|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: International Relations |
|
Rumsfeld, Saddam, And Big Oil |
Current rating: 0 |
by SEEN/IPS
(No verified email address) |
27 Mar 2003
|
|
[This paper] notes that the break in US-Iraq relations occurred not after Iraq used chemical weapons on the Iranians, nor after Iraq gassed its own Kurdish people, nor even after Iraq invaded Kuwait, but rather, followed Saddam's rejection of the Aqaba pipeline deal. |
A stunning new report shines new light on the involvement of Donald Rumsfeld and Bechtel with the Saddam Hussein regime in the 1980s, giving lie to the Bush administration's insistence that the war on Iraq has nothing to do with oil.
In fact, the war can be seen in part as an attempt to complete a business deal that Rumsfeld started back then. The report was issued by the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network and the Institute for Policy Studies.
Sam Smith, The Progressive Review
From the Report - Our examination shines a new spotlight on the revolving door between Bechtel and the Reagan Administration that drove U.S.-Iraq interactions between 1983 and 1985. The men who courted Saddam while he gassed Iranians are now waging war against him, ostensibly because he holds weapons of mass destruction. To a man, they now deny that oil has anything to do with the conflict. Yet during the Reagan Administration, and in the years leading up to the present conflict, these men shaped and implemented a strategy that has everything to do with securing Iraqi oil exports. All of this documentation suggests that Reagan Administration officials bent many rules to convince Saddam Hussein to open up a pipeline of central interest to the US, from Iraq to Jordan. This project, the Aqaba pipeline, was critical not only because it would mean more oil flowing to Western markets; crude would also avoid the thorny Persian Gulf and Straits of Hormuz altogether by passing, instead, through the Red Sea. . .
[This paper] notes that the break in US-Iraq relations occurred not after Iraq used chemical weapons on the Iranians, nor after Iraq gassed its own Kurdish people, nor even after Iraq invaded Kuwait, but rather, followed Saddam's rejection of the Aqaba pipeline deal. Finally, this paper shows that the main actors in the 1980s drama are now back on center stage, this time justifying military action against Iraq in terms of national security. These men's conduct during the Reagan administration - when they negotiated a major oil pipeline deal on behalf of Bechtel with Iraq - belies their present insistence that Saddam Hussein must be toppled because he holds weapons of mass destruction and is tied to terrorists. Among our key findings, confirmed by never-before published government and corporate documents:
1. Secretary of State George Shultz orchestrated the initial discussions with Iraq. Out of public view, he pushed the pipeline project on behalf of his former company, Bechtel. Behind the scenes, Shultz composed Donald Rumsfeld's pipeline pitch to Saddam. (At the time, Rumsfeld, officially, was a special envoy on a peace mission to the Middle East.)
2. From 1983 to 1988, Iraqi warplanes dropped over 13,000 chemical bombs. Iran first reported Iraq's use of chemical warfare well before Rumsfeld met with Saddam in a great victory. Reagan's envoy recorded no discussion of this horror. Instead, Rumsfeld impressed upon Saddam the U.S.'desire to help Iraq increase its oil exports.' He reiterated this desire in a March 26, 1984, meeting with Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, the same day that a UN panel unanimously concluded that Iraq dropped chemical munitions on Iranian troops.
3. Four days after officially condemning Iraq for using chemical weapons on the Iranians, the State Department desk officer for Iraq pressured U.S. Export-Import Bank to initiate short-term loans for Iraq "for foreign relations purposes" - to build a pipeline from Iraq to Jordan.
4. Following Hussein's use of chemical weapons on the Iranians, the only response was instructions, recorded by Shultz, to the Iraqis that they not put Americans in the "embarrassing situation" of buying future chemicals that could be the "source of supply for anything that could contribute to production of CW [chemical weapons]." Reagan officials spent much more time decrying the role of "Iranian revolutionaries" in fostering bloodshed. In private, they forged ahead with the pipeline plan and assured the Iraqis that "we do not want this issue to dominate our bilateral relationship."
5. The U.S. Export-Import Bank and U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, two government-backed export guarantee and credit agencies, were pressured by the Reagan Administration and private individuals lobbying on behalf of Bechtel to provide over $500 million in financing and insurance to the Aqaba pipeline.
6. Government officials and pipeline agents attempted several dubious methods of assuaging Hussein's concerns about a possible Israeli attack on the pipeline. These included secret plans to funnel pipeline income into the Israeli Labor Party and to assign U.S. aid to Israel or U.S. Defense Department funds as collateral in case of an attack on the pipeline. Judge William Clark, while on the payroll of the Bechtel pipeline promoters, flew to Baghdad as a representative of President Reagan and the National Security Council.
7. Two years after Rumsfeld first pitched the plan, Saddam issued a terse rejection. U.S.- Iraqi business relations have never been the same.
8. Many of the same U.S. officials and quasi-officials involved in the Aqaba pipeline project have orchestrated the current Bush/Cheney initiative against Iraq. In recent months, these men have denied any linkage between oil and war; but in previous years, these men repeatedly invoked the Iraqi threat to global energy security as a just cause for war. The hard lesson of the Aqaba pipeline project, it seems, is that an "evil dictator" is a friend of the United States when he is willing to make a deal, and a mortal enemy when he is not.
To read the complete report:
http://www.ips-dc.org/crudevision/crude_vision.pdf |
|
Re: Rumsfeld, Saddam, And Big Oil |
by Gayle Cronin
francyco (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
29 Mar 2003
Modified: 08:33:44 AM |
Hi - Saddam gassing the Kurds in Halabja is propaganda - search google or the New York Times for Pelletier - hired by the pentagon to do a study on the issue - the Iranians gassed the kurds!!! here is one site www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/31PELL.html?th=&pagewanted=all&position=top - It is so pervasive, the propaganda, that we all jump right in - Otherwise - good work - but if you could correct the "gassed the Kurds" bit it would be better
Gayle |
|
Re: Rumsfeld, Saddam, And Big Oil |
by sarefo
sarefo (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
30 Mar 2003
Modified: 05:29:31 PM |
i just heard on c-span from a medic that made a study in the kurdish regions, that it was in fact iraqi gas, and that the info that the gas came from the iranians was some piece of misinformation. but i don't think this point is really important.
i hope this report will get to the people, though i doubt it will make a difference. i mean, there is already enough evidence to put the bush junta into jail for the rest of their lives, and instead thay ride on a wave of public approval. it's sickening. |
