Behind the Fires of Lebanon Lies an Oil World War

Progressive Conservatism ^ | 8/1/06 | Mark Radulich

[markkind]

Since the first Gulf War, peace activists have cried in the streets, “No war for oil, no war for oil!” until they were blue in the face. This is of course meant to insinuate that the US government under a Republican administration will sweep into an Arab nation and “steal that oil.” Yes, in the minds of many liberals throughout the world, the American military is commanded by Exxon/Mobile to solely seek out the oil fields of peaceful sovereign nations and steal their precious crude. In this rationale there’s never any other reason save for greed and imperialism.

What I find difficult to understand about this is why when protesters lament the big, bad USA and their designs to control the oil market, nobody seems to bother looking at how other countries weaponize the oil market as well. Does anyone really believe that OPEC had only defensive measures in mind when they instituted an oil embargo in 1973? You may recall that the embargo by OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, was triggered because of overt American support for Israel at the time of the Yom Kippur War (which Israel didn’t start mind you). The embargo was an attack, no different than planes being crashed into skyscrapers, on the economies of the Western world and the United States specifically. It was a particularly potent weapon as it changed geopolitics throughout the modern for decades to come and the way we conduct business in the Middle East today.

The most basic principle that divides a people is the division between the “haves” and the “have not’s”. If you’ve got oil, you too can have a seat at table where the world is ordered. If you need oil then you are the mercy of the former entities. If you’ve got big bucks to spend on oil, then you become the belle of the ball. For many years, the US had a controlling interest in how the world worked because it was the largest net importer of oil from around the world. The US single-handedly brought many countries out of the Dark Ages due mostly to the amount of oil they bought. By the same token, the US also was able to forcibly guide the policies of said nations because they controlled the purse strings. In the post-WWII era, oil played second to the spread of Communism where global strategy was concerned. Today however, Communism is dead and oil is kingmaker.

Behind this crisis in the Middle East between Hezbollah, Hamas and the arch foe of Muslims worldwide, Israel, lies an international battle for oil. Yes, to some degree there is that element of religious fundamentalism and the belief that the only good Jew is a dead Jew (right Mel?) but if you look at all of the ancillary evidence, you can see that the reason Islamic hatred of Israel is fomented is due to greater concerns.

Ronald Reagan often gets credited for ending the Cold War and defeating the Soviet Union/Communism. That analysis is half right. He did in fact outspend and ultimately bankrupt the Soviet Union, which caused its break-up and the spread of some western-style democracies throughout Eastern Europe and Central Asia. However, when the Berlin Wall came crashing down, the Cold War did not end. It momentarily paused while the Soviets reconverted back to Russians and the world was able to redefine itself. In a way, by stopping the spread of atheist Communism, the US inadvertently made itself the sole focus of Islamic fundamentalism and more to the point, allowed for weaker nations to become stronger by weaponizing the one resource that could bring the might US economy to its knees, oil.

With Communism dead (aside from a few stationary holdouts like Cuba) globalization as an economic policy and free markets blossomed everywhere from Latin America to the Far East. Industrialization, modernization, militarization beget free trade agreements and outsourcing that in the end made many much stronger and the US a bit weaker (loss of jobs in the industrial sector etc.) But the real chink on our armor revealed itself when billion strong newly industrialized nations like China and India opened up their newly fattened wallets and began outstripping the US as net importers of oil too. Now the formerly invincible United States of America faced quite a quandary. How does one promote free markets while still staying the main impetus of economic growth around the world? It is that very question that lies at the center of why the Middle East is on fire today.

As I mentioned earlier, the Cold War didn’t end, it went into intermission while the Russians changed clothes. Many moons after they converted from being dirty Communists to capitalist pigs, the Russians under our “good friend” Vladimir Putin (formerly of the KGB) have figured out how to battle the US and have restarted the Cold War.

A defining characteristic of the first Cold War was how both Super Powers set up satellite or client nations across the globe. These were countries that were autonomous to some degree but basically owed their allegiance, protection and ability to exist i.e. pay bills to the parent Super Power (Russia or the US). Though the Soviet Union is gone and many of those former client states have become fully autonomous nations (like the Ukraine) Russia is back in the business of offering protection for strategic positioning.

For example, according to Global Research.ca Russia is deepening the port of Tartus ( Syria) where it has a naval materiel and technical supplies center…Russia has had a naval materiel and technical supplies center in Tartus since the 1970s. Vladimir Zimin, advisor on the staff of the Russian Embassy in Syria, says that the port is being made deeper at present...All this may be regarded as evidence of Russia's determination to make Syria a bridgehead for boosting its influence with Middle East. The materiel and technical supplies center may eventually gain the status of a base of the Black Sea Fleet.

Defense Ministry sources, speaking anonymously, hint that Moscow has some far-reaching plans indeed. A group of ships under the missile cruiser Moskva (Black Sea Fleet flagship) is to be formed within the next three years. The group will be stationed in the Mediterranean Sea on the permanent basis...But a source in the Naval Main Command said that establishment of a fully-fledged base in Tartus could help Russia with warships and tenders withdrawn from Sevastopol in the Crimea. In fact, once the bottom of the Tartus port is deepened, the port will be able to receive all ships of the Black Sea Fleet without exception.

Defense Ministry sources point out that a naval base in Tartus will enable Russia to solidify its positions in the Middle East and ensure security of Syria. Moscow intends to deploy an air defense system around the base - to provide air cover for the base itself and a substantial part of Syrian territory…Russia and Damascus reached an agreement on modernizing Syria's air defenses. Its medium-range S-125 air defense systems will be upgraded to the Pechora-2A level. The upgrade will certainly improve Syrian air defense, which uses hardware supplied to Syria back in the 1980s. Moscow is prepared to offer Syria more sophisticated medium-range Buk-M1s as well. Close-range Strelets systems sold to Damascus last year are all the Syrian air defense system has to show by way of sophisticated gear at this point…Syria wants more than that. A contract for modernization of 1,000 T-72 tanks was drawn and signed. Yesterday, Arms-TASS news agency reported successful tests of T-90C tanks "in a certain Middle East country" and Rosoboroneksport's negotiations over their sale. Other Russian-Syrian arms talks under way concern two Amurs (Project 1650 diesel submarines), some SU-30MKI fighters along with YAK-130s, and modernization of MIG-29 frontal fighters. Damascus also aspires for a consignment of the latest Pantsir-C1 air defense systems designed in Tula.

Establishment of a base in Tartus and rapid advancement of military technology cooperation with Damascus make Syria Russia's instrumental bridgehead and bulwark in the Middle East…It goes without saying that appearance of the Russian military base in the region will certainly introduce corrections into the existing correlation of forces. Russia is taking the Syrian regime under its protection. It will almost certainly sour Moscow's relations with Israel. It may even encourage the Iranian regime nearby and make it even less tractable in the nuclear program talks.

Another piece of evidence and further proof that the battle for securing oil recourses is what’s really driving the Middle Eastern crisis comes out of Venezuela. I reported on my blog that, “The Russian Federation and Venezuela on July 27, 2006 have negotiated and approved the sale of 24 aircraft and 53 helicopters—about a $1 billion (U.S.) deal—to Venezuela, as part of an ongoing landmark event, defying the American threats and demands to halt all weapons transfers and any future deals between Russia and Venezuela. Russia has already supplied and started delivering portions of a 100,000 Kalashnikov automatic rifles ordered by Venezuela and Russian attack helicopters to Venezuela. This deal has further entrenched Russian-Venezuelan cooperation, partnership, and the strategic shift of Russia replacing the United States as the military hardware supplier of Venezuela. The securing of this military hardware agreement between Russia and Venezuela is a sign of the fermenting geo-strategic confrontation or rivalry between the Russia and the United States.”

Now aside from the military implications, this is important news because Venezuela occasionally threatens and someday probably will divert oil exports from the US to Russia’s strategic ally, China. In order for this to happen, China has to build refineries in Venezuela and essentially make the exchange profitable for Caracas to ship oil to Asia rather than the much shorter distance of the US. In fact, on July 12th of this year, Venezuela-owned Citgo Petroleum Corp. opted to stop distributing gasoline to 1,800 independently owned U.S. stations, including all Citgo stations in Kentucky and nine other states. It wasn’t the end of the world for us as this deal wasn’t all that profitable to either side but it does signal interesting times ahead for US-Latin American relations.

So what does this have to do with Lebanon? It is simple math really. The conflict in Lebanon erupted when Hezbollah, funded by Iran, attacked Israel and captured two of its soldiers. In the past, this usually led to prisoner exchanges that typically greatly benefited the Muslim terrorists. In this case, the Israeli’s opted to disassemble Hezbollah in Lebanon once and for all. This we all know (or at least should know).

What one must ask about the above is, who gave the orders for Hezbollah to attack Israel? Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah would have you believe that his organization is acting independently. That can hardly be the case when the mullahs in Tehran control the purse strings. So it is assumed that Iran gave the orders to Nasrallah to spit in the eye of Ehud Olmert, the acting Prime Minister of Israel. Maybe the Israelis would act as usual and give Hezbollah everything they want including the kitchen sink, or maybe they would do as they are currently doing tonight.

Resident derelict nut job Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad probably doesn’t care all that much either way. What he was trying to do, and to some degree succeeding, was to either shift the attention of the Western world from trying to halt his nuclear program, or at the very least, hedge is bargaining posture. You see, with Lebanon in flames the Western world is loathe to aggravate the conflict by upsetting yet another Muslim country. Ahmadinejad has deftly succeeding in both of these endeavors.

How did he manage to check the mighty US you are now probably asking? Again, you must do the math. Syria and Iran have a mutual protection pact with one another. Syria is essentially a client state of Russia. Iran and Russia are strategic and economic allies. Iran, Venezuela, and Russia are all allies. Then of course there is China. Simply put, Iran now has the chutzpa to challenge the West with impunity because they have Russia, China and Venezuela backing them up. As stated earlier, all three nations are a threat to the US’ economy and national security, in that order.

For those looking for a cease-fire in Lebanon, the answer is not to handicap Israel, but to divorce us from oil. When oil dependence is a thing of the past, the Cold War will then be truly over.