You may have missed this story (I know I did), but thanks to Laura Flanders on Air America’s Morning Sedition today, I learned for the first time that the United States, thanks to Madam Secretary Condoleeza Rice, has entered into a “energy security partnership” with the corrupt government of Nigeria which provides that the United States will operate in the Niger delta as a sort of super policeman to protect Nigeria’s energy infrastructure there, among other things:
As part of efforts to address the security crises in the Niger Delta, Nigeria and the United States announced yesterday the establishment of a joint committee that would be charged with the task of coordinating a comprehensive action against insecurity in the oil-rich region.
The Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) also said yesterday that Nigeria is currently losing 200,000 barrels per day (bpd) to production deferment due to the lingering crises and sporadic clashes in the area. In monetary terms, this translates to a daily loss of $12 million (N1.6 billion).
In the communiqué on the bilateral pact released in Abuja yesterday, Nigeria and the US agreed to establish four special committees to co-ordinate action against trafficking in small arms in the Niger Delta, bolster maritime and coastal security in the region, promote community development and poverty reduction, and combat money laundering and other financial crimes.
On the face of it, this could seemingly be an effort to combat terrorism, i.e., just another front on Bush’s global war on terror. But appearances, as we all know, rarely tell the whole truth. For example, who exactly is suffering these millions of dollars of lost production daily? Well . . .
Shell, Chevron and Total are the companies that suffered the production losses following the forced closure of their facilities in the region.
And what are these so-called “security crises” of which the communique speaks? ” Is Al Qaida implicated in attacking Nigeria now? Well, not exactly. The groups involved are not affiliated with Bin Laden. They are local people who have reason to complain about what’s happening on their lands in the name of economic development:
[T]he 200-page Human Rights Watch report documents how Nigerian security forces are using brutal methods to suppress dissent in the Niger Delta.
“The oil companies can’t pretend they don’t know what’s happening all around them,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, an international monitoring group based in New York. “The Nigerian government obviously has the primary responsibility to stop human rights abuse. But the oil companies are directly benefiting from these crude attempts to suppress dissent, and that means they have a duty to try and stop it.” Roth noted that recent events in the Niger Delta, especially the crackdown on Ijaw communities over the New Year’s weekend, indicate that the Nigerian government is continuing to use violence to protect the interests of international oil companies.
In one particularly serious incident on January 4, soldiers using a Chevron helicopter and Chevron boats attacked villagers in two small communities in Delta State, Opia and Ikenyan, killing at least four people and burning most of the villages to the ground. More than fifty people are still missing. Chevron has alleged to a committee of survivors of the attack that this was a “counterattack” resulting from a confrontation between local youths and soldiers posted to a Chevron drilling rig. Community members deny that any such confrontation took place. In any event, the soldiers’ response was clearly disproportionate and excessive.
. . . In the report, Human Rights Watch describes numerous other incidents in which the Nigerian security forces have beaten, detained, or even killed people who were involved in protests over oil company activities and individuals who have called for compensation for environmental damage. Victims include youths, women, children, and traditional leaders. In some cases, the abuse occurs after oil companies have requested that security forces intervene.
The report charges that multinational oil companies are complicit in abuses committed by the Nigerian military and police because they fail to condemn them publicly and to intervene with the Nigerian government to help ensure that they do not recur. In many cases, Human Rights Watch found that the oil companies had made no effort to learn what was done in their name by abusive local security forces seeking to keep oil flowing in the face of local objections.
Human Rights Watch strongly criticized the oil companies for excessive secrecy, and called upon them to make public their security agreements with state entities. It urged the companies to insist on screening all security staff assigned to protect company property, to investigate violent incidents, and to publish the results of those investigations. The companies were urged to take all necessary steps to ensure that their legitimate need to safeguard their facilities and personnel does not result in abuses against members of the communities where they operate.
Much of the protest against oil companies’ activity in Nigeria has surrounded issues such as environmental pollution and corruption . . .
What a surprise, eh? Oil companies in bed with a brutal regime that oppresses its own people in order to protect the oil companies’ “investments”? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.
Which reminds me: Who do you think used to work for Chevron who now plays a prominent role in the Bush administration? I’ll give you one guess.
14 Nov 1954 Condoleezza Rice born, Titusville (in Birmingham), AL
* * *
7 May 1991 Named a director, Chevron Corporation.
7 Oct 1991 Named a director, Transamerica Corporation (exact date is an estimate).
1995 Chevron names their largest oil tanker (136,000 tons) the Condoleezza Rice.
* * *
May 2001 Oil tanker Condoleezza Rice renamed to Altair Voyager. Chevron’s Fred Gorell: “We made the change to eliminate unnecessary attention caused by the vessel’s original name.” This was likely done at the behest of the Bush Administration, but nobody is saying anything.
Now, some of you might think there’s a connection here between Ms. Rice’s former directorship at Chevron at the sudden need to enter into a securty arrangement to help defend Nigeria’s coastal waterways, etc. You might think the real reason we are agreeing to assist Nigeria is to protect the investments of Chevron and other oil companies in the region. Well, you’re not the only ones. Here’s an editorial from allAfrica.com which comes to the same conclusion:
(Cross-posted at Daily Kos)
practice, the treaty holds dark foreboding. Talk about community development and poverty reduction are mere sops thrown in to sweeten the partnership. The real object of the treaty is aimed at securing the undisturbed exploitation of oil by the partners. From the Nigerian standpoint, Mr. Kupolokun has said that it is meant to a safeguard the oil wealth of the Niger-Delta which is crucial to Nigeria’s achievement of 40 million barrels per day production of crude oil by 2010.
Ambassador Campbell was equally blunt about US interest. Affirming that energy supply from Nigeria is very important and strategic to the US, he noted that the partnership exists to keep the supply lines open. . . .
So, to sum up, the United States has agreed to help provide security to Nigeria in order to protect the oil production infrastructure and the interests of Chevron and Shell, at the expense of local peoples in the Niger delta who are incurring grevious harm, both from environmental pollution and from government crack downs on dissent as a result of that development.
Tell me again: Who are the terrorists here?
Thanks Steven, for bringing this to the front.
The oil companies have long been involved in repressive behavior against the villagers in the area.
Remember back in 1995?
More:
You can thank Laura Flanders. I never would have heard about this if I hadn’t been listening to Air America this morning. I wasn’t exactly surprised that Bush is carryinh water for Chevron, but it never ceases to amaze me how blatant these people are. Cheney with Halliburton, Rice with Chevron, etc. etc. etc. And our so-called liberla media never reports on any of this.
Hmm, I checked the Wikipedia entry on Nigeria and found this tid-bit:
Who is this NDDC?
A thin veneer of consience for the multinationals? A good tax deduction? They need to be further tracked, too bad I’m at work (actually have a couple of deadlines today).
However, I did find that the oil companies have not paid up the funds they are supposed to under the act that created the NDDC. The page does not let me copy quotes, but here is the link to the relevant page. The companies paid up a total of Naira 25.93 billion over 2001-2002. Their expected contribution for the same period was Naira 46.95 billion – hence, only about 55%. The rate for the Naira is currently approximately Naira 130 = 1 USD.
Chevron helped string up Ken Saro-Wiwa on trumped up charges so that they could continue to turn large amounts of Nigeria into dead zones.
I hate them. Lord, I hate them.
I’m beginning to believe that we are at the end of Nationalism. We really are moving into a world where the large multinationals wield power like old medieval baronies.
Meaning fascism.
“Insecurity in an oil-rich region” appears to be self-serving hype. There definitely is inefficiency and lewd mass corruption being hawked as “insecurity.”
The Gulf of Guinea is a strategic area for U.S. energy interests, all the more so with recent finds of oil and gas in the sub-Saharan belt along the Southern borders of Chad and Sudan. The sub-Saharan belt is connected to the Gulf through Cameron by the joint Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco pipeline. The Gulf of Guinea exported 1,3 million barrels a day to the States last year.
There is presently a large American military build-up in Sao Tomé which would allow for rapid deployment throughout the region.
This insecurity hype is a windfall for security companies and yet another excuse to build up U.S. military presence in the area- a presence that will serve to protect private oil interests at the tax-payer’s expense. But what the hell, it’s patriotic.
On another note I’d like to mention the so-called Berber belt that now extends from Algeria to Libya where Chevron has practically monopolized the market. There’s nothing like Chevron money to convince the Libyan fop to be a good boy and get him off the “rogue state” list.
Chad has just declared the state of belligerence against Sudan after several Sudan-backed rebel attacks these past day in the sub-Saharan oil belt- of all places.
I wonder if it puts the US military in the proximity of Uranium mines as well?
It would make it easier to get the much needed evidence of dealing with “Iraq type evidence” easier the next time… Or, perhaps, they are just interested in taking over those Uranium resources for themselves? Can’t have France getting all the good stuff, eh?
Just an abstract and unsubstantiated thought or two from out of nowhere.
The tragedy of the Guinea Gulf states- especially the Congo- is their immense mineral resources.
From a memorable Sirocco diary at Kos:
I regret not having the link at the moment. A must read his series on the Congo.
Unauthorized mining at former Shinkolobwe uranium mine
Since 1997, 6000 miners are entering the former Shinkolobwe mine site each day without authorization. They have excavated a huge open pit next to the former uranium mine, which had been flooded after it was mined out. The miners are interested in cobalt rather than uranium. However, uranium could also be extracted from the ore. In view of the possibility of uranium being extracted and circulated without any control, the United States have demanded the DR Congo government to regain control over the mine site. In January 2004, president Joseph Kabila has decided to interdict access to the mine site. Two months later, no effect could be observed yet. (Le Monde Mar. 24, 2004)
By the end of May, illicit mining at the site was observed to continue uninhibitedly. (AP May 31, 2004)
On July 9, 2004, at least eight miners digging the former Shinkolobwe mine illegally were killed when the mine collapsed. (AP July 12, 2004)
The 15,000 miners now working the Shinkolobwe mine without authorization from the government risk contracting cancer and developing other health problems because of high radiation levels at the site, concluded investigators from the U.N. mission in Congo.
Privatizing the mine could bring illicit mining under control, suggested U.N. investigators, who launched their inquiry earlier this month after part of the mine caved in, killing seven miners. U.N. authorities “recommended that this mine be secured and put in the charge of a private operation for much more disciplined operations, with the aim of avoiding risks including the high rate of radioactivity … and uranium trafficking with those who shouldn’t get it in their hands,” U.N. mission spokesman Alexandre Essome said. (AP July 20, 2004)
On July 16, 2004, district authorities of Haut Katanga prevented an investigation initiated by the UN mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), known by its French acronym MONUC, from accessing the site of a uranium mine in Shinkolobwe. (IRIN July 21, 2004)