Posted on 08/10/2014 12:16:08 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Last night, President Barack Obama announced that he was authorizing American airstrikes in Iraq. He described his intervention as a “humanitarian effort to help save thousands of Iraqi civilians who are trapped on a mountain” and as an effort “to protect our American personnel.” One word that he didn’t mention is “oil,” but it lies near the center of American motives for intervention.
The United States is conducting airdrops to aid the Yazidis who have fled the advance of Islamic State militants, but it is conducting airstrikes around Erbil, which is to the west. There are American consular personnel in Erbil, but they could be evacuated if necessary. What Obama left unsaid was that Erbil, a city of 1.5 million, is the capital of the Kurdish regional government and the administrative center of its oil industry, which accounts for about a quarter of Iraq’s oil. The Kurds claim that if they were to become an independent state, they would have the ninth-largest oil reserves in the world. And oil wells are near Erbil.
If the Islamic State were to take over Erbil, they would endanger Iraq’s oil production and, by extension, global access to oil. Prices would surge at a time when Europe, which buys oil from Iraq, has still not escaped the global recession. Oil prices have already risen in response to the Islamic State’s threat to Erbil, and on Thursday, American oil companies Chevron and Exxon Mobile began evacuating their personnel from Kurdistan. But oil traders are predicting that American intervention could halt the rise. “In essence we find U.S. air strikes more bearish than bullish for oil as the act finally draws a line for IS and reinforces both the stability in south Iraq and in Kurdistan,” Oliver Jakob, a Swiss oil analyst, told Reuters.
In portraying American intervention in Iraq as a purely humanitarian effort, Obama is following the script he read from in Libya, when he justified American intervention as an effort to prevent a massacre in Benghazi. In a March 28, 2011 address to the nation, Obama painted the American intervention as a response to “brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis.” Oil was not mentioned, even though Libya was the world’s sixteenth-largest oil producer in 2009 and a major supplier to Europe. But oil was most likely involved, as became clear when, after preventing a massacre in Benghazi, the United States and its coalition partners stuck around to topple the regime of Muammar Qaddafi. If the Obama administration wanted to prevent the world’s peoples from brutal dictators and repressive regimes or from takeovers by terrorist groups, there are other countries besides Libya and Iraq where it could intervene. What distinguishes these two countries is that they are major oil producers.
The United States should worry about the global oil supply. It is important for global economic and political stability. And having a significant chunk of it fall into the hands of a group like the Islamic State should certainly be a concern. But if Obama is worried about the world’s oil supply, then he should say so forthrightly and not leave himself in a position where he will be unable to justify or explain further intervention after the airdrops to the Yazidis are completed. And the administration should also have a plan for making sure that in sending out the Air Force, it will actually end a dire threat to Iraq’s oil production and put Iraq back on its feet. In Libya, the U.S. and its partners succeeded in getting rid of Muammar Qaddafi, but not in resolving the country’s humanitarian crisis or in keeping its oil flowing. Oil production has plummeted as Libya has been plunged into anarchy after Qaddafi’s fall. The challenge in Erbil and Iraq is even more daunting.
Judis was born in Chicago. He attended Amherst College and received B.A. and M.A. degrees in Philosophy from the University of California at Berkeley. In 1969 he was a founding editor of Socialist Revolution (which was later renamed Socialist Review and then Radical Society before ceasing publication in 2009). In the 1970s he was a founding editor of the East Bay Voice. Judis started reporting from Washington in 1982, when he became a founding editor and Washington correspondent for In These Times, a democratic-socialist weekly magazine.
He has also written for GQ, Foreign Affairs, Mother Jones, The New York Times Magazine, and The Washington Post.
In 2002, he published The Emerging Democratic Majority (co-written with political scientist Ruy Teixeira), a book arguing that Democrats would retake control of American politics, thanks in part to growing support from minorities and well-educated professionals. Its title was a deliberate echo of Kevin Phillips' 1969 classic, The Emerging Republican Majority. The book was named one of the year's best by The Economist.
I love it. you sure know how to find them.
Could a man be any more of a communist without a CP-USA membership card (which I’m not sure he doesn’t have!) in this country?
Wheres all the war protestors denouncing Obama, no blood for oil
No more Blood for Oil.
Take back Obama’s Peace prize now.
Liberal suckers...
No, it’s all about making Obama and the Democrats look good.
Oh, fer crying out loud. These idiots are still singing the same busted old song.
“No, it’s all about making Obama and the Democrats look good.”
that’s the only reason that makes sense because obamas concern for Iraqi oil would be inconsistent with his apparent desire to make America an energy pauper, eg keystone, epa regulations etc.
Would liberals be willing to go to war to acquire or protect access to clean water of air? Or just to ensure the continued flow of government handouts?
Who cares why? Just keep dropping them on the evil scum ISIS.
“Where is your papers.” Typical birther. :)
lolz
Clearly to this man it is only acceptable to go to war if there are no economic reasons involved. If then.
This sort of thinking passes for rationality in Leftist circles.
An incredible accumulation of words which amount to a pile of horse manure. Clearly this liberal socialist does not get far from the front door of whomever is serving the strongest cool-aide. I have American friends still in Irbil as well as a number of Christian Armenian and Christian Iraqis. So far they are all fine and I pray they remain safe. These ISIS, IS, Daash or whatever one wishes to call these rats, need to be eliminated to the last soul and sent to hell.
The 1922 political book “Public Opinion” by Thomas Lippmann said, (essentially) “each person views events through a colored lens. The capitalist sees there was a need and an entrepreneur built a factory and sold goods in a free market at a take it or leave it price. The communist sees a capitalist exploiting the downtrodden masses for personal gain. For each the other is lying and a dangerous character with no moral values. But each sees the same facts and brings his own conclusion.”
While oil is a factor, the air strikes are about establishing the border between the ISIL state and the Kurdish state.
The nation that was Iraq is no more.
All about oil? How old is that refrain? We have more oil than we can use right here in our own country.
Hillary and Obama weren’t after oil in Libya. They were after Qadaffi’s money.
John Judis is a supporter of genocide. That's the bottom line.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.