U.S. Contractors ‘Hold Sway’ in Iraqi Oil

In my recent interview on the Alyona Show, Alyona mentioned that American oil companies didn’t necessarily get the biggest share in oil after the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Well…

New York Times:

When Iraq auctioned rights to rebuild and expand its oil industry two years ago, the Russian company Lukoil won a hefty portion — a field holding about 10 percent of Iraq’s known oil reserves.

It seemed a geopolitical victory for Lukoil. And because only one of the 11 fields that the Iraqis auctioned off  went to an American oil company — Exxon Mobil — it also seemed as if few petroleum benefits would flow to the country that took the lead role in the war, the United States.

The auction’s outcome helped defuse criticism in the Arab world that the United States had invaded Iraq for its oil. “No one, even the United States, can steal the oil,” the Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said at the time.

But American companies can, apparently, drill for the oil.

In fact, American drilling companies stand to make tens of billions of dollars from the new petroleum activity in Iraq long before any of the oil producers start seeing any returns on their investments.

Lukoil and many of the other international oil companies that won fields in the auction are now subcontracting mostly with the four largely American oil services companies that are global leaders in their field: HalliburtonBaker Hughes, Weatherford International and Schlumberger. Those four have won the largest portion of the subcontracts to drill for oil, build wells and refurbish old equipment.

I have argued that the war in Iraq was about oil not in the sense of access, but primarily for control. American oil companies, especially Exxon Mobil, won out big after the U.S. invasion, with other countries like Russia making out even bigger. But with a troop presence remaining indefinitely and with American contractors having the largest stake in, say, drilling as opposed to refining, marketing, and selling, that control has been achieved.

8 thoughts on “U.S. Contractors ‘Hold Sway’ in Iraqi Oil”

  1. Not that anyone really cares anymore – but all we need now are the notes from the Energy meeting chaired by Cheney in 2001 to put everything in context. The oil has always been the real reason for invading Iraq – as you say, the control of the oil.

  2. I'm afraid I don't understand how an exploration drilling subcontractor can "control" where the oil he may or may not find gets sold ultimately.

    On the other hand, I agree with you that permanently stationed troops most definitely can constitute control. But then, so does stationing the Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf. So explain to me again how the war added to our strategic control?

  3. thank you very much executives like you, I yemek tariflerireally like your blog verymetin2 pvp clean and reliable link to a web site trying to get the ban I hope I do not eat many thanks
    Web sites with the music here is actually fun, chat, friendship, bi kind of people that I'm mt2 pvptrying to create an ideal environment for fusion with each other and chat environments, chatand sexual issues, as well as food, drink, and even my own social networking areas, such as creating bayan giyima single goal is to serve our valuable administrators chathope you understand
    If you need
    to make

  4. Thanks for administering this abounding article! I feel absinthian concerning it and applause acquirements added on this subject. it's acutely attainable on behalf of me. I accomplishment you cavalcade once more soon. dissertation editing

  5. It appeared a geopolitical victory for Lukoil. And because of the 11 fields that the Iraqis auctioned off went to an American oil company Exxon Mobil it also appeared as if few petroleum benefits would flow to the country that took the lead role in the war, the United States. Global APO

Comments are closed.