Let’s imagine that a city tells its people, “water is owned by all the citizens.” That’s all that people are told. Who do you think will have access to the water? Despite the friendly language of this policy, most of the city’s citizens lack access to water. The city manager believes by stating that everyone has access to water, people will feel some level of comfort because they have a sense of ownership. In reality, people have no access to anything. Only those related to the city manager can drink water.
Can you imagine how it feels to be thirsty all the time, knowing your city sits on a sea of fresh water?
Do you think the above language supports peace or conflict? I think the language does not support peace at all because it is vague.
Now, read the above paragraph again, and replace the city with “Iraq,” water with “oil,” and thirsty with “hungry.” Now you can see the problem with the language of the oil policy in Iraq. The language is not successful in managing oil.
Vague Language
The language of Iraq’s oil policy leaves too many questions unanswered, and therefore is open to interpretation.
The Constitution of 2005 states;
- Article 111, “Oil and gas are owned by all the people of Iraq in all the regions and governorates.” So what rights do these shareholders have? The policy offers no clue.
- Article 112.1, “the federal government, with the producing governorates and regional governments, shall undertake the management of oil and gas, ……” So which governmental agency is responsible for managing oil, federal, regional, or local? The policy provides no answer. Oftentimes, these agencies fight among themselves over awarding oil contracts.
Therefore, answering these questions determines how revenues will be distributed.
Lessons Learned
- Use clear and precise language when writing policies. Otherwise, your policy will fire back.
- Utilize actionable language to draft policies so that your policies can be implemented.
Detailed Research
Click here to access a more detailed analysis.