|
If you think that conspiracy theories suit the Middle-Ages or the darkest
regimes or just the darkest newspapers for that matter, think again.
Conspiracy theories are here and now. They are the drive behind the Anti-war
movement.
Leaders of this movement are spreading a theory in which most of
their claims are based on. Most people in Europe truly believe that
the United States is going to war not
because of International-Terrorism, but because the US wants to take over
the enormous oil fields of Iraq. The same Iraq that holds the
second biggest oil reserve after Saudi-Arabia. This is the theory in two words.
The “War for Oil” theory.
Last Saturday I witnessed the Anti-War demonstration in Paris and the main slogan
was: “No war for Oil”. As if the coming war in Iraq has nothing to do
with democracy, the people of Iraq,
nor peace but instead, “war for oil” and oil only. That’s Paris for you, where Israel was second to be
blamed for war crimes after George Bush.
When you repeat a lie a thousand times and then a million, you can see the
results in the polls. The Europeans, the so-called “Enlightened Europeans”,
have embraced this theory with great enthusiasm. It suits them perfectly. To
begin with they didn’t like the Americans nor what
they represent. In addition they have another reason to hate the cowboy
George Bush and the “American imperialism”.
The third world in general and the Arab world in particular, would buy any
conspiracy theory with even greater enthusiasm especially if it has in it a
big “American Satan” and a small “Zionist Satan”. After the wide spread
conspiracy theory in which Israel is actually behind
the attack on the twin-towers in New York, the “war for oil”
just completes the picture.
Oil prices have soared in the last weeks to $40 a barrel. Definitely, a price
that is a burden on world-economy. This is the reason according to the theory
for going to war with Iraq. The United States
want to control the Iraqi oil fields and by doing so will push oil prices
down. This lie is actually seen on the European news almost every day and
plays a major role in the Anti war coalition. A coalition, uniting into one
front the radical left & right wings of Europe. Demonstrators with
Bin laden T-shirts from Cape Town together with Neo
Nazis in Berlin, and some
moon-struck left wingers, all carry the same posters of oil barrel with the
photo of George Bush. Here we have the globalization of the “War for oil”
theory.
But there is a slight problem since this story is not just a lie but a big
hot balloon made of many little lies. Lets examine the theory:
Iraq would be more then
happy to sell its oil for a much cheaper price. Excuse me, but in fact Iraq is already selling
its oil for only $19 a barrel to Jordan for instance. And
it would be very happy to sell it to more countries including to George Bush
if it could.
Who doesn’t let Iraq sell its oil? Yes it’s
the UN. The sanctions that were imposed by the Security Council after the
first Gulf-War prohibited Iraq from doing so. It
has nothing to do with war! Which proves that if the whole
thing is indeed about oil and oil only, all that is needed in order to get
cheaper prices is to remove the sanctions and the threat of war and oil
prices will be reduced dramatically. World economy will recover and
the children of Iraq will live freely
from the threat of George Bush. Never mind the threat they live on a daily
basis from Saddam Hussein but then again he is allowed of course.
The ones that spread the “War for oil” theory are very forgiving towards
Saddam. After all he is authentic, he belongs to the department of dictators
from the East in which “enlightened westerners” and orient-adherent
understand and appease. Those dictators are different, they are allowed.
By the way, Saddam and his messengers have tried repeatedly to remove the
sanctions and guess who opposed them? Believe it or not but the same United States.
All this will not stop the anti Americans to continue and recite the theory
of the “war for oil” like an old mantra.
And this is just the first chapter in the theory, surprisingly there is more:
According to the James Baker institution, it will take three and half years
and some 5 billion dollar-investment to return to the same level of oil
production of 1990. And even when that happens, we are talking of only 1.3%
of world oil production.
For that the US would send 250,000
solders with such high cost while the threat in war itself has more impact on
oil prices? More then any Iraqi production would? The answer is clear but the
facts of course are not an interest to the ones that spread the theory.
Indeed it was the drums of war that contributed to the rise of oil prices in
the last few weeks but the major reason for the sharp rise from $24 to $40 a
barrel was the crisis in Venezuela. The strikes at the
oil wells, the demonstrations in Caracas as well as a
governmental crisis, those are the real reasons in rising oil prices. If
indeed all the United States wants is cheaper
oil, it would intervene in Venezuela and not in Iraq. But then again who
cares about facts when you can have an interesting theory that can push
millions to the streets.
Last but not least are the oil companies themselves. Every European kid, if
you wake him up in the middle of the night will automatically recite to you
that the big oil companies are greedy, hate the Arabs and are the one that
push behind the scene for war against Iraq. Go and explain to these kids that
all these companies really want is actually quiet and calm. Perhaps they are
greedy but being greedy and supporting a conflict between the west and the
Muslim world doesn’t really go hand in hand.
In fact the general managers of these companies are the strongest pro-Arabic
lobby.
For all they care the Arab world can be made up of dictators like Saddam
Hussein, as long as they do business, they don’t give a damn. These companies
will recite to you all that the Europeans are claiming against war anyhow.
They are absolutely on the same front. But “the interests of oil companies”
sounds so good on every article and speech so why would we bother with silly
things like facts.
By the way, if “war for oil” is our concern, there is a war going on today
that has to do with oil as well as diamonds. It happens in West Africa. The French oil
company, which is related to Angola and Liberia; two governments
that stand behind the rebels in Ivory Coast. Indeed official
France is helping the government of Ivory-coast and French forces already
have finished off many rebels but behind the scenes there is a dirty war in
which only the lack of media and the fact no one is interested in black
people being killed by French solders, that no one really knows what exactly
is going on there. However from what is known, the double standard France is playing in that area, makes the United States look like the most
moral nation on earth.
This of course doesn’t stop Chirac from blaming the US nor does it stop
French protesters to claim false accusations against the US.
Back to the Middle East. No one really knows how much the war will
cost. Some say dozens of billions and the reconstruction of Iraq even more. Building
cost more then destructing. No one is going to have “lucrative contracts” to
reconstruct Iraq”, just another
cliché from the department of the demagogue. From the very simple
reason that there is no nation that will pay for those “lucrative contracts”.
If at all, the burden will fall on the “International-Community”. The
“International-Community” for those of you who don’t know is normally the United States. It’s hard to make
a profit on a deal that in the best-case scenario; money will be transferred
from one pocket to another.
On the Internet there is even an improved conspiracy theory that says in
short that Saddam has started a process in which oil prices will be quoted in
Euros instead of dollars, a thing that will hurt the American economy greatly
and hence the American motive to go to war. At the same time this ridiculous
theory claims that there is no difference between a democrat with a “big gun”
and a dictator with a “big gun”. In other words, Bush is no less of a bastard
then Saddam Hussein himself. Big money and nothing else is behind everything
and that’s about it.
Indeed it is war and oil which is the essence of all this, however a
different war then is mentioned in the theories. Saddam is not just another
dictator. Saddam is more dangerous and in a direct relation to the fortune
that he possesses. Saddam handles the fortune in the craziest way. On one
hand he uses it to build a serious and dangerous arsenal and on the other, to
build palaces for someone who suffers from serious megalomania. Never mind
the palaces, but weapon is a dangerous game. In that case, the war is not for
the US to have the oil but
the children of Iraq to have it with one
condition: that the mad man from Baghdad will not control
it.
Even in last years the income from oil could have solved all Iraqi problems
of lack of medicine or equipment for hospitals. It is Saddam Hussein and
Saddam only that chooses to use the money to build palaces and equips himself
with non-conventional weapons, a thing the Europeans time and again refuse to
understand.
All this, doesn’t stop a bunch of “peace seekers” from the West which are
armed with heavy ammunition like the German beauty queen from actually going
to Iraq and act like human shields, protecting the palaces of Saddam.
Stupidity has no limits…
The United States has interests
indeed, more then that it has history of unmoral and brutal interventions in
other countries affairs and some were even murderous, but the interventional
history of the US is nothing
comparing with the crimes of colonial Europe. Belgium for instance-blackmailed
Congo, enslaved the
country to its own needs and committed a genocide at the same time. France has controlled many
countries in Africa and never paid the price on its crimes in Algeria. Never mind what it
is doing today in West Africa. Russia exploited East Europe for decades and
today doesn’t want to give up on the oil in Chechnya. England had “celebrated” on
the expanse of India and Germany well, no need to
mention that.
However, it is the public opinion in all those countries that blame the US
for:
All humanity crimes, the hate in third world countries towards the West in
general and the hate in Arab countries in particular. Europe was the one to
commit these crimes but in a stunningly celebration of hypocrisy, Europeans,
blame their own ally, the one that saved them more then once in the last
century. “Ungrateful” is their second name I guess.
Having said all that, The Anti-War movement has some credible claims:
Perhaps we do need to give the inspectors more time, perhaps we do need to
give some Arab countries the chance to put more pressure on Saddam, perhaps
there is a need to concentrate on the killing of Saddam instead of going to
war on a mass scale, perhaps there is a need for another ultimatum just to be
clear how crazy Saddam is. But the leaders of this movement don’t look for
reasons of common sense, instead they pull out a
good old juicy theory from the closet. They know that only real blazing hate
towards the US, towards Bush and
American hegemony and now towards Israel and Jews, only that
will push millions to the streets. Time and again we see the “enlightened Europe” collapse. Those
were not demonstrations for peace and reconciliation. I saw it in my own
eyes, those were demonstrations of pure antagonism, the organizers wanted
blood and that is why they came up with the war for oil theory.
Man Bott, a principal researcher in the Council for
International Relations in the US, wrote in the New
York Times, “As much as it is hard to believe, the United States is acting to guarantee
world peace. It didn’t have any profit from the first Gulf war. Even Kuwait didn’t stand to
some of its promises from that war.” In addition, he writes, “It doesn’t seem
the US will have any
profit from the coming war either.”
By the way, the US had no gain from
the war in former Yugoslavia however it was the US that carried most
of the burden although it was a pure European matter.
So why is it indeed that Europeans don’t believe the
US? Why is it that they think George Bush is a greater danger to
the world then Saddam Hussein?
Mr. Bott answers these questions:
It’s because their greedy colonial traditions that don’t let
them think of another option.
They reflect on the US from who they
really are and what they are made of.
It is they who are greedy and it is they who think from a narrow and an
immediate self-interest only.
They just can’t believe that someone would actually think
differently. The hell with facts and numbers they will not stop their “war
for oil-theory” from continuing to flourish.
I'm not sure that I accept Bott views,
but I think Europeans have something to think about.
|
