George Bush's Realization

In his State of the Union Address, George Bush uttered words that I never expected to hear him speak. Americans, he said, are “addicted to oil.” We need to break our dependence on foreign oil and embrace alternative energy sources. We need to achieve energy independence.

Huh?

This is the administration that, more than any other, has fostered oil dependence, an administration that has systematically gutted federal programs for conservation and for alternative and renewable energy sources, that has pushed tax breaks and tax loopholes for SUVs, that has censored science to defuse worries about fossil-fuel-induced climate change, and that until recently seemed to be betting America’s future on an innocuous and endless supply of coal and oil. What gives?

Iraq. That’s what gives.

In previous columns I have argued that the Iraq war is at bottom a war for control of Middle Eastern oil. Of course the Bush administration can’t admit that, and so it has fabricated many excuses. The danger of imminent attack by Saddam was an excuse, the idea that Saddam was in league with Osama bin Laden was an excuse, the weapons of mass destruction were an excuse—and, finally, the idea that we could build a peaceful democracy in Iraq was an excuse.

All these excuses have now proven false. Until very recently, it was still possible to cling to the last one. It was still possible, that is, that the U.S. would succeed in creating a pliant and friendly, perhaps even superficially democratic government in Iraq. This was always a long shot, of course—far longer than the neo-conservative strategists of the Bush administration were willing to admit, even to themselves. But it was at least possible.

The post-election violence, however, and the emerging Shiite dominance of the Iraqi government, army and police have made it clear that our occupation will have one of two results: (1) a protracted civil war between Shiites and Sunnis, or (2) the establishment of an authoritarian Shiite state more tightly bound to Shiite Iran than to the U.S. Such a government will not be much inclined to cater to our oil interests.

Indeed, the oil war has not at all run according to plan. During its initial phases, administration officials confidently predicted the quick restoration of Iraqi oil production. But the continuing violence has limited Iraq’s oil production to 60 per cent of what it was before the war. Meanwhile, the world’s demand for oil has escalated, and little new oil is being discovered. Oil prices may fluctuate, but in general the trend has been and will be upward. Because some oil users will be driven by cost to switch to other energy sources, coal and natural gas prices will follow. Our addiction is costly in both dollars and lives, and the cost is increasing.

So finally it has dawned on George Bush that we are addicted, that the addiction is serious and that the solution is not to control the Middle Eastern suppliers of the drug (which has proved impractical anyway) but to come clean and aim for energy independence. This realization is late in coming. Jimmy Carter knew all this in the late 70s. If his advice had been followed, we might have steered clear of two fruitless oil wars.

Many of the rest of us have known it as well. In my 1995 book Down to Earth, I wrote of the first Iraqi war, “The root cause of the Persian Gulf War, and the likely cause of wars to come, is the world’s addiction, and your addiction, and my addiction to oil. I mean that literally. It is an addiction.” A few pages later I added, “In attempting to deal nonviolently with the violence resulting from drug addiction, the first step is to free oneself from dependence on the drug. Nationally, this means a policy of energy independence.”

Yeah, there’s some satisfaction in saying “I told you so.” But not much, and not for long. The hour is late. We have work to do.

John Nolt is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, where he co-chairs the Committee on the Campus Environment, which is developing a 25-year energy plan for UTK.