http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=14210

-----------------------------------------------------

Oiling the Wheels of War

Michael T. Klare, 
The Nation October 1, 2002



As the United States gears up for an
invasion of Iraq, the great unanswered question continues to
be: Why is the Bush Administration so determined to topple a
government that has been effectively contained by American
power for eleven years?

The White House has offered several reasons to justify an
attack on Iraq -- Saddam Hussein is on the verge of
obtaining nuclear weapons; an invasion is needed to prevent
the transfer of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons to
international terrorists, and so on. Another factor,
however, may be of equal importance -- oil. Two key concerns
underlie the Administration's thinking: First, the United
States is becoming dangerously dependent on imported
petroleum to meet its daily energy requirements, and,
second, Iraq possesses the world's largest reserves of
untapped petroleum after Saudi Arabia.

The problem of growing US dependence on imported petroleum
was first raised in the National Energy Policy Report,
released by the White House in May 2001. Known as "the
Cheney report," after its principal author, the Vice
President, the document revealed that imported supplies
accounted for half of US oil consumption in 2000 and will
jump to two-thirds in 2020. And despite all the talk of
drilling in Alaska, the report makes one thing clear: Most
of America's future oil supplies will have to come from the
Persian Gulf countries, which alone possess sufficient
production potential to meet ever-growing US energy
requirements. Thus, the report calls on the White House to
place a high priority on increasing US access to Persian
Gulf supplies.

Growing worries about the stability of Saudi Arabia,
principal US supplier there, heightened by revelations of
Saudi extremists' involvement in the September 11 terror
attacks, have prompted US strategists to seek a backup
should future instability lead to a drop in Saudi oil
production, which could trigger a global recession. Some
strategists have proposed Russia as a backup, others the
Caspian Sea states of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. But only
one country has the capacity to substantially increase oil
production in the event of a Saudi collapse: Iraq. With
proven reserves of 112 billion barrels of oil (compared with
49 billion for Russia and 15 billion for the Caspian
states), Iraq alone can serve as a backup for Saudi Arabia.
At the same time, control over Iraqi oil would allow US
leaders to more easily ignore Saudi demands for US action on
behalf of the Palestinians and would weaken OPEC's control
over oil prices.

Iraq has yet another key attraction for US oil strategists:
Whereas most of Saudi Arabia's major fields have already
been explored and claimed, Iraq possesses vast areas of
promising but unexplored hydrocarbon potential. These fields
may harbor the world's largest remaining reservoir of
unmapped and unclaimed petroleum -- far exceeding the
untapped fields in Alaska, Africa and the Caspian. Whoever
gains possession of these fields will exercise enormous
influence over the global energy markets of the twenty-first
century.

Knowing this, and seeking allies for his confrontation with
Washington, Saddam Hussein has begun to parcel out
concessions to the most promising fields to oil firms in
Europe, Russia and China. According to the International
Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook for 2001, he has
already awarded such contracts for fields with an estimated
potential of 44 billion barrels of oil--an amount equal to
the total reserves of the United States, Canada and Norway
(the number-one European producer) combined. At current
rates of about $25 per barrel, that makes these contracts
worth an estimated $1.1 trillion.

And here's the rub: The Iraqi dissidents chosen by
Washington to lead the new regime in Baghdad have threatened
to cancel all contracts awarded to firms in countries that
fail to assist in the overthrow of Saddam. "We will review
all of these agreements," said the head of the London office
of the Iraqi National Congress (a dissident umbrella group
backed by the United States), and those signed by Saddam
Hussein will be considered invalid unless endorsed by the
new government. Not surprisingly, US oil firms are expected
to be awarded most of the Hussein-era contracts voided by
the successor regime.

This could prove to be the biggest oil grab in modern
history, providing hundreds of billions of dollars to US oil
firms -- many linked to senior officials in the Bush
Administration--and helping to avert a future energy crunch
in the United States. But is oil worth spilling the blood of
American soldiers and Iraqi civilians who get caught in the
way? This is the question Congress must ask if we are to
have an honest debate on the merits of invading Iraq.

Michael T. Klare, Five College Professor of Peace and World
Security Studies at Hampshire College, is the defense
correspondent of The Nation and author of "Resource Wars:
The New Landscape of Global Conflict."



© 2002 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.