|

FEATURES 
Blood, oil, tears and sweat
Rod Liddle says that the
most obvious spoils of war are going to American, not British, companies
A question for you. How much money do you
think has been secured in contracts by British oil firms to rebuild
and develop the Iraqi oil industry after the war is over? Here’s
a clue. It’s a round number. A smallish round number. Yes, I know,
that’s giving it away. The answer, of course, is nothing; zero.
 |
 |
| ‘If the war is a ratings success
they’ll do a series.’ |
Meanwhile, how are the American oil companies doing? Actually, they’re
doing rather well. So far, contracts have been signed for well in
excess of £1 billion, probably rather nearer £1.5 billion. I’m sorry
I can’t be more precise about the figures, but, hell, what’s half
a billion between friends?
That figure covers just preliminary work while the war is going on.
The real goldmine lies in the rights to exploit Iraq’s oil reserves
once Saddam has been gently persuaded not to run for a ninth term
in office, but instead to take a comfortable duplex retirement home
in Ndjamena or Minsk. And the American companies are first in the
queue for this bonanza, too. There are no British firms at all in
the running at present.
I don’t know how much Iraq’s oil is worth in the long run. Nobody
will even hazard a guess. Maybe I should just quote you the words
of an industry analyst, when I asked him for the specifics.
‘You’re a journalist, aren’t you?’ he said. ‘So do what you usually
do and make it up. Just choose a number. It’ll still be a lot, lot
less than the real amount.’
It may be that even now the disgust is rising in your throat at the
direction this article seems to be taking. It certainly will be if,
like me, you have the vestigial tail of infantile leftism wagging,
every now and then, from your behind. The expensive rockets are flattening
Baghdad, and presumably some of the people in it; captured American
troops are being paraded on prime-time television. There is an awful
lot of killing to be done before Iraq becomes, as they say, ‘liberated’.
So it seems a bit venal to be carping over the fact that our oil companies
look as though they’re going to be missing out on the extremely lucrative
spoils of this war, just as they missed out on the spoils of the last
Gulf war, winning contracts in Kuwait worth — another precise figure
for you here — sod all.
But while faded pinkos like me wring their hands, our oil companies,
pragmatic beasts that they are, have become enraged by what they see
as official lassitude. They have been begging the government to make
the appropriate representations to the US for months, and the British
government has done, they argue, nothing.
Its main reason for doing nothing was that, in the words of one oil-company
boss, to have started lobbying the Yanks for oil contracts would have
meant conceding that war with Iraq was inevitable or likely. Which
gives you an insight into the markedly different mindsets of the allied
British and American governments. How long ago was it that war with
Iraq was not inevitable? Last April?
Anyway, back in November last year, a number of oil-company people
met government ministers from the Department of Trade and Industry
and asked for help in persuading the Americans who would be on the
ground in Iraq to consider British companies as potential tenders.
In addition, the Foreign Office was told that the Americans had already
set up a secret department to dole out the oil contracts. Our government,
though, did nothing. Since then the oil companies have repeatedly
requested help. Their last letter was not even answered.
Trade Partners UK is the body funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office and the DTI to do precisely such lobbying on behalf of our
companies. Let’s be clear; according to one oil-industry spokesmen
I contacted, to win such contracts from the Americans requires serious
political clout at a high level.
It doesn’t look as if it will be coming from Trade Partners UK. The
man I spoke to seemed unaware that any such beseeching had been made
by the oil companies and wasn’t hugely impressed when told that it
had been a continual cri de coeur for the past six months.
‘The Iraqi oil,’ he said, with the slightest inflection of distaste
for my question, ‘belongs to the people of Iraq.’
And later, when asked again why no lobbying had taken place, he replied,
‘There is a time for that sort of thing and now is not the time.’
Well, if I’m honest, I don’t disagree with him. He had plenty of statistics
about how British companies have become involved in humanitarian aid.
And there you have the essential difference between our two countries
— the USA and Britain — and quite possibly the differing motives for
prosecuting this war.
The American company Halliburton will undoubtedly be one of the most
gleeful benefactors of a successful war in Iraq. It will secure more
contracts than you could shake a stick at. As you may be aware, it
is the company which, until a couple of years ago, was run by the
US vice-president Dick Cheney. That gives Halliburton a degree of
political clout, you have to say.
Halliburton has an enviable record for pragmatism. It has done lucrative
deals with the Libyans. It has done even more lucrative deals with
those twin pillars of the Axis of Evil: Iran and, yes, of course,
Iraq. While Cheney was still in charge, Halliburton, through its subsidiaries,
sold $73 million-worth of oil-production equipment and spare parts
to Saddam Hussein. Cheney shrugged his shoulders and said, sorry,
but he didn’t know anything about all that. The deal was done while
he was looking the other way, maybe taking a coffee break or something.
The suspicion has become planted in my mind — and, by all means, call
me a cynic — that were Osama bin Laden suddenly to require loads of
stuff with which to drill for oil, Halliburton would be first in the
queue for the contract and would probably throttle its own grandmother
in order to get it. This is a company that has been investigated for
its accounting procedures; and, after 9/11, two New York City pension
funds have demanded that Halliburton review its overseas business
dealings because of concerns ‘about corporate ties to states sponsoring
terrorist activities’.
That’s what the British oil companies are up against: a rapacious
and unapologetic capitalistic enterprise which seems to have the unquestioning
support of its government.
Here, it’s different. With Tony Benn (and others) wandering from television
studio to television studio telling us that ‘Itsh all about oil’,
the government is placed in a position of having to say over and over
again, no, actually, it isn’t. Oil hardly comes into it. And the truth
is that for our Prime Minister, I suspect, it doesn’t. Dick Cheney
and the White House boys, though, may have different priorities.
Rod Liddle is associate editor of The Spectator.
©
2003 The Spectator.co.uk
|