[Texgreen] Greenspan: It was all about oil all along

[Roger Baker]

consortiumnews.com

Greenspan Spills the Beans on Oil

By Ray McGovern
September 16, 2007

For those still wondering why President George W. Bush and Vice =20
President Dick Cheney sent our young men and women into Iraq, the =20
secret is now =93largely=94 out.

No, not from the lips of former Secretary of State Colin Powell. It =20
appears we shall have to wait until the disgraced general/diplomat =20
draws nearer to meeting his maker before he gets concerned over =20
anything more than the =93blot=94 that Iraq has put on his reputation.

Rather, the uncommon candor comes from a highly respected Republican =20
doyen, economist Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve from =20=

1987 to 2006, whom the president has praised for his =93wise policies =20=

and prudent judgment.=94

Sadly for Bush and Cheney, Greenspan decided to put prudence aside in =20=

his new book, The Age of Turbulence, and answer the most neuralgic =20
issue of our times=97why the United States invaded Iraq.

Greenspan writes:

=93I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge =20
what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.=94

Everyone knows? Would that it were so. But it=92s hardly everyone.

There are so many, still, who =93can=92t handle the truth,=94 and that =
is =20
understandable. I have found it a wrenching experience to conclude =20
that the America I love would deliberately launch what the Nuremburg =20
Tribunal called the =93supreme international crime=94=97a war of =
aggression=97=20
largely for oil.

For those who are able to overcome the very common, instinctive =20
denial, for those who can handle the truth, it really helps to turn =20
off the Sunday football games early enough to catch up on what=92s =20
going on.

There they could have seen another of Bush=92s senior economic =20
advisers, former Treasury Secretary Paul O=92Neill on Jan. 11, 2004, =20
discussing The Price of Loyalty, his memoir about his two years =20
inside the Bush administration.

O=92Neill, a plain speaker, likened the president=92s behavior at =
cabinet =20
meetings to that of =93a blind man in a roomful of deaf people.=94 =
Cheney =20
and =93a praetorian guard that encircled the president=94 would help =
Bush =20
make decisions off-line, blocking contrary views.

Cheney has a Rumsfeldian knack for aphorisms that don=92t parse in the =20=

real world=97 like =93deficits don=92t matter.=94 To his credit, O=92Neill=
 =20
picked a fight with that and ended up being fired personally by =20
Cheney. In his book, Greenspan heaps scorn on the same Cheneyesque =20
insight.

O=92Neill made no bones about his befuddlement over the president=92s =20=

diffident disengagement from discussions on policy, except, that is, =20
for Bush=92s remarks betraying a pep-rally-cheerleader fixation with =20
removing Saddam Hussein and occupying Iraq.

Why Iraq? 'Largely Oil'

O=92Neill began to understand right after Bush=92s inauguration when the =
=20
discussion among his top advisers abruptly moved to how to divvy up =20
Iraq=92s oil wealth.

Just days into the job, President Bush created the Cheney energy task =20=

force with the stated aim of developing =93a national energy policy =20
designed to help the private sector.=94 Typically, Cheney has been able =20=

to keep secret its deliberations and even the names of its members.

But a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit forced the Commerce =20
Department to turn over task force documents, including a map of =20
Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries, terminals, and potential =20
areas for exploration; a Pentagon chart =93Foreign Suitors for Iraqi =20
Oilfield Contracts=94; and another chart detailing Iraqi oil and gas =20
projects=97all dated March 2001.

On the 60 Minutes program on Dec. 15, 2002, Steve Croft asked then-=20
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, =93What do you say to people who =20
think this [the coming invasion of Iraq] is about oil?=94 Rumsfeld =20
replied:

=93Nonsense. It just isn=92t. There=97there=97there are =20
certain.............   things like that, myths that are floating =20
around. I=92m glad you asked. I=97it has nothing to do with oil, =20
literally nothing to do with oil.=94

Au Contraire

Greenspan=92s indiscreet remark adds to the abundant evidence that Iraq =20=

oil, and not weapons of mass destruction, was the priority target =20
long before the Bush administration invoked WMD as a pretext to =20
invade Iraq.

In the heady days of =93Mission Accomplished,=94 a week after the =20
president landed on the aircraft carrier, then-Deputy Defense =20
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz virtually bragged about the deceit during an =20=

interview.

On May 9, 2003, Wolfowitz told Vanity Fair:

=93The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. =20
government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone =20
could agree on, which was weapons of mass destruction as the core =20
reason...=94

During a relaxed moment in Singapore later that same month, Wolfowitz =20=

reminded the press that Iraq =93floats on a sea of oil,=94 and thus =
added =20
to the migraine he had already given folks in the White House PR shop.

But wait. For those of us absorbing more than Fox channel news, the =20
primacy of the oil factor was a no-brainer.

The limited number of invading troops were ordered to give priority =20
to securing the oil wells and oil industry infrastructure immediately =20=

and let looters have their way with just about everything else =20
(including the ammunition storage depots!).

Barely three weeks into the war, Rumsfeld famously answered criticism =20=

for not stopping the looting: =93Stuff happens.=94 No stuff happened to =20=

the Oil Ministry.

Small wonder that, according to O=92Neill, Rumsfeld tried hard to =20
dissuade him from writing his book and has avoided all comment on it. =20=

As for Greenspan=92s book, Rumsfeld will find it easier to dodge =20
questions from the Washington press corps from his sinecure at the =20
Hoover Institute at Stanford.

Eminence Grise...or Oily

But the other half of what Col. Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell=92s =20
former chief of staff at the State Department, calls the =93Cheney-=20
Rumsfeld cabal=94 is still lurking in the shadows.

What changed Cheney=92s attitude toward Iraq from his sensible remark =20=

in 1992 when then-Defense Secretary Cheney defended President George =20
H.W. Bush's decision in 1991 not to follow up the expulsion of Iraqi =20
troops from Kuwait with the ouster of Saddam Hussein and the conquest =20=

of Iraq.

=93How many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?=94 Cheney =20=

asked in August 1992. =93Not that damned many. So I think we got it =20
right...when the president made the decision that we were not going =20
to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and =20
govern Iraq.=94

Then, there were Cheney=92s revealing, damning remarks as Halliburton's =20=

CEO?

=93Oil companies are expected to keep developing enough oil to offset =20=

oil depletion and also to meet new demand,=94 Cheney said in autumn =20
1999. =93So where is the oil going to come from? Governments and the =20
national oil companies are obviously in control of 90 percent of the =20
assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. The Middle =20
East with two-thirds of the world=92s oil and the lowest cost is still =20=

where the prize ultimately lies.=94

Not only Cheney, but also many of the captains of the oil industry =20
were looking on Iraq with covetous eyes before the war.

Most forget that the Bush/Cheney administration came in on the heels =20
of severe shortages of oil and natural gas in the U.S., and the =20
passing of a milestone at which the United States had just begun =20
importing more than half of the oil it consumes.

One oil executive confided to a New York Times reporter a month =20
before the war: =93For any oil company, being in Iraq is like being a =20=

kid in F.A.O. Schwarz.=94

There were, to be sure, other factors behind the ill-starred attack =20
on Iraq=97the determination to acquire permanent military bases in the =20=

area, for one. But that factor can be viewed as a subset of the =20
energy motivation.

In other words, the felt need for what the Pentagon prefers to call =20
=93enduring=94 military bases in the Middle East is a function of its =20=

strategic importance which is a function=97you guessed it, a function =20=

of its natural resources. Not only oil, but natural gas and water as =20
well.

In my opinion, the other major factor in the Bush/Cheney decision to =20
make war on Iraq was the misguided notion that this would make that =20
part of the world safer for Israel.

Indeed, the so-called =93neo-conservatives=94 still running U.S. policy =20=

toward the Middle East continue to have great difficulty =20
distinguishing between what they perceive to be the strategic =20
interests of Israel and those of the United States.

Why Are Americans Silent?

Could it be that many Americans remain silent because we are =20
unwilling to recognize the Iraq war as the first of the resource wars =20=

of the 21st century; because we continue to be comfortable hogging =20
far more than our share of the world=92s resources and will look the =20
other way if our leaders tell us that aggressive war is necessary to =20
protect that siren-call, =93our way of life,=94 from attack by those who =
=20
are just plain jealous?

Perhaps a clue can be found in the remarkable reaction I received =20
after a lecture I gave two and a half years ago in a very affluent =20
suburb of Milwaukee. I had devoted much of my talk to what I consider =20=

the most important factoid of this century: the world is running out =20
of oil.

Afterwards some 20 folks lingered in a small circle to ask follow-up =20
questions. A persistent, handsomely dressed man, who just would not =20
let go, dominated the questioning:

"Surely you agree that we need the oil. Then what's your problem? =20
Some 1,450 killed thus far are far fewer than the toll in Vietnam =20
where we lost 58,000; it's a small price to pay... a sustainable rate =20=

to bear. What IS your problem?"

I asked the man if he would feel differently if one of those (then) =20
1,450 killed were his own son. Judging from his abrupt, incredulous =20
reaction, the suggestion struck him as so farfetched as to be beyond =20
his ken. =93It wouldn=92t be my son,=94 he said.

And that, I believe, is a HUGE part of the problem.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the =20
ecumenical Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC.  A former CIA =20
analyst, he is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence =20
Professionals for Sanity. His e-mail is RRMcGovern@aol.com.

To comment at Consortiumblog, click here. (To make a blog comment =20
about this or other stories, you can use your normal e-mail address =20
and password. Ignore the prompt for a Google account.) To comment to =20
us by e-mail, click here. To donate so we can continue reporting and =20
publishing stories like the one you just read, click here.

Back to Home Page=