An apparent coordinated terrorist attack on New York City and Washington, DC, last week is expected to have reverberating implications on US energy policy.
At this writing, the White House's suspicions were leaning toward a theory that the aircraft assaults were planned and executed by individuals associated with or sympathetic to Middle East Islamic fundamentalists opposing US policy in the region.
If that theory proves correct, it is likely US policy-makers will be looking at updating energy legislation in the context of national security. And therein lies a politically tragic irony: the last comprehensive energy legislation to pass in Washington was also spurred a decade ago by another national crisis-the Persian Gulf war.
Warnings given
And the ironies continue.
One day before the attacks, veteran energy policy wonk Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) told the National Council on Arab Relations that the US needed to be more engaged in Middle East peace negotiations or face economic repercussions back home.
Reliable energy, he said, is an ongoing problem, not a crisis. But it could turn into a crisis much different than the traditional supply-demand kind of situation America is used to.
"When all is said and done, the economic stability of the US is still tied to energy. We live in a real world that cries out for real peace and world justiceellipseThere is an understanding that none but an alert, intelligent administration can help the situation in the Middle East," he told the audience, which included policy-makers, oil executives, and defense contractors.
"I hope we can look forward to an effort that policy-makers will be honest brokers to all in the Middle East. It's still not impossible."
It's not too often oil companies agree with someone like Dingell, a 4-decade congressman who has often leveled criticism at the oil industry.
But on this issue, his views were heartily endorsed by oil executives. Many oil company officials privately said that they have feared in the weeks and months before the attack that strategic key investments in oil-producing Arab nations were being compromised by the US's lack of focus in the region.
One executive, J. Brooks Buxton, president of Conoco Arabia Inc., openly voiced the concerns that many of his colleagues share. He said that past attempts by the administration of President George W. Bush and its allies to let the Palestinians and Israelis broker their own peace was a waste of time.
There has been a rash of ill-conceived summits that have failed to satisfy various national, political, economic, and social egos, Buxton said.
He added that "never in my more- than-40 years of experience and 61/2 years in the Middle East have I seen the influence or involvement of US policy-makers at such a nadir...It's a policy vacuum that is both tragic and destabilizing."
Promises given
Those perceived errors in policy are now yesterday's headlines. The White House has now made clear it will aggressively pursue an agenda that it sees will serve America's best interests. That's likely to mean lobbying Con- gress to agree to put a greater emphasis on expanding domestic production. Looking overseas, it remains unclear if any possible military response will complicate or solidify US companies' own long-term interests in the Middle East. But the past "policy vacuum" has certainly vanished.
