Susriscomarticles2008ioi080307 russell energyhtml e

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: tion, which may manifest itself in terrorist acts (as in Saudi Arabia). Overthrow of a client government can mean inter-state conflict, as with the US and Iran since the 1979 revolution. Another risk is that major powers might find themselves on opposite sides of an internal conflict, as in Georgia , the territory of which is crossed by a key pipeline for oil from the Caspian Sea basin. There, a US-backed government battles Russian-backed separatists in Abkhazia and South Ossetia – a conflict some experts have identified as resembling a Cold War proxy war.84 Even private companies, as they seek to develop resources in ever more unstable areas, may be implicated in local conflicts. Oil companies have run up large private-security bills in recent years, and oil corporations were among the earliest clients of private military corporations, as in Angola. The formation of new international alliances can also be a driver of conflict as large states pursue energy security. In Central Asia, Russia and China actively seek to counter US influence through bilateral military agreements and with the formation of regional blocs such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation.85 Outside the Caspian Sea basin China is actively securing access to oil through relationships with Iran and Sudan, and through the ongoing build-up of its naval capabilities. 199 Last printed 9/4/2009 7:00:00 PM Oil DDW 2012 1 Energy Conflicts Most Likely 200 Oil DDW 2012 1 Disputes over energy justify large military forces and are the most likely scenario for modern conflict Moran, Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. and Russell , 08 Daniel Moran, Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. and James A. Russell, Associate Professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, 3-7-08, [“The Militarization of Energy Security,” Saudi-US Relations Information Service,] E. Liu This book does not seek to challenge the prevailing consensus that large-scale conflict among developed states has become unlikely. Its aim is rather to reflect upon conditions in the one area of international life where serious observers still regard it as possible: energy security. It is in the energy sector that strategic planners now find it easiest to imagine major states reconsidering their reluctance to use force against each other. “Energy security” is now deemed so central to “national security” that threats to the former are liable to be reflexively interpreted as threats to the latter. In a world in which territorial disputes, ideological competition, ethnic irredentism, and even nuclear proliferation all seem capable of being normalized in ways that constrain the actual use of military force, a crisis in global energy supply stands out as the last allweather casus belli when the moment comes to hypothesize worst-case scenarios. This is not a reason to assume that wars over energy are more likely now than in the past. Precisely bec...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/30/2013 for the course ECON 101 taught by Professor Burke during the Spring '13 term at Southern Arkansas University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online