• 3 minutes Could Venezuela become a net oil importer?
  • 7 minutes Reuters: OPEC Ministers Agree In Principle On 1 Million Barrels Per Day Nominal Output Increase
  • 12 minutes Battle for Oil Port: East Libya Forces In Full Control At Ras Lanuf
  • 6 hours Oil prices going Up? NO!
  • 2 days Could Venezuela become a net oil importer?
  • 8 hours Renewables to generate 50% of worldwide electricity by 2050 (BNEF report)
  • 7 hours Reuters: OPEC Ministers Agree In Principle On 1 Million Barrels Per Day Nominal Output Increase
  • 2 days Gazprom Exports to EU Hit Record
  • 12 hours Oil prices going down
  • 15 hours Could oil demand collapse rapidly? Yup, sure could.
  • 2 days Oil Buyers Club
  • 2 days Why is permian oil "locked in" when refineries abound?
  • 14 hours Tesla Closing a Dozen Solar Facilities in Nine States
  • 6 hours China’s Plastic Waste Ban Will Leave 111 Million Tons of Trash With Nowhere To Go
  • 12 hours Saudi Arabia turns to solar
  • 2 days EVs Could Help Coal Demand
  • 3 hours Are Electric Vehicles Really Better For The Environment?
  • 1 day Russia's Energy Minister says Oil Prices Balanced at $75, so Wants to Increase OPEC + Russia Oil by 1.5 mbpd
  • 14 hours Battle for Oil Port: East Libya Forces In Full Control At Ras Lanuf
Alt Text

Can Nigeria And Libya Avoid A Production Cut?

Nigeria and Libya were exempted…

Alt Text

The Battle For Libyan Oil Is Heating Up

Libya's fragile political balance could…

Alt Text

Chevron, Exxon And Total On Niger Delta Hit List

A group of militant organizations…

Jen Alic

Jen Alic

 

More Info

Trending Discussions

What Does the US Want in Egypt?

What Does the US Want in Egypt?

What the US wants in Egypt is what it failed to attain in Iraq—stability of the kind that assumes US control over the situation.

In Iraq’s case, this meant control over one of the world’s biggest oil resources. In Egypt’s case it means a smooth ride for American foreign investment, a wide reach over one of the busiest shipping zones in the world and an assurance of peace with Israel.

Since the failure in Iraq, the US has had a difficult time implementing its strategy of selective stability, and America was woefully wrong-footed by the events of the Arab Spring. Nowhere was this more visible that in Egypt at the time of the first “revolution” that ousted long-time leader Hosni Mubarak.

Recent history tells us that the US and other Western powers have been inclined to support radical Islamist groups more than political Islam, or even secular centers of powers because these latter two have enough foundation to create truly independent states that are more difficult to control.

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood led by Mohamed Morsi—who is now being held by Egypt’s military—was a failed experiment in political Islam backed by Qatar much to the despair of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Washington is happy to see the Muslim Brotherhood fail and Morsi go under. Had this particular political Islam experiment worked, it would have been much too independent.

Related article: Egypt’s New Government Works to Improve Supplies of Oil and Bread

But now Washington finds itself in a tricky position. It needs to make sure that any new Egypt is friendly with Israel, but it also needs to make sure that it caters to Saudi Arabia’s vision of a new Egypt. So far, so good--minus the stability factor.

So while the US is keen to show the Muslim Brotherhood the back door, it is also keen to make sure that a new secular government that is capable of true independence does not rise from the ashes. Washington wants “stability”, but a stability that works in its favor; a stability that includes leverage.

Strong secular governments are the most dangerous to US foreign policy strategy because they are the most difficult to control.

This is the foundation for interpreting the confusing messages sent by Washington to Cairo over the past week. As diplomats shuttle back and forth, the US is demanding that the military release Morsi and include the Muslim Brotherhood in talks for a new government.

This is also behind the dawdling over Washington’s decision on whether to admit that the military takeover in Egypt on 3 July was actually a “coup”. If they start calling it a “coup” they can’t continue to funnel military aid to the country. They’ve decided now that it wasn’t a coup, per se, and that military aid can continue, but now strings are being attached, and they include the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi.

Related article: Waiting on Egypt for Oil & Gas Investment

It would be wrong to think that a new Egyptian government, if it is to be at all stable or lasting, could avoid including the Muslim Brotherhood. The crisis in Egypt will not end until its new leaders find a way to include the supporters of political Islam without killing or arresting their key leaders and fomenting more violence.

And while this fits nicely into the religious-like Western views of democracy, there is nothing altruistic about it. Mubarak was a dream leader for Washington, but there won’t be another Mubarak—the people won’t have it. True democracy would be much less favorable, and the more combative it ends up being, the more divisive the parties, the easier to control and less independent Egypt can become.

By. Jen Alic of Oilprice.com




Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News