It turns out that this may be a war for oil after all, but not in the way that you think. The United States has made it pretty clear that it’s not interested in Iraqi oil, but the opponents of the war seem awfully interested: scroll down to Section 2(b) of this Cooperative Research report on Iraqi Oil and Gas Reserves. It mentions a Department of Energy report documenting Iraqi oil contracts with “Italy (Eni), Spain (Repsol YPF), Russia (Tatneft), France (TotalFinaElf), China, India, Turkey, and others.” We’ve hinted at this before, but now we’ll come out and say it: could it be that some opposition to this war isn’t high-minded internationalism, but a craven attempt to ensure these contracts pay out?
War for Oil, But Not What You Think
Published
a technology job is no excuse 
It may be true that the opponents of war are motivated (in part) by oil contracts, but this does not detract from the fact that the United States is acting unilaterally to protect its own interests.
In fact, it appears that the U.S. has avoided mentioning the economic motivations of war opponents because it would only serve to highlight the primacy of its oil interests. Acknowledging these economic interests would be tantamount to admitting “we’re arguing about oil here,” which is obviously what the Bush administration is trying to avoid.
The oil in Iraq is a concern for every country that uses electricity (to oversimplify). This is precisely why multilateralism is key. So, whether the motivation is high-minded or low-minded (or some combination), a multilateral approach is still favorable.
LikeLike