The oil nightmare and the terrorist trail

[Chris Burford <cburford@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Another indication that global capitalism has to be dovish, and tie the
hands of any politician looking for a quick political solution:


Another analyst points out that what would also be bad for the markets is
if it was discovered that an oil-producing state was behind the attacks.

Much safer to keep the mystery going that the centre of terrorism in lost
somewhere in the arid, stony, mine-filled, recesses of Afghanistan
sheltered by a mysterious, never photographed leader of a deeply religious
primitive communist movement. A story far better handled by Steven Spielberg.

Hour by hour those selecting the targets for attention in the
counter-attack by the West, are deciding that it is more interesting to
pursue the Afghan connection, than, say, the Iraqi connection. But the
Iraqi connection, *if followed through* could have the very disastrous
effect on world markets through the price of oil, that has been quietly
predicted in the argument above.

But even worse, just supposing that the fact that most of the highjackers
have, if not Egyptian origins, Saudi Arabian origins, is true, not a
fabrication, not totally ignorable by the distractions of uncovering film
of the mysterious leader of the Taleban....

Just imagine if what is said to be true, really is true. The nightmare
might actually be true.

What would be the effect on global financial markets and world governance
as it has been managed up to now??

Because informed commentators suggest that there has long been a sort of
collusion between the Saudi Royal family and the religious radicals: they
do nothing to rock the boat internally (and if they do, foreigners have to
be put on show trial to cover it up) and  they are given a relatively free
hand externally ....

After all if many of the highjackers were Saudi, and they needed a large
supply of finance, why should it not have come from Saudi Arabia?

This is absolutely unthinkable. And must be censored from public
consciousness, probably by the journalists themselves as much as by any
official briefing.

But if it were thinkable, it would suggest that the economic crisis that
was looming anyway before 11th September, is really going to interact with
the political crisis of the legitimacy of world governance under US
hegemony, in ways that the neither the markets nor ourselves can foresee,
but they could well be still more turbulent.

Even if the least dangerous option is to bomb a deserted mountain area of
Afghanistan with cruise missiles, supposing reaction in Pakistan overthrows
the government and brings to power a militant islamic regime. Pakistan of
course is a nuclear power.

Afghanistan has always been the high water mark of Empire.

Perhaps after all it would be better to bomb all economic targets in Saudi
Arabia....

Remember is marxist terms that ideology is an expression of material
interest in indirect terms. Radical islam is an expression of deep
opposition to Empire, by a major section of the third world on the edge of
the capitalist heartland. And there are many other anti-Imperialist
constituencies in the world. If Empire tries to reimpose its will rashly
either politically or economically, this could magnifiy instability. A
trebling of the oil price is only one possible expression of this.

Yes market exchange will go on, and capitalism is a highly flexible and
resilient system, but decisions are increasingly constrained by a growing
awareness that the existing structures of global and economic governance
are inherently unstable.

The markets are quietly briefing the politicians to be as dovish as possible.

The Empire as we know it, is looking like a tower of cards just about to
crumble. Any false move could make it worse.

Chris Burford

London