Doug Henwood wrote:
Does anyone know more about this? Why would a Shell oil guy want to keep Iraqi oil in state hands? Goodman, of course, never asked Palast to elaborate, but it seemed like the most interesting detail in their duet.
. From what I've read, the Iraqi oil infrastructure was (and is moreso now) a shambles, with broken down equipment of 1940s vintage (That's why Cheney's Energy Security Sroup was interested in the oilfield equipment nomenclature, etc.) Perhaps the Oilcos didn't care to, or plan to, make any major expenditures to reap the profits. Leaving the infrastructure in the hands of the Iraqi government is perhaps a calculated risk that between the shiny new Iraqi government's willingness to deal with the oil companies, and rebuilding of the oil infrastructure with Iraqi acquired debt, the profit margins for Shell et al would be higher than if they had the expense of refurbishing the oil infrastructure with their own money. Leigh http://leighm.net/
