FORTUNE -- Are we a nation of people willing to climb into bed with any strongman just to make a buck? First we learn that a swath of software companies helped Libya's Moammar Gadhafi chase down Libyan people who disagreed with him. Then we find out that Oracle (ORCL) is being investigated for possibly violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in making payments to people who matter in Western and Central African countries. Whatever happened to making money the old-fashioned way?
But there's no better evidence that shareholders of publicly-traded U.S. companies are helping foreign autocrats keep their stranglehold on power than the news this week from ExxonMobil (XOM). CEO Rex Tillerson stood beside Russian kingpin Vladimir Putin yesterday morning to announce that the oil company had cut an awesome deal with Russia to find new arctic oil reserves.
Putin, of course, is no longer president of Russia, but as Prime Minister he retains all the traits inherent in any dictator. And he uses the same playbook of nationalizing assets as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. Has no one at ExxonMobil heard of Yukos? As part of the deal with Tillerson and his gang, Russia's state-owned oil company, Rosneft, has taken an equity stake in some of Exxon's U.S. projects. Exxon surely has no plans to steal those stakes back in a few years, but there's every reason to believe that's what Putin will do to Exxon's investment in the Russian arctic.
"Others can weigh in on the legitimacy of various governments," Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers says. "We are not doing business, as far as I'm aware of, with anyone with which we are prohibited from doing so."
He's right, and Exxon employees are actually proud of their partnerships with the likes of Putin. A recent posting on an Exxon blog declared that "Americans benefit both from ExxonMobil's U.S. and global operations in the form of taxes, jobs, and shareholder returns." It's that last part that gets at the nub of the issue: at what price do we seek profit? I usually sit back in awe at Putin's Machiavellian tactics—he's one of the more entertaining dictators around—but I'd never partner with the man.
How about the idea that we might not want to deal with countries that screw shareholders out of their ownership? Last I heard, Exxon had taken a principled stand against the kind of government that appropriates other people's assets when it feels like it. Venezeulan dictator Hugo Chavez made a power grab for Exxon's local oil assets five years ago, and the company and country have been stuck in international litigation ever since. ExxonMobil lost about $12 billion of shareholders' money in that experience, but it's not clear Tillerson learned anything from it. A new deal with Chavez can't be too far in the offing.
Look, I'm no bleeding heart ninny who looks at the world in black-and-white. We've partnered with Middle Eastern autocrats for decades because it helped keep the U.S. engine going. I understand that shaking hands with dishonorable leaders comes with the job of running a global company. I spent part of my childhood in Saudi Arabia, right next to the ARAMCO compound. I saw the devil's handshake up close.
But to commit nearly half a trillion dollars to working with them? Should American companies—or American shareholders—really be doing deals with the likes of the Russian government? I say no. I've got no problem selling them Big Macs or iPads. But lining Kremlin insiders' pockets in exchange for access to their oil fields? Aren't we better than that?
Rex, might I introduce you to the real Vlad Putin? He's the clown who claimed to have discovered ancient urns in six feet of water last week. (For some reason, he wore scuba gear to get to them, adding hilarity to hilarity.) Perhaps he'll take you on a dive trip to find your next oil well.
How the break-up of ConocoPhillips could lead to similar moves by oil conglomerates like BP and Exxon Mobil, forever changing the energy landscape.
By Cyrus Sanati, contributor
FORTUNE -- The announcement last month that ConocoPhillips plans to break up into two separately traded companies took Wall Street by surprise, raising uncomfortable questions as to Big Oil's raison d'etre. If COP proves that it can indeed unlock value from separating its exploration and MOREAug 1, 2011 10:18 AM ET
The oil driller committed the corporate public relations blunder of the year, then followed up with an empty apology. What will it do for an encore?
Making full use of its April 1 filing date, Transocean's (RIG) proxy statement deemed 2010 the "best year in safety performance in our company's history," by certain statistical measures. In a small oversight, those stats ignored the 11 deaths caused last April when the company's MOREColin Barr - Apr 4, 2011 1:48 PM ET
Goldman Sachs: It has this "risk" thing all figured out, according to J.P. Morgan.
The Macondo spill: 12 countries and international bodies, plus Iran, offered to help the U.S. clean it up. The U.S. accepted 12 of those offers, minus Iran.
LeBron James: No one can shut up about his potential move to New York, and the NBA is paying good money to make sure it stays that way.
IBM love liaison and MOREJul 6, 2010 4:16 PM ET
Investors are paying attention to BP's corporate finance decisions, which suggest that the company believes its shares are going to keep going up.
by Heidi N. Moore, contributor
Religion usually has no place in the financial markets -- except for those who are doing God's work, of course -- but the faith that BP shareholders have in their holdings can only be explained by belief in a higher power.
No matter MOREJul 6, 2010 2:17 PM ET
Sketchy credit? Questionable future? Step this way to the debt markets. Capitalism's villains are still selling, but for how long?
By Heidi N. Moore, contributor
The public outrage attached to much of the financial crisis has centered on the problem of "privatized gains and socialized losses," or the idea that corporations and countries can act irresponsibly to make money, then have taxpayers to bail them out. That was an MOREJul 1, 2010 3:23 PM ET
Shareholders liked BP's decisions Wednesday. But a bigger question is how the rating agencies will take the news.
Mollifying President Obama and restive shareholders isn't the only task for the oil giant's chairman, Carl-Henric Svanberg (right, with Obama).
Now he and his minions must court the rating agencies. Both Moody's and Standard & Poor's downgraded BP (BP) earlier this month, saying massive legal and cleanup costs from April's gulf coast oil spill would weigh MOREColin Barr - Jun 16, 2010 4:21 PM ET
BP isn't alone. Transocean's dividend has to go too.
BP (BP), under pressure from the White House and Congress, is now weighing a dividend cut. "We are considering all options on the dividend," CEO Tony Hayward told the Wall Street Journal Thursday. "But no decision has been made."
The comments come as public outrage builds against the company's handling of its Gulf Coast oil spill. Just a week ago, BP was saying MOREColin Barr - Jun 11, 2010 8:05 AM ET
Hang on for your lives, BP shareholders!
Shares of the embattled London-based oil company bounced back Thursday, as BP said it doesn't know why its stock went into free fall a day earlier and Wall Street analysts agreed as they often do that now is not the time to panic.
Among the BP (BP) boosters was Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst Alejandro Demichelis, who rates the stock buy with a $49 price MOREColin Barr - Jun 10, 2010 10:31 AM ET
The fear that the gulf oil spill will force BP into bankruptcy swept the markets Wednesday afternoon.
Update 4:24 p.m.: BP (BP) shares plunged 16% in frenetic trading -- nine times the oil company's average daily volume -- amid speculation that a bankruptcy filing is at hand.
The cost of insuring against a default on BP debt surged 48% to a new high, CMA said. It now costs $382,000 annually to insure $10 MOREColin Barr - Jun 9, 2010 3:48 PM ET
|The medical marijuana ad that never aired, despite contrary media headlines|
|2 million students missing out on college aid|
|Boeing reports wing cracks on Dreamliners|
|China to fight pollution with drones|
|The bull market at 5: Not old yet|