Skip to main content

View Diary: Krugman Bombshell - Bush Oil Buddy Cuts Deal with Kurds (328 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hunt may have signed, but it's illegal (12+ / 0-)

    Iraqi oil minister says Hunt Oil deal with Kurd regional government illegal

    Those comments underscore the central government's view that exploration contracts with foreign companies should be signed only after the adoption of a new national oil law, which has been stalled for months.

    "Any oil deal has no standing as far as the government of Iraq is concerned," al-Shahristani said as he arrived for an OPEC meeting in Vienna. "All these contracts have to be approved by the Federal Authority before they are legal. This (contract) was not presented for approval. It has no standing."

    Krugman is right though, the move by Hunt and the connection to Bush shows the real intentions of these greedy bastards, as we've known them to be all along.

    It's always because we love that we are rebellious; it takes a great deal of love to give a damn ~Kenneth Patchen~

    by cosmic debris on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 07:49:16 AM PDT

    •  The Iraqi oil minister may think that, but my (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      waytac, buckhorn okie, ivorybill

      understanding is that the law is very unclear on this point.  It basically boils down to the extent of the autonomy Iraqi Kurdistan possesses, and I think the Iraqi constitution leaves that point very ambiguous.

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 07:57:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not to mention that ... (6+ / 0-)

        "Law" is a pretty vague concept when it comes to Iraq.

        Why should the Kurds give a flying fuck about what the Iraqi constitution says?

        The best fortress is to be found in the love of the people - Niccolo Machiavelli

        by al Fubar on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 08:01:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Here is an article that discusses legality (8+ / 0-)

        further The Hunt Oil Dispute and the Future of Iraqi Federalism.

        Thus, under the Constitution, the KRG seems to have the better legal argument respecting its deal with Hunt Oil, which was signed, it should be noted, after the KRG passed its own oil and gas law. Baghdad appears to have no exclusive sovereignty over the exploration of new fields. Moreover, the question of appropriate revenue distribution under the Constitution is not at issue because the KRG's oil and gas law requires national distribution of any revenues received, and the KRG has pledged to adhere to this in connection with the Hunt Oil deal.

        Yet while the oil minister hardly seems to be in a very strong legal position to block the deal, surely the KRG's response to his claims, which are that the minister should tend to his own affairs and deal with the substantial problems inherent in the oil industry outside of Kurdistan, is hardly legally defensible as well. If these resources are truly the property of the Iraqi people, and oil policy is decided in connection with the national government, then surely some form of oversight, monitoring or at least extensive detailed consultation with the national government is necessary. How else is the national government to know what oil is part of the "existing fields", whether the figures respecting barrels sold are accurate, along which pipelines the oil is sent, and so forth. Even the terms of the deal have not been disclosed publicly, information that would be vital to setting oil policy.

        To date, the parties have not engaged in meaningful dialogue of any kind on these matters, at least in public. This writing so far as I know is the only one that even begins to touch on the legal issues in any depth. The oil minister and the KRG have made clear their differing views on the legality of the deal, without providing the basis for their positions. And the dispute has not yet involved the Sunni Arabs who are neither in government nor in the Kurdish region in large numbers and who are therefore likely to be even more opposed to the oil deal, let alone any future oil deal signed by a potential Shi'i region. This is hardly an encouraging start to the development of the industry.

        It's always because we love that we are rebellious; it takes a great deal of love to give a damn ~Kenneth Patchen~

        by cosmic debris on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 08:30:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This is important also (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cosmic debris, JuliaAnn, rlharry

      because anyone with any level of power over there is going to be well tied to some militia and if they publicly voice this kind of sentiment, he is speaking with the stick of a clan, sect, religion, branch of Blackwater, or other militia behind him.  They can enforce it one way or the other.

      Or, Maliki could just be providing cover for Bush and friends by publicly denouncing it while secretly consenting to it since some of the proceeds will flow to his account in Switzerland, or the Bahamas, or Panama, or...

      Give me ten lines from a good man and I'll find something in there to hang him. - Cardinal Richelieu

      by lgrooney on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 08:36:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oil Laws? We Don't Need No (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cosmic debris, rlharry

      stinking oil laws!

      wow, this is where clownservatives really shine-- illegal, immoral business deals in order to make themselves filthy rich.

      Cerberus: In Greek mythology, the three-headed watchdog who guards the entrance to the lower world, the Hades.

      by Superpole on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 11:06:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site