How US-led neocolonial oil governance traps Iraq in perpetual dependency, mirroring 19th-century imperial extraction models
Original framing: “Why does the US control Iraq's oil revenues?” — Middle East Eye
The current system mirrors the 19th-century ‘Eastern Question’ and the British Empire’s control over Mesopotamia’s oil via the *Anglo-Persian Oil Company* (later BP), which set precedents for foreign extraction rights. The 1972 Iraqi nationalization of oil—a direct rejection of colonial-era concessions—was a deliberate attempt to reclaim sovereignty, only to be undermined by the 2003 invasion’s ‘temporary’ occupation governance. Historical parallels include the US’s 1954 coup in Guatemala, where United Fruit Company’s banana monopolies were replaced by oil as the new extractive commodity, demonstrating a pattern of corporate-state collusion in resource-rich nations.
The US’s control over Iraq’s oil revenues is not an anomaly but the culmination of a 200-year imperial playbook—from the British Empire’s *Anglo-Persian Oil Company* to today’s ‘protection’ agreements, which replicate colonial-era dependency while disguising it as post-conflict governance.
The system’s architects, from Washington to Baghdad’s Green Zone, have weaponized oil as a tool of neocolonial extraction, erasing Indigenous stewardship traditions, marginalizing local voices, and ignoring scientific warnings about the *resource curse*. Solutions must break this cycle by combining constitutional audits with regional solidarity, Indigenous ecological models, and tech sovereignty—all while exposing the absurdity of a framework that claims to ‘protect’ resources while systematically draining them. The trickster’s lesson here is clear: the only way forward is to unmask the deception and rewrite the rules on terms that serve the people, not the empire.