“War is the great scavenger of thought. It is the sovereign disinfectant, and its red stream of blood is the fluid that cleans out the stagnant pools and clotted channels of the intellect.... We have awakened from an opium-dream of comfort, of ease, of that miserable poltroonery of “the sheltered life.” Our wish for indulgence of every sort, our laxity of manners, our wretched sensitiveness to personal inconvenience, these are suddenly lifted before us in their true guise as the specters of national decay; and we have risen from the lethargy of our dilettantism to lay them down, before it is too late, by the flashing of the unsheathed sword.” –John Stuart Mill (1806–1873)

It is said that democracies are slow to anger but possess a “Terrible Swift Sword” when mobilized for war. With all the fighting in the 20th century, two world wars, Korea, Vietnam, and numerous other skirmishes, one would think democracies loved war. But the truth is that Americans would just as soon be left alone with the fruits of this vast economy and all its plastic and soma like distractions. We have built a nation of computers and DVDs, of television and one day sales, of unlimited food, and freedom, and a constant consumption of resources and petroleum to keep the wheels turning.

Americans have become fat and indolent. They are used to comfort and ease, regular paychecks, access to credit, a house in the suburbs, four kids and two cars. They are NOT used to being inconvenienced—like waiting in line for gasoline on an odd or even day, like having the electricity turned off by Edison because Texas Oil companies have raised the price of a kilowatt hour to dizzying heights. They do NOT like watching their little nest egg of retirement evaporate when the NASDAC falls from over 5000 to under 1300 and the Dow from over 11,000 to under 8,000. Losing all that retirement money was very inconvenient. They do NOT like it when someone flies airliners into our tall skyscrapers, sends letters with Anthrax to our elected officials or rides about the Capital Beltway shooting people at a whim. They don’t care for the government snooping on their e-mail, listening to their cell phone conversations or photographing their every move in public. If truth be told, Americans are a peace loving people. But now their lives are fraught with the fear of foreign terrorists and imminent catastrophe. Is it really so? Are events in the world so dire that we must now commit our democracy to the invasion and occupation of another country because of some evil deed we think they might plan one day? Is this why a democracy should spend its soldiers lives and blood?

As our nation braces itself for war, we ask why? What noble reason justifies the expense of 100 billion dollars and who knows how many lives? Is it about freeing the Iraqi people from the oppression of Saddam? Is it about spreading democracy and the “American Way? Is it all about oil or the evil of potential bio terror? While I do believe that there are times when a democracy must rise to the challenge of protecting the freedom it cherishes, is this such a time? And what has happened to our freedoms? Have they been made more secure since 9-11 or placed in dire jeopardy?

Greed and Fear – The real reasons for the war in Iraq

The Bush administration has been more and more strident in its evocations on the necessity of invading Iraq, and preparations for that campaign continue at an equally intensified level.  The news media have been hyping the story for months, the UN has been pulling at the issue like dogs with a rope, and it now seems inevitable that there will indeed be a second Gulf War. Anyone who knows anything at all about military matters can see this quite plainly.

There are only 10 active divisions in the US Army, 6 heavy, 2 airborne and 2 light. As of this writing two full heavy divisions and elements of three others were deploying to the Gulf or Turkey.  These forces represent at least 50% of the entire war fighting capability of the US! Does that look like a serious intent to launch a war? It certainly does to me.  It was once said that “God is on the side of the Heavy Battalions.” In this scenario, when we see the US government investing the time money and assets required to move, arm and deploy even one of its vaunted “Heavy Divisions,” war is a foregone conclusion.

Irrespective of the fact that the US has shown little resolve with Iraq until the 9-11 incident prompted George Bush to make the “War on Terror” the focal point of his presidency, it should now be obvious to Saddam that his days are clearly numbered. Yet, the Iraqi’s remain curiously mired in their old behaviors, thinking to keep their arsenal of Chemical and Biological weapons, (if they have any), well hidden while they persist with the familiar game of evasion that they have been playing with the international community for the last ten years. But now the big guns are rolling to the front—the Heavy Divisions are moving to the desert again, and the leadership of Iraq is making a serious mistake. With news media replete with details of the growing US buildup in the Middle East, one must ask what in the world could the Iraqi government be thinking?  Do they actually think they can survive another Gulf war where the clear intent of the US is to dismantle the current Iraqi regime? Do they hope to resurrect their hopes for “the Mother of All Battles” in the streets of Baghdad? Are they planning to go out in a blaze of fire and destruction that will make the burning oil fields of Kuwait seem tame by comparison?

And at the same time there are more and more American citizens wondering what our own government is thinking! What is the real motive behind this rush to war? The spectacular and dastardly attack on 9-11 has had far reaching consequences. While Bin Ladin may have made his attack in an effort to catalyze the “Arab Street,” its real effect was to light a fire under the boiler of US ambitions in the Middle East and Central Asia. And,  in spite of all the rhetoric about “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” the simple fact of the matter is that this campaign is about oil, and those who oppose it in the security council do so for reasons that are also about oil.

Consider the facts: The French Oil Company TotalFinaElf has an exclusive contract to develop the largest known field in Iraq at Majnoon (est 20 billion barrels). The second largest field at West Qurna (est 15 billion barrels) is under contract to four Russian oil companies. At Kirkuk, (est 10 billion barrels) the Russians have the key contracts. At Rumaila (est 10 billion barrels) the Russians and Chinese split the contracts. At Bin Umar (est 6 billion barrels) the French and Russians split the contracts. Now…Have you noticed that the US  has no significant development contracts to any of this oil?  And what three countries are most adamant in opposing the US plan for war and military occupation of Iraq? You guessed it, France, Russia and China—each permanent members of the security council with veto powers. Iraq knows this, and it has used oil contracts as a means of enticing support from these countries for many years. In spite of UN sanctions that prohibit this development, France, Russia and China have all been after the black gold beneath the sands of Iraq, and the US has been locked out. Now the US wants in, and may also see that the future development of Iraqi oil has the added benefit of breaking OPEC and diminishing its power over the world oil market. And which country will not let us fight Saddam from its soil this time? You guessed it, Saudi Arabia. Word is that after the Iraq war is over the Saudis will ask the US to remove all its forces from Saudi soil permanently.

So lets us be frank, the US “interest” in this war and the interest of those nations opposing it, stems first and foremost from this greed for oil. Widening your lens on this conflict will also reveal much more. A new “Great Game” that has been underway in this region for some time—and it is all about oil.

Geopolitically, the problem for the US is that oil its reserves are being depleted while its consumption continues to grow.  The US consumes about 20 million barrels of oil per day--about 7.5 billion barrels per year. Current proven reserves on US soil total about 22 billion barrels, (not counting oil that would be difficult to extract in shale deposits). This means the current annual consumption of oil in the US is equal to one third of its proven reserves! If the US tried to rely solely on its own oil production, our reserves would run out in three years! No more oil. Faced with this prospect, the US has been filling up salt caverns on the Gulf Coast of Texas to provide us with a “Strategic Petroleum Reserve,” but even this would only stave off depletion by a few months. (The reserve contains just under 700 million barrels at present - about 60 days at current consumption rates  augmented by imports or a month if we had to rely on it exclusively). The US is therefore forced to rely on foreign oil imports, and it is not the first country to resort to war and occupation to obtain these vital resources. (Japan went to war for oil in WWII).  To complicate this picture, the worldwide production of petroleum has already peaked and is now in decline. The oil is running out, and soon it will cost more to find, extract, deliver and refine than it yields in dollars and energy...Unless, the price goes up dramatically.

The chart above shows two estimates of world petroleum production curves. One shows production peaking in the 1980’s and another peaking at 2000. This “Petroleum Window,” where our vast economy relies on oil and gas, is active now, but is rapidly closing as consumption increases. (Look at the situation in the year 2025 when reserves will decline by as much as 50% over today’s levels!) We may only have another 30-50 years of oil left--and that means war to secure access to existing reserves and new discoveries will be more and more commonplace.  The fact that 80% of the world’s known resources are beneath soil occupied by Muslims is making this a very sticky situation. Sometimes things go well, other times they don’t. OPEC has placed embargos on the US and the West before, and has great power over price by controling production. We want to make sure that no other government has this sort of leverage on us again. Iraq, with the world’s 2nd largest proven reserves, has tried to lock the US  out and deny American companies lucrative contracts for the production of its oil. It wants nuclear bombs to prevent us from doing anything about it. War is the result. War now, before Saddam gets his bomb and “Heavy Divisions” and JDAMs no longer matter. Saddam has not threatened us with “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” he has snubbed us by giving the key oil contracts to France, Russia and China. So now the US Army is going to change all that, and France, Russia and China are not happy about it.

World Reserves and US Involment

The key thing here is that as the proven reserves of the US decline, (7-8 years at the present rate of consumption), the US oil companies will either need a high oil price to justify going after the hard to extract shale oil, or they will need to have easy access to oil from imports. I think they will want both. As we deploy nearly a quarter of a million troops to invade Iraq, the price of oil has suddenly spiked from $20. per barrel to nearly $40, and could go much higher. In the short term this means big profits for the companies holding oil they bought at lower prices. War has always been costly for some, and profitable for others. Both the President and Vice President are oil men, and they know these facts well enough. Expect to hear that “cruel winter conditions have increased demand for oil.” Expect that “the instability in Venezuela and worries over war have frightened the  market.” Expect a big fire at an oil terminal, refinery or other installation on the chain of supply. Expect the price to go up, up, up.  The aim is to get the price up, and control access to the reserves before it can come down again. The US consumes 25% of the world’s oil, and we want to make sure we continue to get our share. (Fair share? I think not.)

But how to convince the American people we need to invade and occupy another country to secure future access to its oil and allow for a strong military presence in the Gulf to keep watch on the rest? Answer--the country has to be evil, and very threatening. Terrorism  and “Weapons of Mass Destruction” provided the perfect vehicle for the fear necessary to to convince the American people we should act. Let’s look back a few years...

A Little History

Twenty years ago it was the blue-turbaned menace of Ayatollah Khomeini that first upset the political and economic balance of power in the Gulf region. Iran was once a great bulwark against Soviet expansion toward the warm oil rich “blue waters” of the gulf. Terrorism was a pesky problem in those years, but no real threat to our national security. Instead, the “Evil Empire” was Soviet Communism. Then, in one fell stroke, the Shah of Iran was in exile and Kohmeini fomented a popular revolution that paraded blindfolded US embassy personnel through the streets in November of 1979. One month later, Russia would invade Afghanistan, moving real military power into this key outpost in Central Asia and pressing closer to the Gulf. Something had to be done, and it was. In Afghanistan the US CIA began to arm and train Afghan fighters called the “mujahideen” with the aim of bogging the Russians down in their road to the Persian Gulf. Sadly, the legacy of the Afghan war was refugees, drugs, the proliferation of arms, crime, and terrorism. Yes, our Bin Ladin “Terrorist” of today was once one of the loyal “Freedom Fighters” of yesterday, and the “mujahideen” became the “Taliban.” We now must sleep in the bed we made in Afghanistan.

But what of Iran? The solution came when Iraq started its own little oil war for the fields around Basra in 1980.  The US decided to back Saddam, giving him arms and even chemical weapons when he started to fail in his 8 year struggle. Then, when Reagan’s “Iran Contra” scandal broke, and Iraq realized the US was also sending weapons to Iran, the game was exposed. It was not the threat of radical Islamic terrorism that motivated us, but the geopolitical chess game against the Soviet Union and the great stakes of oil in this region. Face it—at every turn the US has skillfully masked the real geopolitical and economic reasons for its military intervention behind the convenient veil of opposing some great evil, be it Soviet Communism or now Islamic Terrorism. The Ayatollah was a godsend for the purposes of propaganda. He gave us the “face of evil” that we so need to launch our democracy on the road to war.  Bin Ladin has now become the catalyst for our war on terror, and the new face of evil is Saddam Hussein, the one time leader of a “client state” that has now gone bad. He went so bad, in fact, that he tried to seize all of Kuwait’s oil ten years ago, and the US deployed massive forces to eject him and protect Saudi Arabia as well. Long after the 1st Gulf War, US forces remain in the region in bases throughout Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and with pre-positioned arms afloat at sea. Now the war on terror offers the US new opportunities to expand its influence into the place where the greatest new oil discoveries are being made – Central Asia.

A Look Ahead

The really big oil and gas discoveries in recent years are in the Caspian Sea region and the Central Asian republics of, Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Khazakistan and the Tarim Basin. So it is only natural for the world's biggest petroleum user, with the world's most powerful military, to be projecting power into this region. The US is busy trading the promise of economic development and petroleum dollars for military basing rights in these countries, ostensibly to prosecute its “war against terror,” which began in Afghanistan where contracts to build oil and gas pipelines were threatened by the Taliban. The US presence in Afghanistan now secures the possibility of building pipelines south through Pakistan to Karachi. Basing rights in Uzbekistan and other Central Asian republics give the US the ability to play its military trump card in the region should it ever become necessary.  With the threat in Afghanistan neutralized, and Iraq on the target list for invasion, the US will complete a strategic envelopment of Iran, with the eventual hope that the citizens of that nation will rise against their fundamentalist government and become pro-western again. The situation will then look a bit like it did before the Shah fell in Iran and we got Ted Koppel’s “America Held Hostage” every night—except there is no great Soviet Union in the equation, and the US will be the dominant player.

So greed, the desire to secure and protect oil, is the primary motive for this war, and the secondary motive is fear. The Bin Ladin attack on September 11, 2001 was so shocking in its scale and effect that fear became a very effective means of influencing public opinion in this country. The buildings fell and,  almost before the dust had settled, the word ANTHRAX was broadcast in our media at a fever pitch. Only two or three people died from the spores, but the fear factor of potential bio-terror kept the American public fitfully distracted and ready to welcome the US invasion of Afghanistan in October. The move did indeed seem a logical way of striking back at the terrorists, and defending America from future attacks. At that time I supported the limited operation in Afghanistan that was so successful in quickly routing the Taliban. It was a direct strike against our avowed enemies, and it also promised freedom and the hope of democracy for Afghanistan. Unfortunately, while it liberated the Afghan people, Bin Ladin and his network escaped to fight again. The fear has not gone away. Examine the current news media coverage of the reasons why the war should be fought now in Iraq—you will find fear behind them all. Saddam has had bio and chemical weapons for nearly twenty years, but now, because of the threat of terror attacks, they are suddenly made into a massive threat to the US and the justification for our planned invasion. Russia has bio weapons, as does China, North Korea and a host of other nations. Will we soon have plans to invade them all?

Greed and fear, then, are the two reasons why we move now to war, and I submit they are not good reasons for a democracy to fight. All of our great triumphs in war were fought for good reasons. In WWII the horrors of the holocaust made it quite clear that the world was at stake in a struggle for freedom and democracy against totalitarianism and fascism. Our convenient ally in that war was communism, and then we froze them out of the picture in Europe with our cold war. Now Russia has a GNP equal to that of Denmark or the Netherlands and so we look for our evil elsewhere to justify war, but more often than not we can find our motives in the insatiable consumption our American “way of life” leads to. How are we any different from Imperial Japan when she sought to establish the “Greater Coprosperity Sphere” by seizing Indonesian oil at the outset of WWII?  The end of that conflict was two Atomic Bombs dropped on the Japanese homeland. Will our Islamic Terrorists resort to the same strategy against us? That is what we are teaching them--that there is no way to confront the US unless you have a “Weapon of Mass Destruction.” North Korea’s recent behavior is a perfect example--and they have a missile capable of hitting California.

Surely there are good reasons for a democracy to to wage war if we must, but greed and fear ore both bad reasons. Sir Edmund Gosse, a British poet and critic, (1849–1928), once wrote:

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse.... A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their own free choice—is often the means of their regeneration.”

Sadly, this will not be a good war, carried on for an honest purpose and by the free choice of the American people. The greed of the US economic power brokers, and the fear they have instilled into the public with the threat of terrorism, is leading this charge to war. Who knows what the consequences will be? I do not think that it will be one of those defining moments that will become a means of our regeneration. It will expand the ever widening rift between America and its avowed values and the perception of America the world has based on our actions. By their deeds you shall know them. We should fight to preserve our freedom, we should fight to help the powerless when they appeal to us for aid, we should fight to assure the dignity and human rights of other nations and peoples when genocide, insurrection, disease and poverty threaten to consume them. But we do not fight for these reasons. This time we fight for greed and fear.

Again, the facts speak for themselves. In Rwanda, bands of armed thugs roamed through one village after another committing wholesale slaughter. They killed thousands, and maimed countless others by cutting off hands and arms. Did we fight to end that conflict and preserve the freedom and dignity of the innocent? Nearly a million have died in that region over the last few years because of warlordism, not to mention the countless others who are ravaged by disease and poverty and oppression in Africa. That is the equivalent of some 300+ world trade center attacks! Yet, as we have no “national interest” in that area of the world, we stand aloof, disengaged. Can anyone with any intellectual or moral integrity argue that we would be not be fully engaged there if 70% of the world’s oil sat beneath Rwanda and Central Africa?

Freedom, truth, justice, human dignity--these are the values a democracy should uphold, and the only reasons why a democracy should fight should they become endangered. Our government has told me a thousand times that Saddam Hussein wants to take all those things away from me, and I do not doubt that if he could do so, he would. The truth of the matter is that he cannot do so--nor can Bin Ladin. The incident on September 11th did not take those things away, or threaten them one iota. We are the only people who can threaten the the values we hold dearest, by succumbing to the fear that is broadcast at us daily, and by remaining mute and unresponsive when our government wages war for all the wrong reasons, and does so “in our name.”

This war is going to be fought. The first bombs and cruise missiles will likely be launched  when the moon is dark beginning Late February or early March. Only the reluctance of the UN and the necessity of buying billion dollar access to bases in Turkey seem to be delaying the attack.  The ground troops will swing into action in mid-March. What will the consequences be? Even if we do launch this war for all the wrong reasons, there may still be some chance of redeeming something worthwhile from the conflict. If we can eliminate Saddam, and liberate the Iraqi people...if we can rebuild Iraq, stabilize the Middle East and then solve the Palestinian question...if we can return the oil wealth to the people who own it, instead of to the coffers of the big oil companies...if we can...

We should be able to sit down with reason and good will and make arrangements for the production and equitable distribution of oil to all nations, and to help other nations begin rapid development of alternate sources of energy. We could be the hope and the light of the world, but we have to stop acting like the enemies we create and then vilify. We could earn the love and respect of the people of the world by our fair and just behavior. But instead, many societies now see the US as the primary threat to their future, not their hope for deliverance. We have to start telling the truth and acting according to the values we claim to hold dear--that all men are created equal. Not just us Americans!

These are hopes for some bright phoenix to rise from the ashes of the war that is about to unfold. Let us hope we can.

UPDATE - Sadly, we have all seen the results of our war in Iraq. This article was written in 2002, just before the war on Saddam was launched. Still feel like opening up another front on Iran?

-- John Schettler

UPDATE:  IRAN Re visiting old ground can be informative of the road ahead, particularly when we are now poised at the edge of yet another Middle Eastern war, this time with Iran, and for the same old reasons - Fear and Greed.

As if they learned nothing from the shambles of Iraq, our leaders are once again insisting that they may be forced to attack another Islamic country--with the very same weapons they seem so manic about!

There is a peculiar edge of madness in this latest run-up to war with Iran. We assert that no one is to have nuclear weapons but us, and then threaten to wield our nuclear sword to enforce our will on the world stage. It has a Dr. Strangelove imperative about it--hit them now and “get the job done” before they build their bomb--as if the Iranians actually sought to engage the US, a nation with over 20,000 nuclear warheads, in a shoving match.

Rather than reaching an accommodation on how we can best provide for the energy needs of all nations concerned, we resort to war to secure our interests, and the oil we need to keep Wal-Mart open over here.  How are we any different from Imperial Japan when  she struck south to secure Indonesian oil and resources in WWII?

Rather than putting our industry and ingenuity to work on a comprehensive alternative energy plan, with national urgency and strong financial backing, we choose instead to further the status quo that keeps us beholden to Big Oil.

If America launches a surprise attack on Iran it will be the most cowardly and shameful act ever perpetrated by this nation, and the consequences, like the chaos we now have in Iraq, will be with us for the next decade.

OTHER ARTICLES ON IRAN:

The great Game for oil dominance has been underway for  decades, but we never see to learn our lessons.

What a war with Iran might look like - and what we will face in the Middle East if we launch our own self-righteous Pearl Harbor attack on Iran.

-JS