The Consequences Of John McCain

mccain-coy.jpgBack before McCain decided that the Russia-Georgia crisis was “the first probably serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War,” in 2006 McCain called Iran’s nuclear activities “the most grave situation that we have faced since the end of the Cold War, absent the whole war on terror.”

Responding to the idea that Iran — the world’s fourth-largest oil producer — might attempt to manipulate oil prices in response to sanctions, McCain declared:

If the price of oil has to go up, then that’s a consequence we would have to suffer.

In his convention speech, John McCain condemned Russia’s leaders as “rich with oil wealth and corrupt with power.” But what McCain still doesn’t seem to recognize is that Russia’s resurgence and Iran’s nuclear program have both been enabled by huge oil revenues which are a direct consequence of destabilization resulting from the Iraq war.

According to a leading oil economist, the Iraq war “tripled the price of oil…costing the world a staggering $6 trillion in higher energy prices alone”:

Dr Mamdouh Salameh, who advises both the World Bank and the UN Industrial Development Organisation (Unido), [said] that the price of oil would now be no more than $40 a barrel, less than a third of the record $135 a barrel [of May 2008], if it had not been for the Iraq war.

Back in 2006, NPR correspondent Eric Weiner contemplated the prospect — then scarcely imaginable — of oil at $100 a barrel. Today’s news is that the price of a barrel of oil has fallen below $100.

So, to sum up: War John McCain supports waging indefinitely = regional destabilization = increased oil prices = higher revenues for regimes John McCain wants to contain. It would be great if he understood these consequences.