Many war-weary newshounds are probably wondering why Russia caved in at the IAEA board meeting and agreed to have Iran sent before the UN Security Council. Russia, of course, is very familiar with Iran’s nuclear program (having worked with Iran on its nuclear power projects) and fully realizes that the Mullahs are not developing nuclear weapons.
So, why would they go along with the coercive maneuvering of the United States that is so clearly designed to pave the way for war?
Obviously, Russia’s foreign minister’s comment that the referral to the UNSC is “only a warning” doesn’t adequately explain why Russia would have placed its ally in such grave danger of a preemptive attack.
So why did Russia capitulate?
It may be, in the words of the Godfather, that the Bush administration made Putin “a deal he couldn’t refuse”. For one thing, MosNews reports just yesterday that “Lukoil will replace the disgraced Halliburton” in providing fuel in Iraq. MosNews states, “Over three months beginning from April 1, LITASCO will have to deliver 180,000 tons of gasoline and 130,000 tons of diesel fuel to Iraq. After this the contract may be renewed.
Halliburton’s replacement was chosen by a tender, the results of which the Pentagon announced on March 8. The winners were six Turkish companies and the U.S. Refinery Associates which won the right to the largest contract worth $108.5 million.”
That’s a pretty hefty reward for Putin’s vote on Iran, but apparently it only scratches the surface. (We should also note the generous prizes handed out to the 6 Turkish companies. Is this Turkey’s payoff for using its bases in future military operations against Iran?)
Russia’s real goal, however, is “the securing of rights for exploration and extraction at the huge West Qurna-2 oil field.” Putin has always insisted that the Bush administration honor Saddam’s previous commitments with Lukoil. It appears now that Putin is winning that battle.
According to the Boston, Globe Lukoil president Vagit Alekperov met with Iraq’s oil minister Ibrahim al-Ulloum to firm up “an understanding” about Russia’s $6 billion contract to develop the West Qurna-2 oil field. Al-Ulloum, of course, is just following Washington’s directives in reviving the moribund Russian contract. But it is striking that Bush would surrender such an enormous trophy as one of Iraq’s main oil fields just to secure Russia’s vote.
Why?
Does the administration really need a war with Iran so desperately?
Yes.
The truth is, that even the control of oil is not nearly as critical to the US as maintaining it’s continued dominance in the exchange of oil in greenbacks. If Iran is allowed to open its oil bourse (exchange) in March and openly compete with the US’s monopoly on trading oil in petrodollars, the central banks across the globe will dump hundreds of billions of dollars overnight, and the American economy will disappear beneath the waves.
This is not fiction.
The reason the United States is the unchallenged leader of the global economic system is because it has a stranglehold on the oil trade. Even the oil itself, or the price at which it is sold, is of less importance than the means by which it is traded. The nation that controls the currency, determines the rules of the game. It forces other nations to stockpile mountains of its debt-ridden script, while Congress breezily produces oceans of red ink. America’s fat-cat bankers and corporatists are now living off the generosity of the developing world that must hold on to worthless dollars so they can purchase oil. Iran’s plan to sell its oil in petro-euros threatens to break up this massive extortion-ring and put the greenback nose-to-nose with its global competitor; the euro.
The Lukoil transaction should prove to skeptics that Washington is prepared to give up anything to prevent the opening of Iran’s oil exchange. The UN Security Council is just the last step before military operations begin.
The Bush administration is dead-set on attacking Iran and removing this existential threat to the American economy and the ongoing supremacy of the reserve currency.
Now that the case is in the Security Council, things should move ahead fairly quickly.
Mike is a freelance writer living in Washington state.
i came across this article from one of my google alerts - 'russian economy' - - why would switching from usd in the oil trade tank the dollar? what about the euro, has its' spread hurt the usd?
by
g parker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Sunday, February 5, 2006 at 2:04:51 AM
Everything we say here is, it should be remembered, no more than speculation, as none of us - I assume - possesses a Kremlin pipeline that would provide him or her with direct information on Mr Putin's thinking, but my suggestion is that Mike Whitney is both right and wrong about why Russia seems to have decided in the end to go along with Mr Bush's desire to go to war against Iran. To my mind, the crux of the matter is to be found here :
«The Bush administration is dead-set on attacking Iran and removing this existential threat to the American economy and the ongoing supremacy of the reserve currency.»
Given the current state of the US economy, an oil bourse denominated in a currency other than greenbacks could (unlike shipping denominated in Euro) put such pressure on the latter that, to a so trigger-happy administration like that led by Mr Bush (or Mr Cheney, if you prefer), war might well seem the only possible response. That Lukoil's pre-invasion contract with regard to the West Qurna oil fields would be honoured if Russia didn't block the UN track constitutes a sweetener, but I doubt that by itself it would be enough to sway Mr Putin ; from what I understand of Russia's present contracts with the Iranian government, these latter are far more valuable than anything Mr Bush has to offer in Iraq (besides, there's a war going on in Iraq, and refineries, oil fields, and pipelines are frequently attacked by the resistance, making ostensibly lucrative oil contracts just a little less lucrative). Rather, I suggest, it looks as if Mr Putin has become convinced that, just as in the case of Iraq three years ago, Bush & Co are going to go to war no matter what anybody else does, and with or without the approval of the UN Security Council. Under these circumstance, Mr Putin has to attempt to cut the best deal for Russia that he can. I think the fact that China, which unlike Russia is greatly dependent upon Iran for much of its imported oil but which like Russia has signed lucrative contracts with that country's authorities, has also decided not to block the referral of Iran to the Security Council supports this view (even though it may well be the case that the US has also offered China a sweetener - in Iraq or elsewhere - as well). I think these two countries - and India as well - have been forced to accept the fact that, for the present, the US constitutes a rogue state which accepts no limitations on its power and does whatever it feels it necessary to do and are manoeuvring on that basis. They might also have in mind that a new military adventure in Southwest Asia might just be the tipping point which will lead to the end of the US as a super-power, a consequence none of them would regret greatly....
by
mhenriday (0 articles, 11 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 152 comments)
on Sunday, February 5, 2006 at 11:34:11 AM
2 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
