I can't help feeling that some big change in Bush's policy
in Iraq is in the offing. Let me jot down a few events/portents of the
last week or so
US and UK oil corporations are still firm that they will not develop oil
fields in Iraq until there's a legitimate government, certainly not the
Coalition Provisional Authority for fear of later court action and heavy
penalties;
About two weeks ago, Lukoil, the major Russian oil corporation which made
a deal with Saddam Hussein to develop one of the largest oil fields in
northern Iraq, said publicly that it was prepared to start development
despite the risks. The Americans did not respond publicly;
Bush Junior gave a major speech two days ago saying that the invasion of
Iraq was about instituting democracy to the Middle East (WDMs and
terrorism being forgotten for the moment);
Bush Senior arrives in St Petersburg on 8 November, along with Kissinger,
and Giuliani, apparently on a private visit (and is to visit Putin later)
to see the sights. He is 79. Is this really a pleasure jaunt? Because it
so happens that all the major Russian oil companies are also meeting in
St Petersburg at the same time, among other things worried about Putin's
attempted (or actual) state take-over of Khodorkovsky's personal shares
in Yukos. Is some 'understanding' being made with Lukoil by Kissinger and
Bush? (By now Bush Senior must be very worried indeed that his son's
presidency is going to end in disaster, particularly if there are any
more serious terrorist incidents in Iraq);
US multinationals are "acutely worried" about the business
consequences of the Bush administration foreign policy -- new report from
Control Risks (Financial Times 11 November)
Thamar Ghadhban, chief executive of Iraq's oil ministry was sacked
yesterday and "could be the start of a significant reshuffling of
senior posts" (FT 11 November)
"A fierce debate is raging just below the surface of Bush's
administration over when and how America should exit from Iraq" (Ivo
Daalder, senior fellow, Brookings Institute, and James Lindsay,
vice-president of Council of Foreign Affairs -- FT 11 November)
Six more Americans are killed in southern Iraq. Also, "L. Paul
Bremer, the chief civilian administrator for Iraq, returned to Washington
at a time of increasing tension between coalition officials and the
U.S.-appointed Iraqi leadership, the Governing Council. Bremer wants to
delay transferring sovereignty until the Iraqis draft a constitution and
hold national elections." (New York Times, 11 November
2003)
Is Bremer flying to Washington to prevent some major policy change about
to be made? More than likely. But what will this change be?
My own guess is that a Constitution is about to be announced -- with
early elections within a couple of months with announcements of Lukoil
starting oil operations in Iraq. If the consitution is anywhere near what
we would consider to be democratic then it will give majority power to
the Shias. The Shias, however, if suitably armed could probably get on
top of the Sunni and radical terrorists straightaway and could probably
find Saddam fairly quickly.
And America will exit by about March/April with, apparently, everything
set in order for the reconstruction of Iraq by the Iraqis -- and with
promise of bigger oil revenues down the line (and with a secret deal
involving Lukoil, the Americans and some members of the Iraq oil ministry
that US and UK oil corporations will be allowed in pretty quickly to
start development). All this could could be announced by Bush as a
tremendous breakthrough for Iraq to help his 2004 election
campaign.
I cannot help thinking that something along these lines is in the offing
despite frequent statements (until a week or two ago) that America will
remain in Iraq for the long term.
Keith Hudson
Keith Hudson, Bath, England,
<www.evolutionary-economics.org>
