Winning the War in Afghanistan

[Dayuhan]

I agree that conflict over Central Asian energy resources is a real possibility. I do not think it's likely to involve the US, for reasons of geography a relatively minor player in that picture. It is a very likely Russia/China flashpoint somewhere down the line. The Chinese want the oil and gas: it's the only really substantial supply that they can get that doesn't rely on vulnerable shipping routes. The Russians don't need the energy, but control of the transit routes from Central Asia to Europe gives them a lot of leverage over Europe and over their former possessions on their southern border... maintaining that sphere of influence is important to them for a lot of reasons.

I don't think that conflict is likely to involve Afghanistan or Pakistan at all, and I doubt that the US would have any ability to deter it even now, though there's little immediate prospect of it erupting. Another one of those things we don't and won't control.

[Steve the Planner]

Bob, Dayuhan:

Right, a potential flash point, perhaps more grounded in ego than objective economic realities.

Problem with Oil/Gas inland/maritime exchange is not about whether it is technically feasible, but which resources were invested in, and the immediate impacts of change.

Right now, there are some pipelines and some tankers going to different markets, with investments in either being substantial and long-term.

Overtime, certain investments create explicit short-medium term constraints which, if threatened, can create flashpoint.

It all depends on what, overtime, emerges, and what kinks in the hose occur.

[Dayuhan]

Problem with Oil/Gas inland/maritime exchange is not about whether it is technically feasible, but which resources were invested in, and the immediate impacts of change.

Right now, there are some pipelines and some tankers going to different markets, with investments in either being substantial and long-term.

There's a fundamental difference between tankers and pipelines... pipelines only go to one place. A country with an oil port, say Saudi Arabia, can load tankers going to a dozen different destinations at the same time. Kazakhstan or Turkmenistan are limited to where the pipelines go. Cuts the options a bit.

Right. If kinks in that hose (now or in the future) occur, they would affect those dependent on that hose--not likely to be US.

One reality of the oil business is that a kink in anyone's hose affects everyone else. If the Chinese hose from Kazakhstan gets kinked, the Chinese won't stop burning oil. They'll buy on the spot market, push the price up, and compete to buy the oil that other buyers are now getting. Because they have lots of money, they can compete quite effectively. Just because Angola sells to China and Nigeria sells to the US doesn't mean Angolan oil is "Chinese supply" or Nigerian oil is "American oil". Either will sell to the highest bidder, like everybody else.

Cutting off oil supply from one country to another is not quite the weapon it's sometimes thought to be. It doesn't starve that country, just pushes the price up for everyone.