Putting a Stop to Iran's Nuclear Ambitions Without Export Embargoes
On June 21st a Huffington Post submission ("Boycott Iran's Oil Immediatley") called for the immediate boycott of Iran's oil. It was a seemingly draconian suggestion that was met with widespread skepticism. After all, what would happen to oil markets without Iranian oil?
Well, on today CNN's State of the Union program, Senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind), being interviewed by John King on the timely subject of Iran's nuclear pronouncements (or lack thereof), made a rather startling revelation. According to Senator Bayh, the Russians had informed their American interlocutors that the greatest fear of the current Iranian regime was that they would be denied access to world markets for their oil. Clearly the financial bounty generated by oil sales are key to maintaining their hold on government power and the funding of their nuclear and missile programs, not to speak of buying the loyalty of their goon militias giving them the wherewithal to terrorize their citizenry.
Certainly now is the time to establish the kind of international cooperation needed to boycott Iranian oil. With recent revelations about Iran's nuclear deception, the growing and shared concerns of the major European states and a far more amenable Russia and China, the moment for an international boycott has come.
The boycott would simply be a refusal to buy Iran's oil, either directly or indirectly (i.e. not lifting oil from Iranian ports nor from offshore storage facilities, nor turning a blind eye to third party exchanges). It would be analogous to boycotting Coca Cola (apologies Coca Cola) because of a nasty dispute with its management. No one buys Coke any longer. Soon their warehouse is full. Then their bottling plants shut down. Then after a while one would hope the workers and shareholders organize to oust the management so that business can carry on as before.
Please recall that although Iran produces some four million barrels of oil a day, only some 2.1 million is exported. It is the one year equivalent to the of 700 million barrels plus being held in our Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Given the potential national crisis at hand, certainly the SPR should be considered for a strategic role in the current imbroglio.
More significant, however, is the fact that currently, Saudi Arabia's excess, unused capacity is approximately 4.5 million barrels/day. That is more than twice the current exports of Iranian oil. It is probably more in the interest of Sunni Saudi Arabia to keep Shia Iran nuclear weapon free than virtually any other nation. Saudi Arabia should welcome the opportunity to play a role in defusing Iran's nuclear ambitions by declaring they will supply any and all oil to world markets caused by a consumers boycott of Iran's oil.
A willing Saudi Arabia should be celebrated. An unwilling Saudi Arabia should be placed on notice that the nuclear defense umbrella proffered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (please see "Hillary Clinton's Nuclear Defense Umbrella for the Oil Price Gougers--Who Pays?") will remain moot and tucked away in an umbrella stand in the halls of Foggy Bottom.
By not buying Iran's oil the mullahs understand their sway over Iran's brave citizens will begin to crumble and the petro-potentates of Tehran will eventually have to cede governance to the Iranian masses without a foreign shot having been fired and without a blockade nor an embargo of goods and services(sanctions) having been put into place.
Ahmadinejad left New York with no more questions about his legitimacy, the American hikers in jail in Iran, or rape, torture and forced confessions in Tehran's prisons. No, from now on it's going to be all nukes, all the time.
Defense Chief Says Iran Faces 'Severe' New Sanctions
Iran tests short-range missiles amid nuclear dispute
Venezuela Denies Iran Is Helping It
Russia has powerful levers to pull in persuading Iran to open up
Cryptic Iranian Note Ignited an Urgent Nuclear Strategy Debate
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
What if... but never will happen.
I bet your oil commodity trading friends all support this idea huh?
Less supply=higher price for the oil that they have
As far as trade embargoes on Iran. There already is one
Has been for over a decade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran
But obviously everyone gets around it by buying Iranian oil through middlemen
Maybe I'm missing the point, but without being able to sell Oil, how will Iran be able to buy anything anyway? Isn't this a De facto embargo? It's a bad idea anyway. You want Iran to be able to buy food, medicines and other critical items needed by the populace.
Here's an idea, don't have any more.
I know, let's send Hillary Clinton to the UN with a dog and pony slide show demonstrating how Iran already has mobile WMD and links with Al-Qaeda. She can make as big a fool of herself as Colin Powell did, and neocons like this story's author can laugh their tails off at how they pulled the wool over a gullible public once again. Man, talk about deja vu all over again!
Raymond, even our intelligence, including the NIE, points out that there is no evidence that Iran has or ever had a nuclear weapons program. Iran has violated no international laws on the subject. And don't confuse a US driven Security Council proclamation with law. It is not. The new site 1) will not be operational for another 18 months 2) was reported to the IAEA a full year before required 3) is open for inspection to the IAEA and 4) nothing shows it is part of any weapons program.
So, let's not continue this crap of beating the drums for punishing Iran for doing far, far less than we do, particularly as what they are doing, as far as ALL our intelligence, is totally legal. Was nothing learned from our drum beating against Iraq?
No need for action or embargoes. We just need to sit down and talk and everyone will get along. Talking can solve everything in the age of Aquarius. The USA can even toss in a couple more Michael Jordan signed basketballs as we did with North Korea.
No, we should do what George Bush would do. Without any thinking, or planning declare war on Iran and get us in an intractable conflict that will last 10 years and cost tens of thousands of lives and a trillion dollars. You know? Just like Iraq!
The desire to develop nuclear weapons is more about respect than aggression. This does not diminish the danger of nuclear suicide.
The question should be why are all of europe wanting to obtain the nukes..Israel has over 200 nukes , remember what they did last dec. to palistine..If I were europe, I would want some kind of defense against a unstable country too......
Blood for Oil, is not and good exchange.
Who the heck is this bright Learsy guy to come up with such (un)intelligent proposal? Iran uses more than half of its own oil domesticlly plus the fact that it is second in the world in natural gas. Nabbuco pipiline will be paralized without Iran's gas to Europe and a paralized Europe will paralize American (bankrup) economy further.
It is funny how some comments here take him seriously.
But these commenters support the sanctions idea because once every step you laid out has happened America can invade Iran and take control of the oil fields. After all, that plan worked out so well in Iraq, don't ya know?
Only in a Just World where each Nation is treated equitably, will there be Peace. In such a World there is no G20, or "Superpower" imposing their Nationalist Agenda at the barrel of a gun or threat of Economic Blacklisting on other Nations and Peoples. When we recognize this and begin to treat others as we would wish to be treated, there will be no need for boycotts. The reality is that all of the reasons which spur the G20 and our own "Superpower" to act in this bullying way at home. Tthe G20. They claim "Offshore Tax Havens" and the sub-prime mortgage takers, not lenders,are the causes for the World Financial Crisis. Nothing about the vulgar abusus of their own in creating fictional money based on gambling with non existent assets -derivitives and their counterparts like 'credit default swaps' etc. Creating all this "money" was heralded as being inovative. Until calls were made for funds in banks. Then there were no funds to back this 'new money'. All houdini-like, Las vegas paper 'money'. They ignore that they have ravaged their own middle class by the offshoring of the fundamental blood of an economy: manufacturing jobs.
In their piggish greed for the next dollar, they have destroyed the basis of growth in their own economies and must permit the false creation of wealth so as to be able to bowwoe from the very countries to which they have transfused their wealth.
They need to boycott themselves.
Couldn’t the same “DNA” type id, that shows that the people of the world are not so different from one another, be used? To identify that particular oil from all others or possible blends, for the duration of a salutary embargo (boycott)?
A boycott of "Iranian" oil is an impossibility. Oil is fungible. Once it is loaded onto an oil tanker ship it can be offloaded, transshiped via pipeline, and relabeled as any "flavor" of oil anyone wants it to be.
google Marc Rich.
Saddam Hussein even used convoys of tanker trucks to drive oil over national boarders.
Your proposal is ridiculous on the face of it, sir.
But the sanctions on Iraq are apparently so successful that no trace of WMDs are found when we invade it. It's not at all ridiculous.
As long as this would not be a gift to the oil speculators, then perhaps it is time to do it. In all probability, Iraq would probably smuggle out oil for Iran, but the amount would be severely limited due to logistics. Additionally, it would have to be smuggled via tanker truck and any vessel loading the stuff could be easily identified.
Iran has repeatedly said that an embargo would be considered an act of war by them and our troops remaining in Iraq might find themselves in a very difficult situation. It could be the reason to get them out of Iraq as quickly as possible. Any firing of missiles by Iran toward Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, our troops in Iraq, and Israel would have to draw a tremendous and unified attack via air from the U. S., France, and the U.K., and possibly even Russia. It could all get very, very dangerous. One has to wonder if the same thing could be achieved by limiting Iran's exports and shutting off their importation of oil refined products since they have to import 70% of it. A combination of the both of those would cause huge problems for the already shaky Ayatollah headed regime.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
