|
Oil Companies in Iraq: A Century of Rivalry and War By James A. Paul Global Policy Forum November 2003 Close Personal Ties between Companies and Governments Given the close political relations between the oil companies and their governments, it should be no surprise to find close ties at the personal level binding companies and governments together. The career of Allen Dulles serves as a case in point. He began as a US diplomat in the Middle East and rose to be chief of the Near East section of the State Department. In the early 1920s, he led the campaign to win US oil firms’ participation in Iraq. Later he served as a corporate lawyer at Sullivan and Cromwell, New York’s leading counsel for the oil industry. After wartime intelligence service, he was named head of the CIA by President Eisenhower. As CIA chief, he arranged for the overthrow of Mossadegh, winning a place in Iran’s rich oil fields for US firms. In every assignment he consistently served company interests.21 Max Thornberg came to the US State Department as senior petroleum advisor in 1941, directly from Bahrein Petroleum, a joint venture of Standard Oil of California. Thornberg operated nearly independently of his government superiors. He continued to receive his company salary, informed company executives of private government meetings and actively promoted company proposals. He apparently could not conceive of a conflict of interest. Having worked in the industry his whole life, he thought of industry goals and those of the US government as being identical.22 The administration of President George W. Bush represents an especially close set of personal ties between the oil companies and the government – at the very highest level. The president and his father were both longtime industry insiders from Texas and chief executives of their own oil companies. Other oil figures at the top of the administration include Vice President Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton, the nation’s largest oil-services company, and National Security Advisor Condolezza Rice, a former director of Chevron Texaco, after whom the company named one of its supertankers. These very visible figures give the administration its peculiarly strong oil flavor. In the earliest days of the administration, they promoted a number of striking industry-favorable policy decisions, such as the rejection of the Kyoto Treaty on global warming, the ouster of the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the elaboration of a strongly pro-oil national energy plan. In the UK, close ties likewise bind companies and successive governments together, The government even held a majority stake in BP, with seats on the board, until 1987. By contrast to the United States, where the oil companies are first among such peers as General Motors, Walmart and Citigroup, in the UK, oil giants Shell and BP tower far above the next tier firms like British Telecom, Unilever and ICI.23 From such heights, UK oil executives speak almost as unofficial members of government. In recent years, a number of personal ties stand out, especially the close friendship between Prime Minister Tony Blair and BP CEO John Browne (Lord Browne of Maddingley). The Blair-Browne relationship was so close that wags in the press called the company “Blair Petroleum,” though it would have been more accurate to say that Blair was the BP Prime Minister. At least a dozen BP executives held government posts or sat on official advisory committees, including Browne’s immediate predecessor David Simon (Lord Simon of Highbury). Simon had stepped down as BP CEO to serve as Blair’s unelected Minister for European Trade and Competitiveness from May 1997 to July 1999.24 Later on, Tony Blair’s longtime friend and personal assistant Anjl Hunter, director of government relations and known as “the gatekeeper” in Downing Street, joined BP as head of public relations in the summer of 2002, just as the war was actively brewing.25 After a century of closely-combined action on the global stage, company chieftans and government leaders see their relationship as cooperative and thoroughly complementary. In April, 2003, shortly after the war in Iraq, Lord Browne responded tartly to critics by saying: “It is quite ethical and appropriate for a global company, based in the UK, to be supported by the British government.”26 He did not, of course, go into the details. Seven Oil Wars to Control Iraq Before coming to the Iraq war of 2003, we will review the modern history of conflicts over Iraq. There have been a total of seven wars in the past ninety years, all closely related to oil. What follows is a thumbnail sketch of those conflicts, to suggest the constant military struggle over this oil-rich territory. http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2003/2003companiesiniraq.htm List of PMCs 3D Global Solutions, AD Consultancy, AGS, AMECO, 3S Security Support Solutions, Aegis Defence Services, AirScan Inc., AKE Limited, Al Hamza, American International Security, Anteon International Corp., Applied Marine Technology Inc., ArmorGroup International PLC, Ayr Aviation, Babylon Gates, Ben Tal, BH Defense LLC, Blackheart International LLC, Blackwater USA, Blue Hackle Limited, Britam Defence, Ltd., CACI International, Canine International, CastleForce Consultancy, Ltd., Carnelian International Risks, Centurion Risk Assessment Services, Civilian Police International, LLC, Cochise Consultancy Inc., Combat Support Associates, Ltd., Control Risks Group, Crescent Security Group, CTC Training, CTU ASIA, Cubic Corporation, Custer Battles, Defence Systems Limited, Demming Enterprises International, Ltd., Diligence, LLC, Double Eagle Management Company, DS Vance Iraq, DTS Security, DynCorp, Edinburgh Risk, Edinburgh International Security, Ltd., EODT Technology, Inc., Erinys International Ltd., Evergreen International Aviation, Excalibre, Executive Outcomes, Executive Solutions International, Falcon Group, Genric, Ltd., Greystone, Ltd., Global Marine Security Systems Company, Global Options, Inc., Global Strategies Group, Golan Group, Group 4 Securicor, Hart Group, Henderson Risk, Ltd., Hill and Associates, Homeland Security Corporation, ICP Group, Ltd., International Charter Incorporated of Oregon, ISEC Corporate Security, Ltd., ISI Security, J-3 Global, Janusian Security Risk Management Ltd., Keenie Meenie Services, Kellogg Brown and Root, Kroll, Inc., Levdan, Ltd., Management and Training Corporation, Main Street Supply & Logistics, Medical Support Solutions, Ltd., Meteoric Tactical Solutions, Meyer and Associates, Military Professional Resources Inc., Mushriqui Consulting, MVM, Inc., NAF Security, Neareast Security, New Korea Total Service, Northbridge Services Group, Ltd., Pistris, Inc., Olive Group, Omega Risk Solutions, Optimal Solution Services, Orion Management, OSSI-Safenet, Overseas Security and Strategic Information, Inc/Safenet - Iraq, Pacific Architects and Engineers, Inc., PSI International, PSD Training, PWC Logistics, RamOPS Risk Management Group, Reed, Inc., Ronco, Rubicon International Services, Ltd., Saladin Security, Sandline International, SCG International Risk, Science Applications International Corporation, Securiforce, Security Applications Systems International LLC, Select Armor, Inc., Sentinel, SGS, Silver Shadow, Smith Brandon International, Southern Cross Security, Special Operations Consulting-Security Management Group, Special Ops Associates, Steele Foundation, Sumer International Security, Tarik, THULE Global Security International, Titan Corporation, Toifor, Triple Canopy Inc., US Investigations Services, Unity Resources Group, USA Enviromental, Vinnell Corporation, Vinnell Brown and Root (VBR), VIP Investigations & Protective Services Inc., Wade-Boyd and Associates LLC, Whitestone Group, WVC3 Group, Inc. http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?titl..."The Freedom of Information Act applies to "agency" records. Contractors, in this context, are not "agencies," even where they perform decisional roles. Similarly, government officials are subject to a body of conflict of interest provisions, pay caps, limits on political activity, and labor rules that do not similarly constrain contractors who perform similar, even the same, work." * "In April <2002>, the Army told Congress that its best guess was that the Army had between 124,000 and 605,000 service contract workers. In October, the Army announced that it would permit contractors to compete for "non-core" positions held by 154,910 civilian workers (more than half of the Army's civilian workforce) and 58,727 military personnel." <12> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4901786.stmLast Updated: Wednesday, 12 April 2006, 09:48 GMT 10:48 UK Iraqi death squads 'not police' Iraq's interior minister has admitted death squads and other unauthorised armed groups have been carrying out sectarian killings in the country. But in a BBC interview, Bayan Jabr denied allegations that these groups were linked to his ministry. Mr Jabr blamed the proliferation of civilian security companies and licensed protection agencies used by other government ministries. 'Out of order' In his interview with the BBC, Mr Jabr said despite appearances, those involved in recent attacks were not genuine police officers. "Terrorists or someone who support the terrorists... are using the clothes of the police or the military," he said. He said problems also stemmed from the existence of non-governmental security agencies like the Facility Protection Service, an armed force set up during the US-led administration of Iraq in 2003 to guard official buildings. Mr Jabr called the 150,000-strong FPS "out of order, not under our control". He also implicated the involvement of about 30,000 civilian security guards operating in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4901786.stm http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6802629/site/newsweek/‘The Salvador Option’ The Pentagon may put Special-Forces-led assassination or kidnapping teams in Iraq WEB EXCLUSIVE By Michael Hirsh and John Barry Newsweek Updated: 8:59 p.m. ET Jan. 14, 2005 Jan. 8 - What to do about the deepening quagmire of Iraq? The Pentagon’s latest approach is being called "the Salvador option"—and the fact that it is being discussed at all is a measure of just how worried Donald Rumsfeld really is. "What everyone agrees is that we can’t just go on as we are," one senior military officer told NEWSWEEK. "We have to find a way to take the offensive against the insurgents. Right now, we are playing defense. And we are losing." Last November’s operation in Fallujah, most analysts agree, succeeded less in breaking "the back" of the insurgency—as Marine Gen. John Sattler optimistically declared at the time—than in spreading it out. Now, NEWSWEEK has learned, the Pentagon is intensively debating an option that dates back to a still-secret strategy in the Reagan administration’s battle against the leftist guerrilla insurgency in El Salvador in the early 1980s. Then, faced with a losing war against Salvadoran rebels, the U.S. government funded or supported "nationalist" forces that allegedly included so-called death squads directed to hunt down and kill rebel leaders and sympathizers. Eventually the insurgency was quelled, and many U.S. conservatives consider the policy to have been a success—despite the deaths of innocent civilians and the subsequent Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal. A Timeline of CIA Atrocities By Steve Kangas CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be "communists," but almost always they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow. This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious "School of the Americas." (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and murder. http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html
|