One analyst, economist Ismael Hussein-Zadeh, a professor of
economics at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, has a different
explanation for the price rise, and American motorists and homeowners
should pay close attention.
“Oil prices have gone from the mid $20 range in the fall of 2002 to
$127 yesterday—a rise of $100/barrel in just over five years,” he says.
“And the bulk of that increase can be attributed to the US wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and to the threats of war against Iran.”
Hussein-Zadeh’s analysis looks at a number of ways that the Bush/Cheney
wars have contributed to rising oil prices. Chief among these are two
factors: the threat to supplies, particularly from the Persian Gulf
region from which 20 percent of the world’s oil supplies come, and a
falling dollar, because oil is priced in dollars, and as it loses
value, oil producing countries raise their prices to compensate.
In an article titled
Worried About the Price of Gas? End US Wars,
Hussein-Zadeh writes, “Soon after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq
the price of oil began to escalate in tandem with the escalation of war
and political turbulence in the Middle East.” Furthermore, he says,
“Anytime there is a renewed US military threat against Iran, fuel
prices move up several notches.” If the US were to actually make good
on Bush’s and Cheney’s threats to attack Iran, in Hussein-Zadeh’s view
“the sky would be the limit” to oil prices, with $200/barrel being a
starting point.
The dollar’s fall, too, is significantly a result of the
wars—particularly the Iraq War, he says. That war has been costing the
US $200 billion a year, all in borrowed funds. That in itself is a huge
hole that has to be funded by borrowing from China, Japan, Saudi Arabia
and other nations. But as Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz has pointed
out, the true cost of the Iraq War, when interest on debt, health costs
of injured veterans and other long-term costs are factored in, is more
like $3 trillion and rising. And when currency speculators and
traders—the ones who really set the value of the dollar—make their
bets, they’re looking at that bigger number, not the little one.
Moreover, it’s not just oil that has been driven up in price because of
the war. As energy costs have gone up, so has the cost of food, in no
small part because most fertilizer is oil-based, and because
transportation costs are also largely a reflection of oil prices. As
well, to the extent that American’s food is imported, they are paying
in shrinking dollars, whose value is being driven down because of the
war.
Hussein-Zadeh says the Bush/Cheney administration and its
neoconservative war promoters have worked hard to offer other more
benign explanations for the crippling rise in energy prices, and food
prices. As he puts it:
Neoconservative forces in and around the Bush administration and
beneficiaries of war dividends—wishing to deflect attention away from
war as the main culprit for the skyrocketing energy prices—tend to
blame secondary or marginally relevant factors: OPEC, China and India
for their increased demand for energy, or supply-demand imbalances in
global markets. Whatever the contributory role of these factors, the
fact remains that the current oil price hikes started with the
beginning of the Bush administration’s wars against Iraq and
Afghanistan. Furthermore, a closer examination of these factors reveals
that their roles in the current price inflation of oil have been
negligible.
Common sense bears him out here. China’s and
India’s economies have indeed been growing rapidly, and with them,
demand for oil, but over the past five years, oil prices have risen
400%, and the same cannot be said for demand. Even if Chinese and
Indian growth figures of 7-9 percent per year were accurate (and there
is reason to believe they are grossly inflated), that at best would
amount to perhaps a 50% increase in economic activity over five years.
In fact, during this time more efficient energy use in the developed
countries has largely offset much of the increasing demand for oil in
China and India, and even in China and India, much of the energy growth
has involved replacing inefficient vehicles and power plants with more
efficient ones, so oil consumption isn’t rising in lock step with
economic growth.
The answer then, to rising oil prices, is obvious then. It is not some
silly two-month moratorium on federal taxes—what Sen. McCain referred
to, in a candid moment, as a “little gift” to American vacationers. Nor
is it opening up the Artic refuge to drilling—a move that would take
years to lead to any significant new supply, and which in any case
would have minimal impact on overall supply, or on prices. Nor is it
opening up the Strategic Oil Reserve—another drop in the barrel. Nor is
it boycotting Exxon/Mobil. Nor is it hammering OPEC to boost
production—something they have already done. No, it is much simpler. As
Hussein-Zadeh so eloquently puts it:
The political implications of this discussion are clear: to bring
down the prices of fuel and food requires bringing home the troops. By
lowering the energy costs of production and transportation this will
help save our own and many other economies from the plagues of
inflation and stagnation. It will bring relief to hundreds of millions
worldwide who are burdened by crippling energy bills and the crushing
costs of feeding their families.
Got that people? If you
want to see gasoline drop back below $3.89/gal, if you want to cut your
food bills, if you want to see people in the developing world having
enough to eat, get Congress to end the war! Meanwhile, each time you
pull the trigger on that gas pump, think of the liquid that's running
into your tank, and the money that's flowing out of your wallet, as
blood, because that's what it all comes down to.
It’s that simple.