It seems that secret plans aren’t what they used to be. Not only do we have word from the Guardian that US bigwigs are drawing up secret plan for US-run postwar Iraq, this comes only a couple of weeks after the (London) Times boasted of obtaining a “a confidential plan to establish a post-Saddam government in Iraq in a move that suggests its leaders now consider war all but inevitable.” No government or agency is leakproof, certainly, but these smack of open secrets.
Meanwhile, one writer for the Independent has a good commentary piece, taking a shot at the indulgent selfishness of the “not in our name” mentality as well as at the direction the US government is taking the war. “Indeed,” it notes, “the most nightmarish of conspiracy theories - that a creepy cabal of oilmen in Washington has suckered the American (and British) people into war, knowing full well that it would lead to a wider conflagration in the whole area, at the end of which “energy security” would be ensured for good and all - now looks almost plausible.” Josh Marshall has detailed (here and here and here) the possibility that the hawks will purposely escalate the conflict, a possibility that seems to be borne out by Condaleeza Rice’s latest statements. And I’ve never thought this war was primarily about oil profit, but now I fear that the administration won’t be able to resist the urge to privatize Iraqi oil reserves - even the generally conservative David Warsh says that “the Gulf Wars are best understood as being antitrust policy for oil.” I don’t think he sees that as a bad thing (and in itself it might not be - more on oil policy forthcoming…), but his notion that the Bushies should be complimented for laying their cards on the table does not hold. International anti-trust enforcement was definitely not how this war was or is being sold.
No comments have been added to this post yet.