The Campaign for World War IV and the Coming Oil Crisis

posted by admin on Wednesday April 09, @11:11AM

Whaddaya worried about wwIV for?

Shoot, who even remembers wwIII?

"Recent public revelations ... suggest that your administration considers nuclear weapons as a mere extension of the continuum of conventional weapons open to the United States, and that your administration may use nuclear weapons in the looming military conflict against Iraq," the letter said.
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030305-9535654.htm

On April 2nd a former director of the CIA, R. James Woolsey, in speaking before a group of college students(1,2), described the current war with Iraq as the first stage of World War IV, which is otherwise known as the War against Terrorism. The previous World War III he defined as being the Cold War, where America progressively defeated the forces of communism over a period of 4 decades. Woolsey stated that the current war will not last as long, but the implication is that it will grow into a world-wide conflict where perhaps nations such as Germany, China, Russia and even Saudi Arabia may be required to actively participate. The implication is also, as predicted by the Bush Administration, that there will be a strike against the American population at some point in the future as the U.S. faces a permanent threat of a terrorist attack (3).

In 1997 several members of the current Bush administration, along with others, cofounded a think tank known as the Project for a New American Century , or PNAC (4), which legitimizes the new "neo-conservative" ideology where, in this brave new 21st century world, America must build up its military forces and actively defend American democracy around the world, otherwise we will become victims of external forces beyond our control. The PNAC platform eerily predicts that a "Pearl Harbor event" would coalesce the forces necessary to bring about this effort quickly (5). President Bush stated that "the world has changed" after the events of 9/11 and America must now act preemptively in aggressive use of the military in order to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction instead of waiting for a clear and present threat to make itself known (6).

Advertisement

After the events of 9/11 many Americans went into a state of shock and could not comprehend how terrorists from outside our country could feel so strongly against the United States as to cause the horrible events to happen. In Israel perhaps it could be partially understood how Palestinians may feel physically and spiritually oppressed within their homeland. In the case of 9/11, with terrorists who originated in Saudi Arabia, the only acceptable explanation was that Islamic extremists must be acting out of envy and jealousy for the American way of life, and that there is something about their extreme religious beliefs regarding Jihad which causes them to break all boundaries of civilized behavior with acts of violence that transend the worst acts of war. This behavior matches up very well with the ruling behavior of Saddam Hussein who has murdered, tortured and raped his own people and broken successive treaties with the U.N. Even if there is no solid evidence of a link between Iraq and 9/11, Americans desire to make it known that this type of outlaw behavior will not be tolerated. By liberating the Iraqi people we are also acting to put an end to this type of tyranny of which we are so afraid.

The simplistic justifications of the average American citizen and the motivations of the average Islamic extremist terrorist do not take into account the larger forces that are acting to bring this conflict to a head. I propose that bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are merely opportunists who have latched onto a larger sociological problem brought about by the oil economy of the Middle East.

President Bush often states that he is acting to defend our nation from a definite threat to its security and to secure our freedoms, but rarely does he give any details. In fact, the freedoms and luxuries that we enjoy in our day to day life are intimately tied to transportation: the foundations of the economy depend upon the cheap cost of transportation of goods and services, and the quality of life of the average American is greatly tied to our ability to travel in the day to day business of going about our lives. While watching the major news networks on television certain values are constantly being pounded into us during station breaks: American Freedom = the ability to drive an SUV or luxury sedan. Few Americans, except those who remember the oil crisis of 1973 (7), understand that our economy and quality of life can be greatly affected by the actions of a relatively small group of nations who control the cost and production of foreign oil: OPEC (8). It is really our freedom from OPEC which will ensure the long-term "security" of the U.S. in light of the burgeoning activism which originates in Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing nations.

The economic conditions in Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations has been steadily declining in recent years causing the quality of life of many Arabs to also decline. "The country began running annual deficits in the mid-1980s as oil prices declined and the government continued to spend heavily on armaments and social programs. Saudi Arabia entered a recession in the late 1990s and was forced to initiate spending cuts." (9) The Arab monarchies maintain their power and control due to continuing support from their oil customers, but the increasing costs to produce Saudi oil together with increasing competition from non-Arab oil producers such as Venezuela, Mexico and Canada have undoubtedly kept down the price of oil, decreased the volume demanded, and reduced the resulting profit margins in the oil rich nations. (10) Terrorist organizations such as al-Queda react to the presence of the U.S. military on sacred Arab soil and the increasing dominance of American power as a cause of the decline in the way of life of the greater populace. The show of power which was displayed in the first Gulf War and the death and disruption that followed in its aftermath was the proverbial straw which broke the camel's back in the Arab world.

In a recent article that appeared in Forbes Magazine, "Bomb Baghdad, Hit OPEC" (10) Paul Klebnikov states that "the oil-market effects of a neutralized or pro-Western successor to Saddam Hussein are unmistakenly positive." Not only are there huge oil reserves which have been discovered and are undeveloped in Iraq, but also the cost of processing oil is estimated at $1 per barrel for Iraq, compared to $2.50 per barrel for Saudi Arabia. In the Gulf of Mexico or the North Sea the cost can be $3 or $4 per barrel. Much of Iraq's oil industry has been going to waste with idle wells, rusting pipes and pumping stations that need service. Pipelines and terminals, however, are already in place and Iraq has many of its own technicians and engineers, whereas Saudi Arabia hires many foreign engineers. As Iraq ramps up its production, world market prices could plummet and Saudi Arabia might lose its swing position within OPEC. Iraq's profits will also be unconstrainable by the other OPEC nations because it will need these funds in order to rebuild its country after the war.

Normally the processes of Westernization and nation building are time consuming and can take decades. In the case of Iraq this process has been accelerated in order to head off the threat from Arabian oil producers. Many experts feel that the argument that we are controlling terrorism through our efforts is false because this process can only exacerbate terrorism in the short term. The real threat lies in the control of oil production and oil pricing and how the situation in Saudi Arabia and its neighbors could explode at any time.

Even the above argument for the war, albeit mostly economic, would probably be acceptable to many capitalists in the Western world. The problem lies in the fact that we are still dealing with a finite resource which experts are predicting will be depleted in a matter of decades (12). We are still likely to experience a severe oil crisis along the lines of that experienced in the mid-seventies, at some point in the future, causing our quality of life to degrade and increasing the possibility of mass unrest within our own nation, sacrificing its security. Gaining access to Iraq's oil resources is only delaying the inevitable outcome. We simply don't have the infrastructure in place to support any sort of viable fuel alternative, and it will take a very focused effort to bring this about.

The fact that we are bringing democracy to the Arab world and liberating its people is only a smokescreen covering up the underlying economic situation that is really causing problems. In the U.S. media you will see plenty of cheerleading as corporate America looks forward to a few more years of oil-based freedom, but all you have to do is look at the foreign media and you will see plenty of evidence that there are many Arabs, including Iraqis, who do not want the U.S. to be present in the Middle East and who would have preferred that Saddam Hussein remain in power.

Last year Saddam substituted the Euro for the Dollar as the currency basis of Iraq's oil (13) leading us to believe that he would be favoring the European market as well as the Euro-based economy. With the predicted steady growth of China's energy consumption per capita over the next 20 years (14), now a net importer of oil, it also makes sense that we should fear the shift of resources to a nation which might have been more in line with the politics of Iraq's Baath party. There simply is not enough oil to go around to meet the world's future needs and the U.S. will become more aggressive militarilly in a vain attempt to Americanize the culture and marketing preferences of the Arab world. World War IV could become a true calamity as Americans continue to misunderstand why many Arabs reject American influence, and as the oil spigot slowly and inevitably runs dry. We may win the battle in Iraq, but we will likely lose this World War unless we change our direction now.

(2) http://www.cnn.com
Charles Feldman and Stan Wilson, "Ex-CIA director: U.S. faces 'World War IV'",CNN, 4/3/2003

(3) http://www.cbsnews.com
Associated Press,, "U.S. Gets New Terror Alert System", 3/12/2002

(4) http://www.newamericancentury.org

(5) http://www.newamericancentury.org

(6) http://www.commondreams.org
Mike Allen and Barton Gellman, "Preemptive Strikes Part of U.S. Strategic Doctrine",Washington Post, 12/11/2002

(7) http://hyperion.advanced.org

(8) http://www.opec.org

(9) http://www.encyclopedia.com

(10) http://www.metimes.com
Richard Mably, "The Arab embargo - from oil crisis to OPEC crisis", Middle East Times, Issue 98-42

(11) Paul Kelbnikov, "Bomb Baghdad, Hit OPEC", Forbes, October 28, 2002

(12) http://www.oilcrisis.org/iq/

(13) http://www.evworld.com
W. Clark, "The Euro Effect: The Real Reason for the War in Iraq", EV World, 3/6/2003

(14) http://www.vwa.unisg.ch/ostasien/GO1.pdf Morten Lillesand and Tor Kielland, "Developments in the Chinese Market for Oil and Gas", CEMS Stockholm Workshop, China: the 21st Century Challenge, 9-12 December, 1999"

<  Who DARES to Criticize Our Great Leader | IRAQ: Lessons Learned  >