Halliburton and Iran: One Pea, Two Pods
Halliburton and Iran: One Pea, Two Pods
In January, Halliburton Products & Services Limited and Oriental Kish finalized a contract to develop two sectors of the South Pars oil and gas field in Iran. A primary shareholder of Oriental Kish is none other than Sirous Nasseri, head of the Iranian delegation to the IAEA negotiating the future of Iran’s nuclear programs. Nasseri is also rumored to have been a close advisor and consultant to Halliburton. One of the owners of Oriental Kish is the family of Hashemi Rafsanjani, president of Iran from 1989-1997, whose “pre-revolutionary credentials earned him a place among the trusted advisers of Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
It seems overly convenient that Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator is a business partner to Halliburton.
- Andy Grotto
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush considers Iran an "enemy", but he will not say anything about Halliburton trading with the "enemy". After all Prescott Bush (W's grandfather) was sanctioned for trading with HITLER during the war.
March 31st, 2005 at 5:09 pmThis post fits well enough under corrupt establishment though it greatly simplifies the US-Iran relationship when it comes to oil, gas, and the transportation of these commodities.
For example, for years the US has been blocking pipeline projects that would run through Iran to the Subcontinent (India; Pakistan) and the Caspian sea (Azerbaijan; and then eastern Europe).
I'm not arguing this policy is good or bad. I'm simply calling your attention to it for two reasons--which I'll get to in just a moment.
For the record, I have lived and worked in the http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ae.html�>United Arab Emirates (UAE), just say an hour flight from Tehran, Iran. Since the population of UAE is 80% expatriate, I've had the opportunity to talk with many Iranians who lived and worked in the UAE. So although I can't claim to have surveyed the entire Iranian nation, and I don't speak Farsi, I do have some sense of how this issue plays on the Persian street, as it were.
1. Although the US regularly cuts deals with dangerously repressive governments in the Central Asian and Persian Gulf regions, the US works to limit Iran's economy by sanction and law, policy and practice, and other more indirect means. This includes pressure on the EU and more. The theory being that a weak enemy is better.
Although US citizens seem generally not aware of this (you could get http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/sanctions/sanctguide-iran.shtml�>most of the legalese here), many Iranian citizens are: and it--the hindering of Iran's economic development--is a cause of resentment.
2. When the US does do a deal with Iran or allow other nations to do so, the "free market" is a non-factor: credit these deals to power politics, not textbook capitalism, although as always huge sums of money are involved.
This also causes resentment particularly among Iran's elite and the educated aspiring middle class. First, it seems that the US says one thing, and then does another. Second, it seems that the US has to approve every pie that gets baked, and then get a preferred slice. Again, hardly textbook capitalism.
Okay. End my two points. So why is this a problem? Keeping Iran relatively weak and economically underdeveloped is good, right?
Maybe yes, maybe otherwise.
Just please consider the following:
1. We're putting a big-time squeeze on the middle class: we're making life much harder for the reformers and moderates.
2. The resultant inflation and high unemployment thus far has not encouraged regime change, but has instead helped sustained the religious reactionaries.
The lessons of history aren't unambiguous: but in general, a prosperous nation with a strong middle class not only offers its citizens more social freedom but also behaves much better towards its neighbors. (Canadians, for example, are more interested in sending trucks loaded with beer, not bombs, into the USA).
Now, maybe this prescription for growth is hopelessly naive, outdated, and completely wrong for Iran.
Fair enough.
So let's say that the current US policy is right. Keep Iran weak, contained, underdeveloped, Indirectly, as much as possible, control their economy. Otherwise, as soon they get money they'll put it all into weapons of mass destruction.
That’s what we’re all hearing so it must be true.
You still should know more about what's really going on.
You should also knowâ€â€despite the neocon media blitz to the contraryâ€â€that the "free-market" get ignored the moment it presents the slightest inconvenience. (Remember those “no-bid cost-plusâ€? contracts?)
And finally, you should know the implications that US policy and practice, this perceived double-dealing, is having in the region.
After all, this is being done in your name, my fellow American citizen, and presumably for your benefit.
March 31st, 2005 at 7:40 pmI think if someone does some research that the company Prescot bushie used in his deals with the Nazi is the same as Helliburtin - changed the name but same company now owned by americans.
April 1st, 2005 at 11:13 amI think Bobby Fisher should have got a job with Halliburton and then he could play chess in a saction country and maintained his US citizenship. It's old in Iceland dumbo.
April 1st, 2005 at 2:43 pmMore Halliburton: http://dearkitty.modblog.com/?show=blogview&blog_id=537634
April 2nd, 2005 at 6:47 am[...] hypocrisy. Under the category of Corrupt Establishment, Andy Grotto gets a bit cute with Halliburton and Iran: One Pea, Two Pods. Sure, one can and should ask “if Iran is a member in goo [...]
April 3rd, 2005 at 1:59 am[...] ThinkProgress.Org, a blog I greatly admire, sees the Halliburton contract as more neocon hypocrisy. Under the category of Corrupt Establishment, Andy Grotto gets a bit cute with Halliburton and Iran: One Pea, Two Pods. [...]
July 8th, 2005 at 2:14 amHGH is a very common product nowaday. HGH spray is very effective in anti-aging treatment.
July 19th, 2005 at 7:47 pm1794
You may find it interesting to visit some relevant pages on 480
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:06 pm[...] Halliburton was secretly working at the time with one of Iran’s top nuclear program officials on natural gas related projects and sold the components in April to the official’s oil development company, the sources said. See also here. [...]
January 5th, 2007 at 3:47 pmShannon...
Its not what you say, but how you say it and you are the epitome of that....
February 12th, 2007 at 11:04 pm