Will There Be Another Colonization of Iraq?

Americans oppose an open-ended US military involvement in Iraq. So do Iraqis: "Declaring that there will not be 'another colonization of Iraq,' Iraq’s foreign minister raised the possibility on Wednesday that a full security agreement with the United States might not be reached this year, and that if one was, it would be a short-term pact." I'll say again that I think it will be less politically problematic for the next administration to leave Iraq, if that's what it wants to do, than a lot of the smart set thinks -- they're be a very happy joint press conference and lots of supportive statements from folks like Iraq's Foreign Minister and Republicans will look like idiots when they complain.

Meanwhile, there's Ray Hunt, wildcatting oil man and Bush pal. When his oil deal with the Kurdistan Regional Government was announced, the Bush administration denied all knowledge of it since those kind of deals are deemed to undermine American policy in Iraq. But as Matthew Blake reports "Hunt, President of the company, talked to Bush administration advisers months before the deal was made. Also, officials at the Commerce and State departments encouraged the deal and even congratulated Hunt after obtaining the contract." Shocking stuff. And of course more recently the big players have been getting in on the act.

Comments

"Hunt, President of the company, talked to Bush administration advisers months before the deal was made. Also, officials at the Commerce and State departments encouraged the deal and even congratulated Hunt after obtaining the contract."

The anologies to the Sonics announced move to OKC are rich.

(Matt, I know this isn't the best forum, but what are your thoughts on that?)

Posted by Andrew Fly | July 3, 2008 12:39 PM

Sweetheart deals for American companies and Bush's friend. Yeah. Now THAT's a winning strategy for long-term stability in Iraq.

Posted by LFC | July 3, 2008 1:16 PM

There are three possibilities:

1) Maliki cancels or corrupts the provincial and parliamentary elections, and remains in power, and signs the deal with Bush. (Personally, if he does, I think Iran will have him assassinated - and he knows it.)

2) The provincial and parliamentary elections are held, the nationalists sweep to power, and Maliki is either swept aside or joins them in ordering the US out.

3) Iran war. The US is kicked out in three months as the Shia turns on the US, joined by the Sunnis.

Only in 1) is there any likelihood of the US remaining in Iraq. And most likely that would result in a continuation of the situation as it was in 2007 - i.e., more violence. Sadr is preparing a whole new version of his militia intent on directly fighting the US occupation. If 1) occurs, the Sunnis will eventually get tired of waiting for the Shia to let them into the government and of waiting for the US to leave and will resume its insurgency. The Iranians will ratchet up the pressure, since they don't want an indefinite US presence in Iraq. The senior clerics sooner or later will demand the US leave.

I just don't see how an indefinite US presence is at all feasible under any likely scenario.

And the notion that the Iraqis will eventually get used to the US presence and the insurgency will stop and there will be reconciliation between the Shia and Sunni, and the oil will flow, and everybody will be pro-American is such a fucking brain dead fantasy that it's pointless to mention it.

No doubt Powell will be along in a moment to do so.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | July 3, 2008 5:57 PM

Happy Independence Day.

Iraq will not be recolonized. The deals between its government, which is of course the most representative and legitimate of any in the Arab world if not Arab history, and the major oil companies will reflect Iraqi sovereignty.

Iraqis will demand, and get, meaningful oversight. But it needs to be recognized that only the big companies have the money and the expertise to quickly update the crumbling production infrastructure and open new fields efficiently. Iraqis don't want to go back to the days of colonial exploitation, but they know far better than some Western observers seem to that the forty years following the nationalization of Iraq's oil industry was a largely unrelieved nightmare during which the resources were squandered to fund an aggressive fascist police state that ruined their oil infrastructure along with the rest of the country with a series of hopeless wars.

Our relationship with Iraq is going to evolve into something quite different from what it is today, but we are still going to have a significant presence there for the foreseeable future, prophets of doom notwithstanding. This is in the interests of the Iraqis, the US, and the entire civilized world.

Posted by robert powell | July 4, 2008 5:47 AM

You're a lying POS, Powell, and a moron to boot.

Nothing has gone the way you've said it would, and that will continue to be true probably for the rest of your lying POS life.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | July 4, 2008 6:31 AM

Another brilliant and evidence-free argument by The Incredible Hack. Stay classy.

How's the mind-reading seminar going, Nostradamus?

Posted by robert powell | July 4, 2008 8:41 AM