The Privatization of Iraqi Oil

In 2000, immediately after the Bush administration took office, before 9/11/01 and before the U.S. invasion of Iraq on 3/20/03, Bush and Cheney turned their primary focus to Iraq. The Republican Party’s 2000 platform called for the full implementation of the ‘Iraq Liberation Act of 1998’ and the removal of Saddam Hussein. The preparations for war began almost immediately after Bush‘s inauguration. The first Bush cabinet meetings were not about terrorism, they were about removing Saddam Hussein. After 9/11 Bush demanded that the FBI and the CIA find a link between the terrorist hijackers and Hussein. The administration was willing to accept without any proof, the secondhand testimony of almost anyone who supported their assertions. Anyone who opposed the Iraqi ’regime change’ was promptly shown the door. The attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11 was conveniently the excuse the administration needed to justify going to war (apparently with any Muslim nation, since the hijackers were almost all Muslims from Saudi Arabia, not one of them was from Iraq). President Lyndon Johnson used the same excuse (of being attacked) with the Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 2, 1964 (many still believe that the incident was staged for the purpose of justifying the Vietnam invasion). Between 9/11/01 and 3/20/03, all of the propaganda and misleading news releases from the White House attempted to link Iraq to 9/11 and to terrorism. We now know that there was no such link. But Bush and the spokespersons for the administration continued to create the impression that there was such a link. The administration used a fallacy called ’guilt by association’ to convince the Congress and the public that such a link existed. In this type of fallacy, two separate subjects are continually discussed simultaneously. If this is done repeatedly, especially by someone in a position of authority, the public will unconsciously associate one idea with the other. In every sentence, paragraph, phrase, memo, press release or speech, the administration discussed 9/11, terrorism and Hussein. They repeated this fallacy over and over again. A phrase such as “Our nation was attacked on 9/11 by terrorists and we must stop dictators like Saddam Hussein from acquiring nuclear weapons”. This is an example of ‘guilt by association‘. The individual parts of the statement may be true, but the overall impression is deceptive. It is a fallacy. It implies that Hussein supports terrorism and was responsible for 9/11, when no such evidence exists. The administration flooded the news media with hundreds of fallacious statements like these. As a result of this misleading propaganda, the majority of Americans and the majority in Congress assumed (either directly or unconsciously) that there was a connection and that Iraq and Hussein were directly or indirectly responsible for the attack on the World Trade Center. A large percent of Americans still believe that there was a connection.

The Korean War, the Vietnam War and the Iraqi Wars (in both Bush administrations) all share some common features.

When a U.S. administration decides to invade a sovereign nation, they must create a justifiable excuse that will convince the Congress and the American public that they have honorable and legal motives. Primarily the justification is used that the war is necessary for self defense to preserve our national safety and defend our freedoms and values. Most of the aggressive military actions by other nations throughout history have used these same excuses. These justifications may all be partially true, however in the case of these three wars, Korean, Vietnam and Iraq, it is difficult to see how those nations were threatening the U.S. None of them had attacked any U.S. territory, all were extremely weak militarily and none had nuclear weapons. Each of these nations knew that the U.S. had tens of thousands of these missiles ready for immediate deployment at the presidents command.

In all three of these wars, there is a common underlying motivation. Simply stated, it is the defense, not of democracy, but of capitalism. American industrial corporations have extensive influence over the U.S. government. They have hundreds of lobbyists (on K street in Washington, D.C.) who have no other function than to influence the national and international policies of the current administration to secure financial benefits for U.S. businesses and special interests. This is a gross corruption of our political system.

The U.S. occupied South Korea and South Vietnam, not for the avowed purpose of defending democracy, but for the economic motivation of defending or promoting capitalism. The so-called ’Domino Theory’ had been accepted by the U.S. administrations (President Eisenhower’s speech in 1954) since the end of World War II. This theory created and spread the fear that communism was expanding throughout the world and it was threatening capitalism and more important to the general public, basic American freedoms. Religious leaders throughout the nation shouted the alarm that communism would soon destroy religious freedoms. This emotional panic prepared the general public for the U.S. invasion of Vietnam. (Communism was always a threat to capitalism, but not religious freedom. Communism, socialism and capitalism are economic systems that have nothing to do with religion. Religion continues to exist in all types of economic systems.) To the U.S. government, the Domino Theory justified both the occupation and defense of South Korea and the invasion and occupation of Vietnam. The division of Korea in 1945 at the 38th parallel was a consequence of World War II. The north was controlled by the USSR communists and the south was controlled by the U.S. capitalists. Today about 40,000 American soldiers still guard the partition between North and South Korea. In South Vietnam, the U.S. wanted to repeat the same successful outcome as they had in South Korea. The U.S. wanted to establish a separate capitalistic country to prevent the whole country from becoming communistic. But in Vietnam, nationalism and the desire to drive all foreigners out of the country prevailed and resulted in the failure of the U.S. to establish a separate capitalistic nation in the south. Vietnam is now a united communistic nation. Since the U.S. exit, on April 30, 1975, Vietnam has remained a peaceful developing communistic nation and is now seeking political and economic relations with the U.S. The government now welcomes American tourists. On December 10, 2001, the U.S.-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) took effect. Today, it’s much safer for an American to visit Saigon than it is to visit Baghdad.

The ’Domino Theory’ is now mostly forgotten and the failure and collapse of the Soviet Union has dispelled most of the irrational fears that were so widespread in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Even the largest communistic nation today, China, is steadily evolving into a more capitalistic economic system and like Vietnam is seeking to establish good diplomatic and economic relations with the U.S. Becoming more capitalistic does not mean that China is becoming more democratic. A nation can have a dictatorial government and capitalistic economic system. The Chinese have always been a practical pragmatic people. If a system works, they will use it and if capitalism benefit’s the nation, they will probably develop it. China is changing very rapidly.

Exactly like the Korean and Vietnam wars, the present U.S. administration has used the same justifications (of spreading democracy and freedom) for invading the sovereign nation of Iraq, a militarily weak nation that was no threat to our country (Hussein‘s weak army could not even defend the city of Baghdad). And exactly like those previous wars the underlying motivation was capitalism not the promotion of democracy. Of course anyone who questions the motives of the present administration is immediately accused of opposing democracy and freedom, which is total nonsense. This tactic is also a fallacy. The Bush administration is very skilled at using every type of fallacy.

The government of Saddam Hussein was a military dictatorship. But the national economic system was basically socialistic. The government owned the only important industry that the nation has, the oil industry. The industry was completely state owned and controlled. The government awarded oil lease contracts to many nations such as China, India, Vietnam, and Indonesia and others. But most of the profits from the oil were used by the government to pay national expenses. As is common with most dictators, Hussein spent millions on himself and his immediate family, but a large percentage of the oil revenues went to pay the salaries of the army, the police, government employees, city employees, teachers and doctors. Hussein placed a high priority on education and was credited with making great advancements in educating the Iraqi people in contrast to the previous era when the British occupiers ignored education. Under Hussein, Iraq had over eighteen hundred modern well equipped health care centers and more than 10,000 qualified doctors, both men and women. All medical services were free to all Iraqi citizens. This was a completely socialized medical and economic system but permitted private ownership of small businesses that were not oil related. In hindsight, under the conditions that existed in Iraq, in order to prevent civil war between the sects and tribes, this may have been the best form of government for the people. Most Iraqi citizens today will probably admit that they were better off under Hussein, than they are now. Iraq is now a lawless war zone, in which there is 50% unemployment, no electricity, no medical care, no food, no sanitary drinking water, no sewage system and essentially no functioning government and a continuing bloody civil war. About four million of the most educated, essential leaders and professional people have fled the country. The Iraqi’s have traded the military dictatorship of Hussein for the military dictatorship of the American occupiers without any of the previous benefits.

It was the socialism of the Hussein government that the U.S. wanted to replace. Socialism and communism are constant threats to capitalism.

The Bush administration invaded Iraq for the sole economic purpose of replacing the system of state ownership of the oil industry with a system of private ownership. This master plan was attempted with complete disregard for the well being of the Iraqi people. The privatization of the oil industry was the sole reason for the invasion. All other reasons were simply a façade to hide the real goal. The importance of oil can be observed in the actions of the U.S. military during the invasion of the city of Baghdad. When looting broke out citywide and such places as the National Museum of Iraq were looted of priceless art and artifacts, the U.S. military stood by and did nothing. However upon entering the city, they immediately surrounded the Oil Ministry and protected it like a shrine. The Oil Ministry contained all of the records, maps and scientific studies of oil reserves for the entire nation. The priorities of the Bush administration were obvious.

When any nation invades another sovereign nation for the sole purpose of exploiting it’s resources, it was previously called colonialism. Today this exploitation is accomplished under the guise of ‘spreading democracy’ or ‘globalism’.

In Iraq, the Bush administration has totally failed to achieve their ambitious goal of nation building. The administration based their ruinous policies on a number of naïve and false assumptions. The administration arrogantly thought that they could easily transform the Iraqi culture into a replica of American culture. Complete failure by Bush and his advisors to even begin to understand the culture, the religion or the people has resulted in chaos and disaster for the entire nation. A year long State Department study about the Iraq nation and it’s people was prepared by the Future of Iraq Working Group for the Bush administration, but almost no one read it until long after the U.S. invasion. Bush was so uninformed about the Iraqi culture that he didn’t even know the difference between the Shiites and the Sunnis. The administration didn’t want any alternative or opposing viewpoints to complicate their entrenched objectives. A thorough reading of this State Department report might have alerted the administration to the predictable difficulties that would most likely arise from trying to force the different Islamic sects to compromise. Most religions eventually develop schisms like the Shiite-Sunni split which are mutually antagonist. Major splits like these almost never result in the groups being reunited. Such a split as this, makes democratic compromise impossible in any type of religious government. Only a military dictatorship can force any type of peaceful coexistence. Fundamentalist beliefs are extremely rigid and uncompromising and become even stronger when they believe they are being challenged or threatened. The fundamentalists Muslims believe their religion is under attack by the very presence of un-believers in their nation. They consider all non Muslims to be un-believers.

As a result of centuries of colonialization and invasion by western nations, the Iraqi people have a very negative attitude towards the west and are always suspicious of the idea of democracy. The Iraqi’s associate democracy with exploitation and they do so with just cause. Every nation that has invaded and occupied Iraq has promised the people that they were bringing democracy and freedom, but they only brought war, exploitation and a new dictatorship.

Aside from the economics of the Iraqi situation, a secondary factor has complicated the Bush administration’s goal of privatizing the Iraqi oil industry. This has been the religious factor. Without bothering to acquire any understanding of the importance of the Islamic religion to the people of Iraq, the administration made plans to establish a democratic political system which could be controlled or at least influenced by U.S. government or U.S. businesses. A sympathetic government that would award most of the oil leases to American companies and eliminate the socialized state ownership. Under the socialized system that had existed in Iraq, the revenues from the oil remained in the country and were either used by the government or returned to the people in the form of wages or benefits. Why would the Iraqi people want to privatize the oil industry and allow all of these revenues to be taken out of Iraq by Americans? Even though different religious sects each want to control the Iraqi government, they all are opposed to giving significant oil profits to the American companies.

The Bush administration assumed that the Iraqi people wanted the same things that the American people want. This was a serious mistake. The Islamic theocracies of the Middle East have always taken a dim view of the materialistic cultures and liberal attitudes of some of the western nations, especially the U.S. They observe the sex and violence in American movies, legal pornography stores, gambling casinos, cheap fast food restaurants, immodest women’s clothing styles, loud popular music and in general a society that appears to place more value on consumerism than on spiritual or moral values. Of course most Americans don’t see themselves this way, but many other nations do. Many cultures are trying to prevent some these materialistic values from entering their societies.

The religious factor has been the primary cause for the failure of the Bush administration’s grandiose plan in Iraq. The administration’s assumption that the Iraqi people would welcome the Americans as liberators quickly fizzled out. The Americans were soon viewed merely as occupiers and exploiters who had no respect for the Iraqi religion or culture. It is obvious to most Iraqi’s that the invasion was solely carried out for the benefit and interests of the Americans and was not for the proclaimed purpose of benefiting the Iraqi civilians. This has just been another rerun of all the other previous occupations of Iraq.

The Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld plan of nation building required establishing a central democratic government in Baghdad in which all of the different religious sects and tribes were represented. The purpose of establishing the democratic government was to assist the U.S. in the goal of privatizing the state owned oil industry. The ultimate goal was to give the U.S. companies complete or major control of the country’s natural resources and this required either a sympathetic government or a puppet government.. The plan of establishing democracy failed to take into account the centuries old hostilities that the different Islamic sects and tribes have had towards each other. The Shiites have been at war with the Sunnis for a thousand years. Hussein was able to maintain peace between these two antagonistic sects only by the use of martial law and military force. This was true in the past and it will continue to be true in the future. The Bush administration also failed to understand that in an Islamic nation in which the majority (95%) of the people belong to the same religion, it is impossible to separate religion and government. The Iraqi people have never wanted a secular government and this is what the Bush administration continues to demand that they accept. The Iraqi people have always wanted an Islamic theocracy and will never accept anything else. They have always demanded that the Koran be the supreme law of the land. The Bush administration lawyers have drafted an American styled constitution that is not acceptable to the Islamic people of Iraq. The present Iraqi constitution was adopted only on the condition that it be subservient to the authority of the Koran. Islam and the Koran must come first in Iraq society. This is the definition of theocracy not democracy. In a Muslim society, the word democracy means simply ’rule by the majority’. It does not have all of the extended meanings and freedoms that Americans associate with it. Because the Iraqi people cannot separate religion and state, they cannot compromise on many fundamental issues. Politicians can compromise, but religions can never compromise. The Bush administration has never understood this. The Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are not political parties, they are religious groups. They can never compromise their fundamental religious beliefs. If the government is going to be an Islamic theocracy, as all of the Iraqi people want, then only one religious group can control it. There can be no compromise. Since the U.S. invasion has created the opportunity for nationwide elections, the majority Shiites have been able to acquire control of the entire government, the army and the police forces. This Shiite government is a legally elected democratic government (the Islamic definition) and represents the will of the majority of the Iraqi people. This is what the people have chosen and no other outside nation, like the U.S., has any right to demand that they compromise their religious beliefs or establish a secular government.

It is solely the decision of the Iraqi people to choose whether they want to have an Islamic theocracy or a secular democratic government.

It is solely the decision of the Iraqi people to choose whether they want to have a state owned socialistic oil industry, like they had under Hussein, or whether they want to privatize it the way the Bush administration wants them to. Even if they choose to privatize the oil industry, there is no reason that they should permit ownership by anyone except Iraqis.

It’s time for the U.S. to withdraw from the occupied nation and allow the people of Iraq the right of self determination and independence. The age of colonial domination and exploitation is over.