Oily ‘Oil Wars’

Colonel E. L. Drake was struck by distinction like a bolt to have discovered first oil well in Titusville, Pennsylvania on 27 August, 1859 at the depth of 69 feet. He was a pseudo colonel; given the prefix to reinforce his personality impact by his sponsors in an oil rich but then, otherwise a desolate region. Soon production far exceeded in scale than the earlier quantities of rock oil being extracted manually.

The prices plummeted. In other words first oil glut gripped America. In the meantime a fast prospering oil tycoon, John Rockefeller, controlled vast oil business, merging several components to call his organisation as ‘Standard Oil’; formally launched in January 1870. The crude drilling techniques of oil wells made approaches and the surrounding streets literally slushy. By implication as a metaphor, the oil wars also emerged slushy in varied contexts subsequently and even today, as it is manifest through mega events within the brief history of time.

On the contrary Rockefeller had perceived oil as an instrument of stability and a source of introducing new light to the world. Had he known that his vision would not only succumb to the slippery fields of oil war but the oil in fact would emerge as the most risky element to devastate world peace, he might have at least relented on making his claim.

Not mentioning the fierce battling for markets by 1890 among Standard Oil, Rothschild, Nobel and newly emerging Royal Dutch, let us tip the time scale to WW-l. The conflict, otherwise perceived to last for a few weeks or months stretched beyond the control of the opposing forces for years. Internal combustion engine powered by oil enabled the adversaries on land, sea as well as in the air for the first time to bleed each other white through superior mobility and men versus machine equation.

About 13 million people perished on the battlefields and several million were wounded or displaced. Humanity pathetically gasped for resuscitation through deplorable courtesy of oil. It did not stop here. The world powers, earlier preferring the oil wars to be left to the oil companies, shockingly learnt that oil was the lifeline to sustain empires. Anyone succeeding in severing this lifeline of an empire would initiate her death or extinction. America, Russia, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman Turks, France, Germany, Japan and British empires of the time could not obviously overlook this crucial lesson of war.

It was a major paradigm shift from docility to aggressive posture for the future. Woodrow Wilson, as quoted by the The Guardian, said a year after WW-l ended, “is there any man, let me say any child here that does not know that seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry.” He was being modest. In fact oil rivalry is the seed of war, which was sowed by WW-l; no sooner it ended for yet another conflagration called WW-II.

“Oil equals power,” wrote Daniel Yergin, “If oil was power, it was also symbol of sovereignty.” This led inevitably to clash of interests among the oil companies and nation states, resulting into perpetual strife among the nation states as well who were now very keen to guide their oil men from the front, yet maintaining semblance of decency to stay with a touch of ‘background’ actors. For the paucity of space, the resume of oil in geopolitics of alliances and counter alliances of WW-II may be skipped about Allied and Axis powers except Japan; though none ever appeared willing to let lose her grip over “symbol of sovereignty”.

Japan case in pre-war period and during war is remarkably analogical to US strive and stunt for oil, particularly since last two decades. When Japan’s pursuit of her grand strategy to sustain herself at least as continental power in Asia is interpolated; the thrust, strategic orientation and objective notwithstanding, the print emerges invariably the way US is launching herself, at places openly and at places disguised, in epic quest of oil. Before WW-II, Japan enjoyed stupor of achieving marvelous victories one after another over China (1895) and Russia (1905) as does US in Kuwait. Afghanistan and Iraq recently, keeping Iran and Syria on the bulls’ eye.

Likewise Japan was gripped by arrogance and mystical belief in superiority of their culture. US administration is making determined effort to make her masses believe that they are leading God chosen people and every act of theirs must be acquiesced by other nations. This concept, among the comity of sovereign states is not tenable (though one can not sideline American public role and contribution in the field of science and technology). In fact these are the dangerous portents every emerging power suffers from before sliding down the multitude of humility.

Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were also struck by same syndrome of superiority and they misjudged themselves as invincible. While US war aims also include a clause of prevention of emergence of any other rival power to challenge her monopoly over the globe, Japan appeared content with her pace of acquiring military muscle; at the same time staying suspicious of ABCD powers (America, Britain, China and Dutch) to challenge her imperial status. Japan built up an impressive military might but its think tanks had no misgivings either about her vulnerability of total dependence for oil on US, producing herself only 7 percent of needs. Several studies show that USA, despite her impressive array of state of art arsenal would reduce to a pigmy status if her oil dependence were not addressed.
US peak oil production stage has gone past in 1970 with 4.12 billion barrels (bbls) of oil, declining to 3.01 bbls in 1997. By 2040 her total production would be at paltry scale of only 0.42 bbls; meaning thereby, it has to correct her shortfall by 90 percent in comparison to her peak production of 1970.

These estimates given by Richard C. Duncan and Walter Younquist present no less shudder for the US might and hence universal spin in the international relations is noticeable to secure oil. Her military ventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, her bid to nab Caspian bonanza of oil, her diplomatic tug of war with China, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Germany, France and Russia in collective perspective are the catastrophe prone thrust of follies which Japan committed in single stroke by attacking Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, 7:55 am; Hawaiian time. The Japanese assumption that by knocking out US Pacific Fleet would render her flank secure for her advance to East Indies Dutch Oil could not have been more flawed.

Her doctrine of “hakushu nanshin”(defend in the North, advance to the South) paid her perfect dividends while dealing with Russia and China but for US, she committed grave error of judgment. US would have been inflicted even severer damage if her oil stock of four and half million barrels at Pearl Harbor were also blown off. It survived; to their good luck to enable US to react to her open door customer, Japan with hammer this time, which she had been topping up to 80 percent of her oil requirement.

Pertinent point to ponder is that US is haunted by depletion of her stocks and ultimately by the extinction of global hydrocarbon resources far more severely than Japan who had committed a megalomaniac assault on her benefactor (USA). The depletion and dependence scenario by any interpretation is much more daunting because hydrocarbon reserves are neither sustainable nor can be revived. Some sources sound optimistic through sheer ignorance, advocating that synthetic fuel was the answer.

They forget that synthetic fuel ought to have an element of hydrocarbon base. During WW-II, Germany achieved high form of technology to produce large quantities of synthetic oil through coal. When alternatives and substitutes are not the possibilities, then in such a moment of trial, foregone conclusion emerges that oil wars would turn into swamps of hostilities of larger dimension than intervention in Middle East, US bid to tailor Greater Middle East, securing Central Eurasia and winning rebellious Europe. It is only a matter of time from hence to year 2040 when the fence sitters, equally thirsty of oil, would lose patience about US wrangling under the dream-world – like slogans of peace, prosperity, democracy, justice, human rights and above all safe future. Incidentally out of every ten barrels of exportable oil in 2040, almost six of them will be located in Muslim regions. Beyond this one would not dwell on the subject because hereafter, like a Punjabi movie, the story becomes too well known.