Unpaid Commentary |
|||
|
Because the best things in life are free. The UltraFecta My Due Diligence Wonkette Political Animal Daily Kos Eschaton About Thomas Bio Archives 05/01/2002 - 06/01/2002 06/01/2002 - 07/01/2002 11/01/2002 - 12/01/2002 12/01/2002 - 01/01/2003 01/01/2003 - 02/01/2003 02/01/2003 - 03/01/2003 03/01/2003 - 04/01/2003 04/01/2003 - 05/01/2003 05/01/2003 - 06/01/2003 08/01/2003 - 09/01/2003 09/01/2003 - 10/01/2003 10/01/2003 - 11/01/2003 11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006 |
1.30.2003
A Revolution for Riyadh? As more and more blustering goes on about securing Iraq’s oilfields, a new problem arises in the face of conflict there. No one is much interested in suggesting what could be a strong possibility if the United States proceeds to invade Iraq. Most analyses concentrate on the quick surgical nature of American military prowess able to take Baghdad without much of a fight. It’s very possible that the US could move with enough expertise such that the only real concern would be rebuilding the county’s infrastructure. Except it might not be. The US remains dependant on foreign oil, and with Hugo Chavez paralyzing his nation’s supply while war worries will send prices rising even if supplies are stable, the strike on Saddam could be an economic lump to swallow. Remember though, that as the US attempts to ramp up product of petroleum in Africa, Central Asia, and Iraq, it will become temporarily more reliant upon Saudi Arabia to bridge the gap from its current arrangement to the next one. The reason that this is a dangerous proposition is that Saudi Arabia remains a country with a very shaky regime. At any time, the House of Saud could fall and if Wahabbite extremists expel Western firms from their oilfields, the world would face an energy crunch of untold proportions as well as an ensuing depression. Unfortunately, the decline of Saudi Arabia may be tied to the Iraqi conflict. Al Qaeda or other individuals may be waiting for the US to be occupied with fighting to launch a preordained coup. It’s also possible that average Saudis might murder the royal family in response to Hussein’s deposition. While security is strong at the derricks, civil unrest in Riyadh has to be taken very seriously. If a large scale uprising occurred, it is hard to think that the Kingdom could stop such a thing without American assistance. Given the current zeitgeist, the cure could be worse than the affliction for the royal family. However, unless massive economic restructuring occurs within in the next five to ten year, Islamic fundamentalists probably will be able to co-opt the economic woes of the Kingdom and depose the Sauds regardless. If the majority of the US petroleum producing has moved on, this will be an afterthought for US foreign policy. However, there is a significant window of at least three years in which regime collapse in the Kingdom could punish the world economy in a way that events like the World Trade Center attack could not. |
||