For Immediate Release:

Thursday, May 28, 2015

What would happen if an aggressive nation decided to wage a war – and no one showed up to fight it?
That probably sounds like a ludicrous idea, but to anyone interested in peace and a better world, it’s an idea worth considering.
Now let’s take this scenario a step further: What if energy itself became the world’s most powerful geopolitical weapon, but it was used as a force for good? What would happen to the world’s balance of power, economic viability, and food security if energy could be used proactively to stop conflict as well as start it?
It’s an interesting proposition. The US now has the tools and resources to engage in active energy trade to the benefit of overall international affairs. We have the opportunity to use energy to protect ourselves (and our allies) from aggressive suppliers who fix prices or shut off supplies. We can support smaller countries with an alternate – and more affordable energy – source of their energy, enabling them to buy, sell, or develop their own resources while counterbalancing groups that steal energy and use it for malevolent purposes.
Eyes on Africa
Several nations in Sub-Saharan Africa have already done a reasonable job of balancing public good and competing efforts to optimize energy investment conditions.
As Phillip Van Niekerk and Aaron Sayne wrote in the book Energy and Security: Strategies for a World in Transition, “Grassroots advocacy has spurred some reform and renegotiation efforts, as ordinary Africans demand to see more benefits of oil production trickling down. Several nations have also mounted ambitious, populist drives to boost local content in their energy sectors.” These efforts include transparency language in their laws and contracts, measures that will presumably open up opportunities not only for locals and foreign players alike.
For a newborn country like South Sudan, oil exports are a lifeline to economic independence. After a devastating 20 year-civil war with the northern Republic of Sudan that left 2.5 million people dead and millions more displaced, conflicts between the two countries continue to simmer.
A mix of more than 60 ethnic groups and religious differences have helped the region earn a reputation for instability – and have fueled a pitched battle over oil.
And, it’s a complicated battle, to be sure. South Sudan has bountiful crude – as much as 3.5 billion recoverable barrels. The Republic of Sudan, by contrast, only has about 1.5 billion barrels – but it is home to nearly all of the region’s refineries and pipelines, including a key pipeline through which landlocked South Sudan transports its oil to export terminals at Port Sudan on the Red Sea. Armed conflict and disputes over oil revenue sharing have diminished crude production in both countries – so much so that Sudan proper, which had once been Africa’s second-largest oil producer, dropped to fourth in less than four years. The Republic of Sudan has lost 55% of its fiscal revenues and nearly two-thirds of its foreign exchange earnings since the country was split in two, while its crude oil export revenues fell from almost $11 billion in 2010 to just under $1.8 billion in 2012.
The post What If We Had a War – and Nobody Fought? appeared first on Canary, LLC.