Oil and military conflict in the Middle East (Research work) - Petróleo y conflicto militar en el medio oriente (Trabajo de investigacion)

Yesterday I was happily lying in my bed enjoying the weekend and my girlfriend was calling my cell phone asking for help for a task I had, as a good boyfriend who helped me to do a research work to help her. Research work on environmental conflicts, researching google by reviewing hundreds of blogs, publishing, documentaries, YouTube videos I learned and learned things that today I did not know or had any idea and I realize how ignorant it was in the subject. Maybe you're reading this, the seas like me, or the questions are not ... in the quick form of the quick form what I learned from all this

At first glance we all thought (or so I thought) that the real reason for the militarization of the Middle East is Islam or Islamic fundamentalism or terrorism ... which is the reason why the media constantly throw us . But if we review a bit the history of all these conflicts, we realize that it has been around for a long time, and the common image of the Middle East is that of artistic mosques and fundamentalist Muslims. It is an image built on purpose to cover other truths.

 The explanation for the massive presence of the imperialist armies (one could say so) has to be found in the huge hydrocarbon deposits and their profits ... because if we look at the map of hydrocarbon deposits we see that there is a geographical ellipse that It covers part of the Former Soviet Union and much of the Middle East .... 70% of the world's oil reserves and also 65% of the world's gas reserves are concentrated in that region.

The Gulf region - apart from its economic importance - has acquired strategic importance for the powers of world capital. Control over a region of production of a commodity as important as oil is not only a source of enormous profits but also constitutes a vital weapon in the scenario of competition and for the reduction of economic crises. Whoever dominates the key points of that region has infinite possibilities to exercise better control in other places, as well as, from a position of power, to expand the territory under their control.

Oil profits in the Gulf region also allow for exceptional business and profits for the large arms consortiums.

For example, arms sales worldwide doubled in the 1970s, while sales in the Middle East region quadrupled. "In the eighties, half of all the weapons sent to the Third World, went to that region. That is, more than 25% of all weapons in the world. In a period of less than 20 years, military spending in those countries increased tenfold. From 4.7 billion dollars in 1963 to 46.7 billion in 1980. That's 9 times more than the world average. If the ratio of military spending to national GDP is established worldwide, 6 of the first countries are located in that region. In the 1980s these countries were Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Iran, Oman and Kuwait. "

Between 1970 and 1975 the arms sold to the countries of the Middle East were worth more than 20 billion dollars, that is, 48% of all weapons exported to the Third World.

Of those weapons, 31% for Iran, 14% Saudi Arabia and 13% for Jordan. [Merip Report No. 112, Feb. 1983, Weapons Competition in the Middle East]

Between 1980 and 1984 50.8% of all weapons in the world were in the Middle East, ie between 1979 and 1983 the Gulf countries bought more than 37 billion dollars of weapons and only in 1980 had a military expenditure more than 30 billion dollars. [Ándese goes Peykar No.1]

With only so little information you can already see the link between oil and militarization and the meaning of democracy exported by countries from the metropolis to the region is clear.

To understand what the defense of "their interests", "democracy" and "development" means for the true rulers of the Middle East, I would like to give you one example:

Militarization in the Middle East

Contrary to what the imperialist states, and a large part of the Western mass media, claim, these forces did not come to take care of peace or to establish democracy.

Those forces are the representatives of death and destruction.

After the last Israeli attack on Lebanon in September, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was questioned in the Knesset Defense Commission (Israeli parliament) for the defeat of the Israeli army. Olmert replied: "Half of Lebanon was destroyed and you speak of a defeat!" [Berliner Zeitung, 5.9.2006].

For these gentlemen victory means destruction. And militarization means theft and exploitation. So when we talk about militarization in the Middle East, in itself, we are talking about the theft and exploitation of natural and human resources. However, militarization is only one aspect of oil and other natural resources.

At this moment I am going to limit myself to touching on the aspect of militarization, but let us be aware that there are many other factors that are related to oil and that disrupt the lives of people in the region.

The first oil well was found in 1908 in Masdjed Soleiman, Iran, following a contract between Iran and Englishman William Knox D'Arcy, who authorized the oil concession in the country. Although wars existed in the region from before, this oil played a fundamental and vital role in maintaining the war machine of the British during the First World War.

Middle East at the beginning of the 20th century

According to the Prussian General and modern war theorist Clausewitz "War is the continuation of politics by other means". If that is true, we can conclude that in times of war as well as in times of "peace," human beings are the targets of destruction. During the war they are killed by rifles and bombs and during the "peace" for exploitation and theft of their natural resources.

That is why we can not talk about oil without talking about the environment of these human beings, the destruction of the autonomy of the indigenous peoples of the oil regions, the exploitation and extermination of human beings.

As I said, wars existed from before, but their forms were different and also the geography of the regions was different. Nothing else I am talking about modern times, I will not look further back.

Great Britain, who had occupied much of the Ottoman Empire after the First World War, "decided in 1968 to withdraw its armed forces from the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, carrying out the withdrawal until 1971. Great Britain had 139,000 elements stationed in the northwest of the Indian Ocean, 8500 of them in the Persian Gulf. Under the pressure of the independence movements (South Yemen, etc.) and by its wear and tear after the Second World War, it had decided to leave the region, without this meaning abandoning the main objectives. These objectives were to be sought by other means.

In this context the English Prime Minister Edward Heath said at a meeting of the Ministers of the CENTO Pact (Pakistan, Iran, Turkey) in 1972: "Our withdrawal from the region does not mean that we do not take care of that important region. We are updating our relations with the rulers and the Arab governments. "[The torches of the Persian Gulf. Alexej Wassiliev, Ed. Persa 1981]

To exploit the oil of the region, tranquility and security were needed.

"Within the new military strategy of the United States, which was based on the experience of defeat in Vietnam, the governments of Nixon and Ford and with the support of Kissinger insisted that the Shah of Iran guarantee stability and governability in the region. "[Hard Choices. Cyrus Vance, 1983]

From his point of view, a regional police was the easiest and cheapest option to control the region. In such a situation Iran is given a more and more important role in the region. In June 1974 Le Monde Diplomatique calls Iran "small local imperialist".

That is exactly what Britain calls updating its relations with the countries of the region.

But what was the result of the withdrawal of troops from the region?

This is the map of the Middle East in 1914. Compare it with the current map of the Middle East.

We note that at the time when oil becomes important and the Middle East and Iran are considered strategically important, several countries in the region are designed and created. Many countries are born from Kuwait to Pakistan.

The most interesting examples are:

Saudi Arabia: September 23, 1922 (after an internal war the Saudi family takes power.

Kuwait: June 19, 1961 (it was part of Iraq)

Bahrain on August 15, 1971 (it was part of Iran and through a consultation of the United Nations it was declared an independent state). Bahrain is the Switzerland of the Middle East. Even Michael Jackson, hiding from the American laws, lives there.

Qatar: September 3, 1971. After Iran and Russia it is the country with the most oil reserves and it is estimated that its reserves will last 200 years more. In the entire state of Qatar only 840 thousand people live, and it is the third largest gas exporter in the world.

United Arab Emirates: December 2, 1971. First, 7 Emirates were created (Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharedjeh, Adjaman, Omolghovein, Raasoljaime, Tadjireh) and then the Union was built.

Sometimes children play to be King and to build countries and give them away to whoever they want. We can think that these games come from the brains of children, however looking at those countries, Bahrain, Qatar and the Emirates, we see that children only reflect the imperial realities. These Lords built 3 countries in less than 5 months.

In other words: where there was an oil well an Emir was planted. Thus, it was easier to control the matter for the countries of the West.

It seems an exaggeration to say that countries were only built to guarantee control of oil. But during the First and Second World War and thereafter the oil became so important that Anthony Eden, Foreign Secretary of Churchill said in 1956, shortly before the English-French-Israeli military action to occupy the Suez Canal, to Chruschtschow : "Regarding oil, I tell you frankly that we would fight for it. We can not live without oil. "[The Price. Daniel Yergin, Fischer Verlag Frankfurt 1991. p. 608]

The same is stated by Jimmy Carter, former US President and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1980: "Any attempt by another force to gain control of the Persian Gulf will be considered an attack on the vital interests of the United States and will be rejected by all necessary means, including the military. "[The Price. Daniel Yergin, Fischer Verlag Frankfurt 1991. p. 865]

During the Second World War oil acquired an importance that it never lost afterwards. Just as the German generals complained about the lack of fuel during the last year of the war, then at no time was it said that there was enough. The importance of oil reaches such a point that the powerful states are willing to do everything to ensure their control, as Jimmy Carter said.

But the control of oil is not an isolated act, it is about ensuring the exploitation of the raw material as well as its conversion into a commodity. In this context, the human being has a double importance: as a buyer and consumer and on the other hand as a worker and producer. Every drop of hydrocarbon, beyond the destruction of the environment, smells of the exploitation of the workers, who under extremely difficult conditions, from 50 degrees below zero in Alaska to 50 degrees in the Middle East, extract oil from the earth and the sea. So that their brothers in the refineries, under subhuman conditions, turn it into other products and so that other brothers with slave wages and with the permanent danger of explosion sell it. And the only winners in this extraction-production-sales circle are a few transnationals. The closure of this circle can only be ensured with violence. The change of the map of the Middle East during the last century with the help of the imperialist troops to guarantee the functioning of the circle does not mean that the changes are over or that in the 21st century military reprisals are limited to Afghanistan or Iraq.

The borders are always changed. There are many plans for these changes:

One is the Zionist plan ERETZ - the promised Homeland.

Legend has it that the promised land ERETZ spans the territory from the Nile to the Euphrates River in Mesopotamia. But capitalist ideologues are not limited to a single plan.

Here we see the current borders in the Middle East. This map was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006.

Ralph Peters proposes in the article "Borders of Blood: How a better Middle East will look" that the borders of the Middle East are modified.

This is the proposal of Mr. Peters. The publication of the proposal in the magazine without considering the possibility of making those changes, shows the shamelessness of those people who never take into account the opinions of the people who live in the region.

It is clear that any change in the border lines would mean the loss of tens of thousands of human lives and the loss of the belongings of millions more (unless the people themselves decide freely about these changes - a fact that has never happened in the Middle East before. ).

But the will of the people is a reality and therefore on several occasions has led to the plans of the powerful not being carried out. To understand this point well, it is worth looking at the resistance movements in the region.

Since the Second World War, from Egypt to Afghanistan, from Turkey to Yemen, the imperialist plans have to face resistance movements.

From 1947 until today the resistance of the Palestinian people shines like a star in the Middle East sky. It can also be observed that in almost all countries, after a phase of peaceful resistance, movements were forced to use violence. The militarization of the popular resistance must be understood as a reaction against the policy of exploitation and robbery in their region, although nothing else is the action of a small group of society (eg intellectuals or guerrilla groups).

But the militarization and violence, product among others of the theft of hydrocarbons, does not end here.

To give at least one example of the situation in the Middle East, I want to mention the case of Iran.

As I mentioned, Iran was the first country in the Middle East where oil was found. Although D'Arcy obtained the aforementioned concession in 1901, it was not until 1908 that he found the first deposit. In 1909 the Anglo-Persian Company was established and in 1912 the export of Iranian oil began. From that day until today the export of oil is the main source of income of the State.

In 1951, after a month of strike and the wide march of oil workers, in which the government killed many participants, and declared the general strike and so the parliament elected Mossadegh as prime minister and declared the nationalization of oil . The nationalization did not go unanswered:

On August 19, 1953 with a military coup by the CIA, Mossadegh fell and initiated the totalitarian regime of the Shah. A regime whose basis was to care for American interests, especially their oil interests.

Thus, despite nationalization, foreign companies could enter the exploitation of oil. (Pact of Amini-Pitch concession contract, Anglo-Persian Company 40%, North American companies 40%, Shell 14%, French companies 6%).

The Shah was the supreme commander of the army and the police in the country.

With the creation of the SAVAK secret service and through massive repression, he tried to remain calm where no rebellion could be imagined.

However, the protest against the subhuman conditions was shown in the strikes of workers and students, as well as the guerrilla groups. (Strike of the textile workers in Shahi, Cheate Rey, steel factories, Fedayin guerrilla organization and Mudschaheddin).

Moreover, it also intervened in social movements in neighboring countries:

E.g. in the 70s he sent troops to Amman to fight the revolutionary movement of Safar. (These soldiers returned until after the 1979 revolution). At the same time he supported to take care of Kuwait against Iraq.

He sent arms to Somalia to fight Cuban troops. In 1974 he sent 30 helicopters to Pakistan to fight the Balutschistan rebels.

The export of oil is the main source of income for the Shah. With the purchase of arms sends a good part of that money back to the countries of the metropolis.

However, the popular movement against its domain increases. In 1979 the popular rebellion against the Shah begins. Their defeat was planned by General Heyser and the ruling sectors of the Islamic regime (Mehdi Bazargan, Prime Minister of the Islamic regime, Ayatollah Beheshti, Khomeini's right hand) in such a way that the state apparatus, especially the police and the army, was left without touch them.

The first action of the Islamic regime is to attack Kurdistan. From then until today Kurdistan looks like a military barracks.

Then they attacked the Popular Assembly of Turkemansahara and even bombed the mosques.

This same year the Iran - Iraq war begins. This war was the continuation of the Iran-Iraq war of the year 1975. While then the Shah needed war now the leaders of the Islamic Republic used the war to destroy the mass movement.

In 1981, under the shadow of war, the Islamic Republic took an unprecedented initiative. Through an undeclared coup, they arrested, tortured and killed tens of thousands of opponents. The goal was to destroy any protest voice.

In 1988, after the Iran - Iraq war ended, Khomeini ordered the massacre against the rest of the political prisoners. There is a list of 4482 people executed in the summer of 1988.

That repression did not happen because of personal interests.

At the same time, the government of the Islamic Republic, following the desire of the Monetary Fund and the World Bank, has carried out an enormous privatization.

From textile factories to mines, from factories of electrical products, to the telephone.

Everything that can be privatized.

Privatization has brought wealth for a small minority and poverty for the masses. The government is expanding the apparatus of repression to stop the protests of the impoverished masses.

Militarization is not limited to security aspects. In the South of Iran there is a region called Asaluye. Here is the most important gas deposit in Iran.

A map of oil and gas pipelines was published in 2001 on a website, Inogate, of the European Community. One of the most important pipelines on this map will connect Asaluyeh with Europe.

In 2003, a map was published on the same site as the goal to secure fuel for Europe.

Priority European Axes for the construction of oil pipelines

If we look at the map well, we realize that at least one reason for the US war against Afghanistan and Iraq is to prevent Europe from becoming independent in oil and gas.

If the German government was willing to spend so much money to transport the gas pipeline to Europe through the North Sea instead of Poland, it is exactly because of the desire to become independent. For the then Chancellor and now Chairman of the Advisory Committee of the German-Russian International Consortium, Poland was too inclined towards the United States.

In the Asaluyeh region, which looks more like a military barracks than a place of production, several transnationals are operating. An oil worker from Asaluye says in an interview with a student magazine in Tehran: "The name TOTAL is everywhere, but no TOTAL worker is seen here. TOTAL subcontracted to other foreign companies, such as Hyundai, LG of Korea and also the Koreans subcontracted some Iranian companies.

There are other infrastructure works, such as road and port. In general, those jobs are given to the SEPAH (army). In this work there is a lot of money and also a lot of corruption.

Large and lucrative works are granted to the army or to companies that belong to the military sector or the revolutionary guard. The power of the military is so great that they can act as they wish.

According to the government press, a contract of 1.3 billion dollars was signed - completely illegitimately - for the construction of a 900-kilometer gas pipeline in the east and southeast of Iran with a company that is part of the revolutionary guard (and I I'm talking about your own laws). The government responded to these criticisms that "only the revolutionary guard is capable of carrying out the project in that very troubled region."

The interesting thing is that these plans coincidentally coincide with what strategic as Lindon Larouche proposed years ago.

Let's see, as an example, the map of the Eurasian connection routes.

If we leave aside the inaccuracies of the map it seems that the pipeline built by the revolutionary guard of the Islamic Republic is part of those same connection plans between Europe and Asia.

Eurasian Corridor

A look at the map of oil and military forces in the Middle East allows us to draw the following conclusion:

The coup of 19 August 1953 against the government of Mossadegh in Iran, which was the first attempt to free the country from foreign interference (especially British by British Petroleum), was carried out in collaboration with the United States and Great Britain and confronted Iran with the repression and domination of the Shah regime.

In Iraq the nationalization of the oil industry began with the seizure of power of Abdolkarim Ghasim. It was accompanied by other reforms, including the agrarian reform, and caused movements and agitation in neighboring countries. Finally the interest in oil, the colonial and imperialist strategies, as well as the interests of the conservative forces in the region gave rise to great massacres of the communists and after the fall of the Ghasim government and the arrival of Saddam Hussein.

During the past century, the oil industry workers of Iran and Iraq (both well organized and with good mutual relations) who influenced the situation in their countries, were brutally repressed and disjointed. It is very obvious the role of oil workers in the fall of the Shah, as well as the role of the oil workers of Basra against the illegal intervention of the United States in Iraq during the past years.

During the 8 years of war (1980-1988) between the backward regimes of Iran and Iraq, the center of the Iranian workers movement in Abadan was completely annihilated. The Iraqi workers movement in turn was strongly damaged by the US invasion.

Many people in the region believe that the existence of oil is not a positive factor that favors progress, but rather is the reason for colonial interference, militarization, repression and finally underdevelopment.

Everyone knows that during the United States invasion of Iraq and the fall of Saddam Hussein, ministries and museums were looted everywhere, except the oil ministry.

Oil, arms business, the survival of repressive regimes, wars, dictatorships and underdevelopment in the region go together.

The truth I think it is very interesting to know all this, and there are still many things that are hidden for many people .... If you read everything I thank you because you took the time to read the publication and it is quite long true. Many thanks and until a next post.