Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DNO Revelations: While Influencing Iraqi Constitution Peter Galbraith Held Stakes In Dahuk Oilfield

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Orwellian_Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 03:54 PM
Original message
DNO Revelations: While Influencing Iraqi Constitution Peter Galbraith Held Stakes In Dahuk Oilfield
New DNO Revelations: While He Was Influencing the Shape of the Iraqi Constitution, Peter Galbraith Held Stakes in an Oilfield in Dahuk

By Reidar Visser
10 October 2009


Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith, left

It is widely known that the former US diplomat Peter Galbraith has been one of the most prominent figures in shaping the state structure of Iraq in the period after 2003, especially with his vocal advocacy of various forms of radical decentralisation and/or partition solutions for Iraq’s political problems that are reflected in his books and numerous articles in the New York Review of Books, especially in the period from 2004 to 2008. Until now, though, it has generally been assumed that Galbraith’s fervent pro-partition propaganda was rooted in an ideological belief in national self-determination and a principled view of radical federalism as the best option for Iraq’s Kurds. Many have highlighted Galbraith’s experience as a former US diplomat (especially in the Balkans in the 1990s) as key elements of his academic and policy-making credentials.

Today, however, it has emerged that the realities were probably rather different. For some time, Norway’s most respected financial newspaper, Dagens Næringsliv (DN), has been focusing on the operations of DNO, a small Norwegian private oil company in Kurdistan, especially reporting on unclear aspects concerning share ownership and its contractual partnerships related to the Tawke field in the Dahuk governorate. One particular goal has been to establish the identity of a hitherto unknown “third party” which participated with DNO in the initial production sharing agreement (PSA) for Tawke between 2004 and 2008, but was squeezed out when this deal was converted to a new contract in early 2008, prompting a huge financial claim of around 500 million US dollars against DNO which has yet to be settled. Today, DN claims to present proof that one of the two major “mystery stake-holders” involved in the claim was none other than Peter Galbraith, who allegedly held a five-percent share in the PSA for Tawke from June 2004 until 2008 through his Delaware-based company Porcupine. Galbraith’s partner was the Yemenite multi-millionaire Shahir Abd al-Haqq, whose identity was revealed by the same newspaper earlier this month. DN has published documents from Porcupine showing Galbraith’s personal signature, and today’s reports are complete with paparazzi photographs of Galbraith literally running away from reporters as they confront him in Bergen, where he is currently staying with his Norwegian wife. He refused to give any comment citing potential legal complications.

If proven correct, the implications of this revelation are so enormous that the story is almost unbelievable. As is well known, DNO has been criticised for the way its operations in the Kurdistan region interfere with Iraq’s constitutional process. To their credit, though, DNO are at the very least perfectly forthright about their mission in the area: They are a commercial enterprise set up to make a maximum profit in a high-risk area currently transitioning from conditions of war. Galbraith, however, was almost universally seen as “Ambassador Galbraith”, the statesmanlike former diplomat whose outspoken ideas about post-2003 Iraq were always believed to be rooted in idealism and never in anything else. Instead, it now emerges, he apparently wore several hats at the same time, and mixed his roles in ways that seem entirely incompatible with the capacity of an independent adviser on constitutional affairs.

It can be useful to briefly recapitulate the extent of Galbraith’s involvement in creating the institutions of government in the “new Iraq”. In fact, the best guide to this subject is Galbraith himself, who recounted his own role in the book The End of Iraq, published in 2006. It seems clear he got involved on the Kurdish side early on in 2003: “Two weeks after Saddam’s fall, I began discussions with the Kurdish leaders on the future of Kurdistan and what they could achieve in the new Iraqi constitution (italics added, p.159)”. Supposedly, according to a later book by Galbraith, he was at this point a consultant for ABC News! Later, he appears to have been a regular consultant for the Kurds. While his various books only make vague acknowledgement as far as payment is concerned (“for a few months at the end of 2003 and the beginning of 2004 I did some compensated work for Kurdish clients”, and in the second book from 2008 there is reference to unspecified “corporate clients with several of which I have an ongoing business relationship”), it seems pretty clear from the narrative in the book that at least some of this refers to consultancy work for the Kurdish political leaders in the period leading up to the drafting of the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) which was adopted in March 2004.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. who would unrec this?! This is the forgotten part of the Iraq story that every progressive pol
should preface their comments about Iraq with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowHasItComeToThis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I JUST RECCD IT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I see the problem: this guy is an appointee who more often works for Democrats, and...
the story was posted on National Review.

However, anything that drags the oil motive for the Iraq War (and natural gas pipeline motive in Afghanistan) is all for the good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. link to original?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. gracias
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. follow the money!!
always. always follow the money when it comes to 'war'. any war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. may this be the first of many unravelling the oil motive and chasing these sociopaths out of public
life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. wonder if that charge has something to do with this one?
Sacked envoy Peter Galbraith accuses UN of 'cover-up' on Afghan vote fraud

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6856029.ece
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Ironically, he could have been sincere there but thought he could never be vulnerable on oil deal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. posted to digg, reddit, buzzflash, jabberwonk LINKS to vote up:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
12. can we EVER have that investigation into real motive for Iraq War?
It was supposed to be the follow up to the one on the lies that led to the Iraq War.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orwellian_Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Important story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-12-09 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orwellian_Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
16. More on the Galbraith Story: Translated Text of the DN Article about the Tawke Oilfield
There have been quite a few requests for translations of the original Dagens Næringsliv (DN) article on Peter Galbraith, Porcupine and the Tawke oil field which was published in the hard-copy edition of Saturday’s newspaper. Below is a quick and approximate translation of the meatiest parts of the story. General background facts about Galbraith’s past career (including the ongoing quarrel concerning the Afghanistan election results) and about DNO’s activities in Kurdistan have been left out, as have a couple of quotations by yours truly that have already been paraphrased in English in the previous story on this subject at historiae.org.

One piece of additional background information may be of interest. The arbitration proceedings mentioned in the article refer to a claim by Porcupine (Galbraith’s company) and a Yemenite multimillionaire, both of whom were squeezed out when the PSA for the Tawke oilfield was converted to a new contract by the Kurdish authorities in early 2008. That was when Galbraith lost his stake in the oilfield and instead became party to an arbitration dispute with DNO. The new relationship is recounted in the annual report of DNO for 2008 as follows: “Following the review of DNO’s PSCs in Kurdistan in March 2008, DNO is involved in arbitration proceedings related to third party assignments. A formal award, if any, may only be completed in 1–2 years. However, DNO does not consider the claims to be justified and thereby not likely to become payable. No provision has thereby been made in the financial accounts for 2008.” In the second quarter report for 2009, there is a similar reference: “Also as recorded in the 2008 Annual Report, the Company is involved in arbitration proceedings related to certain third party interests in Kurdistan. The third party interests were not approved by the authorities as part of the PSC review which was completed in March 2008. The first part of the arbitration has ruled that the third party interests had the right to seek compensation for damages from DNO Iraq AS. The arbitration proceedings are therefore continuing and a final award with respect to possible compensation for damages is expected in the second quarter of 2010.”

This makes it clear that the relationship between Galbraith and the Kurdish authorities probably had soured considerably by early 2008, since it seems it was the KRG and not DNO that decided to leave his company out of the revised contract. The fact that the legal dispute has been ongoing since 2008 should hopefully also serve to quash the conspiracy theory already seen in the US blogosphere to the effect that this whole affair is a concoction by Norway to support its UN diplomat Kai Eide in his ongoing spat with Galbraith over the Afghan elections! (That conflict only became publicly known last month.)

One final remark: The article sometimes refers to “licenses” and “ownership”. It may possibly be more precise to speak about a stake in the Tawke PSA from 2004 to 2008 as basis for Galbraith’s claim. Whereas the oil itself presumably remains in Iraqi ownership (even the legal framework in force at the time, the TAL, concedes that much), the stakeholder in this case probably owns a share (in this case 5 per cent) of the economic surplus after the deduction of operating costs.

...

http://gulfanalysis.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/more-on-the-galbraith-story-translated-text-of-the-dn-article-about-the-tawke-oilfield/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
17. k&r, n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC