Opinion
- Editorial - Commentary
The
new world of petropolitics
It
is a new and fascinating world of “petropolitics.”
One sees it everywhere in international relations
today. A newly assertive Russia is flexing its energy
policy in the former states of the now defunct USSR
and in Europe, and stoking Russian nationalism in
global politics.
China,
as a rising modernised global power, appears to
be conducting a foreign policy highly motivated
by the urgency to satisfy its enormous energy needs.
The search for energy has resulted in China’s
political outreach to the Middle East, Africa and
Latin America.
Moreover,
to the surprise of the Europeans, the Russians are
turning to the Chinese for a relationship based
on oil and gas—and not on the now redundant
theories of Marx, Mao or Lenin.
Iran,
one of the world’s great oil powers, is challenging
the United Nations and the United States for the
right to develop its nuclear power capabilities.
India,
like China, is also on a global search for petroleum
resources to feed its burgeoning economy.
Venezuela
with its massive oil and gas resources, and led
by the ubiquitous President Chávez, is using
oil as a “political weapon” (his words)
to reconfigure strategic alliances in Latin America
and the Caribbean, and to fashion global alliances
with what the United States and some European administrations
might characterise as “rogue” states.
Writers
such as Thomas L Friedman (author of The World is
Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century)
have even carried the petropolitics scenario to
a domestic level. He suggests that in the case of
Iran, Russia and Venezuela, the first law of petropolitics
might be that the price of oil and the pace of freedom
seem to move in opposite directions.
To
quote him: “the higher the average global
crude price rises, the more free speech, free press,
free and fair elections, an independent judiciary,
the rule of law, and independent political parties
are eroded... the higher the price goes the less
(these leaders of these nations) are sensitive to
what the world thinks or says about them.”
(Foreign Policy, May/June 2006).
Of
course it’s only a theory, as yet untested,
but an added dimension to the phenomenon.
In
the case of Russia, Iran and Venezuela, would this
flexing of muscles be taking place if the cost of
a barrel of oil was still US$20?
Most
international relations analysts and oil experts
say probably not. From the perspective of contemporary
international relations and international business,
the point is that a tight market and high prices
for petroleum and other fuel commodities, provide
both a shield and the necessary leverage to indulge
in petropolitics.
And
the reality is that Russia’s flexing, Iran’s
command of the world’s attention, President
Chávez’s frequent flyer mileage, and
China’s fascinating outreach are all about
the energy security that only a barrel of oil can
provide.
It
means also that there are new capitals of regional
and global influence (Beijing, New Delhi, and possibly
Tehran and Caracas) that practitioners of diplomacy
in both the developed and developing world will
have to take more seriously.
Caribbean
leverage?
The
realities of energy security and the potential leverage
of petropolitics also have their Caribbean dimensions.
Last
week there was a good deal of local (T&T) and
regional comment, on Prime Minister Manning’s
address to the British Gas (BG) luncheon series
in Port-of-Spain when at one point he criticised
the government of the United States for “studiously
ignoring” the Caribbean and failing to recognise
that T&T seeks to leverage its energy resources
in the cause of national development.
Looking
at the verbatim text of his speech (available on
the web site of the Office of the Prime Minister)
he was very specific about the fact that in the
first four months of 2006, T&T supplied 73 per
cent of all US imports of LNG, 71 per cent of all
US imports of methanol, and about 55 per cent of
all US imports of ammonia.
Briefly,
he was particularly concerned that the US had not
responded to regional concerns about a new free
trade deal to eventually replace the Caribbean Basin
Initiative (the textile provisions expire in 2008),
to requests for duty free entry to the US market
for goods packaged in T&T, and for strengthened
collaboration between the US and T&T in combating
the transshipment of drugs through the Caribbean.
Finally,
he added that maybe it was time for T&T to diversify
and look to other markets such as Mexico and Brazil
for its exports of LNG at better prices than now
prevail.
The
portion of the Prime Minister’s remarks that
provoked the most comment was what appeared to be
his scolding of the United States.
The
Foreign Minister of Jamaica who was attending an
energy conference in Port-of-Spain also added his
bit in support of the Prime Minister’s comments.
The
only response from US officials came from the ambassador
to Port-of-Spain, and an assistant secretary in
the US Department of energy (attending the energy
conference) both of whom emphasised the awareness
in Washington of PM Manning’s concerns, and
stressed the close relationship and cooperation
between both countries.
The
assistant secretary went even further to point out
that once T&T respects its existing contracts,
it had the sovereign right to sell its products
anywhere. The entire episode was barely reported
in the mainstream US press, which perhaps gives
added substance to the Prime Minister’s opinion
about the region being ignored.
Clearly,
the PM’s speech was a very forthright statement
about the state of Trinidad’s energy industry
and its contribution to domestic and regional development.
Obviously a great deal can be accomplished by determined,
structured and persistent T&T lobbying in Washington
to overcome opposition by vested domestic interests.
But
the greater message is that Manning’s criticism
of the US failure to deliver on Caribbean requests,
his rebuke of Venezuela’s regional aspirations
(also in the speech), and the strong inclination
to diversify T&T’s energy markets, all
go along with the current trend of seeking leverage
in this new world of petropolitics. The good news
for the US is that T&T is not Venezuela, Iran
or Russia.
Dr
Anthony T Bryan
is senior associate of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington,
DC (where he works on Caribbean regional energy
diplomacy and cooperation). He is Professor Emeritus
at the University of Miami.
The
Trinidad Guardian
Thursday 14th September 2006
Petroleumworld
Trinidad 09 17 06
Copyright
©2006 The Trinidad Guardian. All Rights Reserved.
