U.S. SEEKS TO CODIFY ITS COLONIAL RULE OF IRAQ

U.S. SEEKS TO CODIFY ITS COLONIAL RULE OF IRAQ

By Sara Flounders

On May 9, 2003, the United States introduced a resolution to the United Nations Security Council entitled "To Assist the People of Iraq." It is actually an attempt to legalize total colonial control of Iraq.

"The president wants the Security Council to act quickly and there is no need for a lengthy debate," White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer told reporters on May 9. Secretary of State Colin Powell said he expected the unanimous approval of the Security Council.

But this resolution is so dangerous in its far-reaching implications that world debate and opposition must immediately begin.

The resolution was formally introduced by the United States, Britain and Spain. But the United States, as the overwhelmingly dominant military and imperial power, would get the lion's share of wealth and control.

The resolution is supposedly about lifting sanctions in order to approve funding for emergency relief to war-devastated Iraq. But it has nothing to do with helping the Iraqi people deal with the disaster they face.

It is the U.S. government that has, for 13 years, led the bombing and starving of Iraq, resulting in the deaths of more than 1 million people.

Now, having waged a criminal war of conquest in the face of international opposition and in violation of the UN Charter and Security Council authorization, Washington is demanding that the UN codify U.S. piracy and plunder and turn over Iraq's future administration to it.

As a condition of providing emergency relief, the resolution would give Wash ing ton absolute power and control over all future development of Iraq's enormous oil and gas resources. It would also turn over direct control of the billions of dollars that are accumulated in UN accounts but withheld from Iraq during the 13 years of sanctions.

The Bush administration wants to legitimize its complete exploitation of Iraq's enormous wealth.

Not since King Leopold of Belgium ruled the Congo as his private preserve has the world seen a more outrageous demand to assert colonial ownership and control. This resolution confirms that from the beginning the U.S. intention was to return Iraq to its old colonial position.

LEGALIZING COLONIAL OCCUPATION

Reviewing the resolution's provisions reveals the devil in the details.

Most illuminating is the reference to the United States and Britain as the "occupying power" and their unified command as "the Authority."

This is not a short-term emergency proposal. Provision 23 states, "The Authority is for an initial period of 12 months. ... to continue thereafter as necessary unless the Security Council decides otherwise."

In other words it would take a Security Council vote to lift the onerous conditions. But the United States and Britain would have veto power over such a vote. So this resolution would give them continued "Authority" far into the future.

Provision 12 outlines the financial levers for absolute economic power that the United States and Britain will wield. The provision "notes the establishment of an Iraqi Assistance Fund, with an international advisory board including duly qualified representatives of the Secretary General, the IMF, appropriate regional institutions and the World Bank to be held by the Central Bank of Iraq."

Of course U.S. domination and control of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank is already well known. Shell Oil Co. CEO Philip J. Carroll heads up the advisory committee to the oil industry.

Who now heads the Central Bank of Iraq, which is to hold the funds? Former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Peter McPherson.

The Iraq banking and oil industries are now firmly in U.S. hands, headed by U.S. appointees.

Provision 13 states, "Funds in the Iraqi Assistance Fund shall be disbursed at the direction of the Authority."

Provision 18 "decides that all funds remaining in the escrow account ... shall be transferred promptly to the Iraqi Assistance Fund." This means that the billions of dollars remaining in the Oil For Food Program would be handed over to U.S. control.

In provision 19: "All funds remaining from export sales of petroleum products and natural gas ... shall be deposited into the Iraqi Assistance Fund."

Provision 21 states that these funds will not be used to pay any past debts or claims.

Some of the provisions in the resolution could be negotiated away as part of the bribery and secret deals that would help ensure passage of the essential resolution. For example, Provision 21 might be modified or dropped as a bargaining chip to secure the votes of France or Russia. Both countries have billions of dollars in past loans and contracts with Iraq.

Provision 22 would place the billions of dollars of Iraqi funds that have been frozen in accounts around the world since August 1990 into the Iraqi Assistance Fund.

In short, billions of dollars that have been frozen or withheld and billions more in future revenues would pour into an account that would be dispersed at the discretion of the United States and Britain.

WHY IS THE U.S. GOING BACK TO THE UN?

The May 9 British Guardian predicted, "The U.S.-backed UN resolution on post-war Iraq has the potential to cause an even bigger row than that which preceded the war."

After ignoring the UN in order to wage a war that was criminal and illegal by every standard of international law, why is Washington bothering with this resolution now?

Over the past centuries those who have carried out horrendous acts of slavery, conquest and colonialism have sought to legitimize their conduct via laws, religious edicts and international treaties. But there may also be a more pressing, immediate reason.

According to a May 9 broadcast on Radio Netherlands: "Virtually no one wants to buy Iraqi oil as long as a series of questions pertaining to the ownership of the so-called 'black gold' remain unanswered. ... The storage tanks for Iraqi oil in the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan are full to the brim, but there are no buyers. Likewise no oil tankers have been spotted at Mina al-Bakr terminal, Iraq's sole outlet in the Persian Gulf."

According to the terms of the sanctions Washington had established after the first Gulf War, meant to isolate and impoverish Iraq, this oil can only be sold through the Oil For Food Program. That is why the Bush administration is suddenly so anxious to lift the sanctions.

If the Iraqi people's needs were the real concern, the U.S. and British rulers could take a first step toward meeting the enormous humanitarian crisis by relinquishing control of the country and its resources to the population of Iraq. The cargo planes and aircraft carriers that brought thousands of tanks, helicopters, tons of equipment and tens of thousands of troops could easily transport desperately needed supplies.

The U.S. and British rulers owe reparations to Iraq for their criminal war. Along with demanding that U.S. and British troops leave immediately, there must be an international demand for reparations.

And international opposition must be mounted to oppose any attempt to legitimize the criminal war or the continuing colonial occupation.

Sara Flounders is coordinator of the Iraq Sanctions Challenge and a co- director of the International Action Center.