According to the Iraqi Prime Minister, Mr. Maliki, the Iraqi Draft Oil Law sent to Parliament in July, 2007 should have already been passed and signed, albeit in an amended form, to suit all concerned, especially the U.S. and Mr Bush. So far, this could still happen but, according to well-informed sources, Maliki is finding increasing resistance in Parliament. Even his close advisers seem to have cold feet regarding passing the Draft Law. Be that as it may, the most likely outcome would be stalling or rejection. This dawning realisation has already changed the atmosphere in Capital Hill, Washington. Suddenly the Democrats abandoned their aggressive posture of breaking-up Iraq into three sectarian enclaves, and demanded the passing of the Draft Oil Law by Iraqi Parliament as a “benchmark” of its good behaviour. But, by November 14th the House of Representatives, sensing the drastically changed situation forgot its benchmarks and the breaking-up exercise, and approved a Bill linking Bush’s war funds to troop withdrawals from Iraq by the end of next year. Meanwhile the State Department hinted it no longer insists on passing the Draft Oil Law. What has happened is too large to pass unnoticed. It all came as if in a ripple effect linking Iraq, the Kurdish Question, Turkey, Pakistan and, last but not least, Iran:
First, the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), signed in a rush several oil deals, the last of which is part of the giant Kirkuk oilfield, forming part of its ‘Third Dome’. Kirkuk is facing a plebiscite to decide its fate by the end of this year, according to the US drawn Iraqi Constitution. This plebiscite, and its possible results seem to be the first casualty of the new series of crises. The other KRG deal was with Reliance Industries, India’s largest company. This made it quite difficult for Maliki and his Oil Minister Hussain Al-Shahristani to swallow, but it provided a convenient alibi to stall on the Draft Oil Law and about Kirkuk which was already raised by influential officials of the ruling party in Baghdad.
Second, came the Turkish crisis: Apparently, this seems to have cooled down. But in reality the apparent relaxation is deceptive, and may be deliberately so. As both Turkey and the US probably trying to keep what is happening, or what is planned to happen away from the headlines. There are now one hundred thousand soldiers on the Northern Iraqi-Turkish border. Where they will enter in force in Iraqi territory is not yet clear, although a senior Turkish general in the area said: “We are in the process of implementing the cross-border operation”, (Reuters Nov. 15).
In such situation where all involved parties avoid disclosing their actions or intentions, it is difficult to get the truth of what is happening. A web site, quoted “Iraqi Kurdish sources” , as it claimed, that Iran started building a security wall on its border with Iraqi Kurdish region while continuing bombarding the frontier area. The same source reported that Turkey has threatened to build a similar, 400 km long, dividing wall on its border with Iraq. While this report may well be just hearsay, there is no doubt that Saudi Arabia has already received tenders from two America companies to build a 900 km barbed wire border fence, costing 5.33 bn dollars, as reported by Iraq Directory, Nov. 2.
A more serious Turkish scheme is an article published in the Turkish newspaper, Today’s Zaman, on 12, Nov. It was written by Professor M. E. Çağıran of Gazi University, entitled “Coercive economic measures against northern Iraq: Are they the best choice?” Whether they are or not, the author hints they could be. He said that a decision was made by the National Security Council (MGK) meeting on Oct. 26, brought up another alternative in addition to others discussed. The decision stressed: “The political and military measures in accordance with the motion have been discussed. It is hereby decided that the cabinet be given recommendations on economic measures that need to be taken vis-a-vis the groups supporting the separatist terrorist organisation in the region.” The author, concludes by asking: “Will the economic measures by Turkey make the [Kurdish] regional administration take effective action? As I noted earlier, at first glance, it appears that the measures will work out. however, a more thorough analysis will suggest that proceeding with economic measures against northern Iraq will involve unbearable risks.” Risks to whom, is not hard to guess.
Third, Pakistan’s crisis has not had a direct result of the Iraqi situation, but the American leadership has managed to achieve the impossible: joining all these shattering crises together and all at the same time! These crises are still unfolding, and it would rash to conclude what and when the end would be. Writing at the beginning of the crisis on Nov. 7, David Ignatius, in an article entitled “In Pakistan, Echoes of Iran“, said: “As we struggle to make sense of the current political crisis in Pakistan, it’s useful to think back nearly 30 years to the wave of protests that toppled the shah of Iran and culminated in the Islamic Republic - a revolutionary earthquake whose tremors are still shaking the Middle East.”
This is not the end, there is more to come. Bush administration officials already “are losing faith that the Pakistani president… can survive and have begun discussing what comes next, according to senior adminstration officials.” (New York Times Nov. 14).
Fourth, Iran: As the Bush administration makes a lot of noise about the recent drop in US military loses, the whole world is watching and waiting with suspense when the American and Israeli bombers will start their attacks. AP had a report on Nov. 16, with an incredible title: “Roadside bombs waning in Iraq; Iran lauded”. The report explained: “Iran seems to be honouring a commitment to stem the flow of deadly weapons into Iraq, contributing to more than 50-percent drop in the number of roadside bombs that kill and maim American troops, a US general said yesterday.” The general in question is James Simmons, a deputy commander of Multinational Corps-Iraq. According to the AP report, he said the number of roadside bombs had fallen from 3,239 in March to 1,560 last month. Simmons also said the decline included all types of roadside bombs, including highly lethal “explosively formed penetrators” - the signature weapon of Shia extremists. U.S. authorities have insisted that penetrator bombs come from Iran.
The report also said: “Earlier this month, Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Iranians had apparently assured Iraq’s government they would stop the flow of weaponry. ‘We believe that the commitments … appear to hold up,’ Simmons said yesterday.” So, after all, the drop in U.S. military losses was not so much the “success” of the surge in American forces, but thanks to Iraq’s government and Iran’s “cooperation”.
All the host of crises have brought about the confused and confusing U.S. leadership, it is becoming apparent that the American project is disintegrating and falling apart, its clients are in disarray, its economy is in serious trouble, American public confidence in its rulers nearing the bottom … Iraq Oil and its Draft Law becoming out of reach, while oil prices broke all time records. So what is the response of the U.S. to all this?
Their response is summed up in a report in the Washington Post, on Nov. 15, written at Camp Liberty, Iraq:
“Senior military commanders here now portray the intransigence of Iraq’s Shiite-dominated government as the key threat facing the U.S. effort in Iraq, rather than al-Qaeda terrorists, Sunni insurgents or Iranian-backed militias.”
Al-Ghad
An Opinion Opposing the Draft Oil Law (Arabic)