S TEPHEN GAGHAN'S fastpaced film Syriana is about several plots and sub-plots all told in two hours. It is about the struggle for the control of oil, about dubious business mergers worked out by two Texan oil companies for oil rights in Kazakhstan; about a 'bad nationalist' Arab prince who gives his country's drilling rights to the Chinese but angry Americans ensure a violent regime change; and it is about the 'good' Arab brother is rewarded for his willingness to help some American companies sell their military hardware. There is torture and one could say, predictably and inevitably, the suicide terrorist is a Pakistani. There is intrigue, treachery and ruthlessness in the pursuit of wealth and power. Clearly, a case of reel life imitating real life. Outside the cinema, the real world looks pretty much similar. The United States has been in this region for over 60 years, ever since Roosevelt promised American protection to the Saudis, in exchange for uninterrupted supply of cheap oil. From then on, there has been a steady accretion of US power and today, the US Centcom's area of responsibility coincides with the entire energy-rich Gulf and Caspian region.
America's neo-cons have consistently professed that America had a global mission, that military power was the indispensable foundation of American foreign policy. They have stressed upon the importance of using military superiority to help introduce democracy. The debate in the last two decades of the 20th century provided the real foundation of the Bush doctrine of 'pre-emptive action'. This means an America driven forward by unrivaled military power and growing profits for the world's largest multinational corporations. Iraq may have been an unmitigated disaster according to most, but for US oil corporations, it has been a glorious war. Between them, Exxon, Chevron and ConocoPhilips earned $ 64 billion in 2005.
The US may, today, have a Bureau of Deconstruction in the Department of Defence that would deconstruct 26 regimes and a Bureau of Reconstruction in the State Department that would reconstruct these countries into democratic American clones. Others, like Seymour Hersh, have talked of ten countries that are up for facelifts while Ralph Peters has redesigned maps of the region. The Global War on Terror is not about defeating terrorism, but it is a handy means to re-order the world and retain US pre-eminence.
It is, however, becoming increasingly costly and difficult to retain this position. It is axiomatic that without access to assured cheap and abundant energy supplies, the US cannot maintain its way of life and full spectrum global dominance. A Russia that was supposed to have been finally defeated after the Afghan jehad and the fall of the Berlin Wall is resurgent under President Putin. The rise of China, as a global power, is another phenomenon that Washington must deal with. There is competition for resources and markets; energy as a weapon of influence has been used by Putin. Neither threatens the US militarily but its economic interests and those of its allies, as well as its political influence, are being challenged. Equally, without access to similar energy resources China will not be able sustain its scorching rate of growth required to keep its economy growing and prevent an internal political upheaval.
Having won the Cold War, the US continued to needle the Russians, in areas the Russians have long considered their own backyard, confirming earlier prognosis that the US and Russia would always be adversaries even had there been no communism to defeat or defend. Now, the US wants all energy supplies meant for the West to bypass Russian and Iranian territory as these provide both with the leverage that the Americans do not want them to enjoy. American troops today guard pipelines that flow from the Caspian to the Adriatic and the Mediterranean, avoiding Russian territory.
As a vital supplier of gas and oil to Europe and Japan, Russia exhibited its newfound strength at the start of the year when it shut off gas supplies to Ukraine as part of the bargain for a higher price. Possibly, the Russian President had learnt these tactics of using energy reserves for geo-strategic advantage at the St. Petersburg Mining Institute where he did a dissertation on "Toward a Russian Transnational Energy Company" soon after making a career change post-KGB. Russia-China relations have been on the upswing with mutually beneficial military and technology deals. They are also working on deals with Saudi Arabia. Russia may have lost the Cold War but it is not going to lose the Energy War.
Elsewhere, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation comprising China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan has enrolled Iran into its membership. This could be early signs of moving towards a Central Asian version of the Opec or Nato. The prospects of a triangular relationship - with Russia, China and Iran as the three sides and the energy-rich Central Asia boxed in - is fast becoming America's geostrategic nightmare, especially after its colossal failures in West Asia. Iran has 11 per cent of the world's oil and 16 per cent the world's gas.
Although Saudi Arabia has more oil and Russia has more gas, no other country has more of both these resources combined. Iran is geo-strategically located as the only country that has borders with the vital Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea. This, rather than the nuclear issue, is the real reason for US anxiety about the way Iran will turn. Iran is the only country that has gained from the failed US campaign in Iraq. No wonder, less than spontaneous antiTehran demonstrations seem to be taking place in Iran's Azerbaijan province and in Khuzestan, bordering Iraq.
American attempts to snub the visiting Chinese leader, Hu Jintao, last April when they 'mistakenly' played the Taiwanese anthem left the Chinese leader unfazed. He took off for his Saudi Arabian visit, struck a deal ensuring access to Saudi oil in exchange for sophisticated weapons and new technologies. China has ventured into the American backyard by recently hosting Hugo Chavez, the defiant Venezuelan leader. Nor did China take American advice to cancel its $ 100 billion deal with Iran. China has worked out several pipeline and exploration deals globally and also hopes to use the Gwadar port for overland energy routes in preference to sea lanes that are subject to American control. A ChinaVenezuela-Iran deal is also a worry for the US, especially its international political significance.
Experts predict that global oil production is peaking and the era of cheap and abundant oil is gone forever. Apart from traditional guzzlers, other claimants like China and India and major Western oil companies will now compete increasingly for the diminishing resource. But India is still on the reserve bench in this Big Boys League.
Meanwhile, the US naval armada is gathering in strength in the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean Sea. The wraps are off in Afghanistan and the Nato is now up front. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya of Global Research has given a carefully documented review of the nature and extent of this naval build-up and the deployment of coalition forces surrounding Iran, which includes a possible request to India to deploy in Afghanistan.
Planned air attacks have been worked out since early 2004. The world watches. Is this merely high drama? Does it all depend on who blinks first - Ahmadinejad or Bush? If this is for real, then the world will go up in smoke - maybe nuclear - as the US Presidential Directive (NSPD 35) of May 2004 is widely presumed to include deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in West Asia.
Source: Hindustan Times, October 11, 2006
0 comments:
Post a Comment