posted on April 2, 2003 07:48:12 AM new
In another thread we discussed how Halliburton would get in on the reconstruction gravy train through KBR. This article from Newsday suggests that Halliburton will only be considered for subcontractor work. I wonder how many subsidiaries Halliburton has. Apparently the subcontracts are awarded, not bid.
Halliburton Seeks Iraq Subcontractor Work
By LARRY MARGASAK
Associated Press Writer
April 2, 2003, 8:10 AM EST
WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney's former company is interested in Iraq reconstruction work, but declined to bid for a primary contract under a State Department procedure open to only a few experienced firms.
Halliburton Co. said its KBR subsidiary "remains a potential subcontractor for this important work." Since secondary contractors do not have to submit bids, the Houston-based company bypassed a system that became controversial after revelations that the main contenders made substantial political donations -- mostly to Republicans.
posted on April 2, 2003 08:19:28 AM new
Halliburton Co.'s (HAL) Kellogg, Brown & Root engineering and construction has been awarded an Army Corps of Engineers contract to extinguish oil well fires in Iraq.
I would imagine that profit will increase for countries all over the world in direct proportion to the length of the war.
A list of Halliburton subsidiaries in offshore tax-havens
AOC Services Limited - Jersey
Avalon Financial Services - Cayman Islands
Baroid Caribbean Limited Brown & Root (Overseas) Limited - Jersey
Brown & Root Cayman Holidings - Cayman Islands
Brown & Root International - Panama
Caspian Transco Inc. - Cayman Islands
Dresser AG - Liechtenstein
Dresser Anstalt - Liechtenstein
Dresser Investments - Netherlands
Antilles Dresser-Rand
C.I. Limited - Cayman Islands
Grove Foreign Sales Corp. - Barbados*
Halliburton Energy Development (Kazakhstan) Limited - Cayman Islands*
Halliburton energy Development - Cayman Islands
Halliburton Geophysical Services - Cayman Islands
Halliburton Latin America - Panama
Halliburton Offshore Servcs Inc. - Cayman Islands*
Halliburton Overseas Limited - Cayman Islands
Halliburton Products & Svcs. - Cayman Islands
Halliburton West Africa Ltd. - Cayman Islands
Halliburton Worldwide Ltd. - Cayman Islands*
Halson Financial Svcs. - Cayman Islands*
HGS enterprises Inc. - Panama
International Admin. Svcs. - Cayman Islands*
International Oil Field Engr. - Cayman Islands
Kellogg Foreign Sales Corp. - Barbados
Kellogg Int'l Services - Cayman Islands
Kellogg ISL Ltd. - Cayman Islands
Kellogg Overseas Corp. - Panama
Kellogg-Chiyoda Services - Cayman Islands
Kinhill Kramer (Vanuatu) - Vanuatu
Kinhill Kramer Solomon - Solomon
Landmark Sales Corp. - Barbados
MWKL Field Services - Cayman Islands
Overseas Administration Servcs - Cayman Islands*
Petroleum and Industrial Maintenance Co. Ltd - Cayman Islands
Professional Resources Ltd. - Bermuda
Property and Casualty Insurance
Limited - Vermont - Bermuda
Security DBS (MEM) E.C. - Bahrain
Service Employees Int'l Inc. - Cayman Islands
Shaw International Ltd. - Barbados
posted on April 2, 2003 10:50:58 AM new
That's quite a list, Helen. And if I understand the occupation plans correctly, none of those companies would have to bid. If they are employed, they could set their own price regardless of the market.
Here's a good summation of the reconstruction planning to date.
Pentagon squares off against Powell, Europe
By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON - Even as United States troops grind their way toward Baghdad, the administration of President George W Bush remains at odds over its post-war plans to occupy Iraq. The main issue - who will be in charge of the occupation - pits the Pentagon against the State Department and its allies in Europe, notably British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The Pentagon appears determined to maintain as much power for itself and its favorites in the opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC) as possible, while the State Department, backed by the intelligence community and Blair, is arguing for major roles for other US allies, the United Nations and other opposition figures.
The Pentagon recently vetoed as many as eight current and former State Department officials for key posts in the occupation administration, according to the Washington Post. Excluded were a number of former ambassadors and high-level foreign service officers with expertise in the Arab world.
Some sources said that they were vetoed because they were "run-of-the-mill" and not "doers", while others revealed that they were opposed by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, who has supported Israel's Likud Party in the past and is said to consider some candidates to be too pro-Arab, a bias that neo-conservatives believe is endemic to the State Department's Near East bureau. Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld has also reportedly insisted that all relief and aid work come under the jurisdiction of retired army general Jay Garner, the coordinator of the Pentagon's office of reconstruction and humanitarian assistance, who will report directly to the chief of the US Central Command, General Tommy Franks.
Secretary of State Colin Powell argued in a letter to Rumsfeld last week that US government relief work should be headed by the US Agency for International Development, which reports to the State Department. He reportedly said that international agencies and voluntary relief groups were unlikely to accept an arrangement in which they reported to the military. The aid groups themselves have called for the United Nations to assume control of relief operations.
But the Pentagon rejects that scheme. In testimony late last week, Feith insisted that as long as the situation on the ground is insecure, the military has to remain in control. "If things go well, we will be able to hand things over to the Iraqis so there would be no need for UN participation," he said.
In addition to being opposed by Powell and the relief groups, the Pentagon's anti-UN position has come under fire from Blair and the European Union, which has long called for a major role for the world body in any relief and reconstruction effort, similar to that it assumed in Afghanistan after the ouster of the Taliban. "We believe that the UN must continue to play a central role during and after the crisis," EU leaders said last week. France, in particular, has threatened to veto any Security Council resolution that subordinates the UN to a US occupation authority.
The breach between the Pentagon on the one hand and Powell, the aid groups and the Europeans on the other, has become so serious that 29 prominent Democrats, neo-conservatives and right-wing Republicans published a joint letter this week that they proposed as the basis for an acceptable compromise.
Signed by analysts and former policy makers from the mainstream Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations and from right-wing think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution, the letter called for Washington to "seek passage of a Security Council resolution that endorses the establishment of a civilian administration in Iraq, authorizes the participation of UN relief and reconstruction agencies, [and] welcomes the deployment of a security stabilization force by NATO allies".
"While some seem determined to create an ever deeper divide between the United States and Europe, and others seem indifferent to the long term survival of the trans-Atlantic partnership," the letter stated in what some sources called an implicit rebuke to both Rumsfeld and French President Jacques Chirac, "we believe it is essential, even in the midst of war, to begin building a new era of trans-Atlantic cooperation".
"To my mind, it's a statement of opposition to the 'scorched earth' sense we have crossed the Rubicon and we can do everything by ourselves," said one right-wing signer, Tod Lindberg of the Hoover Institution.
"The message is: 1) The US doesn't need to go it alone; and 2) That it can't," said Lee Feinstein, another signer and former Bill Clinton official currently with the Council on Foreign Relations.
While the administration may indeed opt for such a solution, it appears clear for now that the Pentagon is still insisting on complete control of the occupation.
The Washington Post reported on Monday that the Defense Department was insisting on a prominent role for former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director R James Woolsey, a protege of the controversial former chairman of Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board (DPB), Richard Perle, who has also been one of the most outspoken champions of radical change throughout the Arab Middle East.
Woolsey, who also helped lead the media campaign to link Iraq to al-Qaeda and who has blamed Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi establishment for anti-US sentiment in the region, was reportedly being promoted by Feith as the occupation's minister of information, but other officials thought that his previous link to the CIA might reduce his credibility in that post. Woolsey has also been one of the strongest Washington supporters of the INC, and its controversial leader Ahmed Chalabi.
Both Woolsey and Garner have been associated with the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs (JINSA), which promotes military and strategic ties between the US and Israel. Woolsey serves on the board of advisers of JINSA, as well as the Pentagon's DPB, and several other neo-conservative groups, including Americans for Victory Over Terrorism.
Garner, who was also promoted by Feith and Perle as the best candidate for administering the occupation, helped the humanitarian effort to save hundreds of thousands of Kurdish refugees in northern Iraq in 1991. He visited Israel as a guest of JINSA in 1998 and in October 2000 was one of 26 US military leaders to sign a staunchly pro-Israel statement released by JINSA that condemned the escalating Palestinian intifada.
posted on April 3, 2003 09:43:11 AM new
Very good analysis of the world armaments game.
"We have armed unstable regimes with our most sophisticated weapons, and have then used the widespread proliferation of the weapons as the argument for producing the next generation of more expensive weapons. The vicious cycle continues," Goldring said.
posted on April 3, 2003 10:00:01 AM new
With the French & Germans automatically out of it now and the fact that there are only a couple of companies in the world with the size and skills to rebuild on this scale, I waouln' exactly call this some kind of "smoking gun."
posted on April 3, 2003 10:30:25 AM new
I'm not sure exactly what your point is, desquirrel.
I realize that some posters prefer to attack or comment regardless of whether or not they understand either the topic or a poster's comments; however, I'm not one of those.
So could you elaborate a little about the relationship of your comments to the thread and what you mean by "smoking gun."
Don Quixote is the neoconservative prototype.
