|
Shaky
Foundations: The US in the Middle East
(Middle East Report 220, Fall 2001)
Editorial
Upon its installment
in the White House, the second Bush administration was universally
expected to be the loyal handmaiden of Big Oil. The US oil and gas
industry lavished $1,387,975 upon the hastily assembled committee
which planned the inaugural festivities for George W. Bush and Dick
Cheney. BP-Amoco contributed $100,000, and executives from Conoco,
Chevron and Exxon Mobil ponied up the same amount. In all, Big Oil
gave $26 million to Bush, Cheney and their fellow Republicans in
the 2000 election campaign. As if on cue, Cheney's national energy
policy report, released in May, recommended drilling in the Alaskan
National Wildlife Refuge, and the administration sent emissaries
to secure US energy interests in South Asia and elsewhere. Yet,
awash as they are in petrodollars, Bush and Cheney have not exactly
done Big Oil's bidding in the Middle East, the industry's most lucrative
field of operations by far. In the 1990s, the calls of oil executives
to lift US trade and investment sanctions on Middle Eastern "rogue
states" became something of a broken record. Relations with
the guardians of the vast reserves in Iran, Iraq and Libya areif
anythingchillier than they were six months ago.
Part of the
reason, certainly, is that lifting sanctions on any of these countries
would contradict years of US rhetoric about "terrorism"
and "weapons of mass destruction," not to mention the
howls of Congressional protest which greet the bare mention of thawed
relations with Iran or Libya. The State Department meekly withdrew
its proposal to renew the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act for two years
when Congress demanded renewing it for five. (Not coincidentally,
the pro-Israel lobby has been harping on the Persian peril to US
interests since Iran upped its pro-Palestinian rhetoric after the
Camp David II fiasco.) Another part of the reason, surprisingly
enough, is that the Bush-Cheney White House has few personal connections
with the large international companies that thirst after Middle
Eastern oil. The administration's oilmenincluding Bush and
Cheney themselvescome not from supermajors like Exxon Mobil
or Chevron, but from leaner Texan firms that drill in the US or
sell services to the majors. These oil independents, and energy
traders like Enron, are the most important cogs in the Bush-Cheney
fundraising machine. According to the Center for Public Integrity,
Enron has given more money to George W.'s campaigns than any other
donor. Enron generates electricity in India and Brazil, but doesn't
care about the remaining "easy oil" in the Middle East.
(In July, Enron sold its only interest in a Middle East operationgas
fields in Qatar.)
It isn't that
the administration doesn't crave the "energy security"
that the opening of sanctioned oilfields would buy. For all its
talk of "clean coal" and reviving nuclear power, Cheney's
task force report reveals an abiding interest in Middle Eastern
oil. The reason is simple. By 2020, US oil consumption will have
increased by 32 percent, while domestic production will remain steady.
Barring a sudden outbreak of environmental responsibility among
the makers and owners of SUVs, this means greater dependence on
imports. Roughly two thirds of the world's proven oil reserves are
in the Persian Gulf. 14 percent of US oil imports today come from
Saudi Arabia, the second largest single supplier (behind Canada).
Cheney's report
applauds the Kingdom for being "a linchpin of supply reliability,"
but also for showing willingness to fill the deficit in world oil
supply in the event of "disruptions." Though the culprit
is not named, the disruptions would presumably come from Iraq, which
is the fifth largest exporter of oil to the US despite sanctions.
The phrase betrays the Cheney task force's awareness that Gulf oil
supply is precarious, even ifprobably naivelythe administration
hopes that Iraq is a short-term problem. As Michael Klare argues
in his new study Resource Wars, over the long term maintaining the
flow of Gulf oil to the West is likely to require US intervention.
For now, the US is pressuring Gulf countries to privatize their
national oil and gas industries, while seeking to expand its military
deployment, as with the widely rumored negotiations over pre-positioning
of US aircraft in the United Arab Emirates. To open Middle Eastern
"rogue states," Big Oil has only the carrot of investment
dollars. The sticks of the White House are many.
|