"Yes, there is an alternative to the Euro-wimps and the neocons, and it is the "geo-greens." I am a geo-green. The geo-greens believe that, going forward, if we put all our focus on reducing the price of oil - by conservation, by developing renewable and alternative energies and by expanding nuclear power - we will force more reform than by any other strategy. You give me $18-a-barrel oil and I will give you political and economic reform from Algeria to Iran. All these regimes have huge population bubbles and too few jobs. They make up the gap with oil revenues. Shrink the oil revenue and they will have to open up their economies and their schools and liberate their women so that their people can compete. It is that simple."
Good idea, Thomas, but you miss two critically important elements (I know you have limited column space.) in your proposal. First, China with it's exploding economy and other countries are energy-hungry and would quickly pick up the oil that the U.S. would forgo if we had an effective, reasonably priced alternative. There would be no glut. Second, the time required for your proposal to produce regime change internally would enable Iran to develop its nukes.
Because of increasing global demand, low priced oil is a thing of the past.
Perhaps the Europeans can pull this off with Iran. I hope so. The U.S. should not be offering carrots to Iran at this point. Regime change should be our policy, but from within, as Thomas suggests, not from without.
Here's a nightmare scenario: Israel, bolstered by the U.S., launches surgical air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities (probably the really important stuff is underground). Iran retaliates with a nuke or provides the capability to Al Qaeda for a dirty bomb. Ugh.
No comments:
Post a Comment