Stevie Nicks - Crystal Visions...the Very Best of Stevie Nicks

Reprise/Warner Bros.

As the tension in Fleetwood Mac escalated during the late 70's Stevie Nicks--clearly the most popular member of the Rumours-era Fleetwood Mac, then and now--went solo and scored big. Her dramatic vocals, openly vulnerable lyrics and fantasy images spoke directly to young women. Nicks has always dressed eccentrically, imagines herself a good witch, and... she writes with lots of... ellipses.
She started her career in a duo with Lindsay Buckingham and has always preferred collaborations. During her solo career she has worked with Tom Petty, Don Henley, Prince, Kenny Loggins and Jon Bon Jovi amongst many, many more.
Crystal Visions is more than a mere revisit to some of the best songs Rock has ever known. It is one of the best accounts of Stevie's musical journey. Her most influential work she has written and performed are here in this collection, from the best of her Fleetwood Mac days (Silver Springs, Dreams) to her more recent songs (Sorcerer, Planets of the Universe) to special live versions of Rhiannon and Landslide, and a dedicated astonishing live version of Edge of Seventeen featuring the Melbourne Symphony.
Aside from her music being just as powerful as it was throughout her early days, Stevie craftily presents herself as an ever-changing icon of personal strength and beauty. In the liner notes she takes fans on journey through her songs featured on this album. Included are photo's that capture the many faces of the woman who never ceases to amaze, Stevie Nicks. Happy belated birthday, and thank you for sharing your crystal visions.

Relient K - Five Score and Seven Years Ago

Capitol/EMI

You know, some bands take seven years in between their debut album and their sophomore effort. Almost like they are counting on a nostalgic feel to sell their crap! Then there are those driven bands who, whether because they have the cash, or they just bust ass, put out album after album.
Here is Relient K with their fifth studio album in seven years! Five Score and Seven Years Ago, debuted at top spot 6 on Billboard's Top 200. After listening to this album it is little wonder why they are one of the biggest names in post-punk-inspired-pop-punk today.
Beautifully composed, these boys have truly created original works of art. The songs are instrumentally diverse with many levels of complication. Their vocals are thick with sweet harmonies and if you take the time to listen, you find realness in their lyrics, depth, truth. I haven't had the opportunity to see many bands as resourceful, clever or as sincerely ecstatic to be sharing their music with the world as Relient K is. This is good stuff.

Neil Young - Live at Massey Hall 1971

Reprise/Warner Bros.

Few musicians have been as influential in as broad a manner as Neil Young, whose career has been remarkably varied. He's both the godfather of grunge and the uncle of unplugged. He helped create the folk-rock genre and he introduced the ragged, powerful, three-chords-and-a-cloud-of-dust approach that mutated into grunge.
His "Old Man," "Heart of Gold," are essential acoustic fare. His 1972 album Harvest cross-pollenated country and rock. After a long fallow period Young returned with a vengeance with 1989's Freedom, and has been going strong ever since.
On January 19, 1971, Neil Young performed at Massey Hall in Toronto, Canada. In many ways this was a homecoming event to be celebrated, and to all who were there--you lucky bastards! He had left Canada in '66 soon becoming a member of Buffalo Springfield, then recorded his self-titled debut solo album in '68. By the time he came back to Canada, he had become one of best known, exciting, successful singer/songwriters in rock.
Neil Young's performance that night heralded the first tastes of "Old Man," "Damage Done," and "Heart of Gold," and let me tell you nothing compares to these version, not even his studio versions that followed on "Harvest." This CD release is monumental, a must have, and the second in the Neil Young Archives Performance Series. So there is only more good stuff coming!

The Terney Sutton Band - On the Other Side

Telarc

The Terney Sutton Band's most focused statement yet, On the Other Side, is a bold expedition through the darkness that consumes everyone's search for happiness. That is exactly what the album is about, the longing for happiness, the heartache of happiness lost, missed, forgotten and even the joy that comes out of finding something better than what we were searching for.
Filled with stylish jazz and Terney's haunting soprano voice floating throughout the album, this is a perfect combination of song selection and exceptional skill. But what is to be expected from one of the brightest women in jazz today? From start (Get Happy) to finish (Smile) this is a tremendous reflection on the pursuit of happiness, the achievement of happiness and the meaning of it all.

Various Artists - Spider-Man 3 Soundtrack

Record Collection/Warner Bros.

This is the hot new soundtrack to one of the most sought after movies this Spring and Summer. The album makes a thrilling first impression with Snow Patrol and their smash single "Signal Fire." And it only gets better with The Killers, Yeah, Yeah, Yeahs, The Flaming Lips, Jet, Wolfmother and more exciting artists.

Paul Rodgers - Live in Glasgow

Eagle Rock

Like Led Zeppelin, Bad Company was the culmination of the British blues-rock scene, a "supergroup" formed with a conscious eye toward the sales charts and an ear for radio-ready songwriting.
The group was formed by two members of Free, throaty vocalist Paul Rodgers and drummer Simon Kirke, after Free broke up. From 1984-86 he was in The Firm with Jimmy Page, Rodgers has gone his own way since then.
Live in Glasgow is hardcore proof that Paul Rodgers' voice has only gotten better with age. This recording is from the last show of his sold-out UK tour in October '06. Highlights of the album are new hits "Warboys (A Prayer For Peace)," and "Far Distant Shore." To seal the deal Paul plays classics that had not been played in 35 years including "Can't Get Enough," All Right Now," and "Feel Like Making Love." Truly a spectacular performance that is not to be missed.

JoyElectric - The Otherly Opus

Tooth & Nail/EMI/CMG

For those Tears For Fears and Duran Duran fans who are not hiding in a closet, this is the record for you. JoyElectric have had an extensive career spanning over 10 years. On the new release Ronnie Martin has surpassed his last collection. Symphonic and complex it is an orchestral success... even if you can't make out the point of the music. After all, not all art has a point.

Moses Mayfield - The Inside

Columbia/Sony BMG

The Inside is a dynamic balance of bare-knuckled rock combined with lush ambient textures. This comes as a result of the album being recorded in two split sessions and front man/vocalist/guitarist Mathew Mayfield concluding the album with songs written in between sessions. Their songs are a repertoire of emotionally rich and musically complex songs. It is music that inspires peace and unity on every possible level.

***Shelton's Single of the Week: Fall Behind***

The Human Abstract - Nocturne

Hopeless/Sub City

The Human Abstract are nothing that you've met before. This is the best example of musicians that could be composing with the Philharmonic Orchestra, but instead they are sharing exemplary skills to create the best metal of today.
Nocturne is filled with classical guitar solo's and harmonizing vocals with heavy metal shreds and thrash drumming. These guys are obviously top musicians as their performances prove with fluid transitions and seamless efforts.

Jack Ingram - This Is It

Big Machine

The Texas-based modern-day honky-tonker Jack Ingram first carved out a niche for himself at the bars and roadhouses between Dallas and Houston. By the mid-90's after extensive touring with his Beat Up Ford Band, he had released two well-recieved independent albums and had opened for artists like Merle Haggard and Mark Chesnutt.
He captures the roadhouse energy of the traditionalist honky-tonker. Running through original material Ingram is energetic and convincing, making modern country sound alive, gritty and vibrant. He writes tight, memorable weepers and honky-tonk ravers.
With his newest relese, This is It, Jack Ingram gives us new heart-clenching hits to fall for, such as the cover of "Lips of an Angel," "Wherever You Are," and "Measure of a Man." His sweet vocals and emotional lyrics are overwhelming and leave you built up rather than shattered with a broken heart. And for those of us who are over being heart broken there is the cheeky "four-letter word that will do--LOVE you!"

Fujiya & Miyagi - Transparent Things

Interscope/Universal

Here are the facts: Fujiya & Miyagi (Steve Lewis & David Best) have a bond forged out of wrestling obsessions, would perform "Purple Rain" at karaoke bars and are in a band with the name that came from a cult film classic and a type of record player.
With not a drop of Japanese blood these two partnered with Matt Hainsby to create music that reflects the joint interest in krautrock and early nineties electronica. The title Transparent Things spawns from the title of a Vladimir Nabakov book. From the opening track of Fijiya and Miyagi being chanted in barely audible voices to the last creative combination of pop friendly beats and dumbfounding lyrics this is definitely not my bag. I wouldn't waste my time downloading it on Kazaa, let alone purchasing it.

Matt Wertz - Everything In Between

Nettwerk

Matt Wertz is proficient at turning life's lessons into a beautiful soundtrack, but then he has a natural way of moving through those serious moments to a place where he can relax in the simplicity of life. His music captures the emotions and turns them into colorful, ear-pleasing songs filled with upbeat guitar playing and soft vocals. A great album for summer days.
And to make it even more worth your while Matt Werks has joined up with a nonprofit, The Mocha Club, to send relief, education and quality care to the African people. Editor's Note:(Stolen Completely from Matt Werks)

What can $7 Really do in Africa?
In the U.S. $7= 2 mochas
In Kibera, Kenya, $7 = 3 meals a day for 9 orphans
In Bulawayo, Zimbabwe, $7 = 1 school term for 2 children
In Tufa, Ethiopia $7 = food for a family of 4 for 1 month
In Uganda, $7 = treatment for 16 children infected with malaria
In all of Africa $7 = clean water for 7 Africans for 1 year
In the Sudan $7 = relief packs for 2 people in the war-torn region of Darfur
In Angola $7 = seed and farming tools for 3 people
If you want to walk the talk get in touch with Christine Bailey and the Mocha Club email: christine@africanleadership.org phone:214.257.0576
(Sub-Saharan Africa is home to 66% of the world's HIV/AIDS population. 6,300 people die every day from what the United Nations calls the "greatest catastrophe in human history.")

Kim and Reggie Harris - Get on Board! (Underground Railroad and Freedom Songs Vol II)

Appleseed

Music is the fuel for every social revolution, the African American struggles out of slavery and into a semblance of equality in our modern culture is no exception. In pre-Civil War years, traditional black gospel spirituals sometimes served dual purposes--to assert hope for a better life and to convey coded directions and advice to runaway slaves heading north on the Underground Railroad. More than a century later many of these same songs became anthems of the Civil Rights movement of the 60's, their messages of faith and determination stoking countless freedom marches and rallies.
On their Get On Board! album Kim and Reggie present some of the lesser-known Underground Railroad songs they've uncovered. Special Guests include Bernice Johnson Reagon, the founder of Sweet Honey in the Rock, actor Danny Glover, Rev. B.Jones, Guy Davis, son of Ozzie Davis and Ruby Dee, Matt and Marshall Jones and more.

Kronos Quartet - ...Songs Are Sung

Nonesuch/Warner Bros.

The Kronos Quartet has played an enormous part in the promotion and dissemination of the music of Polish composer Henryk Mikolaj Gorecki. Kronos Quartet commissioned and premiered his first two quartets and asked Gorecki for a third. It was written in between late 1994 and early 1995 but had been held from the world until 2005 at a world premiere in Bielsko-Biala, in southern Poland. And now here it is for your listening pleasure.

Joss Stone - Introducing Joss Stone

Virgin/EMI

Joss Stone is this decade's Lauryn Hill. The lady of soul-love has come back with a new found connection to herself and her music. This time around she took an active role in the making of her album.
Instead of just laying down vocals on someone else 's songs, Joss has written her own songs and sings them with soul. A gem of an album, the music is stylish with just a twist of retro soul-funk sound. And Joss is accompanied by the Benjamin Wright Orchestra providing ample support for her powerhouse vocals.
***Love's Single of the Week: "Arms of My Baby."***

Del Castillo - Brotherhood

Smilin' Castle/Crystal Clear

Del Castillo is the band that has melded Flamenco, Rock, Latin and Blues to become a cross-cultural phenomenon. Comprised of brothers Rick and Mark del Castillo on twin lead Spanish guitars, charismatic vocalist Alex Ruiz, and the rock-hard rhythm section of Mike Zeoli on drums Albert Besteiro on bass and Rick "The Rev" Holeman on various percussion.
Brotherhood is bound to captivate listeners with the heavy blues undertones and crazy-wild supreme picking skills of the del Castillo brothers. Santana fans will delight in the freshness of the latin dance beats and rhythm. Guest singer Willie Nelson makes an outstanding appearance on a bilingual song titled "I Never Cared For You." Just in time for the hot summer nights.
This extraordinary album reminds me of the good old days when me and my wife Sonia Rodriguez danced down the heart of Spanish Harlem on 116th St. between 2nd and 3rd avenue in New York City. Those were the great old days.

Crime Mob - Hated on Mostly

Crunk Incorporated/G's Up/BME/Reprise/Warner Bros.

It has been nearly two years since five rowdy teenagers from Ellenwood, Georgia first exploded on the national music scene with their thunderous tune "Knuck if You Buck." Like an uncontrollable wildfire the band rose up from the underground scene drawing rave reviews from critics and gaining a faithful cult-like following of fans.
Hated on Mostly is the awaited sophomore album from Crime Mob. It features more chart-topping hits that you can rock yo' hips to. This album represents the next plateau for the band, and it is a significant milestone showing the band's progression. There is a bit of smoothed out tracks for those of you who don't like your ears buzzin with bass and a good deal of trunk-rattling, angst filled bow-throwing club anthems to boot.

Martina McBride - Waking Up Laughing

RCA/Sony BMG

Contemporary country singer Martina McBride rose to stardom in the late 90's, starting out with a more traditionalist approach and moving into pop-friendlier territory. While her blend of country and progressive folk styles--along with her powerful, remarkable voice--got country audiences to sit up and take notice in 1992. It was, most notably, her version of Gretchen Peters-penned single "Independence Day" that blew minds. While the song itself--told from the point of view of a surviving daughter of an alcoholic-wife-beater and an abused, long-suffering wife and mother ends in the tragedy of suicide and death, it is none the less a redemptive song that makes no moral judgments yet asks real questions about what "independence" actually means.
This is Martina's 9th studio release produced over an eight month period, a timetable most artists aren't afforded. Filled with all original material and her first self produced album ever, Martina shows extreme talent and was able to give her all to this record. Her songs are racked with emotion. She has a rich, elegant voice that can take the sorrow that she sings about a make it so beautiful. No one should go without hearing this album.
***So Nice, Gotta Do It Up Twice (Created by the Original NYC DJ, Jocko, 1955)***

Symphorce - Become Death

Metal Blade

Sometime ago, about 8 years, Andy B. Fanck formed Symphorce, a band that has traveled a stoney yet ascending road ever since. They play modern, emotional and energy-laden songs gaining them fans worldwide.
The 6th album from Symphorce, Become Death features new drummer, Stefen Theurer. It is a true and unexpected progression for the band. Symphorce can easily be mentioned amongst the most innovative bands in metal today, and Become Death is bound to become an essential album for this genre.

Ono - Open Your Box

Astralwerks

New Orleans is a city where jazz, Delta blues and rythm are king of tradition. Shad Weathersby stands out as one of the city's top folk and Americana singer-songwriters for the past three decades. He has opened for the likes of Ray Charles, Three Dog Night and Stephen Stills.
The Beaten Path is completely original songs about Shad's life, points of refrence in his history. A fine mixture of the best New Orleans has to offer,.his songs often bring you to the bayou. This is an album that grows on you, check it out and you'll understand.

Alan Jackson, George Strait, Jimmy Buffett - Live at Texas Stadium

MCA Nashville/Universal

Two of biggest names in country and one of the best known names in southern rock had come together in concert back in 2004. It was a blowout show in Dallas, packed with fans of all three legends. And nobody left disappointed with ample hits from each artist.
The recording includes hits "Margaritaville," and "Hey Good Lookin,'" from Buffett, "All My Ex's Live In Texas," and "Milk Cow Blues," from George Strait and "Five O'Clock Somewhere," and "Texas Women," from Alan Jackson with a special version of "Murder On Music Row," with Strait and Jackson performing flawlessly. If you love country then this is a must have for your collection.
***Shelton's Second Single of the Week: Murder On Music Row."***

There is power in a factory, power in the land
Power in the hand of the worker
But it all amounts to nothing if together we don't stand
There is power in a Union

Now the lessons of the past were all learned with workers blood
The mistakes of the bosses we must pay for
From the cities and the farmlands to trenches full of mud
War has always been the bosses way, sir

The Union forever,defending our rights
Down with the blackleg,all workers unite
With our brothers and our sisters from many far-off lands
There is power in a Union

Now I long for the morning that they realise
Brutality and unjust laws cannot defeat us
But who'll defend the workers who cannot organise
When the bosses send their lackeys out to cheat us?

Money speaks for money,the Devil for his own
Who comes to speak for the skin and the bone?
What a comfort for the widow,a light to the child
There is power in a Union

The Union forever,defending our rights
Down with the blackleg,all workers unite
With our brothers and our sisters together we will stand
There is power in a Union

Political Article: The Struggle Over Iraqi Oil: Eyes Eternally on the Prize By: Michael Schwartz Back To Top The struggle over Iraqi oil has been going on for a long, long time. One could date it back to 1980 when President Jimmy Carter Ñ before his Habitat for Humanity days Ñ declared that Persian Gulf oil was ÒvitalÓ to American national interests. So vital was it, he announced, that the U.S. would use Òany means necessary, including military forceÓ to sustain access to it. Soon afterwards, he announced the creation of a Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, a new military command structure that would eventually develop into United States Central Command (Centcom) and give future presidents the ability to intervene relatively quickly and massively in the region. Or we could date it all the way back to World War II, when British officials declared Middle Eastern oil Òa vital prize for any power interested in world influence or domination,Ó and U.S. officials seconded the thought, calling it Òa stupendous source of strategic power and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.Ó The date when the struggle for Iraqi oil began is less critical than our ability to trace the ever growing willingness to use Òany means necessaryÓ to control such a Òvital prizeÓ into the present. We know, for example, that, before and after he ascended to the Vice-Presidency, Dick Cheney has had his eye squarely on the prize. In 1999, for example, he told the Institute of Petroleum Engineers that, when it came to satisfying the exploding demand for oil, Òthe Middle East, with two thirds of the worldÕs oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies.Ó The mysterious Energy Task Force he headed on taking office in 2001 eschewed conservation or developing alternative sources as the main response to any impending energy crisis, preferring instead to make the Middle East Òa primary focus of U.S. international energy policy.Ó As part of this focus, the Task Force recommended that the administration put its energy, so to speak, into convincing Middle Eastern countries Òto open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investmentÓ Ñ in other words, into a policy of reversing 25 years of state control over the petroleum industry in the region. The Energy Task Force set about planning how to accomplish this historic reversal. We know, for instance, that it scrutinized a detailed map of IraqÕs oil fields, together with the (non-American) oil companies scheduled to develop them (once the UN sanctions still in place on Saddam HusseinÕs regime were lifted). It then worked jointly with the administrationÕs national security team to find a compatible combination of military and economic policies that might inject American power into this equation. According to Jane Mayer of The New Yorker, the National Security Council directed its staff Òto cooperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the ÔmeldingÕ of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: Ôthe review of operational policies towards rogue states,Õ such as Iraq, and Ôactions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields.ÕÓ While we cannot be sure that this planning itself was instrumental in setting the U.S. on a course toward invading Iraq, we can be sure that plenty of energy was being expended in Washington, planning for the disposition of IraqÕs massive oil reserves once that invasion was successfully executed. In 2002, just a year after CheneyÕs Task Force completed its work, and before the U.S. had officially decided to invade Iraq, the State Department Òestablished a working group on oil and energy,Ó as part of its ÒFuture of IraqÓ project. It brought together influential Iraqi exiles, U.S. government officials, and international consultants. Later, several Iraqi members of the group became part of the Iraqi government. The result of the projectÕs work was a Òdraft framework for IraqÕs oil policyÓ that would form the foundation for the energy policy now being considered by the Iraqi Parliament. The Prize The specific prize in Iraq is certainly worthy of almost any kind of preoccupation. Indeed, Iraq could someday become the most important source of petrochemical energy on the planet. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Iraq possesses 115 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, third largest in the world (after Saudi Arabia and Iran). About two-thirds of its known oil reserves are located in Shia southern Iraq, and the final third in Kurdish northern Iraq. However, in energy terms, only about 10% of the country has actually been explored and there is good reason to believe that modern methods Ñ which have not been applied since the beginning of the Iraq-Iran War in 1980 Ñ might well uncover magnitudes more oil. Estimates of the possible new finds offered by officials of various interested governments range from 45 billion to 214 billion additional barrels, depending on the source; but some non-governmental experts see the final treasure exceeding 400 billion barrels. If the latter figure is correct, then Iraq would likely become the worldÕs largest source of oil. For the most part, IraqÕs petroleum has Òattractive chemical properties;Ó that is, its oil is considered to be of very high quality. Moreover, both its current fields and many of the potential new discoveries would be extremely cheap to access, if security werenÕt such a problem today in Iraq. James Paul of the international policy monitoring group, the Global Policy Forum, offers this positive view: ÒAccording to Oil and Gas Journal, Western oil companies estimate that they can produce a barrel of Iraqi oil for less than $1.50 and possibly as little as $1É. This is similar to production costs in Saudi Arabia and lower than virtually any other country.Ó With the price of a barrel of crude oil today above $64 a barrel, the potential for profits is stupendous and the only question is: Who will pocket them Ñ the oil companies or the Iraqi government Ñ and, if the former, which oil companies those will be? It is not inconceivable that any major oil companies able to claim a large portion of the Iraqi oil spoils could double, triple, or even quintuple their already gigantic global profits. Under Saddam Hussein, Iraqi oil never fulfilled the potential of even its proven oil fields. A modest goal for the countryÕs oil industry would have been producing 3.5 million barrels per day, but the temporary disruptions caused by the Iraq-Iran War and the more permanent ones caused by UN sanctions imposed after the Gulf War in 1991 severely limited production. From the late 1990s until the American invasion in 2003, Iraq averaged around 2.5 million barrels per day. Knowledge of this level of underproduction was certainly one factor in Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul WolfowitzÕs pre-war prediction that the administrationÕs invasion and occupation of Iraq would pay for itself; he hoped for a quick postwar increase in production to 3.5 million barrels per day or, at the $30 per barrel price of oil at that time, close to $40 billion per year in revenues. An expected expansion in production levels (once the oil giants were brought into the mix) to perhaps 6.5 million barrels, through the development of new oil fields or more efficient exploitation of existing fields, had the potential to more than cover the expected American short-term military costs and leave the new Iraqi government flush as well. This, then, was the allure of melding energy policy and military policy, as CheneyÕs energy group and allied administration officials envisioned it. The Initial Campaign to Capture Iraqi Oil With all this history, the particular way the U.S. sprang into action as soon as its forces arrived in Baghdad was hardly surprising. While American troops simply stood by as unrestrained looting severely damaged the dawn-of-civilization treasures in the National Museum, compromised the ability of hospitals to deliver health care, and destroyed many government offices, large numbers of American soldiers were deployed to protect the Oil Ministry and its associated holdings. This effort was certainly emblematic of the newly established occupationÕs priorities. Not long after President Bush declared Òmajor combat operations in Iraq have endedÓ under a ÒMission AccomplishedÓ banner on the deck of the aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, Paul Bremer, the new head of the American occupation, promulgated a series of laws designed, among other things, to kick-start the development of Iraqi oil. In addition to attempting to transfer management of existing oil facilities (well heads, refineries, pipelines, and shipping) to multinational corporations, he also set about creating an oil-policy framework, unique in the region, that would allow the major companies to develop the countryÕs proven reserves and even to begin drilling new wells. All these plans were, however, quickly frustrated, both by the growing Sunni insurgency and by civil resistance. IraqÕs oil workers quickly unionized Ñ even though Bremer extended SaddamÕs prohibition on unions in state-owned companies Ñ and effectively resisted the transfer of management duties to foreign companies. In one noteworthy moment, the oil workers actually refused to take orders from Bechtel officials in the oil hub of Basra, thus preserving their own jobs as well as the right of the Iraqi state-owned Southern Oil Company to continue to control the operation in that region. BechtelÕs management contract was subsequently voided. At the same time, the growing insurgency, acting on a general Iraqi understanding that a major goal of the occupation was to ÒstealÓ Iraqi oil, systematically began to attack the oil pipelines that traveled through the Sunni areas of the country. Within a few months, all oil exports in the northern part of Iraq were interrupted Ñ and the northern export pipelines have remained generally unusable ever since. To resistance of various sorts must be added the ÒcontributionÓ of the major American corporations involved in ÒreconstructingÓ Iraq, notably Halliburton and Bechtel. These crony corporations, with close ties to the Bush administration, accepted huge fees to rehabilitate dilapidated or damaged oil facilities. Almost without fail, they chose not to repair existing plants locally or to employ the raft of skilled Iraqi technicians who had used remarkable ingenuity in maintaining these facilities during a dozen years of UN sanctions. Working under cost-plus agreements that guaranteed a fixed profit rate no matter how much an operation ultimately cost, they preferred instead to install expensive new proprietary equipment. Then, in the absence of any outside oversight, they ran up huge expenses and frequently failed to complete their contracts, leaving the oil facilities they were servicing in states of disrepair or partial repair Ñ and equipped with technology that local technicians could not service. Meanwhile, the major oil companies refused BremerÕs invitation to invest their own money in Iraqi projects, pointing out the obvious Ñ that the insurgency and the spreading chaos made such investments unwise. In addition, they were well aware that BremerÕs regime in Baghdad lacked clear authority to sign contracts with them. This, in turn, meant that their investments might be in jeopardy once a legitimate government took power. When technical sovereignty was finally handed over to an appointed Iraqi government headed by the CIAÕs favorite Iraqi exile, Iyad Allawi, in June 2004, the new premier embraced BremerÕs policy, but to no avail. The international oil companies were no more impressed with his future than they had been with BremerÕs. Like Wolfowitz, they knew that Iraq Òfloats on a sea of oilÓ; unlike him, they were no dreamers. They werenÕt willing to risk their capital in the dangerous and legally ambiguous circumstances then prevailing. As a result, the first two years of Bush administration efforts to ÒaccessÓ Iraqi oil failed Ñ and dismally so at that. Average production never exceeded the bottom-of-the-barrel 2.5 million barrels SaddamÕs regime managed to extract on its worst days. By 2006, production had slipped below 2 million barrels per day. Dealing with the Iraqi Government It is difficult to judge how much BremerÕs inability to implement the pre-planned oil policy contributed to the Bush administration decision to reverse its plans for Iraqi ÒdemocracyÓ Ñ which, as Juan Cole has pointed out, involved council-based elections, an electorate restricted to a small elite, and Bremer as Òa MacArthur in Baghdad for yearsÓ Ñ and push for an elected Iraqi government. It certainly is true, however, that this change triggered a campaign aimed at the Òcapture of new and existing oil and gas fields.Ó As soon as the first elections for a temporary Iraqi government were completed in January 2005 American officials in Iraq began lobbying forcefully for adoption of the very policy that the State DepartmentÕs pre-invasion Future of Iraq project had drafted. The State Department planners had concluded that Production Sharing Agreements Ñ a method that granted multinational oil companies effective control of oil fields without transferring permanent ownership to them Ñ would be the basic instrument through which a future ÒindependentÓ Iraq would develop new oil fields. Wary by now of being seen as the chief advocate of this policy, which it so desperately wanted in place, the Bush administration concocted a strategy that would enlist the international community in pressuring Iraq to adopt its program. This was done by making the International Monetary Fund (IMF) a key player in Iraqi oil policy. Through loans in the 1980s and reparations imposed for his invasion of Kuwait in 1990, Saddam had accumulated $120 billion in external debt, the largest per capita debt in the world and a potentially insurmountable obstacle to economic recovery, even in oil-rich Iraq. One option available to the new government was to declare this debt Òodious,Ó a technical term in international law referring to debt accumulated by authoritarian rulers for their own personal or political aggrandizement. SaddamÕs expansionist war against Iran, his use of public funds to build ostentatious monuments and palaces, his transfer of billions to his personal accounts, and his failure to maintain the infrastructure of the country all were excellent evidence that the debt was indeed odious; and the U.S. claimed as much for almost $40 billion of it, held by 19 industrialized countries known as the Paris Club. Instead of seeking to cancel this debt (and the remaining $80 billion) entirely, however, the Bush administration sent James Baker, former Secretary of State under George H. W. Bush, to the Paris Club to negotiate conditional forgiveness. The resulting agreement immediately forgave $12 billion, but left $28 billion on the books. A second $12 billion would be abrogated when the Iraqi government signed onto Òa standard International Monetary Fund program,Ó and a further $8 billion three years later, after the IMF confirmed Iraqi compliance. Even if Òsuccessful,Ó almost $8 billion would still be outstanding to the Paris Club Ñ together with $80 billion not covered by the agreement. The Òstandard International Monetary Fund program,Ó not surprisingly, included the now familiar American policies regarding Iraqi oil, as well as the use of Profit Sharing Agreements and a host of other provisions that would open the Iraqi economy as a whole, and the oil sector in particular, to investment by multinational corporations. Among the most punitive of the provisions was a demand for an end to the economic breadbasket that guaranteed all Iraqi families low prices for fuel and food staples. In a country with, by 2005, somewhere between 30% and 70% unemployment, average wage levels under $100 per month, and escalating inflation, these Saddam-era subsidies meant the difference between basic subsistence and disaster for a large proportion of Iraqis. Independent journalists Basav Sen and Hope Chu summarized the new agreement thusly: ÒA move that appears on the surface to be beneficial for Iraq Ñ debt cancellation Ñ is being used as a tool of control by the World Bank, the IMF and the wealthy creditor countries. What is more, it is a tool of control that will last long after the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces.Ó Zaid Al-Ali, an international lawyer working on development issues in Iraq, described the agreement as a Òperfect illustration of how the industrialized world has used debt as a tool to force developing nations to surrender sovereignty over their economies.Ó The newly elected Iraqi National Assembly promptly denounced this agreement as Òa new crime committed by the creditors who financed SaddamÕs oppression.Ó This forceful expression reflected the opinions of the AssemblyÕs constituents. After all, 76% of Iraqis believed that the main reason for the Bush administrationÕs invasion was Òto control Iraqi oil.Ó As it happened, the protest did not prevent that government from endorsing the deal. Otherwise, it faced the prospect of the U.S. Ñ which still had operational control over Iraqi finances Ñ simply appropriating most of its revenues for debt service. When the agreement was announced, interim Oil Minister Thamir Ghadbhan, a British-trained technocrat, publicly protested the provisions eliminating fuel and food subsidies. He was subsequently pushed out. The U.S. then began pressuring the Iraqi government to draft a definitive petrochemical law that would conform to the IMF guidelines. Given the levels of resistance to the very idea, this work was conducted in secret and took until the end of 2006 to complete. As independent journalist Joshua Holland described the process: ÒJust months after the Iraqis elected their first constitutional government, USAID sent a BearingPoint adviser to provide the Iraqi Oil Ministry Ôlegal and regulatory advice in drafting the framework of petroleum and other energy-related legislation, including foreign investmentÕÉ. The Iraqi Parliament had not yet seen a draft of the oil law as of July [2006], but by that timeÉ it had already been reviewed and commented on by U.S. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, who also Ôarranged for Dr. Al-Shahristani to meet with nine major oil companies Ñ including Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips Ñ for them to comment on the draft.ÕÓ Even the Iraqi Study Group, James BakerÕs Commission, got into the act at the end of 2006, devoting three pages of its proposal for a partial redeployment of American forces from Iraq to exhorting the Iraqis to enact a petrochemical bill that would place its oil reserves in the hands of the major oil companies. The Proposed Petrochemical Bill When the ÒDraft Hydrocarbon LawÓ was finally delivered to the Iraqi Parliament on February 18, 2007, key provisions had already been leaked and immediately denounced by the full spectrum of the Iraqi opposition. Taking turns registering dismay were the majority of the Parliament, a wide range of government officials, the leadership of major Sunni political parties, the union of oil workers, the Sadrists Ñ the most powerful Shia grouping Ñ and the visible leadership of the insurgency. All this led to many changes in the law, including the removal of all mention of either privatization or Production Sharing Contracts, which would have given multinational oil companies 15-25 years of basically unregulated operational control over Iraqi oil facilities. The amended version in no way excluded the use of PSAs, but it removed the explosive designation from the actual wording of the law. It is worth reviewing the logic of PSAs to understand why the U.S. was so determined to make them a part of the law, and why many Iraqis were so ferociously opposed. Production sharing agreements are generally applied in circumstances where there is a strong possibility that oil exploration will be extremely costly or even fail, and/or where extraction is likely to prove prohibitively expensive. To offset huge and risky investments, the contracting company is guaranteed a proportion of the profits, if and when oil is extracted and sold. In the most common of these agreements, the proportion remains very high until all development costs are amortized, allowing the investing company to recoup its investment expenditures (if oil is found), and then to be rewarded with a larger-than-normal profit margin for the remainder of the contract which, in the Iraqi case, could extend for up to 25 years. This is perhaps a reasonably fair, or at least necessary, bargain for a country which cannot generate sufficient investment capital on its own, where exploration is difficult (perhaps underwater or deep underground), where the actual reserves may prove small, and/or where ongoing costs of extraction are very high. None of these conditions apply in Iraq: huge reservoirs of easily accessible oil are already proven to exist, with more equally accessible fields likely to be discovered with little expense. This is why none of IraqÕs neighbors utilize PSAs. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates all pay the multinationals a fixed rate to explore and develop their fields; and all of the profits become state revenues. The advocates of PSAs in Iraq justify their use by arguing that $20 billion would be needed to develop the Iraqi fields fully and that favorable PSAs are the only way to attract such heavy doses of finance capital under the current highly dangerous circumstances. This assertion seems, however, to be little more than a smokescreen. No major oil companies are willing to invest in Iraq now, no matter how sweet the deal. If order is restored, on the other hand, Iraq would have no trouble attracting vast amounts of finance capital to develop reserves that could well be worth in excess of $10 trillion and hence would have no need whatsoever for PSAs. Based on leaked information, journalists reported that the PSAs envisioned by the Iraqi petrochemical law contained extremely favorable provisions for the oil companies, in which they would be entitled to 70% of profits until development expenses were amortized and 20% afterwards. This would have guaranteed them at least twice the typical profit margin over the long run and many times that figure during the initial years. There are other elements in the law (and the possible PSA contracts) that have also roused resistance inside Iraq. Among the most controversial: *Insofar as PSAs or their legal equivalent were enacted, Iraq would lose control over what levels of oil the country produced with the potential to substantially weaken the grip of OPEC on the oil market. *The law would allow the oil companies to fully repatriate all profits from oil sales, almost insuring that the proceeds would not be reinvested in the Iraqi economy. *The Iraqi government would not have control over oil company operations inside Iraq. Any disputes would be referred instead to pro-industry international arbitration panels. *No contracts would be public documents. *Contacting companies would not be obliged to hire Iraqi workers, and could pursue the current policy of employing American technicians and South Asian manual laborers. Several African countries with vast mineral riches have been subjected to these sorts of conditions, with large multinational companies extracting both minerals and profits while returning only a tiny fraction of the proceeds to the local population. As the resources are taken out of the ground and the country, the local population actually becomes poorer, while the potential for future prosperity is drained. The draft petrochemical law, if enacted and implemented, could ensure that Iraq would remain in a state of neoliberal poverty in perpetuity, even if order did return to the country. The Resistance The petrochemical law is hardly assured of successful passage, and Ñ even if passed Ñ is in no way assured of successful implementation. Resistance to it, spread as it is throughout Iraqi society, has already shown itself to be a formidable opponent to the dwindling power of the American occupation. The Parliament itself may be the first line of defense. It challenged the original IMF agreement and has refused to consider the bill for two months, already missing a March deadline for passage that American politicians of both parties had pronounced an important ÒbenchmarkÓ by which to judge the viability of Prime Minister Nouri al-MalikiÕs government. In addition, the government officials responsible for administering the oil industry could prove formidable opponents. Rafiq Latta, a London-based oil analyst, told Nation reporter Christian Parenti, ÒThe whole culture of the ministry opposes [the law]É. Those guys ran the industry very well all through the years of sanctions. It was an impressive job, and they take pride in ÔtheirÕ oil.Ó Perhaps most formidable of all is the Federation of Oil Unions, with 26,000 members and allies throughout organized labor. The oil workers overturned contracts in 2003 and 2004 that would have placed substantial oil facilities under multinational corporate control; and they initiated a vigorous campaign against the U.S. sponsored oil program as early as June 2005 Ñ calling a conference to oppose privatization attended by Òworkers, academics, and international civil-society groups.Ó In January 2006, they convened a convention composed of all major Iraqi union groups in Amman, Jordan, which issued a manifesto opposing the entire neo-liberal U.S. program for Iraq, including any compromise on national control of oil production. At a second Amman labor meeting in December of 2006, the Federation of Oil Unions announced its opposition to the pending law even before it was released. IraqÕs trade unions, speaking in a single voice, declared that: ÒIraqi public opinion strongly opposes the handing of authority and control over the oil to foreign companies, that aim to make big profits at the expense of the people. They aim to rob IraqÕs national wealth by virtue of unfair, long term oil contracts that undermine the sovereignty of the State and the dignity of the Iraqi people.Ó When the bill was made public, oil union president Hassan Jumaa denounced it before yet another protest meeting, stating: ÒHistory will not forgive those who play recklessly with our wealthÉ. We consider the new law unbalanced and incoherent with the hopes of those who work in the oil industry. It has been drafted in a great rush in harsh circumstances.Ó He then called on the government to consult Iraqi oil experts (who had not participated in drafting the law) and Òask their opinion before sinking Iraq into an ocean of dark injustice.Ó If the oil workers and their union allies decide to organize protests or strikes, they are likely to have the Iraqi public on their side. Fully three-quarters of Iraqis believe that the United States invaded in order to gain control of Iraqi oil, and most observers believe they will surely agree with the oil workers that this law is a vehicle for that control. Even Iyad Allawi has now publicly taken a stand opposing it, perhaps the best indication that opposition will be virtually unanimous. Finally Ñ and no small matter Ñ the armed resistance is also against the oil law. The Sunni insurgency underscored its opposition by assassinating Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi, a major advocate of the pending law, on the day the bill was made public. The significance of the opposition of the Sunni insurgency is amplified by the stance of the Sadrists, the most rebellious segment of the Shia majority. Sadr spokesman Sheikh Gahaith Al Temimi warned journalist Christian Parenti that while the Sadrists would ÒwelcomeÓ foreign investment in oil, they would do so only Òunder certain conditions. We want our oil to be developed, not stolen. If a bad law were to be passed, all people of Iraq would resist it.Ó It seems clear that what the oil law has the power to do is substantially escalate the already unmanageable conflict in Iraq. Active opposition by the Parliament alone, or by the unions alone, or by the Sunni insurgency alone, or by the Sadrists alone might be sufficient to defeat or disable the law. The possibility that such disparate groups might find unity around this issue, mobilizing both the government bureaucracy and overwhelming public opinion to their cause, holds a much greater threat: the possibility of creating a unified force that might push beyond the oil law to a more general opposition to the American occupation. Like so many American initiatives in Iraq, the oil law, even if passed, might never be worth more than the paper it will be printed on. The likelihood that any future Iraqi government which takes on a nationalist mantel will consider such an agreement in any way binding is nil. One day in perhaps the not so distant future, that Òlaw,Ó even if briefly the law of the land, is likely to find itself in the dustbin of history, along with SaddamÕs various oil deals. As a result, the Bush administrationÕs Òcapture of new and existing oil and gas fieldsÓ is likely to end as a predictable fiasco.

Back To Top