A new slogan: Oil for peace
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Haziran 04, 2009 00:00
That the search for commodities and the sharing of derived wealth is a source of war, conflict and misery is hardly a new story. The "Punic Wars" launched by Carthage in antiquity, the conquest of the Americas after 1500 and the misery of much of the Middle East today are ample examples to prove the point.
That the search for commodities and the sharing of derived wealth is a source of war, conflict and misery is hardly a new story. The "Punic Wars" launched by Carthage in antiquity, the conquest of the Americas after 1500 and the misery of much of the Middle East today are ample examples to prove the point. "No war for oil" is perhaps the most common sign we witness at any protest of U.S. policy in Iraq.
But perhaps too little attention is given to the reverse of this dynamic: the stability that can ensue from energy interdependence that requires permanent Ğ and expensive Ğ infrastructure such as pipelines.
Skeptics to this line of argument will quickly point out that Russia’s control of a majority of Europe’s gas flow has enabled Russia to bully Ukraine and pressure the European Union. They will point out the exploitation of the Ogoni people of Nigeria that has resulted from the development of the oil resources in their Niger Delta. Of course. We are not going to be Pollyannaish about this.
But the pumping of 100,000 barrels of crude oil Monday by the Regional Kurdish Administration to international markets through the Turkish pipeline terminating at Ceyhan is cause to re-examine some of the standard slogans about energy interdependence. As we reported yesterday, Turkish diplomats say the success of this interdependence is powerful incentive to the government in northern Iraq to collaborate with Turkey on cracking down on the terrorist activities of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK. We would agree with security analyst Nihat Ali Özcan of the Economic Policy Research Foundation that one can carry this argument only so far, and that expecting a swift end to the PKK is "too much optimism."
But as our reporter Reeta Paakkinen reported yesterday from the city of Arbil, the Kurdish administration in northern Iraq needs and welcomes Turkish cooperation to attract more capital, technology and know-how to the region. The practical needs of economic development are powerful motivators to set aside ancient grudges, zero-sum alliances and short-term thinking.
The logic is the arrangements that have given northern Iraq access through Turkey to a Mediterranean port is the same logic that should be carried to the so-called "road map" for reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia. This is the logic that might well guide the European Union to end the economic isolation of Turkish Cyprus. It is a logic that should be embraced robustly by Israel in its dealings with Syria and the Palestinian territories or by America in its dealings with Iran.
Certainly, competition for energy can be a cause of war. But as Turkey and the Regional Kurdish Administration have shown, cooperation toward the extraction, transport and use of energy can, with thoughtful stewardship, be an important cause for peace.
But perhaps too little attention is given to the reverse of this dynamic: the stability that can ensue from energy interdependence that requires permanent Ğ and expensive Ğ infrastructure such as pipelines.
Skeptics to this line of argument will quickly point out that Russia’s control of a majority of Europe’s gas flow has enabled Russia to bully Ukraine and pressure the European Union. They will point out the exploitation of the Ogoni people of Nigeria that has resulted from the development of the oil resources in their Niger Delta. Of course. We are not going to be Pollyannaish about this.
But the pumping of 100,000 barrels of crude oil Monday by the Regional Kurdish Administration to international markets through the Turkish pipeline terminating at Ceyhan is cause to re-examine some of the standard slogans about energy interdependence. As we reported yesterday, Turkish diplomats say the success of this interdependence is powerful incentive to the government in northern Iraq to collaborate with Turkey on cracking down on the terrorist activities of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK. We would agree with security analyst Nihat Ali Özcan of the Economic Policy Research Foundation that one can carry this argument only so far, and that expecting a swift end to the PKK is "too much optimism."
But as our reporter Reeta Paakkinen reported yesterday from the city of Arbil, the Kurdish administration in northern Iraq needs and welcomes Turkish cooperation to attract more capital, technology and know-how to the region. The practical needs of economic development are powerful motivators to set aside ancient grudges, zero-sum alliances and short-term thinking.
The logic is the arrangements that have given northern Iraq access through Turkey to a Mediterranean port is the same logic that should be carried to the so-called "road map" for reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia. This is the logic that might well guide the European Union to end the economic isolation of Turkish Cyprus. It is a logic that should be embraced robustly by Israel in its dealings with Syria and the Palestinian territories or by America in its dealings with Iran.
Certainly, competition for energy can be a cause of war. But as Turkey and the Regional Kurdish Administration have shown, cooperation toward the extraction, transport and use of energy can, with thoughtful stewardship, be an important cause for peace.