| ARMS
TRADE RESOURCE CENTER
CURRENT
UPDATES: June 21, 2005
Dear Friends,
Happy Summer!
As the weather warms up, we are making a new commitment to bring you the ATRC Update twice a month. Research and writing projects, travel, and press work have kept us from keeping to any sort of regular schedule throughout the Winter and Spring. But, as it is cooler in our office than it is in our apartments, we promise to be more regular and even more informative than in the past.
In this (re)inaugural edition of the Update, we discuss oil, war and Iran, Guantanamo and the costs of war, and bring you a much need, much deserved sliver of good news.
Here is the quote of the day, from Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, House Democratic leader:
"This is a war that each passing day confirms what I have said before and I will say again - that this war in Iraq is a grotesque mistake."
In this update:
I. OIL AND ARMS
II. OIL AND WAR
III. SPEAKING OF THE COMING WAR WITH IRAN
IV. GUANTANAMO
V. COSTS OF WAR
VI. VICIOUS CIRCLE: THE DYNAMICS OF OCCUPATION OF RESISTANCE IN IRAQ
VII. AND NOW FOR SOME GOOD NEWS
I. OIL AND ARMS
Oil Prices Reach Record High
Reuters started this week off with big bad news about oil prices, reporting on June 20, 2005 that the price per barrel hit a new record high, soaring to almost $60. This is a jump of $5 a barrel over the past week.
A May 30, 2005 article in Defense News notes that the oil price increases are bad news for consumers, but good news for defense ministries throughout the Persian Gulf, and big money for military contractors in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Oil revenue for members of the Gulf Cooperation Council increased 35% and GDP is up 9.4% from 2003 and that means more guns in the Gulf.
To cite one example, in Saudi Arabia, where oil sales account for 70-80% of state revenue, the spike in oil prices has flipped an expected $8 billion deficit in government revenue into a $26 billion surplus. And that money is burning a hole in the pockets of security-conscious Princes and Emirs. Defense News reports that: "During an April visit to Paris, Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz discussed with French officials a multibillion-dollar deal that would include Rafale fighters and a fully integrated border security system, press reports said. Saudi and French officials declined to confirm the signing of any deal between the two states. Riyadh is also planning to purchase of 12 to 24 Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopters to augment their existing fleet of 20. Saudi and Sikorsky officials are now in final talks."
The United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Oman are also beefing up their militaries with new oil windfalls:
* The United Arab Emirates may buy ex-Libyan CH-47 transport helicopters and has been looking to bolster its network-centric operations, perhaps by buying an early warning and electronic warfare aircraft.
* The United Arab Emirates is also talking with Agusta Westland and Bell Helicopter about buying more AB139s for police and Special Forces units.
* Qatar is planning to buy 20 medium multi-role helicopters in 2005.
* The Royal Air Force of Oman has ordered 20 NH90 tactical transport helicopters and six AB139 utility and transport helicopters.
II. OIL AND WAR
Military analyst Michael Klare writes on how Iran's oil wealth is missing from reportage on the racketing up of tensions between Washington and Tehran in his recent article "Oil, Geopolitics and the Coming War with Iran."
Klare explores Iran's strategic importance-- both as an oil producer; Iran possesses the world's second largest pool of untapped petroleum in the world (125.8 billion barrels to Saudi Arabia's 260 billion barrels); and because it is geographically perfectly positioned to impede the flow of oil from other producers in the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world. Iran is located on the northern side of the Persian Gulf, where it could threaten Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and the U.A.E. who collectively account for more than half the world's known oil reserves. It also sits atop the Straits of Hormuz where 40% of the world's oil exports pass each day. In addition, Klare notes that Iran is a major (and growing) supplier of oil to China, India and Japan, three countries crucial to the United States. For all these reasons, Klare concludes that "Bush administration officials have two key strategic aims: a desire to open up Iranian oil and gas fields to exploitation by American firms, and concern over Iran's growing ties to America's competitors in the global energy market."
"Under U.S. law, the first of these aims can only be achieved after the President lifts EO 12959 [barring the United States from doing business with Iran], and this is not likely to occur as long as Iran is controlled by anti-American mullahs and refuses to abandon its uranium enrichment activities with potential bomb-making applications. Likewise, the ban on U.S. involvement in Iranian energy production and export gives Tehran no choice but to pursue ties with other consuming nations.
"From the Bush administration's point of view, there is only one obvious and immediate way to alter this unappetizing landscape -- by inducing "regime change" in Iran and replacing the existing leadership with one far friendlier to U.S. strategic interests."
To read Klare's whole article, visit www.tomdispatch.com
SPEAKING OF THE COMING WAR WITH IRAN
Scott Ritter says it has already started. Speaking on Al-Jazeera on June 20, 2005, the former UN weapons inspector in Iraq asserts that "U.S. war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilot-less drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities."
Ritter contends that the United States is using "several covert offensive operations inside Iran," including "the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations. It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labeled as a terrorist organization, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq."
Additionally, "To the north, in neighboring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran."
Other analysts contend that as long as it is bogged down in Iraq, a full-scale war on Iran is out of the question. But covert operations, air strikes, and other aggressive acts short of war are certainly possible. It remains to be seen what the Bush administration will do, but public pressure for no more wars in the Persian Gulf is certainly in order.
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE ONLINE AT -- english.aljazeera.net
FOR MORE ON U.S. MILITARY BASES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, READ
Bases, Bases Everywhere: Pentagon Planning in Iraq, 2003-2005
By Tom Engelhardt
www.tomdispatch.com
MORE ON IRAN
Reading the major papers, the big news is Iran this week is elections, not the drum beat to war, but as Norman Solomon, executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, observes from his discussions with people in Tehran for the 10 days leading up to the elections, "The Bush administration has been eager to dismiss the Iranian presidential election as meaningless, even though the election has included signific ant elements of democracy. The White House seems to be primarily interested in setting an agenda for military confrontation."
Solomon spoke with hundreds of Iranians spanning the political and economic spectrum, including voters, reform activists, and Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the front-running presidential candidate. To read his analysis, visit www.normansolomon.com
Fueling Mistrust Between Iran and the United States
By Roger Howard, FPIF Commentary, June 14, 2005
www.fpif.org
IV. GUANTANAMO:
TORTURE CENTER OR CASH COW FOR HALLIBURTON?
A month after Amnesty International called the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba "a gulag for our times," Haliburton is getting a new contract to expand the prison facility. The company, formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, was awarded a $30 million contract to help build a new two-story prison to hold 220 terror suspects. The Independent (UK) reports that there are more than 520 inmates from 40 countries at Guantanamo, some of whom have been held there for more than three years. Under the contract with the US Naval Engineering Command, the work is to be finished by the end of July 2006. The final deal could be worth as much as $500 million.
Curt Goering, Senior Deputy Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, is not happy about the decision, saying "Amid numerous calls to dismantle the facility, the Administration instead plans to memorialize in bricks and mortar its decision to operate outside of the law.
"President Bush must close Guantánamo and disclose the facts about the U.S.'s shadowy network of detention centers around the world to quell global concerns about this country's human rights failings in the 'war on terror.'"
Getting Away with Torture? Command Responsibility for the U.S. Abuse of Detainees, Human Rights Watch, April 2005 -- www.hrw.org
Annual Report: Amnesty International, United States, May 25, 2005 -- web.amnesty.org. Also, Amnesty has a site responding to the Bush administration's rejection of Amnesty's criticism called "USA: CLOSE AND DISCLOSE"
Finally, in the July issue of The Progressive (and on their spiffily re-designed website) editor Matthew Rothschild makes the argument for "Stripping Rumsfeld and Bush of Impunity," by dissecting their statements about torture. Read it online at The Progressive
V. COST OF THE WAR
On Monday, June 20th, the House approved a $408.9 billion military spending bill. The Senate is expected to take up the issue in July. So, its a good moment to look again at how much the United States devotes to the military.
A new report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) finds that the United States alone spends what the 32 next most powerful nations spend together, accounting for half the world's total military expenditures of $1.04 trillion.
And no matter how large the final Department of Defense budget ends up being after it goes through the Senate, it is only a piece of the whole picture. The Department of Energy's nuclear weapons activities add another $6.6 billion to the tally and the total still does not reflect the costs of military action aborad.
To date, the Pentagon has received $230 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ($64 billion in FY'03, $66 billion in FY'04, and $25 billion in early FY'05 and an additional $75 billion for the remainder of FY'05). Further funding will clearly be necessary to fund operations during FY'06.
SIPRI Yearbook 2005: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security, Released June 7, 2005, online at yearbook2005.sipri.org
MORE ON THE MILITARY BUDGET -- www.armscontrolcenter.org
VI. VICIOUS CIRCLE: THE DYNAMICS OF OCCUPATION OF RESISTANCE IN IRAQ
In exhaustive detail, our friends at the Project on Defense Alternatives analyze Iraqi public opinion of coalition military presence and actions, contributing to our understanding of the long term consequences of U.S. intervention and occupation.
"Vicious Circle" is Part I, asserting that "Public discontent is the water in which the insurgents swim. Polls show that a large majority of Iraqis have little faith in coalition troops and view them as occupiers, not liberators. There is significant support for attacks on foreign troops and a large majority of Iraqis want them to leave within a year. But attitudes about the occupation vary significantly among communities." Part II will look at "Patterns of Insurgency."
Part I is available online at www.comw.org and check back for Part II, coming soon.
VII. AND NOW FOR SOME GOOD NEWS: Is this the Beginning of the End?
Gallup's most recent poll finds that 6 in 10 Americans support full or partial withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
The Associated Press reports that President Bush's approval numbers are at their lowest ever, with 59% of Americans signaling their disapproval with his job performance.
Meanwhile, Congress is finally getting the message. Thursday, June 16th was "Anti War" day on the Hill.
Representative Maxine Waters launched an "Out of Iraq" caucus in the House, which now has more than 41 members.
House Minority Leader Representative Nancy Pelosi introduced an amendment to the defense budget that would have required President Bush to tell Congress what his criteria are for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq within 30 days. The amendment did not pass, but 200 Representatives voted for it.
The press conference on the amendment brought together strange bedfellows. From the far left to the extreme right, Representatives demanded a time-table for withdrawal. On the one side was Representative Dennis Kucinich, the Democrat from Ohio who ran for President on the anti-war ticket and introduces legislation to create a Department of Peace each year. On the other side was Representative Walter Jones, Republican from North Carolina, an arch conservative who strong armed the House's cafeteria into serving Freedom Fries instead of French Fries in the lead up to the war against Iraq. They don't agree on much, but they both said, "bring the troops home."
Anti-War Thursday wrapped up with Representative John Conyers' hearing on the "Downing Street Memo" in which British officials discuss President Bush's plans to "fix the intelligence on Iraq" in a secret July 2002 meeting. He then delivered a petition signed by more than 500,000 people demanding that president Bush "directly address the evidence in the Downing St. Memo of intelligence manipulation and public deceit in the rush to invade Iraq." To read the text of the letter, visit www.moveonpac.org
On the Senate side, Russ Feingold introduced a resolution last Tuesday calling on the Bush Administration to report to Congress on a timeframe for achieving its military goals in Iraq and withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Barbara Boxer is co-sponsoring. Read his statement online at feingold.senate.gov. Encourage your Senator to sign on.
To Get Involved:
Visit www.AfterDowningStreet.org, an network of organizations like Gold Star Families for Peace, Veterans for Peace, US Tour of Duty: Iraq Veterans and Military Families Demand the Truth and many others, formed in May 2005 to urge the U.S. Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush has committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war
United for Peace and Justice is planning a Massive Mobilization in Washington, D.C. Sept. 24-26, 2005 to End the War on Iraq, to learn more visit www.unitedforpeace.org
Reports
| Recent News Coverage
| Updates
|
