[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 17188-17189]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      PLANNED WITHDRAWAL FROM IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate my colleague from 
California (Ms. Woolsey) on the 100th occasion of speaking on this very 
important subject.
  The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) has maintained a 
drumbeat of truth on one of the most important issues, probably the 
most important issue, facing our Nation. It is a most important moral 
issue. It is the most important political issue also. It is moral 
because human life is sacred, and too many souls have already been 
destroyed in this war on both sides, on all sides.
  The insurgent fanatics who seem to be growing unlimited are not 
really that powerful. Insurgent fanatics do not have the support of the 
majority of the people. A clearly articulated plan for withdrawal will 
drastically decrease the clusters of support that the fanatic killers 
have. If people could see the movement towards some progress in 
resolving this problem, they would abandon the fanatics at a faster 
rate.
  Let us propose a plan. And I do not disagree with any of the plans 
and proposals that have been made by my colleague, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey) in her 100 presentations, or plans that have 
been made by my other colleagues. I think that we have enough 
brainpower in America with our think tanks and our various academic 
circles, et cetera, to come up with a plan which really can work.
  I want to just add that in that plan should be some more open 
discussion

[[Page 17189]]

and honest discussion of oil, the oil wealth of Iraq. Too little is 
being said about the oil wealth of Iraq and what is going to happen to 
the oil wealth of Iraq. The people of Iraq, the different factions, I 
think, would begin to react differently if they heard from America a 
clear statement of how we propose to fairly divide the oil wealth of 
Iraq.

                              {time}  2015

  First, they will want to hear that we are not going to take a 
disproportionate amount in investment returns and technical assistance 
fees, et cetera. That is the first thing they want to hear. But the 
biggest things for the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shiites is how will 
the oil well be divided as they draw boundaries for sectors or 
provinces or states or whatever they are going to do in their 
constitution to divide up the nation.
  I think we ought to put on the table, tell the Sunnis, the Kurds, and 
the Shiites that the oil wells will be fairly shared by all revenue 
benefits being assigned on a per capita basis, regardless of ethnicity 
or geographic location; that the revenue, the profits, are going to be 
divided equally on a per capita basis. So if one area of the country 
occupied by the Kurds has a certain population, they will get according 
to the population their share of the oil no matter where the wells are 
located. No matter where the oil wells are located, those who live in 
Baghdad, whether Shiite or Sunnis, their particular sector would get a 
share of the oil revenues also.
  I think it is also important because it is necessary to draw some 
boundaries in this constitutional process, and they will be drawing 
boundaries. Whether by state or by provinces or whatever, there are 
going to be boundaries; and there is a need to have some kind of 
understanding that concentrations of ethnic groups or concentrations of 
religious affiliations need to be respected. So there will be a 
necessity to draw some sectors that have a majority of Sunnis, 
necessity to draw boundaries which have a majority of Shiites, et 
cetera with the Kurds.
  This nation was held together, I think, partially due to the 
principle that it was divided up into states so that many different 
kinds of personalities and groups could express themselves through a 
state process when the states were more independent and the national 
government was less of an entity. I think the same process would hold 
in the case of Iraq. We should have a chance for groups to express 
themselves for local decision-making to be maximized in those areas, in 
those sectors.
  But, overall, they should understand they are not going to be starved 
for revenue, that the riches underneath the Earth in Iraq are going to 
be available to every group no matter where they are located.
  I think it is up to us to have that kind of honest discussion. There 
is too little talk about exactly what we are going to do about the oil 
in Iraq, and too many whispers and too many rumors about our having 
some kind of hidden agenda that is not to the benefit of Iraq. Let us 
tell the people of Iraq what we are going to do with the oil.

                          ____________________