McClatchy tells less than HALF the Iraq oil law story

i've posted numerous times on the iraq oil law (over 10 times, at least, some of the major ones being here, here, here, and here, among others)... the key points that AREN'T getting reported in the so-called "news" outlets in the u.s. are these, compiled from both the uk independent and the inter press news service agency...

[The production sharing agreements - PSAs] envisioned by the Iraqi petrochemical law contained extremely favorable provisions for the oil companies, in which they would be entitled to 70 percent of profits until development expenses were amortized and 20 percent afterwards. This would have guaranteed them at least twice the typical profit margin over the long run and many times that figure during the initial years.

There are other elements in the law (and the possible PSA contracts) that have also roused resistance inside Iraq. Among the most controversial:

* Insofar as PSAs or their legal equivalent were enacted, Iraq would lose control over what levels of oil the country produced with the potential to substantially weaken the grip of OPEC on the oil market.

* The law would allow the oil companies to fully repatriate all profits from oil sales, almost insuring that the proceeds would not be reinvested in the Iraqi economy.

* The Iraqi government would not have control over oil company operations inside Iraq. Any disputes would be referred instead to pro-industry international arbitration panels.

* No contracts would be public documents.

* Contacting companies would not be obliged to hire Iraqi workers, and could pursue the current policy of employing American technicians and South Asian manual laborers.

Several African countries with vast mineral riches have been subjected to these sorts of conditions, with large multinational companies extracting both minerals and profits while returning only a tiny fraction of the proceeds to the local population. As the resources are taken out of the ground and the country, the local population actually becomes poorer, while the potential for future prosperity is drained.

i've developed some respect for mcclatchy over the past few months as being one of the few u.s. news outlets that's taking the risk to put out the truth... so, why the hell am i reading a story like this...?

Leading Sunnis in Iraq's parliament continued on Wednesday to snub a set of U.S.-supported oil laws many see as key to ending sectarian killing.

The laws would regulate Iraq's oil industry and govern how to distribute oil revenues. The Bush administration contends passage of an equitable oil-sharing law would draw Sunnis into the Shiite-led government and help heal the nation's deep religious rift.

U.S. lawmakers also see the oil provisions as a gauge that measures the effectiveness of President Bush's surge strategy. An influx of 28,500 troops has brought total force strength to 150,000.

[...]

Iraqis of all political and sectarian stripes have concerns about any provision that would call for sharing oil revenues with foreign oil companies.

Ministers from parliament's Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front have boycotted voting for the bills. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Tuesday predicted that parliament would begin debating the legislation. But on Wednesday an official for the group said no draft should be considered until the Sunnis return to session.

ok, mcclatchy, WHY ARE THEY SO DAMN CONCERNED...? HUH...? could it be about some of the things the independent and inter press service reported...? COULD IT...? yeah... i thought so... SO WHY THE HELL DIDN'T YOU MENTION THEM...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet