Barack Obama's New Energy Policy: Consider the Bigger Picture and Some Old Friends

The Obama Administration's recent announcement to endorse new oil and natural gas exploration in US waters, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill notwithstanding, is an important and essential move toward enhancing the energy security of the United States. However, the Administration should not lose sight of what the Clinton Administration correctly understood as the bigger picture in terms of energy security and its relationship to geopolitics-energy security of the West is energy security for the United States.

The Clinton Administration's strategy was to foster the development of energy resources and projects in non-OPEC nations. These nations, predominantly on the Western and Eastern shores of the Caspian Sea in Eurasia, were the obvious choices. Mostly former Soviet Republics, they longed for the freedom, Westernism, and economic development that the West enjoyed and that their energy resources could buy them.

The Clinton Administration understood that fostering these Western leaning governments and their vast energy reserves provided energy security for the West and had a valuable added bonus - keeping the new Russian Federation from an oil and gas monopoly in Europe and the power over European nations it would afford them. Another significant added bonus is that these nations are predominantly Muslim and fostering positive relationships with secular Muslims could only help US foreign policy and its standing on the world stage. This, of course, is even truer and more important today.

The most notable Clinton-era success in Eurasia was the building of the Baku-Tbilisi-Cheyhan (BTC) oil pipeline over the staunch objections of the Russian Federation. BTC, to this day, supplies predominantly Azerbaijani "sweet" oil directly to Western markets. The pipeline begins in Azerbaijan, a US ally and secular Muslim state; transits through Georgia; and terminates in NATO Turkey. The pipeline not only contributes to the energy security of the West but to energy diversity and security worldwide. An important note: BTC supplies about 24% of Israel's oil and has contributed to the close bilateral relationship between secular Muslim-Azerbaijan and Israel.

In the Obama Administration's new tack on oil, old friends in Eurasia (a key region to the supplying of NATO troops in Afghanistan) should not be forgotten, lest the US further diminishes its influence and foothold in the region.

Perhaps even more significantly, the President should be commended for focusing not just on oil exploration but also on the exploration of natural gas. Though, again, this should be dealt with as a much more strategic endeavor, transcending simply exploring possible US sources.

The growing importance of natural gas for energy security resonates throughout the world. The reality is that "green energy" will not be ready for "prime time" for some years (or some decades as some experts contend), and natural gas is the logical interim energy commodity as the world weans itself off of oil. Natural gas is plentiful in Western friendly nations, cleaner and has the capability of being widely utilized.

Again, though, the Obama Administration needs to take a more strategic, Clintonian stance on the issue. This, particularly, in the case of a resurgent and aggressive Russian Federation and how the US deals with its interests in Eurasia and Europe.

The Obama Administration's first order of business should be to take a solid leadership position in seeing through the construction of the much lauded and little accomplished NABUCCO natural gas project-as the US did in the case of BTC. To the ire, alarm and disdain of Russia, NABUCCO is slated to take Caspian natural gas directly to Europe; thus, bypassing Russia and helping to break the Russian gas monopoly in Europe.

Point in fact is that recent history is replete with examples of the Russian energy monopoly, GAZPROM, taking advantage of Russia's neighbors' dependence. Russia used its monopoly of gas supplies to Georgia, Ukraine and others as a political leverage repeatedly, mostly taking perverse pleasure in cutting supplies in the middle of winter. It even attempted to do the same to gas producing nations like Azerbaijan, only to discover in Azerbaijan's case that Azerbaijan managed to increase its own production and, partly as a result of Russia's over-reaching pressures, turned from a net importer into a net exporter of gas in about a year.

Seemingly oblivious to the threat of a Russian gas monopoly, Western nations loudly discuss the benefits of alternative supplies of gas to Europe without paying attention to the solution, NABUCCO, or really committing to it. This, while Moscow has taken some real action by twisting the arms of the Kazakhs and Turkmen so they would sign long-term agreements to send major volumes of their gas via Russia, thereby putting the needed volume of natural gas needed to supply NABUCCO in jeopardy. It is worth noting that Russia buys much of its gas from both Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan and then resells it to Europe at a much higher price, of course, with political power as an added benefit.

As always, the Russians are playing for the future. They are not after oil, it seems, but after the monopoly over the interim global energy solution: natural gas. It makes sense, too, since oil is a commodity shipped much easier and thus less controllable than natural gas. You are just much more dependent on your natural gas supplier than on the one that supplies your oil. Of course, given the percentage of energy imports from Russia to Europe, understanding this should not be hard.

While the Obama Administration and Europe hopefully prepare to reengage in the region, stand up to the Russian desire for dominance and solve their own energy issues, old US friends like Azerbaijan and others have been actively and successfully negotiating an increase in its natural gas exports to Europe, thus undermining Russian monopoly and opening doors to future major deliveries of Central Asian gas from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. Not to put too fine a point on it, but they could sure use some US and European help and support.

Russia's reckless brutishness fueled by oil and gas is a reminder that energy and security do go hand-in-hand. It is foolish and dangerous to allow Moscow to expand its monopoly over energy resources. It is no coincidence that as Russian bombers flew to Venezuela, Moscow announced plans to sell more missiles to Iran.

If jockeying for energy resources in the 1990s in Eurasia was about oil, it is all about natural gas and Russia now. To view US energy security compartmentally is short sighted. The Obama Administration should take stock of its energy producing friends and include them in a larger strategy for energy security that will benefit all.


Jason Katz is a public relations, political and public affairs advisor to several governments and NGOs, including the Republic of Azerbaijan, and the former head of public affairs for the American Jewish Committee in Los Angeles.


/Huffungton Post/