FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Oil War, the Smoking guns

While chants of “No War for Oil” mark an increasingly dissenting and skeptical public, the Bush administration has continued bulldozing its way towards a crushing Iraq rendezvous. As you read this war may already have begun. But startling in its candor, a US Department of Defense document has just been discovered, a top-level document specifically discussing war for oil. This is the first official document found explicitly confirming as policy the US Defense Department’s readiness to wage oil war.

According to the report–Strategic Assessment 1999–prepared for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense (and only recently unearthed by this journalist), “energy and resource issues will continue to shape international security”. Explicitly envisioned were potential oil “conflicts over production facilities and transportation routes”, particularly in the Persian Gulf and Caspian regions.

Paradoxically, Strategic Assessment 1999 forecast it was “most likely” that America would not need to “employ military forces” to obtain energy. But the Assessment nevertheless ranks as extraordinary, doing so because it positively documents an official willingness to wage oil war, a willingness at the very highest levels of the US defense community.

While the document was prepared under Clinton, it suggests he was willing to wage war only to protect what he perceived as the existing interests of America’s economy. In contrast, war critics have repeatedly charged that Bush is seeking to conquer new interests, not defend old one’s. Clinton may have opened the door, but Bush marched through it.

In what many will see as a disturbing parallel to present events, the Report also drew attention to pre-WWII Britain’s pursuit of an approach where “control over territory was seen as essential to ensuring resource supplies”. However, the defense policymakers authoring Strategic Assessment also appear cognizant of the potential consequences of such policies. The authors warned that if the great powers should return to “the 19th century approach” of securing resources, of conquering resource suppliers, “the world economy would suffer and world politics would become more tense”.

Although at the time of its writing, Strategic Assessment 1999 predicted adequate US energy supplies, it also found that supply shortages “could exacerbate underlying political differences and serve as a catalyst for regional conflicts”, illustrating oil war’s potential trigger. And the Bush administration has repeatedly stated that America is facing what has been termed an “energy crisis”.

Highlighting the Assessment’s importance, it was prepared by the Institute for National Strategic Studies, part of the US Department of Defense’s National Defense University. The Institute is located at Fort McNair in Washington, DC, and lists its primary mission as policy “research and analysis” for the Joint Chiefs, the Defense Secretary, and other key US Governmental security and defense bodies. But this DOD “smoking gun” is linked to another.

In 2001 US VP Dick Cheney headed the Bush administration’s National Energy Policy Development Group, an energy task force working to devise a National Energy Policy to address America’s looming shortages. In line with the defense policy outlined in Strategic Assessment, it had been urged that Cheney’s task force include DOD participation. And so it will surprise few that the Bush administration has been going to extraordinary lengths to conceal both who attended the Cheney energy task force’s meetings and what those meetings were about.

Commenting upon the nature of this concealment, Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking member of the Committee on Government Reform, said “The White House should simply try telling the truth on the Task Force’s activities and stop hiding information that Congress and the public have a right to see.” The Administration’s stonewalling also spawned a lawsuit by the General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress.

The Cheney Task force confrontation resulted in the GAO pursuing the first lawsuit in its 81 year history, though, that suit was dismissed this December by Judge John Bates, a recent Bush appointee. Bates’ decision found that the GAO had “no standing” to sue Cheney or any other executive branch official for information.

In a sharp reflection upon that decision, John Dean (the former Republican Presidential Counsel) wrote, “the present situation is absurd”. Dean charged that Bates’ ruling means an ordinary US citizen has more power to compel the release of government information than the investigative arm of America’s Congress.

Cutting to what many perceive as the ruling’s true basis, Congressman John Dingle (D-MI), ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, charged “Vice President Cheney’s cover-up will apparently continue for the foreseeable future”. And summarizing the key question, the former US Vice-Presidential candidate, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, asked, “What are they hiding?”.

While most speculation regarding the Cheney task force has centered around its relationship to the energy industry, the military implications of task force deliberations–military action to secure oil and gas supplies–has yet to be addressed. And notably, according to a February headline in The Hill–the largest of Capitol Hill’s political newsletters and among the most respected–“GOP threats halted Cheney suit”, with The Hill reporting that Republicans had threatened to cut the GAO’s budget should an appeal of Judge Bates’ ruling be pursued.

RITT GOLDSTEIN can be reached at: ritt1997@hotmail.com.

 

More articles by:

Ritt Goldstein is an American investigative political journalist living in Sweden.

September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
Jeff Ballinger
Nike and Colin Kaepernick: Fronting the Bigots’ Team
David Rosen
Why Stop at Roe? How “Settled Law” Can be Overturned
Gary Olson
Pope Francis and the Battle Over Cultural Terrain
Nick Pemberton
Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America
Ramzy Baroud
The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords
Kevin Martin
U.S. Support for the Bombing of Yemen to Continue
Robert Fisk
A Murder in Aleppo
Robert Hunziker
The Elite World Order in Jitters
Ben Dangl
After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror
Charles Pierson
Invade The Hague! Bolton vs. the ICC
Robert Fantina
Trump and Palestine
Daniel Warner
Hubris on and Off the Court
John Kendall Hawkins
Boning Up on Eternal Recurrence, Kubrick-style: “2001,” Revisited
Haydar Khan
Set Theory of the Left
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail