No doubt, and like the Japanese in 1941, I doubt if the US will sit idly by and see their economic stucture disintegrate.
Posted on 01/22/2006 9:36:34 AM PST by Lorianne
WASHINGTON, Jan. 18 (UPI) -- The prospect of a mushroom cloud rising from the Dasht-e-Lut, Iran's Desert of Stones, may not be Tehran's greatest threat to international stability. A successful test of an Iranian nuclear weapon at some point in the next few years may prove less destabilizing than a simple free market economic measure that Iran is said to be planning for March of this year.
Tehran is preparing to open a bourse, a mercantile exchange and potentially a futures market, where traders can buy and sell oil and gas, along the lines of the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) in London and the NYTMEX in New York.
The differences are first, that this one would price its energy in euros, not dollars, and second, that it would not use West Texas Intermediate or Brent Crude (from the North Sea) as its standard oil for pricing. It would use a Persian Gulf-produced oil instead.
So what? This sounds like a minor change, and possibly even a useful one, broadening the choice among traders and consumers in the kind of way that Adam Smith, the 18th century father of modern capitalism, would have recommended.
Not so. This could be a far more profoundly punishing blow to American interests than Iran's ability to manufacture a crude atom bomb that would have little credibility until it became small and stable and reliable enough to be delivered on some putative target.
The relationship between the oil price and dollar is intimate and important, and very useful to the dollar's highly profitable status as the world's reserve currency. The prospect of a rival bourse and futures market opens the intriguing possibility, beyond hedging the future oil price, of profitable arbitrage between the euro and the dollar.
And if oil and gas are to be denominated in more than just one currency, why not open the trade to others? Why not denominate the price of a barrel of oil in Japanese Yen, or in Chinese yuan, the currency of the world's second biggest oil importer?
Why not, in short, end the monopoly rule of the almighty dollar?
Such a move would not be welcomed in Washington, which swiftly moved after the fall of Baghdad in 2003 to reverse Saddam Hussein's impudent decision to start selling Iraqi oil for euros, rather than dollars. After all, the great benefit of running the world's reserve currency means that if all else fails, the United States Treasury can just print more and more of the stuff and pay for its oil imports that way.
There are, naturally, limits to the degree to which the United States can debase its currency, as the world found with the first great OPEC price rise of 1973, when the price per barrel tripled. This is usually attributed to the political decision by Saudi Arabia and other Arab oil producers to punish the United States for its decisive support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War. That is partly true, but the crucial OPEC decision was as a direct result of President Richard Nixon's Aug. 15 decision to end the dollar's link to the gold standard.
The dollar declined in value, which meant the OPEC producers received less value for their oil. So at their Beirut meeting on Sept. 22, OPEC adopted resolution XXV:140, which resolved to take "any necessary action ... to offset any adverse effects on the per barrel real income of member countries resulting from the international monetary developments as of Aug. 15."
That was also the time when Sheikh Zaki Yamani, the Saudi oil minister, first mentioned the possibility of deploying the ultimate weapon of an oil embargo.
Most of the financial world is currently awaiting another, similar devaluation of the dollar, in response to the monstrous scale of current deficit on the U.S. current account. Writing in the Financial Times last week, Harvard Professor Marty Feldstein suggested that on the basis of the 1985-87 Louvre and Plaza devaluations, the dollar could fall as much as 40 percent or even more.
The markets simply do not know when. But should it come after an Iranian bourse is up and running, some very tidy sums could be made by those playing a dollar-euro trade on Tehran's energy futures market.
The Tehran bourse is listed as an objective for this year in Iran's current five-year plan. The Tehran Times reported July 26 that the final authorizations had been received for the bourse to go ahead. Mohammad Javad Asemipour, the technocrat and former deputy petroleum minister who has been charged with launching the bourse, has made a number of discreet scouting trips to London, Frankfurt, Moscow and Paris. Just after Christmas, he was quoted by the Iran Labor News Agency saying "transparency in oil transactions would be one of the advantages of having such an establishment "(the bourse), and adding that this would "allow dealers access to related information and promote equal trade opportunities."
Asemipour is an elusive type, but one who seems convinced that Iran can play off the European against the Americans, the euro against the dollar. Just over a year ago, he was quoted in the quasi-official Iran Daily saying that the Europeans have played "a beautiful game" with the United States during the years of sanctions, when they actively participated in economic projects, particularly in the energy sector, across Iran.
"In this game, the Europeans have pretended to be siding with America, whereas they got involved in business here and developed a sort of competition with the Americans," he said. "But in practice, they (the Europeans) have pursued their own interests." There is no shortage of officials in the Bush administration who nurture such suspicions of the French and Germans, despite what seems at the moment to be a common concern about Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The question now is whether the world's traders will come to a Tehran Bourse if and when it opens, bearing in mind that a similar idea in Dubai failed to gain much traction. But that was before oil prices reached $65 a barrel, and before the Dubai's partners in the Gulf Cooperation Council decided it was time to stop glowering at Iran as a potential enemy, and started to invite Tehran to their meetings as an observer. Before, that is, the Arab world began to judge that whatever the American intentions, Iran had become the real winner of the Iraq War.
The world could be about to change much faster than we think, whether or not Iran tests an atomic device. There are other, possibly more devastating weapons available that could hit a financially vulnerable American where it hurts most.
Oooo, the Euro, I'm scared. Competition is good. The more the merrier.
EGADS. GADZOOKS. ODDS-BODKINS.
Yuan.
One thing you left out: the government in Iran ain't gonna last long enough to do any of that...
One thing I learned long ago was that the stock and futures markets are not economically perfect markets. There are a lot of smart rich people who make their living off the slight imperfections in market efficiency.
If the Iranians think that they are going to change world markets and destroy the dollar, they need to understand that those smart rich people at the controls of world markets may be able to either resist or retaliate.
The other thing that I learned long ago, is that even with our markets being slightly imperfect, they are still head and shoulders better than the next best thing and that is why the world invests in US markets and US currency. It is the fairest and safest game on the planet.
After they are nuked by the Israelis, the bourse would become rather moot.
Except for the nation with the trillion dollar trade deficit.
I was waiting for a voice of logic in this thread. I guess logic just doesn't live amongst those with maxed out credit cards. Thanks
No doubt, and like the Japanese in 1941, I doubt if the US will sit idly by and see their economic stucture disintegrate.
I'm normally one critical of the latest doomsaying story about the dollar, but that was primarily because the there was not a raft of fundamentally problematic issues and threats arrayed against the dollar's value and reserve currency status. Unfortunately as the twin deficits have grown and numerous such challenges have come to the public eye, the important issue of public sentiment is combining with those issues and challenges to make an incredibly damaging spillover effect more likely. A dollar that is severely weakened will find ever-increasing challenges to its position as the de facto unit of pricing for commodities, especially given -- and this is what people seem to miss here -- the FRIENDLY nature of the relationship between many of these nations and the European Union. Anyone who does not see that there are many moves, large and small, around the globe to do anything possible to minimize U.S. hegemony is gravely ill-informed. It is happening on a public and private level, companies large to small, political interest groups, politicians, governments, commissions.
I'm not saying the U.S. deserves these moves against it, but in everything from an incredibly poor handling of what are essentially little more than 'public relations' issues to a simple unwillingness to admit that there are problems which must be addressed and will not be solved by simply maintaining the status quo of our approach. (Deficits - more trade than governmental, fiscal policy messages, the like.)
On the other hand, all of these moves do exactly what has been discussed for a few decades now: Erode the relative dominance of the United States in virtually all areas of national power, and leveling the playing field. It's really great for everyone else, it's in their interests, both commercial/economic and political. Yes, diversification, competition, new players, more efficient purchasing (less costly). Who wouldn't want that? It just has to come at our expense, and unfortunately that's a price that may well do more than just level the playing field, it could very well create a few large mounds in that field where advantage is shifted to other large entities. (The EU in some areas, China in others.)
For my support of Bush in many areas, these are the issues with which I have had grave, grave misgivings since 2002. These are the issues that have been stirring for longer than he's been in office, and have been boiling up and into a new concotion since. They're issues that get little if any play in public discourse, but they're easily the most important ones we face in terms of American national power. (Or, narrowly put, the question of just how much of a 'superpower' the U.S. is or will be in the near future versus other entities. Given that a good deal of America's power is 'soft power,' these are actually critical, if also vain, questions.)
dumb, dumb, dumb. The "Reserve Currency" is what central banks use to settle accounts and manipulate exchange rates. I don't recall any central banks buying oil lately, but i could be wrong. </p>
"Gee, if crude were priced in euros, then people need fewer dollars to buy their crude." So? Oil producers now have more euros than they want instead of more dollars than they want. There cannot be any effect on $/Euro because of this "threat."
</p>
Moreover.... who in their right mind would trade on an iranian exchange? assume they do the smart thing and ape our futures clearing model. To trade,you will need margin money with a member firm, and the member firm will have to wire money to the Iranian clearinghouse. Er, no thanks. Nigeria pumps a lot of crude, too. Care to wire money there?
I got an email that said their royal family is in exile and all they need is . . . .
Where did you cut and paste this from?
The collapse of our economic stucture and sovereignty is self induced, starting with GATT, then NAFTA, now the free trade agreements.
The decline of graduated American citizen engineers (in all fields) from our colleges is insuring that the worlds once largest manufacturing nation will never be again.
The design and research brains are still here but the physical capabilities to manufacture are rapidly dying. We must buy our basic metals (steel, tin, copper, aluminum, etc.) from countries with reduced enviro standards. The foundaries are all closing down. Fifty percent plus of our oil in foreign, the same situation with the cleaner burning gases. Having to import the basic manufacturing materials is not the characteristics of a great nation.
Our lumber mills are all but non existant. Our automotive factories are shutting down or reducing their output. Trade schools are as rare as gold nuggets. Even our edible foodstuff importation has increased to intolerable levels.
Have you ever calculated the reduction in active military troop levels? How many military bases have we closed in the past three decades? We had to bring back ex soldiers, hire civilian merc and the hire on the national guard just to fight a small raghead conflict. What would we do if this was a fight with China? Lose?
I hope the facts about doom and gloom doesn't ruin your day. IMO, We MUST get out of the United Nations as fast as possible and get off this global New World Order kick if we are to keep from dying off as a world voice.
You and I have the same views about the 'other' exchanges BUT not all of the world shares our segregationist views.
Hmmmm...I do seem to remember another ME nation threatening this back some time ago. Matter of fact IIRC they switched to the euro in November 2002....wonder what happened to them?
Well said.
The darkness with which you view the United States, Her sovereignty, manufacturing capabitlities, alleged educational declines, lack of military men and facilities, etc. etc., are symptomatic of a depressed mental state.
While I agree, all is not as I would like it to be, that is not to say the United States is terminally ill.
As in WWII, when the automobile manufacturers produced armaments, government instituted the draft, suspended many laws, and otherwise girded for the fight, so will we do so again.
It is the American people who must support these efforts. It will not be done through one man, speaking from the Bully Pulpit, or several of those in Congress pleading.
As in the possible oil crisis looming on the horizon, when Americans see their standard of life lowered to intolerable measure, they will act and demand action.
The illegal immigration problem is now front page headline news. The American public is beginning to wake up and say enough is enough.
As in 1941, the people will "rally 'round the flag", doing what is necessary to survive.
Perhaps 9/11 did not hit home as did the Jap attack on Pearl Harbor. Perhaps it will take another hit for the majority to get the wake up call. And perhaps the illegal situation will become so intolerable to the majority of us, that we will demand and end to it.
Suffice it to say, that I believe the UN to have evolved into a most corrupt and useless world organization, fermenting hatred of the USA, Israel, and other nations. It needs reorganization, to be neutered, (GWB has done a good job there) or be disbanded.
Above all, the United States will remain viable as long as we the people demand it. Or like Winchester, when the people no longer support them, it will just fade away.
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.