Yes we can... maybe
by Robert Philbin
[ opinion - july 08 ]
In a move to boost production back to pre-US invasion levels, the Iraq oil minister has opened development deals with a total of 41 foreign oil firms, the first since Iraq nationalized its major natural resource almost 40 years ago. "We chose 35 companies of international standard, according to their finances, environment and experience, and we granted them permission to extract oil," oil ministry spokesman Asim Jihad said.
The goal is to add 400,000 barrels of production a day through these 35 companies and another 100,000 barrels a day through six non-bid deals with oil "majors" who controlled Iraqi oil development in pre-nationalized Iraq. These six include Royal Dutch Shell, Shell in partnership with BHP Billiton, BP and Exxon Mobil, plus Chevron and Total.
These six short-term (two-year) service contracts, worth about $500 million each, are to provide technical support to increase production by 100,000 barrels per day. The current per barrel price is about $140, so, at a cost of about $3 billion over two years, the Iraq government will see a return of $14 million per day, or about $10 billion over the contract period. According to news reports there will be no revenue sharing, simply contracted technology, and some personnel, implemented under Iraqi management.
These no-bid contracts, to be announced June 30, are relatively small by international standards, but some say they could open the door to lucrative work for the Western firms because the corporations will have an advantage on future contracts.
Meanwhile Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated that "the US government was not involved" in the no-bid oil contracts. "The United States government has stayed out of the matter of awarding the Iraq oil contracts. It's a private sector matter," Rice said in an interview on Fox news network. Given more than five years of US occupation of Iraq for no rational reason other than the US control of Iraqi oil fields, most Americans, not to mention most of the Middle East, will find this statement nothing short of ludicrous.
There was further talk of a national oil law in Iraq, guaranteeing US oil interests a major role in profiteering in Iraq for decades, but nobody in Iraq seems to take the Bush-Cheney drafted law very seriously.
'Campaign reform': who's kidding whom?
Suddenly "campaign reform," a subject of interest only to manipulative power elites, the lobbyist industry, fund-raising staffers or the brain dead, became a focus this week in the Presidential campaign. Barack Obama elected to pass on "public funding" as well as the collateral restrictions it brought to his campaign spending.
This absolutely politically pragmatic decision should come as no surprise to any one paying attention to recent history for two very good reasons: Obama has built the most successful grass roots - "publicly financed" - contribution system in American history and therefore doesn't need the money (nor the spending limitations) from the Federal government and Republicans will use every means necessary to circumvent "campaign reform" and finance absolutely anything necessary to win any election, just as they have in every election in recent memory.
For evidence of the latter, look no further than recent GOP campaigns in Louisiana, Virginia, and North Carolina, which raised race, personally attacked Mrs Obama, as were financed by "diverted, uncontrollable contributions," as condemned by John McCain.
By not accepting Treasury money, Obama can pour any amount of the millions contributed to respond to the scurrilous attacks which will come out of "nowhere" - attacks on his wife, his race, his religious expression, his middle name, etc, - despite the protestations of John McCain, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and The Fox News Network.
As to the point of "campaign finance reform," take a look at the new one-stop shopping GOP McCain contribution scheme constructed so wealthy individuals can contribute up to $70,000 in one check because their money would be networked legally to every imaginable GOP party financial entity - local, state parties, and campaigns, etc. - then recirculated back to the McCain Campaign to drive decisions such as campaign advertising and timing by state.
In short, "campaign reform" is a joke, not a hope, and the only way to share the laughter is to get on line now and make a credit card contribution of $25 or more to the candidate of your choice. Those contributors - more than 1.5 million for Obama - are reforming the system faster than pundits can comprehend, or the US Congress will ever attempt. Reform is happening now and in the most meaningful way possible: from the people up.
Reform America's democracy deficit first
As most of us know, Americans overwhelming oppose the Bush administration, the Congress, the war in Iraq - we want it all to end. We insist, for example, on diplomatic solutions to problems in the Middle East. We want the entire region nuclear free. We want a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem. We want democratic and human rights to progress around the planet.
But it doesn't matter what the American people want, or how we vote. Elitist interests - like the defense-oil industry - are far more powerful than the American people, and they will determine these outcomes according to their own best interests.
The House Democrats, elected in 2006 to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home, approved the war in Iraq this week, insisted on the maintenance of US troops in occupation there, and endorsed lame duck President Bush and his administration's conduct of the war through next January.
President Bush "conceded" more funding for GI benefits and an extra 13 months of unemployment for returning combat veterans with three years or more of service.
The official cost of the two wars is now about $16 billion per month and the $162 billion "emergency spending bill" passed by the Democratic House comes on top of the more than $580 billion in already approved annual defense spending. The total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will exceed $3 Trillion, according to reliable experts. Who gains and who loses from this historic waste of American resources?
Meanwhile domestically, the House overwhelmingly approved a sweeping new surveillance law this week that extends the Bush administration's eavesdropping capability and effectively shields telecommunications companies from lawsuits for cooperating with the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program.
Ending his year-long battle with Congress victoriously, President Bush said, "It's vital that our intelligence community has the ability to learn who the terrorists are talking to, what they're saying and what they are planning." Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama agreed with Mr. Bush, stating, "Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said.
The bill includes oversight in the form of a secret FISA court for foreigners, and requires a warrant from the same secret court for American citizens. After all: "This is a democracy. It is not a monarchy," as Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi commented on the bill's passage.
Of course the bill most importantly provides a legal avenue for AT&T, Verizon Communications and other telecommunications firms to navigate around about 40 lawsuits alleging that they violated customers' privacy by helping the government conduct a warrantless spying program. Neither Bush, McCain, nor Obama commented on the fact that corporations are apparently no longer libel for their actions taken against consumers so long as they have a directive to action from a U.S. President. The bill is expected to clear the Democratic-controlled Senate next week.
So much for the new change that's coming this Fall. Yes we can... Maybe.
