The United States recently announced it will be sending 200 US troops and advanced air defence systems to Saudi Arabia. The decision follows the strike on Saudi oilfields earlier this month on Sept. 14. The attack originated from a pro-Iranian area inside Iraq and responsibility was claimed by the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The 10 suicide drones wiped out almost half of Saudi oil production although it was soon brought back up to normal levels. Iran denied any involvement.

The request for troops comes from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). President Trump’s recent claim that the United States is “more prepared” than ever before to go to war with Iran should chill even neutral observers, as it would be an incredibly dangerous blunder. A powerful Patriot surface-to-air missile system is also on the way with two more on standby as well as a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD).

Approximately 500 US troops were already deployed to Saudi Arabia this past July to pressure Iran out of taking any hostile actions. This is in addition to the tens of thousands of American troops and significant assets already in place around the Gulf in Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE. Iran is experiencing the geopolitical equivalent of being backed in a corner. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called the crushing American sanctions “merciless economic terrorism” recently at the UN General Assembly and said Iran won’t negotiate with America while the sanctions remain in place. Additional sanctions were put on Iran following the Sept. 14 strike on Saudi oilfields, despite a lack of proof provided of Iran’s complicity.

For its part, Yemen is experiencing the worst humanitarian crisis in the world, partly as a result of the US-backed Saudi coalition’s campaign against the Houthi rebels. Yemen’s civil war, which broke out after the ouster of former President Ali Saleh between his supporters and opponents, has seen both sides commit atrocities and war crimes. However, Saudi Arabia and its coalition contributing most to the bloodshed, starvation and disease through a devastating economic blockade and airstrikes that have killed an estimated 4,800 civilians since the war started and the Houthis have killed around 1,700 in the same period according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project.

Saudi Arabia has also allegedly been recruiting Sudanese child soldiers to fight in the Yemen war and has shocked the public with events such as bombing a Yemeni school for the blind and a bus full of Yemeni schoolchildren. Fortunately, a partial ceasefire may be coming up soon between the Houthis and Saudis. Perhaps it has something to do with the recent Houthi claim that they have just captured thousands of Saudi soldiers in a major military victory.

Recent polling by Gallup showed only 18 percent of Americans want military strikes on Iran, and sending more troops and sophisticated equipment there at this time leads closer to that outcome. Saudi Arabia has been identified as being the biggest arms importer in the world between 2014 to 2018, a 192 percent jump from their arms import levels between 2009 to 2013. They are awash in armoured trucks, tanks, missiles, warplanes, guns and bombs, with an estimated $15.6 billion in arms imports from their top five sellers US, UK, France, Spain and Germany. Saudi Arabia also has a highly-trained and lethal military of over 230,000. They are far from defenceless or weak, and sending additional American troops and equipment—which are functionally irrelevant additions compared to the already massive American and European arms exports and Saudi Arabia’s army strength and Gulf allies—does indeed seem to be more about “posturing” and ramping up the media war against Iran than real military logistics.

Nonetheless, posturing can quickly turn into real war as the past century shows us, and American and Western assets in the Middle East and Gulf region are already significant. The move to send more troops and equipment to Saudi Arabia should concern even those who consider Iran a threat, because it increases the tempo of rhetoric and reminder of how easily any incident at this point could lead to an outbreak of direct hostilities between Iran and the Saudi coalition backed by the US.

Certainly Iran is not all some innocent victim of everyone else, and it is a threat to regional stability: but the world-threatening bogeyman it has been built up into by America and its “allies” like Saudi Arabia is making it harder to deescalate the situation and come up with a solution that doesn’t involve catastrophic war. In addition to being unpopular strikes on Iran are also militarily unwise considering its military power and strategic depth.

Recently, during the ongoing debacle over Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump defended his decision to delay military aid to Ukraine before the call because of concern over Ukraine’ s corruption. “Why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?” Some Americans and world observers might also ask why you would give troops and risk American lives for a country which is corrupt and beheads and crucifies teenagers and bombs schools for blind people?

Most countries that cut up a journalist in pieces, bomb schoolkids and have the distinction of 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers coming from their shores (two others from UAE, another from Lebanon and another from Egypt), would not be getting American lives put on the line to defend their nation and their oil flow. Saudi Arabia: with friends like this, who needs enemies?

L'articolo Why Is The United States Sending More Troops To Saudi Arabia? proviene da InsideOver.

The recent drone attacks, attributed to Iran-backed Houthi rebels, against oil infrastructure facilities in Saudi Arabia have triggered another rally in global oil prices. Even though POTUS has promptly made a reassuring announcement trying to confine extreme market reactions the overall sentiment remains highly volatile. The latest developments bring forward once again the crucial matter of the correlation between the energy markets and geopolitics. Apparently we are standing nowhere close to the fragile environment that dominated the energy scene during the 1970s and 1980s and obviously the US resiliency against a potential cut-down in the oil supply from OPEC is undoubted, compared to those days; however there is still a lasting element from this era and this is the impact of geopolitical tensions on the oil and gas industry, alongside the role of energy resources as a tool to achieve political ends worldwide. The energy industry has ultimately been affecting the US foreign policy and how developments of the last decade have reshaped the previous status quo.

JCPOA and Iran

With Iran being the talk of the day, it is worth having a look into how JCPOA -and the following US withdrawal- has impacted the oil market. The country holds a prominent role in the global energy sector, standing third among OPEC members when it comes to proven oil reserves. Undoubtedly Iran’s economy has been tightly relevant to the energy markets. The signing of JCPOA back in July 2015 has been a decisive factor to send and keep the oil prices in historic lows until the US withdrawal from the agreement on May 2018. As discussed in a previous article, the Trump administration is focusing on weakening the US rivals worldwide through a combination of diplomatic means and economic sanctions rather than dragging the country in a costly and politically damaging wide-scale military campaign.

Through the reinforcement of the sanctions, the States aim to strangle Iran financially, to reach the point, where president Rouhani -or his successor- would be eager to sit at the negotiation table, without being in the position to efficiently negotiate. The longer the sanctions stay in place the more difficult it will be for Tehran to manage its domestic affairs and maintain its international standing. Opportunistic reactions should be anticipated by the Islamic Republic, both through its proxy powers in the region and by taking unilateral action against Western interests focusing on the harassment of military assets and shipping industry. However extreme measures, that could be perceived as casus belli, like the closure of Straits of Hormuz, are highly unlikely since both sides want to avoid a full-scale confrontation.

This US approach is two-fold; Washington undoubtedly seeks to restraint the regional influence of Tehran, since it is perceived as a destabilizing power in the Middle East and a permanent threat to the US strategic partners, KSA and Israel. Iran allies, like the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon -and Syria- pose major challenges to the US interests and the Trump administration comprehends, that by minimizing Iranian logistical and operational support to such groups, their tactical and strategic capabilities will be significantly downgraded. On the other hand, the top priority for President Trump, to capitalize politically and secure his reelection, is to boost the US economy and self-sufficiency during his first term. The ensuing soar in oil prices, following the US withdrawal from JCPOA, created positive circumstances for the US shale oil industry, as will be thoroughly examined below.

Geopolitical Implications of US oil imports

For the last few decades the dependency of the US industry and eventually US economy per se, on the major oil-producing countries of the Gulf, has been unquestionable. Therefore, Washington had to adjust the US overseas policy following this reality, seeking to build a modus vivendi with those powers, even when this seemed rather controversial.

For instance, the States have been traditionally implementing an Israeli-friendly strategy in the region, identifying common interests with Tel Aviv and pursuing to secure the preservation of a small state surrounded by perceived hostile nations. Given the crucial role of religious politics in the past Arab-Israeli wars and ongoing disputes, it is questionable how Saudi Arabia -the gatekeeper and guardian of the Muslim world- or the rich gulf monarchies have not been heavily involved in those conflicts and in the same time managed to sustain a friendly relationship with the US. A closer look though indicates that the Saudis were quick to understand that the prosperity of their nation was based upon the establishment and maintenance of friendly relations with one of their top oil buyers. Accordingly, American Presidents could easily realize that KSA has been a critical factor of stability in the region and a reliable business partner, thus it wasn’t too hard for them to oversee some in-country -but internationally addressed- human right violations, that in other cases could lead to a major US backlash.

On the other hand, oil-producing countries that followed a rather unpredictable and dubious -domestic or foreign- policy, with leaders that could not be trustworthy counterparts, would make the US feel quite uncomfortable. In such cases, Washington would either encourage and indirectly support a popular uprising leading to a regime change, or directly campaign against that country. The most indicative instances of this approach have been Libya and Iraq respectively.

US shale oil industry and Trump Presidency, as Game Changers

We have described just now some of the dynamics that shaped the US policy-making process for the last half-century. The tables have turned though during the last decade because of two seemingly different but essentially related developments; the massive expansion of US shale industry and the election of Donald J. Trump, as the 45^th President of the United States.

The potential exploitation of shale oil is not something new in the US. The commonly referred today method of fracking has been known since the late 1940s. But it took almost 30 years until this technique has been utilized to extract shale oil in Odessa, Austin, San Antonio and other places in Texas, close to the Mexican border; and it wasn’t until the late 2000s when the method of hydraulic fracturing has finally evolved to the point that could be widely used and became an economically viable option to extract oil.

From that moment US shale and gas production has soared. The US production in the energy sector has put the States in the top of the oil-producing countries overlapping major powers of the OPEC block. But as mentioned above to make this sector profitable US want to keep the oil prices steady and avoid any sharp decreases on the value of the commodity. Therefore, the withdrawal from JCPOA, the ongoing tension of the last decade in the Middle East and the reaction of the energy markets have created the ideal context for US shale producers.

Now let’s examine this soar in shale oil production concerning the current US administration. The new POTUS has made clear even before his election that he would seek to disengage the country’s armed forces from any deployments overseas. Initially, we must highlight that Trump wants to have absolute control over the decisions of his country and the feeling of being independent to shape his foreign policy is a vital part of his comfort zone. Situations, where a potential OPEC embargo could cause panic in the heart of the US and paralyze everything is a no-go for POTUS. An energy-independent Washington brings a series of significant implications for the US policy in the Trump era. No use of force is deemed necessary for the promotion of US interests, as this would not only ruin the President’s image but also might be proved financially damaging. Thus, the bargaining power of the Gulf countries has been minimized giving the initiative to Washington, leading to much more rational political decisions from the US side.

To this end the current administration has been moving towards easing regulations for oil companies, with most topical the governmental plans to weaken methane control; a move that could save almost $20 million per year for US oil and gas producers, but in the same time has triggered massive public opposition, concerning the potential environmental impact of this development. Additionally, President Trump has ensured that global oil prices are kept within a specific limit, so the costly procedure of shale oil extraction is economically viable and makes the final product competitive in the market. There are several examples of oil markets reacting to a President’s announcement -or rather tweet- and this is so indicative of Trump’s influence on the volatile energy sector; an unquestionable reality that urged numerous critics to accuse the President of market manipulation.

Bottomline

Is should be clear that the current US administration is trying to strengthen the US domestic industry and enhance the macro-economic trends of the country. As oil holds a prominent role in the US national economy, we should anticipate further increases in the global prices with barrel price of WTI staying well over the $50 threshold whatsoever. The developments in the Middle East will probably contribute to this direction, but any large-scale confrontation between the Washington and regional rivals -predominantly Iran- should not be expected. The US shale production industry will keep expanding, contributing to self-sufficiency in the energy sector and affecting accordingly the US foreign policy. All these assumptions though should be considered within the ever-changing geopolitical reality of our days and the current fluid political scene of the United States.

L'articolo US Energy Drama Amidst Tensions In The Middle East proviene da InsideOver.

For the first time in the four years of war in Yemen, a lethal drone attack against Saudi Arabia’s two main oil plants was confirmed to have been launched from Iraqi territory. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s quick blame on Iran and its Houthi rebels in Yemen from where he originally claimed the attack was initiated, added to the confusion concerning this major development. Pompeo later joined the chorus confirming that the suicide drones raid which targeted the most important Saudi oil fields of Kuhrais and al Abqaiq originated in an Iraqi border area with a pro-Iranian local community. The deliberate US insistence to force Iran’s name in the incident – the Saudis themselves held off on accusations – has not downgraded the significance of this development and its immediate repercussions on the world oil markets.

Drones or Missiles, Damage Was Done

Houthi rebels in Yemen were quick to assume responsibility for the deadly attacks that set the two major Saudi oil installations ablaze on the morning of Saturday, September 14. Initially, it was quite clear whether the attack was carried out by long-range missiles or suicide drones, but Houthis reaffirmed the latter confirming that they had sent 10 suicide drones on this very mission.

Damage to the Saudi plants was so immense that it crippled the country’s oil production cutting it by half – that amounts to 5% of the world’s crude production. The Saudis announcement a few days ago that their production quota is now back to normal does not underestimate the seriousness of the incident and its economic, security and political fallout. Once again, US-made expensive and supposedly sophisticated Patriot anti-aircraft systems and other surface-to-air batteries have abysmally failed to prevent yet another costly drone attack by Yemeni rebels with limited resources, who threatened that there was more to come unless the Saudi-led coalition stops its war on Yemen.

More Embarrassment for MBS and Saudi Allies

The impact of the raids on the oil and financial markets was immediate. Oil prices rose and Saudi stocks fell, then settled and later fell again. A growing sense of anger and frustration among Saudi citizens following every such attack adds to the embarrassment of the Saudi royal family and its strong man, Crown Prince MBS. Their coalition has failed to produce any tangible results on the ground in Yemen, and has suffered widening fractures following the drawdown of UAE’s troops operating in Yemen, and a recent visit to Tehran by the Emirati Coast Guard commander to Tehran for consultations and coordination with Iran, Saudi Arabia’s arch-rival and enemy, regarding security and safety issues in the Gulf region. The United Arab Emirates has had its own share of national regional insecurity and fear of an uncontrollable escalation when 6 tankers and other vessels were attacked off the coast of Al Fujairah a few months ago.

Confusion Shrouds Iraq Implication in Attack

So much ado and uncertainty regarding where this Houthi attack on Saudi oil plants had originated, as Iraq was implicated for the first time in such incidents against Saudi Arabia. Immediately following the attack, a senior Iraqi government official confirmed that the attack was launched from Iraqi soil, not from Yemen. Soon thereafter, Iraqi officials utterly denied that they had anything to do with this attack. Adding to the confusion and embarrassment of the Iraqis, a US-based Iraqi centre, the Future Foundation’s president Intifad Qanbar, quoting reliable sources of his inside Iraq itself, reconfirmed that the attack was launched from inside Iraqi territories, most likely from southern Iraq where Iran sympathizers are a majority. Iran, as usual, was singled out for the immediate blame and ready-made accusation; the media loves it, and the Iranians have grown used to it with obvious indifference.

The mere fact that this deadly attack against Saudi Arabia’s backbone oil installations was, for the first time, waged from inside Iraq itself remains a major and unexpected development that has everything to do with the Saudi-led war on Yemen. But more importantly even, is the fact that Iran-backed Houthi rebels feel much more confident and capable of inflicting ‘serious and painful’ damage on their arch-enemy Saudi Arabia, with strong warnings to its coalition partners. The table is turning against the Saudis and their fractured coalition in Yemen, and Houthi rebels are now well poised on the winning side.

L'articolo Iraqi Drone Attack On Saudi Oil Plants proviene da InsideOver.