Enter Yamani with an appeal to "please forget" the "weapons of mass destruction" (WMD) excuse, since "these weapons were there with the aid of the US, and some of those who run the US." Yamani began his two-hour talk last Thursday by offering his understanding of the overall situation. "President Bush and his lackey Prime Minister Blair insist that Iraq has WMDs. Then there's North Korea who admits possessing WMDs, which are even more dangerous than the ones they accuse Iraq of having. But Bush says he'll deal politically and diplomatically with North Korea, while he'll attack and occupy Iraq."

"Then there is a neighboring regional power, Israel, which has 200 nuclear warheads and refuses to be monitored," Yamani added. "And a recent energy conference in Abu Dhabi refused to name Israel as a country which is in possession of destructive weapons. Such is the state of our Arab nation today."

With this opener, Yamani moved on to the big question: what does the US stand to gain by occupying Iraq? "The US has a very clear policy on the Middle East," he stated. "This policy is founded on two fronts, namely Israel and oil. And never the twain have met except when the Arabs 'dared' to impose the 1973 oil embargo," he said. "This annoyed the US, which made a long-term plan to control the oil and the Gulf by military means -- and it succeed in doing so, thanks to us, the Arabs."

Yamani, Saudi Arabia's minister of petroleum and mineral resources from 1962 to 1986, was the first secretary-general of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). His international fame was established with the oil embargo in 1973, and also in 1975 as a hostage on the hijacked plane carrying OPEC oil ministers. Yamani is viewed as the architect of most of Saudi Arabia's modern laws and regulations and is currently chairman of the London-based Centre for Global Energy Studies.

According to Yamani, with the formation of the new Bush administration -- "most [members of which] headed oil companies" -- the US president founded a committee chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney whose goal was to ensure the US does not remain reliant on Gulf oil, "especially not Saudi oil". The committee's formation was initially shrouded in secrecy, but not for long, he pointed out.

One quarter of US oil imports come from the Arabian Gulf and 16.5 per cent of this is from Saudi Arabia. According to Yamani, the US began developing alternative sources, such as Russia, the Caspian Sea and Western Africa, ensuring that by 2005 the country would not have to rely on Gulf oil. But the US soon realized that this policy meant that Europe would also be more dependent on Gulf oil. It also realized that any oil turbulences, such as those in Venezuela, would force the US to once again resort to Gulf oil. What to do? "Cheney is a man who knows all about oil, and five years ago he published an article in which he clearly stated that the US should invade Iraq and control its oil," Yamani said. Iraq, he explained, has the second largest oil reserve in the world after Saudi Arabia and, according to recent studies, is capable of producing eight million barrels per day in this decade alone. If Iraq was invaded, the US could extend oil pipelines to the Eastern Mediterranean. It would then have sufficient access to oil without having to go through the Strait of Hormoz.

But oil isn't the only reason for the war, Yamani argued. "Israel wants the map of the region to be redrawn so it becomes the only power, which would allow it to control the Middle East." Then there is, of course, Bush's desire to be elected for a second term.

Yamani moved on to the more pressing question of whether or not there will be a war. "America's big dream is victory without a war, which means that Saddam would withdraw from power or go into exile. That way, the Americans could enter Baghdad like victorious conquerors. To achieve that victory, the US has recruited its friends and lackeys who are working faithfully to satisfy the Godfather." At this point, chuckles rang out among the audience.

Another scenario would be postponing the war until autumn. Instability in Venezuela, which provides the US with one million barrels of oil a day, is also a concern for the US. "The US wanted to oust [Venezuelan] President Hugo Chavez by orchestrating a failed military coup when the man began to apply real democracy. When that didn't work, the US turned the man in the street against him. This ploy worked, but oil production stopped as a result and then all oil resources dried up. Had Saudi Arabia not [recently] increased its oil production, the US would be in a truly miserable situation today. If the situation in Venezuela continues to deteriorate, the US will have to postpone its invasion, because, according to surveys, Iraq produces between 800,000 and one million barrels per day. If Iraq is attacked, this flow will stop, at least temporarily. With Venezuela's exports in doubt, the US may not want to depend on Saudi Arabia to cover this deficit. It is not even clear if it could."

Then there's Bush's second term of office. "If the US president feels that the vast majority of Americans oppose a war -- which isn't the case -- he'll have to change his position. Some predict that the US economy will collapse anyway." But Bush, Yamani argues, has already placed himself in an embarrassing situation. "It's very difficult for him not to invade Iraq, and it's also very difficult for him to invade it. But it seems more likely that he'll go to war."

Yamani offered three scenarios for the war on Iraq. The first is a fast entry into Iraq with advanced US military machinery coupled with speedy control of the situation. The second option is a swift military strike and invasion of Iraq, but with great difficulty in gaining control of this multi-ethnic country.

The third scenario is "frightening and keeps me awake at night", Yamani said. "Bush and his lackey Blair say Saddam has chemical and biological weapons; a fact which Saddam denies. From the studies we conducted and which involved former inspectors in Iraq, there is evidence that he does possess chemical and biological weapons. We also know that he owns 12 missiles, each with a range of 650-kilometres. Capsules containing plagues and germs could easily be placed in these missiles which could land in Iraq's neighboring countries to the south. If Saddam [carries out this scenario] tens of thousands of innocent people will perish. It will also mean the stoppage of oil in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and maybe Iran. If that happened, there would be an expected shortfall of more than 10 million oil barrels on the [international] market, a gap which no country could fill -- not even in part. In this case, oil prices would reach $80 to $100 per barrel. None of the world's industrial countries' oil supplies would help out of this devastating situation. Many factories across the globe would be forced to shut down, which would result in a massive wave of unemployment with no historical precedent. Not to mention, of course, what would happen to innocent children, women, elderly and other people. I hope this scenario does not happen, but we shouldn't ignore it either. This scenario would mean the end for the US, Europe and the West."

This would also cause major repercussions in the Arab world, particularly on the "suppressed" Arab grass roots, which, Yamani predicts, would be the victims of terrorists and terrorism and possibly coups.

However, if the US succeeds in securing a victory without war and if Saddam is persuaded to step down, Yamani thinks another terrible scenario will occur. Iraq will be invaded and occupied for three years; "the plan for dividing the country has [already] been devised by the UK." Work will then start in the oil fields of Iraq. And if Venezuela resumes its oil production, the oil prices will drop to possibly $25 a barrel and Saudi Arabia will be forced to reduce its production. This will also affect the revenues of the Suez Canal, as fewer carriers will have to pass through it.

But more damage would be inflicted on Jordan, warned Yamani, which receives 59,000 barrels of oil [per day] from Iraq. "Half this amount is a grant from Iraq while the other half is paid in the form of Jordanian exports to Iraq, via the Gulf of Aqaba. This would stop when and if Iraq is invaded, of course. Jordan "is in real danger and will suffer in any case" if you include Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plans to expel the Palestinians from the West Bank to Jordan, he suggested. "Then it's Iran's turn and Syria will fall. The end result is that Israel will be the strongest and most powerful country in the region."

Despite the variety of scenarios offered by Yamani, his talk eventually landed on the bleakest: Saddam is likely to create a lot of damage if his country is attacked. "He didn't leave Kuwait before burning its oil fields, which cost [several billion dollars] to fix. He'll probably explode his country's oil fields as well, and that will create a huge cloud with the result that US pilots will not be able to see their targets."

"The horrifying repercussions of an attack on Iraq are frightening," Yamani added. "There will be hundreds of Osama Bin Ladens."