The Politics of Oil

New Resources


[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Date Index] [Subject Index]

Drilling for Freedom



Here is a not very sophisticated version of rentier theory: oil fuels
autocracy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/20/opinion/20FRIE.html
Title: Drilling for Freedom
The New York Times The New York Times Opinion October 20, 2002  

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Campaigns
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
- Columns
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia/Photos
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version

Discover New Topics in Depth


Go to Advanced Search/Archive Go to Advanced Search/Archive Symbol Lookup
Search Optionsdivide
go to Member Center Log Out
  Welcome, cmhenry
Today's News Past Week Past 30 Days Past 90 Days Past Year Since 1996

Drilling for Freedom

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

A funny thing happened in Iran the other day. The official Iranian news agency, IRNA, published a poll on Iranian attitudes toward America, conducted by Iran's National Institute for Research Studies and Opinion Polls. The poll asked 1,500 Iranians whether they favored opening talks with America, and 75 percent said "yes." More interesting, 46 percent said U.S. policies on Iran — which include an economic boycott and labeling Iran part of an "axis of evil" — were "to some extent correct."

Oops!

You can imagine what happened next. Iran's hard-liners shut down the polling institute and threatened the IRNA official who published the results. Never mind. The fact that the hard-liners had to do such a thing shows how out of touch they are with Iran's courageous mainstream.

I relate this incident because it is very useful in thinking about the task of democratic transition in the Middle East. The Arab and Muslim worlds today are largely dominated by autocratic regimes. If you want to know what it would look like for them to move from autocracy to democracy, check out Iran. In many countries it will involve an Iranian-like mixture of theocracy and democracy, in which the Islamists initially win power by the ballot box, but then can't deliver the jobs and rising living standards that their young people desire, so they come under popular pressure and can only hold on to power by force.

But eventually they will lose, because the young generation in Iran today knows two things: (1) They've had enough democracy to know they want more of it. (2) They've had enough theocracy crammed down their throats to know they want less of it. Eventually, they will force a new balance in Iran, involving real democracy and an honored place for Islam, but not an imposed one.

But why is it taking so long? Why isn't Iran like Poland or Hungary after the fall of the Berlin Wall? And why might Iraq not be like them after the fall of Saddam? The answer is spelled O-I-L.

The transition from autocracy to real democracy in Iran is dragged out much longer than in Europe for many reasons, but the most important is because the hard-line mullahs control Iran's oil wealth. What that means is that they have a pool of money that they can use to monopolize all the instruments of coercion — the army, police and intelligence services. And their pool of money is not dependent on their opening Iran's economy or political system or being truly responsive to their people's aspirations.

Think of it like this: There are two ways for a government to get rich in the Middle East. One is by drilling a sand dune and the other is by drilling the talents, intelligence, creativity and energy of its men and women. As long as the autocratic leaders of Iran, Iraq or Saudi Arabia can get rich by drilling their natural resources, they can stay in power a long, long time. All they have to do is capture control of the oil tap. Only when a government has to drill its human resources will it organize itself in a way that enables it to extract those talents — with modern education, open trade, and freedom of thought, of scientific enquiry and of the press.

For all these reasons, if we really want to hasten the transition from autocracy to something more democratic in places like Iraq or Iran, the most important thing we can do is gradually, but steadily, bring down the price of oil — through conservation and alternative energies.

I know that Dick Cheney thinks conservation is for sissies. Real men send B-52's. But he's dead wrong. In the Middle East, conservation and alternative energies are strategic tools. Ronald Reagan helped bring down the Soviet Union by using two tactics: he delegitimized the Soviets and he defueled them. He delegitimized them by branding the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire," and by exposing its youth to what was going on elsewhere in the world, and he defueled them by so outspending them on Star Wars that the Soviet Union went bankrupt. In the Middle East today, the Bush team is delegitimizing the worst regimes as an "axis of evil," but it is doing nothing to defuel them. Just the opposite. We refuel them with our big cars.

Which was the first and only real Arab democracy? Lebanon. Which Arab country had no oil? Lebanon. Which is the first Arab oil state to turn itself into a constitutional monarchy? Bahrain. Which is the first Arab oil state to run out of oil? Bahrain.

Ousting Saddam is necessary for promoting the spread of democracy in the Middle East, but it won't be sufficient, it won't stick, without the Mideast states kicking their oil dependency and without us kicking ours. 




Forum: Join a Discussion on Thomas L. Friedman's Columns (Moderated)



China Struggles To Cut Reliance On Mideast Oil  (September 3, 2002)  $

Bush Begins Mission to Assure Europeans He Wants Their Advice on Global Hot Spots  (May 23, 2002)  $

A NATION CHALLENGED: THE THREAT; QAEDA STILL ABLE TO STRIKE THE U.S., HEAD OF C.I.A. SAYS  (February 7, 2002)  $

CRITIC'S NOTEBOOK; Lifting the Veil On a Far-Off World  (November 23, 2001)  $



Doing research? Search the archive for more than 500,000 articles:
Today's News Past Week Past 30 Days Past 90 Days Past Year Since 1996




E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-Mailed Articles

Wake up to the world with home delivery of The New York Times newspaper.
Click Here for 50% off.


Home | Back to Opinion | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top

Copyright The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-Mailed Articles


More Op-Ed Columns

Columnist Biography: Thomas L. Friedman




Topics

 Alerts
Iran
Middle East
Politics and Government
Public Opinion
Create Your Own | Manage Alerts
Take a Tour
Sign Up for Newsletters


















Back to:   The Politics of Oil Main Page