The role of oil in the attack upon Iraq

Hartford Web Publishing is not the author of the documents in World History Archives and does not presume to validate their accuracy or authenticity nor to release their copyright.

U.S. considers seizing revenues to pay for occupation, source says: By Knut Royce, Newsday, 10 January 2003. Bush administration officials are seriously considering proposals that the United States tap Iraq’s oil to help pay the cost of a military occupation, a move that likely would prove highly inflammatory in an Arab world already suspicious of U.S. motives in Iraq.
Foreign secretary admits oil central to war vs. Iraq: By Julie Hyland, World Socialist Web Site, 14 January 2003. Oil is a key factor in the UKs willingness to participate in a US-led war against Iraq. A strategic priority is to bolster the security of British and global energy supplies. Government officials admit that oil is the real reason for the war.
US Begins Secret Talks to Secure Iraq’s Oilfields: By Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow, Julian Borger in Washington, Terry Macalister and Ewen MacAskill, Guardian (UK), 23 January 2003. The US military has drawn up detailed plans to secure and protect Iraq’s oilfields. with war looming, discussions in private have inevitably begun on the future of the world’s second biggest oil reserves.
US buys up Iraqi oil to stave off crisis: Seizing reserves will be an allied priority if forces go in: By Faisal Islam and Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow, The Observer, Sunday 26 January 2003. Facing its most chronic shortage in oil stocks for 27 years, the US has this month turned to an unlikely source of help—Iraq. Weeks before a prospective invasion of Iraq, the oil-rich state has doubled its exports of oil to America, helping US refineries cope with a debilitating strike in Venezuela.
All Bush Wants is Iraqi Oil, Says Mandela: Independent (Cape Town, SA), 30 January 2003. Former president Nelson Mandela said on Thursday the United States was preparing to go to war because George Bush wants to get hold of the Iraqi oil. We must fight globalisation which is for the high and mighty. Bush and Blair undermining the United Nations.
Kirkuk: Mad race for a 10bn-barrel prize: By Ian Urbina, Asia Times, 1 February 2003. One of the potentially hottest spots could be the northern oil-rich and historically controversial city of Kirkuk. Not only might this city witness a mad dash on the part of the Turks, the Americans and the Kurds, it could also face internal clashes as ethnic groups take the chance to settle old scores.
Proof—War on Iraq is for Oil: The Insider 13 February 2003. The US government officially decided that the war on Iraq was necessary six months before September 11th. The one and only reason for this was to improve Western access to Iraqi oil. The US government’s policy on Iraq can only be explained by the people behind it, because it was written by an elite group of wealthy oil men.
The New Oil Order: By Michael Renner, 20 February 2003. It is likely that a U.S.-controlled Iraq will be the linchpin of a new order in the world oil industry. Indeed, a war against Iraq may well herald a major realignment of the Middle East power balance. The Bush administration’s ties to the oil and gas industry are pervasive.
Is this war all about oil?: By Anthony Sampson, The Evening Standard (London), 11 March 2003. There remains extraordinary uncertainty about which countries and companies will gain the huge prizes after the war is won: the access to Iraq’s enormous oil reserves. The Bush administration makes no secret of its desire to break the power of Opec, to bring down the oil price, and to lessen the Americans’ dependence on Saudi Arabia.
Oil firms ‘discuss Iraqi stake’: BBC News, Wednesday 12 March 2003. Oil firms BP and Shell have confirmed they would be interested in developing oil fields in Iraq, in the aftermath of any potential war in the area and argues for what it calls a level playing field in the event of post-war development of Iraq’s oil fields.