Of course a certain fraction of US capital would benefit most from control of Iraqi oil. But as the PNA and other neo-con sites make clear control of energy resources is crucial to the continued hegemony of the US. Why do you think that countries such as Japan are kissing US ass in Iraq in spite of the fact that most Japanese are opposed to Japanese involvement. The Japanese know that access to energy resources is essential for their capitalists and the US knows the same. Surely it should be evident to a left business observer and this aim is documented in lots of places..
Cheers, Ken Hanly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 10:59 AM Subject: Re: Mark Jones Was Right > Julio Huato wrote: > > >If the Arabs control the oil in their soil, they still need to sell it at a > >price the buyers can accept. > > I don't really get the argument that the U.S. would enjoy a great > windfall from the "control" of Iraqi oil. Say the occupation manages > to pacify the country and U.S.-based (and only U.S. - what about > non-U.S. firms?) oil companies end up owning Iraq's oil, like in the > old days. So they capture some rents that would otherwise go to the > Iraqi national oil company. Good for the oil companies involved, but > how much would that help other sectors of U.S. capital? Oil companies > have an interest in high oil prices, but that harms autos, airlines, > chemicals, and finance. If you want to say that the Bush admin > narrowly represents oil interests in the U.S., ok (but there's no > evidence that big oil actively encouraged the invasion of Iraq). But > the broader arguments about some great material interests behind the > war - I just don't get them. This isn't the 19th century anymore. > > Doug
