Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire - Major Energy and Environmental News and Commentary affecting the Nuclear Industry. Nuclear Activities
Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire
Friday, October 18, 2019
Rick Perry To Resign As Trump's Energy Secretary : NPR
Rick Perry To Resign As Trump's Energy Secretary : NPR: As the country's 14th secretary of energy, Perry leads an agency he once vowed to eliminate. He has emerged as a central figure in the impeachment inquiry of Trump.
Nuclear and Crowdfunded: A Startup's Unconventional Route to Building a Reactor | Fortune
Nuclear and Crowdfunded: A Startup's Unconventional Route to Building a Reactor | Fortune: By now most people are accustomed to crowdfunding as a means to finance everything from smart light bulbs to inventive bug zappers. But a next-generation nuclear reactor?
How Nuclear Power Will Impact NJ’s Clean Energy Future | NJ Spotlight
How Nuclear Power Will Impact NJ’s Clean Energy Future | NJ Spotlight: As BPU officials finalize a new energy master plan, stakeholders debate how big of a role nuclear energy will play
Missouri Commission Wants Legislators To Scrap Nuclear Plant-Funding Law | St. Louis Public Radio
Missouri Commission Wants Legislators To Scrap Nuclear Plant-Funding Law | St. Louis Public Radio: The Missouri Air Conservation Commission is asking state legislators to repeal a decades-old law that controls how companies fund new nuclear power plants.
California Nuclear Power Plant Approved for Demolition
California Nuclear Power Plant Approved for Demolition: Amid a revived legal challenge over the storage of nuclear waste and public doubts over the safety of the decommissioning process of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, the California Coastal Commission Thursday unanimously approved demolition of the iconic Southern California nuclear power plant.
ANS Nuclear Policy Wire October 18, 2019 - Energy and water bill could move forward in the Senate next week
 |
|||
October 18, 2019
|
|||
|
Thursday, October 17, 2019
DOE: Perry: Small nuclear reactors a ‘true game changer’ -- Thursday, October 17, 2019 -- www.eenews.net E&E News -- Start a free trial
DOE: Perry: Small nuclear reactors a ‘true game changer’ -- Thursday, October 17, 2019 -- www.eenews.net E&E News -- Start a free trial: Energy Secretary Rick Perry will head back to Europe next week as part of an effort to boost the U.S. advanced nuclear industry's ability to export its technologies across the globe.
Will the Saudis Go Nuclear? | The National Interest
Will the Saudis Go Nuclear? | The National Interest: Under what circumstances might Riyadh conclude that the clandestine and rapid acquisition of a nuclear arsenal would help address the challenges the country faces?
Southern California Edison considers power shut-offs ahead of high winds
Southern California Edison considers power shut-offs ahead of high winds
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-16/southern-california-edison-mulls-power-shut-offs-ahead-of-high-winds?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Issue:%202019-10-17%20Utility%20Dive%20Newsletter%20%5Bissue:23607%5D&utm_term=Utility%20Dive
Despite 'political tug-of-war,' the US 'still needs fossil fuels': DOE General Counsel | Utility Dive
Despite 'political tug-of-war,' the US 'still needs fossil fuels': DOE General Counsel | Utility Dive: Utility industry news, voices and jobs for energy industry professionals. Optimized for your mobile phone.
Nuclear Matters
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
|
Distribution of highly radioactive microparticles in Fukushima revealed: Distribution and origin of highly radioactive microparticles in Fukushima revealed -- ScienceDaily
Distribution of highly radioactive microparticles in Fukushima revealed: Distribution and origin of highly radioactive microparticles in Fukushima revealed -- ScienceDaily: New method allows scientists to create a quantitative map of radioactive cesium-rich microparticle distribution in soils collected around the damaged Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Nuclear Power Plant (FDNPP). This could help inform clean-up efforts in Fuksuhima region.
U.K. Nuclear Industry Braces for No-Deal Brexit Fuel Disruption - BNN Bloomberg
U.K. Nuclear Industry Braces for No-Deal Brexit Fuel Disruption - BNN Bloomberg: The U.K.’s civil nuclear industry faces disruption if the country crashes out of the European Union without a deal because companies could lack the necessary paperwork to import fuel from the bloc.
3D printing is helping to tackle nuclear waste | TechRadar
3D printing is helping to tackle nuclear waste | TechRadar: We want to avoid storing nuclear waste long-term, and 3D-printed parts can help with that.
Local State Senators File Bill to Strengthen Pilgrim Advisory Panel - CapeCod.com
Local State Senators File Bill to Strengthen Pilgrim Advisory Panel - CapeCod.com: PLYMOUTH – A bill has been filed by local legislators to strengthen the Nuclear Decommissioning Advisory Panel for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. Plymouth and Barnstable State Senator Vin…
Purdue tech startup lands $6.9M grant from Department of Energy - Indianapolis Business Journal
Purdue tech startup lands $6.9M grant from Department of Energy - Indianapolis Business Journal: A Purdue University-affiliated startup recently received a $6.9 million grant from the Department of Energy to develop a system to predict when nuclear reactor components need maintenance or replacement before they fail and cause power outages.
Nevada seeks to restart lawsuit over US plutonium shipment
Nevada seeks to restart lawsuit over US plutonium shipment: RENO, Nev. (AP) — Lawyers for Nevada and the U.S. Energy Department are accusing each other of contradicting their own past arguments as the state seeks to restart a legal challenge to force the...
U.S. energy secretary says cabinet-level group will boost domestic uranium mining - Reuters
U.S. energy secretary says cabinet-level group will boost domestic uranium mining - Reuters: U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry said on Wednesday he believes a cabinet-level working group set up by President Donald Trump will make recommendations that will revive domestic mining of uranium for nuclear power plants.
Assystem, Uzbek energy ministry create JV - World Nuclear News
Assystem, Uzbek energy ministry create JV - World Nuclear News: Assystem and the Ministry of Energy of Uzbekistan have formalised the creation of a joint venture to oversee their cooperation in the implementation of the Central Asian country's energy transition. The development, which the French engineering group announced on 11 October, follows an agreement they signed on 16 May.
DOE, NRC collaborate on advanced reactor deployment - World Nuclear News
DOE, NRC collaborate on advanced reactor deployment - World Nuclear News: A Memorandum of Understanding has been signed between the US Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to share technical expertise and computing resources to accelerate the deployment of advanced nuclear technologies.
UK designates radwaste disposal policy - World Nuclear News
UK designates radwaste disposal policy - World Nuclear News: The UK government has designated its National Policy Statement for Geological Disposal Infrastructure, following its completion of 21 parliamentary sitting days on 2 October, the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy said today. BEIS has also published the Appraisal of Sustainability Post Adoption Statement and the Final Habitats and Regulation Assessment report.
Construction starts on first Zhangzhou unit - World Nuclear News
Construction starts on first Zhangzhou unit - World Nuclear News: Construction of the first unit at the Zhangzhou nuclear power plant in China's Fujian province has started, one week after the issuance of a construction licence for the Hualong One reactor, China National Nuclear Corporation has announced.
Asian Americans offended by Ohio political ads about nuclear bailout | WKRC
Asian Americans offended by Ohio political ads about nuclear bailout | WKRC: CINCINNATI (WKRC) - You've likely seen the commercial at one point or another over the past month or so: An ominous voice delivering a grim warning about China controlling Ohio's energy. That commercial is not sitting well with everyone, and mailers are also being sent out all over Ohio. It all has to do with the bailout Ohio lawmakers gave nuclear power plants earlier in 2019. The ads specifically disturb Asian Americans. Ohioans For Energy Security is behind them.
DoE awards nearly $7 million to Purdue-based startup to advance nuclear technology using artificial intelligence and machine learning - Purdue University News
DoE awards nearly $7 million to Purdue-based startup to advance nuclear technology using artificial intelligence and machine learning - Purdue University News: One of the hot topics in artificial intelligence and machine learning is predictive analysis – knowing the future by analyzing data from the past.
Iran to limit inspectors' access to its nuclear facilities | World news | The Guardian
Iran to limit inspectors' access to its nuclear facilities | World news | The Guardian: Move announced by senior MPs represents another step away from nuclear deal signed in 2015
Keep nuclear in the energy mix to tackle climate change: IEA's Birol - Reuters
Keep nuclear in the energy mix to tackle climate change: IEA's Birol - Reuters: The decline of nuclear in the global energy mix poses a threat to economies and efforts to reduce carbon emissions, International Energy Agency (IEA) Executive Director Fatih Birol said on Wednesday.
Why France is eyeing nuclear power again - MIT Technology Review
Why France is eyeing nuclear power again - MIT Technology Review: The nation asked its major utility to make plans for six huge reactors.
The great PG&E power shut-off – Lake County Record-Bee
The great PG&E power shut-off – Lake County Record-Bee: For the last four nights I’ve seen lots of stars. Cleo and I were alone on a deserted island a million miles from anyone. At least, that was the way it felt. Like a five-day plague, or a curse on a…
Governor blasts PG&E over blackouts, saying it should follow San Diego's lead | abc7news.com
Governor blasts PG&E over blackouts, saying it should follow San Diego's lead | abc7news.com: California Governor Gavin Newsom kept the pressure on PG&E at a climate conference this afternoon in San Francisco, saying the utility might be too big to survive and calling for more competition.
15 Things You Need to Know About PG&E’s Public Safety Power Shutoff | Transmission & Distribution World
15 Things You Need to Know About PG&E’s Public Safety Power Shutoff | Transmission & Distribution World: More than 100 instances of damage were found during inspections, including trees into lines and downed power lines
California power outage: Months of planning by PG&E does little - Los Angeles Times
California power outage: Months of planning by PG&E does little - Los Angeles Times: Several utility executives and political leaders seemed shocked, shocked to find that when electricity is shut off, traffic lights go dark and drivers smash their cars.
Column: The hedge fund battle to control PG&E leaves us no one to root for - Los Angeles Times
Column: The hedge fund battle to control PG&E leaves us no one to root for - Los Angeles Times: A gang of Wall Street hedge funds is jousting to own PG&E, leaving Californians with nothing but bad choices.
Grids and Greed: An Expert Breaks Down Where PG&E Went Wrong and What It—and California—Needs to Do Now – Mother Jones
Grids and Greed: An Expert Breaks Down Where PG&E Went Wrong and What It—and California—Needs to Do Now – Mother Jones: "The problem is much more ingrained in the way this company has developed and continues to operate than it is something as simple as just trying to make more money."
Southern Company Selected as Finalist for Corporate Social Responsibility Award at the 2019 Global Energy Awards
Southern Company Selected as Finalist for Corporate Social Responsibility Award at the 2019 Global Energy Awards: ATLANTA, Oct. 16, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Southern Company has been selected as a finalist for the Corporate Social Responsibility Award – Diversified Program at...
2019 Radiation Shielding & Monitoring Report | Worldwide Technologies & Application Markets, 2017-2024 - ResearchAndMarkets.com | Business & Finance | manchestertimes.com
Why Trump's Orders On Agency Guidance Are Significant - Law360
Why Trump's Orders On Agency Guidance Are Significant - Law360: Two recent executive orders on the use of guidance documents by federal agencies represent a major change for virtually every executive agency and a historic assertion of the president’s authority under Article II to oversee the independent regulatory agencies, says Paul Noe, former counselor to the administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
FirstEnergy Solutions wins court approval for bankruptcy plan following labor agreement - cleveland.com
FirstEnergy Solutions wins court approval for bankruptcy plan following labor agreement - cleveland.com: A federal judge on Wednesday signed off on a bankruptcy restricting plan for FirstEnergy Solutions after the power-plant owner reached a deal with employee unions not to cut pensions or benefits.
Oklo Fabricates Fuel Prototypes at Idaho National Laboratory
Oklo Fabricates Fuel Prototypes at Idaho National Laboratory: The developer of a miniature nuclear reactor said it has successfully demonstrated prototypes of its metallic fuel — a key development for the company and for the U.S. advanced nuclear reactor community, whose years-long timelines to deployment often beget sporadic messaging wins.
Why Japan’s Radioactive Water May End Up In the Ocean - The Washington Post
Why Japan’s Radioactive Water May End Up In the Ocean - The Washington Post: Tepco is considering a plan to dump roughly 1 million cubic meters of treated radioactive water -- enough to fill 400 Olympic-size swimming pools -- from the wrecked Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean, part of its nearly $200 billion effort to clean up the worst atomic accident since Chernobyl. Storage tanks at the site are forecast to be full by mid-2022, and space for building more is scarce. Scary as it sounds, discharges are common practice in the industry and woul
U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Collaborate on Advanced Nuclear Technologies - EIN News
U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Collaborate on Advanced Nuclear Technologies - EIN News: WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to share
Nuclear Regulatory Commission announce merger of Nuclear Reactor Offices
Nuclear Regulatory Commission announce merger of Nuclear Reactor Offices
https://dailyenergyinsider.com/news/22312-nuclear-regulatory-commission-announce-merger-of-nuclear-reactor-offices/
Power Shutoffs: Playing with Fire | The Energy Collective Daily
- Power Shutoffs: Playing with Fire
- How Wholesale Electricity Markets Work – and Don’t
- All-electric homes offer a prototype for low-carbon housing in Colorado
- ‘Game-Changing’ Analysis: Unsubsidized Renewables, Efficiency Cost Less than New Alberta Gas Plants
- U.S. Green Economy Produced 10 Times More Jobs Than Fossils in 2016
- Enel Foundation at UN Climate Summit 2019
Power Shutoffs: Playing with Fire | The Energy Collective Daily |
|
Arabia, the Persian Gulf, and Great Power Competition Remarks to the Gulf International Forum
Arabia, the Persian Gulf, and Great
Power Competition
Remarks to the Gulf International Forum
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS,
Ret.)
Senior Fellow, Watson Institute for
International and Public Affairs, Brown University
Washington, DC, 17 October 2019
There is a rhythm in the affairs
of men, a pattern shaped by enduring interests.
It echoes through the ages. So,
it is no surprise that empires and external great powers have regularly found
themselves drawn to the Red Sea, Arabian Peninsula, and Persian Gulf
region. Afro-Asia is where Africa, Asia,
and Europe come together. It is where
modern man first exited Africa to populate the world. It is the mother of all strategic choke
points. From time to time, the region
has dominated markets for specific commodities in great demand, like perfumes,
pearls, and petroleum. And, for fifteen
centuries, its holy cities have been destinations for pilgrimage by the world’s
Muslims.
Rome looked to the region for
frankincense and myrrh, which were essential to its funeral practices. Early in the 7th century Afro-Asia was united
under Islam. Zealous Muslim warriors
then exploded outward, creating an Arabic-speaking empire that stretched from
Central Asia across North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula. This Arabian awakening led to the creation of
a vastly more populous Islamic domain, which in 637 embraced Iran and, in time,
much of sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia.
Those Arabs who emigrated with
the conquest prospered. Those who remained
in the Afro-Asian region did not. It is
true that, for a millennium, the silk and spice trade between Europe and Asia
was monopolized by Arabs and Persians, acting independently or, for a century
or so, under the Mongols. Nevertheless,
the great centers of Arab and Islamic civilization were not in its Afro-Asian
epicenter.
In 1414, China reached out
directly to the region, as the first of three great Chinese fleets arrived to
buy pearls, fine horses, and precious gems in Hormuz. In 1507, seeking to flank the Ottoman Empire
and monopolize the Indian Ocean spice trade, the Portuguese took Hormuz and
Muscat. Soon thereafter, they garrisoned
Bahrain and other trading centers in the Gulf.
In response, the Ottomans pushed south into Al Hasa, now Saudi Arabia’s
Eastern Province. A decade of fierce
skirmishing between Turks and Portuguese followed.
Regional powers reacted to the
increasing foreign presence in their midst.
Safavid Iran took Bahrain from Portugal in 1602. As the 17th century proceeded, Oman expelled
the Portuguese from its territory and built an empire spanning the Indian
Ocean. But the power of Iran continued
to grow, as did that of the first Saudi state, established near Riyadh in 1744. As the Saudis expanded from the Arabian
interior, the Persians captured Muscat, throwing the Omani Empire into
disarray. By the early 19th century,
Britain had recognized Iran as the sovereign authority in the Persian Gulf and
the Ottomans had invaded Arabia from Egypt to overthrow the Saudis and contain
Wahhabi fanaticism.
As this happened, the British were
swallowing up India. British shipping in
the Indian Ocean expanded apace. The
raids of the so-called “pirate kingdoms” on the southern coast of the Gulf –
present-day Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates – threatened British
India’s strategic lines of communication.
Efforts to suppress this piracy came to naught.
In 1819, a massive
British-commanded Indian force crushed the formidable Qasimi Emirate of Ras Al
Khaimah with help from its Qatari and Omani rivals. The “Raj” had effectively dominated the
Gulf. The British rulers of India were
able to compel all the Gulf Arab statelets to renounce slavery and to fly
“white pierced red flags,” signifying their abandonment of piracy. But these
statelets continued to fight with each other, disrupting the pearl trade and
again appearing to menace freedom of navigation in their region. In 1835, Britain intervened to broker an
uneasy truce between the ten warring emirates of the Gulf, which were thereafter
known as the “Trucial States.” The
Indian rupee became the regional currency.
Britain found oil in Persia in
1908, then more in Iraq (1927) and Bahrain (1932). The discovery of these geological riches set
off a race between British and American companies to secure oil
concessions. Britain used its imperial
privileges to keep the Americans out of Iran, Iraq, and the “Trucial
States.” But, in 1938, in Saudi Arabia,
an American consortium found and began to develop what turned out to be the
world’s largest oil field. In that same
year, the British discovered huge deposits of oil in Kuwait. In the 1950s and ‘60s, oil began to be
exported from Qatar, the UAE, and Oman.
After World War II, the countries of Afro-Asia began an abrupt transformation
from poverty to wealth and technological modernity.
In 1947, India and Pakistan
gained independence from Britain. This
greatly reduced London’s interest in
securing passage through Afro-Asia to points East and South. The British remained intensely interested in
the region’s oil – as their CIA-assisted overthrow of Iranian democracy in 1953
demonstrated – but they divested themselves of the burden of protecting access
to the Gulf’s energy supplies. This task
was taken up by the United States as part of its Cold War assumption of
responsibility for the security and prosperity of the so-called “free world” beyond
the Soviet sphere. The United States
itself was not then dependent on energy from the Gulf, but its commitment to
protect access to the region’s oil and gas reserves symbolized its assertion of
global primacy.
In 1961, Britain granted Kuwait
independence and withdrew its protection of it.
In 1968, the British announced their intention to do the same for the
rest of the Gulf. Oman declared its
independence in 1970. Qatar, Bahrain,
and the United Arab Emirates followed in 1971.
In 1979, Persia threw off Western tutelage, conducted a referendum, and
asserted a revolutionary Shi`ite identity as the Islamic Republic of Iran. Two years later, the Gulf Arab states –
Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates –
responded by forming the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
This brief history serves to underscore
the importance of both the strategic position and natural resources of the
independent kingdoms, emirates, and republics of the Afro-Asian region. Both the powers on their periphery and those
farther away are interested in their affairs.
The Gulf Arab states, once poor and backward, are now wealthy and able
to use their wealth to entice external partners to back them in their quarrels
with each other and with Iran.
In many respects, today’s
contentions among the states of the Afro-Asian region and their foreign
protectors echo those of the past. To
get from Asia to Europe without circumnavigating Africa, one must pass through
Afro-Asia. One-fifth of the world’s
trade traverses the region. It produces
about half of the world’s oil and gas and contains about two-thirds of its
reserves of hydrocarbons. The members of
the GCC have become significant capital exporters. As tensions among them have risen, they have come
to account for two-fifths of global arms purchases. One fourth of the world’s people revere the Saudi
cities of Makkah and Medina as the birthplace of their faith.
The world’s great powers remain
vitally interested in assured passage through the Afro-Asian region as well as
in access to its oil, gas, and capital.
They also seek to moderate its export of religious fervor and funds that
sanctify and support violence against other peoples, faiths, and cultures. The evolving
United States relationship with the region reflects shifting balances between
these interests.
At the outset, in the eyes of the
Gulf Arabs, Americans’ main virtues were that we weren’t the British, didn’t
have an empire, and didn’t want anything except easy access to their oil and
gas. The apparent disinterest of the
United States in changing the region’s political and social systems resembled
that of China today and facilitated U.S. replacement of Britain as the dominant
power in the region. Initially, the
United States left the control of strategic lines of communication to Britain. Americans knew and cared little about Islam or
its local manifestations. But, as Britain
retreated, the United States stepped in to replace it as the guarantor and
regulator of the region’s stability.
In the late 1940s, the United
States began to acquire a global sphere of military influence that included the
Gulf. In 1980, Washington declared that
“an attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region
will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of
America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including
military force.” The American focus on
outside threats to the Gulf was almost immediately displaced by concerns about the
region’s internal dynamics. The United
States feared that the Iran-Iraq War might enable whoever won to dominate the
region and use its monopoly to dictate global energy prices.
As the Cold War ended and the
1990s began, Iraq’s attempt to annex Kuwait led to the formation of a UN-authorized,
US-led, ad hoc military coalition of NATO and Islamic countries that was able
to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. But
neither the United States nor its coalition members had a war-termination
strategy. They failed to follow up
diplomatically either to reconcile Iraq to its defeat or to build a viable post-war
Gulf security architecture. So, despite
the successful liberation of Kuwait, the first Gulf war did not end. Instead, it sputtered on. The United States kept its armed forces in the
Gulf.
In 1993, America abruptly
abandoned its longstanding policy of offshore balancing in the Gulf. This approach had relied on Iraq and the Gulf
Arab states to join in balancing and containing Iran, while Iran balanced
Iraq. Offshore balancing had avoided any
requirement for the United States to maintain a military presence ashore in the
Gulf. In its place, Washington embarked
on a policy of so-called “dual containment” aimed at unilaterally containing
both Iran and Iraq.
“Dual containment” significantly
raised the cost to the United States of assuring stability in the Gulf. It required American troops to be stationed
there, to the extent possible at the expense of the countries that hosted
them. The Gulf Arab countries accepted
“dual containment” without enthusiasm.
Iran saw it as a threat. But
Israel welcomed it. After all, as its
authors intended, it established a permanent US-manned defense perimeter and
tripwire between Israel and its two most capable regional opponents – Iran and
Iraq.
The substantial ongoing U.S.
military presence in the Gulf irritated ordinary people in the region,
especially in Saudi Arabia, where it was resented by both religious zealots and
the welfare recipients whose benefits were reduced to pay for it. This irritation, joined with Arab backlash
against U.S. support for Israel’s ongoing oppression and dispossession of
Palestinian Arabs, helped stimulate the traumatic terrorist attacks on the
United States of “9/11.” Increasingly
thereafter, force protection requirements drove U.S. policies and relationships
in the Gulf.
After 9/11, Islamophobia quickly became
as American as the Ku Klux Klan. No
longer facing a great power rival for influence in Afro-Asia, the United States
began to pursue an expanding list of exclusively American agendas there,
including ill-considered calls for democratization and other efforts to impose
contemporary Western values on Gulf Arab societies. In 2001 and 2003, the Gulf became the staging
area for poorly planned American invasions, occupations, and pacification
efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. The
main beneficiary of these regime change operations was Iran. The main losers from them, other than Afghans
and Iraqis, were Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E.
America’s regime-change wars
eliminated vital checks on Iran’s influence in the region. This facilitated the Islamic Republic’s
consolidation of a sphere of influence in the Fertile Crescent and the
Levant. In time, Iranian client states
and non-state actors came to encircle both Israel and the Arab Gulf
states. Meanwhile, Afghanistan, Iraq,
Syria, and Yemen remained mired in seemingly endless civil strife abetted by
American intervention.
As long as Iraq remains aligned
with Iran and thus unavailable as a security partner, the Gulf Arabs have no choice but to seek the backing of a
powerful external power to balance Iran.
The only country now capable of projecting enough force to the Gulf to deter
and defeat Iran is the United States.
But the Gulf countries have come to see Americans as demanding but
unreliable patrons. Like others in West
Asia, North Africa, and elsewhere, they are hedging against over-reliance on
Washington.
Since the U.S. launch of its
“Global War on Terror” in 2001, the institutionalization of Islamophobia in
America, and repeated demonstrations of American fickleness as successive
governments in Egypt were overthrown, the United States has carried a lot of
awkward political baggage in the Middle East.
The Trump administration’s Muslim visa bans and something-for-nothing appeasement
of Israel have added to this awkwardness.
America’s erratic treatment of Iraq’s and Syria’s Kurds has reinforced the
judgment of Arab rulers that it is unwise to rely on the United States.
Meanwhile, the
importance of transit through Afro-Asia to the global economy and its great
powers, including the United States, has, if anything, increased. The recent expansion of the Suez Canal and
its inclusion as an East-West waypoint in China’s Belt and Road Initiative are
leading to large increases in goods traffic through the region. The Persian Gulf has become a major air
travel corridor. Dubai International
Airport is now the world’s busiest. The
Bāb al-Mandab Strait is the fourth busiest waterway in the world. Despite China’s sponsorship of land routes
connecting Europe and Asia and the opening of the Arctic to shipping, this
trend seems certain to continue.
The Strait of Hormuz now ranks as
the world’s most important energy chokepoint.
About 80 percent of Saudi and all of Bahraini, Iraqi, and Qatari oil
exports pass through the Strait. So do Qatar’s
exports of natural gas – about 30 percent of global supplies. Iran’s oil ports and terminals are all within
the Gulf. Its oil and gas exports
transit the Strait, as do about 70 percent of the UAE’s. In 2018, the daily oil flow through the
Strait of Hormuz averaged 21 million barrels per day, or the equivalent of
about 21 percent of global consumption.
Of course, the United States is
once again a net exporter of hydrocarbons and no longer itself dependent on
imports from the Gulf. But the world market
relies on Gulf energy exports to avoid or mitigate volatility in global energy supplies
and prices. Were these exports
throttled, energy prices could surge to levels that would cripple global
prosperity, including that of the United States.
While protecting the free flow of
oil and gas from the Gulf and Red Sea may no longer be a direct interest of the
United States, it remains an important indirect U.S. interest and an essential
element in America’s claim to be “the indispensable nation.” If the U.S. armed forces ceased to protect
the global economy from interruptions of access to Afro-Asian energy supplies,
the world would no longer defer to Washington as the manager of the global or
regional political-economic orders.
Frankly, this outcome would suit
many Americans just fine. War weariness
and a sense that foreigners are free riding on American willingness to take
sole responsibility for sustaining global stability – if you will, “empire
fatigue” – contributed significantly to the election of President Trump. Many in the United States would welcome a
debate about whether our country should continue to bear the burdens of global
leadership. Some, like Mr. Trump, would
answer no, it should not.
Any doubt about the reality of
empire fatigue should have been erased by Washington’s limp-wristed response to
this June’s apparent Iranian attacks on ships from Norway and Japan, both U.S.
allies. In the 1980s, when tankers in
the Gulf were threatened, the U.S. Navy unilaterally intervened to protect the world’s
oil supply from disruption. But the response
of the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the June 2019 attacks was to
point out that “the circumstances are very different now than they were in the
1980s. . . . Ensuring freedom of navigation and the movement of oil in and out
of the Gulf . . . [is no longer] a U.S.-only responsibility,” he said, and called
on other “nations that benefit from that movement of oil through the Persian
Gulf” to share the burden of protecting shipping from Iranian attack.[1]
A subsequent failed effort by
Secretary of State Pompeo to organize a US-led naval coalition for this purpose
exposed how disinclined America’s allies and security partners are to support
the current U.S. confrontation with Iran.
It also underscored the diminished ability of the United States to
convene global backing for its politico-military initiatives. One of the few great powers to suggest it
might participate in protecting tanker traffic in the Gulf was China. Given Washington’s present animus against
that country, there was no audible response from it to this offer, if indeed it
was an offer.
American geopolitical priorities
are visibly changing. The end point of
their evolution remains unclear, but it is obvious that the stability of the
Persian Gulf is no longer at the center of U.S. foreign policy concerns. There are 45,000 American troops and legions
of DOD contractors deployed in and around the Persian Gulf. But their declared mission is no longer primarily
to ensure oil security or the protection of friendly Arab states. Increasingly, their presence is justified as menacing
putative Iranian nuclear programs, defending Israel against Iran, combatting
Islamist terrorism, or denying influence to China and Russia (with which all
the states of the region, whether Arab or Persian-aligned, nevertheless have
burgeoning relationships).
Thanks largely to coordinated
Israeli, Saudi, and Emirati pressure on the United States to aggressively
oppose Iran and its proxies, America’s confrontation with Iran has
escalated. Its policies of “maximum
pressure” on Iran now resemble those that panicked Japan into attacking Pearl
Harbor in 1941. The United States has no
dialogue with Iran that might influence its decisions. And America’s muddled response to the recent
attacks on Saudi Arabia’s oil industry was followed by its abrupt abandonment
of Syria’s Kurds.
Not surprisingly, the Gulf Arabs
states are stepping up their efforts to reduce reliance on American diplomacy
and military power projection to defend them, increasing purchases of weaponry,
diversifying their international economic and arms procurement relationships,
building their own military industries, and exploring rapprochement with
Iraq. They have largely ceased to defer
to the United States in formulating their policies and managing their relations
with other great powers like China, India, and Russia. They see themselves as increasingly on their
own.
The recent attacks on Saudi oil
facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais illustrate the vulnerability of Gulf Arab
societies to foreign or terrorist attack. Their prosperity depends on the
production and export of oil and gas.
Their viability as societies depends on their ability to desalinate
water. Imagine the consequences if the
attacks had focused on desal rather than oil facilities!
Security anxieties in the Arab
Gulf countries have been aggravated by divisions over Iran and future models of
governance of Sunni Muslim societies.
These have split the GCC and suspended most politico-military and
economic policy coordination among its members.
The UAE and Saudi Arabia do not accept that Qatar’s geographical
situation dictates that it maintain a stable relationship with Iran. Abu Dhabi and Riyadh consider the Muslim
Brotherhood a terrorist movement. Doha
is aligned with Ankara in support of the Brotherhood and other democratic
Islamist movements, like Hamas. To
Iran’s delight, the Emiratis and Saudis remain engaged in a largely ineffectual
blockade of Qatar.
Meanwhile, the United States is
making no apparent effort to help the GCC reunite, though it has continued inanely
to call for what some sort of “Arab
NATO” built on it. Meanwhile, Iran has
proposed a regionwide pact to combat terrorism, advance cybersecurity, protect
energy production and exports, and assure freedom of navigation. Neither of these proposals has any real
prospect of success. But risk reduction is now an imperative.
The best that might be hoped for
is that all sides might agree to a temporary stand-down from violent
confrontation, as was the case with the British-brokered truce of 1835. This would leave the issues driving their
rivalries to be worked out later and give diplomacy a chance to enable an
acceptable non-violent status quo to emerge in the Persian Gulf as it did in the
mid-19th century. Something
like this seems to be the core of the Iranian proposal. It different from but is compatible with the
Gulf security architecture advocated by China and Russia. Despite its suspect origins, it deserves
exploration. It would buy time for a
reduction in tensions of benefit to all in the region, while reducing risks to
the global economy.
But GCC disunity, the U.S.
inability to communicate convincingly with Iran, and American diplomacy-free
foreign policy together ensure that any such détente in the Gulf will be made
in Moscow or Beijing, with possible assistance from Islamabad or a European
capital or two, rather than crafted locally or by the United States. The GCC was once described by an American
diplomat as “a large shell inhabited by a small and indecisive snail.” It is now vivisected and on life support. If
the Gulf Arabs wish to control their own destiny, they would do well to restore
the GCC to health. This is the
prerequisite for collective defense, diplomacy supporting common interests with
the world’s established and emerging great powers, intelligent management of
relations with Iran, and influence in the broader Arab and Islamic worlds. All these things, I submit, are very much in
the interest of the United States as well as the Gulf Arabs.
If the GCC can get its act
together, there is a fair chance that it can continue to enlist American
support. It if cannot, the Gulf Arabs
must reconcile themselves to the new reality of Iranian primacy in their region. America is now a war-weary and reluctant
global hegemon, riven by constitutional crises, and intent on reducing its
overseas commitments. Without unity, the
ability of the Gulf Arabs to court support for their security from outside
their region is gravely impaired. In the
famous words of Benjamin Franklin, the Gulf Arabs “will all hang together or
hang separately.”
On that cheery note, I wish this
conference every success!
Disappearing glaciers: Before and after views of Mont Blanc - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Disappearing glaciers: Before and after views of Mont Blanc - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: A century ago, pioneering Swiss pilot Walter Mittelholzer took aerial photos of Europe's highest mountain and its glaciers in his biplane. Two scientists retraced his steps today, shooting from the same positions. The side-by-side comparisons of ice loss? Stunning.
Guest Post by Matt Stoller: When Democrats Used to Indict Plutocrats and Monopolists
Hi,
Welcome to BIG, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here. Or just read on…
For those of you near D.C., I will be at Politics and Prose today at 7pm to do a book talk on Goliath: The Hundred Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy. More information is here.
Today’s
issue will be about the Democratic debate, in which antitrust played a
prominent role. Part of the story is that the Democrats are
strengthening their own views on monopoly, and I trace the parallel to
how Democrats operated in the late 19th and early 20th century, when
they effectively demanded that the DOJ send John D. Rockefeller to jail,
and did actually indict his brother William.
In
the meantime, I had my own debate over monopoly versus automation on
MSNBC yesterday with MSNBC anchor Stephanie Ruhle and political pundit
Jason Johnson. Sparks fly!
The Crisis of Capitalism
It’s
fairly obvious something is deeply wrong with our economy, a crisis of
capitalism. There are many theories, but my basic view is that the
problem is that monopolists have taken over everywhere. There’s
concentration in big markets, everything from search and social
networking to airlines and cable. There’s concentration in smaller
markets, like peanut butter, syringes, bank software, and comic book distribution.
Monopolization increases inequality and wage stagnation, reduces
entrepreneurship, causes regional inequality, and corrupts our politics
and corporations.
The
Democratic Party is responding by getting more aggressive against
monopoly power. In the Democratic debate in June, Democrats spent a few minutes
on big tech and monopoly. This time, they did it again, with a twist.
The moderators started by asking about Andrew Yang’s argument that automation,
not monopoly power, is what matters. Pete Buttigieg has made this case
as well, saying that automation, not offshoring via trading structures,
led to job losses in the 2000s.
The
counter-narrative is that problems in our economy are due not to trends
that have existed since the 1700s, but to the central question of
power. Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, and Cory Booker
all took this side, arguing that monopolization in the business world is
the key issue at hand. All of the major figures in the party, with the
exception of Joe Biden, increasingly see our central economic challenge
this way. Robert Bork came up twice in the debate, and Bork, while featuring prominently as a Supreme Court nominee, was an antitrust lawyer first and foremost.
Even
Biden is sympathetic to antitrust. Biden himself is more driven by the
environment around him, not any hard and fast principles, and he would
like to rhetorically go after big tech and concentrations of corporate
power if only because it sounds good. It doesn’t hurt that some of his
main backers are from Comcast, and they hate Google. He’s reluctant,
though, because one of his main advisors on antitrust, Terrell
McSweeney, was on the Obama Federal Trade Commission, and she bears some
responsibility for the lax antitrust record of the Democrats in that
era. For example, while at the FTC, she supported a regulatory attack on the city of Seattle for trying to increase wages for Uber drivers. As it turns out, McSweeney’s view is causing tension
on the Biden team. Nancy Scola of Politico writes as much, in a coded
way, saying the topic is a “live issue” inside the campaign. But it’s
what I’ve heard as well from multiple people close to Biden.
If
you look at how Uber responded to California’s law probably mandating
that it treat its drivers as employees, you’ll see why anti-monopolists
are gaining strength. Uber general counsel Tony West basically responded
to the California government with, ‘nahh, we’re not going to comply.’
And then threatened to spend $60 million on a popular referendum to
overturn the law if California tries to enforce it. I wrote about this
dynamic for Wired yesterday in a piece called Corporate America's Second War With the Rule of Law. As usual, we’ve been here before, this was the situation in the roaring 1920s.
There
were bitter battles in the 1930s, because the rule of law is a
political value that must be won. And in fact, going back through
history, I found that the Democratic Party, for a hundred years until
the Clinton administration, tried to do just that, particularly focused
on the problem of monopolies. The party consistently got stronger on the
problem of monopoly over time. From 1880-1988, there was something on
antitrust or monopolies in the Democratic Platform. Here’s the
Democratic platform in 1880.
“Free ships and a living chance for American commerce on the seas, and on the land no discrimination in favor of transportation lines, corporations, or monopolies.”
The
language got more aggressive as farmers, merchants, and workers
organized against railroads on the one hand, and as corporations became
more powerful on the other. In 1900, in the midst of the first great
merger wave that created modern corporate America, the platform said
“private monopolies are indefensible and intolerable” and were “robbing”
the people and small businessmen. As problems in the corporate world
got worse, Democrats became even more assertive. Think Democratic
attacks on the FTC for its weak $5 billion settlement for Facebook was
aggressive? When the antitrust division under Taft broke up Standard Oil
and American Tobacco, Democrats in 1912 said this was a pittance,
demanding that enforcers effectively send John D. Rockefeller to jail.
We condemn the action of the Republican administration in compromising with the Standard Oil Company and the tobacco trust and its failure to invoke the criminal provisions of the anti-trust law against the officers of those corporations after the court had declared that from the undisputed facts in the record they had violated the criminal provisions of the law.
When
Democrats took power later that year, they acted. In 1912-1913,
Congressman Arsène Pujo led the first great Congressional investigation
into corporate power, the ‘money trust’ hearings. When Woodrow Wilson
became President, the DOJ started indictments. In the case of the J.P.
Morgan dominated transportation conglomerate The New Haven Railroad,
which was sort of the Uber of its day, the antitrust division indicted the *entire board of directors,* which included such luminaries as William Rockefeller and Theodore Vail, the President of AT&T.
Wilson
also broke up AT&T for the first time, established the Federal
Trade Commission to stop anti-competitive practices, and appointed Louis
Brandeis to the Supreme Court in 1916. Democrats were on the cusp of a
New Deal, a genuine attack on monopolists. Unfortunately, World War One
interrupted, delaying the restructuring of the American political order
for another twenty years.
Today
we’re in a similar situation as we were in the early 1900s, on the cusp
of a major policy revolution. The wind is blowing strongly. From
1992-2012, antitrust didn’t warrant a mention in the Democratic platform
(thank you Bill Clinton!) And then, in 2016, because of the new
anti-monopoly movement, Democrats finally put something into their
platform again. I was actually part of the group who worked to insert a
provision; we tried to get something about big tech and data in there,
but the Clinton campaign, which did inch
towards antitrust, wouldn’t go that far. They wanted to focus on
airlines and cable, the rumor was Sheryl Sandberg would be in Clinton’s
cabinet.
By
the 2020 debates, it is now axiomatic that we have to address the
crisis of big tech. And the leading Democrat, Elizabeth Warren, wants to
do that with a series of break-ups. In fact, she put that idea out
there in March, and it has since become a normalized idea across the
enforcement community. The right question isn’t whether what Warren
suggested is too aggressive. The right question is when break-ups will
become the moderate option. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear
calls for jail time for some of the richest men in the country. The
Sherman Act, after all, is a criminal statute.
Thanks for reading. And if you liked this essay, you can sign up here for
more issues of BIG, a newsletter on how to restore fair commerce,
innovation and democracy. If you want to really understand the secret
history of monopoly power, buy my book, Goliath: The 100-Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy.
cheers,
Matt Stoller
P.S. Here's a snippet about sloth and waste from one corner of the world, the electric utility industry.
As
tech companies march towards monopoly, one could think of utilities as
"postcards from the future." One of the common threads between utilities
and large corporations in "competitive" markets is that management
becomes more concerned with the avoidance of bad press than with
delivering high-quality products. This principle is showcased perfectly
in information technology (IT) contracting. Some major utilities (whose
names I will withhold to avoid retaliation) spent north of $100M on a
shitty database and web portal for one state's electric market. Utility
managers hired IBM for this piece of work -- not because IBM's IT
consulting is worth a damn, but because "no one ever got fired for
hiring IBM." Later, to my horror, I got this utility to admit in sworn
testimony that they hired IBM without a defined scope of
work....Naturally, costs skyrocketed -- but who cares? The utility's
laziness led to windfalls for IBM and some random management consultant.
The project was a disaster, but a few years later, IBM's contract was
renewed without any competitive bidding. This taught me that monopolies
trade price and quality for decreased liability.https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/when-democrats-used-to-indict-plutocrats?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozMjc2MzIwLCJwb3N0X2lkIjoxNDc3OTksIl8iOiJ3U2tVciIsImlhdCI6MTU3MTMzOTE1MywiZXhwIjoxNTcxMzQyNzUzLCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTE1MjQiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.ECxCEjfuGvFWLRqyjG6Y2U0CJkdUOZV5Mmwt6nFTOVM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)