Deep Blade Archive
Cutting through the machinations and
effects of the U.S. empire
Issue #3
Posted 08/21/2003
Archive of 2003 War Resources
Archive of 1991 Gulf War Articles
911 Archive
Aftermath (second in a series)
In Iraq, continuing deaths, bomb attacks,
lack of security for the population, and lack of services
plague the occupation. Now let us echo Issue #1 of Deep Blade
News:
“Despite their arrogance and
hubris, Bush and his team should not have much confidence that the chaos of
the post-invasion period can be kept benign.There is great
uncertainty about the controllability of forces that could be
unleashed as America commits to new global management
requirements far beyond its present substantial deployments.
Current U.S. planning envisions a three-phase transition of
Iraq from American military administration to some form of
American-style government led by current Iraqi exiles. This
process will be highly problematic and will probably require
considerable force to pacify the disparate populations within
Iraq.”
This was a major reason not to go to war
in the first place. These chickens are really coming home to
roost as U.S. soldiers are slowly picked off, civilians are
brutalized by scared soldiers, truck bombs devastate the
Jordanian embassy and U.N. headquarters, and it is proving next
to impossible to protect oil and utility infrastructure from
sabotage.
The U.S. is paying the price for snubbing
the U.N. in the march to war. It is pathetically going hat in
hand to other countries, pleading for more help while the
dissatisfaction of beleaguered troops and their families at
home is finding its way into the media.
"Begging Poland and Ukraine and
Nicaragua and Honduras to help us is rather humiliating and
degrading when we are supposed to be the great power,"
says Clyde Prestowitz, founder of the Economic Strategic
Institute and author of American Unilateralism And The Failure
Of Good Intentions.
Speaking from Europe, Prestowitz says
traditional allies, whom Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
calls the "new Europe," want no part of the chaos in
Iraq and don't want to fight under American command. "We
are now paying the price of our own cynicism and the perception
in Europe of an America betraying its own ideals. It may be a
silent price at home, but I hear it everywhere (in
Europe.)" (quoted in the Toronto Star, 7/7/2003)
More war targets are also in
America’s crosshairs. U.S. Undersecretary of State for
Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton, has been
a busy man. He said on April 9, “We warned North Korea,
Syria, and Iran to draw the appropriate lesson from
Iraq.” Today, warnings against Syria are regular and a
June incident well within Syrian territory involved U.S.
bombing of a convoy of fuel smugglers. Eighty people are said
to have died in the attack. Meanwhile, Bolton has been cast as
“bad cop” while handling interactions with North
Korea that are parodies of themselves. This would be funny if
the potential consequences of war in Northeast Asia were not so
grave.
Has the world plunged into Nelson
Mandela’s holocaust? Not yet. But the consequences of
this war will not play out for many years, perhaps decades. To
be continued....
Guess What? They Will Take the Oil
Misleading statements by Bush,
Powell, and others suggested Iraq’s oil would benefit the
Iraqi people — That won’t be anytime soon —
U.S. Corporations are first in line
Issue #2 argues that the strategic value of oil is
a massive underlying motivation for the U.S. taking of Iraq.
It’s beginning to look more like a lot of Iraqi oil could
just be stolen in the privatization process.
According to a story in the Los Angeles
Times back in January, “Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell insisted [on 1/22/2003] that the United States has no
plans to claim Iraq's oil fields or use its petroleum revenue
to recoup the cost of a possible war. Powell, offering the most
explicit U.S. assurance to date about the future of Iraq's oil
industry, said future production proceeds would be held
‘in trust’ for ordinary Iraqis. ‘The oil of
Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people.’
"’Whatever form of
custodianship there is, it will be held for and used for the
people of Iraq. It will not be exploited for the United states'
own purpose.’”
However, Steve Kretzmann and Jim Valette,
analysts with the Sustainable Energy & Economy Network of
the Institute for Policy Studies reported on Alternet that in
May, after the UN Security Council unanimously adopted
Resolution 1483 ending sanctions and endorsing the creation of
Development Fund for Iraq. This fund will be controlled by
[U.S. Administrator in Iraq] Paul Bremer and overseen by a
board of accountants, including UN, World Bank, and IMF
representatives. It endorsed the transfer of over $1 billion
(of Iraqi oil money) from the Oil-for-Food program into the
Development Fund. All proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil and
natural gas are also to be placed into the fund. This fund will
then become a conduit for repayment of Export-Import Bank loans
issued to private concerns.
Plans call for the oil fields to be
privatized. Meanwhile, President Bush issued Executive Order
13303 giving U.S. corporations blanket immunity in any
activities that gain possession or control of Iraqi oil or
products through any means.
“EO 13303 also shields the value of
anything related to the sale or marketing of Iraqi petroleum or
a petroleum product, as long as the oil is making money
domestically or abroad. There is no cutoff date for the
immunity, which renders ‘the judicial process …
null and void,’” according to the Government
Accountability Project in a press release dated August 15, 2003.
More detail is also posted in Deep Blade Journal for August 22, 2003. Powell’s January assurances appear to
be misleading.
Permanent U.S. Military Bases in
Iraq
The Administration denies there
will be such bases —
The denials are hollow
The denials are hollow
Issue #2 argues that strategic basing is a root
motivation for the Iraq war. The U.S. State Department and the
Pentagon have strenuously denied that this is the case.
But Janes Defense Weekly for April 28
carried a story “US and UK reveal plans to set up bases
in Iraq”
“As details of US plans to build up
its military bases inside Iraq emerge, Jane's Defense Weekly
has learned that the UK also plans to construct a major base
near Basra to support its troop presence in southern Iraq.
“Senior UK officers say plans are
being developed to turn Basra International Airport into a
major logistics and helicopter base. Elements of the UK's Joint
Helicopter Force, including Chinook HC Mk2 heavy-lift and Puma
HC Mk 1 medium-lift helicopters, are already moving to the
airport to support troops of 1 (UK) Armoured Division operating
in and around Basra.
“By developing an 'in-country' base
infrastructure, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) hopes to be able
to scale down massively the number of bases throughout the
Gulf/Middle East to save money and reduce the US 'footprint' in
countries where the presence of US troops is still
controversial.
“Plans are advanced to wind down
USCENTCOM's forward headquarters at Camp As Sayliyah and
eventually move the deployable headquarters modules to Baghdad,
allowing USCENTCOM to run operations inside Iraq.”
The New York Times reported on April 20
that the “Pentagon Expects Long-Term Access to Key Iraq
Bases.”
“American military officials, in
interviews this week, spoke of maintaining perhaps four bases
in Iraq that could be used in the future: one at the
international airport just outside Baghdad; another at Tallil,
near Nasiriya in the south; the third at an isolated airstrip
called H-1 in the western desert, along the old oil pipeline
that runs to Jordan; and the last at the Bashur air field in
the Kurdish north.”
The Guardian (UK) is a little more cheeky
about U.S. intentions in an article titled “How American
power girds the globe with a ring of steel: New bases take
Pentagon's armed presence far and wide,” by Ian Traynor,
April 21, 2003.
“The Iraqi deployment plans fall
into the century-old pattern of US foreign bases being built on
the back of military victory. They are also the latest episode
in an extraordinary surge in America's projection of military
muscle since September 11.
“The past two years have seen a
rapid expansion of American deployments across thousands of
miles stretching from the Balkans to the Chinese border and
taking in the Caucasus, central Asia, the Middle East and the
Indian subcontinent.
“From Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, a
result of the 1999 Nato campaign, to the Bishkek airbase in
Kyrgyzstan, appropriated for the Afghanistan war, the Americans
are establishing an armed presence in places they have never
been before.
“Thirteen new bases in nine
countries ringing Afghanistan were rapidly established as
Russia's underbelly in central Asia became an American theatre
for the first time....
“The new bases in central Asia, the
Middle East, and the Balkans mean that the US military now
girds the globe as no power has done before, from the frozen
wastes of Greenland to the deserts of southern
Afghanistan.“
These developments speak for themselves,
as Colin Powell today exclaims that the U.S. is in Iraq for the
long haul, and that a few truck bombs are not going to drive
out the Americans. So even though the Bush administration says
it will not stay in Iraq "any longer than will be
necessary,” it appears that “as long as
necessary” effectively means forever. j
