248. Oil is the real motive
Did president Bush make the case for war against Iraq? Polls, here and
abroad, show that he didn’t. The reason is simple: there is no case to
The president keeps saying that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction.
The problem, as columnist Robert Novak said on Crossfire (Jan. 28), is that
“this weapons of mass destruction (issue) is a subterfuge. It is a pretext…
I need him to tell us what the clear and present danger to the American national
interest is by Saddam Hussein, who has had weapons of mass destruction for
20 years. He’s never used them on us.”
Had the president brought oil into the equation, he would have a case.
It should be noted that Bush was on the board of Harken Energy; vice-president
Cheney was CEO of Halliburton; and national security adviser Condoleezza
Rice was on Chevron’s board. So, when an article in The Wall Street Journal
(Jan. 29) is entitled “U.S. Probes Its Iraq-Oil Rights” the oil
case becomes stronger.
For Bush to be credible, he must pledge that not a penny of Iraqi oil
will be used to pay for the war; that not a single American company will
be granted any oil contract in Iraq; that once Iraq is “liberated” an international
independent body will be formed to manage the Iraqi oil business until Iraqis
freely elect new leaders. Otherwise, the suspicion will remain that the war
is about the control of a country that has the second-largest oil reserve
in the world.
February 3, 2003