Chalabi Named Iraq Oil Minister

[Lux]

Chalabi Named Iraq Oil Minister

NEW YORK - Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi has added another hat, and no small chapeau at that: He was named interim oil minister of the war-torn nation.

According to published reports, the incumbent petroleum honcho, Ibrahim Bahr al-Uloum, was given leave amid a spate of sabotage and irksome logistics problems that have all but halted crude exports.

http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2005/12/30/chelabi-iraq-oil-cx_gl_1230autofacescan04.html

[MunnyBaggs]

Well I'm definitely not a Chalabi fan but who knows whether this is a good or bad thing. Hopefully he's learned from his shady past and will now work for the good of the Iraqi people. That's the only way to get a positive legacy attached to his life.

[Javabear]

Chalabi wants power, and now he's got one of the most coveted positions in Iraq. This may help calm things on the "election fraud" and insurgency fronts.

[tattatu]

and has close connections to Al-Uluum. This is why he is Deputy PM.

Chalabi wrote this in April 2004:
"The one bright spot among the Iraqi security forces has been the 36th Battalion of the ICDC. This special unit, which was formed from the hardened fighters of the anti-Saddam opposition, has performed admirably and bravely in Fallujah. The officers and men of this battalion were nominated by the main political parties of the struggle against Saddam, who are America's chief allies in Iraq today: the Kurdistan Democratic Party, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Iraqi National Accord and the Iraqi National Congress. These parties and others are able to immediately field a cadre of loyal and motivated troops. Most importantly we can provide forces that have been vetted and vouched for."

http://www.puk.org/web/htm/news/nws/news040419a.html

[lance]

Whats done is done. I dont think he is good man, with Iraq's best interest at heart. I will say I have no doubt that he will run his operation with a iron fist. He is not a man of half measures, and will not suffer fools under him.

[tattatu]

will visit hell to make sure the fires stay lit. If you know how Chalabi manages his Ministry then why dont you write about it. Michael Hirsch not my favorite source, but I found this interesting, since it was written more than a year ago:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50518-2004Sep25.html

" Bremer, a historian by training, then reached over to his desk for a thick briefing book that laid out detailed timelines for the development of each Iraqi ministry. He pointed out a chart that he consulted more than any other: "MILESTONES: Iraq and Germany." It laid out the handover of state institutions during the 1945-52 occupation of Germany, side by side with corresponding plans for Iraq over a more compressed period. That way, Bremer said, he could "keep track of where we are versus Germany." The U.S. occupation embraced that model so completely that officials lifted whole passages from Marshall Plan-era documents in designing the future of Iraq -- once forgetting, in a section dealing with currency, to change "Reichsmark" to "dinar."

Hirsch then proceeds to demolish US foreign policy. But its a good article.

[tattatu]

Published in the Arabic News (Nov 1, 05):
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/051101/2005110121.html

Interesting to compare the two interviews. This one following the ratification of the Constitution. Which although won the popular vote, was close electorally.

On building government coalitions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

QUESTION: Could you draw on your experience a little bit in Afghanistan or comment on this because I'm sure you're doing -- practically in dealing with it, I mean. In Afghanistan, obviously you -- one was able to find a unifying leader in Hamid Karzai. He had the prestige and the presence.

AMBASSADOR KHALILZAD: Sure.

QUESTION: It seems as if it's been impossible to find someone similar. And I know many US officials have said it's critical that in December there be a stronger leader produced, a more, let's say, universally accepted leader than the current prime minister. Could you talk about that challenge a little bit (inaudible)?

AMBASSADOR KHALILZAD: I think that the fact that Afghanistan had a charismatic leader broadly accepted in Hamid Karzai was a huge asset for Afghanistan, and the fact that Iraq did not have such a figure or such a figure was not identified has been a problem. But I'm not looking back because one could raise questions about various things that were done or were not done. I think a Hamid Karzai-type figure could have been identified early on, could have been identified, because, you know, when there is a role, you can find -- usually a person can be found to fill it. But that was, you know -- in Afghanistan we immediately went to an Afghan Interim Government formation. Here we had a period of CPA and --

[millionairetobe71]

Published in the Arabic News (Nov 1, 05):
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/051101/2005110121.html

Interesting to compare the two interviews. This one following the ratification of the Constitution. Which although won the popular vote, was close electorally.

On building government coalitions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

QUESTION: Could you draw on your experience a little bit in Afghanistan or comment on this because I'm sure you're doing -- practically in dealing with it, I mean. In Afghanistan, obviously you -- one was able to find a unifying leader in Hamid Karzai. He had the prestige and the presence.

AMBASSADOR KHALILZAD: Sure.

QUESTION: It seems as if it's been impossible to find someone similar. And I know many US officials have said it's critical that in December there be a stronger leader produced, a more, let's say, universally accepted leader than the current prime minister. Could you talk about that challenge a little bit (inaudible)?

AMBASSADOR KHALILZAD: I think that the fact that Afghanistan had a charismatic leader broadly accepted in Hamid Karzai was a huge asset for Afghanistan, and the fact that Iraq did not have such a figure or such a figure was not identified has been a problem. But I'm not looking back because one could raise questions about various things that were done or were not done. I think a Hamid Karzai-type figure could have been identified early on, could have been identified, because, you know, when there is a role, you can find -- usually a person can be found to fill it. But that was, you know -- in Afghanistan we immediately went to an Afghan Interim Government formation. Here we had a period of CPA and --

....and..what is the rest Tattatu?...Please enlight me...I don't get the point yet,...:(

[tattatu]

If you read the interview further, Hirsch asks Khalilizad about Chalabi (was he the Karzai-like person that some in the Pentagon thought should be PM.) and Khalilizad responds that it will be left to the Iraqi people to decide -- the US was interested in keeping the elections fair -- and that the "US had expended alot of blood and treasure." - the outcome would affect the entire region -- so we will have to work with whoever is elected.

So again, I think this is more media spin. Chalabi has been important in building coalitions -- but he is not popular with Iraqis. That's old news, water under the bridge.

"Fall (to) /v./ AKA free-solo rappel. A dynamic retreat from a climb. Note: it is never the fall that kills — it's the sudden stop at the end."

[aaaack]

This quote seems to indicate that there won't be a revalue until the new government is fully formed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001307.html

"Iraq's leaders have said no major decisions would be made while the composition of a new governing coalition was being determined."

[MEALTICKET]

I think this was the best slot for Chalbi as well. I think the Iraqis got a grasp for what will happen.

[trusty]

This quote seems to indicate that there won't be a revalue until the new government is fully formed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001307.html

"Iraq's leaders have said no major decisions would be made while the composition of a new governing coalition was being determined."

Got to get the election dust settled/Audits etc...middle of next week. The after parliament is seated...another 6 weeks to select a Prisident and 2 Vp(s) and then a Prime Minister. So a best middle of Feb.

Trusty

Trusty

[Dinaress]

I will be sure to mark my calendar :rolleye03

[MunnyBaggs]

This quote seems to indicate that there won't be a revalue until the new government is fully formed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001307.html

"Iraq's leaders have said no major decisions would be made while the composition of a new governing coalition was being determined."

That's exactly what I've been saying with my model early on. They are supposed to have the Government seated by Jan 3rd. The way they move over there it wouldn't surprise me one bit if it takes a couple weeks up to a couple of months before they seat the Government. That would push a re-val back potentially to March 1, 2006. Sounds like I'll update this right now to reflect my new beliefs.