Geopolitics studies the relationship between geography and the policies of nations.
It takes into account questions relating to raw materials including sources of energy, in particular oil which became a strategic raw material in the 20 th century. Strategic, not only because it is vital to the functioning of the economy and society in general, but also because there are risks involved in its supply situation.
So far, oil has remained plentiful and relatively inexpensive. We have not experienced shortages, except in times of war, for example during the First World War when the Germans sank American vessels which were supplying oil to the members of the Three Nations Alliance (UK, France, Russia). The most recent oil shortages date from 1974. In October 1973, war broke out between Israel and the Arab countries (Kippur war also called Ramadan war in the Arab world). On the 17 th of October, Arab oil producers decided to impose a petroleum embargo on supporters of Israel (the United States, Portugal, the Netherlands, South Africa and Rhodesia). This embargo was lifted in July 1974, following its failure. In fact, the major petroleum companies, controllers of the distribution of world oil supplies, had allocated shortages between all industrialised countries, those targeted by the embargo along with the others.
For the last 30 years, the developed countries have become used to a situation
of plenty. Inexpensive oil and gas have made all alternative energy sources expensive in comparison. Moreover, the dependence of consumer countries on hydrocarbon producers has increased. A single model of economic development, that of the consumer society, is tending to become the rule everywhere, even in China, the last major country with a Communist political system. The result is globalisation: emerging countries and developing countries have also become dependent on oil from producer countries.
So today, as the Hubbert Peak approaches, the whole world will be impacted by the inevitable reduction in supplies. A shortage could also happen if a serious crisis destabilises a major producer country, leading to a sudden drop in its production level. Faced with this two-fold threat, two policies are open to those countries having the financial means to react:
Reduction of their dependence on oil by developing alternative energy sources (coal, nuclear, renewable energy) and above all by achieving significant energy savings;
And/or ensuring that their energy supplies are safe from threat.
The developing countries, on their side, have significant “deposits” of new types of energy (solar, wind, geothermal,
hydroelectricity…) available for the production of electricity. But they need aid from the rich countries:
- On the one hand, to purchase and use the appropriate technologies, which are expensive in investment terms;
- Also to purchase the plant and equipment enabling them to use the electricity produced (what is the point of having electricity if one has nothing to use it for?);
- On the other hand, to train personnel competent in these technical sectors, to ensure for example the distribution and maintenance of all the plant and equipment.
The geopolitical problems posed for hydrocarbons can be clearly seen from a map of the world:
- The Middle East, which is very rich in oil and gas, is a long way from European consumers and even further from the United States and Japan. It is a region of widely diverse countries, peoples, religions and political regimes. Its history has been complex since ancient times. It is a region where the risk of conflict remains high, but which, fortunately, also has factors of stability, such as OPEC (the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries). This producer organisation includes many Middle Eastern countries and plays an important role in the good management of world petroleum production, and, above all, in price stabilisation.
- The other major zone rich in hydrocarbons – Russia and the two states bordering the east coast of the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan – can naturally supply Europe to the west and Japan, South Korea and China to the east. But these supplies will remain dependent on the goodwill of Russia, which can choose, in a situation where production becomes inferior to demand, to favour supplies to Europe or, on the contrary, to the Far East. Certain countries are attempting to escape from this control: for example, in a bid to by-pass the Russian network, BP and its partners have constructed an
pipeline
linking Bakou in Azerbaidjan to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. A part of the oil from Kazakhstan could also take this route, thus escaping from Russian control.
Oil and gas are found elsewhere than in these two major zones, but such regions have smaller reserves. South America, and Venezuela in particular, export their crude largely towards North America, because of their geographical proximity and the enormous requirements of the United States!
The geopolitics involved in other energy sources pose fewer problems. Coal is much more widely spread throughout the world, and the major users are in general also major producers. As far as uranium is concerned, the greater part of the reserves are held by rich countries (Australia, Canada, the United States). And, above all, the Hubbert Peak for these two resources is situated much further away in time than for oil and gas. Access to coal and uranium resources should not be affected by international tension for many years.
Hydroelectric dams built across very large rivers which cross several countries can create tensions. For example, Syria and Iraq are protesting against current Turkish projects to build 22 dams on the Tigre and Euphrates rivers, resulting in a reduction in the flow of these two major rivers downstream from the dams. Water available for farmers would be reduced, and the ecological balance of the rivers themselves and the land along their banks threatened. That is without taking account of the threat for inhabitants downstream posed by risks of dam bursts in a country like Turkey, which is subject to strong earthquake activity. On the other hand, these dams would enable control of the rate of flow of the two rivers, which would be favourable to farmers.
|