main page
"To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
|
click here for a bigger sunset
One small voice in the proud tradition of FreeBlogging*
Thursday, April 03, 2003
posted by gbarto at 5:37 AM:
U.S., Allies Clash Over Plan to Use Iraqi Oil Profits for RebuildingWashington wants to sell the oil to finance rebuilding Iraq and then turn the oil over to the people. Meanwhile, a lot of UN folk are saying that the UN is in charge until UN ordered sanctions connected to the oil for food program are lifted.
Question: Are these people saying that with Saddam's regime gone, a US occupation transitioning to a self-governing Iraqi people, etc., the UN is going to continue to treat Iraq as an outlaw regime? Are they saying they wouldn't vote to lift the sanctions once the man whose recalcitrance provoked them is gone?
The answers to the above are, of course, yes. The irony is that the two countries least respectful of the sanctions, France and Russia, are suddenly determined that all aspects of the sanctions policy remain in place. Why? you ask. Easy. France and Russia negotiated sweetheart deals with a cash-strapped Saddam eager to collect anything he could get to finance the war machine, and they want contracts written in the blood of the Iraqi people to stand. TotalFinaElf - part owned by the French government - was counting on Saddam's contracts being good. So was Russia:
Russia, which signed large oil development contracts with Saddam Hussein's government, is seeking a guarantee that it will continue to have a say in the United Nations on how Iraqi oil revenue is spent. France also is determined to protect its interests in development of Iraq's oil reserves.The Post story is pretty good, but it ends with this bizarre quote:
Robert E. Ebel, energy program director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said: "The French have a position to protect in Iraq and so do the Russians. They want to be sure they're not shunted aside. If we do too much of that people will say it really was about oil."Funny, if the US spends its own money - and lives - to free the Iraqi people, and then gives the oil to the Iraqis but insists that the Iraqis help pay for reconstruction with some of the oil revenue - they get to keep the rest - then the US was in it for oil. If France and Russia demand that the UN be in charge so that their oil companies retain contracts made with a tyrant, it's about... Nobody has anything to say to that.
I think the Bushies should (again) say to hell with international law as negotiated at the UN, and once they seize Baghdad they should announce over loudspeakers to the Iraqi people that the oppressor is gone, and - as has happened with every leftist revolt around the world - the illegally acquired property and revenue of the dictator will be properly restored to the people. Including the oil revenue. We should humbly offer to do reconstruction for reasonable fees and pack up and leave if they give the job to someone else. But I have a feeling that in choosing between a US that has just told them the oil money is theirs and French, Russians and Germans who are trying to take it away from them through the international courts, the choice will be obvious.
* * *
French Elections, 1st round
Second round special page
Second Round Results Map
The TurkeyBlog main page contains only the 20 most recent entries.
To go further back, check the archive in the right hand bar.
