Re my posting of yesterday (RE: [Futurework]
Something big in the offing in Iraq?) I can't help feeling
also that it is going to be announced just before Bush visits England to
see the Queen (who snubbed him many years ago when Bush Senior was in
charge).
Although they've decked Pall Mall with US and UK flags (the road leading
to Buckingham Palace -- which, usually, is lined with cheering people as
a state visitor goes down in an old-fashioned state coach and horses) and
many other roads, the Metropolitan Police, in opposition to the Mayor of
London, is going to declare Pall Mall and large parts of central London
closed down to normal traffic. This is to keep the massive numbers of
demonstrators (250,000 expected) away from Bush. But how are the police
going to sift the demonstrators from the peaceful flag wavers? And if
they stop all crowds getting near the Bush parade, then he'll motor in a
bullet-proof car with armed outriders through empty streets. What a snub!
Yet the plans are going ahead.
So, my sunsequent thought is: Is Bush going to announce democratic
elections for Iraqis, an early exit, etc, etc (see below) in Washington a
day or two before his visit to London?
This would totally bemuse potential demonstrators and perhaps allow a
fairly normal state visit. Also, if evidence and truth mean anything,
Blair is in danger of being named as a liar by Lord Hutton when his
Report on the suicide of Dr David Kelly is released at the end of this
month. (Blair categorically denied that he had anything to do with naming
David Kelly as the source of the original BBC story about the sexing-up
of Intelligence Dossier. The chief civil servant of the Ministry of
Defence has said at the Enquiry that the decision was taken at a Cabinet
meeting at No 10 chaired by Blair.) Such will let Blair off the hook
also, and he'll be able to resign "triumphantly" instead of
shamefully. But he'll be condemned by history all the same for invading
Iraq illegally.
Keith Hudson
<<<<<
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 to develop one of the largest oil fields in northern
Iraq, said that it was prepared to start development despite the
troubles;
Bush Junior gave a major speech two days ago saying that the invasion of
Iraq was about instituting democaracy 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 (FT 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 swith, 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 Zmericans and some members of the Iraq oil ministry
that US and UK oil corporations will be allowed in pretty quickly to
start developments). All this could could be announced by Bush as a
tremendous breakthrough for Iraq.
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, Bath, England,
<www.evolutionary-economics.org>
