Rockefeller Internationalist - Emanuel Josephson

Rockefeller 'Crusades' —
The 'Oil War'

"What an opportunity! What a privilege! What a duty!"
—John D. Rockefeller Jr.
The Christian Church, What of Its Future?

The twentieth century, to date, has been a continuous era of intensive war between the rival Rockefeller Standard Oil and the British oil interests. This war has only focused public attention at intervals. But periodically, it erupts into physical warfare in the battlefield; and it has twice involved the entire world in wars in the past half century,—World Wars I and II , with World War III in the making.

The Rockefeller Empire does not engage in the wars directly. It merely engineers, plans and plots the wars and then tricks and inveigles nations, or other groups, to fight as its pawns and mercenaries. Invariably these wars prove fabulously profitable to the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests. For they regularly supply oil and other material of war to all the belligerents indiscriminately; and modern war requires much oil. Among the nations that have been impressed as mercenaries in the wars of the Rockefeller Empire are Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Zionist Palestine, China, Korea, Canada, Bolivia, Mexico, Soviet Russia and many others. Outstanding mercenary of the Rockefeller Empire, and highly useful and profitable to it, has been the United States and its "peasants".

John D. Rockefeller Jr. has undertaken to represent these wars as Crusades in his address delivered on January 31, 1945 at a dinner given by the Protestant Council of the City of New York, entitled The Christian Church, What of Its Future?, in the following words:

"Not many weeks or months had elapsed after this World War began before there was presented to our vision a picture so horrible it hardly seemed that it could be true.

"It appeared that hell had broken loose and that millions of evil spirits had become incarnate in human form and were going about the earth committing atrocities and acts of cruelty beyond belief.

"But there is another picture which the war has painted. In it we see millions of men and women who are exemplifying in their daily lives, in the commonplace fashion, unselfishness, generosity, loyalty, self-sacrifice and other characteristics and qualities which command the admiration of the world. Unconsciously these people are reflecting Christ's spirit. Whether they know it or not, their inspiration comes from the God of all good deeds."

He stated further:

"What I have said thus far is the substance of an address which I made during the first World War."

In short, those who fought, shed their blood and lost their lives for his oil in the World Wars were "Crusaders" serving in a Christ-like manner in the "Church of the Living God," Rockefeller. "What an opportunity! What a privilege! What a duty!" said John D. Rockefeller Jr. Millions of dead and tens of millions of mutilated and maimed would have been glad to have been spared the "opportunity . . . privilege . . . duty" offered them by pious hypocrisy.

The process whereby the U.S. government, and more especially the State Department, was converted into a minor bureau of the Rockefeller Empire at the very beginning of the century, was cunning, crafty and unscrupulous play on public gullibility and pristine American patriotism. This has become its systematic practise. Rockefeller publicity men, supported by prostituted "scientists" and "educators", represented to the public through all avenues of publicity, that the U.S. supply of oil faced imminent exhaustion. They pointed to the heavy and steadily rising export of petroleum products since the 1860's (for even in the midst of the Civil War the slogan of the Standard Oil principals was the same as it is now in the course of modern wars: "Business as usual").

They alleged then, as they have repeatedly since, that the oil reserves of the nation would not suffice for a decade more at the current rate of use. How false, absurd and designing these representations were, is apparent from the fact that after each of those "predictions" our rate of production and our acknowledged reserves of oil rose by leaps and bounds.

On the basis of these deliberately and designedly false "predictions", their oil "experts", supported by the Standard Oil Co. and allied interests, have insisted that our country must seek to gain control of foreign oil-fields,—naturally, "in our national interest". These "predictions" served as an excuse for the corrupt political officials, agents of the Rockefeller-Standard Oil group to openly turn over to it control of our government, and more particularly of the State Department and of the nation's international policies. Since 1900, every President, with the possible exception of Theodore Roosevelt, who was subservient to the rival Morgan interests, and every Secretary of State of the U.S., has been openly an agent and spokesman for the Rockefeller Empire.

The subservience of the U.S. Government to the Rockefeller and allied interests, and especially of the State Department, since the turn of the century, was acknowledged in the Federal Trade Commission Report On Foreign Ownership In The Petroleum Industry, 1923 and was clearly stated in the instructions sent out by the State Department to its consuls and agents on August 16, 1919, reading as follows:

"Gentlemen: The vital importance of securing adequate supplies of mineral oil both for the present and future needs of the United States has been forcibly brought to the attention of the Department. The development of proven fields and the exploration of new areas is being aggressively conducted in many parts of the world by nationals of various countries, and concessions for mineral rights are being actively sought. It is desired to have the most complete and recent information regarding such activities either by United States citizens or by others.

"You are accordingly instructed to obtain and forward promptly from time to time information regarding mineral oil concessions either proposed or granted, sale or transfer of such concessions, change of ownership of oil property or important changes in ownership of corporate companies concerned with oil production or distribution. Information regarding development of new oil fields or increased output of producing areas should also be forwarded. Comprehensive data are desired and reports should not be limited to points specifically mentioned above, but should include information regarding all matters of interest affecting the mineral oil industry which may arise from time to time.

"You are instructed to lend all legitimate aid to reliable and responsible United States citizens or interests which are seeking mineral oil concessions or rights. Care should be taken, however, to distinguish between United States citizens representing United States capital and United States citizens representing foreign capital; also between corporations incorporated in the United States and actually controlled by United States capital and those companies which are merely incorporated under United States laws but dominated by foreign capital."

Not infrequently in the course of the diplomatic exchanges in the "Oil War" the Rockefeller domination of the State Department found open expression. Thus U.S. Ambassador to Britain, Walter Hines Page, an associate of the Rockefellers, as are most of our envoys to St. James, reported the following exchange between Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan and Sir William Tyrell, the special envoy of the British Foreign Office:

"The Foreign Office has simply handed its Mexican policy over to the oil barons for predatory purposes', Bryan charged in his talk with Tyrrell.

"Mr. Secretary' Sir William replied, 'you are talking just like a Standard Oil man . . . you are pursuing the policy which they have decided on.'" (Hendrickson, The Life & Letters of Walter Page)

The State Department has served the Rockefeller Standard Oil interest with complete and undivided loyalty and without regard to the interests of the United States and its citizenry, during the past half century. It can be said with absolute assurance that whatever occurs in the State Department does so at the behest of the Rockefeller interests. Thus if the State Department is filled with Communists and fellow travelers, one can be certain they are there because the Rockefeller interests want them there; if records are removed from State Department files in volume, the same conclusion can be drawn. This was especially true during the past decade, because the Rockefellers are directly represented in the State Department in the person of Nelson Rockefeller, as well as indirectly, through their agents.

The British were not slow to recognize the importance of oil, in the imperial game. For this realization they did not require Clemenceau's plea to President Wilson, when in 1917 Great Britain came close to an oil shortage, when he wrote:

"A failure in petroleum supply would cause the immediate paralysis of our armies and might compel us to a peace unfavorable to the allies. Now the minimum supply of petroleum computed for the French armies by their Commander-in-Chief must be 44,000 tons, and the monthly consumption is 35,000 tons. This indispensable stock has fallen today to 28,000 tons and threatens to fall almost to nothing if immediate and exceptional measures are not undertaken and carried out by the United States. These measures must be taken without a day's delay for the common safety of the Allies, the essential condition being that President Wilson shall obtain permanently from the American oil companies tankers with supplementary tonnage of 10,000 tons . . . If the Allies do not wish to lose the war, . . . they must not let France lack the petroleum that is as necessary as blood in the battles of tomorrow."

Nor did they need the assurance of Lord Curzon that "the allies floated to victory on waves of oil", American oil provided to both the Allies and to their enemies indiscriminately by Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co.

As early as 1882 Admiral Lord Fisher had sought to impress upon the British government the importance of oil as a fuel for the British Navy and merchant marine. He constantly reiterated the statements:

"The use of oil adds 50 percent to the value of any fleet that uses it."

"The use of oil fuel would increase the strength of the British Navy 33 percent, because it can refuel off the enemy's harbours. Coal necessitates about one third of the fleet being absent refueling at a base . . . With two similar dreadnoughts, oil gives three knots more speed, and speed is everything.

"Oil for steamraising reduces the engine and boiler-room personnel over 60 percent. At any moment during refueling the oil-engine ship can fight—the coal-burning ship cannot . . . Oil does not deteriorate by keeping. Coal does . . . It is criminal folly to allow another pound of coal on board a fighting ship." (Davenport & Cooke, The Oil Trusts And Anglo-American Relations)

The action of the British Government in the matter of acquiring oil reserves contrasts sharply with that taken by the U.S. Reflecting British cupidity and acquisitiveness, traits that they erroneously attribute to the Scotch, they held undeveloped the oil resources of their own Empire, and with dog-in-the-manger attitude refused to develop them and refused to permit others to develop them, and sought to acquire the oil reserves of other lands. Reflecting a higher level of official ethics, instead of using the wealth of the nation to roll up tremendous holdings for private groups, such as the Rockefeller Empire, the British Government entered into the oil business as an agent of the citizens whose wealth was being used for their theoretical advantage. It took actual partnerships in various oil enterprises, including Royal Dutch-Shell and Anglo Persian, which amounted to control. British Controlled Oil-fields Ltd. is entirely owned by the British Government. They erred gravely in permitting their cupidity to bring them into direct conflict with the Rockefeller Empire, and in dissipating the wealth that they gained from their lucrative oil ventures in Rockefeller fostered, Bismarxian "social service" activities. They were badly tripped up by the Rockefeller "philanthropies" and betrayed themselves into the hands of their mortal adversary, with whom they entered into direct and bitter conflict.

The battle with the Rockefeller Empire was generaled on the British side by Sir Henri W. A. Deterding of the Royal Dutch Co., who was popularly known as the oil "Napoleon". Rockefeller was nicknamed "Oil King". Deterding rescued the Royal Dutch Co. from bankruptcy in a fierce price war with Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co. in the export field, by inducing the Paris Rothschilds to make a loan to his company in 1898, in return for a minority interest. The price war was continued until 1902, with the new financing and with the aid of the Shell Transport and Trading Co. and the heavy Russian oil production of the Nobel-Rothschild interests. This eventually led to a merger of the Royal Dutch and Shell interests in 1907.

Lord Fisher joined forces with Deterding, and the two enlisted E. G. Pretyman, Civil Lord of the Admiralty, and later, Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty, in effecting the entry and later expansion of the British government in the oil business. Churchill reported to the House of Commons in 1913:

"Our ultimate policy is that the Admiralty should become independent owner and producer of its own supplies of liquid fuel, first by building up an oil reserve in this country sufficient to make us safe in war and able to override price fluctuations in peace; secondly, by acquiring the power to deal in crude oils as they come cheaply into the market . . . The third aspect of our ultimate policy is that we must become the owners, or at any rate, the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the supply of natural oil which we require."

The Oil War was waged in every part of the world where oil-fields were known to exist or were suspected.

The Mexican war was the first shift in the 20th century of the Oil War to the battlefield, in which the United States Armed Forces were drafted into fighting an oily Rockefeller Crusade. The British had carried their assault on the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests into home territory, the Western Hemisphere. Lord Cowdray's Mexican Eagle Co. had acquired more than half of the oil production of Mexico by 1910, in competition with the Doheny and Standard Oil interests. Diaz, dictator of Mexico for thirty five years, was overthrown because he supported the British by a revolution financed by the Standard Oil interests (Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearings 1913, Revolutions in Mexico).

Madero, who had sold his lands in Mexico to Rockefeller in February, 1912, staged the revolution. Oil concessions for the Standard Oil Co. were part of the deal. Two years later Madero was ousted by a revolution led by General Huerta, who was financed by British money. President Woodrow Wilson rose to the support of his masters, the Rockefeller interests, and refused to recognize the Huerta regime. The Rockefeller dominated State Department openly issued orders for the ousting of Huerta and even threatened war. (We Fight For Oil, p. 50) Sir William Tyrell and Secretary of State Bryan accused each other of acting respectively for the Royal Dutch and the Standard Oil Co.

The Wilson administration openly fostered revolution against Huerta by facilitating exportation of arms and munitions for the rebels Carranza and Villa, while a financial and munitions blockade was established against the government. Panama tolls were used as a device for exerting political pressure on the British to force them to abandon Huerta. Vera Cruz was occupied by the U.S. Army and Navy. Every conceivable device was brought to bear by the Wilson regime to secure and protect the control of Mexican oil for the Standard Oil interests. Finally Huerta was ousted and replaced by Carranza.

The breaking of the hold of the British interests in the Mexican oil-fields was solved by the expropriation of all of the companies, that at the same time solved the problem of the glutting of the oil market with Mexican oil. Josephus Daniels and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as Secretary of the Navy and Assistant Secretary, played a role in engineering this arrangement. Several decades later, the Rockefeller interests recovered the Mexican concessions which they desired by a decision of the Mexican Supreme Court that was influenced by the funds of the Committee for Coordination of Hemispheric Defense administered by Nelson Rockefeller. In the meantime the Rockefeller interests received the bulk of the $28,000,000 paid by the Mexican government for the expropriated properties.

In the Near East at the turn of the century there was laid the foundation of one of the most fateful phases of both World Wars, by William K. D'Arcy, an Australian, and American Admiral Colby M. Chester. D'Arcy obtained from the Shah of Persia in 1901 a concession for all but the northern section of Persia. He promptly organized the Anglo-Persian (later the Anglo Iranian) Oil Co. with British capital for the exploitation of the concession. The controlling interest in Anglo Iranian Oil Co. was purchased for the British Government, after D'Arcy had arranged to sell it to foreign interests, in order to prevent loss of control by the British. The control was openly sold to the British Government several years later.

Admiral Chester unsuccessfully sought to gain control of the Turkish oil-fields. Sultan Abdul Hamid first gave the oil concession to the Germans together with one for the Anatolian Railway Co.; and then reversed himself and offered to give the concession to D'Arcy's Anglo Persian Co. Before the Sultan could grant the concession, "liberal" forces were well financed from abroad to revolt against the Sultan and depose him. This gave the American Standard Oil interests another chance to bid for the concession. This time Chester got it, in return for the financing of the revolution. But before he could develop the fields, the British Government blocked the ratification of the deal by forcing the Turkish to recognize the concessions which Sultan Abdul Hamid had given to the German interests. The German concession had been taken over by the Turkish Petroleum Co. which was 75 percent controlled by the British Government through the Royal Dutch Shell group and the Anglo-Persian Co. The Germans had been outmaneuvered by the British and retained only 25 percent of their concession when the deal was consummated in the early part of 1914.

The Rockefeller interests had been completely shut out and defeated. But they did not take their defeat lying down. They fanned German resentment at being outmaneuvered by the British and given the short end of the deal. They aided and abetted the German plan to seize control of the entire Turkish concession through the device of construction of the Berlin to Bagdad railroad. The Germans were so confident of the success of this "Drang nach Osten" that they opened the terminus in Bagdad before the road was built.

In anticipation of the war which they were instigating in order to seize victory from defeat in the battle for Turkish oil, the Rockefeller Oil interests made a deal with the German Government, under which their holdings in Germany were taken over by the Reich with full compensation. The deal was made to appear in press reports as an act of confiscation. The same sort of deal was consummated by the same principals before World War II, as a sort of established practice between them, and constituted the basis of a charge of treason, made against Standard Oil by Sen. Harry S. Truman.

The Germans were materially aided in their waging of World War I by the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests. They supplied the Germans with the oil required for the conduct of the war and enabled them to come within reach of victory. But trusting neither of their rivals, the Rockefeller interests aimed at "balance of power" by playing the Germans against the British. The plan was to let them fight until they had exhausted each other and then step in and "rescue" the weaker of the two for a price, using the Rockefeller Empire's satellite, the U.S., for the purpose. The price was Saudi Arabian oil and other concessions for the Rockefeller interests.

The manner in which the U.S. was forced into the War was a masterpiece of craftiness, cunning and deceit, that would do credit to "Doc" William Rockefeller's best moments. Ludwell Denny points out in his We Fight For Oil:

"Standard met Dutch-Shell expansion in the United States by stirring up the Washington Government and by loosing the 'British Peril' propaganda . ..

"The situation was reaching a critical point in 1917. But the United States entered the Great War. On Washington's orders anti-British propaganda was suddenly turned into pro-British propaganda . . . There followed an Anglo-American oil truce, with Yankee wells and tankers furnishing 80 percent of the 'blood of battle which won the war'."

Behind this change of front in policy and propaganda was a deal for the surrender by the British of a share in the Near East and other oil-fields, particularly Saudi Arabia, to the Rockefeller interests in return for their drafting the United States into the war to fight and pay for it. President Woodrow Wilson was a slavish puppet of the Rockefeller-Ryan-Brady clique, and an intimate and agent of Rockefeller's in-law munition king, Cleveland H. Dodge, and was dependent on their pin-money bribes. (Strange Death Of F. D. Roosevelt, Lundberg, America's 60 Families) His campaign for reelection at this time, 1916, had as its principal platform the slogan "Keep the U.S. out of the war".

As in the case of Roosevelt twenty-three years later Woodrow Wilson and his bosses already had made the deal with England to enter the war as an ally. Then within a short time after he was reelected by the duped electorate, their propaganda was changed to a martial note, and the U.S. was drafted by them into another, oily Rockefeller Crusade, that was palmed off on the "peasantry" as the "War To Save Democracy". Rockefeller's acquisition of the Saudi Arabian concession cost the U.S. 333,734 dead and injured and more than fifty billion dollars.

Stewart Alsop in his Saturday Evening Post article, dated July 14, 1951, entitled "Stalin's Plans for the U.S.A." quotes the former Secretary General of the Czech Foreign Office, in the Communized Gottwald regime, as follows:

"Heidrick sensed that Stalin believed deeply that the American Government was not really master in its own house . .. partly . . . because of the ease with which American opinion could be manipulated."

None should know this better than Stalin and the Politburo, who have dealt with the Rockefeller Empire so long and served it so well.

The very planting in Russia of Communism, in the midst of World War I, through the German General Staff as agents of the German associates of the Rockefeller Empire, was a signal service to the latter. For it broke the stranglehold of Royal Dutch, Nobel-Rothschild and other interests on the Russian oil-fields and cut off the dangerous flow of cheap oil from that source. It opened the way for possible acquisition of those fields by the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests.

At the conclusion of World War I, the British with the aid of Denikin and the White Russians, seized the Russian oil-fields in the Caucasus and sought to set up independent republics in Georgia and Azerbaijhan, (which were immediately given recognition by the Allied Supreme Council), that would give them control of Baku oil-field and the Batum-Baku pipeline. But the State Department refused them recognition. As Ludwell Denny reports, in We Fight For Oil:

"The American attitude is easily explained by the fear of the Standard Oil that the two British vassals in the Caucasus would close the door to the Rockefeller firm. . ."

The French newspapers wrote of these projected republics as the "Oil State", and suggested that they operate under the aegis of the League of Nations.

The Rockefeller Foundation-subsidized Labor Party in England served the Rockefeller Empire well by raising an insistent demand for the withdrawal of British troops from the Caucasus, and prepared the way for its recapture by the Communists.

At the Genoa and Hague Conferences the Rockefeller interests demonstrated their mastery of the technique of the "balance of power" and the extent of their control among the world powers. They sought primarily to prevent their rivals regaining control of the Russian oil-fields. They did this by forcing a united stand of the conferring nations against Russia and for denationalizing the oil-fields of Russia. They were served faithfully by the State Department, with the help of France and of Belgium which were pawns in the game. In the meantime, behind the backs of the conferees, the Rockefeller interests sought to make deals with Russia for monopolistic control of its oil, while berating their competitors the Royal Dutch Shell interests, for doing the same.

In the end the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests won out with a deal described in detail in the chapter on the Rockefeller Soviet Axis which gave them a large measure of control, or influence, over Russia and her oil-fields. These deals protected their valuable concessions in Saudi Arabia at the cost of the security of the United States and the rest of the world.

In the meantime, the Rockefeller interests also were instrumental in obtaining the use of U.S. military forces in blocking the invasion of Russia and the taking over of the Trans-Siberian railway by the Japs. They smashed Harry F. Sinclair and his associates, in the Teapot Dome affair, after he had secured concessions which they sought in Russia and in the Russian sphere of influence in North Persia.

The British learned nothing from their experience and jeopardy in World War I. No sooner was it over than they started once again to wage a more intensive commercial oil war on the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and to offer them strenuous competition and opposition in the quest for world monopoly of oil. Despite the fact that World War I had been fought and won largely with oil provided by the Rockefeller interests from American oil-fields, Sir Edward Mackay Edgar, Trustee of BCO who represented Great Britain, stupidly boasted in an article in Sperling's Journal, September 1919:

"The British position is impregnable. All known oil fields, all the likely or probable oil fields, outside of the United States itself, are in British hands or under British management or control, or financed by British capital".

Treacherously the British undertook to block the Rockefeller interests from developing the Saudi Arabian and other Near Eastern concessions that had been surrendered to them as the price of the entry of the U.S. into the war, the objective of the British-French San Remo agreement for monopoly of the Turkish and Near East oil-fields.

The significance of the oil war was pointed up by the Federal Trade Commission Report On Ownership in the Petroleum Industry of 1928. The findings were summarized as follows:

"1. The Royal Dutch-Shell group, a combination of the Royal Dutch Co. and the Shell Transport and Trading Co. of London has world-wide oil investments, including numerous refineries, an immense fleet of tank ships, and petroleum production in many lands, which in 1921, was less than 11 percent of the world output.

"2. The Royal Dutch Shell group in February 1922 consummated a merger of the principal properties and investments of the Union Oil Co. (Del.) with its chief American subsidiaries in a new company, the Shell Union Oil Corp.

"3. The Shell Union Oil Corp. now controls over 240,000 acres of oil lands in the United States; has about 3.5 per cent of the total of crude petroleum; owns extensive properties in refineries, pipelines, tank-cars, and marketing equipment; and is one of the larger companies in the domestic petroleum industry.

"4. The Union Oil Co. (Del.) owned about 26 per cent of the stock of the Union Oil Co. of California, but, to prevent the Royal Dutch Shell group from gaining control, certain stockholders of the Union of California organized an American controlled holding company, which now owns more than half of its issued stock.

"5. The most important instances of discrimination by foreign governments against citizens of this country are the exclusive policies of the Governments of Great Britain and the Netherlands in respect to the oil fields of India and the Dutch East Indies, and the San Remo Agreement of Great Britain and France covering the undeveloped oil fields of Mesopotamia and of the British and French colonies.

"6. Denial of reciprocity of treatment to citizens of this country appears to exist with respect to the petroleum industries of Australia, British Borneo, certain African colonies, British Honduras, British Guiana and Trinidad; France and French possessions; Italy, and the Netherlands and its dependencies.

"7. Thus forced to modify its historic policy. Congress in 1920 enacted a mineral leasing law for public lands which forbids the acquisition of properties by nationals of any foreign country that denies reciprocity to Americans, in consequence of which certain applications for petroleum leaseholds have been denied to the Royal Dutch-Shell group.

"What further efforts may be made by this combination to acquire privately-owned petroleum lands or competing oil companies it is of course impossible to predict, or how far anti-trust laws may be effective in preventing them.

"The supply of crude petroleum in this country is being rapidly depleted to meet the requirements of a growing domestic consumption and foreign trade. The sources of supply of the domestic industry are concentrated within its own borders and in Mexico, while those of its principal competitors are widely distributed throughout the world. It appears obvious that a nation having widely distributed supply and storage facilities and owning means of distribution will have certain advantages in world trade against one having concentrated supply."

At the very moment that the American doughboys were laying down their lives and the wealth of the people of the U.S. was being squandered for the salvation of the British Empire and the expansion of the Rockefeller Empire, the British were making preparations to wage a devastating commercial and military war on the U.S. and the Rockefeller Empire. The irony of the situation was intensified by the fact that the British were financing this Oil War with the money provided them by the U.S. at the expense of its taxpayers, and by American investors.

For the purpose of promoting this war the British organized in 1918 the Government owned British Controlled oil-fields Ltd. (BCO Ltd.) for the specific object of smashing Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co. In collaboration with the Royal Dutch and Shell group, BCO Ltd. undertook to gain control of the Central and South American lands bordering the U.S. to the south and surrounding the Panama Canal, which it was openly suggested could then be seized in a British-American war with or without the help of Japan. M. Pierre l'Espagnol de la Tramcrye in his book World Struggle For Oil, published in 1923, under the chapter heading "An American Balkanism", described the objectives of the British, as follows:

"The Anglo-Persian Oil is no longer sufficient for Great Britain, which founded a new company in 1918, the 'British Controlled Oil-fields', specially commissioned to fight the Standard Oil . . . Like the Anglo-Persian, it is entirely in the hands of the British Government under a system of the Voting Trust. It seems that an immense tract of oil bearing territory exists from Mexico to Argentine . . .

"Of these deposits the BCO Ltd. wishes to gain possession on behalf of the British Government, thus completing the work of the Royal Dutch-Shell in Venezuela and in the neighborhood of the Panama Canal. Its concessions actually surround two-thirds of the Caribbean Sea: they are situated in the States of Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, British Guiana, Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador and the Island of Trinidad. The concessions of the BCO are nearly always on the sea coast—or rather in close proximity to the sea—which is a considerable advantage. It has expressly chosen them, on both the Atlantic and Pacific, as a precaution in case war should break out between Great Britain and the United States; for even with the help of the Japanese fleet, the British navy might not be able to seize the Panama Canal. All its units must be in a position to replenish their stores of fuel without being obliged to make the long detour round the Magellan Straits . . .

"In order to obtain Costa Rican concessions, Great Britain did not hesitate to foment revolution in this little Republic. Unable to obtain anything from the established Government, it helped to place in power the revolutionary Pres. Tinoco, from whom it got what it wanted; more than 60,000 square miles were granted to BCO. Unfortunately Tinoco has been overthrown; the regular Government restored to power, hastened to annul these concessions. Great Britain, to compel it to ratify these concessions stirred up a war between Costa Rica and Panama, while she sent the cruiser Cambrian to the coast of Costa Rica in order to increase the pressure. Events went against her. Costa Rican troops invaded Panama.

"A landing took place on February 28, 1921, on the Pacific Coast, south of the Dulce Gulf, the eastern shore of which is common to both countries, and another less important one on the Atlantic towards Bocas de la Toro. Panama lost the territory of Coto. Mr. Alves, chairman of the BCO, set out in March 1921 for Costa Rica, to study the question at issue. But the United States stepped in; and Judge White, as arbitrator, pronounced in favor of Costa Rica. On August 26, 1921, an American naval detachment assisted the Costa Rican forces to take definite possession of the contested territory, in spite of the indignant protests of the Government of Panama against the violent measures of which it was a victim. The imbroglio of British and American affairs around the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea (BCO, Mexican Eagle, Royal Dutch-Shell, Mexican Petroleum, Standard Oil) makes this region the Balkans of the oil world."

BCO, Anglo Persian and Royal Dutch and Shell companies obtained concessions throughout Latin America. Sir Edward Mackay Edgar exulted in his article in Sperling's Journal, in 1919:

"I should say that two-thirds of the improved fields of Central and South America are in British hands. In Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador, a decisive and really overwhelming majority of the petroleum concessions are held by British subjects. The Alves group (BCO) whose holdings encircle practically two-thirds of the Caribbean Sea, is wholly British, working under an arrangement which insures that perpetual control of its undertakings shall remain in British hands. No American citizen and no American group has acquired, or even could acquire any such position in Central America as that which enterprise and personality have acquired for Mr. Alves . . . Unfortunately for them —and fortunately for us—their eyes have been opened too late."

Sir Edward's crowings proved absurdly premature. The State Department, ever ready to defend the Rockefeller interests, rose nobly to their defenses. Fortunately for the U.S. its interests and defense happened to coincide with those of the Rockefeller Empire. By diplomatic pressure, force and the happy accident of threatened insolvency of BCO Ltd., many of its important holdings were acquired by Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co., including the Costa Rican, through Doheny, and Colombian, directly. In the case of the Chaco, the grip of British interests was loosened or broken by a war in which the Paraguayan Government, financed by the British, openly charged that Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co. was financing Bolivia, a charge that was later given substance by an increase of Bolivian concessions to the Standard Oil Co. of more than two million acres, announced on July 13, 1934.

In the meantime the League of Nations and its mandates were set up as instruments of the Oil War. The primary consideration of the series of conferences held at Genoa, the Hague and elsewhere was oil reserves—of Russia, Turkey, Persia and all sections of the globe. Rockefeller's Standard Oil was devotedly represented by the State Department as well as by the Foreign Office of the Rockefeller Empire. When Great Britain undertook in its San Remo Agreement with France to set up a monopoly of Turkish and Near Eastern oil reserves through their Near East mandates and arrange for their "permanent British control", protests voiced by Bedford, its president, were insistently echoed by the State Department.

England was violently denounced on the floor of Senate with some open threats of retaliation, and even of war. When the Foreign Office, in reply to Standard Oil protests, replied that the U.S. was entitled to no voice in the disposition of the mandated areas and their resources, because of failure to join the League of Nations the State Department replied that the U.S. "should not be dissociated in the rights of peace from the usual consequences of association in war". The inconsistency of the State Department's "noble, Christain" pose and attitude of spurning all advantages of the victory for the U.S. other than the oil reserves sought by the Rockefeller Empire, elicited from the British the taunt of "hypocrites", which was wholely justified. As Davenport and Cooke wrote in their The Oil Trusts and Anglo-American Relations

"One observes that the high-sounding note of the principle of economic equality (the American 'principle' of the Open Door) has now sunk into the lower note of the principle of 'sharing the swag'. How the mighty have fallen! The United States had originally set a fine example by virtuously declining to take a mark of German reparations or a square mile of German colonies, but after four years was found making an exception to its self-denying ordinance in the case of oil in Mesopotamia".

The protests of the State Department on behalf of the Rockefeller interests were effective. Through Sir John Cadman, negotiator of the San Remo Agreement and official of the Anglo-Persian Co., as envoy to Washington, and the Rockefeller Empire, a deal was made compromising the matter. Rockefeller's Standard Oil was given control of Palestine and the right to continue to explore it, subject to a mandate that was to be given to the British. This constitutes the background of the subsequent partition of Palestine and the ousting of British rule in favor of the Zionists, who might be expected to be more amenable than the British.

Despite this uneasy compromise, the Oil War continued more bitterly than ever. As Davenport and Cooke stated in their book, above quoted:

"For the betterment of Anglo-American relations the British Government fell to bribing Standard Oil: the bribes were to be paid in the oil of Persia and Mesopotamia . . . Did anyone suppose that Standard Oil could be silenced by sops from two of the world's oil fields as long as it did not control the rest?"

How well they understood the character of the Rockefellers and their Empire is borne out in the newspaper headlines of succeeding years:

  • 9/6/22 Englebert Graff announces that rivalry of money kings will cause a war; and that the Rockefeller interests control three Paris newspapers— Figaro, Matin and L'Eclair —for the purpose of warping public opinion on the Continent.
  • 9/2/23 World politics are oil politics says Premier Briand of France.
  • 3/5/24 See Standard Oil Co. dominating the world.
  • 8/2/24 Big oil drama involves world peace.
  • 9/7/24 World's future depends on oil.
  • 9/14/24 America smeared with oil in Near East.
  • 1/29/25 Tchitcherin says Standard Oil and Royal Dutch dominate world politics.
  • 2/26/29 France protests world Oil Trust.
  • 11/28/34 Secret war over oil.

Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co. steadily pressed its advantages in the Oil War in other sections of the globe than those from which it was barred by Great Britain. This is made clear from a perusal of newspaper headlines of the period. (France and the Rockefeller Empire: )

  • 5/20/20 U.S. protests to France for the Standard Oil Co.
  • 10/16/20 Standard Oil merges with French oil company to form a government monopoly. (Bedford Petroleum Co.)
  • 10/30/20 Standard Oil monopoly is disputed.
  • 4/5/21 Standard Oil Co. monopoly upheld.
  • 6/7/21 Standard Oil Co. spends six million francs to influence press. France served as catspaw of Rockefeller Empire at Genoa Conference:
  • 3/15/22 "Standard Oil interests are reported to be preparing to make a fight at Genoa to protect the company's old concessions, held in the name of Russian Standard Oil Co. and are seeking French assistance against their French rivals". (N.Y. Herald)
  • 5/6/22 Secretary of State Hughes assures Standard Oil Co. that United States would tolerate no agreement which would exclude it from Russian oil concessions. (N.Y. Herald)
  • 6/7/22 The press is full of oil to-day. (London Times)
  • 6/9/22 "As regards the Standard Oil Co., which wields great influence in the United States, it must be remembered that its acquisition of the oil rights of the Nobel Brothers in South Russia some time ago, gives it a distinct status in Russian oil negotiations. This status clearly lends point to the support given by the United States to the French and Belgian attitude in regard to private property in Russia .. ( London Times)
  • 5/11/51 Standard Oil interests stiffen opposition of French and Belgians to Rapallo Treaty . . . "consider the present moment of financial stringency of the Soviet government. . . favorable to enable them finally to arrive at some co-ownership of Russian petroleum deposits . . . Without this support from America, France, which furnishes the Pretorian guard for this Trust (Standard Oil Co.) would hardly dare oppose Great Britain in this manner." (Berlin Lokal Anzeiger)
  • 5/15/22 America intervened at Genoa in a sense hostile to the Soviets". . . . the plan proposed by (Ambassador) Child, with the support of Vanderlip and 'Observers' of the Standard Oil now at Genoa. . . represents the . . . basis on which it will participate in a commission to be set up at the Hague . . . " (London Daily Herald)

The story of the Ethiopian War is that of another oily Rockefeller Crusade. It began on July 1, 1923, when the press announced that the Anglo-American Oil Co. a Standard Oil subsidiary, had obtained an exclusive oil concession in the northern half of the Harrar Province of Abyssinia. Nothing more was heard of this concession for more than a decade despite the urgent need of the Rockefeller interests for a source of oil for the Mediterranean basin that was close at hand and did not require costly haulage by tankers, from the far-off Gulf and Venezuelan ports, or from East India. Behind the scenes there raged a fierce diplomatic battle. For Ethiopia holds the source of the Nile and was regarded by the British Empire as one of its critical spheres of influence. It vigorously opposed permitting its deadly rival, the Rockefeller Empire, to gain a foothold there. Under pressure of the British, Haile Selassie denied permission to the Rockefeller interests to proceed with the development of the concession that had been given them.

Following negotiations of Sir Francis Rickett, a director of Rockefeller's Socony Vacuum Oil Co., with Mussolini, in which it is apparent that the Rockefeller interests assured II Duce of supplies of oil for a war on Abyssinia in exchange for a thirty year monopoly of the Italian oil market and the ratification of their Ethiopian concessions, as well as other considerations, border incidents on December 9, 1934, between Italian and Ethiopian troops, in connection with a dispute over the Italian Somaliland frontier, served as a pretext for the waging by Italy of an undeclared war. In the midst of the war, on September 1, 1935, the press announced the text of an Ethiopian concession, negotiated by Sir Francis Rickett, to the African Exploration & Development Co., organized in 1933 as a subsidiary of the Socony Vacuum. The names of Mellon, Mitchell and Teagle were mentioned in connection with the deal, and in the following month, October 15, the press linked an Ethiopian arms order to the Rickett deal. This followed the traditional practise of the Rockefeller Empire, of playing all ends against center. Shortly thereafter the British, acting on behalf of the League of Nations offered Haile Selassie a negotiated peace for surrender to the Italians of the oil-rich Fafan Valley in the Harrar Province-the original 1923 concession to the Rockefeller interests. This was rejected on December 12, 1935.

In the meantime belated economic sanctions were ordered by the League of Nations to go into effect November 38, 1935, and continued until July 15, 1936, after termination of the war. The Rockefeller Empire, which had assured Mussolini in advance that no effective sanctions would be applied in respect to that absolute essential of modern war,—oil—made good on its assurance. On December 4, 1935, the press announced that the Rockefeller interests would defy the League and supply Mussolini with oil from the Roumanian fields; on December 12, Socony Vacuum announced the building of two refineries for Mussolini in Naples; and on January 8, 1936, it was announced that Italy might get oil from Germany. The Ethiopian oil-fields are now controlled by the Rockefeller interests through Sinclair Oil Corporation. The red that tints their end product, ethyl gasoline, might well be Italian and Ethiopian blood.