iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Thomas Ferguson

Thomas Ferguson

GET UPDATES FROM Thomas Ferguson
 

Oil-Soaked Politics: Secret U.K. Docs on Iraq

Posted: 04/19/11 07:53 PM ET

Cross-posted from New Deal 2.0.

Revolution in the Middle East, nuclear meltdown in Japan, war in Libya, the U.S. budget crisis, the looming problems of the Eurozone -- some days it's all just too much. But today there's something no one can afford to ignore: The Independent, one of Britain's leading newspapers, broke a must-read story. In a nutshell, the story buries forever all claims that the US, the UK, and other governments did not have oil on their minds as they prepared to invade Iraq.

The story reports on a forthcoming book that draws on more than a thousand secret government documents. The excerpts the paper prints detailing meetings between the UK government and British oil companies in the run up to the war are devastating. They demonstrate that all the denials in London and Washington that policymakers were not concerned about oil as they invaded were as false as the famous cover story about weapons of mass destruction.

The passages quoted in the Independent show that all the governments were negotiating over rights to oil long before the invasion and that they were working closely with their companies. But it is impossible from a single newspaper article to assess the full extent of oil's role in precipitating the invasion of Iraq. The book, obviously, will need a careful review; presumably the author realizes that he will need to make the materials he drew upon available on some website. But enough has already been revealed to make a compelling case for a congressional committee to demand that all the relevant U.S. government documents now be revealed. Ever since a court ordered the release of some government documents in response to a suit Judicial Watch filed under the Freedom of Information Act, we have known that Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force was reviewing documents on Iraqi oil -- well before the attack on 9/11. See here, for example.

It's time the rest of the story came out -- not because it is history, but because it is not. The U.S. is still in Iraq. Major decisions about the continuing presence of U.S. troops there loom just ahead. The major U.S. media have done little or nothing to investigate the story, though journalists working the U.K., notably Greg Palast, produced excellent reports on the subject. The endless chain of books about the Green Zone and corruption has not really gotten to the heart of the matter. As the U.S. deliberates about its next steps in Iraq, it is time somebody does.

 
Cross-posted from New Deal 2.0. Revolution in the Middle East, nuclear meltdown in Japan, war in Libya, the U.S. budget crisis, the looming problems of the Eurozone -- some days it's all just too muc...
Cross-posted from New Deal 2.0. Revolution in the Middle East, nuclear meltdown in Japan, war in Libya, the U.S. budget crisis, the looming problems of the Eurozone -- some days it's all just too muc...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:28 AM on 04/21/2011
And we assisted the South Vietnam government because China was going to take over Vietnam to have access to the rice paddies to feed their growing population. We are surprised that America the largest user of petroleum products elected two individuals connected to the oil industry who then started a war in Iraq. We have bases in all of these foreign countries to protect our borders (fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here) and we can't stop illegal emigrants from crossing our own borders, drugs from entering the country, or weapons going out of the country. One political party cuts the budget on the sick, poor, and elderly and increases the budget of the war machine. Sounds like Rome to me.
photo
RubalKhali
Philosophy is the stray camel of the faithful
05:27 AM on 04/21/2011
And this is a surprise to anyone?
06:13 PM on 04/20/2011
The US needs to comply with the end-of-2011 deadline for getting all troops out of Iraq.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gracie fr
03:36 PM on 04/20/2011
From Democracy Now :
Exposed: Link Between British Oil Firms and Invasion of Iraq
The Independent newspaper of London has revealed Britain discussed plans to exploit Iraq’s oil reserves with some of the world’s biggest oil companies five months before it joined the United States in invading the country in 2003. Citing previously secret documents, the newspaper said at least five meetings were held between British officials and BP and Royal Dutch Shell in late 2002. BP privately told the British Foreign Office at the time that Iraq was "more important than anything we’ve seen for a long time." The documents were obtained by the oil campaigner Greg Muttitt, author of the new book Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq.

Greg Muttitt: “Tony Blair famously said in early 2003, ‘The idea that we’re interested in Iraq’s oil is absurd, it’s one of the most absurd conspiracy theories you can imagine,’ if you remember. And at the same time as he was saying that, there was an internal document, a secret document, in the Foreign Office, which set out British strategy towards Iraqi oil, and it said, 'Britain has an absolutely vital interest in Iraq’s oil.'"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gracie fr
03:25 PM on 04/20/2011
I suppose, for all of us that saw what was "so blatantly obvious" should fell a twinge of vindication, but that is difficult in the face of the untold millions of dead. In Cheney's twisted patriotic logic, oil and American preeminence were more important than the lives of a humbler and distant humanity....
08:42 AM on 04/20/2011
"The passages quoted in the Independent show that all the governments were negotiating over rights to oil long before the invasion and that they were working closely with their companies." but of course . . . . it was an open secret . . . .
photo
CigarGod
What is your process?
08:45 AM on 04/20/2011
...with Cheney greasing the skids for the whole operation.
09:16 AM on 04/20/2011
yup . . . he thought he's greased them good too . .
02:48 AM on 04/20/2011
Let me think - the Russians needed a port on the Afghani coast and invaded Afghanistan. They were defeated by the Afghani Taliban who were armed by the good ol USA. The Russians needed the port so they could export the oil from the oil rich areas which had been part of the USSR. Then, although it was Saudis who attacked the Twin Towers, America attacked the Taliban even though the Taliban had nothing to do with anything concerning the Twin Towers. America had never expressed concern about the treatment of women or anything else in Afghanistan while they were supporting the Taliban. Iraq was an ally of America and received arms from America while Saddam Hussein was in power. America also decimated the Iraqi army when it invaded Kuwait which is ruled by an emir. The Gulf War was about oil and nothing but oil. Democracy was not demanded of the Kuwaitis or women's rights. the picture to remember is the one of American tanks surrounding the Iraqi Ministry of Oil while the museum which Dubya vowed to protect was looted. American soldiers sat in their turrets and watched the looting. America is collapsing because of the debt to fund wars over oil. Had the money been spent on renewable energy rather than war America would be charfinbg full speed ahead, respected in the world and the price of oil would be relatively unimportant for Americans. Never think Dubya, a failed oil man, Rice and Cheney wanted anything but
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:43 AM on 04/20/2011
Not to mention that the territory that became the geo-political invention called "Kuwait" was stolen from Iraq by the UK on behalf of British oil interests in 1961.
11:47 AM on 04/20/2011
Not really. The Russians were asked by a newly elected communist president for help against Muslims who opposed communism. The Russians did not invade, nor did they invade for a port as Afganistan is landlocked. It is true that the end of Russia's role came with the introduction of American stinger missiles, very good at shooting down Russian helicopters, their main means of transportation around the countryside. The Americans cared not about politics in Afganistan, they just wanted to cause their cold war foe as much trouble as possible.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
waldopepper
I'd tell you all about me if you were my friend.
11:34 PM on 04/19/2011
The BBC commentators made a good point on these documents the other night. Considering that these documents date from something like five weeks before the military campaign began, it was obvious even to the most jaded observer that an invasion would happen. It was simply prudent and expected to have these discussions. Had they predated the invasion by a years, or a year then it would be a far more convincing cause and effect sort of scenario.
photo
CigarGod
What is your process?
08:49 AM on 04/20/2011
I think you forget...that Bush was still trying to form a coalition "5 weeks before".
Oil rights helped form it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
waldopepper
I'd tell you all about me if you were my friend.
12:48 PM on 04/20/2011
Agreed. Bush was trying to recruit participant nations from the beginning, and after the invasion. What I said was very specific. Had these documents preceded the invasion by more time they would be MORE of a smoking gun.

I am so tempted to say that there is never a single reason for any decision. But to talk in absolutes like that is to be automatically wrong. But I will say that extremely rarely is there ever a single reason for any decision. Oil was obviously going to be mentioned. If all Iraq had was Date trees - then they too would be mentioned by international Date brokers. But if Iraq had NO oil - then this would have happened anyway. I think that that is pretty obvious.
10:35 PM on 04/19/2011
Right now, Baghdad is still a subsidiary of Iran, and the North is the heart of Greater Kurdistan. As for the Sunnis, they can't win an open confrontation, but are still plenty strong enough to win plenty.

So the story about negotiations over oil (which surely did happen in abundance) is that they were as premature back then as they still are today.
02:20 AM on 04/20/2011
Any postponement of an attack on Iraq at this stage will serve no purpose," Ranaan Gissin, a senior Sharon adviser told the Associated Press yesterday. "It will only give Saddam Hussein more of an opportunity to accelerate his programme of weapons of mass destruction."

Israeli intelligence officials had new evidence that Iraq was speeding up efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons, he added
03:25 PM on 04/20/2011
Oh yeah, any statement by an Israeli spy agency person at that time is definitely something that should have been taken at face value.