[CLUE-Talk] Why Iraq? Why now?

[Matt Gushee]

This recurring debate on Iraq is wearing me out. But I thought I'd
present a selection of interesting links, with just a little commentary.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a think tank that is
reported to have had a strong influence on the Bush administration's
foreign policy. Several current members of the administration are or
have been associated with the project, notably Paul Wolfowitz. Here is
an excerpt from PNAC's 1998 letter to then-president Clinton:

  The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility
  that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass
  destruction.  In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake
  military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it
  means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now
  needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
  
  (http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm)

The signatories of this letter included Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld,
Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and Richard Armitage.
  
The 2002 policy paper _Rebuilding America's Defenses_ takes a new and
more revealing tack on the Iraq problem:

  Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more
  permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved
  conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for
  substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue
  of the regime of Saddam Hussein.

  (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf)

Read that carefully.

Why exactly are we so interested in Gulf regional security, anyway? 

What else could the reason be but oil?

And what is the specific concern around oil? 

According to sources I have read, world oil production will most likely
peak in the near future, possibly in the next 5-20 years. And when that
happens--not in the much more distant future when the oil comes close to
actually running out--things will start to get very ugly. Certainly
there will be intense competition and rapid price increases for energy;
resource wars seem to be a strong possibility. From what I have seen,
this projection is not mere environmentalist doomsaying, but the
thoroughly-researched opinion of respected petroleum industry analysts
(note, however, that this is difficult to fully confirm, since I haven't
found any open-access petroleum industry sites). But anyway, here are
some of the better links I've found:

  http://www.wri.org/wri/climate/jm_oil_000.html
  http://www.iea.org/g8/world/oilsup.htm
  http://www.hubbertpeak.com/
  http://www.ems.org/oil_depletion/story.html

Also, a Google search for "peak oil production" turns up quite a few
hits.

If these projections are indeed well-known and believed in the oil
industry, then we can reasonably guess that they are very much on Dick
Cheney's mind. So here's a hypothesis:

  Cheney and his war faction believe they are doing us all a favor by
  going out and grabbing a share of the remaining oil before the shit
  hits the fan.

  If you ask me, part of a sensible response to the coming scarcity
  would be an aggressive program of conservation and alternative energy
  development. But that, of course, has the potential to cut into the
  profits of Big Oil.

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee at havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)