United States and
China on Collision Course for Oil
By
Ewintu Yeferad - eyeferad2007@yahoo.com
The recent attack on Chinese oil exploration facility in desert killing some 65 Ethiopian workers and nine Chinese was a part of the collision course between the U.S. and
China. The U.S. and
China are engaged in a worldwide dog fight. In January, Chinese president Hu Jintao toured
Africa to solidify deals for energy, trade and recourses. Immediately the New York Time editorial scolded China for heartlessly exploiting
Africa’s worst-of-people:
If you run an African country and have some natural resources…you’ve got a friend in Beijing ready to write you big checks with no embarrassing questions. That’s nice for government, but not so nice for their misgoverned people.1
The Time’s editorial admitted that…”the West had behaved badly in the past,” but concluded that
China, “should not be proud of following the west’s sorry historical example.”
Behind the Times supposed…”concern for African people is the U.S. struggle to continue exploiting the largest possible share of the world’s resources while the Chinese rising challenge, The African people can only win the situation by uniting and standing together.
U.S. and
China’s Escalating Confrontation
Some honest people in the U.S. are echoing the Bush Administration position by calling for sending troops to Darfur and increasing the existing U.S. sanctions on the
Sudan. But
U.S. government is concerned with being frozen out of recently discovered oil fields, not stopping any genocide.
According to the New York Times, U.S. oil company Chevron left the Sudan in 1992, and the Clinton administration cut off ties to the
Sudan in 1997. Abdo Yahia el-Mahdi, a former Sudanese finance minister said, “the only people …being hurt by the [
U.S.] sanctions are the Americans who are missing out of the [oil] boom.” (New York Times November24, 2006)
China National Petroleum Corporation is the biggest player. Companies are building a 930-mile oil pipeline to the
Red Sea (Asia Times September 6, 2006). Four thousand Chinese troops are deployed in
Southern Sudan guarding an oil pipeline to protect Chinese rulers, and they are “…supposed to be building an armaments factory.” (Financial Times December 16, 2006; Time Magazine January 11, 2007, The Economist October 28, 2006)
This January, China invested over $2 billion in oil-rich Nigeria—the largest supplier of African oil to the
U.S.—and Chinese companies secured rights to another four oil fields. (The Economist October 28, 2006)
Nigeria has curbed oil production due to fighting over oil profits in Niger Delta region. China—not the U.S. or France (which has the largest outside military presence in
Africa)—is supplying the government with patrol boats used to combat local rebels.
U.S. commitment for securing Nigerian oil has been slow and low
.
The Bush Administration may be slow, but they aren’t out. Calls to “Save Darfur” by George Clooney, Mia Farrow, and Barak Obama concede the creation of a U.S. African command.
Defense and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy magazine (September 2006) reports that the White House is pushing the African command for …”strategic reasons…Nigeria alone provides almost as much oil to the U.S…. as Saudi Arabia and by 2015 will provide more than 25% of the U.S. energy supplies…” and [the U.S.]…”sees African energy and sea lanes as vital to the
U.S.”
China’s African strategy is…”aid for oil.” Chinese elites are pouring millions into constructing refineries, dams, roads, hospitals, railroads, bridges, telecommunication networks, and shopping malls—not to benefit the African people, but for oil deals and commercial ties. Presently, the U.S./China rivalry remains a war of commercial exploitation, but historically imperialism’s trade wars inevitably lead to shooting wars.*
On February 9,2007, U.S. Secretary of Defense,
Robert Gates, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the
U.S. needs more troops with an infantry capable of fighting regular armies. “We don’t know what changes can take place in such countries.” [China, Russia,
North Korea and others] (C-SPAN February 9, 2007)
U.S. counts on naval control of the sea lanes on which
China depends to export goods and import raw materials. But in January, Chinese military elites successfully tested an anti-satellite missile, signaling their capability of targeting U.S. Navy communications and navigation satellites.
Ultimately, the greatest potential for U.S./Chinese armed rivalry lies in the
Middle East and the Horn of Africa. U.S .is bogged down in Iraq, while
Iran’s oil supplies still remain a coveted imperialist treasure. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and
Iraq control 65% of the world’s cheap-to-pump oil reserves.
In conclusion, the stakes in the confrontation between the U.S. and China are high, and neither country’s leaders will hesitate to go to war to protect and expand their oil interests in
Africa.
*China intends to provide about $20 billion in infrastructure and trade financing to
Africa during the next three years eclipsing many of the continent’s traditional big donors in a single pledge. (Financial Times May 19,2007)
1 New York Times Editorial February 9, 2007.
