Inevitable if you think in terms of decades. But if you think in shorter terms, no.
> My sense is that the preferred mode for the oil majors is therefore not
> privatization, but minority stakes, leasing arrangements, and exploration-
> and production-sharing agreements where they can extract the most favourable
> terms from the host governments without exposing themselves to the attendant
> risks of ownership.
The terms offered by Saudi Arabia are not bad, but they still preclude many forms of foreign investment:
<http://www.state.gov/e/eb/ifd/2006/62029.htm> Saudi Arabia 2006 INVESTMENT CLIMATE STATEMENT -- SAUDI ARABIA OPENNESS TO FOREIGN INVESTMENT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Saudi Arabian regulations currently close oil exploration, drilling, and production to foreign investment. The national oil company, Saudi Aramco, presently conducts all oil exploration and development. A U.S. company, under current Saudi law, cannot purchase a stake in Aramco or obtain equity oil. In July 2003, however, the Ministry of Petroleum announced an auction to open up part of the Ghawar area to foreign investors for non-associated natural gas exploration. In January 2004, six companies competed in the auction for the three offered blocks. Russia's Lukoil, China's Sinopec, and a joint bid by Italy's Eni and Spain's Repsol, each won a block and signed 40-year exploration and production contracts with the Saudi Minister of Petroleum in March 2004. The deals mark the first time since nationalization of ARAMCO in 1980 that foreign oil companies have been permitted to explore in Saudi Arabia. There have been no further production exploration deals authorized involving foreign investment. Saudi Arabia, as part of its WTO Accession Agreement with the United States, made a broad range of positive commitments that should result in the substantial opening of its energy service market. These commitments should allow U.S. energy service firms to compete on a level playing field for energy services projects associated with oil and gas exploration and development, pipeline transport of fuels and management of consulting services.
In contrast, there is no prohibition on foreign investment in refining and petrochemical development and there is significant foreign investment in the downstream Saudi energy sector. Foreign investment in the full upstream hydrocarbon sector will be vital in the coming decades if Saudi Arabia hopes to expand production and refining capacity to meet expected growth in international demand.
On 1/31/07, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 31, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Marvin Gandall wrote:
>
> > I don't think
> > it's the case, as suggested above and elsewhere, that Capital was
> > at one
> > with the neocons in launching the invasion of Iraq
>
> For what it's worth, an economist for PFC Energy said on my radio
> show several years ago that the oil industry did not agitate for the
> invasion of Iraq.
I don't think you can find a war favored by a whole industry or a whole capitalist class in a nation or the entire capitalist class in the world. But what counts is the organized part of capitalists in control of state power and their perception of what's good for themselves, their class, and their state. The rest of unorganized capitalists, who do have potential veto power through capital flight and the like, so far have let the White House do what it wants, though, so they are not really at odds with what it is doing either. -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>