Stephen Gaghan’s fast paced film Syriana is about several plots and sub-plots all told in two hours. It is about the struggle for control of oil, about dubious business mergers worked out by two Texan oil companies for oil rights in Kazhakhstan; 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 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 who 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 hall, the real world looks pretty much simiar. The US has been there for over 60 years ever since they displaced the Brits when Roosevelt promised American protection to the Saudis in exchange for uninterrupted supply of cheap oil. Since then there has been a steady accretion of US power where 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, and stressed the importance of the use of 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 which means an America driven forward by unrivalled military power and the growing profits of 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. Exxon, Chevron and ConocoPhilips earned US $ 64 billion between them 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 is a handy means for re-ordering the world and retaining 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 its 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 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 if there had been no Communism to defeat or defend. The US today 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 have.
As a vital supplier of gas and oil to Europe and Japan, Russia exhibited its new-found strength at the start of the year when it shut off gas supplied to Ukraine as part of a 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 some deals with Saudi Arabia. Russia may have lost the Cold War but is not going to lose the Energy War.
Elsewhere, the Shanghai Co-operation 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 OPEC or NATO.. The propects of a triangular relationship that has Russia, China and Iran as the three sides with the energy rich Central Asia boxed in, is fast becoming America’s geo-strategic nightmare especially after its collosal failures in West Asia. Iran has 11% of the world’oil and 16% the world’s gas. Although Saudi Arabia has more oil and Russia has more gas, no other country has more of both of 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 anti-Tehran 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 and then had a Falun Gong member demonstrate loudly, 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 has China taken American advice to cancel its US $ 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.
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 this diminishing resource. But India is still on the reserve bench in this Big Boys League.
India joined this energy race not only late but with other handicaps, without Russia’s energy reserves, China’s deep pockets nor American military might and no direct access to energy areas.. Since India cannot sustain its economic growth without an assured and cheap energy supply, civilian nuclear energy is important. The hope is that the US Congress does not force America to lose a deal by converting the original energy deal into an NPT that would force India to rethink. As the US eyes Indian markets as a means to revive its economy, only a mutually satisfactory nuclear deal will hold. Further, nuclear energy will provide electricity to the industry but will not turn the wheels of the transport sector. No amount of increased supplies will help unless we collectively learn to be less extravagent than we are today and the government is prepared to spend huge sums on a cheap and efficient transport system, beginning today.
Outside the cinema hall, the real world looks pretty much simiar. The US has been there for over 60 years ever since they displaced the Brits when Roosevelt promised American protection to the Saudis in exchange for uninterrupted supply of cheap oil. Since then there has been a steady accretion of US power where 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, and stressed the importance of the use of 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 which means an America driven forward by unrivalled military power and the growing profits of 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. Exxon, Chevron and ConocoPhilips earned US $ 64 billion between them 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 is a handy means for re-ordering the world and retaining 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 its 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 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 if there had been no Communism to defeat or defend. The US today 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 have.
As a vital supplier of gas and oil to Europe and Japan, Russia exhibited its new-found strength at the start of the year when it shut off gas supplied to Ukraine as part of a 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 some deals with Saudi Arabia. Russia may have lost the Cold War but is not going to lose the Energy War.
Elsewhere, the Shanghai Co-operation 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 OPEC or NATO.. The propects of a triangular relationship that has Russia, China and Iran as the three sides with the energy rich Central Asia boxed in, is fast becoming America’s geo-strategic nightmare especially after its collosal failures in West Asia. Iran has 11% of the world’oil and 16% the world’s gas. Although Saudi Arabia has more oil and Russia has more gas, no other country has more of both of 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 anti-Tehran 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 and then had a Falun Gong member demonstrate loudly, 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 has China taken American advice to cancel its US $ 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.
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 this diminishing resource. But India is still on the reserve bench in this Big Boys League.
India joined this energy race not only late but with other handicaps, without Russia’s energy reserves, China’s deep pockets nor American military might and no direct access to energy areas.. Since India cannot sustain its economic growth without an assured and cheap energy supply, civilian nuclear energy is important. The hope is that the US Congress does not force America to lose a deal by converting the original energy deal into an NPT that would force India to rethink. As the US eyes Indian markets as a means to revive its economy, only a mutually satisfactory nuclear deal will hold. Further, nuclear energy will provide electricity to the industry but will not turn the wheels of the transport sector. No amount of increased supplies will help unless we collectively learn to be less extravagent than we are today and the government is prepared to spend huge sums on a cheap and efficient transport system, beginning today.
Source : Hindustan Times 18th September 2006
0 comments:
Post a Comment