SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mani1 who wrote (145762)4/21/2002 9:00:02 PM
From: richard surckla  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1575659
 
Hell Mani, if you want more to think about...

U.S. Firms Aiding Iraqi Oil Industry
Commerce With Baghdad Grows Quietly as Washington Urges Regime Change

By Colum Lynch
Special to The Washington Post
Sunday, February 20, 2000; Page A23
UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 17—Four years ago, when he was director of central intelligence, John M. Deutch headed up
American efforts to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Today, Deutch sits on the board of Schlumberger Ltd., a
multinational company that is helping Baghdad service its oil rigs.

As secretary of defense during the Persian Gulf War, Richard B. Cheney played a key role in the U.S.-led military coalition that
forced Iraq to retreat from Kuwait. But as chief executive officer of Halliburton Co., a Dallas-based maker of oil equipment,
Cheney recently held a major stake in Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll-Dresser Pump Co., two American players in the reconstruction
of Iraq's oil industry. While the United States and Britain wage almost daily airstrikes against military installations in northern and
southern Iraq, U.S. companies, executives and even some architects of American policy toward Iraq are doing business with
Saddam Hussein's government and helping to rebuild its battered oil industry. Though perfectly legal, the growing U.S.-Iraqi
commerce has been kept quiet by both sides because it seems to fly in the face of Washington's commitment to "regime change"
in Baghdad and Saddam Hussein's claim to be defying the world's lone superpower. The United Nations also helps both countries
avoid embarrassment by treating the business arrangements as confidential.

The trade is permitted under the "oil for food" deal, a humanitarianexemption from the U.N. trade embargo imposed on Iraq after
the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. It allows Iraq to sell oil and use the proceeds, under U.N. supervision, to purchase food, medicine
and other humanitarian goods, as well as spare parts to keep the oil flowing.

Placing bids through overseas subsidiaries and affiliates, more than a dozen U.S. firms have signed millions of dollars in contracts
with Baghdad for oil-related equipment since the summer of 1998, according to diplomats, industry officials and U.N. documents.

"The United States is the cradle of the international oil industry," said James Placke, who tracks Persian Gulf oil production for
Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consulting firm. "A lot of the equipment in Iraq's oil industry was originally made in
America, and if you want spare parts, you go back to the original supplier."

Most U.S. oil companies have been prohibited by Baghdad from directly purchasing Iraqi crude since the United States bombed
Iraq during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998. But Iraq nevertheless has emerged in the past year as the fastest growing
source of U.S. oil imports, according to Larry Goldstein, president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation.

American companies, he said, now purchase about 700,000 of the 2 million barrels of oil exported daily by Iraq, mainly through
foreign middlemen who load the Iraqi crude and transport it directly to American ports, primarily in the Gulf of Mexico.

"The Chevrons and the Exxons of this world have to buy from the Russians, the French and the Chinese traders," said Goldstein.
But, he added, "the U.S. spare parts industry is too dominant to ignore."

After approving the oil-for-food exemption in 1996, the U.N. Security Council gradually raised the amount of oil Iraq was allowed
to sell, and on Dec. 17 it removed the ceiling.

In June 1998, the 15-nation Security Council voted to allow Iraq to buy up to $300 million in spare parts every six months. The
council is considering a proposal to double that limit.

According to U.S. government figures, American firms account for only a tiny share of the nearly $10 billion in trade that has been
conducted under the oil-for-food exemption. U.S. citizens have received licenses to export about $15 million of oil-related spare
parts and $400 million of food, medicine and water treatment equipment to Iraq, according to the State Department.

But those figures do not count most products purchased by Iraq from American subsidiaries abroad. This indirect U.S.-Iraqi trade
is tracked by the United Nations, which must approve all the contracts. But little information about it has been made public.

The U.N. humanitarian program for Iraq maintains a Web site that lists contracts by number, with a brief description of the goods
involved and the country--but not the company--selling them to Iraq. According to this, the United States has been responsible for
only 2 out of 2,080 contracts for oil spare parts submitted to the United Nations for approval. France, China and Russia, by
contrast, submitted a total of 746 contracts.

America's real share of this trade, while unclear, is certainly far greater. Until recently, visitors to the Web site could search for a
company name and then call up the contract numbers associated with that company, allowing cross-referencing between contracts
and companies. The search engine was shut down last week after U.N. officials learned that The Washington Post had used it to
investigate U.S. companies doing business with Iraq through foreign subsidiaries.

John Mills, spokesman for the U.N. Office of the Iraq Program, declined to comment on the extent of U.S. trade with Iraq, saying
it was proprietary trade information.

According to diplomats and the Web site, American firms that have done business with Iraq, directly or through subsidiaries,
include such petroleum industry giants as Halliburton, the world's largest oil field service company; Schlumberger, the second
largest oil field servicer; the Fisher-Rosemount unit of Emerson Electric Co. in St. Louis; the Hamilton Sundstrand unit of United
Technologies in Windsor Locks, Conn.; and Baker Hughes Inc. of Houston.

Deutch, the former CIA director who sits on the board of Schlumberger, and officials at the firm's New York headquarters did not
respond to requests for comment on their dealings with Iraq. A Halliburton spokesman, Guy Marcus, confirmed that two of his
firm's former joint ventures--Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll-Dresser Pump--conducted business with Baghdad. "The joint ventures
sold spare parts to Iraq through European subsidiaries," he said.

Marcus added, however, that Halliburton's share of both joint ventures was sold in the last two months to Ingersoll-Rand of
Woodcliff Lake, N.J., which now wholly owns them. He also said that Cheney, the former secretary of defense, "was not involved
in the management of either joint venture and was not involved in the decision to make such sales" to Iraq.

According to one diplomat at the United Nations, Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll-Dresser Pump signed $29 million in contracts for
spare parts with Iraq through affiliates in Austria, France, Germany and Italy. Marcus said he did not know whether that figure
was accurate.

Peg Hashem, a spokeswoman for Hamilton Sundstrand, confirmed that a French subsidiary, Dosapro Milton Roy, sold pumps for
Iraqi water treatment plants in a contract worth "under $1 million." She said it was also possible that the firm had sold additional
equipment to Iraq.

Spokesmen for Dresser-Rand, Dresser-Ingersoll Pump Co. and Baker Hughes did not respond to requests for comment on their
ties to Iraq. But a Fisher-Rosemount spokesman, Walt Sharp, acknowledged that it has sold equipment to Iraq. Although he was
not sure of the value of the contracts, he said, all the deals were approved by the Treasury Department and a U.N. Security
Council sanctions committee.

Indeed, Diplomats said Washington has been a greater obstacle for American businesses than Baghdad. The United States has
placed "holds" on more than 1,000 contracts valued at $1.5 billion under the oil-for-food program, including some held by American
companies. A review of 22 Fisher-Rosemount contracts, for example, showed that the United States had held up eight and
approved seven; the remainder were pending or had been canceled.

"We don't play favorites," said a State Department official.

© Copyright 2000 The Washington Post Company

Gulf War Vets Home Page

gulfwarvets.com



To: Mani1 who wrote (145762)4/22/2002 12:38:08 AM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575659
 
It does not really matter. Oil is a commodity, we can always buy it from someone else and Iraq can sell it to someone else. Who buys from whom is not significant.

Mani, I understand the issue of oil being a commodity but that doesn't change what I am saying. Its the principle......you say someone is a crook, then you don't compromise that stand by doing some trading with him on the side because the traded item is a commodity and in the final analysis, you don't think it should matter. However, it does matter..........and to others, you given the appearance of diluting your stance.

What I do find hypocritical is continued use of vehicles such as SUV that are gas hogs and increase dependence on foreign oil.

That too........and then we can't understand why the Europeans won't support us when it comes to Saddam. They have made oil an expensive commodity which limits its usage while we drink it up like there's no tomorrow because we have made sure that its nearly as cheap as coke.

People think we look strong because we drop a few bombs. The true appearance of strength is when you stand up for what you believe on all levels and not allow yourself to be dependent on your enemy no matter the consequence. We are fortunate that Libya and the Saudis and other oil producers needed the oil money and so, didn't fall in line with Saddam's temporary embargo ploy. Had they complied with Saddam, we would have been up a creek without a paddle.

ted