Michael T. Klare: US garrisons and global gas stations

American policymakers have long viewed the protection of overseas oil supplies as an essential matter of “national security”, requiring the threat of – and sometimes the use of – military force. This is now an unquestioned part of American foreign policy.

On this basis, the George H W Bush administration fought a war against Iraq in 1990-1991 and the George W Bush administration invaded Iraq in 2003. With global oil prices soaring and oil reserves expected to dwindle in the years ahead, military force is sure to be seen by whatever new administration enters Washington in January 2009 as the ultimate guarantor of the US’s well-being in the oil heartlands of the planet.


But with the costs of militarized oil operations – in both blood and
dollars – rising precipitously, isn’t it time to challenge such “wisdom”? Isn’t it time to ask whether the US military has anything reasonable to do with American energy security, and whether a reliance on military force, when it comes to energy policy, is practical, affordable or justifiable?

How energy policy got militarized

The association between “energy security” (as it’s now termed) and “national security” was established long ago. President Franklin D Roosevelt first forged this association in 1945, when he pledged to protect the Saudi Arabian royal family in return for privileged American access to Saudi oil.

The relationship was given formal expression in 1980, when president Jimmy Carter told the US Congress that maintaining the uninterrupted flow of Persian Gulf oil was a “vital interest” of the United States, and attempts by hostile nations to cut that flow would be countered “by any means necessary, including military force”.

Asia Times Online