July 7th, 2007 by John
In The Independent, Kathey Marks reported on how the Australian Defence Minister, Brendan Nelson has admitted that oil was a major factor in the governments decision to keep troops in Iraq.
That’s no surprise to me.
Anti-war protesters have long said that the real reason behind the Iraq war was oil. They seem surprised that our leaders should think that attempting to secure the future flow of oil from the Middle East was worth going to war over. But looking at it from their point of view, Saddam Hussein had already invaded Iran and then Kuwait. Only quick action by the US prevented an invasion of Saudi Arabia. He obviously would have liked to dominate the entire oil-rich region. Regime change in Iraq was intended to stabilise the region and act as a warning to other dictators. It didn’t work out well and the area is more volatile then ever with war between Sunni and Shi’ite countries now a possibility. If there were a pull out of US and other Western troops from the area, the whole region could be engulfed in conflict and oil supplies severely disrupted for years. As over 60% of the world’s remaining oil is in the region, the world economy would suffer. Food production - now totally dependent on oil - would be severely effected and as world food stocks are now very low, panic-buying and hording would add to the problem.
Western leaders know that we simply can’t now manage without Middle East oil, so instead of taking measures to reduce consumption and make us less dependent, they rely on military muscle.
Posted in Security of Energy Supply, Threats to Food Supply | No Comments »
July 4th, 2007 by John
When George W. Bush narrowly won the presidential election, many people suspected it would be a setback to the fight against global warming. But it’s only now with hindsight that we can grasp the severity of that setback.
We know that both men are concerned about US dependence on imported oil and that a sudden disruption to supplies would devastate the US economy. I’m not sure though if they fully realise what the effect on food supply would be.
Because of Al Gore’s passionate interest in climate change we can assume that he would have taken steps to reduce US oil consumption through tax changes and car fuel consumption legislation. US oil imports would then have started to decline so that at some time in the future it would have been possible to manage on the still huge domestic oil production. Worries about oil security would then have eased so that the never-ending turmoil in the Middle East would no longer have been a direct threat to the well being of the US.
George Bush, of course, has no interest in climate change but is extremely concerned about oil security. His response was not to reduce demand but to try to secure supply.
The invasion of Iraq was meant not only to establish a friendly, democratic government right in the centre of things, but also act as a warning to other countries in the region that they should behave or the same could happen to them.
Unfortunately, things have worked out differently; the region is now in danger of the civil war between Shi’ite and Sunny Muslims in Iraq spreading to engulf the entire area. The American public is in no mood to become even more deeply involved and a troop pull-out could be needed before too long leaving the Middle East to its own devices.
So George Bush has made oil supply less secure then ever, and done nothing to fight climate change. A very poor result.
Posted in Climate Change, Security of Energy Supply | No Comments »
With world food supplies becoming tighter each year and the West being unable to produce food without oil and gas, we should consider the effect Jihad may have on oil supplies and therefore food supplies.
Jihad or Holy War is funded by oil and is very likely to cause a shortage of oil.
Wahabism, an extreme branch of Islam is Saudi based. A strange alliance was formed between the Royal family and the clerics so that the clerics could continue to teach extremism while the royals rule the land. This may well backfire against the royals as the extremists aim for an Islamic state in Saudi, Pakistan and elsewhere.
Jihadists are focused on the destruction of the Infidel world and bringing back the Caliphate, a new superstate above the sovereignties of all Arab or Muslim countries. The oil money flowing into Saudi is allowing the clerics to spread the Jihadi doctrine throughout the world.
Many people in the West imagine that extremists are a very tiny minority in the Muslim world, but now the Madrassas (religious schools) in Saudi, Pakistan and elsewhere are brainwashing children of an impressionable age.
The Jihadists know that they cannot defeat the West by conventional warfare or even by more terrorist attacks similar to 9/11. Security is now much tighter, but in any case such acts only do superficial damage. They know too well that to bring the West to its knees they would need to deny us the oil and gas that built our wealth and on which our civilisation now depends.
As we cannot now produce food without oil and gas, any large or prolonged reduction in supplies would create chaos in the food industry which the Jihadists would welcome.
Energy supplies are bound to be the weapon of choice for these extremists and the arrest of 172 people in Saudi recently accused of planning to blow up oil installations might well have been the start of this.
Our best defence against this would be to take steps to becoming much less dependent on the Middle East by using less oil and gas and finding ways to use the abundant power of the sun in innovative and efficient ways.
