The Oil Drum

47 comments on A Glimpse of our Geopolitical Future -- The East and South China Seas

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

davebygolly on March 15, 2006 - 10:40pm

The US is not just a neutral bystander in all these things. Japan is being not just given permission, but being urged to rearm, and could acquire nuclear weapons in the blink of an eye. Japan is the US outpost on the eastern flank of China, India is being groomed for the western flank, and her nuclear status was blessed in the recent Bush visit.

Korea (South!) is far less ready to follow the baton. And of course S. Korea could also easily develop nuclear weapons if it chose to.

Where will Russia end up? So far the US has done far more damage to Russian interests than has China, but her huge empty spaces, vast resources and (relatively) small population cannot but stimulate improper thoughts in its resource-starved southern neighbor with 1.3 billion people. Nuclear weapons, the missiles to deliver them, lots of gas and oil -- these enable a mutually beneficial and respectful relationship with China for the near term. Somewhat longer term, the relationship is another bomb waiting to go off.

Despite China's military buildup, she and some 20 other countries' military budgets do not equal that of the US. Some picture China as the upcoming threat to the US empire. But China has its own vulnerabilities -- much unrest in the countryside, which would become much worse with any downturn in the US economy, terrible ecological problems, and of course a growing energy deficit with no good solution is sight. I see no chance whatsoever in China challenging US global hegemony on the basis of its continued growth.

There is no doubt that the US empire will crumble as have all empires, due to overreach among other things, but its hard to see China standing around unscathed, ready to step in its shoes. What I think is possible is that the day of global empire may be nearing its end -- no one will be able to sustain one anymore, not the least because of peak oil.

Unfortunately, there may be one more horrendous and gigantic spasm of violence in the coming decade or two before that day arrives.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

oilaholic on March 16, 2006 - 12:13am

"What I think is possible is that the day of global empire may be nearing its end -- no one will be able to sustain one anymore, not the least because of peak oil."

That seems right to me. The military is already proclaiming a fiscal crisis just based on the price of oil doubling to $60. Military power is all about transportation and transportation, of course, is all about oil. So at much higher prices, it simply will not be able to afford to project itself into all corners of the world. Peak oil's number one victim will be all countries' military efforts, and most particularly those of the U.S.

The brass will scream like mad, but so will the voters when they are subject to rationing and/or enormous prices and when they then come to understand how much fuel the military is squandering. Triage will be the order of the day and the only solution will be to downsize, especially the projection of force in the sea and the air around the world, since the last place to cut back (one hopes) is the defence of the homeland. U.S. downsizing will be made a bit easier by the forced reduction of military spending by China, for the same reasons.

On the other hand, of course, the belicose oil exporters like Russia and Venezuela may have a different take. They may see the opportunity for improved power, which would then cause them to allocate production away from exporting and toward their own internal uses, including military. Which, of course, would exacerbate the oil supply problem for all importers, including both the U.S. and China.

This whole line of thought is just one example of the chaotic changes that will effect virtually all aspects of life post-peak.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

writerman on March 16, 2006 - 7:24am

I sort of agree with a lot Dave and Oilaholic have said. Only I'm not sure about the end of empire. I actually think the last thing we'll give up in an "interesting" world, with oil shortages, will be our military strengh. Sure one needs wealth and an advanced infrastructure to support a huge military and an empire, but in time of war it's relatively easy to convince the people that sacrifices have to be made. The army is the last place Peak Oil is going to hit with full force.

Basically I think current American foreign policy is crackpot and probably counterproductive as well.

I also believe that if 9/11 hadn't have gone down when it did, the simmering tension with China may have pushed its way far higher up the political agenda. One has to remember that there are forces in the U.S. that appear to want some sort of conflict with China.

The recent visit of Bush to India and the signing of a nuclear co-operation pact hasn't gone unoticed in China or in Pakistan. Pakistan was more or less humiliated by Bush. They got nothing, only a scolding. This is an unwise strategy. Pakistan has the Bomb after all. Seeing the U.S. moving closer to India is causing instability in Pakistan. The Pakistani military and security services are unstable and semi-independent of the central government.

Currently Iran wishes to build an oil/gas pipeline through Pakistan and India to China. All four countries will benefit from this, but the Bush administration is against this pipeline. This is also a short-sighted policy. One risks upsetting everybody.

Already in India there is a great deal of debate about the wisdom of India forming a de facto alliance with the U.S. against China. Many Indians don't see the sense of it. Why choose an aliance with a country which is going down over one (China) which is going up?

I think the U.S. is pushing China into the arms of Russia. China and Russia for a lot of reasons could form a really powerful alliance. Iran would be nuts not to join this group. Pakistan may do to as a counter-balance to India's alliance with the United States.

Dave may well be correct when he says that the age of empire is over. As there is only one "empire" in the world now, that means the end of the age of America is over. That may also be true. But that isn't really going to mean much to Russia, India and China which are still going to be around even if the American Empire falls.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

oilaholic on March 16, 2006 - 10:52am

Writerman makes a good point saying "I actually think the last thing we'll give up in an "interesting" world, with oil shortages, will be our military strengh." In fact it is very hard to imagine, from the perspective of our current world, the idea of reducing military spending. However, like so many paradigms that will change when oil becomes scarce, this one will too.

It is just very hard for us to to project ourselves into a world where economies are so hobbled that food and shelter are the chief concerns of a majority of the population. Forget vacations. Forget status symbols, MP3's, the latest video games, visits to Disneyland - don't even dream about hopping on a plane. But that world will also govern military spending, and if the oil ain't there, it ain't there. So I don't think our Congress will be approving military bases all over the world when their constituents are concerned about the costs of food and shelter.

Now, China might be a different story because people don't get to vote in China. Also, their peasant population, currently still 2/3rds of the country, is used to extreme poverty. In that situation, I image that at least for a while, the government could fall back on the reflexive instinct to distract the population through war and could order sufficient oil supplies to do it. But it would likely be a regional conflict, probably aimed at Taiwan, possibly Japan.

In today's world, there is no doubt that the U.S. reaction would be to strike back, defending both Taiwan and Japan. But, again, try to project your mind into a world of 20% unemployment, $500 oil, $trillion budget deficits, $2,000/oz gold, bank failures, etc. In that situation, the U.S. position is a rather far way from a slam-dunk. My guess: Fortress America. Massive programs to develop nuclear energy, enhance the grid, develop rail transport. These sorts of programs, plus the reversal of globalization so that manufacturing comes back home, is what keeps unemployment at "only" 20%.

And why, in that situation is oil at $500 and not $5? Because there are almost no exporters. Sure, we'll get some from Canada, but the Saudi's, Russians, Venezuelan's, etc. will cut way back on exports, recognizing that the end of their own oil supplies are in sight and not being willing to sell their future for worthless dollars.

So that's why U.S. military hegemony will end. Not next year or in five years. But likely in twenty years.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

writerman on March 16, 2006 - 12:28pm

Jesus! Oilaholic old man, is that how you really see the world "developing" during the rest of our lifetimes? That's a pretty detailed and depressing scenario ain't it? It's a dystopian nightmare infact!

In a world like that, with such drastic economic/social/political disruption, I think all bets are off about our collective futures. I mean if were really go down that kind of road, a road that only leads downwards towards...towards barbarism and the end of our way of life and civilization, then I see nuclear war in my dark, crystal ball. We ain't gonna get thru it in one piece, man!
See, now look what you've gone and done, I'm starting to sound even more pessimistic than you do!

I can imagine a lot. I do it for a living. I could imagine a world with the United States fighting resource wars all over the place. American robot/human hybrid legions on the march everywhere. In Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Nigeria, Sudan, Libya, carving huge chunks out of Russia and Canada... the list of countries with oil in long, but how realistic is it? A few thousand resitance fighters in Iraq are winning a guerilla war against an American army, can one really imagine the U:S. fighting two or three wars like that? I somehow doubt it. I don't believe the current American political system could survive such a scenario. Some form of "dictatorship" maybe, might want to take on such an "insane" role, but goodbye to democracy along the way.

I can't remember if I mentioned this, but my daughter spent some time in China recently. She was teaching english at an elite highschool outside Beijing. Lots of the young people she talked to seemed convinced the United States wanted a conflict with China before China became too strong. They thought China would do everything in its power to avoid such a conflict, because it wasn't strong enough at present to win such a conflict. For the next ten to twenty years the priority was economic growth and development. Then and only then, when China was strong, could they afford to adopt a less passive and defensive role if they were forced to. So that is perhaps a kind of anecdotal Chinese perspective.

Now, I'm sceptical about many conspiracy theories, but politics is a sort of conspiracy by it's very nature. I think there are influential groups in the U.S. who don't want China to reach economic/military parity with the United States anytime. If one reads some of the latest reports from the Pentagon this attitude is expressed openly. The United States we stop any nation from becoming a new Soviet Union. A new bi-polar world in not acceptable. Now I don't know how seriously one should take this kind of talk. Are they remotely serious, are they realistic, is such talk hubristic nonsense? Who knows? It should perhaps be mentioned that there are other groups in the U.S. that don't want conflict with China.

The problem is, it could happen without anyone really wanting it to happen. China has a very emotional attitude towards the province of Taiwan. China is concerned about rising Japanese nationalism. The same groups in the U.S. that want conflict with China also have close contacts with Taiwan. They could encourage Taiwan to declare unilateral independence from China. The Taiwanses could do this hoping to "force" the United States to defend them from a Chinese invasion. China will not accept an independent Taiwan. Some think the Chinese army would take over if the politicians in Beijing even contemplated accepting Taiwanese independence. So one needs to be really careful about the forces being relised in this area.

Personally, I think we have a stark choice about the future we are going to inhabit. We all have to learn to live together, or, die together.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

davebygolly on March 16, 2006 - 12:47pm

Writerman,

"Personally, I think we have a stark choice about the future we are going to inhabit. We all have to learn to live together, or, die together."

That is also my deepest and most fundamental belief. I just don't know how much dying together it will take before we decide to live together.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Search The Oil Drum with Google

Peak Oil Primers

“The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…”

—Winston Churchill, November 1936