U.S. President Bush may be right: Iraq's oil law, although highly controversial, could be a "benchmark for reconciliation."
When Iraq's council of ministers last week suddenly approved the law, critics of various stripes united in opposition. Shiite and Sunni political parties alike denounced it, vowed to defeat it, even threatened to ensure Parliament can't take it up. It is seen by some as weakening the central government and giving too much to foreign companies.
The oil law already faced opposition from Iraq oil experts - including two of the law's three original authors - as well as the powerful oil unions. The unions say they're willing to stop production and exports if the law gives foreign oil companies too much access to or ownership of the oil.
Last week the Iraq Freedom Congress - whose motto is "Working for a Democratic, Secular and Progressive Alternative to both the U.S. Occupation and Political Islam in Iraq" - teamed up with the new Anti Oil Law Frontier to rally masses against the law.
All the while a coalition in Iraq grows. It encompasses Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and secularists. Its goal is to keep Iraq together. But it also wants an end to the U.S. occupation.
"They are also strongly opposed both to the terrorist forces of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and to the growing influence of Iran in Iraq," Robert Dreyfuss wrote of the opposition in The Nation.
Despite sharing two key tenets of the war on terrorism, the United States isn't supporting the coalition.
Of course not. We're not going to support any coalition, no matter how unifying, that keeps control of Iraq's oil in their own hands and negates the purpose of Bush's War. We don't mind too awful much having to kick down some bread for them to share as long as Big Oil gets most of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment