| The 2003 American-led invasion of Iraq has sustained international criticism within recent years both for its apparent unilateral approach and the ambiguous pretext on which it was launched. While countless accusations have been levelled against the Bush administration, many in the public and academic sphere have come to accept a common interpretation regarding America's presence in Iraq---that it was an attempt to hijack its rich oil reserves. The goal of this thesis is to debunk this popular claim and it arrives at four conclusions: First, Middle Eastern producers are inextricably bound to their oil industries, and the sale of oil, for their economic and social well-being. Second, America has never pursued an imperialist agenda with respect to oil. Third, any illusion that America invaded Iraq as a means to relish in the region's oil wealth is false. The cost of the invasion, the poor state of Iraq's oil industry and the subsequent structure of the oil industry---which progressed under US supervision---ensures that the US will be unable to turn a profit. Finally, America is a nation dangerously addicted to oil, and invading Iraq in order to facilitate a few oil contracts and deliver slightly more oil onto the international market is not a viable solution. |
