OPEC
The Creation of OPEC Severed the Relationship between the Middle East and the United States Forever
Introduction
OPEC is an abbreviation for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. At one point, the a joint effort by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, decided to unite the countries that produced oil and issued a directive on the 13th of May 1960, according to the objectives of the Arab Petroleum congress of1959, which recommended that this countries pursue a common goal of protecting their rightful wellbeing in oil exportation.
This declaration also highly developed the idea of forming an organization that would be aimed at achieving these goals. However, this petroleum exporting countries took little or no concern immediately but after a conference in Baghdad in august 1960, the oil producing countries in the likes of Venezuela, Iran, Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia met in Baghdad to discuss the notably low prices of oil.
The main agenda of the meeting was to form the Organization of Petroleum Exporting countries (OPEC). These OPEC member countries had the goals of working together to ensure that they secured and stabilized oil prices internationally to satisfy their interests as oil producing countries. The management of such goals was through maintenance of export allocations that assisted in the prevention of the overproduction of oil on an international scale.
The main objectives of OPEC were: the harmonization and amalgamation of petroleum guidelines of the member countries and the determination of the most excellent means to preserve their individual and combined interests; the devising of ways and means of ensuring the stabilization of prices in the global oil markets with the aim of lessening the chances of damaging and needless fluctuations; lastly, the organization was to ensure that the interests of the generating countries was given the due regards with the aim of ensuring a reliable income to the producing countries.
In addition, the organization was to ensure that the consuming countries experienced cost-effective and regular supplies at all times; to the investors in the oil industries, a return of capital was to be ensured.
Originally, OPEC had only five members and the seat was held in Geneva in 1965. Other countries that later joined opec include Quartar which joined in 1961, Libya which joined in 1962 together with Indonesia, Abou Dabi which joined in the 1967, Algeria which joined in 1969, Nigeria which joined in 1971, Gabon 1994 and lastly Bolivia and Angola in 2006. Ever since it was formed, OPEC has attached immense meaning on the responsibility it attributes to the stipulation of leading energy source which is mainly working to guarantee a stable and secure, as well as a well managed oil segment. The purpose of this paper is to prove that the creation of OPEC severed the relationship between the Middle East and the United States forever.
The creation of OPEC severed the relationship between the Middle East and the United States forever
Since the creation of OPEC, there have been several crises. The first embargo was experienced on June 6, 1967, just one day after the commencement of the Six-Day War, with a joint Arab resolution to dishearten any countries from sustaining Israel military (Kranser 1978). In this regard, several of the Middle East countries eventually restricted their oil consignments, some prohibiting only the United States and United Kingdom, while others completely banning oil exports. This oil Embargo did not only considerably reduce oil amounts available in the United States or the affected European countries as there was a general lack of solidarity and uniformity in banning specific countries. The end of this Embargo came in 1st September 1967 through the issuance of Khartoum Resolution.
One of the key factors contributions to the hatred between the Middle Eastern countries and the US is evident in the Oil crisis of the 1973-1974. According to Krasner (1978), the late 1960s to the early 1970s was a period of dramatic change in the history of American raw materials investors which was seen gradual accommodation rather than a stubborn resistance as the American officials were unwilling to risk infuriating relations with Peru for the mere reason of protecting corporate privileges. As of the oil industry, formal ownership was moved from multinational firms to host-country government, and in the fall of 1973 to 1974, some exporting countries gathered a triumphant production curtail by the dramatic rise in oil price by about 600 percent between 1970-1974 (Merrill 2007).
Such gains were not without impediments as they caused strained relationships with the Western alliance which reduced the chances of political peace in the Middle East (Krasner 1978). In addition, the international economy became more unbalanced due to the evolution of petrodollars, the new unpredictable global liquidity, a surplus held by the oil exporting states. This resulted to a severe financial crisis which had negative impact on the lesser developed states.
On the other hand, there were some positive impacts associated with the crude oil producers in the US but generally, the negative impacts outweighed it as the objectives of the American policy makers were undermined. For the longest time, the concerns of the US regimes was in the defense of conventional administrations in oil producing states and openly accepted changes in oil ownership and prices despite the critics from cosmopolitan oil companies.
As stated by Merrill (2007), in early 1974, American Policy makers were faced by a situation of confronting the issue of limiting further increase in oil prices and avoiding another production curtail while guaranteeing no deflation to the oil exporting countries’ governments that were still anti-communist. From these reactions, it is clear that the American policy makers had more concern on the wider foreign procedures objectives than in the prerogative of corporation or the oil prices (Krasner 1978).
The enmity between the United States and Middle East has for the longest time been very evident due to the impartial involvement in the affairs of some of the Middle Eastern countries ever since the end of the second world war (Krasner 1978). Some of the key factors behind the enormity were international and economic factors where United States as the lone super power made the middle easterners feels that United States can impose its will in the middle on international organizations and exercise military power in pursuit of its objectives while despising other countries (Prados 2001). This envy by the Muslim and Arab countries on being superpower has continued to increase the hatred as up to this far there lacks a second super power amongst world nations.
The other major contributing factor is the American prosperity that is largely broadcasted by the western media which was in contrast with deprivation in key segments of Middle Eastern populations like the Yemeni villagers, urban under classes in Egypt, Palestinian refugees. Other factors included the military support to Israel, training the secret police in Iran in the order of Shah, the provision of aid and ammunitions to Turkey in its attack to Kurdish villages among others.
The United States has continuously been accused of purportedly using pressure on oil producers to keep supplies plentiful and prices as low as possible and as a result, the oil market has become unpredictable reducing the per capita income for most of the oil exporting countries especially Saudi Arabia which is against the OPEC objectives (Prados 2001).
In all this accusations, the Muslims and Arabs want to deny the fact the United States act in the defense of itself against terrorism and not to defend vital economic interests , like it did in Iraq in 1991 or to check widespread disorder and relieve famine like in the case of its involvement in Somalia in the 1993 war. In addition, the US has deployed forces in the name of protecting Muslims like in the case of Kosovo and Bosnia in the 1980s (Yaqub 2011).
Another cause of hatred between the United States and the Middle East is the prevailing unfavorable image of US among most of the Middle East Muslim countries where most of them feel that the US is hostile and should be treated as an alien and not up to any Islamic values and beliefs (Merrill 2007). The critics mostly focus on the arising negatives associated with America such as intemperance in alcohol, drugs and the breakdown of the traditional family as a result of westernization and globalization. In addition, most of the images brought out by films and sexual morals of America in Televisions and film disregard America and the Muslim see it as a form of corruption for the Muslim society (Prados 2001).
The prevailing presence of Western military and the deployment of the U.S. military forces in the Middle East bring out an inharmonious image among the many Arabs and other Muslims in the Middle East region (Krasner 1978). For instance, the middle easterners have always cited that ever since the expulsion of the Iraqi forces from Kuwait in 1991, via a US led coalition, the states have maintained a force of almost 25,000 military personnel in the Persian Gulf region. This number has notably increased since the September 11 2001 attack as a campaign against terrorism.
In addition, most Muslims refute the presence of non Muslim forces on Saudi Arabia soil as an isolation of Islamic holy places of Mecca and Medina, which are in Saudi Arabia as stated by Osama bin Laden in his fetwa on February 1998 (Yaqub 2011). US has also had involvements in the protection of Saudi Arabia against the renewed aggression by Iraq and this leaves the Saudis in a state of dilemma as they still have the position of guardians of this Islamic holy sites.
In its defense, the use has cited the presence of US military in some of the Middle East countries as a fight against terrorism which is not aimed at any particular Islamic religion as stated by Bush and US officials. For instance, they state that the US military forces are no where close to the holy site of Mecca and medina in Saudi Arabia and that they are only situated at distant and isolated positions (Prados 2001). As matter of fact, the although many Arabs and Muslims opposed the US campaign in Afghanistan, US officials have stressed that most Afghans were happy with the liberation from the Taliban regime.
In addition, the US lacks a history of enlarging military presence in the Middle East and can be seen to maintain only as regulated presence of only small naval force situated in the Persian Gulf without the regard of the monetary and strategic importance of the region. To some extent, the united states have shown less need for permanent forces in the middle East through the deployment of temporary troops like the withdrawal of troops from countries like Libya and morocco by the demand of the host government in the 1970s. Furthermore, the involvement of the US in regional peacekeeping efforts in Egyptian Israel peace treaty in the 1979 drew little or no opposition from the Middle East countries (Merrill 2007).
The other factor widening the gap between Middle East and United States is the suppression of policy towards Iraq (Krasner 1978). For the longest time, the US has had the role of restraining Iraq by implementing military and economic procedures, a role that is not popularly known among the Middle Easterners. Confusion heightened in the involvement of the US led coalition in the eviction of the Iraq forces from Kuwait in 1991 when majority of the Middle East began laying blames on the United States Security Council’s sanctions for the deteriorated living conditions on the people of Iraqi for the past ten years. The middle easterners hold it that the US, as the key force behind the sanctions is insensitive on the plight of the people of Iraqi. As a result, the US has always been against the Iraqi president and in the year 2004, Sadaam Hussein’s Iraqis president was hanged to death for violation of human rights (Yakub 2011).
Another focus of criticism by the Middle East on the US is its involvement together with the British role in containing Iraqi (Prados 2001). The two countries has since the 1990s been conducting frequent visits to the northern and the southern of Iraqi to prevent the regime from oppressing internal opposition groups and even preventing them from intimidating the bordering states. For this reason, the Iraqi air defense unit has responded by causing frequent clashes of US and British aircrafts.
With this in mind, both the US and the British have strengthened air strikes against major Iraqi mechanism and surprisingly, the leaders of some Arab states like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan have set up the application of pressure against Iraqi. In this light, the opposing Middle East countries have held it that the US has the will to retain Saddam on power as they believe that it was a US green light that directed Saddam to Kuwait so that the Americans could have reasons for keeping forces in Middle East.
In its defense, the US claims that all the misfortunes facing Iraqi and its population were all as a result of Saddam who they claim opposed the US plan to support Iraqi’s citizens by buying essential commodities for the Iraqi citizens using funds obtained from the UN- supervised oil sales, for five years before later accepting the offer and since 1998, there has not been any impositions on Iraqi on the amount of oil it should sell (Prados 2001).
As of the containment of Iraqi by the US military since 1991, the US administration maintained that the over flights to enforce no-fly zones over parts of Iraq were a UN Security Council resolution adopted in post gulf war in 1991, despite the fact that not all UN members support such allegations. The US also claims that Iraqi had gone against human protection by placing air defense units near populated areas resulting to the civilian casualties as reported by Iraqi and that at some point it had used civilians as human shield.
As of the massive related strikes, the US had it that this was as a result of the violation by Iraq on cease-fire terms, and in December 1998, the Operation Desert Fox occurred after nearly two years of Iraq interference with the UN inspectors who sought to establish and destroy Iraq programs for constructing weapons of mass obliteration. The US is still convinced that, since Iraqi has no signs of readiness to pay tribute to the obligations for abandonment of mass obliteration weapons as well as the end of oppression for internal groups and intimidating its neighboring states, or support for global terror campaign, there is no need to withdraw the over flights from its territory (Krasner 1978).
For the continued hatred between US and Middle East, the US policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict is another major contributing factor as the Muslims and most Arabs are convinced that the involvement of the US is biased, a cry specifically from the Palestinian community who had remained under Israeli rule for more than 30 years especially in West Bank and Gaza (Prados 2001).
The concern of US involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict by the middle Easterners is mainly due to two key elements of the involvement which are: the failure by the US to press for key issues concerning the Palestinians from Israeli in the course of which there was a Palestinians uprising as a result to the collapsed US negations between the Palestinians and the Israeli; the Syrian-Israeli talk sponsored by the US also failed to materialize and there was ongoing clashes in the tri-border between Israeli, Syria and Lebanon.
Concerning this issue, the most affected are Palestinians and Syrians since for the longest time, Palestinians have held the dreams of being free state in vain and this alone has stirred concern among most Middle East countries including Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) who are mostly concern about the hostility and violent nature of the issue by the US which to the largest extent is behind Israeli (Yakub 2011). For this reason, most Arabs and Muslims perceive that the involvement of the US in such issues raises questions on just how serious the US is in ending the conflicts.
There are also allegations that the US holds less strict obligations against Israeli as is for other Middle East nations (Merrill 2007). The Arabs and Muslims have also consistently asserted that the US has held the wrong definition for terrorism which they believe focuses on the Palestinians and the Lebanese who seek to drive Israeli out of the West Bank and Gaza strip. On this issues, the US claim to have devoted more efforts on the resolving the Israeli conflict, just like it did in resolving the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty in 1979 as well as the Jordanian-Israeli peace treaty in 1994 and a succession of Palestinian-Israeli agreements that led to restricted rules for the Palestinians.
Lastly is the US long standing support for detested regimes in Middle East has had an adverse effect on the US image among mainstream residents (Prados 2001). This is mainly because of the perceived dictatorial and corrupt nature associated with those governments which are narrowly based or non Islamic. This title is mainly for the US allies in the likes of Egypt, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Jordan who have allowed, to a small extent, the involvement of the US in their affairs. As a result, such nations have continued to face persecutions for lack of a clear stand in according to the Muslim and Arab principles. Some of the Middle East countries described such involvement of the US as a way of securing a strong US-Arab relationship and expressed dissatisfaction to these ties to existing regimes.
References
Krasner S D (1978). Defending the National Interests: Raw Materials investment and US Foreign involvement.PrincetonUniversity Press. New Jersey.
Merrill K. (2007). The Oil Crisis of 1973-1974.Bedford. USA.
Prados A. (2001). Middle East Attitudes towards US. From http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:jq-aJbr6GYAJ:fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/7858.pdf+opec%2BMiddle+east+and+United+states+enermity&hl=en&gl=ke&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgPwIXbLecftCVzKbkDimq7DIbJ2MPkbjwP_f0oBjtsaqDtP5l_hTmwVUSh_ZHWr2J5FFRn0ZqhebYi4AubVbg0KtVf_efn6nFwDMytY0pBJzKXOlseXjoCbWUvvW0zkZONe52c&sig=AHIEtbQderZjRU0RSdWNQBA5WEa6HSkDHg&pli=1.
Yakub S., (2011). United States and the Middle East: 1914 to 2001. Yale University. Santa Barbara: California. Retrieved from http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/Course_Detail.aspx?cid=8593
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
