March 24, 2006
Traprock Homepage
TALKING POINTS - EXXONMOBIL WAR BOYCOTT consumersforpeace.org
- EXXONMOBIL AND OTHER MAJOR OIL COMPANIES STAND TO MAKE HUGE
PROFITS ON IRAQ OIL AGREEMENTS DRAFTED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO
THE INVASION OF IRAQ according the "Crude Designs" report published by
Platform in the UK last November. It appears there there is still time
for a boycott to have a positive effect, as none of these contracts
have yet been signed, though it is reported that negotiations are
underway with the new Iraqi government. The U.S. drafted contracts
could bring the oil companies profits on investment ranging from 42% to
162% compared to the minimum of 12% return that is considered more
normal. Contracted access to one of the major southern Iraq oil fields
could double ExxonMobil’s oil reserves, doubling the worth of the
company. In January, 2003, the Coalition Provisional Authority CPA
appointed former senior executives from oil companies to help set up
the framework for a longer-term oil policy in Iraq, with Gary Vogler of
ExxonMobil, being one of the first advisors. ExxonMobil is on the board
of directors of the International Tax & Investment Centre (ITIC),
with is seeking Production Sharing Agreements in Iraq. Before the war
started, ExxonMobil was in the hunt for Iraqi oil and it continues this
quest during the occupation.
- $7 BILLION OF EXXONMOBIL’S 2005 RECORD PROFIT OF $36 BILLION CAN
BE CONSIDERED WAR PROFITEERING. Dean Baker, co-director of the Center
for Economic and Policy Research, said that as much as 20 percent of
EXXONMOBIL’s record $36 billion 2005 profit, or about $7 billion, is "a
ball park number" for what can be considered war profits for the oil
giant. This is an estimate of the amount of profit that is essentially
unearned and is traceable to oil prices that have been inflated
because: (1) the Iraq War has severely depressed Iraq oil production
and (2) because of fears that the Iraq War may spread, possibly
affecting oil production in Iran and Saudi Arabia. Noble Prize winning
Joseph Stiglitz has also said that the war, in inflating oil prices,
has brought huge profits to U.S. oil companies. Tyson Slocum, Acting
Director of Public Citizen’s Energy Program, says that ExxonMobil
accumulated a war profit in 2005 "in the billions".
- EXXONMOBIL’s recently-retired Chair and CEO Lee Raymond appears
to have had a major role in US policy making - including planning for
access to Iraqi oil and promoting the war against Iraq. Mr. Raymond has
personal access to Vice President Dick Cheney; for example, he met with
him privately 10 days after the first Bush inauguration. Shortly after
that Cheney’s energy task force began drafting an energy policy. The
Vice President went to court to keep the energy task force work secret,
but the few papers forced out by law suits have included maps of Iraqi
oil fields. Two months before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Mr. Raymond
became the vice chair of the board of the American Enterprise
Institute, possibly the foremost "think tank" in engineering the Bush
Administration Iraq War Policy, and central in promoting the war. Mr.
Raymond continues as vice chair of AEI’s board after his 12/31/05
retirement.
- CONSUMERS FOR PEACE HAS WRITTEN TO EXXONMOBIL asking that the firm
endorse the goals of the ExxonMobil War Boycott campaign and engage the
full force of its lobbying effort in advancing these goals. The goals
are: (1) immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops and mercenaries from
Iraq; (2) impeachment of George W. Bush and prosecution of U.S.
officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity. ExxonMobil has
not responded to a certified letter except with the postal receipt.
Consumers for Peace has written to the nine other firms selected for
boycott because of their involvement with ExxonMobil through its board
of directors, asking that they endorse the above goals. Of the nine,
only Novartis has responded, declining to meet the request. The other
firms affected are: Campbell Soups; Carlson Companies (Radisson Hotels,
TGI Friday’s); Corning Inc. (Steuben Glass); Metlife; Pfizer; Verizon;
Wells Fargo; and Wyeth.
- APART FROM APPLYING PRESSURE TO END THE IRAQ WAR AND IMPEACH MR.
BUSH, THE PURPOSE OF THE BOYCOTT IS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE WILL NO
LONGER ACCEPT GOING TO WAR FOR OIL. As the competition for oil and
other energy sources increases, the temptation to use force to maintain
control over oil will increase. The war alternative, one can argue, can
be viewed a major factor in delaying the U.S. from seriously addressing
petroleum overconsumption, for example through gasoline rationing. The
war alternative forestalls urgently needed action to protect the
environment.
- There has been some controversy over the "war for oil" premise,
with some saying this idea is too simplistic. However, it is becoming
more clear that the struggle between nations - between the U.S. and
China for example - for assured access to oil reserves is intensifying.
Without oil, the Middle East would not have had such keen attention
from Washington since the early 1900s. A State Department official
under Colin Powell said that while oil wasn’t specifically mentioned in
State Department pre-war planning, everyone knew in the back of their
minds that Iraq reportedly has the world’s second largest oil reserves
after Saudi Arabia.
- A BASIC PREMISE OF THE BOYCOTT IS THAT THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION
OF IRAQ ARE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES, VIOLATING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND
INTERNATIONAL LAW. The boycott is leveled at a major firm that appears
to be complicit in this illegal behavior and is clearly a beneficiary.
It is also directed at nine firms connected with ExxonMobil that
benefit from this connection. Novartis is one such firm. While the
Novartis website states that the firm will not benefit from violations
of human rights, it has sent representatives to Iraq investment
conferences even as the killing in Iraq escalated. At no point has
ExxonMobil, or any of the firms associated with it, come forward to
disavow connection with the illegal acts of the United States in Iraq.
ExxonMobil has not offered to direct its war profits to relieving the
vast suffering caused by the war.
***
Prepared by Nick Mottern, ConsumersforPeace.org
