US may seize Iraq oil to pay for occupation

  • From: "" <editor_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <submit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 12:06:42 -0000

Washington -- Bush administration officials are seriously considering
proposals that the United States tap Iraq's oil to help pay the cost of
a military occupation, a move that likely would prove highly
inflammatory in an Arab world already suspicious of U.S. motives in

Officially, the White House agrees that oil revenue would play an
important role during an occupation period, but only for the benefit of
Iraqis, according to a National Security Council spokesman. 

Yet there are strong advocates inside the administration, including the
White House, for appropriating the oil funds as "spoils of war,?
according to a source who has been briefed by participants in the

"There are people in the White House who take the position that it's all
the spoils of war,? said the source, who asked not to be further
identified. "We [the United States] take all the oil money until there
is a new democratic government [in Iraq].? 

The source said the Justice Department has urged caution. "The Justice
Department has doubts,? he said. He said department lawyers are unsure
"whether any of it [Iraqi oil funds] can be used or has to all be held
in trust for the people of Iraq.? 

Another source who has worked closely with the office of Vice President
Dick Cheney said that a number of officials there too are urging that
Iraq's oil funds be used to defray the cost of occupation. 

Jennifer Millerwise, a Cheney spokeswoman, declined to talk about
"internal policy discussions.? 

Using Iraqi oil to fund an occupation would reinforce a prevalent belief
in the Mideast that the conflict is all about control of oil, not
rooting out weapons of mass destruction, according to Halim Barakat, a
recently retired professor of Arab studies at Georgetown University. 

"It would mean that the real ... objective of the war is not the
democratization of Iraq, not getting rid of Saddam, not to liberate the
Iraqi people, but a return to colonialism,? he said. "That is how they
[Mideast nations] would perceive it.? 

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cost of an occupation
would range from $12 billion to $48 billion a year, and officials
believe an occupation could last 1-1/2 years or more. 

And Iraq has a lot of oil. Its proven oil reserves are second in the
world only to Saudi Arabia's. But how much revenue could be generated is
an open question. The budget office estimates Iraq now is producing
nearly 2.8 million a day, with 80 percent of the revenues going for the
United Nations Oil for Food Program or domestic consumption. The
remaining 20 percent, worth about $3 billion a year, is generated by oil
smuggling and much of it goes to support Saddam Hussein's military. In
theory that is the money that could be used for reconstruction or to
help defer occupation costs. 

Yet with fresh drilling and new equipment Iraq could produce much more.
By some estimates, however, it would take 10 years to fully restore
Iraq's oil industry. Conversely, if Hussein torches the fields, as he
did in Kuwait in 1991, it would take a year or more to resume even a
modest flow. And, of course, it is impossible to predict the price of

Laurence Meyer, a former Federal Reserve Board governor who chaired a
Center for Strategic and International Studies conference in November on
the economic consequences of a war with Iraq, said that conference
participants deliberately avoided the question of whether Iraq should
help pay occupation or other costs. 

"It's a very politically sensitive issue,? he said. "... We're in a
situation where we're going to be very sensitive to how our actions are
perceived in the Arab world.? 

Meyer said officials who believe Iraq's oil could defer some of the
occupation costs may be "too optimistic about how much you could
increase [oil production] and how long it would take to reinvest in the
infrastructure and reinvest in additional oil.? 

An administration source said that most of the proposals for the conduct
of the war and implementation of plans for a subsequent occupation are
being drafted by the Pentagon. Last month a respected Washington think
tank prepared a classified briefing commissioned by Andrew Marshall, the
Pentagon's influential director of Net Assessment, on the future role of
U.S. Special Forces in the global war against terrorism, among other
issues. Part of the presentation recommended that oil funds be used to
defray the costs of a military occupation in Iraq, according to a source
who helped prepare the report. He said that the study, undertaken by the
Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, concluded that "the cost
of the occupation, the cost for the military administration and
providing for a provisional administration, all of that would come out
of Iraqi oil.? He said the briefing was delivered to the office of Paul
Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense and one of the
administration's strongest advocates for an invasion of Iraq, on Dec.

Steven Kosiak, the center's director of budget studies, said he could
not remember whether such a recommendation was made, but if it was it
would only have been "a passing reference to something we did.? 

Asked whether the Pentagon was now advocating the use of Iraqi oil to
pay for the cost of a military occupation, Army Lt. Col. Gary Keck, a
spokesman, said, "We don't have any official comment on that.? 

NSC spokesman Mike Anton said that in the event of war and a military
occupation the oil revenues would be used "not so much to fund the
operation and maintaining American forces but for humanitarian aid,
refugees, possibly for infrastructure rebuilding, that kind of thing.? 

But the source who contributed to the Marshall report said that its
conclusions reflect the opinion of many senior administration officials.
"It [the oil] is going to fund the U.S. military presence there,? he
said. "... They're not just going to take the Iraqi oil and use it for
Iraq's purpose. They will charge the Iraqis for the U.S. cost of
operating in Iraq. I don't think they're planning as far as I know to
use Iraqi oil to pay for the invasion, but they are going to use it to
pay for the occupation.?

Source:  Newsday

You can choose whether you prefer to receive regular emails or a weekly digest 
by visiting


You can subscribe by sending an email to request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
"subscribe" (without quotes) in the subject line, or by visiting

You can unsubscribe by sending an email to request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the 
word "unsubscribe" (without quotes) in the subject line, or by visiting

You are welcome to submit any relevant news story to submit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For regular Islamic cultural articles by email, send email to 

Other related posts:

  • » US may seize Iraq oil to pay for occupation