How
can you tell whether an American is feeling secure or if he worries about
something? What you do is mention the thing you suspect worries him, and see
how he reacts. If he shrugs what you just said, you know he feels secure. If he
bursts into a xenophobic bluster, you know he worries.
For
example, talk to an American about going to Mars, and you'll see him respond in
a relaxed manner, feeling secure that America will win this race. But talk to
him about sending American astronauts to the space station on Russian rockets,
and he'll burst into a polemic about this being a temporary aberration.
Those
kinds of reactions extend to all fields in which the Americans are made to feel
challenged by a foreign power. One such field is the energy sector where the
Americans were put on notice 45 years ago that the regime they relied on since
the start of the Twentieth Century had collapsed. And whatever the Americans
have been trying to do to remedy the situation ever since, does not seem to
work. You can tell this is the case by the fact that the Americans are
blustering xenophobic outbursts about it like they are worried stiff.
You
can see one such outburst when you go over the article that came under the title:
“America, the global energy superpower,” written by Steve Everley, and
published on December 5, 2018 in The Washington Times. But what was the regime
used by America that collapsed 45 years ago, anyway? It was to develop and
consume the cheap energy of other countries, especially those in the Middle
East, while keeping untapped America's expensive-to-get-at reserves. The idea
was that the foreign reserves will eventually be depleted, at which time the
Americans will turn to their own.
When
it happened in 1973 that the Egyptians were fed up telling the Israelis to get
out of the Sinai, they had been occupying for six years, and the Israelis did
not, the Egyptians went on the offensive to kick them out. Instead of accepting
Egypt's right to do so, the Americans physically intervened in the war on the
side of Israel. And this is when Egypt's Arab allies realized that their energy
resources were used to attack a fellow Arab country that was doing nothing
worse than liberate territory stolen by Jews. And so, the rest of the Arab
world told the Americans that from here on, they will have to pay not what it
costs to produce Middle Eastern oil, but what it will cost to replace it. That
is, they will pay what it will cost to develop and extract America's own
reserves.
America
has been trying to do that ever since, but was never able to produce more than
half of what it consumes. Thus, for Steve Everley to bluster about America
being a global energy superpower, is to give the false impression that America
can supply the world with all the energy it will need should there be supply
interruptions. But the truth is that if something like this happens, America
will suffer along everyone else given that it needs to import as much as it
produces to fill a shortfall ... or else half the cars, ships, planes and
trains in the country will go idle.
Citing
statistics that serve to hide America's energy vulnerabilities, Steve Everley
avoided getting involved in the impossible task of explaining how the current
situation makes America's energy needs safe, let alone how America will help
the rest of the world. But this reality put the writer in a quandary when it
came to finding an angle through which to write an article that can stand on
its own.
So
then, for what other purpose could the statistics be used? Well, they could be
used to engage in America's newly acquired pastime. It is to invoke the “us
versus them” doctrine of ideological warfare, and go after former President
Barack Obama. In fact, Everley started his article by quoting Obama who reminded
the world of the contribution he made to help increase oil and gas production
in America.
Steve
Everley admitted that Obama was correct but added this: “Total production isn't
the best measurement. States regulate oil and gas production within their
borders, which means [that the increase] is a product of state, not federal,
regulation”.
That
is a curious thing to say because people like Everley have been accusing Obama
of “interfering” in the free market by over-regulating the oil and gas
industry. But because the industry did well, the same people are now accusing
Obama of letting the industry thrive by not regulating it. In fact, Everley himself
says something to this effect. Here it is: “He [Obama] could have given local
officials the necessary cover to adopt measures that would have restricted
production [but he didn't].” So then, what's the accusation about?
It's
about nothing. It is there not because it contributes to the debate, but
because everyone is supposed to contribute to the ongoing ideological warfare.
But do you know what this does to America? It diminishes it in the eyes of the
world, with consequences that cannot be ignored.