In the interpretation of the Western press, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which seized the north of Iraq, is nothing more than a horde of religious fanatics armed with the Qur'an and the Kalashnikovs. But those who observed the actions of these people in Syria, it is obvious that we are talking about a full-fledged private army consisting of mercenaries of different nationalities, subordinate to American, French and Saudi officers. Now this army has dismembered the territory of Iraq in such a way that it was more convenient to carry out its colonial exploitation.
If we assume that members of ISIS are just armed believers, then behind their actions there is no need to look for material interest. If we assume that we are talking about fighters who have covered themselves with religion to justify their criminal actions, then the situation will be interpreted differently.
Shedding crocodile tears over the thousands of victims of the next Iraqi massacre, the Western press is also worried about the impact of these events on the oil market. Indeed, in just a few days, the price per barrel rose to 115 dollars, that is, to the level of September 2013 of the year. This is supposedly the way the markets reacted to the battles around the Baïji refinery near Tikrit. But this plant provides only nearby areas with oil, which may very soon be without fuel and electricity. But the growth of world oil prices can not be attributed to interruptions in Iraqi production - only interruptions in delivery can affect them. However, there will be no long problems, and there will definitely be no harm, since oil is in excess, and Saudi Arabia has already stated that it will significantly increase production in order to bring down the price inflated by ISIL. True, experts are skeptical of this statement, since the kingdom has never produced more 10 million barrels per day.
Persistently denying that NATO is the "roof" of ISIS, the Western press diligently proves the audience that the Islamic state suddenly became rich only by conquering oil-bearing regions. But a similar situation had already taken place after the seizure of the north of Syria, but the media for some reason did not notice this, and the battles between the Al-Nosra army and ISIL were interpreted solely as a rivalry inflated by the “regime”, while in reality was about controlling the oil fields.
This raises a question that neither the Western media nor the Gulf media can answer: how can terrorists sell oil on the international market, which is fully controlled by Washington? For example, in March, Libyan separatists from Benghazi did not succeed in attaching the oil they seized — the US Navy intercepted the Morning Glory tanker and returned it to Libya.
That is, if Al-Nosra and ISIS are capable of selling oil, then they are directly connected with the “right” companies, and Washington blesses these transactions.
Since the annual congress of oil companies took place from 15 to 19 in Moscow in June, everyone thought that it would be about Ukraine, but no - they spoke exclusively about Syria and Iraq. It was announced that the oil stolen by the Al-Nosra army in Syria is traded by Exxon-Mobil (the Rockefeller company that holds Qatar), and the oil by ISIL is used by Aramco (USA / Saudi Arabia). By the way, during the Libyan conflict, NATO authorized Qatar (that is, Exxon-Mobil) to sell oil to the "liberated" by Al-Qaeda territories.
That is, the current confrontation (as well as all the wars of the twentieth century in the Middle East) is another act of struggle between oil companies. And the fact that ISIL is funded by Aramco easily explains why Saudi Arabia suddenly declared that it was able to compensate for its fall in Iraqi production: the kingdom would simply “wash” stolen oil.
ISIS’s success lies in the fact that it now controls two main oil pipelines: one leading to Banias and supplying Syria, and the other delivering brut to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. Moreover, the Islamic state blocked the first, provoking electricity shortages in Syria, but the second is working properly.
The operating pipeline is used by the local Israeli authorities of Kurdistan, which with its help exports the oil stolen to Kirkuk. That is, it is absolutely clear that the ISIS attack is coordinated with the Kurdistan authorities and the aim of the venture is to divide Iraq into three parts, which fully corresponds to the redrawing plan of the “expanded Middle East” voiced by the US General Staff in 2001 year. In 2003, the US Army failed to impose this plan, but in 2007, Senator Joe Biden forced Congress to accept it.
Kurdistan has already started exporting Kirkuk oil through an ISIL-controlled oil pipeline. For several days, he equipped two tankers to Ceyhan. These tankers were chartered by Palmali Shipping & Agency JSC, owned by Turkish-Azerbaijani billionaire Mubariz Gurbanoglu. But the government of Al-Maliki (which Washington has not yet overthrown) published a note stating this theft, so none of the companies operating in Kurdistan (Chevron, Hess, Total) dared to buy this oil. Not finding a buyer, Kurdistan knocked the price down to 57,5 dollars per barrel, continuing to accumulate it. Now two more tankers are being loaded, and all this is happening with the blessing of ISIS. The very fact that the oil is pumped in the absence of a buyer indicates that Kurdistan and ISIL have confidence that they will attach their goods, since they are patronized by two states - Israel and Saudi Arabia.
The likely split of Iraq into three parts, of course, will change the oil balance. After the success of ISIS, all oil companies have reduced their staff. Some are stronger than others. This applies to BP, Royal Dutch Shell (which uses the services of Sheikh Moaz al-Khatib, a geologist and former president of the Syrian National Coalition), Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Ortaklığı and Chinese companies PetroChina, Sinopec and CNOOC.
Thus, the British, the Turks and especially China, which was one of the main clients of Iraq, will suffer losses. In a gain - USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
That is, it is about anything, but not about Islam.