VHeadline commentarist Kenneth T. Tellis writes: Way back in 1948, when the Iranian government nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and created the Iranian National Oil Company, the U.S. administration of Harry S. Truman stated that Iran had the right to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian as it was on the sovereign territory of Iran.
Thus the British owned Oil Company did not receive any compensation from Iran.
In 1956, the Egyptian government of Abdel Gamel Nasser seized the British owned Suez Canal Co. and declared it nationalized on the advice of U.S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, speaking for the Eisenhower administration. The U.S. supported the view that since the Suez Canal Co. was based on Egyptian soil, it was perfectly legal to nationalize it. Egypt did not pay any compensation to Britain for the nationalization of the Suez Canal Co.
Under those circumstances, why should Venezuela pay one red cent to Exxon-Mobil for the nationalization of their Oilfields on Venezuela�s sovereign territory? Here we are a seeing a different standard being set by the U.S. for U.S. owned businesses on foreign territory. Why is that that the U.S. felt it was all right to nationalize British owned property in Iran and Egypt, yet those same rules did not apply to U.S. owned interests in Venezuela? Thus, we can see how the U.S. has set about applying double standards to protect it�s their own interests in investments overseas. Of course, the U.S. uses every possible loophole in the law, and even resorts to military threats if need be. The courts in the European Union therefore knuckle down to the Bush regime mainly out of fear or reprisals. With the U.S. military presence in Western Europe it is not hard to understand why.
Venezuela has every right to nationalize property on its sovereign territory without having to answer to the E. U. or the U.S. National sovereignty is not up for grabs, and the Chavez government is well within its rights. Meanwhile Exxon-Mobil, with the support of the Bush regime thinks that it can pressure courts in other countries into freezing Venezuela�s assets and forcing it to revoke nationalization. The issue here is not only nationalization, but the sovereignty of a country, which cannot be negotiated.
Exxon-Mobil is going to lose big time, if it does not negotiate with the Chavez government of Venezuela immediately.
Kenneth T. Tellis
kenttellis@rogers.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The problem is still the incredible and dangerous level of political-economic pressure which the anglo-american oligarchy can still bring to bear on any country, even in the present period of its senile decay.
ReplyDeleteAre latin americans really prepared to pay the price of true and real independence yet?
My answer to the question of are Latin Americans willing to pay the price of ridding themselves of Anglo-American oligarchy, can be answered with: Are Latin American any less heroic than the American colonists of 1775 that rid their country of British rule?
ReplyDeleteIf Latin Americans can take a lesson from the Americans of 1775, they will stand up as one people and drive out those who have exploited them for well over 100 years and counting.
That is the only answer I have for those who seek to be rid of U.S. imperialism in Latin America. Throw off your fears and get the job done now! Because tomorrow might be too late for your children.