing in The New York Times, broke the story that the world's oil giants, "Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP ... along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies" were "in talks with Iraq's Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq's largest fields." Subsequently, the Times went on to report that "A group of American advisers led by a small State Department team played an integral part in drawing up contracts between the Iraqi government and five major Western oil companies ... " The Times asserted that the "disclosure" was "the first confirmation of direct involvement by the Bush administration in deals to open Iraq's oil to commercial development and is likely to stoke criticism."
In reality, there had long been ample evidence of deep involvement between the Bush administration, foreign firms and Iraq's Oil Ministry. The Times and other major media outlets also failed to expose the major financial ties between the military occupation in Iraq and the same oil giants. In fact, each of the oil giants named in the original New York Times piece - Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total, BP, and Chevron - regularly shows up on the Pentagon's payroll. In fact, last year, the five firms took home more than $4.1 billion from the Pentagon - with Shell leading the way with $2.1 billion.
In September, the "criticism" the Times predicted apparently finally scuttled the no-bid deals. In a piece by Kramer and Campbell Robertson, it was reported that the "plan to award six no-bid contracts to Western oil companies, which came under sharp criticism from several United States senators this summer, ha[d] been withdrawn." The companies would, however, be eligible to bid for contracts and, just days later, it was announced that the Pentagon's favorite of the oil majors, Shell, would become the first oil giant to sign an energy deal with the Iraqi government in 35 years.
On September 22nd, the government of Iraq and Royal Dutch Shell officially signed a $4 billion deal "to establish a joint venture with [Iraq's] South Gas Company in the Basra district of southern Iraq to process and market natural gas." A day later, the Times reported that Shell had "established an office in Baghdad." From a "news conference in Baghdad's heavily guarded Green Zone," the Times quoted Linda Cook, the executive director of the Shell's gas and power unit, as saying, "We are ready to establish a presence."
While the Times didn't report it, Cook went on to say, "I am delighted that the Iraqi Government including the Ministry of Oil have supported Shell as the partner for joint venture with the South Gas Company. We look forward to moving jointly to implement the JV and begin investing in the energy infrastructure in Iraq." What the Times (and other major media outlets) also failed to mention was that guarantor of that "Green Zone" from which Cook spoke, just days before, had the inked its own huge energy deal with Shell. On September 17th, Shell was awarded a $338 million contract for aviation fuel by the Pentagon. In fact, even before this contract, Shell had already awarded over $1 billion from the Pentagon during this fiscal year. If history is any guide, it will receive billions more before fiscal 2009 starts.'
In June of this year, Andrew Kramer, writing in The New York Times, broke the story that the world's oil giants, "Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP ... along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies" were "in talks with Iraq's Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq's largest fields." Subsequently, the Times went on to report that "A group of American advisers led by a small State Department team played an integral part in drawing up contracts between the Iraqi government and five major Western oil companies ... " The Times asserted that the "disclosure" was "the first confirmation of direct involvement by the Bush administration in deals to open Iraq's oil to commercial development and is likely to stoke criticism."
In reality, there had long been ample evidence of deep involvement between the Bush administration, foreign firms and Iraq's Oil Ministry. The Times and other major media outlets also failed to expose the major financial ties between the military occupation in Iraq and the same oil giants. In fact, each of the oil giants named in the original New York Times piece - Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total, BP, and Chevron - regularly shows up on the Pentagon's payroll. In fact, last year, the five firms took home more than $4.1 billion from the Pentagon - with Shell leading the way with $2.1 billion.
In September, the "criticism" the Times predicted apparently finally scuttled the no-bid deals. In a piece by Kramer and Campbell Robertson, it was reported that the "plan to award six no-bid contracts to Western oil companies, which came under sharp criticism from several United States senators this summer, ha[d] been withdrawn." The companies would, however, be eligible to bid for contracts and, just days later, it was announced that the Pentagon's favorite of the oil majors, Shell, would become the first oil giant to sign an energy deal with the Iraqi government in 35 years.
On September 22nd, the government of Iraq and Royal Dutch Shell officially signed a $4 billion deal "to establish a joint venture with [Iraq's] South Gas Company in the Basra district of southern Iraq to process and market natural gas." A day later, the Times reported that Shell had "established an office in Baghdad." From a "news conference in Baghdad's heavily guarded Green Zone," the Times quoted Linda Cook, the executive director of the Shell's gas and power unit, as saying, "We are ready to establish a presence."
While the Times didn't report it, Cook went on to say, "I am delighted that the Iraqi Government including the Ministry of Oil have supported Shell as the partner for joint venture with the South Gas Company. We look forward to moving jointly to implement the JV and begin investing in the energy infrastructure in Iraq." What the Times (and other major media outlets) also failed to mention was that guarantor of that "Green Zone" from which Cook spoke, just days before, had the inked its own huge energy deal with Shell. On September 17th, Shell was awarded a $338 million contract for aviation fuel by the Pentagon. In fact, even before this contract, Shell had already awarded over $1 billion from the Pentagon during this fiscal year. If history is any guide, it will receive billions more before fiscal 2009 starts.'
Lees verder: http://www.truthout.org/100308S
U kunt ook lezen wat ik zes jaar geleden schreef: http://home.planet.nl/~houck006/oorlogomolie.html en: http://home.planet.nl/~houck006/oorlogomolie2.html
Of wat ik 5 jaar geleden voor de VPRO-Radio hierover berichtte. http://www.vpro.nl/programma/madiwodo/dossiers/10840950/ Overigens vertelde mij onlangs nog de vooraanstaande NRC-journalist Raymond van den Boogaard dat de VS Irak binnenviel om er democratie te brengen! En dat is ook de officieel goedgekeurde consensus in de Nederlandse journalistiek.
5 opmerkingen:
Overigens vertelde mij onlangs nog de vooraanstaande NRC-journalist Raymond van den Boogaard dat de VS Irak binnenviel om er democratie te brengen!
Als ik over dat soort ploerten hoor denk ik soms, waar is mijn geweer. Je zou dat soort tuig in Irak moeten dumpen, in de ergste DU-vervuilde greppel die je kan vinden. Je bent toch zo voor het "brengen" van democratie Raymond? Ga dan maar eens kijken hoe "democratie" eruit ziet.
ach yelamdenu, je weet zelf wel dat geweld geen zin heeft, maar het blijft bitter dat dit soort journalisten consequentieloos hun nonsens kunnen blijven verkopen. zij zitten hoog en droog hier, de bevolking daar betaalt de prijs voor zijn propaganda.
Inderdaad, ik ben ook slechts een pantoffelheld. :-)
Maar het verbaal uiten van "virtuele gewelddadigheid" wordt veroorzaakt door de accumulatie van walging over deze pseudo-journalisten.
Herhaaldelijk werden (toch aardig goede) ingezonden stukken van mij die gingen over de economische motieven van de Irak-oorlog door de NRC geweigerd. Onder het mom dat dat allemaal uitgebreid aan de orde is geweest. Of ik het niet een beetje kon aanpassen, dan zouden ze het wel plaatsen. Want het was nu natuurlijk te lang (stel je voor, meer dan een kwart kolom in de NRC over de economische motieven van de meest vernietigende oorlog van het decennium).
Of zoiets.
En inderdaad, zo'n propagandist is medeverantwoordelijk. Net als de Hans Jansens van deze wereld.
Bedankt voor de democratie! Ik zou graag al mijn oliebronnen beschikbaar willen stellen uit dankbaarheid. Nee nee, betalen hoeft niet, neem het maar, neem het maar gratis. Ik heb genoeg aan deze heerlijke democratie.
Iets dergelijks inspireerde mij tot het schrijven van de ontroerende novelle:
Lang leve de Iraakse democratie!
Een reactie posten