Stealing Oil

A segment on CBS.com highlights what is considered the "most lucrative" job on the black market—stealing oil and selling it on the black market. Every year, stolen oil accounts for a $5 billion dollar "industry" of sorts in Iraq. Smugglers will fill up their trucks, bribing officials along the way to their final destination, where the oil will be sold for twice its original price at illegal gas stations.

The smuggling of oil seems to reflect a lot of the problems in Iraq— corruption runs rampant, and the extensive black market which this corruption fosters severely limits the economy of the country. What's particularly interesting is that many of the oil smuggling operations are run by militias that in turn have ties to political parties. According to the video, over 200 people have been accused by a state prosecutor of crimes, but many officials are able to wriggle out of prosecution by citing a legal clause that protects them.

However, what's more troublesome about the illegal oil market is that the fuel will often go to insurgent groups in the region, which is, for obvious reasons, dangerous for American interests in the region.

Although it is regrettable that this is happening, I must say that I don't blame the truck drivers who smuggle the oil. If I had the option of selling oil to one depot for a certain price, but also had the option of selling to another depot for twice the other price (and tax free!), I think I would choose the latter over the former.

And yet, it is very problematic that it seems pretty much everyone—the militias, insurgents, and political parties—all have their hands in the cookie jar. Because of the recent lost revenue from oil, (according to this newspaper article), the Iraqi government is having trouble paying for basic public services, like sewage treatment and power. I'm sure that the illegal market in stolen oil, which saps so much revenue from the legal market, is not helping the efforts to provide Iraqi citizens with basic human needs.

Iraq emerging as key route in global drugs trade

I found this article while looking for drug use among Iraqis. It is disconcerting to hear that since the border between Iraq and Iran are so "porous" that criminals are using that to get out west. The more west they are able to go, the more money they are able to make per pound of heroin. Given all the money that the US has poured into Iraq, the fact that the borders are not secure makes the money seem wasteful (you never know, those drug dealers could be Al-Queda!).

“The drugs come from Iran, then they are sold at the Saudi border. Smugglers are young and they use motorcycles or animals to cross the desert late at night.” According to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Afghanistan’s opium production soared to 8,200 tonnes in 2007 from 6,100 tonnes the year before, accounting for 93 per cent of global production."

The trade is really global as well since its Iranians and Syrians that are doing this trade. The deterioration of security that allowed this happen has global impact because these drugs from Afghanistan and other places will get to South America and feed into the Mexican drug war. Cutting off one link would make it harder for drugs to come in and out of places.
What will be interesting to see is what will happen once US soldiers leave Iraq and go into Afghanistan, will the geographic differences help or hinder the trade? Since so much of it comes from Afghanistan, will stopping it at the source help? Given the fact that they are unable to secure Iraq with the massive amount of money already poured in, I doubt that they can secure the hills of Afghanistan.
It is interesting to note that a lot of this comes after the fall of Saddam Hussein;

Officials say that the incentive to catch drug smugglers waned sharply after Saddam Hussein was toppled more than five years ago. Beforehand customs officers were offered market rates for uncovering contraband.

While Saddam did a lot of bad things, his control over everything made the country run more smoothly and the strong central government helped stability. Without people knowing how to run the country before the invasion, it would make a lot of sense why certain things that did not happen before now start to happen. Perhaps with some re-introduction of Baath party members, certain incentives can help restore Iraq. Yet, that political option is not popular with American politicians.

Hate Crimes in a "Free" Iraq

The status of gay men and women in Iraq has never been good. Gay sex was a criminal offense under Saddam and remains one today. But some gay Iraqis have argued that life was actually better under Saddam's secular regime because there was neither the political will nor the Islamic militias there to pursue a policy of active persecution. Balancing the human rights of this group and the traditional religious beliefs of the country will be a difficult task to be sure, especially as conservatives push to make Islamic law the basis of the country's legal system.

This week's article in the NY Times talks about how despite the relative decrease in violence in Iraq, a dangerous atmosphere for the openly gay remains very much intact in Sadr City. In the past two months, 25 men have been killed there most likely due to their sexual orientation and a café frequented by gays was burned down. And so, in a period when other Iraqi citizens are feeling more and more comfortable about going out at night, some gay Iraqis are feeling the pressure to stay inside day and night.

Blame for the killings is not concentrated on the Shiite “death squads” that we hear so much about in the news. Instead, local police say that the murders are being carried out by the victim’s own relatives, who feel that his homosexuality has brought shame upon the whole family.

This article forced me to think about a couple of uncomfortable questions. First, what casualties do we privilege in our death tolls? Of course every week we count up the American soldiers who have died, and sometimes we pay attention to losses in the Iraqi security services or civilian casualties within the theatre of war. But it seems to me that the casualties of “cultural transition” often go uncounted. I hate to admit it, but this is probably especially true as concerns freedom of sexual orientation. It is one of those freedoms and rights that many American supporters of democracy either outright oppose or feel little sympathy for. Even though we Americans have gotten rid of Saddam and supposedly allowed for the establishment of a freer society in Iraq, I don’t know whether we are ready to defend all elements of that freer society equally.

And so I wondered whether the U.S. army has interested itself in this issue at all up to this time or if their presence has inadvertently acted as a mild disincentive to violence? What is going to happen to men and women that push the limits of Iraqi sexual sensibilities when the U.S. army pulls out for good? Frankly, I doubt that the U.S. army gives much concern to the welfare of gays outside the Green Zone, yet I feel like the situation is likely to worsen when they are gone. It seems like the Iraqi police are already acting very nonchalant about these murders, denying the extent of the problem and the role of religious leaders in stirring up hate. Even if they wish that people would not break the law against murder, they do not show any sympathy for the victim in this article. In fact, they are put into the same categories as beggars, liars, and thieves. Furthermore, the families of the victims seem disinterested in cooperating with any investigations or even claiming the body. All this is sort of a perfect storm already for wiping out the openly gay community. And I feel that if the general rate of violence rises after the withdrawal of American troops, then between the general atmosphere of insecurity and the fact that hate crimes are likely to get totally lost in the shuffle, the gay subculture will be forced back underground or into the closet. And thus all of our fighting for a “freer” society in Iraq will have been totally meaningless for these people.

US Weapons on the Iraqi Black Market

I found this article while perusing various websites and found it quite interesting. The article is from June 2008, making it somewhat dated but I still think it is relevant. The Bush administration accused Iran of supplying the majority of the Shiite militia rocket propelled grenade launchers in Iraq. Well, it turns out that a US government study found that the vast majority of the RPGs confiscated came from one of two sources: US-purchased weapons intended for Iraqi security forces (which were then sold on the black market) and Saddam Hussein's old stockpiles of weapons (which were not properly secured when the US took over Iraq). Other RPGs, the RPG-29 (an anti-taken launcher) manufactured in Russia, came in through Syria (as these same weapons were used by Hezbollah against Israel, based on media reports from Israel and Lebanon). Look at all the other countries involved in this mess! These weapons cross the Iraqi border, aside from the one's looted within Iraq. The smuggling operation over the desert must be extensive.

More interesting (and related to the topic of black markets) is this quote: "Malcolm Nance, an Arabic-speaking 20-year veteran of military and civilian U.S. intelligence, recalls being offered more than 20 RPG-7 rocket launchers and dozens of RPG rounds in a single trip to an arms bazaar in Sadr City in September 2003. According to Nance, RPG-7s were also on sale in black markets at another location in Baghdad and in at least seven other Iraqi cities... the Iraqi RPG-7s were "so ubiquitous" that they were selling for a mere $50 each for the launcher and $5 each for an RPG missile." Related to Grace's post, the prevelance of these weapons (and these markets) is quite astonishing. The black markets, while internal to Iraq, invoke a host of other countries (including the US). And their effects certainly go beyond Iraq and the US but involve the rest of the volatile region including Iran and Syria.

Black Market Weapons in Iraq

I found this article about black market weapons in Iraq, published in 2006. It outlines how members of the Iraqi Army and police are selling their US issued weapons on the black market, where prices have been rising steadily. According to the article, one could easily buy a Glock or Kalashnikov in the back of grocery stores or in the back of a car trunk. 

It seems like the black market for weapons in Iraq is not very hidden or secretive. The article states that these weapons are "semi-hidden" in market places. If the practice is well known, and there is evidence that these weapons are coming from the US, through the Iraqi Army and police, why isn't the US halting its practice of supplying Iraqi security with weapons?

Obviously, an abundance of weapons in the hands of Iraqi civilians is not beneficial to the US, or the Iraqis. If it is as clear as it seems in the article, it is almost as if the US is arming Iraqi civilians. While tighter restrictions on weapon sales may help ebb the black market weapons wave, it appears that the most prudent solution would be for the US to stop supplying the Iraqi Army with weapons. While many of the weapons could have been stolen from fallen soldiers after raids, the article mentions that many of the guns were unused. This indicated that Iraqi military could have immediately turned their weapons into the market. If it is clear the American-supplied weapons are found in large quantities in the black market, why is the US continuing to supply them? Because this article is three years old, it is possible that the US has changed their practice. But if it hasn't, what factors would compel them to continue to supply guns to the Iraqi army and police? 

Prostitution in Iraq

Article #1: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1883696,00.html?iid=tsmodule

Article #2: http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/06/24/prostitutes/index.html

The first article describes how increasingly more women/girls entered prostitution following the break down of Saddam Hussein's regime. Few statistics about these girls are known because it is a socially taboo subject. There is also an ongoing controversy about the role sex traffickers play in the region: one Iraqi ex-politician, when asked about trafficking, believed that girls (for the most part) chose to engage in the activity. Yanar Mohammed, who heads the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, fervently disagrees.

The second article focuses more on the tragedy that women must turn to prostitution for survival. Regarding trafficking, the article states: "according to the report (U.S. State Department's 2005 "Trafficking in Persons Report), "There have been some reports that indicate Iraqi women may be subjected to sexual exploitation in prostitution in Syria at the hands of Iraqi criminal networks, but those reports have not been confirmed."

To contrast the ambivalence of the report's statement, Article #1 featured a lady with a first hand account of the activity. At this point, I began to feel that the issue of sex trafficking in Iraq was curiously suppressed. There is no doubt of some trafficking activity going on, but the Iraqi government has not yet prosecuted any traffickers since it has gotten into power (at the time of Article #1, Mar. 2009).

It is agreed that prostitution is an issue within the region. However, involuntary prostitution seems to be a hush-hush topic. There is no doubt of its occurrence: mothers are selling unwilling daughters to brothels; the first article reported a story about a girl who was married to a man, who promptly divorced her and gave her to a prostitution ring. I wondered if the reason for it being a hush-hush topic is the lack of information. I wondered if part of the in-action may be due to pride; perhaps it is less weight on a conscience to blame a girl for her individual "choice" than acknowledging that more individuals, besides the girl, were involved. I wouldn't know; these are speculations.

Selling cellphone numbers...illegally?

A Saudi telecommunications company shut down over 300,000 cellphone chips, due to their being sold on the internet at inflated prices. The people who sell the numbers will buy sometimes over 50 phone subscriptions, and then list them on the internet for a higher price. The problem is that these are prepaid subscriptions, so once a person buys a phone, he/she doesn't have to pay a bill each month, allowing for the black market in cellphones.

What's interesting about the repackaged sale of cellphones is that it shows just how sophisticated Saudi Arabia is technologically. Often, we think of prostitution and drugs coming from the country, but not much else. The use of the internet to sell cellphones shows that Saudis have access to many of the same, if not all the same, technologies as we are privy to. What's interesting is that the article doesn't speak of the government taking any action to rout out these kinds of crimes, but rather mentions the actions taken by the company to deal with the problem. It seems that there is very little regulation of any markets, especially the technology sector. It would be interesting to see the extent to which the government controls online activities as well.

I really enjoyed this brief article, in that it demonstrates how the Saudi black markets are adjusting and adapting with the times.