After
Iraq: Oil and
Geopolitics
May 21, 2003
By Charles Kohlhaas
It is an understatement to say the aftermath of the war
in Iraq
is proving to be a difficult period.
World media attention is focused on anti-American demonstrations
and the failure of the American military to establish civil order.
Diplomats and commentators debate and opine on how, and by whom, a
stable government, an orderly social system and a functioning economy
should be established in
Iraq
; as well as what actions the
United States
will take regarding other Middle
Eastern countries and
North Korea
.
At this point, it is obvious the follow-up process will not be a smooth
one and the result will probably not be the orderly, federal democratic
system envisioned by the Bush Administration—at least not until after a
long period of turmoil and conflict. Oil
fields and facilities were damaged much less than was expected before the
war. A return of production to
supply the domestic Iraqi oil market may take only a few months.
A return to significant volumes of oil exports, however, will need
to overcome several political and legal—as well as operational and
investment—obstacles.
As such, Iraq
may not realize its potential as a
source of large increased supplies of oil to a growing world market for
several years, if at all.
For several decades, the
United States
, as a matter of its own enlightened
self-interest, has undertaken to establish and maintain security of oil
supply for all the world’s economies.
Any serious consideration of energy or foreign policy must
recognize that now, and for the foreseeable future, oil represents the
life’s blood of the international economic order. Despite the delusions
of anti-globalization protestors and street demonstrators, the secure
supply and low price of oil not only allow wealthy countries to prosper
but also define the margin in poor countries as to whether people eat or
go hungry, have the medicines they need or send their children to school.
The
Iraq
affair highlighted a coincidental development in international
economics. Combined with the
strike in
Venezuela
and political unrest in
Nigeria
, it showed the world’s discretionary
surplus oil productive capability is much less than had been previously
estimated. As world economies
resume normal growth with accompanying increases in oil demand, the world
is likely to be faced, for the first time, with oil-supply shortages and
persistent upward pressure on prices over the next several years.
Oil prices have declined since the end of the war due to the return of
Iraqi and Venezuelan production and a seasonal spring demand slump, but
this price drop should not induce a false complacency regarding supplies.
A prolonged trend of increasing prices would severely restrain
economic recovery in the
United States
,
Europe
and
Japan
.
Oil shortages would be particularly disruptive to stability in
Asia
, the area of fastest economic and oil demand growth.
Japan
is still in a prolonged depression and
barely avoiding financial collapse.
China
has been an oil importer since 1993,
while
India
has always been dependent on imports. Both
are rapidly industrializing.
China
continues to modernize its military and
is already laying claim to large areas of the
South China Sea
and its potential oil and gas resources.
The need for oil supplies without American guarantees of free
access and stability will only increase
China
’s temptation to solve its energy
needs by force. Since the
U.S.
lost its Philippine bases, piracy has
become one of the fastest-growing industries in
Southeast Asia
.
China
also borders
Russia
and Central Asian countries with large
oil and gas resources and could become belligerent about access to those
supplies.
Indonesia
, the only OPEC producer in
Asia
, has been disintegrating since the Bre-X gold mining fraud was exposed
in 1997. It is now under its fourth government in 5 years, the middle
class has been wiped out, investment has stopped, and religious strife and
civil disorder are increasing with no improvement in sight.
Amid the rising discontent and disintegration, Islamic terrorist
groups are becoming aggressive.
Indonesia
is the world’s largest Islamic country
and is strategically located; over one-third of the world’s sea-borne
commerce passes through Indonesian waters.
The combination of a sick
Japan
, an expansionistic
China
and an unstable
Indonesia
mixed with oil shortages is an excellent
recipe for future conflict and instability.
But the oil industry is not responding to the prospect of impending
shortages. Capital budgets are
not increasing and worldwide drilling and exploration activity is down.
Oil prices are too volatile. Projects
that require investments of billions of dollars that require years to be
repaid at low rates of return are not attracting capital.
In addition, after 20 years of severe cost-cutting, oil companies
are without research laboratories, experienced staffs or young engineers
trained in petroleum engineering.
Another coincidental aspect of the
Iraq
affair was that it came just when
Russia
’s president had reached out to the
United States
, supporting its war on terrorism and
establishing a rapport with the American administration. France, who
passed
Italy
as the largest purchaser of Russian
crude and thus has become the largest source of foreign income to
Russia
, and
Germany
, the largest foreign investor in
Russia
, used their clout successfully to
elicit Russian support for an anti-Iraq-war position.
France is trying for a realignment of world power with typical and
obvious French tactics--to ally France with Germany to control the
European Union and, with such a large economic block, attract Russia into
an alliance. A combination of
united European economies with Russian resources would establish an
economic and political block to rival, and possibly displace, the
United States
.
This strategy was severely undermined by the rebellion of certain European
countries (the UK, Italy, and Spain), combined with various Eastern
European countries who are not yet members of the EU but who supported the
American position on Iraq. Jacques
Chirac saw his plans to stop the war thwarted by a combination of this
rebellion against the French mandates and by Bush’s disdain for European
opinion which were then followed by exposure of close French relations
with Saddam Hussein. He may
have achieved his longer-term goals, however.
Putin is now actively seeking closer economic ties with the
European Union and has proposed a common market of
Russia
,
Ukraine
,
Belarus
, and
Kazakhstan
with the EU that will be discussed
further at an EU –
Russia
summit on May 31.
United States
relations and meetings with
Russia
mainly concern military matters.
The
United States
needs to restore the relationship with
Putin and develop and nurture non-military political and economic aspects.
Oil can be a tool to do that, especially
Russian oil exported to Asia to
stabilize a region of continuing Russian concern.
The
U.S.
can also establish independent
free-trade relations with Eastern European countries and others who
supported it with respect to the war and undermine efforts to develop
united European economic or political strength.
The strike of oil workers in
Venezuela
, concurrent with worries about oil
supplies from
Iraq
, revealed the lack of worldwide surplus
productive capacity. It also
focused attention for a short time on the deterioration of political
stability in several Latin American countries.
If the
United States
is to develop secure, long-term and
diverse supplies of oil for world economic stability, it must devote
diplomatic attention to restoring relations with
Russia
and
Latin America
. As
the world’s largest importer, the
U.S.
can use oil as a tool to stabilize the
political and economic systems in
Russia
and in several Latin American countries
where potential oil reserves are large and oil production represents a
large part of the economy.
The primary diplomatic objective should be to create favorable
investment conditions in those countries.
Such conditions include favorable fiscal terms, safe working
conditions, lack of corruption, expeditious bureaucratic action, and a
fair system of legal enforcement and dispute resolution.
In addition, a major requirement is a stable, long-term oil pricing
system, consistent with expectations of investors in large projects, and
must be at a level that will also stabilize the income stream of host
countries. Reserves in
Russia
and
Latin America
, for technical reasons, are very large
at certain prices but vulnerable to low prices.
Low oil prices significantly disrupt the economies of those
countries and destabilize their political and social systems.
For instance, the reserves of the Russian Far East region are huge
at $25 per barrel but are mostly non-commercial at $10.
An efficient free-market system operates best with minimal government
interference. Government
participation is required, however, to provide an environment in which a
market system can operate safely, fairly, and efficiently.
Private market participants have no authority to establish or
change international systems. Only
government can use oil as a tool to achieve international geopolitical
objectives.
A relatively simple policy can meet many of these needs.
The
U.S.
needs to establish long-term purchase
contracts with supplier countries for a large portion of their oil exports
at fixed, moderate prices. For
instance, the
United States
, in a cooperative government-industry
action, could contract to buy 500,000 barrels of oil per day at $25 per
barrel from the Russians at the export terminal on the Pacific for their
planned new pipelines. Details
of amounts and price would be negotiated specifically; this volume would
be about 50 percent of planned capacity.
Such a policy would provide a stable investment climate for
construction of the pipelines and development of the fields to supply
them. It would also contribute
to stability in the Russian economy that is dependent on oil for foreign
income, develop secure supplies for the growing Asian market, complement
OPEC’s price structure, and balance French and other European political
influence in
Russia
.
Similar contracts should be written with
Venezuela
,
Mexico
,
Argentina
,
Peru
and
Colombia.
The amount, price, and length of the contract would be specific to
each country. Such contracts
would act as a flywheel on the world oil pricing system, remove
investors’ fear an oil price drop caused by the production they develop
coming on stream, and prevent high price spikes from disrupting world
economies because new diverse supplies at moderate prices would be
available.
The current oil pricing system, establishing oil prices by trading
short-term contracts on the NYMEX, was established in the early 1980’s
to pull price control away from OPEC.
This pricing system worked fine for the last two decades, a period
of surplus supplies, but it no longer meets our economic or geopolitical
needs. It is time for another
change.
Dr. Charles A. Kohlhaas is a former Professor of
Petroleum Engineering at the Colorado School of Mines and has worked for,
founded, managed, and consulted for major and independent companies in the
international oil and gas industry.
He
has written on questions relating to oil for In
the National Interest
in the January 15, February 12, and
March 5, 2003
issues.
|