EKDIDONAI

Thank you very much for accepting on Tuesday evening the printed information I offered you concerning oil. And thank you for whatever attention you have given it. I would like to say a bit more about the information, which had I been less nervous I might have said last evening.

In recent months I have become increasingly suspicious that the US's primary if not sole interest in Iraq is oil, and that weapons of mass destruction, past human rights violations, and democracy have at best little to do with it, save perhaps as a cover (it should be emphasized that the US has one of the largest arsenals of weapons of mass destruction in the world, has one of the worst human rights records, and our president was elected by our supreme court). Lately I have been trying to learn more about the oil industry, using public as well as non-public resources, primarily through the Internet. Recently I tried to find information on the Internet about oil production throughout the world, which I found at the address cited in the papers I handed you:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/petroleu.html
This website represents the US Department of Energy's "Energy Information Administration". The information is, I suppose, as reliable as the word of the US government, however reliable that may be. On the EIA website I also found numbers for consumption and reserves. Looking at the reserves, I noticed some were remarkably high (Venezuela, Russia, Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, etc.). It occurred to me that reserves ought to be looked at relative to production and consumption; a country that produces or consumes a lot of oil would reasonably be expected to have large oil reserves. Using the EIA's Excel files on production, consumption, and reserves, I calculated the ratios reserves/production, reserves/consumption, and consumption/production. I didn't know what pattern if any would emerge.

I found, and perhaps you'll agree, that generally the countries with unfriendly relations with the US (e.g. Iraq, Venezuela, Iran, Libya) had high reserves/production and/or high reserves/consumption. Some exceptions to this pattern are: Israel (but it consumes an immense quantity, produces virtually none, and I would imagine its reserves effectively belong to the US and are necessary to feed Israel's consumption); Philippines (it is 98th of 109 for production, so of course its reserves/production would be high, but its reserves/consumption is 53rd of 62, i.e. its reserves are not really very high); Kuwait (among the highest res/prod & res/cons, and 21st for production which is all the more remarkable given its size - but since the US "liberated" them I imagine their reserves effectively belong to the US); Saudi Arabia (given how singularly important oil is to their economy, it is not surprising that they should have huge oil reserves, regardless of whether their relationship with the US is friendly); Congo Brazzaville (2nd for res/cons - while I'm not sure what US relations are like with this country, two things seem noteworthy: (a) consumption is probably virtually nothing given how very small the country is, and (b) former Marxist President Denis Sassou-Nguesso returned to power in October 1997 after a brief civil war).

Since low consumption could account for high res/cons, and low production could account for high res/prod, I thought it might be useful to note which countries have both high res/cons and high res/prod. The following 24 are among the top 31 of 62 on both lists, listed here in decreasing order of res/prod:
Iraq
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Middle East Total
Saudi Arabia
Guatemala
Venezuela
Iran
Albania
Libya
C. & S. America Total
World Total
Romania
Nigeria
Bolivia
Africa Total
Mexico
Kazakhstan
Gabon
Congo (Kinshasa)
Angola
Russia
E. Europe & Former USSR
Algeria

I'll stop the analysis there, and offer three hypotheses.

1. Perhaps the US (and its allies?) wants countries to minimize reserves, and consequently countries which do not minimize reserves earn the wrath of Bush & Co, cf. Iraq.

2. Perhaps countries which (for whatever reason) want not to be part of America's global colony and/or want to compete with the US politically if not economically, have correctly observed that one political weapon they can stockpile is oil.

3. Perhaps this has something to do with communism. I cannot help but notice high on the lists Cuba, Eastern Europe & Former USSR, Congo (Brazzaville), Venezuela, and China - while noticing low on the lists the UK, Canada, the US, Germany, France, South Africa, and Spain. What exactly the connection with communism might be, I cannot imagine.

Why have I brought this information to your attention? In return for the wealth of information you have supplied me in your writings, and in the belief that this information ought to be made public and you of all people might be both willing and able to do so well.

I would be extremely grateful for your thoughts, as always.

-ekdidonai